In his latest newsletter Mark Keohane, a sports journalist who at one stage was part of the Springbok setup under Rudolps Straeuli believes the current situation surrounding Frans Steyn can only be resolved by one person, Frans Steyn.
Mark Keohane
What to make of the Frans Steyn situation? What indeed?
The only person with that answer is Frans Steyn. It is convenient to knock Peter de Villiers for his stupidity when it comes to certain ramblings, and no doubt a lot of damage was done in relation to Steyn when he publicly criticized Steyn after the Boks’ win against Wales in Cardiff and then did not select him for the June internationals or the away leg of the Tri Nations.
Steyn’s agent seems to do all the talking and the word in the industry is he is the biggest problem because it stems from the make-up of Steyn’s club contract with Racing Metro. If Steyn is not there and away on international duty he then loses on his remuneration – and by extension so does his agent. Steyn makes up for it with match fees for the Boks, but his agent gets nothing while Steyn is with the Boks. Steyn is the agent’s meal ticket. This is the word in the industry, and the only person capable of giving the exact breakdown of what the issue is, is the player. Steyn has conveniently avoided being the bad guy in this situation. His agent talks; De Villiers responds and the there is little love between the two of them.
De Villiers says there is no problem between him and Steyn, but opinion on this within Bok circles is divided and the most commonly held view is that Steyn does not rate De Villiers, has little respect for his coaching ability and does not want to play under him.
If this is the case then Steyn must go on record and say so and make himself unavailable for Bok selection until such time as there is a new coach, which will be after the 2011 World Cup. It is a player’s right to chose the environment in which he plays, even though the average supporter would be disgusted at players being selective about when they play for their country.
If Steyn does not have the desire to play Test rugby – and that well may be the case because he started so young and at 20 years-old had already won a World Cup medal – then he must be mature enough to say so. It could be he needs two years at club level in Europe, without the enormous pressure that comes with having played for your country at 19, and then returns to Test rugby rejuvenated at 25 and ready to commit to those pressures for the next five years.
To get closure on the immediate situation, it is Steyn – and not De Villiers – who needs to be doing the talking. The bad guy here is not De Villiers. The bad guy, by continued silence, is the player every South African supporter wants to see wearing the Bok No 15 jersey. It is time Steyn spoke with the same clarity and authority with which he kicks a ball.
To subscribe to Mark Keohane’s newsletter visit www.keo.co.za to sign up.
August 13th, 2010 at 12:34 pm
Very nice piece by Keo and I cannot help but agree.
August 13th, 2010 at 1:11 pm
yeah… don’t often agree with mark… but have to say “good piece” on this one…
August 13th, 2010 at 1:28 pm
Reply to Morné @ 12:34 pm:
because it support your view?
Just as much conjecture in this piece as in all the other where Peter is the bad guy.
“word is steyn does not rate Peter”.
Now there is an allegation.
Just to back Steyn up aa bit, the player would not have been thrust into the spotlight if there were any planning. His choice (and this is from his father to my dad) is that he wanted to experience europe, not play for the boks and only return after 2011 to challenge for the next world cup.
Peter does not want to play foreign okes and Steyn was fine with this, until all hell broke loose and he was flown in to save the team because again there was no planning (jooste and mac) around back-up players.
In contrast a player like jean Divs did not cut it and in the meantime his poissie was under threat, so he runs back and shoves for his position which he might not deserve anymore?
Do you agree that all of this could have been avoided had there been a proper 15 tried to replace Steyn once the incumbent (my other favourite) jantjes was injured?
August 13th, 2010 at 1:34 pm
Reply to Brendon Shields @ 1:28 pm:
What you say is fine in theory, but in reality the coach only has space for x players in the squad. With that he has to:
- Blood new players
- Test out new possible combinations
- Have a balance between experience and youth
- Develop depth
- Try and find new talent
- Appease the politicians
- Win every match
- Take into account and make a decision on lost form players
- Contend with injury
- etc.
Planning is easily said and done with hindsight. Foresight is a moer lot harder.
August 13th, 2010 at 1:34 pm
Steyn is wrong (naive) to let his agent do the talking.
Peter is wrong to slate his players in the press.
The impression is thus created by both that they are not interested.
My question is why MUST we have Steyn at all cost suddenly? Because plan B failed? What about plan C?
Same with BJ and CJ and all the clowns overseas. You cannot be selected is you dont play in SA. Fair enough.
The next thing SA not only demands you come and play but after your game tells you how kak you are?
Why dont they just leave the foreign players alone?
