Winning matches is better than winning respect

Well done to the Springboks for the passion and commitment that rattled England for 40 minutes and kept them competitive in the important Pool C match for nearly an hour.

At least those who did go to Perth for the most long-awaited match involving South Africa in the last four years got their money's worth, which is more than can be said for the hapless souls who travelled to Twickenham during the last three Novembers.

I watched the game in a cinema in Witbank and the big screen brought home just how much the Springbok players put their bodies on the line.

The pack was magnificent and on this showing the Boks certainly can beat New Zealand in the quarterfinal. But note that I use the word can, and not should, for unless the Bok management take a clear view of the situation, that much-cherished victory just isn't going to happen.

Yes, the blood and guts showed by the Boks was heartwarming stuff, but it was hardly new. We all know the Boks can guts it out with the best, and judging from the previews penned in the various media last week, most were expecting nothing less than a supremely brave, committed and gutsy effort from the men in green.

But those who have read my columns during the year will know I have always said blood and guts will never suffice against England.

And it won't against New Zealand either unless coach Rudolf Straeuli quickly realises what most critics realised a long time ago - namely that the current halfbacks are not the answer and that instead of talking about a plan, he actually has to have a plan.

This plan patently also has to revolve around something more directly rugby oriented than just being the fittest team at the World Cup, for unless my eyes were deceiving me, England did not lack gas in the last 20 minutes.

While the forwards were brilliant against England, the backs were predictable and only the most optimistic South African heart would have seen any hope of them getting through the English defence. Even when Bakkies Botha was knocked out at the corner flag, there were four England tacklers on top of him.

For me the writing was already on the wall when the sides went to the break at 6-all. South Africa had thrown everything they had at England and yet the tournament favourites had not trailed on the scoreboard.

The Bok backs, taking everything way behind the advantage line and thus rendering it almost impossible for them to capitalise on the turn-overs won by De Wet Barry and Corné Krige, had never seriously threatened to create a try from the possession they enjoyed in the first half.

And when Louis Koen missed those kicks at goal you did not have to be a soothsayer of note to predict that the South Africans were going to end up paying for it.

In many ways it reminded me of one of Straeuli's other big games as coach. It was almost three years ago in Canberra, the 2001 Super 12 final between the Sharks and the ACT Brumbies.

In the first half of that match the Sharks hit the Brumbies with an intensity and ferocity that was frightening. But Butch James missed some crucial kicks, the backline wasted the possession, and the sides went to the break with a similar score to the one in Perth on Saturday.

The Brumbies emerged after half time knowing they had absorbed the best the Sharks could throw at them and they promptly went out and wrapped up the match.

It took a little longer for England to do it just because the Bok forwards were so spirited, but once they got ahead early in the half there was no way back for South Africa for the simple reason that the backline lacked the necessary attacking flair.

Much of this can be blamed on Koen spending the entire evening playing in the pocket, as well as Joost van der Westhuizen's inability to deliver the required crisp service. Although it may be unfair to blame one or two players for a defeat, it is not unfair to blame the coaches and selectors who keep defying the obvious by sticking with those players.

Van der Westhuizen is a supreme competitor and he has clearly worked hard on eradicating his weak points, but he still falls short and we cannot continue to live in hope.

It was this area of the Bok game that saw South Africa to another "honourable defeat", as opposed to a victory, in the last Tri-Nations match against New Zealand in Dunedin.

While some celebrated the fact that the Boks had at last become competitive, what was largely overlooked after Dunedin was the way the halfbacks had frittered away the chance to win with poor option taking, missed goalkicks and, perhaps most importantly, misdirected tactical kicks.

This problem was in no sense new and Koen's shortcomings have been highlighted in this column many times over the past few months.

Indeed, an entire column was devoted to Koen's unsuitability for the role of Bok flyhalf following the opening test of 2003 against Scotland in Durban.

While many applauded Koen for kicking the goals that mattered, my biggest concern was the halfback dithering that allowed Scotland to end that Durban test having won the try count three against two.

There was one particular move that sticks in the mind from that game - Koen's decision to kick ahead when he had an overlap waiting outside him and the tryline at the Bok mercy.

A week later the same player threw out a poor pass in the early stages which enabled Scotland to score an intercept try, something he repeated at a critical stage of the away Tri-Nations test against Australia, when he had a poor pass intercepted just outside his 22 by Matt Rogers.

At the time the Boks were down to 14 men and were trailing 9-6. If ever Koen should have kicked rather than passed it was then and it was that moment that turned the game Australia's way.

A few weeks earlier Koen had been as poor, and had committed as many mistakes on attack, in the test against Argentina in Port Elizabeth. But because he did his job of kicking the vital goal in the final minute, his shortcomings were again overlooked.

Also overlooked throughout the international season building up to the World Cup was the fact that by far South Africa's most impressive game of the past two or three years was the victory over Australia in the last match of the 2002 Tri-Nations.

This was a win achieved with an attacking player in the No10 jersey, but since then Straeuli has been travelling in the opposite direction.

While he spoke after the Perth defeat of a desire to play attacking rugby, it has been obvious from day one of this tournament that his team is not equipped with the personnel to play that game, and we saw that against England on Saturday.

Perhaps that was the most frustrating aspect of the game for me: had Straeuli stuck with last year's backs (not to mention last year's backline coach), his current pack would have paved the way not just for a win over England, but perhaps the World Cup itself.

One of the biggest indictments of Koen's status as an international flyhalf was provided by England's apparent lack of interest in putting any extra pressure on him.

They probably figured correctly that he is not a player that is likely to trouble their defences by taking the ball up and, considering where he stands, neither is he likely to ignite attacking plays outside him.

Unless someone is injured and André Pretorius or Brent Russell, who scored a typically brilliant solo try for Natal the other night, are flown out to Australia, I fancy the forwards will continue to battle manfully without reaping their just reward.

The one other option is for Straeuli to move Werner Greeff in at flyhalf and trust the goalkicking of Jaco van der Westhuyzen from fullback. It might seem like a desperate option, but I don't believe he has any alternative.

Retaining Koen at flyhalf (or even playing Derick Hougaard there if he is going to play from the pocket throughout the match) will lead only to another post-match comment from the skipper about the Boks winning respect. Excuse me for being old fashioned, but when it comes to a World Cup, what I like to see the Boks win is the match.