John Smit's "Call of 99"

In the third test of the 2009 British Lions series, the Springboks demonstrated their solidarity with team mate Bakkies Botha (who was suspended for foul play in the second test) by wearing white "justice 4 Bakkies" armbands. The Springboks have made it clear that they feel Botha is being victimised for an action which is a routine part of the game and rarely gets penalised, let alone results in a suspension to the guilty party.

In doing so South African rugby has, perhaps unwittingly, issued its own Call of 99. Back in 1974 it was the British Lions standing up to the bullying tactics of the Springboks; in 2009 it is the Springboks standing up to what they perceive as the bullying tactics of the International Rugby Board (IRB)'s disciplinary process. One wonders if they are prepared for the fallout that may ensue.

Willie John McBride's men operated under the (correct) assumption that the referee of that match would be unlikely to issue red cards if the whole team was involved. As an interesting aside, the South Africa-Canada match in the 1995 World Cup - also in Port Elizabeth - was played in a similarly mean spirit and did result in three red cards being issued.

The difference with the current confrontation is that:

1. the Springboks are up against their own sport's governing body, and


2. the drama is unfolding at a more considered pace, behind closed doors, allowing the participants plenty of time to consider their response.

Intimidation and domination in rugby

The essence of rugby is simple and unsubtle: the game is won by physically and mentally dominating your opponent. However, perhaps rugby administrators need to realise that that mentality does not necessarily translate well into the boardroom. Whereas rugby is a game of winners and losers, in business and politics win-win outcomes are generally more desirable. This inevitably involves an element of compromise, but generally leads to agreements that all parties can live with.

It will be interesting to see how the IRB handle the matter. Early indications are that they will take the Springboks on up front, as it were, evidenced by reports that the South African Rugby Union will be charged with bringing the game into disrepute. That may well be a fight that the IRB will win, but it will be seen as an opportunity missed: to clarify the letter and application of rugby's laws in this area, and to rise above petty power-plays, for the good of the game and all who enjoy it, players and spectators alike.

British Lions Tour: physical confrontation without foul play

The South African Springboks have long been known as one of the most physical - some would say dirty - teams in international rugby. There certainly have been some unsavoury incidents involving South African teams over the years, none more so than the 1974 Lions tour when the Lions famously employed their "99 call" to combat the Springboks' off-the-ball tactics:



In recent years however, the International Rugby Board has done a good job of cleaning up rugby, assisted by advances in video technology, the sin bin, and the use of citing commissioners to mete out punishment for foul play after the game. Stuff still happens - rugby is a confrontational contact sport after all - but rarely on the scale seen here.

Sin Binning and Sending Off

Teams and players are generally a lot more circumspect these days - England's 2002 demolition of the Springboks at Twickenham clearly demonstrated the effect of a red card early in a game. England would probably have won that match anyway, but certainly not by the record margin they achieved if the Springboks had not had to play the majority of the match with 14 men.

Evidence suggests that even having a player receive a yellow card and being sent to the sin bin for 10 minutes usually results in points against his team, often from the accompanying penalty, but also from the physical advantage it gives the opposition. And even if points aren't scored within the period of the suspension, it's likely that the extra effort expended by the rest of the team to cover for the missing player takes a toll later on in the match.

Physical Domination in Rugby

But while we will hopefully not see any punching or blatant foul play during the 2009 British Lions tour, physical domination of the opposition is still a fundamental of the game, and we should expect no quarter to be asked or given by either side. In recent years the Springboks have not often strayed too far from their traditional pattern of play, based on a solid foundation of forward play to get over the advantage line and creating space out wide for their classy backs. When they have experimented with playing a more expansive game, they have invariably come unstuck.

It remains to be seen what tactics the British Lions of 2009 will employ, but they will need to at least match the Springboks in the scrums, lineouts and at the breakdown if they are to control the play.