We should in all sincerity rejoice a victory over the six nations. Instead, on the evidence of the two games played so far, I am left feeling very concerned particularly with the the Tri Nations just around the corner.

Make no mistake, we have the core of the playing personal that can beat our southern hemisphere rivals barring one or two selections. I have no doubt that we have the players that can overcome Australia and New Zealand.

But what we seem to be lacking against our two southern hemisphere rivals is so critically essential….the management and coaching staff behind the team. Here I am afraid, Pieter de Villiers is out of his depth. Furthermore he is flanked by two inexperienced assistant’s (at international level) in Gary Gold and Dick Muir.

This guy is not in the same league as his two southern hemisphere counterparts …Robbie Deans and Graham Henry.

It is not just selection a coach needs to get right, nor his ability to write a winning game plan. It is also his ability to inspire his players, and the ability to get the best out of his players. Many coaches of our past were able to inspire confidence and instil self belief in players that they were as good as any on the planet, if not better.

Jake White was one, Nick Mallet another, Kitch Christie was a coach who also possessed those qualities. Kitch Christie won the world cup with a team sheet that did,nt t read on paper as one of the strongest Bok teams of the post isolation era. Apart from Joost van der Westhuizen and Andre Joubert, most of those players were not nearly as highly regarded as players like Bryan Habana, Vic Matfield, Schalk Burger, Jean de Villiers, Percy Montgomery etc. When you compare Hennie le Roux, Hannes Strydom, dare I say it, Rudolph Strauli, James Smal, Chris Russouw, even Stransky were averagely good players who became world beaters through self belief.

Rudolph Strauli and Andre Markgraaf were two coaches who achieved exactly the opposite in their players. Pieter de Villiers in these early days, doesn't seem to be that kind of coach regardless of the public fronts ala Corne Krige in the Strauli era.

It is also the ability of a coach to cohesively get his guys to play as a unit, whilst at the same time not quelling the expression of individual talents.

Am I wrong in saying that this is just not Pieter de Villiers. Perhaps it is early days…and I would love to be proven wrong. But to me he is way to naïve to coach at this intense level. Already the writing is on the wall. You wouldn't say so looking at his two test winning margin over the current six nations champs. But for me the alarm bells ring. Perhaps he is just not a gifted speaker like Jake White, but when I see him talking on TV, I get filled with a sense of dread.

The Rudolph Strauli mentality is not all together absent here. Forgive me fellow SAFFA’s, if I am overly negative in these early days but on the evidence of the coaches statement’s himself and a blundering game plan in a test match, I am all but uninspired with confidence.

Against Wales yesterday, the Boks under their new coach abandoned some crucial principles of test rugby as well as playing away from the traditional Springbok strength. From the outset, the Boks attempted to run Wales ragged. For a while it threatened to be pretty entertaining and for a moment it looked like Wales would be on a thumping to none. My take is that this was brainless, careless, stupid and naïve rugby of the highest order…at least for a test match. This certainly was not clever nor tactical rugby of laying down the solid foundations for a winning result.

Flip sake, this was a test match and it needed to be approached exactly as that. The wheels so nearly came off and was eventually rescued much like our quarter final win against Fiji, when the Boks went back to basics, kept it tight and grounded down their opposition.

This happy flash rugby from the kick off is not Bok rugby and will never be in the foreseeable future. My take would have been to ground down the opposition, take the three points when they present themselves, lay the foundations of a win and then if the game allows, open up in the last half hour.

With two dynamic speedsters and probably the most lethal finishers on either side of the wings (not discounting the classy Shane Williams), neither Bryan Habana nor Tonderai Chavanga once received a clean pass from a backline move in either of these two tests. Chavanga on defence is a huge liability. His strength is ball in open space. He is a gas man like Habana, but if he is not going to be given the space he needs to turn up the heat, then there is no alternate logic to justify his selection. Apart from burning pace, he has nothing else to offer in the test arena.

Most frustrating in the Loftus test and going on memory, I counted at least three occasions when the ball sailed down the backline in what were very promising moves…instead of Habana or Chavanga being on their wings to finish off with their lightning pace, big bouncy, slow forwards were in their place to take that final wing pass. Beast was a prime example of a move made for the gas men. Haring down the touchline with commendable determination but without that burning pace, the Welsh defence were able to monster him and snuff out the threat. The Loftus test’s displayed far too much individualism from the players and some very unstructured passages of play. The only consolation here is that it is typically early season.

