Keo, in his News 24 column, writes that if Jake White has to pay R350 to watch the Boks lose every Saturday heâ€™ll also start believing test results are important.
If five wins out of 12 is acceptable fare for the Springboks then donâ€™t waste your time on a World Cup ticket in 2007.
Jake White has told us not to judge him on five wins out of 12, but on what his strongest team could do at the World Cup â€“ the kind of team that has beaten the All Blacks in the past few years, but also that team that lost in Dublin to Ireland and at Twickenham to England.
For the moment, letâ€™s forget about the losses and concentrate on the wins, even if they havenâ€™t been that many.
And letâ€™s look at who achieved our famous wins for the Bok coach.
The Boks, if they put together their strongest team, can beat anyone on their day. How often have I heard this in the past 12 months? Hell, Iâ€™ve even said it myself on more than 10 occasions.
But will the Boks ever put out their strongest team? And does such a thing actually exist?
The Bok coach has said often this year that the ideal match 22 he has in his mind has (in 37 tests) never played. That could be because theyâ€™re all New Zealanders, but weâ€™ll give Jake the benefit on this one and actually believe they are all South Africans.
Then, what is the best XV? Is it an ageing Percy Montgomery or a youthful Francois Steyn? Schalk Burger, Juan Smith, Danie Rossouw, Pierre Spies, Kabamba Floors and Pedrie Wannenburg donâ€™t go into three. It can only be one of Ricky Januarie or Fourie du Preez at scrumhalf â€¦ the best to beat Ireland is perhaps a different best to beat New Zealand.
You need bulk to batter the Kiwis, but more mobility to see off the Wallabies. Which is better and what makes one player better than the other? Oneâ€™s skill could be potent in a particular game plan and not a factor when played in a different combination.
It is fantastic to develop depth and to have two or more players to cover every position. But the moment a team reaches that level, what they gain in quality they lose in talk of a best team. The latter term then no longer exists because you can only play 15 at one time.
So when Jake White says his best team can beat the All Blacks and whoever else at the World Cup and win it, who is this best team he has developed over three years?
Youâ€™d have to say Steyn has overtaken Montgomery, even if White wonâ€™t be as quick to agree with you. Youâ€™d have to say Bryan Habanaâ€™s shares have dropped, even if White wonâ€™t agree with you. You could argue a place has to be made for Wynand Olivier and that Jaque Fourie and Jean de Villiers arenâ€™t as good as weâ€™d like to think. Of the flyhalves Andre Pretorius rose from the dead at Twickenham, but only next year will tell us if the life in his international career has 12 months or more. Can Butch Jamesâ€™s knees take another year and will Meyer Bosman come good?
At scrumhalf thereâ€™s Ruan Pienaar, Januarie and Du Preez. Who do you play against whom?
The loosies number 10, but only three can start. We know who the locks will be, we know who the hooker will be if White takes the team to the World Cup and we know who the loosehead prop will be, even though White keeps on bemoaning Gurthro Steenkampâ€™s absence. If he can breathe, Os du Randt will be there.
Given this little exercise you canâ€™t say with any certainty after three years of Whiteâ€™s coaching which is the best 15 out of the 64 players he has used.
And I seriously doubt White can tell us who they are either.
This brings me back to results and the need to win more than you lose every Saturday during the test match season.
White has to be judged on the team he picks every test and on the subsequent results. If we do that we are dealing in tangibles.
If we start buying into the â€˜judge me at the World Cupâ€™ and â€˜when I pick my ideal teamâ€™ then we may as well stop keeping score on a Saturday and all sign up for the fantasy league.
And if we do that then SARU may as well stop charging outrageous cash for test match tickets.
Professional coaches are well paid to do a job and that job is about each Saturday and not 44 supposedly meaningless tests between World Cups; tests that cost the punter more than R350 a pop.
Sorry Jake, but you have to be judged on a 59 percent win record in the last three years. No more and no less.
If SARUâ€™s bosses believe that is acceptable, then you should stay. If not, then get in the queue for a World Cup ticket and youâ€™ll soon start seeing that when you are paying every test result does actually count. When youâ€™re cashing big dollars to watch a team, you are entitled to performance and not four year promises from coaches.
Iâ€™ve said it often: the World Cup has become a four year excuse for the majority of the gameâ€™s coaches. The World Cup should be a bonus to winning more test matches in four years than you actually lose.