Intense interrogation for Bulls
4 Apr 2011
RYAN VREDE writes that the Crusaders will be the measure of the Bulls’ progress after an ordinary start.
I don’t expect the Bulls to win, they rarely do away to the Crusaders, and certainly the current vintage from Christchurch is an excellent one that looks likely to secure the franchise’s eighth Super Rugby title. The Bulls, conversely, are in decline. Despite successive wins, they have offered little counter to that assertion.
You don’t measure yourself against the Lions and Hurricanes if you are the Bulls. The former are impostors of a Super Rugby team, while the latter have been dreadfully poor this season.
But they have to show progress against an elite side. It’s in their rebuttal to key questions – how they counter the Crusaders’ scrum, how they unlock their organsied and physical defence, how front up in the forwards – that their ambition will be judged as realistic or optimistic.
Undoubtedly the most pressing question will be how they repel Sonny Bill Williams. The Crusaders have relied so heavily on his ability to commit defenders and offload to support runners. It doesn’t take a master technical analyst to work that out, but it’ll take an astute one to develop an effective counter. Even then he will be at the mercy of the men who execute that plan. None have succeeded in derailing the Sonny Bill Express. The Bulls as defending champions must roll out the blueprint.
Collision dominance hasn’t been the their strong point. Their gain line challenge has been unconvincing at best, and while they improved in that facet of play in Napier at the weekend, the Saders, with Williams a central figure, pose an exponentially bigger challenge.
It is often foolish to place such an intense emphasis on one player, but Williams is an extraordinary talent and warrants special attention. I’m thoroughly convinced that blunting his threat will significantly dilute the potency of their outside backs.
The Saders have never been forced to contemplate a change of tactics in their campaign to date; such has been the consistency with which Williams has serviced the flyers on his outside. An upset victory rests on the Bulls’ ability to make them veer from the script.
113 Comments
Pages: « 1 2 [3] Show All
4 Apr 2011, 20:44 pm
@poppa69(poppa69)-99: I concur. That very thing has kept me from blogging for a long time because I cannot abide the bigotry that accompanies the views of some of the bloggers, but I guess – to each his own.
4 Apr 2011, 21:01 pm
@Ogre(Ogre)-101: we all have our moments, and Im also guilty as charged
4 Apr 2011, 21:02 pm
@Ogre(Ogre)-100:
Firstly: I’m not English.
Secondly: Of course it’s opinion. That’s the whole point of this site… sharing and challenging opinions. I’d be very surprised if you have it your way with the Crusaders, but pleasantly so.
The Bulls’ performances against the Lions and Hurricanes are not exactly showing competition winning potential. If the Bulls happen to win this one, it is (in my opinion) evidence that the Crusaders’ backline is not as good as everyone thinks.
If the Bulls go on and win the S15 I will buy a Loftus season ticket and give it to someone of your choice.
4 Apr 2011, 21:06 pm
@poppa69(poppa69)-102: same here, but of late I really try to avoid blaming the refs.
4 Apr 2011, 21:18 pm
The Bulls’ two losses were close on the scoreboard, even though we were very poor on the field with very bad execution. The Bulls have gone some way towards rectifying their problems- how far we will only find out on Saturday. I think the Canes were better on Saturday than you give them credit for. The Bulls put them under pressure up front and it paid dividends.
To quote you: ”If the Bulls happen to win this one, it is (in my opinion) evidence that the Crusaders’ backline is not as good as everyone thinks.”
Yet they slaughtered the Sharks. Why could it not be that the Bulls backline is better than what you and the rest of the Stormers and Sharks gaggle would like to give credit for? If we beat the same team the Sharks lost to, surely it is not preposterous to contend that the Saders did not become bad overnight, and that the Bulls are better than what was believed. Why is that so hard to do?
By the way, I have enough seating at Loftus, so don’t waste your money. It is a nice gesture though!
4 Apr 2011, 21:29 pm
@Ogre(Ogre)-105: I haven’t rated any Bulls backline player since Ettienne Botha, and Apart from Lambie I don’t rate the Sharks backline. The Bulls could have won the S14 over the last 2 years with any Carlton Cup backline, however pedestrian. That’s how good their pack was. Now with Guthro out and Bakkies and Matfield aging a little, the rest of the bunch is exposed as ordinary. This was no surprise as Spies, Stegmann, Kirchner, Olivier and Steyn (in the absence of Du Preez) didn’t really shape up in the Bok jersey. Name ONE test where Kirchner or Olivier actually looked like international players. That’s why it is so hard to do.
4 Apr 2011, 22:34 pm
Everybody might not agree, but this is my take on things as they stand now for WC2011:
1. I’m not a Smit disciple, but he has to start for the Boks and captain the side from the hooking berth, with Bissy coming on as impact player after 60 minutes. Saturdays game showed us how easy it is to counter Bissy with his bad temperament. If he comes on as impact, it is more difficult to negate him.
2. If an SA team wins the S15, the bulk of that team should be selected for the Boks, with the rest of the SA franchises providing the depth. This S15 comp is so long that it can safely be accepted that the winner has what it takes to beat NZ and OZ down under. Here I want to specifically refer to the loosies. To me size is not the be-all and end-all, it is about winning and what the players do to achieve that by the contribution they make to the team effort and effectivity. I want to see more skill. Otherwise we might as well turn rugby over to the WWF to run. And there is enough room for bulk amongst the tight 5.
