In defence of John Smit
rugby365.com guest columnist Howard Kahn cannot understand why so much criticism has been directed at Springbok captain John Smit after South Africa's 6-21 defeat at the hands of Australia last weekend.
"Just you wait and see, John Smit will be remembered as the greatest ever tighthead prop in the history of South African rugby."
Those are the words of former Springbok tighthead prop Adrian Garvey - an ex-teammate of Smit's.
I just happened to speak to Garvs earlier this week in my guise as the Media Manager for the Cape Town Tens. (Without trying to digress, we are trying to convince Garvs to compete in next year's Cape Town Tens tournament after he pulled out of the 2009 event - watch this space!)
We chatted about a host of topics. His age - "Did you know I am 41 years old", he cackled - came up, his coaching academy (www.garvz.co.za) was mentioned briefly, the Currie Cup was discussed and, then, we got onto the hottest topic in SA rugby at present; the Bok scrum and John Smit.
Many pundits and fans have questioned Smit's move from hooker to tighthead prop - a position he played in his junior days.
Despite having never packed down in the front row in a Test match myself (or even coming close!), I have always liked the move - especially with the brute force of Bismarck du Plessis on Smit's inside and, lately, the presence of Jannie du Plessis on the bench as back-up.
The only issue is the Bok brainstrust's reluctance to use the good Doctor Jannie from the bench when Smit tires. But then again as we saw in the first Lions Test, in Durban, the world champions tend to struggle without their captain on the field. The other option, of course, is to move Smit across to the loosehead side during the latter stages of a match, but giving him a decent breather every now and then could only benefit him and his understudy in the long-run.
To me, South Africa's over-reliance on Smit is a bigger issue than his recent struggles against the Aussies and, in particular, the barrel-chested Wallabies and Waratahs loosehead prop Benn Robinson - who also gave Smit a torrid time during the Super 14.
Garvey, however, has no doubt about Smit's abilities up front, saying: "Look, I might be biased... After all, I know John and I've played with him and then, of course, I was a tighthead prop myself.
"I haven't exactly analysed last week's game, but there were about four or five bad scrums and now, suddenly, everyone wants John axed. It's unfair.
"Sure, Benn Robinson did well in those few scrums. But he's being picked to do just that - yet he managed to disrupt a few scrums only, whereas John brings a lot more than that to the party.
"It's quite similar to my experience in 1998," continued the former Bok No.3. "We scrummed badly against the All Blacks in that come-from-behind Tri-Nations win in Durban (in 1998) and I was very worried about my place in the team for the final game against the Wallabies.
"As it turns out I was picked for that game and I scored our first try early on as we went on to win our first-ever Tri-Nations trophy. But this is not about me, this is about John and it's something I feel strongly about. Watch him have the game of his life on Saturday and score a try as we win the 2009 Tri-Nations."
Okay, let's look at some minor statistics...
John Smit has played 89 Tests, 63 of them as captain, starting 10 of his last 11 Tests at tighthead prop. With him starting in the No.3 shirt, the Boks have lost just twice - in the third Test against the British & Irish Lions in July and last weekend to 'Dingo' Deans's underfire Wallabies.
Whilst on the topic of stats, Springbok assistant coach Gary Gold writes a very interesting weekly blog on his coaching website, RugbyIQ.
This week, Gold held nothing back in defence of the Bok scrum - quoting some interesting statistics before last week's clash in Brisbane.
"Australia had had 47 scrums in the three games they had played, in those 47 scrums they had 14 re-sets, which is 30%," wrote Gold.
"Remarkably, they only got to launch an effective play off 17 of there scrums which is 36%. In South Africa's case we had had 54 scrums in the first three games. The Boks had five re-sets which was 9% and incredibly, the Boks were able to launch effective plays off 39 of those scrums which constitutes a very acceptable 72%.
"These are facts, hard undebatable facts, these are not my emotive views, or a personal attack or defence toward or in favour of anyone, as I have witnessed recently towards South Africa's scrums and, in particular, John Smit.
"As a coach we need to present facts to players and a team in order for them to improve, or if an aspect of one's game is not up to standard, then, I suppose like any good doctor, we need to fix the cause and not the symptom.
"Now I am also not totally blinkered and naive, and please, I am not needing to defend John or the Boks, I believe there are definitely areas of the Boks game where they can certainly improve, and scrums is certainly one, but I don't feel that the specific scale of the criticism toward the scrum is based on facts and evidence, which as coaches, is all we can and should be focused on.
"I assume that a lot of the criticism has possibly come from what we all saw in the Test in Brisbane, and in the Test in Perth when the talented Benn Robinson caught John on the hit in three scrums, and was able to get underneath him, and in those scrums, yes, Australia had the upperhand. It looked dramatic, as John was lifted into the air and his head popped out of the scrum, and in fact in the game on the weekend he (Smit) was actually penalised.
"Yes, this did not look good, but this is what the short, talented Robinson's strategy was, to attempt to walk around John, get underneath him and then scrum up on him and hence catching him on the angle. Fair play to him, but in the other 27 scrums we had in the two Tests, that was not necessarily the case and that ploy certainly did not work." (Read Gary Gold's full blog here.)
It would be nice to see all the statistics from last weekend's scrums. There is no doubt that Smit was caught out in a few scrums in Brisbane; heck, Gold even admits it himself.
But does one bad outing suddenly make John Smit the weak link of the SA pack? At the same time, does one loss make this Bok team - which many pundits believe is the greatest modern-day Test outside - a bad side?
Weren't we all singing Smit's praises after the first Lions Test when the Bok unit - remember, a scrum is an eight-man effort - smashed the visitors in Durban?
Garvey has the last say: "Other than John Smit, show me a guy who has played Test rugby at loosehead prop, hooker and tighthead (prop)? I was a tighthead prop and when a coach once asked me to play loosehead (which is meant to be easier from a technical point of view) I ran a mile.
"Do you think we lost that Test last week because John Smit supposedly cannot scrum?!
"No... in fact, if you ask me, I don't think the team's focus was right. Maybe they started believing the press about being the best-ever Bok team. Maybe they just were not hungry enough, knowing they still had this game left against the All Blacks.
"(But) I have no doubt John Smit will come out firing on Saturday and play the game of his life and the Boks will win the Tri-Nations trophy - he's a quality player and true quality will always shine through."
Do you agree with Howard? Do people unfairly target Smit at every opportunity? Leave your comment below...
Former rugby365 editor Howard Kahn is the MD of Sports Network. Email howard@sportsnetwork.co.za for all your media management and sports marketing needs.