Why Butch must play against England

The past couple of weeks of ABSA Currie Cup action have provided compelling evidence of why the Springbok selectors should shelve any plans to omit Butch James from the end of year tour of Wales, Scotland and England.

I hear that James is still in the selection mix, which is good news if it is true, for there is uncertainty in some quarters over James’ status. He did say during the Vodacom Tri-Nations season that he was considering retiring from international rugby after the tournament, but that was said with the proviso that he would do so if his form did not improve.

After the tournament ended there was no announcement from James, who returned immediately to England to link up with his club side Bath, for whom he has reportedly been excelling in the past few weeks.

But his decision to sign a three year contract with Bath has been seen as an indication that he is not necessarily expecting his Bok career to continue beyond this juncture. While SA Rugby earlier this year voted to suspend the ban on overseas based players playing for the Boks, it is no secret that coach Peter de Villiers prefers to stick with players appearing on a regular basis in the South African and southern hemisphere competitions.

It was for this reason that his management asked the Sharks to re-contract John Smit, and it is believed a similar request was made regarding James. However, there was reluctance to engage James because the player wanted a long-term contract and the Sharks are only too aware of the amount of work that has been done on the player’s knees.

But whether or not James is living on borrowed time is not the point. There has been a sword hanging over James for some years now regarding his injuries, and I remember writing after the 2006 tour of the United Kingdom that well though James played in the first Twickenham test of that series, it would be a massive gamble for Jake White to bank on him as the Springbok World Cup flyhalf.

Thankfully I was wrong about that, for James ended up playing the entire 2007 year, and was the unsung hero of the South African World Cup campaign. Those knees may give in at some stage, and sooner or later the Boks are going to have to look for a replacement flyhalf, but with the British Lions series on the horizon, it would be wise for the Boks to stick with James in the absence of suitable replacements.

Peter Grant was definitely the better of the two Springbok hopefuls on show in the recent Currie Cup match between Western Province and the Lions. The WP man shares James’ appetite for playing at the gain-line, and like James, he is a great defender who is not afraid of being physical.

But the question marks over the length of his field kicks persist, and while it would not be a massive gamble to give Grant some game-time on the end of year tour, it would be safer to do so with the experienced James still in the mix.

Earl Rose is being touted by some as the next best thing as a Bok flyhalf, and he may well be that. The Lions pivot certainly does not lack ability. But when his provincial coach Eugene Eloff said after the Province game that Rose wasn’t ready to play international rugby just yet, that should have been the death-knell to any chance of playing on the end of year tour.

So call out the names of the other contenders. I have always like Morne Steyn, and Eddie Jones said last year that Ruan Pienaar should be groomed to be the Bok flyhalf in the 2011 World Cup. However, Pienaar appears to have made it clear to the Sharks that he sees himself as a scrumhalf only.

James played well in the last Tri-Nations test against Australia, when the Boks made a welcome return to structured rugby, and he has been in good form in England, where the big game of this tour is to be played. He should be the first name pencilled into the squad that will be announced on 25 October and given the licence to continue where he left off when he was injured with 20 minutes to go of his previous test at Twickenham in 2006.