We, as a sporting public, are witness to this act from time to time. All Blacks supporters, who have endured World Cup pain since 1991, have never hissed at their team.

For all New Zealand fans, the 1999 and 2003 World Cups were particularly devastating and it took time to get over the nation’s failure. The heartache of 2007 was no different, but many reflected on a magnificent four years to take away the pain of such a loss. But I can think of few supporters who could, and would, jeer their own team.

The South African public showed their short memories by doing this to their side, who, quite simply, are a quality team playing without a rudder. Since October 22, 2007, I have always referred to the Springboks as the world champions. But now this tag sounds particularly hollow as the might of the Bok appears a distant beast.

Three consecutive losses have consigned the Springboks to the ranking of third-best team in the world. It is the third straight year that South Africa have been consigned to the foot of the Tri-Nations table. World champions or not, they have only twice won the Tri-Nations in the 13 years of competition, and have won but 20 of their 55 games played.

As another Olympiad draws to a close, to quote a famous Olympian: ''To win a world championship is one thing, but to be the best you must beat the best.'' On the basis of the quality of the Southern Hemisphere giants – two of the three teams have always been ranked in the top three – the Tri-Nations is the Olympics of world rugby, and the Springboks should have achieved more than their solitary victory over the All Blacks this year.

If the South Africans cannot beat the Wallabies in their final game of the 2008 series, then Peter de Villiers and his men have truly undone all the brilliant work fashioned by Jake White less than a year ago. A week is a very long time in sport, but now even a win against a vastly improving Australian team will not placate the voracious South African public.

So, what exactly is wrong with a team that did the impossible barely a month ago and handed the All Blacks their first defeat at home in 30 Test matches? Why is a team that has more personnel from their World Cup year than any other side in international rugby looking like a schoolboy team?

Such a reference is indeed harsh, but it is unskilled schoolboy teams that commit unforced errors, cannot guard first-phase ball and repeatedly turn over ball to their opposition. To lay the guillotine at the coach’s door is rarely just, but the South Africans are looking like a poorly coached team.

De Villiers has constantly stressed the desire to change the style of this Springbok team, but he is remiss in two fundamental points. First, why change the approach of a team who are world champions, and who won that title based on a pragmatic percentage style approach? Not attractive rugby, but winning rugby. No Rugby World Cup champions have won the title by playing flamboyant rugby.

Secondly, De Villiers is trying to change his team’s approach to a more expansive plan against the two teams in the world who are the premier exponents of this technique. The Springbok victory against New Zealand in the House of Pain was hard, uncompromising rugby. The physicality of South African rugby has long been their trump card of world dominance – why change a century of patterns?

De Villiers remarked that “Rome wasn’t built in a day”. But Rome was already built at the end of last year, so why is he bringing the barbarians to the gates of the Springbok forum? Of course, responsibility must lie with the players. Coaching has nothing to do with terrible out-of-hand kicking, dropped balls and the inability of a world-class back row to maintain possession. They are a team playing without control or composure.

While I must state the quality of officiating has been terrible this year, no team can use this as an excuse. Victor Matfield nailed this on the head by stating: “We are a quality team and we must adapt to the way the referee wishes us to play.” While the All Blacks and Wallabies seem to have had the benefit of decisions in recent matches, they are playing to the referee, in a manner very similar to the way John Smit manipulated officials in the World Cup to the benefit of his side.

Upon comparing the three Tri-Nations teams, one factor strikes me. The All Blacks and the Wallabies still have experience and world-class players, but have been forced to blood new players and invigorate the team. Maybe some World Cup-winners need a brutal reality check, and the next tier of South African players need to be funnelled through – or 2008 will be a long dark year for the Bok faithful.