August 13th, 2010 at 1:36 pm
Reply to Ollie @ 1:34 pm:
when did steyn say his leaving, and Percy retired, and Jantjes got injured? How long ago did these 3 things occur?
So how many alternative 15′s have we tried?
Or did we always just think if we in trouble we will fly Steyn in?
August 13th, 2010 at 1:38 pm
Reply to Brendon Shields @ 1:28 pm:
Uhm well ja…
The conclusion of this piece is simple – the only person to solve this issue is one Frans Steyn…
And:
His choice (and this is from his father to my dad) is that he wanted to experience europe, not play for the boks and only return after 2011 to challenge for the next world cup.
Is this a fact?
Well how is it you are so happy to sit on the fence then Brendon?
If this is true then it is quite clear Steyn DOES NOT want to be considered for the Boks so what is stopping him from just saying it?
Maybe ask your dad to ask his dad.
August 13th, 2010 at 1:40 pm
Reply to Morné @ 1:38 pm:
In fact given that one quote from you, Keo is absolutely spot on with this piece.
August 13th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
Morne as I said, and dont be so defensive, you are not a woman, is that I believe Peter and Steyn are good people and Bok heroes. I give both the benefit of the doubt.
Steyn reluctance to play for the Boks right now i believe has little to do with his relationship with Peter, which is what Keo plays on. My understanding is that Steyn just wanted to get away for a bit and give his all to his club and then come back and fight for his position. Nothing to do with Peter or anyone.
But given this, do you think there is any way that Steyn can say out loud that he wants a break without this being interpreted as arrogance? So he rather keeps silent?
Again, do you think this would have been an issue had there been another 15 groomed?
August 13th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
and as far as I know Steyns dad is not the nicest person, walys ready to tell anyone who good his son is and that he should play 10.
My own father (seeing as he is now in the discussion) reasons that Steyn wanted to get away from his dad first and foremost.
August 13th, 2010 at 2:03 pm
Reply to Brendon Shields @ 1:52 pm:
I am hardly being defensive Brendon.
I dont have issues with either and personally would love for Steyn to be playing for the Boks. Been saying it from the start but then I also said he and/or Peter need to sort this shit out like grown men.
De Villiers says there is no problem between him and Steyn, but opinion on this within Bok circles is divided and the most commonly held view is that Steyn does not rate De Villiers, has little respect for his coaching ability and does not want to play under him.
He mentions it, mentions it is divided, implies that it could be a factor but does not state it as fact.
For my money, his message is that Steyn is hiding behind his agent and club and for once, the player needs to come out and make his feelings clear.
He can even do a joint statement with SA Rugby on the matter but again, that will mean these guys sit in a room and sort their shit out like grown men.
Steyn keeping silent and causing this much controvesy every single time he is selected for the Bok does his, and the team’s reputation no good.
De Villiers have stated many times how he rates Steyn and how he wants him to play for the Boks.
He has also expressed his concern with Steyn playing at Metro and the difficulties this pose for him as coach – it is about time Steyn makes his feelings as clear as PDV did.
My problem with this whole thing and whenever this comes up is that it is way too easy to make the Boks, PDV and SA Rugby out as bumbling fools when the REAL issue lies elsewhere.
And Keo deals with what I believe, is the real issue.
August 13th, 2010 at 2:19 pm
Steyn could do worse than sign with the bulls once his contract is up. We don’t have any decent 15s coming through.
August 13th, 2010 at 2:20 pm
Few good points Morne.
You are however not addressing the planning conundrum. Steyn plays at 12. He has not played 15 for a year. Boks push him in there for one game. He is ordinary. Coach says he lacks speed etc.
My issue is with the selectors here.
Steyn is not in SA which means he cannot be selected.
The player is fine with this and focussing on a new position etc. Then suddenly the Boks are stuck and all of a sudden Steyn needs to jump for the cause. I am sure he loves the Boks enough to do so, but I am not sure his career has been taken into consideration here, which points to bad player management on behalf of SARU and the selectors.
Now we expect Steyn to come out and say all this? Will he have a career left in SA after he does so?
Thats not fair. At best I think he should learn to write his own statements and not let his agent speak for him and thus twist words etc.
August 13th, 2010 at 2:22 pm
Reply to Brendon Shields @ 2:20 pm:
Point taken.
Solution, simply do not select any overseas based players as we cannot manage or map their careers effectively?
August 13th, 2010 at 2:22 pm
My personal opinion on this is that our selectors THOUGHT they had it covered and then came unstuck.
I suppose this happens and its a human mistake.
But now Frans gets the kak yet no-one points a finger at the shoddy planning around this.
Yet most people are so eager to paint Peter as a fool tat they miss entirely who is really to blame for this.
