To be fair, labelling it an exhibition match is a bit unfair. It was a lot of things...
As the fixture drew closer I realized how much was actually at stake...
AB win would have seen them move to 1st on the rankings, they would have avoided the ignominy of losing to the same opposition 3 times consecutively and officially they would have drawn the 4 match away test series 2-2 (see the abnormality)? They would also have gained a psychological advantage over the Boks re performance at neutral venues, ahead of the 2027 RWC. Over and above that NRU stands to make a significant purse out of the fixture, essential given world cup years tend to be rather lean as there are no home tests.
For the Boks, the converse of the above rings true IE stay at no.1, 3 consecutive victories, series win etc etc etc
So yes, to refer to the 4th test as simply an exhibition match is selling it short and rather disingenuous...
To be fair, most of the pundits expressing the exact same dubious reaction to the organizers' decision-making on including a 4th test as part of a home series.... in another country, was quite carefully done.
Most of them used the term carefully, by saying things like '
almost an exhibition match', or "it seems
like an exhibition match".
They aren't lawyers, or technocrats. They were just speaking from their instant gut reaction to an obvious diversion from the 40+ year norm, and their experience in life and professional rugby which tells them not everyone who reaches a position of mass influence has the best interest of the masses at heart.
Matfield said it as part of his podcast which is - at least in part - an entertainment podcast. Even tho' Victor might even believe what he said, part of their following is there to watch the two of them wind each other up. It's known.
I said it without reference to a technical definition. And I still stand by my assertion. It was an exhibition match, as I later defined it, in line with how all those pundits and ex-players meant it... the boks won the series 2-1.
Officially they won
a series 3 - 1. But it wasn't a home series, if they won it 3 - 1.
You obviously can't call it a home series, if you go with the official narrative. Everyone has to change their language, now. In drawing comparisons, everyone will have to be a little more nuanced since in their own adopted definition, the boks did
not win a home series against the All Blacks 3 - 1, in 2026.
What are the chances nobody will bother with the nuance, and instead settle at the new low of simply doing a less meaningful comparison from now on? Pretty good, if you ask me.
This is how it starts. Steps small enough that you don't ever kick up a fuss. I think it's part of a denationalization agenda.
I watched your video, and it was almost unanimously received in incredulity. As though it was a move, packaged to paper over its astro-turf nature. Made to look like an organically derived label. Pundits were and many still are genuinely suspicious.... and they are right to be.
It's nothing new, right. We see headlines on mybb day in and day out using this same astro-turfing strategy to gauge the reaction to something tptb want to introduce on a national level. To prepare the way, to grease the skids they imply/infer that the masses are already in favor of the end phenomenon being sought. Such headlines typically begin '[South Africa increasingly opting for a digital payments future]' or '[South Africans prefer id cards to old id books]'. It's gaslighting. We've become very accustomed to these kinds of headlines.
The 'stakeholders', as they like to call themselves, are never keen to actually
consult individuals, in order to gauge real grass-roots preferences.
www.planetrugby.com
