I was told by some good friends whose opinions I hold in high regard that this article smacks of arrogance and that we should not get ahead of ourselves after beating a poor English side – but this to me has nothing to do with the World Cup.
I love writing about rugby, hopefully as much as people still like to read what I have got to say!
Rugby stirs emotions in South Africans which are unequaled compared to any other sport or past time, which makes for a very opinionated audience, but also a very educated one – and what higher emotions can one get given it is World Cup time!
I guess many South Africans today will buy their Sunday newspaper and go straight for the back page or sports pages and absorb all the stories from Friday night’s thrashing of England by the Boks – that is of course if those stories are not on the front page which I am sure it will be.
I don’t think South Africans are arrogant when it comes to rugby. Results over the last 10 years have taught us one thing, savor a good win, but don’t get ahead of yourself because it probably won’t last very long…
It is good advice, because from a World Cup perspective the thrashing over England must be seen in context, but that is in a World Cup context to me.
As far as the World Cup goes there is still some way to go before we can truly celebrate, but Friday’s win has nothing to do with the World Cup for me. I am euphoric about the result because we have experienced something you do not find in South African rugby much, and that is a plan coming together.
In 2003, and even before that South African rugby experienced low’s I hope we as supporters never go through again. 2003 is also well documented as being the absolute low thanks to our rugby results and also the infamous Kamp Staaldraad.
Just to mention a few – our coach was fired, the president of the South African Rugby Union resigned and players took the union to court following disputes over contracts and money, there were allegations of racism and a couple of people even took the opportunity to write books about it deepening the stab wounds already inflicted at the World Cup in Australia and record defeats to countries like England.
Rugby was in chaos.
Then a guy came into a change room one day and told his players who have just been through all this that they will win the World Cup in 2007.
One would be forgiven to think this guy was on tik to be honest.
This man of course was Jake White, a relatively unknown figure in SA Rugby who’s only claim to fame was an age-group level World Cup victory a couple of years back.
I am actually positive that a couple of players, or anyone in that room that day wrote him and his statement off as someone who is a bit of a basket case, but in 4 years, he never wavered from that statement, or his plan.
What makes this even more significant is the fact, or factors from the outside that plays a role especially in South Africa. Apart from the challenges the game of rugby brings on its own like injuries and players losing form, you have unique circumstance at play in South African rugby, most significantly political pressure but also, and even as influential, media and public opinion.
Yet he never wavered.
Jake White has been ridiculed, insulted, threatened and challenged in just about every way possible – whether it be through his selections, policies or rugby knowledge and acumen or tactics.
Yet he never wavered.
Jake White has not only been fighting forces outside of rugby like public opinion and political influences, but he has also been fighting forces within rugby from coaches at lower levels like the Super 14 and Currie Cup, and even his own employers baying for his head less than a year out from the ultimate show-piece flying him back mid-tour to the United Kingdom to answer to allegations and results.
Yet he never wavered.
My love for the World Cup, or lack thereof, is pretty well documented and how I believe it is hurting our game on a global stage, not only for South Africa, but every rugby playing country all over the world.
So this victory on Friday night and my euphoria surrounding it has nothing to do with what lies ahead for the Boks in the coming weeks, or whether we will win the thing or not.
The significance is that for the first time ever I have seen a man with a vision and a plan that started in 2004, come together in the most clinical fashion one could imagine on Friday night – against all the odds.
Sure, that plan was based around the tournament I despise being the World Cup – Jake has always said it was the only thing he was working towards, but what sets it apart to me is that for once someone in South African rugby at least had a plan, had a vision, and stuck to his guns with a belief unequaled in the history of coaching in this country – and that plan came together in the most spectacular way on Friday night. That vision and plan I have been hearing about for 4 years from White came together in one moment for me when the final whistle blew and the scoreboard read: “South Africa 36 England 0�.
Jake never wavered.
I will tell you what is significant about this World Cup though.
Jake is probably lost to South African rugby after this event, even though he has indicated that he would love to stay on – and even now I see polls and people calling for his head as coach of our national team.
But if Jake does come back victorious from this event, I can bet you those very same people would want him to stay and take us forward – even if he just makes the final.
The irony of all this is that these people won’t look at the plan this man had when he told those players in 2004 that he believes they could win the World Cup when they decide to ask him to stay or ask him to leave, they won’t know how to plan or a plan if it slapped them in the face, but they will judge him on one single event, one single match, and even one single moment in a match forgetting what he has achieved in over 4 years while in charge of Springbok rugby.
So thank you Jake, thanks for never giving up and sticking to your guns and making this fan see on Friday night what you have been promising for 4 years. You are probably lost for South African rugby, but then again, because you never wavered, because you never folded or gave into pressures in an environment rife with corruption and backstabbing, South African rugby probably does not deserve you in any case.
September 16th, 2007 at 2:16 pm
PA
The best rugby article relating to the present team I have ever read. Been wanting to say something similar for ages but can’t put it as well as you guys do.
Thanks.
Yet somehow there are those who even now don’t appreciate what JW has done for us (SA), the Boks, and rugby in general. But I am sure most will agree with your article.
I am sure we will be in the final – and we CAN win it! Even if we don’t, we could not have asked for better.
Thanks Jake and John and team!!
