Ken Borland

Springbok coach Jacques Nienaber said he will be looking at the replay of their first Rugby Championship Test against Australia again just to check whether they should have been given more reward in the last couple of scrums and whether their chasers were obstructed in getting to the aerial ball, but he was clear that the Wallabies deserved to win and his team lost 26-28 because of their own ill-discipline.

South Africa were leading 26-25 in the final minutes when they dominated successive scrums, but referee Luke Pearce only ordered resets. Then, after the final hooter, the Wallabies wheeled a scrum to isolate the eighthman and won a turnover penalty, which Quade Cooper slotted from long-range, on the angle, to snatch victory at the death.

It was Cooper’s seventh penalty and he also converted Australia’s try in a faultless kicking display in his first Test in four years. But it was those seven penalties conceded which cost the Springboks, according to Nienaber.

“Conceding 23 points off the tee, that sums it up, our discipline was poor. We scored three tries to one, but we gave them 23 points and that’s the reason we lost. We did brilliantly to get back in the game in the second half, but then we lost in the 82^nd minute, again because of discipline, we conceded a penalty. Australia played well and they deserved to win.

“In our third-last scrum I thought we had good dominance, but obviously the referee saw a different picture that didn’t show clear dominance. We need to make sure our pictures are aligned with the referee’s and we knew that it would be a struggle to get our wings into the aerial contest, but it’s tough to say now if there were any line-changes, I can’t say with absolute conviction,” Nienaber said.

The Springbok coach clearly did not want to make excuses and he also did not want to use the fact that his team have recently been released from their Covid bubble and returned to normal life on the largest island in the world, and were playing in front of a crowd for the first time since the World Cup, to justify an unfocused performance.

“We weren’t great today, we were just a bit off our game, especially discipline. It was not a polished performance, so we need to fix those things we got wrong. Conceding anything beyond 10 penalties in a game makes it a real grind to win and we must be smarter than giving away stupid penalties. Our scrums were fairly solid but there were two scrums which Australia got points off at crucial times –just before halftime and then the last kick.

“But it was lovely to play in front of a crowd again, it’s what the players wanted. In the first 20 minutes we were quite dominant, we had control of the game but then we lost it. We created opportunities, we scored three tries and Sbu Nkosi and Lukhanyo Am were both over the line. But Australia are a quality side and this is a tough place to win,” Nienaber said.

One thing that has become clear in this year’s Carling Currie Cup is that the ‘smaller’ unions, those not playing in Europe, cannot be taken for granted and the belief and hunger now flowing through the veins of the Griquas and Pumas players is going to make them hard to stop in the last three weeks of competition.

Griquas are third on the log and the Pumas fourth, with just the Sharks and Bulls ahead of them. At least one of them is going to make the semi-finals as they play each other in Kimberley on Saturday, but they will both go through if Western Province fail to beat the Sharks in Durban.

For the Pumas, the success of their season has been based on the realisation that they cannot just rely on their forwards to grind opponents down and they have produced some fine attacking rugby with ball-in-hand too.

“Our forwards were our go-to and they are still one of our strong points. But we said that we must play balanced rugby, we can’t just rely on our forwards for 80 minutes. The engine must rest a bit as well! So we have spread the workload, we are also using the kicking game more and overall we are just playing with more ball.

“When we played in SuperRugby Unlocked last year we got exposed to playing against the very best guys, Springboks included. We saw that we can beat them, but we just needed to rectify the small mistakes that were costing us. We spent two months focusing on that in pre-season and now we are starting to really get belief that we can beat the big unions,” ever-dangerous Pumas fullback Devon Williams told The Citizen on Wednesday.

Griquas wing Daniel Kasande also said there was a link between last year’s experiences and all the narrow defeats they suffered and their strong showing in this year’s Currie Cup.

“Not much has changed in terms of our system and structure from last year, but we had a lot of narrow losses then, things would just not go for us at the end of matcheis. So since then we have been fine-tuning our play and getting in sync with each other. Being together now for two seasons, you can see the chemistry in how we play.

“Before, every time we went into a competition we were the new boys and you get a bit of cold feet. But once you are in with the big boys for a while, you grow in confidence. You start to feel that you can dominate and it was very special beating Western Province at Newlands, once you do that sort of thing once, you believe you can do it again and again,” Kasande told The Citizen.

The way Griquas and the Pumas have contributed to the competition, one hopes many of their players are voted into the team for the newly-created Carling Champions Match – an all-star Currie Cup team chosen by the public – on November 6.

The second week of the Social Justice and Nation-Building Hearings has taken place at Cricket South Africa’s Melrose offices and, with former players giving evidence this week, it is clear that many feelings of discrimination arose from selection matters.

Selection in cricket is always a controversial and complex matter because of how many variables are involved in the game. It’s a bit like rugby in that you often don’t just choose your 11 or 15 best individual players. It’s about combinations and, in cricket especially, the balance of the team is so crucial.

