Do the Springboks Deserve the Vestige of Greatness?

This is a very good South African team, for one could not defeat the All Blacks and Wallabies on consecutive weeks and not have a certain essence of quality. But there is evidence in the last 12 months that they still a lot to do, and there are other indicators that need to be achieved.

If they are indeed a great team, then the winning of the Tri Nations must be a fait accompli.

It certainly is a heady mix of experience and rising talent that the Bokke wield, with the challenge now for Peter De Villiers in the coming years, is whether the evolution of their team from the 2007 World Cup winning vintage can be maintained through to the first ever successful Rugby World Cup title defence.

While some soothsayers would say that victories over two mixed All Black and Wallaby teams may not prove much, especially while basking in the comfort of their daunting coliseums in South Africa, there is no such thing as weak SANZAR teams, and they were convincing wins.

Maybe not so convincing for fans of the game as a spectacle.

But the reality is that the Springboks are playing the game to win, adjusting to the laws of the game better than their Tri Nations opponents, and playing to the strengths that they have in abundance.

But are they truly great?

They boast some of the best players in world rugby, with Victor Matfield and Fourie Du Preez unchallenged as the preeminent players in their positions, and John Smit, Bryan Habana, Bakkies Botha and Jean De Villiers candidates for a World XV.

They have a verifiable squadron of flankers, and appear to have new caps such as Morne Steyn and Heinrich Brussow making dramatic impacts.

The cattle are there, and for now, so does the game plan. 

However, De Villiers is hardly the most humble of coaches, and while winning is the greatest feeling, the sweet smell of success and breed complacency and comfort of a routine.

For all of their success against their Tri Nations opponents, the series against the Lions showed that their brutally pragmatic game plan can be countered. While the Springboks have been coy, almost suggestive that they will eventually play an expansive style, there is nothing in evidence to suggest that they can easily make that adaptation.

As for their reputation as bully boys on the field, it has been their opponents that have struggled with their discipline whereas the Springboks have conceded fewer penalties in their last three matches than any other run in modern history.

While there may be the ordinary and almost expected off the ball niggle from the Springboks, it occurs from any international side.

The South Africans tactical approach is itself pressure building, but sooner or later the question will come whether they can win a match without kicking penalties.

However, it is the Springboks off field demeanour that may be the only hindrance to their tag of greatness, although this may be somewhat moot.

After all, history books remember winners above all other things.

But the South Africans blatant and almost arrogant protesting of Botha’s ban—in which the Springboks wore “Justice for Bakkies” armbands—was not becoming of a team that has the opportunity, as World Cup holders and currently the IRB’s number one side, of being the leading ambassadors for the game.

Whether Botha’s act was worth a ban, or that the ban was unfair, isn’t relevant to the final act of protest.

This is not a political piece, and for some South African rugby or sporting supporters to believe that they are sufferers of victimisation isn’t germane or unique to their mighty rugby team. 

Negativity, insults, dislike or even the hating of a team is common to all sporting psychology. The Springboks must act the part of a team that like it or not, is currently the best rugby team on the planet. 

This for mine is what will cement their status as a truly great side.