September 16th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
Quin,
Seeing how pretenders to the thrown like France and Ireland are struggling – having had coaches for yonkers in charge – it makes this/his accomplishments even more important.
Take a bow Mr. White.
September 16th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
I see the kiwis on Voldy’s site is getting very irritated very fast.Like a woman during that time of the month.Seems our display against Eng are leaving them a bit uneasy.We know and they kow we will raise our game against us.They have only had easy games.Seems the Boks didnt read the script that they wrote…
September 16th, 2007 at 5:19 pm
hoener,
they are realising that something is happening is happening that is not to benefit the AB’s! For what reason would an AB-supporter worry about a defecting Aussie coach!
September 16th, 2007 at 5:27 pm
Pissant, good article as can be expected of you.
….. someone in South African rugby at least had a plan, had a vision, and stuck to his guns with a belief unequaled in the history of coaching in this country tells it all!!
I’ve said before; I’ve met Jake White at a rugby function one evening and I will never deny that I was one of his critics before that evening. After a very nice conversation I understood a lot of things.
Go Jake, realise your dream and make us proud.
September 16th, 2007 at 7:29 pm
“I am euphoric about the result because we have experienced something you do not find in South African rugby much, and that is a plan coming together.
Then a guy came into a change room one day and told his players who have just been through all this that they will win the World Cup in 2007.
One would be forgiven to think this guy was on tik to be honest.
This man of course was Jake White”
Eish , eish, eish PA good article but nothing but winning the WC will redeem Jake in my eyes.
It was a lovely win , i enjoyed every moment of it but the scoreboard flatters us. We were not so brilliant England was dismal. Take Bakkies,s monsterous performance away and the absolute brilliance of FDP and…. Even though EJ is a great improvement on Alistair the one man that made the GREAT difference was Fourie du Preez, we must hope and pray he can give us another performance like that , preferably against the ABs.
Tell me another thing whats going on in the front row, maybe Jake missed this one. He got EJ to show AC how to. HM could have done the same for Gert Smal.
September 16th, 2007 at 7:34 pm
guys… time to change your nicks…
September 16th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
SA put on 154/8
Eng neec 155 to win, game in the balance…
September 16th, 2007 at 7:56 pm
Poms are 23/1 after 4 overs…
September 16th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
24/2 KP run out
September 16th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
27/3
September 16th, 2007 at 8:02 pm
bokdylan,
huh?
September 16th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
He means as in Boerboel to Boerbok or Boerboelbok etc… That is as a show of support.
September 16th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
or Hoenermoordenaar to Bokmoordenaar?
September 16th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
September 16th, 2007 at 8:12 pm
JT, wat is die kriekettelling?
September 16th, 2007 at 8:13 pm
37/3
Eng need 118 of 77
September 16th, 2007 at 8:15 pm
Eng need 113 of 72
September 16th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
102 needed from 66
7 wickets still standing…
September 16th, 2007 at 8:23 pm
96 needed from 60
7 wickets still standing…
September 16th, 2007 at 8:29 pm
Super,
Jake has his critics and rightly so, I dont even agree with mush he has done in 4 years but unfortunately I never had the opportunity to sit with him and pick his brain with regards to a rugby philosophy.
But I think people often underestimate the difficulty this guy has worked under.
Most things in life is relative to me.
Jake is often compared to local coaches from a success point of view, past and present. Meyer and Muir are the obvious present ones, Mallet is an example of a past one.
And even then, relatively speaking Jake has done more, in a much more difficult environment than Meyer and Muir did in my view.
Meyer lost everything (S12 matches) before he started building the Bulls empire which we see today – and that took him 4 years.
Muir, for all his achievements and there are many, has not tasted success yet or brought any medals or cups home to Durbs.
After about 10 years the jury is still out on Mallet and just how much he has actually done in Bok rugby given the fact that many, including myself, actually believe Carel got it just right just before he got sacked with a team Mallet basically adopted.
Also, relatively speaking the counter argument could go that Jake has to be successful or is successful because relative to where we were (in 2003) no-one could actually do any worse. I mean if you just go 1% better than your predecessor you are better, or more successful which is what Jake is obviously.
But then, relative to where we find ourselves as a nation and the pressures associated with coaching the Boks I believe it only gets more difficult as time goes on, and to achieve success, any success in that environment is an amazing achievement.
A 3N win, team of the year, coach of the year, player of the year, coming second in 2005 in the 3N, wins every single year over the #1 team (something no other nation can say) since 2004, thrashing the Poms (not even Mallet can say that) and many more achievements higlights this.
Jake is not perfect, far from it.
But Jake is someone who has achieved major success in a short time in the most volatile of environments, and that should be applauded.
The only other coach that is equal or better in the world is Graham Henry, but then life is a breeze in NZ rugby given the environment and structures he has, also the free reign.
Other examples who has been in charge for a while are guys like Eddie O’ Sullivan, and Bernard Laporte. And where they are currently imploding on grand scale, Jake’s plan is coming together.
Hindsight is a bitch, and I can assure you a lot of that (hindsight) will be applied the day he walks out of rugby in SA, and every and any coach that takes over from him, will be measured against him, and personally, I will put money on the fact that they will fall short.
September 16th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
Well said PA.
September 16th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
92 needed from 54
7 wickets still standing…
September 16th, 2007 at 8:36 pm
76 needed from 48
7 wickets still standing…
September 16th, 2007 at 8:37 pm
WICKET!!!
