the AFTERMATH

There's a saying "every dog has his day". Well this day was (or wasn't, depending your take on it) South Africa's. All we are hearing from the republic is how Bryce Lawrence cost them the game (and so it seems, also the cup). I have been repeating for weeks how Bryce Lawrence was not up to scratch and his policing of the ruck was incredibly weak. Now surely any top level international team & coaching group had spotted that? What did Pocock get away with? Whatever he could....and good on him. Isn't that his role? And was it any different to what Heinrich Brüssow gets away with every single time he pulls on the Springbok jersey? Lawrence was just plain weak. It was 80minutes of non stop errors. He didn't favour 1 team. He made 2 bad calls in the opening stanzas that wrestled the early initiative from the Wallabies and gave South Africa the ball well into enemy territory. The honest truth is South Africa should have known what Lawrence's weakness was, and played to it. They didn't.

What happened here was the Boks had no plan B. They never do. If another team get ahead and just return in kind to the South African kicking game they are bereft of ideas. Once they have to start playing catch up it's good night nurse. They had the game at 9-8 but despite all Matfield's lineout work and all his experience...a basic error from him gave Australia the shot they needed to take back the lead with the clock counting down. Scoring 3pts from putting the opposition under pressure in their own half? Hmmmm...seems the Saffers lost at their own game.

What happened here was the Boks' luck ran out. They had their fair share in cups gone by. And they had their fair share here. Now the shoe is on the other foot and they don't like it. Smit's comments are an insult to his legacy. "Bryce is not difficult to communicate with, he just doesn't seem to listen very well. The one positive is that I won't ever have to be reffed by him again."  For all the bad luck Richie McCaw has been through he can hold his head high. Not once has he criticized anybody despite the flak he has received from all sides. The same can't, now, be said for John Smit.

It doesn't stop there, with many journalists from the republic having their say. Apparently they would have us believe this is the "biggest sport injustice" since ever. Don't they remember '95? Probably not with their selective memory that I've come to know. Apparently the Boks were "hitting their straps". Really? Laughable. What I saw was yet again a South African team making very hard work of getting through pool play. Apparently they were the All Blacks' #1 threat. Apparently all Kiwis thought so, too. Funny. The common stream of thought was Australia have always been our nemesis and would be again. Apparently Dan Vickerman's illegal shoulder from the side of the ruck took Brüssow out of the game & cost them the match(so it wasn't Lawrence??). Apparently when Bakkies Botha did it last British Lions tour(wow, pulled that one out of the hat) he was cited (once in 100 times aren't bad odds). Vickerman wasn't cited. Ohhhh the SANZAR conspiracy theory all over again? You see, after they had dealt to the Wallabies it was also a foregone conclusion vs the All Blacks. Apparently NZ are back to playing high risk rugby, looking vulnerable, and playing right into South African hands. Apparently all Kiwis are relieved the Boks are gone. Yes, I wanted the Boks out. Not because they were a threat to the ABs. The Wallabies are the threat. I wanted to Boks out because they are a threat to rugby.

It was actually refereeing incompetence that got the Boks through to the 1/4 finals in the 1st place. Both Wales & Samoa deserved victories against the Boks. As I said...the shoes on the other foot. Like it or lump it.

Oh....apparently they are lumping it.