SA’s elite need tactical rethink
11 May 2011
RYAN VREDE writes that the impotency of South African back threes is a cause for concern.
Statistics suggest that tactical conservatism by South Africa’s elite franchises – the Stormers, Bulls and Sharks – is seriously undermining their back three’s threat.
In the top 20 leading try-scorers (in the back three) in the tournament, only Bulls wing Bjorn Basson features, with six to his name. However, the majority of those have been opportunistic or individual efforts. Few have come from purposeful, structured play.
The Australasian teams in the play-off positions at present have at least one back three player in the top 20 – the Crusaders lead the way with all three of their unit prolific represented, while the and Reds and Blues have two each (note: the Blues have lost fullback Isaia Toeava who was a force prior to injury).
Waratahs fullback Kurtley Beale is in there and so is wing Drew Mitchell, although his absence through injury is sure to be telling as the tournament advances to its crucial point.
There is other statistical evidence to suggest that South African back threes are struggling, or, more likely, being strangled by conservative tactics. Lions fullback Jaco Taute is the only South African to feature in the run metres, and only Taute is among the leading players in the back three for linebreaks. Even Lachlan Mitchell of the Rebels, who get pounded most weeks, is prominent in the latter category.
Either our back three players are highly ineffective with the opportunities that are created for them, or too few opportunities are being created. My observations have me inclined to the latter.
Notably, and herein lies a strong hint at the problem, there are eight South Africa flyhalves and scrumhalves among the 20 players who have kicked the most. Certainly for the Bulls, the accuracy of those kicks has generally been poor, which has compromised their effectiveness. The Sharks and Stormers haven’t fared much better.
It would be amiss not to note that the Blues, Reds and Waratahs are among those with players in this category. However, they have all exhibited the ability to vary their play, and none have used kicks as a primary avenue of attack.
What does this say about our thinking on the game? Prior to the introduction of the breakdown law interpretations, South African teams could justify their pragmatism statistically. Teams were getting penalised consistently at attacking rucks, making it risky to try and play through phases. But that has changed, with ball-in-hand play promoted through law interpretations that make it more difficult for defending teams to stifle the attacking flow.
This is not a call for cavalier play, merely an observation that teams have generally been rewarded for skilfully retaining possession, and the ones that play through enough phases are able to create scoring opportunities in the wide channels for their outside backs. In addition, those with a back three adept at countering from broken field or turnover ball have profited as well.
South Africa’s elite sides are equipped to do both, but there sadly has been little evidence of their ability to do so. The style of play on show from the Bulls, Stormers and Sharks has a place, and that’s in a play-off environment. To get there they’ll have to adapt their tactics, especially since four-try bonus points looks likely to be decisive in the final analysis.
71 Comments
Pages: « 1 [2] Show All
11 May 2011, 21:26 pm
No one would say that in the past , the likes of Johan Heunis, Andre Joubert, Percy, Werner Grieff or even Tinus Delport didn’t have attcking skills, and all had a thundering boot.
Take their average size, weight, speed and kicking distance and compared it with the current ones, what will you get?
11 May 2011, 22:09 pm
hondo, what of daniller?
11 May 2011, 22:16 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-52:
I thought he has it all incld Left Foot, size, speed and power, but whether it’s a stiff competition from Rian Viljon or lack of trust from Naka, possibly both, he never got the recognition for his potential
Hope the Bulls will take him back sometime later
11 May 2011, 22:50 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-18: Ironic, that. Seeing that the “traditional” fullback always was “the last line of defence” until a South African (H.O. de Villiers) and a Frenchman (Claude Lacaze) hit on the idea of running up the ball and joining the backline to create a running overlap — in the pathbreaking 1967 series in SA.
(And the French flyhalf, Guy Camberabero, became known as Monsieur Drop for his unusual penchant for taking close range dropped goals rather than trying to get the team over for a try — then only worth 3 points anyway)
11 May 2011, 23:38 pm
Vodacom Super Rugby
Tappe: Ref cost Stormers
2011-05-11 22:06Email | Print Tappe Henning (Gallo Images)
Related Links
Grant returns for Stormers
Changes aplenty for Lions
Bulls bench Matfield Stephen Nell Cape Town – Dewaldt Duvenage’s “try” that was not awarded early on in Saturday’s Super Rugby match between the Stormers and Crusaders should have been awarded. That was the word on Wednesday from SANZAR referees selector Tappe Henning when he was asked about the incident in the match at Newlands. Henning has subsequently discussed the incident with referee Chris Pollock and the error has been pointed out to him. “It was a try. The referee made the wrong call and was supposed to play advantage. The assistant referee told him that he could play advantage and he incorrectly awarded a lineout to the Crusaders,” said Henning. Duvenage intercepted the ball after a quick throw-in by Crusaders captain Kieran Read. Read had one foot in play when he took the throw-in, but the fact that the illegal throw-in had been intercepted should have brought the advantage law into play. Pollock’s uncertainty was a result of the word “disallowed” which appears in the laws of the game – in other words, he thought that the throw-in should not have been allowed as it had been incorrectly executed by the Crusaders. Advantage should have been applied in the Stormers’ favour. The incident apparently bothered Pollock after the game and he already phoned Henning from his dressing room at Newlands to ask whether he had made the right decision. There was some debate in local refereeing circles and a quick call to the International Rugby Board (IRB) eradicated any uncertainty. Pollock is handling Saturday’s match between the Bulls and the Melbourne Rebels at Loftus Versfeld. The incident has been discussed with him so that the mistake is not repeated. “The whole world now knows that advantage applies in such a situation,” said Henning. The former Test referee is not of the view that the incident cost the Stormers the game. “It happened after four minutes and it will be unfair to say that it was responsible for changing the outcome of the game. You could also point to a situation where the Stormers flyhalf missed a kick at goal,” said Henning. Another talking point is that Pollock did not act more decisively when the Crusaders illegally stopped the Stormers’ lineout mauls. “We asked him about that and he was not of the view that a try would have been scored from either incident,” said Henning. Oh BP, makes you proud to be a Kiwi, was he on the sauce like Walsh?
