Talking Rugby: Can the Springboks win the World Cup by playing in the past?

Peter de Villiers has had four years to change his game plan

Can South Africa defy the modern conventions and ways of an entire sport in their World Cup campaign?

The question comes ever more urgently into mind in the light of their opening Tri-Nations defeat by Australia in Sydney last weekend.

It is clear that New Zealand and Australia are playing a completely different game to the South Africans. They seek to utilise the opportunities afforded by the new law interpretations by keeping possession and attacking mostly with ball in hand.

By contrast, the South African game does not appear to have moved forward hardly one iota since 2007 when they won a kicking dominated World Cup by playing tactically, relying on their impressive line-out for solid, consistent possession, driving the ball on by hammering into the opposition and landing copious numbers of penalty goals.

But that was then and this is now. Four years is a long time in any sport and in rugby terms in countries like New Zealand, Australia and even England, it is almost a generation in terms of change.

Yet the South Africans will try to retain their World Cup crown by playing virtually a similar game to 2007. Whether it be Morne Steyn or Butch James wearing the No. 10 jersey, they will seek physical contact, use the box kick to keep the ball in front of their pack, aim for the corners and hope their immense line-out, with Victor Matfield the world’s No. 1 tactician in that department to the fore, can steal opposition ball. From that, they will use forward power and the driving maul whenever possible.

We know this because this is how they have played for almost the last four years under Peter de Villiers. It is now far too late to change that basic game plan.

Yet it surely leaves the South Africans vulnerable. What if the fast, fleet-footed young Australian backs, win enough ball? They will threaten to run the senior players in the Springbok side, the likes of John Smit, Bakkies Botha, Victor Matfield and others off their feet.

And what happens if the opposition, such as the All Blacks, keeps ball in hand, attacks from deep and does not kick the ball into touch, knowing that represents a South African strength? How then do the Springboks’ play it?

Peter de Villiers has had four years to develop a different game plan, had he wanted to. The fact that the Boks today are playing almost the same as they were under Jake White in 2007 suggests strongly that they won’t be doing anything radically different for this World Cup.

But you have to wonder at this approach. With ball in hand, Australia showed what they are capable of doing on Saturday in Sydney. New Zealand can play that style of rugby even better.

This surely does not bode well for the ‘Boks World Cup prospects. Images of ostriches and heads in sand come vividly to mind. And even when, on a few occasions, the Springboks have tried to expand their game plan, they have looked less than adept at such tactics.

But then, they would do. You need to be playing this style of rugby on a regular basis to become comfortable with its intricacies.

The ‘Boks under de Villiers must now stick to what they know best; a rigid, conservative game plan. But it remains to be seen whether this can really win another World Cup.

Recent Posts on Sport - Latest analysis on the Sporting world -

• Bayern Munich in last chance saloon against Chelsea
• 2012 Olympics: Who said there are no shortcuts in sport?
• iBet: Back goals in the Championship play-off final
• iBet: Chelsea beware, Bayern Munich are formidable at home
• Via the World: From the Kuroshiocurrent to capsizing