When it comes to rugby, few things are as thrilling and contentious as the rivalry between the Springboks and the All Blacks. Yet, the former head coach of New Zealand, Laurie Mains, has stirred the pot by suggesting that the gap between these two powerhouse teams is narrower than many might think.
After the recent conclusion of the Rugby Championship, which saw South Africa narrowly triumph over Argentina and New Zealand defeat Australia, both teams ended the tournament with 19 points. However, the Springboks ended up claiming the championship title due to a superior points differential. This outcome brings to light an intriguing observation made by Mains – while they finished tied in points, the performances showcased varied significantly between the two sides.
Both teams, currently ranked first and second respectively in the World Rugby standings, each bagged four victories from six matches during this year’s championship. The Springboks faced their defeats against Australia and New Zealand, while the All Blacks stumbled against Argentina in Buenos Aires.
One of the standout moments of this rivalry came when the Springboks handed the All Blacks their most significant loss in history, a staggering 43-10 defeat at Sky Stadium. The All Blacks had previously secured victory over the Boks with a 24-17 win, maintaining their unbeaten streak at Eden Park. These contrasting results raise questions about the strategic choices made in crucial matches.
In a recent conversation on The Platform NZ podcast, Mains discussed the strengths of the Springboks, which the host praised highly. However, he used their second matchup to underscore that the All Blacks are not far off the pace. His argument was built around the notion that certain key player selections negatively impacted New Zealand's performance. Mains remarked that the first half was quite evenly matched, but he contended that the All Blacks made poor decisions in player selection, particularly noting the absence of the team's largest player, Fabian Holland, who was benched.
Mains pointed out, "The All Blacks have been at their best this year with Fabian Holland in lock and Tupou Vaa’i, who excelled as a blindside flanker. It was puzzling to see him pushed into the lock position where he had to compete against much larger opponents."
The selections, along with what Mains described as a ‘mental lapse,’ became pivotal in determining the outcome of the match. He elaborated, "At halftime, the match was tightly contested, but then our performance fell apart. One major factor was the failure to secure our own lineouts because Holland was not on the field. We also experienced setbacks in our scrums, which was a case of mental struggle rather than physical inadequacy."
He stressed that the Springboks do not possess a stronger scrum than the All Blacks, indicating that their earlier struggles were more psychological. Mains also highlighted the logistical challenge faced by smaller players like Damian McKenzie, who had difficulty gathering high kicks against taller opponents.
The implications of these challenges were significant, leading to a disastrous second half for New Zealand. Mains crisply summarized the trifecta of issues: "If you can't win scrums, manage lineouts, or catch high kicks, you put yourself at a severe disadvantage." This raises important questions about selection strategy, game psychology, and how mental preparedness can be just as crucial as physical fitness in rugby.
As discussions around this topic flourish, one must ponder: Are the All Blacks genuinely lagging behind the Springboks, or is it a matter of strategic missteps that can be corrected? What do you think? Share your opinions below!
Don't miss the detailed analysis and insights from former players and coaches alike – the debate on player selections and their impact on international rugby is far from over!
