Criticism of Lane is misguided

Here's one that is going to get up the nose of many of my xenophobic countrymen: The problem with South African rugby is that there are not enough Tim Lanes plying their trade at lower levels.

I can almost sense nostrils flaring and smoke rising as I write this. In particular it will not go down with the several ex-Springboks who opposed the appointment of foreign coaches on the basis that, as one prominent hero of yesteryear put it in a radio interview the other day, "we have the people here who can do the job and Springbok rugby does not need outsiders".

If that is the case it begs an obvious question - why are these experts not plying their trade at provincial level? Why, if they really have the health of South African rugby at heart, are they not getting involved at grassroots level, where their expertise would really count, and making a name for themselves there?

If there is one former Bok that I respect more than any other at the moment it is Dick Muir. Instead of spending his days criticising and wondering why he is not the man employed as the Bok backline coach, Muir is making a great fist of his new career as a coach at club level. Muir, unlike several of his peers, appears to understand that good coaches are the ones who come up through the ranks.

Hopefully his switch from Pirates, who he guided to the club championships last season, to Tukkies will revive a once-proud club that used to be only second to the Maties in their conveyor-belt production of Springboks.

It is because of the weaknesses at this level and lower that Lane's expertise has been of no visible value to the Bok backs thus far. That Lane has something to offer is obvious to anyone who cares to have a conversation with the players who have worked with him this year.

I am not going to reel off a list of those who have spoken highly of the former Wallaby assistant. As any experienced journalist with half a brain should be able to tell you, the truth of what players may be feeling usually does not emerge from the interview situation where they know they are going to be quoted.

In those instances it would be just plain stupid for the player in question to speak out against a coach or assistant as it will impact on his chances of playing in the next game.

No, the real truth emerges from off-the-record conversations, many of them conducted late at night over a couple of cold beverages. If there is one thing that has emerged crystal clear from these conversations this year it is that Lane is a very necessary addition to the squad.

A friend who coaches at club level in Durban and who has regular contact with top players phoned me the other day to express a similar view. His line went something this: "Explain to me what is going on with the Boks. I keep hearing from critics that Tim Lane is the problem, but the Natal Boks I have spoken to speak of him as if he is some kind of god".

If Lane is as good as the players say he is, we have to proceed to the question of why the Boks are not showing the benefits of his expertise.

The key might lie in my introduction: There are simply not enough Tim Lanes plying their trade in this country to make the necessary difference to the dearth of skills across all levels.

In the fortnight after my return from the Twickenham test match I hosted a sports show on a Cape Town radio station. Naturally the topic was Springbok rugby and callers were invited to phone in with reasons and solutions for the poor performances of the Boks.

It amazed me how quickly the conversation was turned away from Harry Viljoen towards other contributing aspects to the crisis such as the demise of club rugby and, the most often repeated one, the South African pre-occupation with brawn and physical strength at the expense of skill.

I have not watched a lower age-group schools match for some years now, but judging from the what the callers have to say, it has not changed much in the 20 odd years since I played at that level. The more successful school teams from under-13 to under-15 level build that success around their bigger forwards, a flyhalf with a kicking boot and, more often than not, one big centre and an equally well built winger who joins the line from the blindside.

The winning team has no need for any concentration on handling skills. They win because they are bigger, and sadly in this country even at this early level of competition winning is everything.

I have not conducted a comparative study of school coaching methods in the various rugby playing countries. But I do recall Rassie Erasmus returning wide- eyed to the team hotel after helping out at a local school during the Springbok stay in Dunedin for the 1999 Tri-Nations match against the All Blacks.

"That was a shocking experience. Those guys are more skilled than some of my teammates," said Erasmus.

By all accounts Erasmus' experience was not unique. In places like New Zealand there is a greater concentration on equipping young players with skills - teaching them to win comes a lot later.

That in the end is probably the heart of Lane's problem. His great ideas flounder because at international level he is having to introduce skills and attitudes which the players should have been taught much earlier in life. This was not a problem he experienced at the Wallabies, where all the players arrived at international level properly equipped.

A glance over the past nine years of post-isolation rugby will reveal that there have been few Springboks who can claim to be allround players. Too often the Springbok selectors have been forced to compromise, as they did this year when they chose Braam van Straaten, who could kick and tackle but did not possess the other necessary attributes of an international centre.

There are other examples: the finest scrumhalf of the era (Joost van der Westhuizen) had the drawback of not being able to pass both ways; the best fullback (Andre Joubert) could not kick with both feet.

This is symptomatic of the real problem which faces South African rugby at the start of the new millennium. It is not too different from the one faced at the start of the post-isolation era - in certain areas we have a lot of catching up to do and the long-term solution does not lie with the waving of a magic wand.