At the turn of the last century the All Blacks toured the British Isles. Dave Gallagher’s 1905 side known as “The Orginals” by many set the tone for the All Blacks in years to come. They played 32 games on tour, losing only once. They amassed 830 points – and there were only three points for a try then – and conceded only 39. Wales was the only team to defeat them 3-0 in what is still a very contentious game from the perspective of both nations. Many have said that the success of this tour led to Rugby becoming the national game in New Zealand.
A year later it was the turn of South Africa to tour Great Britain, and like the New Zealanders they were keen to show the motherland that they were now a force to be reckoned with. The Springbok name was born on that tour and while their victory over the combined Midlands was described as making their opponents look ‘like thin skim milk,’ they did not quite match the form of the All Blacks. They won 25 of their matches on tour, lost two, and drew with England; they did beat Wales though. They scored 553 points and conceded only 79.
From these tours a great rivalry was born between the All Blacks and the Springboks. A battle to be crowned the World’s best team ensued. One that has continued today. Both nations having won the Ruby World Cup three times out of the nine tournaments played. It should be noted that South Africa did not pay in the first two editions.
While the All Blacks dominance is much talked about in modern times, many are unaware that the Springboks went fifty years without losing a Test series to any nation. It must be said that sometimes their tactics did not make them the best loved side in World rugby.
In 1953 the Australians were the first side to defeat the Springboks in 15 years. In a true act of sportsmanship two Springbok players chaired the Australian captain John Solomon on their shoulders and carried him from the field of play; Would we ever see that today from a defeated team?
In 1956 the All Blacks avenged their 4- 0 whitewash from 1949 at the hands of the Springboks by becoming the first nation to win a series against the South Africans.
The battle for supremacy continued into the 1960’s and ’70’s but South Africa faced a far bigger challenge. Pressure was mounting across the globe for nations to sever ties with the country over their Apartheid regime. In 1976 there were 28 countries that boycotted the Summer Olympics in Montreal in protest to the regime, and in 1977 the Gleneagles Agreement discouraged any Commonwealth sporting contact with South Africa. By 1984 the country was forced to play its rugby in isolation.
Some will argue that it was during the next eight years with no South Africa playing international rugby that the All Blacks took centre stage. They hosted and won the first Rugby World Cup in 1987 and that helped enhance their reputation.
When South Africa returned to the fold following the abolishment of Apartheid appropriately their first international match was against the All Blacks. New Zealand led 10-0 at half time. With five minutes to go they looked to have the match won, but two converted tries made the match look closer than it probably was, with the All Blacks claiming victory 24-27. For rugby fans it was great to see the two great rugby nations once again vying for supremacy.
New Zealand has clearly maintained that supremacy in the post Apartheid era. The two nations have met 62 times since South African returned to International rugby, and there have been two draws between the two sides. New Zealand has won 44 matches to South Africa’s 16.
If you look at the record over all matches there have been 99 played between the two sides, of which four have ended in a draw. New Zealand has won 59 and South Africa 36.
There was no reason to believe that this dominance would not continue, however the changes announced in the past week may well benefit South African rugby in the long term, and see them regain the ascendancy.
South Africa is looking to move its Super Rugby teams from the Southern Hemisphere competition to play in Europe’s Pro Rugby Championship. Super Rugby had claimed to be the top rugby competition, but with South African sides looking to play against teams from Ireland, Wales, Scotland and Italy, that boast may not carry as much weight.
What will be interesting for the South African teams is whether their sides will be admitted to play in the European Rugby Champions Cup. One would think that this is unlikely as this is currently the top-tier competition for clubs whose countries’ national teams compete in the Six Nations Championship. Although if the South African participation will guarantee bigger viewing numbers on television, increased crowds and interest, their participation could help pull in more sponsorship dollars and television money, which could make their inclusion too good to refuse. After all top elite sport is about revenue.
If they were to be admitted to the European Rugby Champions Cup then the South African clubs players would have the best of both worlds. They would be playing club rugby against the cream of Europe, and then as announced this week will return to play in the Rugby Championship against the All Blacks, Australia and Argentina. Their players would be gaining great exposure to the top players from all of those countries and at the same time adapting to a variety of playing styles. Which one would think under a good coach should translate into a formidable international side.
The gamble, and for South African fans the fear is that they will be restricted to the Pro Rugby Championship competition, which many will feel is not as strong as England’s AVIVA Premiership or possibly France’s Top 14 League. If that is indeed the case will it weaken the Springboks at international level?
There have been strong rumours for a number of years that South Africa was looking to leave its southern hemisphere partnership and play in European competitions, due to the similar time zone and flying times. Yet the South African Rugby Union said that it was forced to make this move by New Zealand’s “unilateral” decision to organise its own domestic competition, or possibly a trans-Tasman competition involving Australian and other teams for next year. A decision made due to the uncertainty over whether a traditional Super Rugby tournament would be able to be played amid the coronavirus pandemic.
This in itself is a gamble for Australia and New Zealand rugby. Australian rugby is struggling at the present time and faith in the administration of the game is at an all time low. Attendance figures prior to the Pandemic were in decline and unless the Australian Super Rugby teams are given an injection of life on and of the pitch the future of the tournament may be on shaky ground.
There is talk that South Africa’s Bloemfontein-based Cheetahs, who were cut from Super Rugby and played in the Pro14 competition, may actually now leave Europe and return to Super Rugby so that the governing body SANZAAR remains, and South Africa remains a small part of the competition. This seems to many in the know to be an untenable option.
So what doe step move to the Northern Hemisphere competition mean to South African rugby? Could leaving South Africa out of the Super Rugby mix in the long term help South African Rugby, and ultimately harm their longstanding rivals, New Zealand? Or will the decision to head North ultimately harm South African Rugby and ensure that the ascendancy remains with the All Blacks for the foreseeable future? In these crazy times it is hard to predict anything, but as they say, time will tell.