3. Flyhalf play. Like it or not, a good kicking game is essential and comboinations are very important. I would not simply change just for the sake of changing. The new guy has to be at least 15 to 20 percent better than the incumbent, and I’m afraid not one of the pretenders to Morne Steyn’s throne are. Lambie is supertalented and a great prospect, but inexperienced at that level. Grant is much improved, but his kicking out of hand is still not what it should be. Butchie is, it would seem, has seen the best of his days. So it is a no-brainer
4. Scrumhalf. One name = FdP, with FH and Ruan Pienaar as his adjudants and as utility backs..
5. Tighthead. I’don’t like Jannie duP. I’d take Brian Mujati and Werner Kruger.
6. Loosehead= Beast and a guy like Daan Human.
7. Locks = Bakkies and Vic, with Bekker and Danie Rossouw
8 Centres pick themselves= JdV and Mossie with JdJ and WO(Doppies next)
9 Wings = Aplon, Habs and JPP (Basson next)
10. Fullback = Frans Steyn (Aplon and Ruan P to cover)
I believe the WC will be won amongst the Loosies, and that there will be avery high attrition rate, so in a squad of 30 I would have an 11/19 backs/forwards split, with 6 loosies. Assume Juan Smith out. I would pick 2 trios-
-Burger/Flo/Alberts = the heavies
-Brussow/Potgieter/Spies = the up-tempo magic (Stegmann if Brussow injured, Daniel if Potgieter injured and Vermeulen if Spies injured)
I would alternate them on a horses for courses basis and have two of the alternate three on the bench in every match.
If the squad is 33 strong, I’d add FvdM as lock cover, CJ vd Linde as Prop cover and Lambie as utility back
1. Beast/Daan Human
2. JSmit/Bissy/Chilli
3.Mujati/WernerKruger/CJvdL
4. Bakkies/Rossouw/FvdM
5. VMatfield/Andries Bekker
6.Schalk Burger/Brussow
7.Flo/Potties
8.Alberts/Spies
9. FdP/FHougard/RPienaar
10.M.Steyn/Lambie
11.Habana/BBasson
12.JdV/WOlivier
13.JFourie/JdJ
14.JPP/Aplon
15. FSteyn
Something serious has to go wrong for this group not to bring home the bacon.
4 Apr 2011, 22:47 pm
@Suidkapenaar(Suidkapenaar)-106: That is flawed logic. If Matfield, Bakkies and Gurthro are out or of the boil, that affects the team dynamic, end of story, and everyone else will be under more pressure. You need to understand that it is no accident that any of the Bulls starting team are there. The Bulls could pretty much buy anyone they wanted with their full coffers, but they bought these individuals. Why? Because the powers that be believe that these okes are best capable of delivering the goods within the Bulls gameplan with due consideration of what each other individual in the team brings to the team make-up. The Bulls are a team in the truest sense of the word, with collective responsibility. You might not like individuals, their style or the way they play, but you can’t argue with their results in the S14=- the premier comp in the SH. Yes, they have gone off the boil like any team does from time to time, but they always bounce back, because their strength lies within the collective, not individuals, and they lift each other for the team.
4 Apr 2011, 23:11 pm
Bulls pulled out their A game, their traditional strengths this is our heritage game, when all else fails, saffa safety first rugby is skopenjaag. Bulls adopted the skopenjaag strategy vs Hurricanes like there was no tomorrow, FdP and M. Steyn hoisted every single ball without fail, back to prehistoric times when such was our lack of penetration anywhere else that we had to resort to this archaic hereditary art form we wield with such deft duplicitous dexterity, time in and time out. When everything else goes titties up then its back to the sordid safety first comfort zone, skopenjaag and we straight away back where we belong, where the eagles fly on mountains high.
5 Apr 2011, 01:03 am
I don’t think it’s a coincidence that they went back to that style immediately after PDV announced that the Bok style in WC would be conservative and based around pressure. The game will be orientated and controlled by FDP and Steyn with the wingers selected for chasing and high ball ability with midfield selected for defense rather than attacking ability.
I think this will be the style that the Bulls will adopt for the rest of the competition and their sucess or failure under the current rules and ball in hand game the other teams adopt will be a good indication of how the Boks will perform in the WC.
5 Apr 2011, 01:48 am
@Ogre(Ogre)-108:
They always bounce back, you’ve obviously only been watching super rugby for a few years then, the Bulls have more wooden spoons than the Bokke do in the Tri Nations, their success is very recent and its over now they wont win anything this year.
5 Apr 2011, 02:06 am
Big test for the Bulls this week-end. They took a step in the right direction by showing a bit more heart against the Canes, but if they get smashed by the Saders (and I think they may), then Hellium will have to do a re-think of his Bok plans (Can he think?)
Lets wait and see
5 Apr 2011, 02:33 am
McCaw and Whitelock both out, Carter also likely out, Read will play. Bulls are getting a good opportunity with some of these injuries.
Pages: « 1 2 [3] Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.