When it comes right down to it South Africa are in the Rugby World Cup final because they were able to change on the fly when things were going against them. England put in an almost pitch-perfect performance, akin to their victory against the All Blacks in the semi-final four years ago. But it was the sheer depth of South Africa’s squad that denied them.
Rassie made a raft of substitutes as clearly the weather was having a huge impact on the fundamentals of the game – Jamie George was trying to throw the ball into the lineout and it slipped out of his hands at one stage. This was quickly becoming one of those games where you would prefer not to not have the ball. So Rassie acted.
Manie Libbok was replaced on 30 minutes. On a very basic level it tells the world he is not the player they trusted to win the match. Even if it begs the question of why they started him, you must admire this level of confidence from the South African coaches. So many coaches shy away from big calls like these and leave players on the field too long. I have rarely played with anyone who was able to find a way to turn around a game that clearly wasn’t happening for them.
I have talked about at length how well connected the Irish coaches and players are – and we have been told and shown (through multiple media channels) that this is also the case. This week will test exactly how strong that bond is in the South African camp. The ruthless and dispassionate substitutions by Erasmus won them the game.
The Counter Ruck: the rugby newsletter from The Irish Times
Unbreakable, a cautionary tale about the heavy toll top-level rugby can take
Jacques Nienaber: ‘It was never the case that Rassie and I didn’t enjoy Munster or Ireland’
Joe Schmidt factor makes Australia game special for Ireland and Andy Farrell
Six replacements in the space of about eight minutes – Ox Nché, RG Snyman, Faf de Klerk, Deon Fourie, Kwagga Smith and Willie Le Roux – followed by Vincent Koch five minutes later. They forced the game back in their favour, slowly but surely, over the closing half hour. Nché became the latest saviour in South African rugby folklore, with what can only be described as an incredible display of power, skill and tactical nous.
The scrum may have been the final nail in the coffin but there were too many other factors in the build-up to this win for South Africa to suggest it was one facet of the game. The quality within the 33-man South Africa squad is a key difference. To my mind a comparable advantage exists in the French and Kiwi squads as well.
But what about Ireland? Now that the dust has settled, the lack of rotation in the Irish squad is glaring. Watching the matches over the last two weeks I feel it is fair to say that our old Achilles heel contributed to this World Cup exit, albeit under a slightly unique guise. Andy Farrell was consistent and it would be impossible to suggest he got any selections wrong. The question is, did he have enough to pick from in the first place?
Was there a genuine strength in depth within the Irish squad to be able to compete consistently with the top teams? The evidence of the World Cup suggests there wasn’t. Take away Jamison Gibson-Park being rested for the Tonga game and what other examples of rotation were there? Any other replacements were largely injury-dependent. That tells you that there is still a gap between the top players and the next layer beneath.
This has happened before. It was highlighted in 2015 when we lost a half dozen crucial players and the performance dipped accordingly. For all our progress we have not changed our structures since then. As a result we have the ability to produce one-off world class players. But we evidently don’t have the strength in depth needed to deliver at a World Cup.
We are talking about very small margins here, obviously. But clutch matches are decided by small margins. Keystone players were below their peak physical performance state, which is understandable considering how many of them started every match. None of the New Zealand players started every match. None of the South Africa players started every match. None of the England players started every match.
By contrast, 10 Ireland players started every match. When you compare the individual workload to the other quarter-finalists Ireland had disproportionally more than their rivals. I felt that the over-reliance on Andrew Porter, Tadhg Furlong and Beirne, Caelan Doris and Bundee Aki told in the end as they looked a little below par across the final 80 minutes. Aside from South Africa, the majority of Ireland’s substitutions were planned and designed to try and rest key players rather than anything tactical, which tells the same story in a different voice.
It comes back to structures. Our professional game is primarily driven by the schools’ game. Our X-factor has been secured through nationalised recruitment. The club game has minimal effect on our international squad, with Furlong the only club-originated player at the World Cup.
Had David Nucifora made any stab at a club pathway when he took over as performance director in June 2014 there is every chance that with improved coaching in the club system we would have a more diverse player profile to pick from today. This does not guarantee success, but a more diverse player pool can only benefit the Irish game.
Leinster were missing close to 19 players over the weekend in their opening loss to Glasgow. Again, only Ciarán Frawley came through the club system with Skerries. The concentration and profile of players originated predominantly from the schools system. Imagine what a decade of investment in a club pathway could be bringing through by now.
The opening loss will be extremely useful as Leinster and Ireland now look to rugby in the post-Johnny Sexton era. I played a large portion of my professional rugby on a team with a poor win-loss record in important matches. This was always a driving factor for me in the pursuit of winning – I had spent enough time on the other side of the fence and it wasn’t pretty.
Irish rugby is in superb health considering the self-imposed constraints we have within our structures. As we are today we will never be able to create the genuine competition for places that exists in France, South Africa and New Zealand. The English club system is in pieces and even though they have 10 clubs they could not produce the required strength in depth to reach another World Cup final.
In many ways the Irish system is okay. We have ebbs and flows at international level and four provinces that face a robust financial future and will be competitive in the URC and Champions Cup. As it stands the club game is unlikely to ever get the respect and investment it deserves.
So it will always be a case of wondering what if?
