By Peter Bills”Nineteen-nil and lucky to get the nil”, as an old Irish forward of the 1950s vintage once remarked, after a hammering one day at the hands of England.
In this case, lucky was the word. Had Daniel Carter kicked with his normal metronomic accuracy rather than like a drunk trying to hit a tin can in a high wind, New Zealand would have been out to 30 and a hiding would have become a humiliation.
Cape Town and one victory, commendable as it was, does not make this All Black side the best in the world, nor the Springboks the worst.
Much work lies ahead for New Zealand, not least to address the fact that without Richie McCaw, they are half the side.
His was a phenomenal performance, a comprehensive display and one of the great individual performances of recent years.
If you were there, count yourself privileged to have seen it at first hand. But when McCaw isn’t there, New Zealand don’t look the same side.
But the worries were all South Africa’s after this Test. Zero points is always a concern. They had enough ball to win a match, had three scoring chances in the first half alone.
Yet they failed to put a single point on the scoreboard chiefly because of the All Blacks’ world-class scrambling defence, and their own disturbing lack of control and composure at critical moments.
A total of 546 caps for the South Africans added up to hardly any composure whatsoever when scoring situations arose. No one led decisively from the front, no one put up their hands and said “follow me” and no one seemed to counsel the patience required, sometimes to work their way through nine or 10 phases inside their opponents’ 22 before making the decisive incision.
There are some harsh, uncomfortable truths for the South Africans to digest from this failed performance. The first is that John Smit’s leadership qualities are hugely missed by this Bok side. There is a worrying lack of direction without him, a sense of rush and unco-ordinated effort that resembles headless chickens hurtling around the place.
The second lesson is that you cannot, in the modern rugby world, allow your focus to slip one iota during the period of preparation. It was obvious to outsiders all week that the All Blacks were focused, clinically committed and dedicated to the task before them.
By contrast, the Springboks were bothering themselves with dinners, silly wigs and special celebratory cakes to mark Percy Montgomery’s 100th cap. You could never imagine an All Black side allowing themselves to be photographed, laughing themselves silly in blond wigs 24 hours before a major Test match.
That alone told you everything about South Africa’s lack of intensity and cold, ruthless readiness for the contest. It looked like it, too, when they got out there at Newlands on Saturday.
Their coach has to bear the responsibility for the preparation – he makes the calls, judges what is and is not permissible. South Africa got it wrong this week and they should know it. But problems of a longer-term nature exist. Schalk Burger’s lack of construction, accuracy and precision at the breakdown was badly exposed by McCaw. Likewise, for a player winning his 50th cap, Juan Smith never got his head above the ranks.
Victor Matfield’s chief contribution was to argue constantly with the referee and, in a sense, he was right. Matt Goddard was weak, a craven figure who wouldn’t punish the cheating by both sides at the breakdown for most of the first half.
Only yellow cards will persuade players to stop cheating and killing the ball at the breakdown under these new laws.
But that doesn’t explain away South Africa’s defeat. Despite an obvious advantage in the set scrums and the excellence of “Beast” Mtawarira, they looked rudderless.
Teams can reinvent themselves inside seven days, as New Zealand proved a few weeks back in turning the Sydney defeat into a decisive win over the Wallabies in Auckland. But watching Wallaby coach Robbie Deans will have taken careful notes on Saturday.
It won’t be easy for the Boks to get past Deans’s men in Durban this Saturday, especially if their preparation is again so laissez-faire.