August 13th, 2010 at 2:25 pm
Reply to Morné @ 2:22 pm:
well yes. and the players who take contracts abroad must know this is the drill. which they do mostly.
steyn is so young that he could do this stint with no pressure and come back a mature person with more rugby experience etc.
Now its a mess, and i dont think it would have been had Steyn not been needed?
August 13th, 2010 at 2:33 pm
Reply to Brendon Shields @ 2:20 pm:
“suddenly the Boks are stuck and all of a sudden Steyn needs to jump for the cause.”
yet…
many people have been castigating WP for not releasing nienaber to the boks… there’s not only nienaber’s career on the line… but all the coaches and players at wp… and the commercial interests of the union based on the success (or not) of the CC season…
yet people expected all that to be sacrificed… on a perhaps/maybe/wishful/hope that nienaber could fix the boks…
much food for thought…
August 13th, 2010 at 2:38 pm
Reply to Brendon Shields @ 2:22 pm:
Look to one Andy Marinos I reckon.
August 13th, 2010 at 2:40 pm
All in all I hope there are lessons learned so we don’t end up with this
again.
August 13th, 2010 at 2:47 pm
Steyns main asset is his long range boot. The Boks are loing by 15-20 points so a few extra penalties aren’t going to solve the problem. Leave Steyn where he is, he’s made his choices for the moment. What the Boks need is a decsion making ball player, that without FDP is clearly needed.
http://fromthebottomoftheruck.blogspot.com/
August 13th, 2010 at 2:51 pm
Reply to Fromthebottomoftheruck @ 2:47 pm:
FDP has really left a hole.
August 13th, 2010 at 3:01 pm
Steyn at 15 has more value than just his kicking. He normally keeps 2-3 defenders busy, so if he decides to run the ball back, his ability to remain standing longer in the tackle gives more time for the support to arrive and retain possession
August 13th, 2010 at 3:14 pm
His long range drop goals also force opponents to make sure they kick the ball out, into the stands. Resulting in better line-out possession for his team.
One thing leads to another.
August 13th, 2010 at 3:18 pm
Long range place kicking abilities force other teams to be more circumspect in their break down tactics over a larger part of the field.
More turn-overs for his team, less for the opponents.
Turn-overs lead to tries. One more for the Boks and one less for their opponents may be a 14 point swing in the final result.
August 13th, 2010 at 3:20 pm
Reply to Bokhoring T @ 3:01 pm:
Steyns value is that you have to kick out when you clear. If not you risk him taking a drop. But if you kick out you will lose ball because our line-out is (was) the best.
He also place-kicks from inside his own half, which means you cannot be penalised against SA in this area.
In other words so much of our game plan rests on this type of player in the team.
Why did we not just replace him with similar player then? Viljoen plays the same game. Daniller has the same size and many other attributes. Yet we somehow did not spend enough time exploring any other options.
Reply to UFO @ 2:33 pm:
I agree 100% ufo. Why must WP now suddenly jump? Forward planning surely could have prevented this?
Its as if the Bok brains take many things for granted when we on top, leaving us exposed when we do fall.
August 13th, 2010 at 3:26 pm
Reply to Brendon Shields @ 3:20 pm: I agree fully about his kicking, but what should also not be forgotten is his strength in the tackle. If he does decide to run the ball back, you have a much better chance of retaining the possession, as opposed to guys like Zane against a good defensive system is going to concede a turnover 9 out of 10 times – hence all the useless up and unders
August 13th, 2010 at 3:26 pm
Reply to Brendon Shields @ 3:20 pm:
The thing is that there are people hired in certain positions that are just not getting the results intended. When taht happens you have to go outside again. The trick is to decide when to go outside or for how long to allow the original person to try and fix the situation.
August 13th, 2010 at 3:38 pm
So after the secod game against NZ did we not worry yet about our defence, after the 8th try was scored against us in 8 days?
Did we then notify Nienaber that we require himn for the home games?
If not did we do so the day after we played Oz?
If not did we do so the minute we landed here?
No. Instead we waited until #99.
August 13th, 2010 at 3:42 pm
Reply to Ollie @ 3:26 pm:
Peter is not allowed to make mistakes Ollie.
August 13th, 2010 at 3:45 pm
Reply to Brendon Shields @ 3:38 pm:
Basically it comes down to having had 3 attempts at adjusting the current defensive plan and then call in somebody else.
3 Chances is not that many considering that both NZ and AUS will have different aspects to their play that need to be taken into account defensively
August 13th, 2010 at 3:46 pm
Reply to Morné @ 3:42 pm:
Players and coaches are always judged on their most recent results. PdV is not special in that regard.
