Publications
Partners
Rob Houwing
I felt for John Smit on Saturday night, as he fronted up as bravely as possible - like all good captains, this is not a weakness of his - to the media in the wake of another inconvenient defeat for his charges.
I felt even worse, in some ways, having to identify in my own post-mortem from Kings Park the decision to switch him to tighthead prop during the second half as a rather pivotal turning point in the game - better-qualified critics than I pinpointed the same drawback.
It is not totally out of the question, despite the general Bok tank beginning to empty ominously as the clock ticked on, that had Smit either stayed on as hooker or been more “directly” substituted for the impressive Bismarck du Plessis with some 20 to 25 minutes left, South Africa might yet have winkled their way to a morale-boosting win they so nearly deserved.
Instead, the 33-year-old was made to look vulnerable - and thus pretty much villain-in-chief in the eyes of his unforgiving detractors - as the adjustment to the unique demands of tighthead at an advanced stage proved too much for his own tiring body on the night.
It was a shame, really, that the Bok prop reserve on this match-day was an essentially specialist loosehead, Gurthrö Steenkamp, rather than someone like CJ van der Linde.
I have ongoing reservations about that particular, nomadic customer, often wishing he had just half the lustre to accompany his considerable talent, but at least Van der Linde is a recognised No 3 who can scrum down on both sides and should probably be deemed the best bench option as prop come the key World Cup matches.
Unfortunately that awkward stint at tighthead on Saturday only served to undo, in the eyes of the jaundiced, the largely decent industry Smit had put in during his time at hooker against the Wallabies, when the Bok pack produced some extremely solid signs of the mongrel of old.
It is true that his opposite number Stephen Moore showed up more prominently in open play, but if you revisit the game you will only find confirmation that, in the encouraging first 40 minutes by the Boks, Smit got commendably stuck in, closer to the coalface.
And certainly in the time that he was hooker, I take issue with some Aussie media chortling that their improved scrum had the better of the host nation: the battle was dead even (every now and then South Africa got a dominant heave going) until Smit’s switch suddenly made the duel look deceptively lopsided.
I made the point the other day, too, that Smit’s lineout throwing may be slightly more consistent than his hooker deputy, and that is not a trifling matter when you consider the importance of one of the former’s most trusty lieutenants, Victor Matfield, in this department in New Zealand.
Matfield must be given the best possible tools to aid his cause: the lineout remains one area where the Boks have good opportunity to be genuinely “destructive”, let’s not forget.
I am not a Smit apologist by any means: I still suspect deep down that the end of the heady 2009 season should have been the fitting time for the old Sharks favourite to quit the international arena.
But like it or not, in the subsequent period Peter de Villiers has at least been consistent in his determination that the RWC-winning “old guard” be predominantly tasked with carrying the nation’s hopes at the 2011 event.
Some time in October we will best be able to judge the wisdom of that philosophy, of course.
So there is really no sense at this notably advanced stage of preparation in essentially “shafting” John Smit, for the simple reason that he is at the very fulcrum of the 2007 players.
He is the man who has led them to every form of top-tier triumph available to the Boks and the soldiers are clearly right behind their commander once more for the proverbial last big push.
It is tough on Bismarck du Plessis, I agree, that it seems he will be confined mostly to an impact role at the World Cup: he may very well be the better “package” as hooker overall.
But there will be another World Cup left in the younger player, and I am increasingly comfortable with the idea of Smit - who only half jokingly admitted last week that he requires his “diesel engine” to turn turbo-diesel come the RWC - leading the side out and then perhaps being withdrawn (as opposed to moved across the front row!) on, say, the 50-minute mark for the in-your-face Du Plessis.
While this is hardly the be all and end all of successful rugby sides, Smit’s respected leadership qualities and diplomatic skills - especially given his coach’s propensity for the odd press conference clanger - bring a certain security and comfort to the Bok “PR” strategy at RWC 2011.
Certainly our Smittie remains a likelier source of an intelligent, candid sound-bite than the publicly humourless, dull-as-ditchwater Rocky Elsom.
Someone possibly tried to “write” Smit out of the World Cup on Saturday night, prematurely, it seems, suggesting he may have torn elbow ligaments and thus be a non-starter for the tournament.
With apologies to Mark Twain, reports of the captain’s demise now appear greatly exaggerated.
John Smit or no John Smit, and even taking into account the depressing Bok “duck” in Tests thus far this year, I still fancy that everything at the World Cup from their point of view will still boil down to that likely, once-off meeting with the All Blacks in a semi-final.
And that occasion may well require the motivational prowess of a proven, exceptional leader of men ...
Rob Houwing is Sport24’s chief writer
Disclaimer: Sport24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on Sport24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Sport24.