82/4
September 16th, 2007 at 8:38 pm
PA,
Especially the part where you state that Mallet took over Carel du Plessis’s when he starts to get things together I agree 100% with.
You must add that the only two coaches that really got some time with the Boks and were successful, perhaps for that reason, were Mallet and White. Our amateur union bosses can’t, unfortunately, see this very basic point.
September 16th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
57 needed from 34
6 wickets still standing…
September 16th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
Wicket!!!
98/5
September 16th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
54 needed from 30
6 wickets still standing…
September 16th, 2007 at 8:53 pm
48 needed from 24
6 wickets still standing…
September 16th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Andre Nel sitting in the Eng dugout. Must be trying out his ‘how to win friends & influence people’ skills.
September 16th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
43 needed from 18
6 wickets still standing…
Off to the RUGBY!
September 16th, 2007 at 8:59 pm
Maybe Allen D is his hero, he was/is mine
September 16th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
Very Good read PA
I agree fully- jake White asked to be rated on the RWC 007 and so far yip he is holding a deck of cards that he had collected over 4 years of hell.
No other international coach ever had his environment to work in.
I still believe he had made mistakes along the way and his insistence on size as the almost only criteria is for me the biggest one.
Also one thing he could not have planned for, was the demise of eDDie Moans in Ozzie circles and the rise of CoachJones in the Bok Squad. It is my opinion that CoachJones provides a safety valve to CoachWhite- almost like the role that Morne Dup played for Francois Pienaar in the RWC 1995.
Do we have a realistic chance of winning the RWC regardless of who we face in the final-
for sure!
If we do winnit- I have a letter to write to the Sunday Times – believe me, it will be the best tasting humble pie I have ever had.
PS- I do believe that CoachJones should be forced to wear a Springbok blazer when we win the RWC!
BOKKE!!
September 16th, 2007 at 9:29 pm
PA there was no need to try and convince me with such a long post, I have said enough trough the last 2 years about Jake and this is not the time , during a world cup to slate him.
The fact is HM doesnt have the money or the right to pick anyone he likes for the Bulls ( same for all other s14 Coaches)Jake have that luxury.
Jakes sucsess in the first year was maybe also the previous coaches “kallers” But lets face you never liked it that we used tests in the time before the WC as practice matches niether did I.
His record against the Big teams is as low as 40%.
But lets leave it at that , will be intresting to see how a lot of people reacts if Jake takes the WC.
Well like i said it over and over, I will only take a win as good enough.
September 16th, 2007 at 10:18 pm
Piss Ant wrote:
“The significance is that for the first time ever I have seen a man with a vision and a plan that started in 2004, come together in the most clinical fashion one could imagine on Friday night – against all the odds.
Sure, that plan was based around the tournament I despise being the World Cup – Jake has always said it was the only thing he was working towards, but what sets it apart to me is that for once someone in South African rugby at least had a plan, had a vision, and stuck to his guns with a belief unequaled in the history of coaching in this country – and that plan came together in the most spectacular way on Friday night. That vision and plan I have been hearing about for 4 years from White came together in one moment for me when the final whistle blew and the scoreboard read: “South Africa 36 England 0�.
Jake never wavered.”….
THANKS PISS ANT. WELL WRITTEN FROM THE BOTTOM OF YOUR SOUL.
If SA Rugby loses Jake they will soon understand the huge mistake to let him go
September 16th, 2007 at 10:22 pm
Super,
Convincing was never my point. I am not in the business of convincing people of anything, I am in the business of being convinced of a lot of things myself.
What you mention with regards to Heyneke and Jake where Jake can pick, whoever he wants, or that money is not a problem is again relative to me like my first reply to you.
Fact is Jake cannot simply pick who he wants, the Bulls, relatively speaking once again is one of the (if not the) richests unions in SA, and Heyneke, and the pressures and environment he works under, is no where close to what a national coach and Jake specifically experiences.
Relatively speaking, Heyneke’s success is only also a couple of domestic cups and one, only one, international provincial cup in over 4 years.
Jake has no luxury in my view whatsoever. Every decision and selection he makes is scrutinized and disected to the bone – and he has to motivate it to everyone. After 4 years he still needs to ‘prove’ himself to people out there – not only fans, but his own employers even.
I am not a fan of the world cup, I am not a fan of building towards a singular thing or moment so you are right that I dislike using tests as practice matches.
But thats was never the point in my article.
Where people have all the time, and give all the time in the world to coaches in SA, Jake has not been given an inch, ever. Yet he achieved more than most.
September 16th, 2007 at 10:52 pm
“Jake has not been given an inch, ever. Yet he achieved more than most”
Not an inch? 4 Years 45+ matches , a hell of a lot of support, a few of us are vocal but the majority are Jake dissiples. Will there ever be another coach getting 50 tests to prove himself?
Are We are becoming good losers?
September 16th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
Super,
Reading a lot of things I have yet to find the majority who are Jake’s disciples.
And no, I do not reckon he has been given an inch.
If he is not critted in the media on selections, he is critted by SARU or government for not selecting enough blacks.
If it is not difficult enough to only work with a sqaud for 4 out of 12 months a year – where every single SA coach has the rest through CC and S14, he still has to take flack from provincial coaches and provincial presidents (the PC) when it comes to availibility and conditioning of players.
