Predicting this didn’t need Nostradamus

There must have been many Free State Cheetahs fans after the Currie Cup final who probably consoled themselves with the words “But at least we played more rugby than they did”.

I can’t say I never saw it coming, for I had taken readers of my Saturday newspaper a column in Cape Town a bet on the morning of the game that this would be the case. Not that this should put me in the league of Nostradamus, or even Nostrildamus – my friends reckon these things are dreamed up in my nostril hairs – for everyone should have seen it coming.

It has been that kind of year, and statements like the above have been prevalent for much of the past 12 months, starting with when Wales coach Warren Gatland uttered those words, or words that were similar, after the Millennium Stadium clash where the Bok kicking game won it last November.

After 20 minutes of the final I sent an SMS to a friend which read “Only one team has played in this game, and they are down by 24 points!” After that, the Cheetahs fought back but the damage had been done, and in truth it never really looked like the best provincial team in the world was going to be caught.

Yet this was a match where all the statistics were loaded heavily in favour of the Cheetahs. They had by far the most possession, and you couldn’t even say the Bulls won this one through a territory game, for the truth is they lost that battle in the first half too.

It made me think of Heyneke Meyer, the former Bulls coach, who years ago explained to me that having possession was no longer the key to victory. He reckoned more points were scored by winning collisions and robbing the other team of possession, and the final proved this fact once more.

Had the Cheetahs been more controlled in their approach and used their possession more wisely instead of trying to spin it to all corners of the field, they could well have won the game. They were lauded afterwards for the show they put up, but to my mind they played dumb rugby in the first half and it was why they fell so far behind.

It was not the first time this year we saw such a result at Loftus. The British and Irish Lions were praised after the recent series for the style of rugby they played, but I am not convinced that their multi-phase approach worked for them rather than against them in the second test at Loftus.

I remember bumping into a journalist colleague in the corridor outside the press box at half time of that match. The Boks were well behind and had hardly played any rugby in the game, with the Lions doing all the playing.

He was understandably concerned, but I wasn’t – I told him that the Lions were playing too much rugby, did not have enough to show for it in terms of points, and that all their early huff and puff at altitude would catch up with them later in the game.

Earlier in the year the Stormers played the Bulls in a Super 14 game at Loftus, and ran the eventual champions much closer than they had in a long time. Indeed, the Bulls looked in trouble in the first half, and afterwards admitted that they had no answer to the Stormers’ strategy, which essentially involved them playing the Bulls at their own game.

Very little rugby was played, with the big boot of Willem de Waal keeping the match in a holding pattern, denying the Bulls the good field position they require to launch first phase attacks. Had it not been for the bounce of the ball and a few questionable refereeing decisions, the Stormers could well have won.

Western Province nearly did win when the two sides met again in the Currie Cup semifinal two weeks ago, and afterwards several of their management peddled the line that WP had done more playing than the Bulls and created more opportunities.

And that wasn’t dissimilar to the Sharks’ attitude after the Super 14 league game against the Bulls in May. It will be recalled that the Sharks were seeking a four try bonus point win to clinch a place in the semifinals. They got their four tries, and the line to come out of the commentators was that this was the way the Sharks should have been playing all year.

Yet the Sharks lost the match to a Bulls team that played less rugby than they did, so the four tries meant nothing.

Of course, it is easy to play the way the Bulls do when they have halfbacks such as Fourie du Preez and Morne Steyn in the side. Du Preez is one of those rare scrumhalves who can transfer play from inside his own 22 to inside the opposition 22 with one kick, and Steyn of course can do the same and also puts goalkicks over from almost anywhere.

This explains why the Boks, who returned this year to the platform created by Jake White’s selections and the genre of rugby inspired by Meyer at the Bulls, have also enjoyed a dominant year. The key men in the Bulls game also occupy the key positions with the Boks.

But the type of rugby that is winning competitions needs to be taken cognisance of by the chasers, and it is no coincidence that the champion teams around the world at the moment are also the teams with the superior kicking games and who are best equipped to win games without the ball.