Letter of the week

This week's letter comes from Canada but is all about the hottest debate in South Africa.

Planet Rugby readers are never short of an opinion and our mail box is seldom empty. The Letter of the Week is your chance to air your views and get published.

Do you have an opinion you'd like to share with the world? Reckon you can express it in a coherent, balanced argument? Well, send it to us! The best letters will get some time in the spotlight.

Please note that the views expressed in readers' letters to not necessarily reflect those of Planet Rugby.

This week's letter comes from Jake Roberts in Montreal, Canada:

“The Springbok hooker/captain question

Since he returned from a year in France post-World Cup, John Smit's form in his preferred position of hooker has been declining. Not helping matters is the fact that his teammate Bismarck du Plessis is a superior player in every aspect, helping the Sharks dominate in set pieces and playing like an extra flanker in the loose. As of this writing, Du Plessis is the leading try scorer among all front row players in the Super XV competition (a dubious honour, perhaps, but still worth noting).

Between 2008 and 2010 Smit roamed around the front row, plugging holes created by injury and “bulking up” to withstand the challenge of playing at prop. However, in order to re-focus for the World Cup, Smit has shed some excess weight and declared his desire to play more often in his preferred position. Sprinboks coach Peter De Villiers seems to want him as the starting hooker in September and spoke with Sharks coach John Plumtree this past week about Smit's role in both squads.

Du Plessis was then rested during the Shark's shellacking of the Hurricanes on Saturday and Smit had a standout performance at hooker, scoring a try in the process. Encouraging news, but not nearly enough to change anyone's mind. Du Plessis is still the top hooker at the Sharks and must therefore be considered as the starter for the national team.

Peter de Villiers has a hard question in front of him with no easy answer. If Du Plessis is the best hooker in South Africa, why can't he just pick him, bench Smit and be done with it? I think that de Villiers is insisting on Smit so that he can avoid the larger question: who's the next long-term Springbok captain?

A second-rate hooker by South African standards is still pretty decent against most opponents. Smit might struggle against New Zealand and possibly England and Wales, but otherwise he'll still cut the mustard. However, a second-rate captain won't do. Somehow, even when huffing and puffing around the field, Smit leads his side to victory time and again. John Plumtree has the luxury of picking Du Plessis based on merit, as he has a great captain in Stefan Terblanche. The situation at the national level is markedly different…

Victor Matfield is a reasonable substitute when Smit's unavailable, but looking at the Bulls this season leaves me with serious doubts about him as a full-time captain. Jean de Villiers is another name that's been floated around, but he's very injury-prone and too many quality centers are knocking on the door for him to be guaranteed a place in the starting XV. Juan Smith is dynamic and inspirational, but equally injury-prone. Chiliboy Ralepelle has captained the side once, but he isn't even starting for the Bulls this season.

So, it's easy to bash De Villiers, but think about it: the drop from Du Plessis to Smit at hooker isn't as great as the drop from Smit to no one as captain. Without a decent leader, the Springboks probably won't even make the semi-finals of the World Cup, let alone be in a position to defend the title.