No team, aside from the All Blacks has the collective record the Boks has since 2004, with only the French coming close.
Not too long ago, the supporters or clubs from the Bulls ‘demanded’ Heyneke gets given the boot – incidently, they were the same ones demanding Jake be fired late last year…
Heyneke is seen as a national hero to most, especially and obviously Bulls supporters, and you mention 4 years and 45 matches being enough? Imagine how many he had to get where he is today, and that is still only a couple of domestic titles and one international title in a competition weakened by World Cup planning and exclusions from NZ.
Show me any coach in SA, even Mallet included, who had done more, under the same circumstances, as what Jake has done, and maybe I will be convinced.
But again its all relative.
Because exactly what did Mallet introduce that was revolutionary in Bok rugby?
How does a couple of CC’s and one S14 title compare to a 3N victory or victory at Twickers?
How do you compare quota selections done at Bok level to that of domestic level and the pressures from government in those arenas?
So will there be another coach to take 50 tests to prove himself?
With the fickle SA fans, probably not.
But then why should Jake prove himself over 50 tests when he did it in 10 in his first year?
Why does he need to prove himself to the public when the only international coach with a better record is Graham Henry in the same time? And that includes coaches like Laporte and O’Sullivan that has been in charge for even longer than he has.
Why does he need to prove anything?
Or rather, what is left to prove?
I say this in a general sense and I wrote many articles about this in the past – the day SA supporters learn how to grow up and stop being so damn fickle, is the day we might actually move forward.
The biggest problem we have, and I will say this again and again – is that we are blinded by traditional provincial cultures and backgrounds and as supporters, have no clue on what it rugby as a professional sport actually means.
September 17th, 2007 at 12:24 am
Any coach given the task of coaching the Springboks in my view has no excuse but to deliver at least a 70-80% success rate of all games played against all other nations both home and away, if he fails to achieve that in my view he has failed as national coach, and to gear every last ounce of the talent resource available to him only to win a knock out competition that comes around every four years at the expense of winning other annual tournaments or tests against equally pitted nations is in my book a failure to deliver the countries hopes and dreams to their natural elevation.
We have a very proud rugby heritage to live up to and to reduce it to only competing at full potential for 6 weeks out of every 4 years is definitely a lack and a losing deal in my book.
We have talent and ability to compete at the highest level 9 times out of ten, to only deliver 50% or less of that time is a failure. So this competition that is elevated above all other competitions belittles the ability and hopes and aspirations of a nations rugby following if we can only muster our full ability and commitment to outright winning only once every 4 long years.
September 17th, 2007 at 12:46 am
Skop,
One question.
In our heritage you mention, and the obvious talent at our disposal, which coach in our history of over 100 years has had a 70-80% record?
Kitch and Mallet are obvious ones, but they only came into the picture recently given our 100+ year history so to me not really part of this heritage you mention that we have to live up to.
Honest question, I don’t know – but if 2 coaches only in 100 years were able to achieve this (given amount of tests coaches as an important guideline for qualification in this regard) then our heritage is not that proud afterall.
Recently, since Williams in 1992 or somewhere around there, we had 9 coaches (if I think about it quickly), and only 2 out of 9 had this record – that is just over 20%. I would love to know the success rate of all previous coaches were.
September 17th, 2007 at 1:09 am
The history prior to 92 is sketchy due to breaks through isolation and ostracizing of Springbok rugby by Home Unions, France, NZ and Aus. But if my sketchy knowledge is anything to go by the Springbok was revered only 2nd to the All Black and maybe in some cases on par or better, throughout that 100 year cycle. So barring a loss here and there to England, France or the British Lions occasionally out of the blue, the only ‘acceptable’ loss to any Sprinbok prior to 81 was in fact a loss to the arch rival the All Blacks, and then only perhaps away not at home.
You mention Christie and Mallet two coaches that managed to maintain that level of esteemed heritage, all others including White have failed to maintain that level of esteem or heritage, until very recently that is, like the last 2 games.
September 17th, 2007 at 1:40 am
BTW just as a parting comment PA, I do agree with you about Carel Dup, I believe he was badly short changed and poorly treated, they canned him after one season (or less) about 4 or 5 tests, and just when his innovative ideas were about to bare fruit they ousted him and gave Mallet all his hard prep on a plate to carry through.
If Carel was given half, nay a quarter of the latitude that Jake has enjoyed, he would have been a far more successful coach than our new found hero.
September 17th, 2007 at 3:18 am
PA… I could not have said any of that better myself…
September 17th, 2007 at 5:00 am
Skop quote
“We have a very proud rugby heritage to live up to and to reduce it to only competing at full potential for 6 weeks out of every 4 years is definitely a lack and a losing deal in my book.”
Although i respect you very much PA this article sounds befitting to the Welsh , they have great spirit , great songs and are happy to compete, winning is not everything for them.
This article in my mind is placed prematurely , nothing is achieved yet by beating a P%ss poor England , we have done it for the last few matches(4). Our scrum has problems and this wouldnt have worked against AUS and NZ. FDP was the big difference between Eng and SA.
Your teory on the history
OK, we cant realy compare the pro and amateur codes , but note one thing the lenght of time the pre 92 coaches had with the players. Some got the teams on the Sunday night before the teasts and by monday it is discovered that some are infact injured/Jake had periods of up to 2 months with this squad.