I felt for John Smit on Saturday night, as he fronted up as bravely as possible - like all good captains, this is not a weakness of his - to the media in the wake of another inconvenient defeat for his charges.
I felt even worse, in some ways, having to identify in my own post-mortem from Kings Park the decision to switch him to tighthead prop during the second half as a rather pivotal turning point in the game - better-qualified critics than I pinpointed the same drawback.
It is not totally out of the question, despite the general Bok tank beginning to empty ominously as the clock ticked on, that had Smit either stayed on as hooker or been more “directly” substituted for the impressive Bismarck du Plessis with some 20 to 25 minutes left, South Africa might yet have winkled their way to a morale-boosting win they so nearly deserved.
Instead, the 33-year-old was made to look vulnerable - and thus pretty much villain-in-chief in the eyes of his unforgiving detractors - as the adjustment to the unique demands of tighthead at an advanced stage proved too much for his own tiring body on the night.
It was a shame, really, that the Bok prop reserve on this match-day was an essentially specialist loosehead, Gurthrö Steenkamp, rather than someone like CJ van der Linde.
I have ongoing reservations about that particular, nomadic customer, often wishing he had just half the lustre to accompany his considerable talent, but at least Van der Linde is a recognised No 3 who can scrum down on both sides and should probably be deemed the best bench option as prop come the key World Cup matches.
Unfortunately that awkward stint at tighthead on Saturday only served to undo, in the eyes of the jaundiced, the largely decent industry Smit had put in during his time at hooker against the Wallabies, when the Bok pack produced some extremely solid signs of the mongrel of old.
It is true that his opposite number Stephen Moore showed up more prominently in open play, but if you revisit the game you will only find confirmation that, in the encouraging first 40 minutes by the Boks, Smit got commendably stuck in, closer to the coalface.
And certainly in the time that he was hooker, I take issue with some Aussie media chortling that their improved scrum had the better of the host nation: the battle was dead even (every now and then South Africa got a dominant heave going) until Smit’s switch suddenly made the duel look deceptively lopsided.
I made the point the other day, too, that Smit’s lineout throwing may be slightly more consistent than his hooker deputy, and that is not a trifling matter when you consider the importance of one of the former’s most trusty lieutenants, Victor Matfield, in this department in New Zealand.
Matfield must be given the best possible tools to aid his cause: the lineout remains one area where the Boks have good opportunity to be genuinely “destructive”, let’s not forget.
I am not a Smit apologist by any means: I still suspect deep down that the end of the heady 2009 season should have been the fitting time for the old Sharks favourite to quit the international arena.
But like it or not, in the subsequent period Peter de Villiers has at least been consistent in his determination that the RWC-winning “old guard” be predominantly tasked with carrying the nation’s hopes at the 2011 event.
Some time in October we will best be able to judge the wisdom of that philosophy, of course.
So there is really no sense at this notably advanced stage of preparation in essentially “shafting” John Smit, for the simple reason that he is at the very fulcrum of the 2007 players.
He is the man who has led them to every form of top-tier triumph available to the Boks and the soldiers are clearly right behind their commander once more for the proverbial last big push.
It is tough on Bismarck du Plessis, I agree, that it seems he will be confined mostly to an impact role at the World Cup: he may very well be the better “package” as hooker overall.
But there will be another World Cup left in the younger player, and I am increasingly comfortable with the idea of Smit - who only half jokingly admitted last week that he requires his “diesel engine” to turn turbo-diesel come the RWC - leading the side out and then perhaps being withdrawn (as opposed to moved across the front row!) on, say, the 50-minute mark for the in-your-face Du Plessis.
While this is hardly the be all and end all of successful rugby sides, Smit’s respected leadership qualities and diplomatic skills - especially given his coach’s propensity for the odd press conference clanger - bring a certain security and comfort to the Bok “PR” strategy at RWC 2011.
Certainly our Smittie remains a likelier source of an intelligent, candid sound-bite than the publicly humourless, dull-as-ditchwater Rocky Elsom.
Someone possibly tried to “write” Smit out of the World Cup on Saturday night, prematurely, it seems, suggesting he may have torn elbow ligaments and thus be a non-starter for the tournament.
With apologies to Mark Twain, reports of the captain’s demise now appear greatly exaggerated.
John Smit or no John Smit, and even taking into account the depressing Bok “duck” in Tests thus far this year, I still fancy that everything at the World Cup from their point of view will still boil down to that likely, once-off meeting with the All Blacks in a semi-final.
And that occasion may well require the motivational prowess of a proven, exceptional leader of men ...
Rob Houwing is Sport24’s chief writer
Disclaimer: Sport24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on Sport24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Sport24.