August 13th, 2010 at 3:46 pm
Reply to Morné @ 3:42 pm:
What’s good for the goose is poison for the gander it seems
August 13th, 2010 at 3:51 pm
Reply to fyndraai @ 3:46 pm:
Nor should he.
As long as he is judged like any coach before him, I have no issues.
August 13th, 2010 at 3:51 pm
Anycase I am out folks, enjoy your weekends!
August 13th, 2010 at 4:00 pm
Reply to Morné @ 3:42 pm:
yes because a bricklayer or an accountant should not make the same mistakes made 400 years ago.
the key idea of progress is to build systems that protect you from makeing the same mistakes in future.
Why must SARU learn the lesson to have outside experts if its worked so well under White? You’d think it logical they would keep whats worked and discard what did not, but instead the preferred to start from scratch?
August 13th, 2010 at 4:06 pm
Reply to fyndraai @ 3:46 pm:
it seems peter and hoskins get a clean sheet to make every mistake made before by virtue of them being previously disadvantaged.
And all this because the racists on the one side would do their utmost to discredit both based on a prejudiced understanding of their competence.
So we are fucked basically.
August 13th, 2010 at 4:20 pm
Reply to Brendon Shields @ 4:06 pm:
All coaches make mistakes, it’s a given.
As for outside experts, what is Percy, what is Os?
JW only brought Eddie in right before the RWC. Calder is the only real difference.
You could argue for Noakes as well but PDV has a medical team that is working with the unions in order to monitor the and condition the players in collaboration with each other.
Also, you can’t compare accountants and rugby coaches, the dynamics are hugely different. Compare rugby coaches with businesses in highly competitive markets. Companies have being going bust for aeons.
A CEO can be good in one company, move him to another and the new company nearly folds.
Be careful of over simplifying.
Just to make my stand clear, I just think PDV get more flack than he deserves. In my books He has to fix the current problems by EOYT time to show that he is capable. The fact that he tried to get Nienaber in shows that he is trying to do just that.
August 13th, 2010 at 4:22 pm
Also, count the number of missed tackles in the first 3 matches. Tackling is taught from U10′s through to Super x that is not a coaching problem.
August 13th, 2010 at 4:58 pm
Ollie it just pains me how reluctant our selectors wer to play Brussouw and M Steyn last year and how in fact the Lions campaign was saved in large part by the influence of these 2 players.
This time no-one saved us (not Zane or Francois Louw) so we lost.
Its all too by chance for my liking. Not scientific or calculated
Percy and Os were good choices. But White did not only HAVE Calder and Noakes around. The opinions of these two were given real importance. Their word were the law almost.
Tackling is not coachable but a defensive pattern is. Why did they abandon the umbrella yet Habana still thinks its on?
August 13th, 2010 at 4:58 pm
Reply to Morné @ 12:34 pm: Sure you could not wait to post this
August 13th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
Creesus Jaist!
I swear Morne and Ollie are like Groundhawg Day on this issue
As I said before
If you repeat a lie enough it does not become true… no matter what your fantasies are…
August 13th, 2010 at 5:33 pm
but dawie I thought you are this months anointed Peter defender?
What with boks holding back and all that?
Peter is only the coach. My bigger gripe is with selectors.
1) Since Adi jacobs departure we have seen no stratgu of creative attack. This has not been dealth with at all.
2) Jake already did not groom a follow up 9 for FdP. Selectors to blame once more. Then Ricky is stop-gap solution, but he is not even conditioned?
3) Frans’ play dictates so much of how we play. Why not even try finding a sub that resemble Frans’ attributes?
4) Props. We are not sure about Smit. Now we have fucked him around also. He is now a 2 conditioned to be a prop? Now they toss around with CJ and BJ and every other Jay.
5) The selectors never deemed Brussouw good enough, until injury forced his selection. He gets injured and its agreed all over that Stegman is not onoly similar but the second best fetcher. Again the selectors sleep on it and Louw forces his way in. Where was he last year in the pecking order?
On and on. Selectors?
August 13th, 2010 at 5:44 pm
Reply to Brendon Shields @ 5:33 pm:
Who is the main selector
that calls the shots?
As for the Tina saga: I blame
Snor only for not kicking the
arse of Marinos, whoever.
JASSAS – how difficult can it
be to sort out?
I deducted that Marinos will be
flying to Europe to sort out all
the OS based Boks’ terms and
conditions.
Hope he doesn’t miss his flight.