Jakes record of 48/30 matches is over 4 continous years.
Cecil Moss, 12/10 over 7 years, isolation years
Nellie Smit 15/12 over 17 months
Danie Craven 23/17 over 7 years
Before 92 not a single country had a better win lose ratio against us, not even the mighty ABs. In fact 37/20/15/2.
Since 92,
ABs 35/9/25/1
Aus 34/16/17/1
Aaag forgett it just hope and pray.
September 17th, 2007 at 5:08 am
Markgraaf 13/8 = 61%, won his last 6, had only half a year, achieved wins against ABs x 1, Aus x 1, FRA x 2 (away).
Biggest defeat
10 Aug 1996 New Zealand Lose: 18-29 Newlands, Cape Town
September 17th, 2007 at 8:35 am
Skop,
I just found it interesting which is why I asked, but I did get the following:
Only coaches with 5 tests or more in charge
Kitch Christie 100%
Cecil Moss 83%
Nelie Smith 80%
Danie Craven 73%
Nick Mallett 71%
Boy Louw 66%
Jake White 62%
André Markgraaff 61%
Ian Kirkpatrick 60%
Harry Viljoen 53%
Rudolph Straeuli 52%
Johan Claassen 50%
Avril Malan 50%
Hennie Muller 43%
Carel du Plessis 37%
Ian McIntosh 33%
John Williams 20%
It is unfair to compare the two codes I agree, but it is interesting to note we only had 5 coaches ever to have a 70+% win ration in our history.
Super,
From your last post it is clear we are not on the same page here.
This article is not about the World Cup, and that is the major difference in our opinions. It is not premature, because I could not care less about a World Cup.
Given what has gone before in the last 15 years, I am seeing a team and coach with some form of structure and plan. I see something or someone working towards a goal and with a vision on how to get there, and given this specific plan, he might actually achieve all of this.
Now consider it at any level or apart from a WC scenario. What could it mean to our rugby if someone worked towards something with a plan, how many coaches do we have that has done this?
Heyneke is one, and he is respected by all and achieved his goal in the form of the S14. Muir is arguably another although he has not quite got there yet but if his plan is to buiild the Sharks up again as a union with great depth, he too, is a success.
Now what if we get someone with a plan to win every 3N, or to become the #1 team in the world, or to hammer the British Lions in 2009?
The plan was to take a team in tatters in 2003, and make it all come together (a strong and respected Bok team, an experienced Bok team, and a Bok team with a real chance to win it) in 2007.
Dont simply look at the World Cup, doing that is looking at the S14 final alone and saying Muir failed, and he clearly did not – or Heyneke failed 2 years in a row (pre-2007). Judging someone on a singular moment or event is a mistake, and one we continuily make, and one we will make again.
September 17th, 2007 at 9:36 am
Comment by skopskiet — September 17, 2007 @ 12:24 am
Comment by skopskiet — September 17, 2007 @ 1:09 am
Comment by skopskiet — September 17, 2007 @ 1:40 am
I couldn’t agree more even if I tried.
Remember Jake’s first interview after being appointed? “I want to bring the pride back to the Bok Jersey.”
Pride is not winning a knock out competition. Pride is being to be able to win 60%+ of any game, home and away. If not then you are a one hit wonder.
Jake only started to use the “Jidge me on the WC” excuse when results started going south the EOYT 2004.
I hope the Bok players can win this thing. What unfortunately will be the atrocity is that Jake will be grouped with a great coach like Kitch Christie.
September 17th, 2007 at 9:51 am
So he did not bring pride back Donner?
Beating the All Blacks for the first time since 2000 under Mallet.
Winning the 3N for the second time only.
Team of the year in 2004 this after 2003.
Beating the All Black every year since 2004, no other team came close apart from Aus this year where they beat them.
Beating England for the first time since 2000 and first time in 10 years in England.
Bringing SA from 6 to 2 in World Rugby.
Only losing home games to France and the All Blacks, again no team bar the All Blacks comes even close to that.
4 years after our worst time in history (2003) we are favourites to win the World Cup next to the home team and the All Blacks and have taken our most experienced team over.
Kitch definately had a great record, 14 tests and 14 wins.
All of them at home with the exception of Argentina, Scotland and Wales.
Its all relative isn’t it? Kitch never had to travel to NZ, Aus or England or France and only beat the Blacks once in 1995.
And Jake said from the start that his goal was the World Cup, even to his own players.
September 17th, 2007 at 9:53 am
Donner
Couldn’t disagree more
So
Take a bow Mr White and thanks for Friday
Thanks for Newlands 2005
Thanks for Dunedin 2004
Thanks for Perth 2005
Thanks for Parc de Prince 2007
Thanks for Twickenham 2006
September 17th, 2007 at 9:57 am
PA,
Were you proud of a 40 -0 drubbing?
Were you proud to the fact we we came last in the Tri Nations 2006?
Were you proud during the EOYT’s of 2004 and 2005?
If we want to say that Mallet was successful with Carel’s tema, why cannot we say White was succesful with most of the 2003 team? Yes the disruptive influences were removed by retirement, but the core was stil the 2003 team.
Did Jake all of a sudden teach them to play rugby?
Maybe rugby was not at such a low as you think. Yes the administration side was in shambles.
