Rugby in the 21st century has me flummoxed

Two weekends of test match rugby, the Springboks versus France, have left me so baffled that I am compelled to borrow the words of Winston Churchill to describe it all for it is indeed 'a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.'

Whoever said hindsight was an exact science did not know what he was talking about, for the more I look back the more puzzled I become, so this is an appeal for help in straightening out some of the posers.

Why, if Breyton Paulse scored a try within 21 seconds of the start of the first test, were the Springboks able to score only one other try in the remaining 3hrs 12 min 53 sec of the two internationals?

And, leading on from that, why were the Springboks incapable of constructing the move that led to their second try, by Corné Krige, more than once? This is how it went. Penalty to touch. Ball won by Albert van der Berg standing (still) at No4. Ball moved right with blindside wing Dean Hall and fullback Thinus Delport coming up from undefended positions to be the extra men. Ball won back near the line, where Joost van der Westhuizen delays his pass just long enough to change the point of attack to the left with a flat pass to Robbie Fleck, who feeds Delport, who has raced to get back into position, who puts Krige in the clear for a try.

Is this too simple to qualify as new rugby?

If Breyton Paulse is one of the world’s most elusive runners and Dean Hall was picked because of the myriad of options provided by his size and pace why were they never given a single, decent attacking opportunity in the second test?

If Butch James was given the responsibility of taking the goal-kicks why was the risk taken of breaking his confidence by denying him one or two easier kicks only to suddenly return to him when the chips were down?

If Mark Andrews is such a good lineout forward how come he won just four balls, two in each test, of the total of 38 taken by the Springboks?

Talking of Andrews. How come he was able to come back onto the field in Durban after he had been substituted by Albert van den Berg? Law 3 (10) states quite clearly that “players who have been substituted may not re-enter the match even to replaced an injured player except in the case of a player having a bleeding or open wound or for an injured front row player if no other suitably trained replacement is available.”

The French commentators referred to Andrews as a “clandestine” replacement but by comparison the action of All Black doctor John Mayhew was pure skullduggery. When Jerry Collins left the field against Argentina suffering from what was clearly a very sore shoulder, Mayhew had the “foresight” to signal to the official controlling substitutes that he was taking him off because of blood. How can this be allowed?

Who is this person called Cameron Kotze; the citing commissioner who watches games in Windhoek? After Mark Andrews was cited for allegedly head-butting Fabian Galthie and breaking his nose, said Kotze let it be known that there was no case to be answered because there was nothing questionable on the video tape of the game. In fact when the re-runs were shown the incident was most questionable. But then comes the second test and Butch James is cited (rightly) and sentenced quicker than he would have been in a township kangaroo court. Is this really the way the citing procedure should work?

How come virtually everyone in rugby could see that it was only a matter of time before James was “sent down,” yet his coaches at both the Sharks and the Springboks could not?

How come James did not take heed when referee Chris White told him in the 8th minute that “if this happens again you’ll be in big trouble?” How come Mark Andrews was yellow-carded just two minutes after being warned by the match official? Is it so surprising that De Wet Barry received his marching orders just a minute after White had told André Vos about his team: “Your instinct the whole time is to tackle up here,” pointing to his neck?

How come the French were penalised so often for having the stronger scrum when it was the Boks who stood up because they could not take the pressure?

How come the players are allowed to run around in the lineout like kids in a play park when Law 23 (B)(11) clearly states: “The lineout begins when the ball leaves the hands of the player throwing it in. No player may jump for the ball or support any player before the ball has left the hands of the player throwing it in?”

How come professional rugby players can know so little of the laws that they are penalised 38 times (SA 18, France 20) in the course of a single test match – as they were in Durban?

How come so many players, other than Joost van der Westhuizen, pick the ball up behind the Springbok forwards whereas in the Brumbies, the team we’re meant to be copying remember, George Gregan is always first to the ball?

Do the Springboks play so badly because of, or in spite of, the 16-man back-up team that Harry Viljoen has assembled?

What has caused Rassie Erasmus to go from being arguably the best player in the competition at the start of the Super 12 in March to a nervous under-performer in June?

Do I know anything about rugby at all?