RUGBY: Hayman fires All Blacks engin

Phil Wilkins - Rugby Heaven

The smoke of a Test match inevitably emerges from the fire of the scrum, and on Saturday night, stoking the furnace against Australia will be New Zealand's Carl Hayman - the most destructive force in international rugby.

Over and above the many contributing factors, it was the massive tight-head prop who paved the way for the All Blacks' absorbing, step-by-step, metre-by-metre revival from a 9-18 deficit to an eventual 26-21 victory in Durban last weekend.

When South African coach Jake White was ringing the changes with increasing desperation late in the Test, the one player he dared not take off was his talismanic 34-year-old loose-head prop, Os du Randt. In all of his international squad, he trusted no other to combat Hayman - and still the Boks lost.

Led by Hayman, the unrelenting power of New Zealand's scrum slowly squeezed the life and limbs from the Springboks pack, with only "Ox" du Randt's 125kg physique preventing the All Blacks winning by a landslide.

Since New Zealand's semi-final elimination by Australia in 2003, the lingering motivation for the 1.93m, 120kg, black-bearded Hayman has been his omission from the All Blacks' last World Cup campaign. Along with his Otago teammate and then 27-year-old hooker Anton Oliver, the front-rower was devastated to be left out by New Zealand's coach of the period, John Mitchell.

Significantly, when Graham Henry took the reins again after Mitchell's term ended, one of his first actions was to rush the pair back into the international fold. Last Saturday, both jogged out in New Zealand's starting XV against South Africa.

Despite the undoubted and outstanding talents of Keven Mealamu, Oliver is regarded as the superior scrummager. Mealamu's mobility and workrate make him an exceptional replacement off the bench, as was obvious at Absa Stadium.

New Zealand's forwards coach, Steve Hansen, told Fairfax rugby writer Marc Hinton of Hayman's enhanced standing among the All Blacks: "The thing that has really impressed me about Carl is his maturity as a person. He has grown tremendously and that is reflected in his preparation. It's reflected in his work ethic in the gym and the things he was probably not good at. Because he's doing that stuff from Sunday to Friday, his performances on game day have really improved.

"He's always been a good rugby player, and now he's probably the No.1 tight-head in the world. He's a huge asset to any side. He is 122kgs of sheer muscle. He's a big man and naturally strong. Not only is he a great scrummager, but also he's an outstanding lifter - which is handy in a lineout."

The rising alarm in the South African television broadcaster's voice foretold doom for the Springboks as the "enormous pressure" of Hayman started to tell and the "black tide" began freeing up the ball.

Suddenly, No.8 Rodney So'oialo was carving a 50-metre swathe through the Springboks' defensive line, carried on by his Wellington crony, Jerry Collins and finished by winger Joe Rokocoko, and the Test was over. Justifiably, Hayman's arms were held high at the final whistle.

They call Durban's ground the Shark Tank. Make no mistake, the black shark of the New Zealand team is Hayman, the ferocious No.3 diving headlong into every wave of every scrum, sending tremors through opposition packs.

*Disclaimer - Views expressed within this story are not necessarily the views of this Blog

RUGBY: To rest or not to rest

Yahoo!Xtra / Marcus Forbes

OK, hold the phone, back the truck up and give me a minute to get something off my chest.

So the Springboks have decided they want to give their top players a bit of a rest before the World Cup.

Sounds fair to me, the rest of the world's power players have done the same at some stage this season and let's be honest some have been doing the same thing for years.

Now there is outrage and officials are seething, disappointed and surprised over the issue.

But seriously, what is the difference between what the Springboks are doing and the All Blacks rotating their squad or England and France sending C strength teams on the road?

There is none.

And anyone who says this is devaluing test rugby should take a look at the state of the game.

It's World Cup year and we have all had it jammed down our throats that the most important thing this season is bringing home the William Webb Ellis trophy.

Every team involved in the competition will do everything in their power to win.

And who can blame them?

This is the most valued prize in world rugby.

You can call yourself the Tri-Nations champion, the Bledisloe Cup holder or Six Nations champ but it doesn't mean a hell of a lot when it comes to the world cup.

This is the be all and end all.

And no one is really going to bat an eyelid come September when the world cup kicks off about who did or didn't field a full-strength team in the Tri-Nations.

What's good for the goose has got to be good for the gander.

So basically if you ask me, there's really not a lot the power brokers can do about this.

And is it just me or are the head honchos at the various rugby unions getting it all a bit wrong?

At the end of the day it's the fans that are suffering.

The ticket prices won't come down because the strength of the opposition has.

Your Sky subscription isn't going to get any cheaper because the teams are weaker.

And too be honest something needs to be done about this.

This isn't going to be an issue that disappears.

Yes, next season we'll see the Super 14 and Tri-Nations completely full of A grade sides.

But when the next World Cup comes around it will be the same issue.

Each team will find a way of resting their top players to make sure they are at full strength to be in the final and win it.

So, what are the people at the IRB doing to help out the fans?

Whatever they do they must act now.

This is a right now topic, once we get to the World Cup no one is going to care again.

So the message is pretty clear to all the rugby unions.

Do what you have to to win the big trophies but don't do it at the expense of the fans.

*Disclaimer - Views expressed within this story are not necessarily the views of this Blog

RUGBY: Jake’s white flag

Jake White’s refusal to test his best away from home is as good as hoisting the World Cup white flag, writes Keo in his Independent Newspapers weekly column.

Minutes after All Blacks captain Richie McCaw on Saturday night told the Springboks the current generation of All Black finally had an appreciation of the Springboks and All Blacks rivalry, it was confirmed a second-string Bok squad would play the All Blacks in New Zealand.

The biggest All Black compliment of the last decade was returned with an even bigger South African insult.

