+Springboks - the only true 2-time Rugby World Cup Champions! #RWC2015

+Rugby World Cup 2015  The +Springboks are the only genuine 2-time Rugby World Cup champs.

The Rugby World Cup is due to commence in less than a fortnight. Will the New Zealand +All Blacks , the defending champions and the no. 1 ranked team in the World be the first team to successfully defend their world cup crown?

Despite a recent loss to the Australian +Wallabies in the Southern Hemisphere's 4 nation Rugby Championship, such is New Zealand's class and depth that they certainly warrant their no.1 ranking. If there is one team in World Cup rugby which is capable of winning two world cups in a row, it must be the All Blacks.

Other possible winners are +Australia , South Africa (+the Springboks) England and three time finalists France (1987, 1999 & 2011).

Only four nations have won the World Cup. History records that three teams won twice: New Zealand (1987 / 2011), Australia (1991/1999) and South Africa (1995/2007). The only other team to win the title was England in 2003.

I contend, however, that the only genuine two-time winner of the Rugby World Cup is South Africa. I say this because the Springboks were excluded from the 1987 and 1991 tournaments due to the international sports boycott against South Africa. 

Before I continue, permit me to say that I have no problem with the international sports boycott which applied against South Africa at the time due to its abhorrent policy of apartheid.  

What cannot be denied, however, is that South Africa's exclusion, albeit justified, diminished the value of the 1987 and 1999 World Cup tournaments. The Springboks have arguably been the second most powerful and successful side in World rugby after New Zealand.

If, prior to the advent of the World Cup, one had asked any New Zealand youngster who dreamt of taking to the field as an All Black, who their chosen opponents would be, the Springboks would have been the most likely answer.

South Africa's exclusion from the first two Rugby World Cups is equivalent to having a soccer world cup without Germany, Italy or Argentina. Lets assume, for example, that four times winner, Germany were excluded from a future world cup for legitimate political reasons.  Whichever other team goes on to win such a tournament cannot claim to be real world champions. The victory will be hollow without Germany having been eliminated!

History has shown that just as one cannot have a World War without inviting the Germans, one cannot have a Soccer World Cup Semi-Final without the Germans. The German record of making the last four of almost every Soccer World Cup is unmatched by any other side. Even five time champions, Brazil have not matched Germany's World Cup consistency.

As proof of the point I am making, since readmission to world rugby, South Africa has won two of the five Rugby World Cup tournaments it participated in. Alternatively stated, the only side to win more than one world cup tournament since South Africa's readmission is South Africa. This, on its own, undermines the claims of the 1987 and 1991 rugby world cup champions to being the real world champions.

South Africa's record from 1995 onwards proves this point: Any other team who wish to call themselves the Rugby World Champions can only do so if they win a world cup tournament in which South Africa has been eliminated.

In saying what I do, I don't for one minute wish to suggest that had South Africa fielded a team in the 1987 or 1991 World Cups, New Zealand and Australia, respectively, would not in any event have won. On paper, the 1987 All Blacks and the 1991 Wallabies were arguably better than any side the Springboks would have fielded.

Yet, if New Zealand or Australia had had a choice of facing the Springboks with the kicking abilities of Naas Botha or their actual respective opponents in the 1987 & 1991 finals i.e.  France and England, you can bet that the answer in both cases would not have been the Springboks.

Rugby is not played on paper. In a once-off knockout game, any side wearing the Springbok jersey, be they the best side in the tournament, or a young, inexperienced side, is capable of beating any side in the world.

I freely concede that New Zealand have been the best side in the world, bar none for the past quarter century. During most of this period, the All Blacks were, or ought to have been the legitimate favourites to win most series against South Africa, home or away.

Yet, despite being favourites to win almost every world cup since South Africa's readmission, New Zealand failed to win one tournament after another until they finally won at home in the 2011 World Cup.

Winning a world cup is not about starting the tournament as the best side or as favourites. Instead, its about making it to the quarter-finals, and once there, it is about winning every match. This is something the Springboks have shown themselves capable of doing, and doing well.  They know they don't need to be the best side on offer at any world cup. They also know that any Springbok side always has sufficient talent to beat any side in the world in a once-off knock-out encounter.

Since 1995, South Africa have won two tournaments and they came third once in 1999 (beating New Zealand into fourth in a plate match). This was after South Africa lost narrowly to eventual 1999 champions, Australia, in extra time of their semi-final clash.

Since South Africa's readmission, Australia and New Zealand have each only managed one world cup win.

In the premises, the Springboks are the only true 2-time Rugby World Cup champions!

Siegfried Walther, Cape Town

Free eBook on #MH370 & #AF447 by Siegfried Walther https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/526079 Also at +iBookstore +Kobo Inc. +Barnes & Noble 

+MH370 News 

DJ @SG_Walther Top 100 Playlist  6 Sept 2015  CAPE TOWN

http://siegfriedwalther.blogspot.co.za/2015/09/dj-sgwalther-cape-town-top-100-6.html