August 13th, 2010 at 5:54 pm
ja its always crisis management as there is no forward planning.
as far as I understand under white many of the good initiatives (prozone,clinics.technology etc) were initiated by the sponsors and not by SARU/White.
Again you want your coach to be an expert on matter between the 4 lines, and SOMEONE ELSE to do the rest.
We were lucky that White had a great relationship with sponsors etc, which Peter seems to not enjoy.
August 13th, 2010 at 6:07 pm
I also wonder what peter was shiting on about a while ago when he said he needs to “make decisions that can benefit the boks in 2012″ after this generation is done?
What did he mean by that?
Are they planning for 2012 in 2010 but in 2009 they did not plan for 2010?
August 13th, 2010 at 6:08 pm
Again SARU needs to explain this but its a closed shop.
August 13th, 2010 at 6:24 pm
Andries Kalkoen is now with Saru.
He has firsthand knowledge of all
the frustrations caused by Saru and
regularly let rip in his column.
Now nothing has changed.
Maybe they just can’t be bothered.
August 13th, 2010 at 6:33 pm
Reply to Jacques(Bunny) @ 4:58 pm: Reply to DavidS @ 5:24 pm:
WOW what absolutely mind-numbing posts there…
Reply to Brendon Shields @ 6:08 pm:
andReply to Boertjie @ 6:24 pm:
It all has to come down to the head honcho, and that is PDV, I agree with it and always have.
But we also need to have an appreciation how things work in SA Rugby – the one guy will much rather look to screw you than help you (coaches supporting one another).
Administrators as a whole are a bunch of fucking clowns.
I have long been a supporter of a strong DOR at national level and nothing has changed.
Believe it or not, I have little sympathy for PDV, but I have a lot of empathy.
August 13th, 2010 at 7:27 pm
Reply to Morné @ 6:33 pm:
I was referring to Saru’s bungling,
also as far as communication and
general image is concerned.
Those should not be the worries of
the coach, although he was very
much part of the way the criticism
against referees came to the fore.
Snor should be able to say:
“I want Tina in the squad, get me
a definite answer if and when he
will be available” and then make
his squad announcements.
It seems he may have been mislead.
August 13th, 2010 at 7:29 pm
Reply to Boertjie @ 7:27 pm:
It does work like that and you are spot on about the fact that his or SA rugby let him down and made all this more than it ever should have been.
The day a coach can merely worry about coaching will be a major turning point in rugby in this country.
We live in hope.
August 13th, 2010 at 8:27 pm
About Nienaber’s withdrawal
from the Bok squad by WP:
Does it mean that Mossie,
JdeV, Aplon, Habs etc. should
also stay mum?
Loyalty with the province or
the country?
August 13th, 2010 at 10:06 pm
NAAS BOTHA ON NIENABER:
“I believe your country should come first, but then the Boks should have contracted him as a defensive consultant in December last year already.
“When things are not going your way, you cannot suddenly expect to get someone to leave their job to come help you when you are in trouble.
August 14th, 2010 at 12:33 am
Naas as usual the most level-headed of the commentators. When I was in SA recently I destinctly heard him say that he was going to be “away on sabbatical”. He probably deserves it but it worries me that there will be nobody at Supersport who can reign in the rediculous comments from the other “experts” who seem able to distort the SA rugby public thinking.
August 14th, 2010 at 4:00 am
Oh no… “The Emperors New Clothes” mob have now stooped to new levels by ‘for the first time in my memory’ actually posting a Voldy article to support their delusional cause!
Desperation is as rife as a clown resorting to scape-goating!
August 14th, 2010 at 4:03 am
Reply to Ollie @ 1:34 pm:
Oh please… recite your points again with the persistence of the worlds slowest uber-quota Ralepelle and also Ricky January in mind…
Monumental fail!
August 14th, 2010 at 10:53 am
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 4:00 am:
Not so much different from you quoting Ryan Vrede just two days ago is it?
Question is, do you agree with it or not?
August 14th, 2010 at 4:30 pm
So put simply its the Delusional Mob Vs Alzeihmers Brigade. Who needs pay per view
August 14th, 2010 at 4:46 pm
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 4:03 am:
Why, would it change your mind about anything? My guess is not so I wont even bother.
August 14th, 2010 at 4:46 pm
Reply to farjan @ 4:30 pm:
HEHEHEHE
August 14th, 2010 at 4:49 pm
Well, we know who always has
to do the explaining after
having put his foot into his
mouth.
August 14th, 2010 at 4:50 pm
Reply to Boertjie @ 4:49 pm:
Oh, sorry – I forgot:
He always gets misquoted -
even in TV interviews.
August 15th, 2010 at 8:04 am
“Peter is only the coach. My bigger gripe is with selectors.”