And that balance has to be fit for purpose for whatever the conditions on the day or the opposition.

Adding to this already delicate mix is the fact that interfering with selection is official CSA policy; as Roger Telemachus testified this week, he had to be pulled from a 2007 World Cup match because there were no Black Africans in the XI.

The fact that it was Makhaya Ntini who was ‘forced’ into the team is interesting. The Mdingi Express was not only a vital beacon for transformation, but also a guaranteed selection for the vast majority of his career simply because of how great a fast bowler he was. But by 2007, especially on the low and slow pitches of the Caribbean, his white-ball form was declining.

Telemachus, a more skilful bowler in terms of slower balls, yorkers and other variations, was probably the better bet at that stage. Shaun Pollock, around about the same time, had to face similar pain as coach Mickey Arthur called time on his Test career because of his declining pace.

These are the sort of cricketing, rather than discriminatory, reasons that should definitely be considered by the SJN commission. As excellent a job as ombudsman Advocate Dumisa Ntsebenza and his two colleagues are doing, I do wish they had been given a cricketing expert to assist them – someone like Geoff Toyana.

The SJN’s shortcomings in this regard were shown when Ntsebeza asked Aaron Phangiso why Imran Tahir didn’t just stand down and give him a chance. Imagine Kagiso Rabada being asked to sit out and give Lutho Sipamla a go?

Phangiso was disgracefully treated in terms of selection in the 2015 World Cup, of that I have no doubt. For him to not play a single match was far more in need of intervention than the ill-fated make-up of the semifinal team. To not even play this quality left-arm spinner, known as ‘The Banker’ by his highly successful Highveld Lions team, against Ireland and the United Arab Emirates was appalling. The latter game was played on the isle of New Zealand, where the UAE were never going to stretch the Proteas. If South Africa felt Phangiso’s inclusion was somehow going to risk defeat, he should never have been in the World Cup squad in the first place.

But was this discrimination? The coach at the time – Russell Domingo – is Black, and so is the then-CEO, Haroon Lorgat, who had oversight over selection, with a majority Black board breathing down his neck.

I get the feeling from the many comments I have seen about former players ‘deserving’ better or ‘why weren’t they given more opportunity’, that many people don’t understand the nature of high-performance sport. Its about the best taking on the best. Of course in this country, with its history of oppression, there are mechanisms required to level the playing fields.

But no-one is entitled to be chosen, high performance sport is not about giving everyone a chance. It was also my dream to play first-class cricket, but I wasn’t good enough, end of story.

To see a former player with a batting average of 19.24 and strike-rate of 51 after 72 innings across the formats pose as a victim of a lack of opportunity is sad. He also said CSA is full of white bosses, which is totally at odds with the actual situation in a boardroom that has been majority Black for a long time.

I fully support Ntsebeza in this vital initiative to try and fix our cricket. But he is going to need the Wisdom of Solomon and some real cricket experts to do that.

As praiseworthy as Ireland’s brilliant display in the second ODI was, Proteas captain Temba Bavuma made it clear that he was not fine with the dismal performance his team produced in the field.

After South Africa won the toss and were able to bowl first, they were poor in the opening powerplay and dreadful at the death, conceding 95 runs in the last eight overs. Their fielding was also terrible, four catches that should have been taken were dropped and there were several fumbles and misfields.

“We were totally outplayed but the fielding was not the standards that we pride ourselves on and those dropped catches were always going to be costly. Bowling short and wide is never the plan, I’d like to give the bowlers the benefit of the doubt and say it was down to execution. But it’s happening all too often that we find ourselves trying to defend both sides of the field.

“In the death bowling there just hasn’t been any consistency, which makes it hard to set a plan. We’ve had enough conversations about it, we’ve exhausted those conversations now and we need to show it in action now. We trust these guys, but they must be able to bowl to a plan. We know there are guys on the sidelines who have the skills, so there is now a strong case for them getting an opportunity,” Bavuma threatened after the shock 43-run defeat in Dublin.

The batting, especially the middle-order, could also see changes beyond the expected return of Quinton de Kock.

On the bright side, Janneman Malan’s 84 off 96 balls showed that he is a young batsman who watches and learns from all that is going on around him. The 25-year-old has made a great start to his ODI career with 306 runs in five innings, including a century and now his second half-century.

“It was quite nervewracking because I haven’t had a lot of games or been able to get momentum, and it’s in different conditions. But watching Ireland bat twice before I had my first time at the crease gave me a bit of info and I was able to take all the learnings. Chasing 290, at halfway we were on a good path, Rassie van der Dussen and I had set it up well.

“But it would have been great if I could have batted through. I needed to get a big hundred, so I failed the team in that respect. We needed an in-batter at the end and to lose myself and Rassie bang-bang was not great. We needed to take it deeper and put pressure on them. They showed by scoring close to 60 runs in the last four overs what having a guy in could do at the end,” Malan said on Wednesday.