Can anyone answer why Habana and Chavanga were so often awol during moments tailor made for their strengths. Actually, I became quite annoyed at seeing so many promising moves tailor made for speedsters only to break down in midfield coz of a big forward playing at centre or out on the wing.

Questions answered in yesterdays match. Percy is still our number one fullback. No offence to a player like Janjies who has done every thing to deserve his jersey. Whilst Percy is around, Jantjies will always be second best option at best. Percy on the park brings a sense of calmness amongst disorder with his years of experience. Loftus reminded me of the WC match against Tonga when the wheels were falling off  and Montgomery was one of a hand full of experienced campaigners brought off the bench to steady the ship.

Chavanga at this level is a liability, especially on defence. If you can get him decent ball, you may get your money’s worth. But as in both tests, he was nothing more than a highly paid spectator with the best seat in the house. I wont elaborate about his flakiness under the high balls.

I wouldn't write him off just yet and I believe he still has a contribution to make to the Bok cause. At the moment, I would settle for an out of form JP Pieterson who at least gives you better options at defence, fielding the high balls and less fragile nerves under pressure. On the evidence of the two test’s this season, the All Blacks will be licking their chops if they see Chavanga line up against them come Tri Nations.

Adi Jacobs is one of my favourite Super 14 midfielders on the SA circuit, but I feel he falls a yard short of international standards. There are a couple of better options in the Bok midfield in the absence of Jacques Fourie. Francois Steyn is my choice. But if he is not yours, there are other options in Waylon Murray, even Peter Grant. I am not going to criticise Jacobs as others have done except to say that he is a marvellous talent who is just a milestone short of test standards.

Interestingly, I read on the fern a couple of posts going against Luke Watson, as an international player. Whilst some of the posts raise good points why Luke is not our man, I ask the question …who is in the absence of Schalk Burger. Luke Watson, I do believe, is a better player then these two test performances proved. But I also feel that although he didn't play blinders, he had done enough to justify his inclusion in the absence of Shalk Burger. Clearly TB never was nor will ever be a Luke Watson fan.

Ryan Kankowski. Well, I am a big fan of  his and maybe its my personal bias toward the player, but I thought he made a huge difference to the Bok cause when he came onto the field. Last week I debated the Kanwoski verse Spies subject with one of our work colleagues and a die hard Sharks fan. I was surprised to hear him describe Kankowski as overrated. My earnest colleague told me that Kankowski looks good and flashy running around the field with the ball but he prefers his forwards to be doing the hard dirty work in the grit and the scrum and mauls, which is what he believes Pierre Spies offers.

Absolutely do not agree and the Loftus test showed Kankowski in the final twenty getting his hands dirty. Pierre Spies is a brilliant carrier of the ball, much like Kanwonski. But the opposite applies to the above observation, where Spies is less effective in the tight exchanges.

Either player though, would not disgrace South Africa and I have said before that we are blessed to have two quality number 8s, each almost as good as the other. Some go for Spies, others like me go for Kankowski.

Players to deserve special mention from these two test’s is without doubt the enormity of Juan Smith who delivers at the same intensity test after test. The other, although this is a Bok perspective, is the sheer thrill and class of a player like Shane Williams. I read in a newspaper article some journo stating that Juan Smith has emerged as the Boks best number 7 since the days of Andre Venter and I could take that further. He consistently performs and his presence on the field is huge in every game. Wales I am sure will give testament to this.

Shane Williams, two stunning tries…breathtaking tries against our Bokke but no less conceding our admiration for a dynamic player. Jeez, this guy can burn and side step.
No wonder this guy is the sensation that he is. One word. Simply electric. Last week he had Habana and friends grasping at thin air, and again at Loftus he left everyone smoked with a sensational try that brought Wales straight back into the match. World class and thrilling to watch even if it your team he is smoking over.

Lastly, with two tests in New Zealand awaiting us not too far away, our dear coach needs to learn some test lessons, and he needs to learn them hard and fast otherwise he is going to be sorely exposed for sheer nous and brains by the likes of Messer Henry and Deans. Remember the contrast between thick as a dick Rudolph Strauli against the more astute John Mitchell. I absolutely believe that South Africa has the playing personal to beat both the Blacks and Ozzies. It’s the coaching staff I am worried about.