Wrong… Snor demanded that SARU rewrite the constitution so he has SOLE mandate over selection!
‘Jake already did not groom a follow up 9 for FdP. Selectors to blame once more.
‘
Nope Ruan Pienaar was the backup… Snor chose to persist with RJ and then expect RP to win the Aus test!
August 15th, 2010 at 9:48 am
Morne
You and Ollie have proven yourselves too stupid to understand well structured conclusive answers to your nonsensical opinions…
I already said I have given up on that route
From now on everytime you two morons try something like that I’ll just troll and derail the thread…
August 15th, 2010 at 9:57 am
Reply to DavidS @ 9:48 am:
I’ve seen more objectiveness from a pair of Jehovah’s Witness’…
August 15th, 2010 at 9:58 am
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 9:57 am:
I forgot…
and
and
August 15th, 2010 at 12:56 pm
Bryce you forgot to wave too
Oh wait… you didn’t…
Remember for me it is
As I said
when I raised the issues with them concerning the IRB regulations the first time they wanted to argue with me about the regulations.
They were like a chicken after you chop its head off. Still flapping its wings and kicking legs and you’re like “Hey… your head’s been chopped off!” and the chicken is like “Yeah but I ain’t dead yet!”
August 16th, 2010 at 12:10 pm
I was wondering why Morne and co (now deciding to post Voldy articles) haven’t posted the updates?
http://www.keo.co.za/2010/08/16/simple-solution-to-steyn-saga/
August 16th, 2010 at 12:12 pm
MARK KEOHANE, in his weekly Business Day column, says Peter de Villiers should have picked up the phone months ago and spoken directly with the Bok fullback.
Frans Steyn has told South Africans he is prepared to die for his country – on a rugby field that is. Personally I’d much prefer him to want to live for his country – on a rugby field that is. Steyn wouldn’t be worth anything dead.
The Springboks are a better side with a living Steyn at fullback, although there has been little life when it comes to communication between Steyn and Springbok coach Peter de Villiers, who last week publicly questioned Paris-based Steyn’s commitment to playing for his country.
Steyn’s response was by way of the media. He said he wanted to go to the World Cup. He said he was prepared to die on a field for the Springboks. He said in an interview with Rapport newspaper that he hadn’t spoken to De Villiers since a one-off appearance against Wales in Cardiff in June. The only communication was from convener of selectors Peter Jooste a few weeks ago to tell him he would only be considered for the Boks’ Grand Slam tour in November.
Then Steyn was picked for the home Tri-Nations Tests.
Steyn said he called the Bok coach and left a voice message. He hasn’t heard from him again. While Steyn was doing his talking in one Sunday publication, De Villiers was doing his in another and had this to say about Steyn and the 2011 World Cup in New Zealand: ‘Regarding Frans, I haven’t thought that far yet.’
It was the most revealing of responses because De Villiers seems to have thought about everything else in confirming he had already identified his World Cup squad and that there would not be enough time (more than a year) to introduce new players.
De Villiers also had a few other things to say, which I’ll get to, but what I can never understand – and De Villiers is not the exception among rugby coaches – is just why it is so damn difficult for a coach to talk directly to a player.
I can only think the problem is the size of so many coach’s egos. Do they consider it beneath them to be the first to call and is it the responsibility of the player to go on two knees in asking for personal communication?
Players don’t initiate communication with coaches because players don’t select themselves, but no coach can expect loyalty from a player when that coach can’t take the time to speak to the player and uses third parties and the public forum of the media to get across the message.
De Villiers did not want Steyn in his squad, which explains why he hasn’t ‘thought that far yet’ when it comes to Steyn’s World Cup ambitions. The senior players then insisted Steyn get selected, and with De Villiers having sworn allegiance to these senior players he was compelled to reintroduce Steyn to the national squad.
Steyn, in the interim, had got hurt in a pre-season club match and did not make it to South Africa. Now there is doubt over the seriousness of the injury and De Villiers, again publicly, questioned Steyn’s desire and how much the medical opinion can be trusted.
Steyn then fired back that there had been no communication between De Villiers and himself. And so it has continues … everything gets said in the media, but nothing gets said privately.
The situation would have been resolved months ago by one phone call, and if the coach had made the effort and Steyn had still played silly buggers then make it public, but the only thing De Villiers has made public is that he refuses to talk personally to Steyn.
Ideally you’d want a coach who actually wants to talk to one of the best players in the world, but generally when it comes to De Villiers you’d want him to do less talking and more coaching, assuming that he has it in him to actually coach.
