History is on our side

The Japanese, before they became the manufacturing marvels of the modern world, made an art form of copying a good idea and making it better and in a way that is what Harry Viljoen is attempting to do with the Springboks.

The good idea in this instance is the kind of rugby that has evolved in Australia. Viljoen has been unreserved in expounding his admiration of the Wallaby way and he has set about, through his own experience of working with the like of Rod Macqueen, and the introduction of specialist coaches to try to replicate what the Aussies do.

Needless to say, Viljoen is not a fool. His aim is not to just emulate the men from the land down under but to learn from them, dissect and understand what it is that they do, and then, in the tradition of the aforesaid Japanese, produce a model that his superior.

Viljoen has ventured onto ground that angels would shy away from by conceding that someone might know more about rugby than we do – and he deserves to be applauded – but from my perspective some of the things surrounding the Springboks is a cause for unease.

By all means study the winning ways of the Wallabies, but also take heed of some less than successful examples.

New Zealand rugby is still reeling from - and just beginning to understand the full implications of - John Hart’s efforts to “modernise” and “professionalise” their game.

A lot of what Harry Viljoen is saying and doing has a discomfiting ring of Hart’s utterances when he was in charge of the All Blacks. Setting up the All Blacks as a business unit, embracing unusual methods, moving away from tradition… Hart did these things and the upshot was that the All Blacks sheered away from their culture; away from the inherent principles that made them such a force.

They are now trying to undo the damage and once again build an All Black team on the solid values of their past and I, for one, expect we might feel a backlash in the Tri-Nations.

Viljoen made plenty of use of the concept of a “Springbok culture”, especially in relation to his utterances concerning the young flyhalf Francois Swart, but does he really know what the Springbok culture is?

Not one member of his over-large management team is a Springbok and, at the risk of being accused of being old fashioned and not moving with the times, I contend that only a Springbok knows what it really means to be a Springbok.

Nick Mallett, who played only two tests against the South American Jaguars, also tended to be dismissive of the institutions of the Springbok and it played a role in his dramatic loss of popularity.

Warning signs are starting to emerge - such as the media schedule emanating from the team referring to “one-on-one interviews with the six new caps, Conrad Jantjes, Adrian Jacobs, Dean Hall, Butch James, Neil de Kock and Lucas van Biljon.”

They are not new caps and they are not Springboks. That distinction, that crowning glory, will only be theirs when they go onto the field to play a game for South Africa. It’s a little thing, I know, but it is on these small conventions that the aura of being a Springbok rests.

History has a way of repeating itself and there is much that is worth repeating in South Africa’s rugby history.

PS: On the subject of uncapped players in the Springbok squad it seems that situation will soon be changing for Dean Hall and Butch James… there are only two wings in the squad and Hall is one of them and there is only one flyhalf and James is he!