Ken Borland

South Africa lost the plot in the afternoon and found themselves in desperate trouble after the second day of the second Test against England at Old Trafford on Friday, needing 241 more runs just to make the hosts bat again.

Openers Sarel Erwee (12*) and Dean Elgar (11*) will resume in the morning on 23 without loss but the skipper will not only be contemplating the massive mountain in front of his team, but also his own decision-making in the field.

England amassed 415/9 declared in their first innings thanks to inspired centuries by captain Ben Stokes and wicketkeeper Ben Foakes, who added a match-defining 173 for the sixth wicket.

They came together in an intriguing morning session in which fast bowler Anrich Nortje made two early inroads into the England batting by dismissing Jonny Bairstow (49) and Zak Crawley (38), both edging excellent deliveries that angled in and then nipped away to be caught behind the wicket.

That left England on 147/5 and South Africa were still four runs ahead. But Stokes and Foakes batted with great clarity and composure, digging in until the hosts went into lunch on 212/5.

With the lead now already 61, one imagined the talk in the South African dressingroom over lunch would have been all about hitting England hard straight after the break to try and get the tail in to bat as soon as possible.

But incredibly, the on-fire Nortje was not brought on until after spinners Simon Harmer and Keshav Maharaj had bowled for 35 minutes, allowing Stokes and Foakes to get themselves properly in at the crease.

Having established control, Stokes and Foakes then batted with more freedom as the Proteas became more and more desperate shopping for a breakthrough, four reviews not going their way.

Stokes went to his fourth century in 14 Tests against South Africa, but fell for 103 as he tried to slog Kagiso Rabada. One of the most competitive cricketers in the world had produced a masterclass in playing the situation, his judgement of when to attack and when to defend solidly being well-nigh perfect.

Foakes batted on for his second Test century and ended with a career-best 113 not out, a determined innings of great value for his team, in which he targeted his favoured leg-side with nifty footwork and fine shots, collecting nine fours.

Nortje’s bowling – he finished with 3/82 in 20 overs – and the fact that England were unable to buy a wicket in the nine overs they bowled at South Africa before stumps, were about the only positives for the Proteas on a second day that somehow managed to be worse than their opening day woes.

One of the triumphs of this current Proteas team has been the way they have been able to bounce back from disastrous performances relatively quickly and they will need to do that again on Sunday as they play the English side that tore their batting apart to level the series in Manchester, in the decisive third ODI at Headingley.

South Africa, having impressed with the ball to bowl England out for 201 inside their 29 overs at Old Trafford, were bundled out for just 83 in reply. Having made their highest ever score [333/5] in England in the first ODI, the Proteas then slumped to their joint-worst total against the hosts. Their 83 all out in Nottingham in 2008 and Manchester on Friday night are their second-lowest totals in all ODIs, behind their 69 against Australia in Sydney in 1993.

But South Africa’s two highest run-scorers, Heinrich Klaasen (33) and Dwaine Pretorius (17), were both exuding positive vibes after wasting a good chance to win the series.

“We don’t need to change anything, our blueprints are good and we bowled extremely well. With the bat, if our risks come off on Sunday then it will be a different ball-game,” Klaasen said.

“We are playing good cricket, they just bowled extremely well up front, put us on the back foot and we never recovered. We still believe in our plan.”

Pretorius, who led an outstanding bowling display with career-best figures of four for 36, echoed Klaasen’s view.

“All our options to take a risk with the bat just did not come off, but I’m sure we’ll bounce back. It was our first innings here under lights and that definitely had an impact.

“The next game is a day game and it will be interesting to see if that swing England found is still there. The batting unit has really been on fire and it was just one of those days.

“They mustn’t let it go to their heads, they must stay confident. England put the performance in in this match, and we did in the previous game. So it’s going to be a great game on Sunday.

“What happened is not a massive issue, teams are allowed to play well against you and England did, they outskilled us. But the rub of the green did not go our way and cricket does not always work out perfectly,” Pretorius said.

Alarmingly, both Pretorius and Klaasen said the Proteas had practised hard at the swinging ball, which was their undoing as they crashed to 6 for four, their worst ever start in an ODI, in terms of their total when the fourth wicket fell.

“We have been preparing exactly for that swing, we’ve done a lot of work against the swinging ball,” Pretorius said.

“We trained hard for the left-armers and the ball coming in,” Klaasen assured. “But credit to them, they bowled extremely well, kept their lengths and swung the ball nicely.”

The third ODI starts at 12pm SA time.

Saturday is the day when South African rugby returns to, as the Spanish would say, La Vida Normal (the normal life) as the former national sport can once again be played in front of full stadiums of spectators.

Although, seeing as though it is Griquas and the Pumas who will contest the Currie Cup final in Kimberley on Saturday afternoon, we might be heading into a new normal for rugby. Griquas have actually won the Currie Cup three times, although the last time they did it was in 1970, which was also their last appearance in the final.

The Pumas, or South-Eastern Transvaal as they were then known, only came into being a year earlier, in 1969. This is their first ever appearance in the final, having been well-beaten by Northern Transvaal in the semi-finals in 1980, their previous best showing in the famous tournament.

It will be a massive day for two unions, their players and coaches, who don’t usually get to shine in the spotlight. Such occurrences are what makes sport so utterly charming at times.