And it is an assumption that I make with little conviction after reading De Villiers’ Sunday Times interview with Simnikiwe Xabanisa. His answers lacked reflection and introspection and rugby intelligence.
‘Studying our videos, it’s mind boggling to me why we didn’t win,’ was De Villiers’ response to losing 32-12 and 31-17 to the All Blacks and 30-13 to the Wallabies.
Mindboggling is more appropriate to De Villiers’ refusal to dial a number and tell a player he either wants him in his squad or doesn’t.
What should boggle the mind though is when your teams scores four tries and concedes one and loses. And for purposes of clarity De Villiers’ team scored the one try.
August 16th, 2010 at 12:14 pm
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 12:10 pm:
Now Bryce I would be fascinated to know how the same guy can write two articles not 3 days apart that differs this much?
Perhaps because one is not printed in the mainstream media circles (newsletter) and the other one he is playing to his audience?
But hey like I said, if it is that easy to feed the monkey’s peanuts I would also do it.
August 16th, 2010 at 12:26 pm
Reply to Morné @ 12:14 pm:
Either way… unfortunately for the coach… my side of the fence is proving to be the correct one… almost too the letter…
August 16th, 2010 at 12:26 pm
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 12:26 pm:
“unfortunately for the coach… (and the team)…”
August 16th, 2010 at 12:27 pm
And with that… the last time I provide a link to the nuthouse of rugby blogs
August 16th, 2010 at 12:32 pm
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 12:26 pm:
Naaah wouldn’t say that.
Especially since Gerrie Swart, Steyn’s agent insists all communications go through him, and speaking of Gerrie, I see Keo made no mention of the email which Gerrie sent to him before the Welsh test.
Keo unfortunately does not deal with facts and he basically re-inforces his point (through his article in Business Day) that Steyn is looking to paint himself pretty in the media…
In his newsletter he gives you a nice insight in how things work at this level (as he was part of the Bok setup and know exactly how these things work) and in his BD column he reports from one side of the spectrum only.
August 16th, 2010 at 12:33 pm
But I am seriously all Steyn’ed out. I would rather talk about quotas.
August 16th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
Reply to Morné @ 12:33 pm:
Source: TheTackler…
Peter ‘OMO’ De Villiers… the Steyn-remover…
August 16th, 2010 at 12:39 pm
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 12:37 pm:
Bwahaha, kak funny.
August 16th, 2010 at 1:39 pm
Reply to DavidS @ 12:56 pm:
Actually in your comments about the IRB regulations there was no mention about the 2 weeks notification window. Which, if a remember correctly, somebody (Morné?) said did not apply to the 3N.
Secondly the very fact that Steyn said something that was reported along the lines of, “De Villiers gave Steyn an undertaking during their meeting on May 28 that he would visit France to sort out matters with Racing Metro.” Means that THERE IS AN ISSUE with the club.
So I say it again, I want facts not this he said she said back and forth rhetoric through the most unreliable of communicators, the media.
You guys are like granny chicken licken with wet panties, squealing. The sky is not going to fall on your heads. Bok rugby is not dying. There is nothing that is not quickly fixable wrong with the Boks.
It’s so saffa to run somebody down in the most derogatory way possible when your disagree with the way somebody else does something (and I am not referring to your comments about me). We must be one of the most socially anti-social countries in the world.
As a last comment on this issue, without being any of us actually being in the inner circles of the Bok setup we cannot know what the reasons are behind what is happening. Therefore I treat the information as such. Until there are clear facts to unconditionally prove the inadequacy of PDV or any player I will continue pointing issues that attempt to balance the scales.
Capish
August 16th, 2010 at 1:40 pm
Reply to Ollie @ 1:39 pm:
should read: As a last comment on this issue, without any of us actually being in the inner circles of the Bok setup we cannot know what the reasons are behind what is happening.
August 16th, 2010 at 2:03 pm
Reply to Ollie @ 1:39 pm:
“You guys are like granny chicken licken with wet panties, squealing”
I was too afraid to read past there…
August 16th, 2010 at 2:15 pm
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 2:03 pm:
Why? The truth hurt to much?
August 16th, 2010 at 2:32 pm
Reply to Ollie @ 2:15 pm:
The case is pretty much wrapped up… Snor’s lies caught up to him…
August 16th, 2010 at 2:33 pm
Reply to Morné @ 12:33 pm:
Forget Steyn. Why not address some of the real issues.
De Villiers telling us he “slacked off”.
De Villiers telling us that rugby “boggles his mind.”
The (non)firing saga and what it says about who is in charge.