September 17th, 2007 at 9:59 am
PA,
BTW, Jake didn’t even have a contract till the WC when he was appointed. If I remember correctly he only had a one year contract, that was extended when we won the 2004 Trinations.
Interesting to see what happened with the results after that.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:03 am
your oen intro actualy says what i am trying to.
“I was told by some good friends whose opinions I hold in high regard that this article smacks of arrogance and that we should not get ahead of ourselves after beating a poor English side”
Are you insinuating that all previous Springbok coaches didnt have a plan? It sounds in your reply that only Jake had one. Well only Jake was given a fair chance , and certainly his plans didnt all work , JVDW , MJ/DWB was certainly his long term plans and if we didnt put him under presure they would have been there still.
Like Donner said above Jake promised to bring back the pride in the Bok jersey , if that is a sucsess story, f$#k me.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:06 am
Proud?
Of course not, who likes to lose? I like winning more, and under Jake, we have been winning more and thats the point.
And for the record, 2003 we were in absolute shambles only managing wins against Samoa, Georgia, Uruguay, Scotland, Argentina and scraping one win against Aus (26-20) and losing against everyone else including the Blacks, Aus, Eng.
2002 was even worse with again wins only over Wales, Argentina, Samoa and again scraping a win against Aus (33-31). We lost more than what we won.
So if Jake inherited this team then it makes his accomplishment in 2004 even more significant. 9 victories out of 13 (69%) tests including a victory over the All Blacks for the first time since 2000.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:09 am
Super,
I am not insinuating anything, there are no dark or alterior motives.
Point is simple, Jake’s plan according to what he set himself out to do is coming together.
Am I saying no other coach had one? No.
Did any other coach’s plan come together? No.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:11 am
Nice one PA.
I agree that it seems some guys are missing your point; winning the WC is not the standard you are judging White on, though it would be great.
What is great is watching a team that plays to a plan, that plays as a team, and that has steadily improved.
I really enjoyed the spirit of the team against England, as I did with the team in ’95. The coach is obviously doing something right if the boys are looking so settled, happy and cohesive, despite the obvious pressure, from both within and without.
As an aside, when are we gonna get over this fallacy that the Boks were previously the dominant world rugby power? We have had our moments and have always been in the upper echelon, but foreign fans rightly class us as arrogant for believing that prior to re-admission we were invincible.
Further, 1 player did not win that games for us – FDP was brilliant, but the coach selected him, the coach prepared the game plan, the coach selected his team-mates, and a player struggles to shine if his team-mates aren’t supporting him.
To single FDP out is not only short-sighted, but also disrespectful of a great performance from an entire team.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:11 am
And Super,
Wanted to add, if you read my first paragraph that you quoted a lot of what I am saying should make sense.
You seem to judge everything on this World Cup and the results of it – and this (the artcile)has nothing to do with the World Cup.
If you want to judge White on the World Cup – do so.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:12 am
BF,
Finally, thank you.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:14 am
Fish, Donner and PA
Why haven’t yo changed your nicks yet
Disgraces…
September 17th, 2007 at 10:16 am
Cause PisBok does not really sound all that catchy
September 17th, 2007 at 10:16 am
I don’t think Fishy Bok or Pissed Bok will really show support. Do you?
September 17th, 2007 at 10:18 am
Did anyone notice that although no tries resulted, New Zealand conceded three intercepts against Portugal
That adds to the two they conceded to Italy in the opener
If New Zealand get to the final (IF) and concede three intercepts against us the result will be 21 points and goodnight nurse
Portugal just didn’t have the pace to make it count, while the Italians did.
The Kiwis also look vulnerable to the grinding pick and go close to the line.
Hell if the Portuguese can score a try against them using that….
The reason I say IF New Zealnd reaches the final is because if they simiarly concede two or three intercepts against the Wallabies it’ll also be goodnight nurse.
The 2003 semi was won on a penalty followed almost immediately by an intercept by Striling Mortlock that spelt doom.
10 points in like two minutes and goodnight nurse
The Wallabies won’t sommer just take 3 intercept offers and go home. If the Kiwis concede three or even two interceptions against Aussies it’s SA v Aus in the final and a lynch mob for Carter, McCaw and henry
September 17th, 2007 at 10:19 am
PA (should that not be PissBok?).
I have read your articles with interest for a long time, and I know where you are coming from on this. Maybe people need to contextualise?
After the game, I said to DawieBok that the spirit in the team just kept shining through. The other stand-out of course was the intensity that they played with – they just tackled and ran harder, and when they upped the pace, England couldn’t keep up.
In a WC there are no easy games – surely we have seen that bar a few already? We could win or lose this WC, but I know that we wont get a result that will be a result of lack of effort or that will disgrace us.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:19 am
Comment by PissAnt — September 17, 2007 @ 10:16 am
I rest my case.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:19 am
Well some of us were pissed boks on Friday night…
Bokpiss won’t sound all that cool either I guess
September 17th, 2007 at 10:21 am
I tried to change, let me try again…
September 17th, 2007 at 10:22 am
I must say FishBok that I watched the game after all the hype on Saturday mrning.
During the anthems the Boks were basically just mumbling along
But what got to me was the intensity that shone through in their faces.
You could see from the looks on Os Du Randt and Victor matfield in particular that they just wanted the anthems done and start playing.
