IT’S business as usual in the north as teams prepare for the opening weekend of the Six Nations but in South Africa, the situation is completely the opposite as beleaguered Springboks coach Allister Coetzee decided recently to let fly at his employer, the South African Rugby Union or SA Rugby.
The fact that the expected sacking of Coetzee has dragged on for months perhaps best describes the situation there, although the national team will play its next round of Tests in a little over four months’ time, beginning with the one at a neutral venue against Wales and then three home Tests against England. If the Springboks are to perform decently especially against a strong side like England, they need a team that is well settled and not distracted by off the field issues.
A review of Coetzee’s performance in 2016 and 2017 could not be concluded last December because SA Rugby could not agree on the panellists but despite this, at a meeting in the second week of January between Coetzee and SA Rugby CEO Jurie Roux, the former was told about his pending removal as national coach. On that score Coetzee is said to have a valid point in feeling hard done by.
In his 19-page letter addressed to Roux and delivered by his legal representatives, Coetzee for the most part blamed external factors for not being able to deliver as targeted by SA Rugby, winning only 11 of 25 Tests.
One commentator noted that while he didn’t quite have his way in his first year in charge relating to his choice of assistants and support services, the same didn’t apply during Coetzee's second year at the helm.
Coetzee also went on a rant to claim that he was no more than a black South African sacrificial lamb. Worst, he also took it out on newly appointed director of coaching Rassie Erasmus, who to be fair, has nothing to do with Coetzee’s position as coach, nor his poor win-loss record in the last two years.
The criticism against Erasmus was linked to the possibility that Coetzee may be asked to report to Erasmus if he is retained as coach and that, Coetzee feels, is an insult because he also doesn’t think that Erasmus has the credentials to be Springboks coach. To this Coetzee was reminded by a journalist that Erasmus had a successful career as coach with Munster in Ireland.
What Coetzee cannot run away from is that during the two years he achieved several dubious firsts which were an embarrassment to the proud rugby nation that for a long period had a national team feared by rivals all over the world.
Just last November Ireland scored a record 38-3 win in Dublin. There was also a defeat against Wales to make it two in a row.
In 2016 there was a first ever defeat to Italy, apart from the first away defeat to Argentina. Last year the Springboks also lost by a record 57-0 to the All Blacks in the Rugby Championship.
In the same competition while coached by Coetzee they had only one win in four games against the Wallabies and lost all four to the All Blacks.
But while most of his criticisms against SA Rugby appear misplaced, there are those who think that Coetzee is not to be blamed entirely for the poor health of South African rugby in the last few years, save for the men’s Sevens team.
All Springboks coaches are guided by a requirement mandated by SA Rugby to have a certain number of non-White players, both in the squad and matchday team.
There is also the restriction placed on the selection of foreign-based players similar to the one practised by Australia and more recently, Wales.
The general opinion in South Africa is to allow the Springboks coach a free hand on team selection but there is no sign that the conditions regarding the selection of non-Whites and overseas based players are about to be lifted anytime soon.
For this reason, one tends to agree to an extent that the likes of Coetzee do have a case against SA Rugby.