His discovery, 2.5 months into the season, that the Bulls and WP players has not been playing to the same game-plan. Did he not communicate HIS plan to them? Does he have a plan? His implausible claim that it has been resolved at a single meeting.
August 16th, 2010 at 2:34 pm
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 2:32 pm:
Ok, it’s obvious you didn’t read my post to the end.
I’m done on this issue
August 16th, 2010 at 4:23 pm
Reply to Ollie @ 2:34 pm:
Pity – I would have loved your
answers to Fyndraai @ [82]
August 16th, 2010 at 4:47 pm
Reply to Boertjie @ 4:23 pm:
Those are not FS vs PDV issues and are slightly more valid as issues. I don’t have time for a long reply and full quotes, but in a nutshell:
“Slacked off”:- Contextual issue in which he says the team (including management) slacked off, not just him. This issue does worry me some as I put it down to overplaying lead players, e.g; matfield, smit etc. It is also something appeared in the JW era, but in a slightly different form (e.g. the Centenary test). This can not be isolated to just PDV as so many missed tackles is not a coaching issue. There are a number of small issues like the tackling issue which add to this. Maybe Brands services are required there
“boggles his mind.”:- In context, it boggled his mind that they could get 3 players sent of in 3 matches in the first 20 minutes and how they can get within 2 metres of the tryline x amount of times without scoring. turn of phrase, wet panty stuff, Nuff said, non-issue
Non-firing:- No proper inside info, no comment
Not-same game plan:- Again contextual and inside info. Although admittedly I think it might be a slip up by him, at the same time, with the complexity of game plans I doubt it is as simple as it is made out to be.
Will trry to answer in more details later, but must run for train
August 16th, 2010 at 7:14 pm
Reply to Ollie @ 4:47 pm:
They should appoint you as Snor’s
PRO, media agent, speech writer
and guardian angel.
Maybe you can also take over
some of his coaching.
August 16th, 2010 at 7:25 pm
Reply to Boertjie @ 7:14 pm:
Just being realistic, that’s all.
August 16th, 2010 at 7:25 pm
Reply to Ollie @ 7:25 pm:
Oh, and not just PDV’s. Any and all Bok coaches
August 16th, 2010 at 7:34 pm
Reply to fyndraai @ 2:33 pm: It does not help talking about it all they see is how great PDV is in there eyes and he can do nothing wrong. Great will be the shock when they wake up one day and see their coffee is cold
August 16th, 2010 at 8:55 pm
Reply to Ollie @ 4:47 pm:
The players may be overplayed but the coaches are not. PDV had Jan through May to study the game as it is played this year and devise his plans. After that he had 4 warm-up tests to rest players and work with them on implementation.
In his own words, he did not because he “slacked off”.
August 16th, 2010 at 9:00 pm
He said in Aus and recently in SA in different words that he does not understand why the Boks lost. If the games were close I would say, fair enough, but with the drubbings the Boks received it is very disturbing.
If he does not know why they lost, how can he fix it?
August 16th, 2010 at 9:03 pm
Reply to fyndraai @ 9:00 pm:
I thought he felt they lost
because of referee decisions?
Now where did I get that from . . .
August 16th, 2010 at 9:04 pm
In April he was quoted in the press saying he will fire an assistant in May. His words. I never saw an allegation that he was misquoted.
Announcing in April that you plan to fire an unnamed team member in May is not professional at all. Not firing anybody is “mind boggling”.
August 16th, 2010 at 9:07 pm
Apparently PdV feel the game-plan issue is very simple, since they resolved it in a single meeting. Rather than a slip up it speaks directly to the other point: “slacking off”.
August 16th, 2010 at 9:07 pm
Ai can I please come on here and not have to read how peter is misunderstood (on one side) and how he is the devil (on the other)?
My take is this. If we lose Saturday, there will be very few excuses left to use. These boks will be in big kak. If we win, we can relax and do what needs to be done for 2011.
Either way, it will work itself out this saturday.
I predicted the boks to lose all away games, but I think we will win this one, with a different approach and a lot of ‘i told you so’s’ about our game plan.
August 16th, 2010 at 9:21 pm
Reply to Boertjie @ 9:03 pm:
Lol. I was thinking of listing that but decided to let it go. To easy to fall back on the “misquoted” excuse.
August 16th, 2010 at 9:28 pm
i just wish saru had the balls to impose a spokesperson on Peter.
Also watched Classic Clashes today where Mr Gary gold flaunted the following quote:
EXECUTION OVER INNOVATION.
He then described why the boks play the way they dont and was even cocky to suggest that the ‘others’ know how the boks play but cannot stop them.
I dont think I can ever distrust Peter as much as i do this man.