The guys were SOOOOOOO focused it was scary.
If you see those looks in the final the Kiwis or Aussies are toast
September 17th, 2007 at 10:22 am
Imagine if the guys get peed off should we loose. Then the nicks will be:
Pissed doos
DavidSdoos
KSA doos
Doosdylan
doos in oz
JT doos
Fishy doos
Donnerdose
September 17th, 2007 at 10:22 am
I have said before and may i say it again not even winning the WC will take away the suffering Jake took us trough, if it sounded that i judge him by this WC sorry but trough the years i said this is a overated TOURNAMENT , the real WChamp should be crowned on World Ranking points , and there Graham Herny is miles ahead. He only lost 5 games in his 45+ games , 89% , if Jake could win a match in NZ i might have believed in him more.
The only reason why Jake is around 40% against the big 5 countries is his last 4 wins against Eng, not that they deserve to be called a big5 nation anymore
September 17th, 2007 at 10:22 am
Cool Fish and Donner
September 17th, 2007 at 10:22 am
Guys…I just have to say what a great weekend this was…
In the Rugby world Cup we totally smashed the current RWC champions 36 – 0
Then we went on and beat them in the T20 WC as well….(there in da Cape my ladies)
And on top of that Albie Morkel got crowned the biggest hitter in world cricket by outgunning Gayle like he is no competition…
Biggest six’s standings:
1) Morkel 106 meters
2) Morkel 104 meters
3) Gayle 101 meters
4) Morkel 100 meters
5)= Morkel/Gayle 99 meters
It is great to be a Saffa this weekend…
Only bad thing is the Pirates lost the SAA final…and the Lions lost to the Cheetahs…but that is only provincial..
September 17th, 2007 at 10:27 am
Comment by Donnerboks — September 17, 2007 @ 10:22 am |Edit This
Nah
Fish will be
Big Doos
September 17th, 2007 at 10:28 am
Super,
Compared to what every coach with the exception of Kristie put us through I would take Jake any day mate.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:28 am
Comment by DavidSBok — September 17, 2007 @ 10:27 am
An I thought you liked the guy.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:32 am
September 17th, 2007 at 10:34 am
Comment by DavidSBok — September 17, 2007 @ 10:27 am
Thanks man!
At least I will only be that if we lose – you are one already.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:52 am
Comment by Donnerboks — September 17, 2007 @ 10:22 am
I already said that I will change my nick to “SpringDoos” should the Boks be crowned RWC 2007 champions.
September 17th, 2007 at 10:58 am
Touche!!!!!
September 17th, 2007 at 10:59 am
So why will fish be a “Big Boks”
September 17th, 2007 at 11:01 am
Comment by Donnerboks — September 17, 2007 @ 10:22 am
So then I’ll become ‘just-another-doos_in_oz’!
September 17th, 2007 at 11:02 am
Where is Wes these days?!?
He got at me when I was goin on about Morkel ahead of the T20 WC…
September 17th, 2007 at 11:03 am
TafleBoks?
September 17th, 2007 at 11:04 am
Comment by Donnerboks — September 17, 2007 @ 10:28 am
Ha-Ha…cool nic…donnerdoos…haha
September 17th, 2007 at 11:04 am
Wes is weg…
September 17th, 2007 at 11:21 am
will take away the suffering Jake took us trough,
Comment by superBul — September 17, 2007 @ 10:22 am
you have to be kidding me…like the suffering we experienced in 2002 and 2003.
50 points drubbings from ABs,Aus and England!
Hell we even lost to Scotland.
September 17th, 2007 at 11:24 am
Comment by DavidSBok — September 17, 2007 @ 11:03 am
I don’t even want to go there and disect that nic…
Donner…you readin this?!?!?!?!?
September 17th, 2007 at 11:27 am
Comment by Bok-El — September 17, 2007 @ 11:04 am
Where to?
September 17th, 2007 at 11:30 am
PA very well said , it still astounds me that supporters out there fail to see what White has managed to achieve with this team.
September 17th, 2007 at 11:44 am
Stop for a while and look at Boks vs ABs since 2004
Played 9
Wins 3 33.3%
Losses 6 66.7%
Its true we won 1 every year and if we go on to the 1 for this year we would probably be crowned WC. But 3 wins out of 9 starts good enough for some , sooory not for me. There is absolutely no good reason for us to play 2nd fiddle to them.
September 17th, 2007 at 11:58 am
Comment by superBul — September 17, 2007 @ 11:44 am
Agree Fully SuperBul on your statement that 1 win a year against the AB’s should not be acceptable
but is it fair to blame CoachWhite for that?
Why would heyneke Meyer have had a better rate?- by playing more Bulls?
Is most of SA Rugby underlying problems not “bigger” than the coach only?
September 17th, 2007 at 12:00 pm
superbul
i agree that we should accept a 33% win ratio against them but we have to agree that they are the number 1 side in the world for the last few years and if we compared our record to theirs we will be found wanting.
under jake we have lost against eng, france, aus, nz and ireland.
under henry, the ab’s have only lost a few tests against us and one against aus.
September 17th, 2007 at 12:15 pm
I dont for one moment think we have any SA coach better than Jake , what i feel is that the moment they(SARU) allowed him to concentrate on the WC and WC alone is when our proud Bok tradition and records was trown out of the window. Jake decided that we dont care about other tests anymore, he was the one who followed Clive Woodwards blue print to go for one thing the WC. So by the way Woodwards winning percentage was 71%.