But there is no denying the defending champion Bulls, who were desperate to become the first team to win a hat-trick of titles since the Free State Cheetahs did it between 2005 and 2007, are less than charmed about their exit from the Currie Cup at the semifinal stage at the hands of Griquas.

There is growing dissatisfaction amongst the country’s four international franchises that play in the United Rugby Championship that trying to contend in the Currie Cup at the same time is a bit like tilting at windmills. And next year will be even worse as they also have European cup tournaments to play in.

The sponsors, Carling Black Label, have also expressed their concern over the famous event continuing to lose prestige, and it is important SA Rugby lance this festering boil of malcontent over the Currie Cup.

As admirable as the campaigns mounted by the Griquas and Pumas have been, it has been unfortunate for the tournament that of the so-called Test unions, only the Bulls fielded anything resembling a top side and even they had to give in to the realities of fighting on two fronts in the closing stages.

Moving the Currie Cup until after the end of the European season seems the best way to go. Of course it will then clash with the international season of the Springboks, but that cavalry has long since departed the Currie Cup and fans and sponsors have become accustomed to them not featuring in the premier domestic tournament.

Speaking of the Springboks, there was certainly an air of great excitement in their camp this week as they gathered in Pretoria.

Eight new faces will always bring an injection of fresh energy and the URC has certainly unveiled some exciting new talent that deserves exposure at the highest level.

But without deflating fans too much, they should not expect the starting XV to pay Wales at Loftus Versfeld on July 2 to differ much from the team that last appeared in the UK at the end of last year.

Duane Vermeulen will need to be replaced at eighthman and Evan Roos and Elrigh Louw, who announced themselves in such incredible fashion in the URC, will be in the forefront of most fans’ thinking. But Jasper Wiese is the incumbent back-up No.8 and, after his inspirational display in the English Premiership final for Leicester, he is probably the favourite to come in for Vermeulen.

Key stars such as Cheslin Kolbe, Faf de Klerk and Pieter-Steph du Toit should also be back in action, and I look forward to Damian Willemse playing the Frans Steyn role of utility back on the bench. Hopefully there is space for one of Roos or Louw alongside him on the wood, and maybe even Marcell Coetzee.

WorldRugby this week confirmed the hosts of their World Cup tournaments for men and women through to 2033 and proved again that, as the governing body for the sport, they are mainly concerned with making as much money as possible and not necessarily the good of the game or sporting principles like fairness and equity.

Of the nine men’s World Cup tournaments held, six have been won by New Zealand and South Africa, and yet they are the countries most unlikely to ever host rugby’s showpiece tournament again, purely for economic reasons.

New Zealand’s small population and time zone issues mean the 2011 tournament they won is likely to be the last one they ever host, while South Africa are mainly prejudiced by their weak economy. Although the exchange rate does make hosting the tournament cheaper, WorldRugby still demand a guarantee of about R2 billion from whoever stages a World Cup.

That sort of money can only really be stumped up by northern hemisphere nations and Australia.

But having put on some of the greatest sporting events ever held – Madiba’s 1995 Rugby World Cup at the dawn of democracy, the 2003 Cricket World Cup and the 2010 Football World Cup – there is no denying South African rugby fans feel tremendously hurt at being snubbed by WorldRugby.

That hurt is only made greater by the skullduggery that saw France snatching the hosting rights for next year’s World Cup, after WorldRugby’s own evaluation committee had recommended South Africa.

But when it came to the WorldRugby council voting on the issue, the powerful European bloc backed France. The worse betrayal of all came from Rugby Africa, the continental body which has its offices in Cape Town, paid for by SA Rugby, and who also voted for France.

Much like in African football, there is a growing sense of north African teams seizing power and aligning themselves with the old colonial power of France.

In a decision WorldRugby chairman Bill Beaumont, the former England captain, said would “accelerate the growth and impact of rugby globally”, Australia were awarded the 2027 World Cup and the USA the 2031 edition. The next three Women’s World Cups (2025, 2029 & 2033) will be hosted by England, Australia and the USA.

Apart from an obvious trend towards favouring the Anglosphere, the USA are hardly a rugby power. Their women may be ranked seventh in the world, but the men’s game is still taking baby steps.

Major League Rugby has been on the go in America since 2017 and the sport is growing in the world’s biggest commercial market. But the USA would be the weakest team to ever host the World Cup and they still only attract around 20 000 people to their home matches.

Sevens rugby is their most popular format, with nine million TV viewers for the Rugby World Cup Sevens in San Francisco in 2018.

One can argue giving Australia a World Cup is also helping the development of the game because Rugby Union is perpetually fighting a battle for prominence in a country that prefers Aussie Rules and Rugby League. Especially with the Wallabies slowly drifting away from rock-bottom and their union admitting that hosting the World Cup will basically save them from going bankrupt.

Having been kind enough to help Australia out of their financial hole, one hopes WorldRugby will show the same generosity and offer the same opportunities to New Zealand and South Africa, historically the most important rugby nations.

But it will be at least 40 years between World Cups for South Africa, and New Zealand are lagging in the sporting arms race when it comes to the capacity of their stadiums, the size of their population and technological advancement.

Oh, and don’t forget that both these great nations cannot pour enough of that all-important cash into WorldRugby’s greedy coffers.