Coaches have been axed for less
rugby365.com columnist Grant Ball says Peter de Villiers wouldn't be the first international coach fired in the year before a World Cup.
On appointment, De Villiers asked to be judged on rugby results like any other international coach would have been and said that he didn't want a free ride. In that light, SARU must make a sound rugby decision and he shouldn't have a job in 2011.
The November internationals exposed the weakness of northern hemisphere rugby, and still the Boks stuttered to unconvincing wins over Ireland, Wales and England, and lost to a Scottish side who won't contend for the World Cup.
If Ronan O'Gara's conversion had gone over, if Wales had won a last minute line-out and the naive English hadn't believed their own hype, the Boks would have had a very different tour.
Even with three wins out of four, this group of Bok players - who were at full strength barring a few injuries which all international coaches have to deal with - should be cantering to a Grand Slam (like New Zealand did), when looking at talent at their disposal.
In that context and looking at the relative strength of the opposition, this tour must be deemed another failure under De Villiers. Scotland had to rely on a last-minute penalty to beat Samoa a week after beating the Boks, while Wales showed how weak they are when they drew with Fiji. And both those European sides sternly tested the Boks, showing how the latter have regressed.
De Villiers won't be fired as that would mean Oregan Hoskins would have to admit SARU were wrong in appointing De Villiers initially.
The latest reports suggest a technical team of former coaches will be appointed to guide De Villiers, which will effectively reduce his powers. But with De Villiers being as arrogant and ignorant as he is, that situation would be untenable. More importantly, what will Carel du Plessis, Rudolf Straeuli and Harry Viljoen offer the Boks? All their tenures coincided with poor records, confusing selections and haphazard game-plans - all similar traits to De Villiers' - so they're more likely to reinforce De Villiers' warped ideas than provide sound advice.
Financially, employing Straeuli and co all will also be a waste as this committee will have no power to force De Villiers into decisions. De Villiers has a water-tight contract on issues such as selection and tactics, and it's unlikely he'll cede those powers to give the committee any form of control.
If SARU really wanted what's best for the Boks and South African rugby, De Villiers would be judged on the Boks' failings in the last 12 months, where they have won nine out of 19, which includes losses to under-strength Leicester and Saracens outfits. Three of those wins were also against Italy, who aren't in the top 10 in the world.
Many claim that one year before the World Cup is too late to bring in a new coach, but history suggests it's not. Ian McIntosh was fired less than a year before the World Cup, and Kitch Christie then led the Boks to the title in 1995. Andy Robinson was fired by England in 2006, and Brian Ashton led the side to the final. Eddie Jones was also fired in the same year, with John Connolly taking over.
Coaches get fired in the cut-throat world of professional rugby, and firing De Villiers now would not be a unique situation as other countries have shown.
In the case of Robinson, he took over as England coach in 2004, but after 25 months of losses and a nine from 22 record, the RFU lost patience and he was forced to resign. The English were the reigning World Champions, but Robinson didn't do a good enough job and therefore didn't take the side to France in 2007.
De Villiers has done similar damage, except he has a golden generation of Bok players at his disposal. However, it's unlikely that SARU will have the backbone to ensure that he pays the correct price.
Grant Ball writes for RugbyXV