September 17th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
I told a bunch of guys on Saturday that we shouldn’t have been surprised at the outsomes
I watched 6N this year at the same time as Super 14
At the end I held the view that any of the Bulls, Sharks, Crusaders, Blues and Brumbies would have won the 6N if they took part
September 17th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
Comment by superBul — September 17, 2007 @ 12:15 pm |Edit This
Graham Henry got similarly lambasted for doing the same thing…
September 17th, 2007 at 12:18 pm
Super,
In over 100years we had 5 coaches with a win % of over 70.
That roughly means one coach every 20 years in Bok rugby.
There are many reasons we play second fiddle to NZ, reasons aired and debated before between the differences in the two countries not only from a rugby perspective – but I see no reason to go into that again.
There is no reason we should keep on playing second fiddle to them but then quite a bit needs to change in or rugby, least of which is the coach or any coach or how our players are coached.
Like Fish said, given this record of our coaches over time it is probably time we get of our high horses thinking that ‘once we were great’ – I cannot see that we were. Sure we had our moments and we are always there and there about, most coaches do, even White.
September 17th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
And strangely enough
After the first two games of the World Cup, which two teams are considered the front runners to be WORLD CHAMPIONS
Surprisingly, the two teams that actually allowed themselves not to worry about results from 2003 – 2007 and concentrated on winning the world cup…
September 17th, 2007 at 12:20 pm
Comment by superBul — September 17, 2007 @ 12:15 pm
Now we are getting into what the real problem is and you will find that I agree with you, but Super, this is the way of modern rugby my man.
All international coaches are judged on this event, thus every coach works to this event and puts all his eggs in the World Cup basket.
Nothing else matters in rugby anymore.
3N, 6N, etc are boring and serves no purpose anymore – it is all about the World Cup. Coaches gets hired and fired for it, its the reality.
September 17th, 2007 at 12:25 pm
Woodward het 22 games gespeel en net een verloor voor die WB eindstryd
September 17th, 2007 at 12:30 pm
If Jake does win this thing with the Boks, he would have a record that reads 15/3 going into the world cup.
Played 15, lost only 3.
Not that much different at all.
September 17th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
PA
“All international coaches are judged on this event, thus every coach works to this event and puts all his eggs in the World Cup basket.
Nothing else matters in rugby anymore”
Heaven forbids , are we going to see friendlies only , like in soccer.
What will the point be to go and watch tests again, lets all fight this, this is something worth fighting for. Cant imagine watching a AB test with a smile on my face after another 49-0
September 17th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
3N, 6N, etc are boring and serves no purpose anymore – it is all about the World Cup. Coaches gets hired and fired for it, its the reality.
Comment by BokAnt — September 17, 2007 @ 12:20 pm
So true – John Mitchell
September 17th, 2007 at 12:39 pm
Super,
That is the reality my man. I have been saying it for close to a year now.
Power are going to go back to clubs and club/franchise rugby with national duty playing second fiddle between World Cups.
Of course every guy wants to represent his country at a WC, but for the 4 years inbetween, nothing else matters.
Watch this space.
September 17th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
I mean like think of it in these terms
Who’s the current Soccer World Champions?
Italy
So what was the outcome of the last match that Italy played outside the World Cup?
Exactly
Who cares
In 1990 Germany won SCW in Italy right
Five weeks afterwards they played a friendly against Portugal and lost
Question
Who cares
Why is Brazil the best soccer team in the world?
because they’ve won the World Cup the most…
September 17th, 2007 at 12:49 pm
Sad ,Sad does things we love mean nothing anymore , hey we must stop this trend, how on earth can we give up everything precious to us, time to fight back. We want it i believe.
September 17th, 2007 at 12:52 pm
Good luck Jake, I can’t say I’ve ever wavered in my support for you, hope you prove me right
or it’s pie + face for me 
September 17th, 2007 at 12:55 pm
Comment by DavidSBok — September 17, 2007 @ 12:42 pm
Although Euro soccer fans also go nuts for UEFA. Euro 2008 is gonna be huge.
Also in S America the Copa America is supported passionately by millions. ( It is the oldest international soccer tournament in the world.)
Maybe for rugby the answer is to have the Tri Nations plus Agrentina every 2 years, and obv. never in WC year.
September 17th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
Superbul
Let me ask you this
Would you go watch Bulls v Border at Loftus?
Can you remember who were the teams that came here for the incoming tours prior to 3N the last few years?
Do you think Samoa’s crowd in the pre 3N would have been bigger if it was a 3N decider against New Zealand?
You see
It’s already happening
September 17th, 2007 at 1:03 pm
Yoss
Damn you that was going to be the next thing I said!!!!!!!
We follow the soccer example and lay on a 4N tounament every four years between World Cups between the 3N teams and Argentina and a PI combo (no not New Zealand I mean a real PI combo as in Samoa, Tonga and Fiji)
In the year right after or right before you do a tour
September 17th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
Brilliant article.
September 17th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
Although Euro soccer fans also go nuts for UEFA. Euro 2008 is gonna be huge.
Ok Brazil & Argentina is missing but the Euro tornaments is way tuffer than the Worldcup!