Just when the respect is back for the contest, the national selectors pick a team with disregard for the traditions of the rivalry. New Zealand versus South Africa is supposed to be best plays best.

Springbok coach Jake White was adamant the mass pull-out was logical and necessary if the Boks were to win the World Cup. White said it was ludicrous to risk his first choice players in New Zealand. Why?

What was the risk? Is he talking the psychological blow of further defeat or is he masking behind potential injury risk?

If his available best can’t win in Durban, has he privately conceded they have no price in Christchurch? White needs the players and the public to believe a World Cup win against the All Blacks is possible. And he now has the escape of saying who knows how the first-choice team would have gone in New Zealand.

Where defeat in Christchurch would crush the Boks’ spirits, the coach will argue his second-string option is an all-win situation. Any decent performance will be a moral victory. Some would say there is brilliance in the thinking.

It is one way of looking at it; the other is White is simply delaying the inevitable by not fronting the All Blacks in New Zealand with his best.

That game would have given him the most honest assessment of their ability to beat the All Blacks on neutral ground.

White, in refusing to back his best to win in New Zealand in three weeks’ time, will have his conviction questioned. Does he really believe this team can do it in Paris? Or does he hope they can?

We won’t know the answer until the World Cup is over. But if fatigue is the currency for escaping selection accountability then why did exhausted Bulls and Sharks players get selected to play a third-choice England seven days after a titanic Super 14 final? Why did these same players again play England a week later?

The rest White now promotes should have come during the first three home Tests against meaningless opposition. The World Cup dress rehearsal should have been this Tri-Nations. White, playing his best against New Zealand and Australia’s best, would have known the World Cup state of play.

Saru has used science to defend the mass withdrawal. Where is the science in resting the likes of Ashwin Willemse, Os du Randt and CJ van der Linde, who hardly played in the Super 14? Jaque Fourie missed a month of rugby and only started as recently as the Wallabies Test. Fourie du Preez has not played for six weeks.

There was sound basis for tinkering with the squad for the demands of overseas travel. The All Blacks will see the mass withdrawal as a Bok white flag and confirmation of how much damage they did to the Boks’ World Cup psyche by winning in Durban.

Mark Keohane - keo.co.za

*Disclaimer - Views expressed within this story are not necessarily the views of this Blog

RUGBY: Class counters crassness

Monday 25 June 2007

Classy substitutes proved decisive for the All Blacks in Durban, writes Keo in the Independent Group Newspapers.

The All Blacks emphasised the importance of a world-class reserves bench to condemn the Springboks to a painful defeat.

Keven Mealamu, Piri Weepu, Luke McAlister and Leon Macdonald all made an immediate difference to a test match that was crass viewing, but for the connoisseur this crassness would have been a picture of beauty.

After the run-on XV’s had brutally battered each other for an hour, New Zealand won the match in the last quarter because they had the classier impact players.

The Boks led 21-12 with 15 minutes to play, but nine points was an inflated buffer courtesy of Butch James’s intercept try. At that stage the Boks were probably a three-point better side, but New Zealand coach Graham Henry knew he could introduce players capable of scoring 15-20 points in as many minutes.

Jake White couldn’t.

The Boks, on this particular Saturday, did not have the man-power to counter New Zealand’s impact players. Injury had depleted the Boks in the build-up to this test and perhaps a Pierre Spies, Bryan Habana and Fourie du Preez would have made a difference because it would have allowed Ruan Pienaar and Danie Rossouw to strike with fresh legs in the last quarter.

Who knows?

What we do know is that the All Blacks can win away from home when Dan Carter does not play well. Carter, the best flyhalf produced in the professional era, has battled for form this season and it did not get any better for him in Durban.

His decision-making was poor and he took great exception to James’s defence, some of it legal, some of it not. The physical attention upset Carter and his game suffered because of it. Fortunately for New Zealand they have two world class inside centres in Aaron Mauger and McAlister. When Carter doesn’t go well, one of Mauger or McAlister invariably takes up the challenge.

The All Blacks, in the last three years, have matured. All Black teams have played better in South Africa and lost. This one can play a game of decidedly better quality than we saw on Saturday, but they will struggle to show greater ticker in defence, composure in scrambling back and physical intensity.

Jerry Collins and Richie McCaw were colossal for the All Blacks, while Schalk Burger was massive for the Boks.

It was billed as a dress rehearsal of the World Cup final in France. Some won’t be so sure as the Boks’ attacking limitations were again exposed, despite an abundance of possession in the first hour.

To beat the All Blacks, in Durban, in Christchurch and in Paris, it is accepted that the Boks have to maintain physical intensity in defence for 80 minutes. They know it and so do the All Blacks.

In Durban this intensity never went past 65 minutes. The last 15 minutes belonged to the All Blacks, who would have won more comfortably had Carter not missed three kicks that would have swung the momentum earlier.

Injured Bok captain John Smit’s presence at hooker and as leader was missed. That was one positive to take from the game because it showed up the folly of the constant criticism Smit has had to endure.

Sadly, though, Os du Randt is on one leg. White has invested so much faith in Du Randt being the cornerstone of his pack at the World Cup. But as they say in the bible, faith without works is dead, and the work in Du Randt’s legs are no longer there.

The All Blacks deserved a win that meant a lot to them. You only had to witness their elation at the final whistle. They struck the big psychological blow in Durban because what we got out of the game was the strength of the All Blacks and the weakness of the Boks.

The New Zealanders have balance to their attack and defence. The Boks don’t. And that is the brutal concession White will have to make if he has any chance of fixing it before Paris.

Mark Keohane - keo.co.za

*Disclaimer - Views expressed within this story are not necessarily the views of this Blog