Where to now, De Villiers?

The embattled Springbok team and its management are currently trying to survive as all-comers hurl verbal missiles at them. It would seem that some tough decisions and changes in approach have become unavoidable, and will start this week when a review board of the South African Rugby Union (SARU) asks tough questions of the coach, Peter de Villiers.

There are persistent rumours that De Villiers is a hands-off mentor, that the team is effectively being coached by senior players, with him merely rubber-stamping the style and plan devised by the players.

SARU is extremely perturbed by the controversial media statements made by De Villiers, which are harmful to the Bok cause and fire up the opposition.

Ultimately, the other members of the management team and the senior Boks are forced to aid their ailing coach and jump to his assistance, detracting from their focus on the immediate task at hand.

Furthermore, De Villiers has been grilled for his lack of leadership, an apparent lack of progressive ideas, and stale tactics.

The Bok management team has denied there is a rift within the coaching staff on the Plan A of the South African team.

Apparently, Dick Muir is an apostle for an expansive game, while the other assistant Gary Gold prefers a more structured approach.

The crisis calls for cool heads, and a coach who is prepared to put his head on the block in proactive pursuit of the right style, willing to reassume control while taking tough and, sometimes, unpopular decisions.

Best squad available?

Many pundits, including former coach Jake White, believe that this Springbok squad is arguably the most talented ever assembled on a South African rugby field.

The performances by the Bulls and Stormers have underlined that we have the talent available to win the Vodacom Tri-Nations tournament.

But these players have not been managed correctly – rather man-handled, abused and demoralised. Some have been overplayed to the point of burnout, while others have reached the end of their career.

What is most disconcerting is that many senior Boks have hardly had any rest over the past six months. If you persist with the tried and trusted experience in the hope that it becomes an insurance policy for success, you are flirting with disaster.

That is exactly what happened in Australasia, and specifically on Saturday when the Boks were humiliated and outplayed by a rampant Wallabies team in Brisbane.

The Australians won 30-13. Bryan Habana, Jaque Fourie and Pierre Spies were pale shadows of their exhilarating best; while John Smit, Victor Matfield and Morné Steyn hardly convinced the South Africa public with stale performances.

Former All Blacks Richard Loe and Sean Fitzpatrick pointed to the fact that the Boks looked jaded.

Rugby columnist Peter Bills warned in the Cape Times that if De Villiers were permitted to stay until after the Rugby World Cup, he may by then have squandered the golden generation bequeathed by White and failed in his principal task to retain the Cup.

Lessons from history

A Springbok coach cannot and should not be short-sighted, a yes man toeing the political line and simply endorsing the populist views of players.

He must make unpopular decisions and be proactive, live and die by his decisions, be prepared to fall in his own sword if things backfire spectacularly.

At this stage, it seems De Villiers is unwilling or unable to take this unpopular and highly controversial stand, as epitomised by White when he sent a B team into the Tri-Nations, but ultimately won the World Cup because of it.

Nick Mallett had the courage of his convictions to drop Gary Teichmann before the Rugby World Cup in 1999. Rugby supporters were enraged, and with the 20/20 vision of hindsight, it turned out to be a faulty decision.

Yet, it almost paid off, as South Africa was only beaten in the extra time period in the semifinals of the World Cup as Australia squeezed through to the final.

South Africa can ill afford to persist with its very predictable style of structured rugby and a love for using high kicks in a vain attempt to force the opposition into defensive blunders.

And, because the Boks have rarely protected possession and have had to defend all the time, they have ultimately imploded under the enormous pressure.

Hug a ref

The Boks have also become defensive in their evaluation of the performances by northern hemisphere referees.

Sure, they have made cardinal errors, but how do you get the best of out of the referees? What good can come from publically humiliating them and questioning their bona fides?

Perhaps dealing with referees calls for a different game plan altogether. Perhaps a more phlegmatic approach with a mid-week conference by the coach and captain with the referee prior to the game would do South Africa’s cause much more good than a public pasting of their northern hemisphere ‘shortcomings’.

As was mentioned previously in this column, the definition of insanity is to do the same things over and over again and to expect a different result.

South Africa will have to change lanes – or course; adapt their game plan to a more expansive style of play, while berating De Villiers for his controversial media statements.

And, the coach will have to make tough choices before the home leg of the Tri-Nations.

If he is not prepared to rest some senior Springboks and give some of the best performing solo ‘artists’ of the Super 14 campaign a run, South Africa’s downward spiral will continue.

Surely it is time to give Francois Hougaard an extensive run, to contemplate the claims of Francois Steyn and to rethink the wisdom of persisting with the Olivier/Fourie combination.

Time will tell if De Villiers would be bold or timid. A return to his conservative style of play may see the All Blacks and the Wallabies ‘green-washing’ the Boks.