11 May 2011, 23:45 pm
@JL1(JL1)-55: bwahahahahaha
now you have to post this on multiple threads to “make your point”
looking to score browny points with your countrymen?
bwahahaha
12 May 2011, 04:45 am
Its our centres, all of them. Ball shufflers. This was highlighted when we had the white wing stories on Vandhoover about 1 1/2 years ago.
Our centres make line breaks when there is a gap, that is if they dont ry run over him, but they do not create nor do they have fancy moves with blockers like the Wallas or the Chokers. Even JDV and Mossie are guilty here.
The Cheetahs are the best backline attacking side due to the very quick ball they get which allows them to attack the gain line as the opposition dont rush them. SPretorius can take credit here as his service is slick and his snipping around the fringes affects the defensive line making them hang back.
For me Taute, Ebersholm, JDJ are our future. Its is no surprise to see Taute with most metres gained in south africa.
12 May 2011, 04:47 am
@JL1(JL1)-55: I thought the touch judge made the call!
If not this just highlights the fact that kiwi refs can make big mistakes changing (cheating) outcomes of games and we dont hear from Paddy. Time to get out of Sanzoo.
12 May 2011, 04:48 am
Whilst there may be some merit in the latest reported statements by John Smit (essentially that the team that wins this year’s 3N will have peaked too early, and won’t win the RWC) – I suggest that many people will say that he is just getting the Bok’s excuses in early!
You can play it either way – do you want to go into the RWC on a losing pattern, or go in full of confidence from winning games. The confidence factor is very important too.
12 May 2011, 05:07 am
There’s an interesting side-note to the above.
Deliberately going into Test Matches ‘under-cooked’ says that “we don’t mind if we lose”.
This is not the ethos and expectation of the All Blacks. They go into every game with the objective of winning it. Perhaps that’s why they have the best winning percentage of any international sporting team over a 100 year history. Perhaps that’s why they win matches they should have lost – like the 3N at FNB Stadium, Soweto last year.
Just a thought…
12 May 2011, 05:46 am
@BillTong(BillTong)-60: Billtong, have seen you post on BBC and enjoy your posts, you will be a breath of fresh air on this site…
its a shame more Saffa’s arent of your ilk…
already the majority here are hoping NZ will “choke” come RWC time… this is usually their sole basis for any debate/argument and is always seen as the “trump card”… especially when they arent holding any aces…
12 May 2011, 06:54 am
Cape Town – Dewaldt Duvenage’s “try” that was not awarded early on in Saturday’s Super Rugby match between the Stormers and Crusaders should have been awarded.
That was the word on Wednesday from SANZAR referees selector Tappe Henning when he was asked about the incident in the match at Newlands.
Henning has subsequently discussed the incident with referee Chris Pollock and the error has been pointed out to him.
“It was a try. The referee made the wrong call and was supposed to play advantage. The assistant referee told him that he could play advantage and he incorrectl
12 May 2011, 07:01 am
@Great White Shark(Predawn)-62: water under the bridge
cowboys dont cry.
12 May 2011, 07:07 am
@grant10(grant10)-63:
Absolutely. The result won’t change either…just interesting to hear a ref come out and make comments. Andre Watson wouldn’t dare.
12 May 2011, 07:13 am
@Great White Shark(Predawn)-64: thank the holy angels this did not happen to the Sharks….
The crying, wailing , gnashing of teeth and all round depression and paranoia of the likes of SL and HG would have filled cyber space for weeks !
12 May 2011, 07:17 am
@grant10(grant10)-65: not to mention Puma….who would have had a meltdown of amazing propoertions.
12 May 2011, 07:20 am
Rangerman would have declared war on anything Kiwi….Dusky would have had a heart attack….that make the circle oke would have spluttered and screamed for a week like a granny with a wet panty!
12 May 2011, 07:22 am
@grant10(grant10)-65:
Thing is there are reffing ballsups in at least half the games every week. I don’t envy their job.
I cringed the whole way through the Stormers vs Sharks game and thought The Sharks got pinged for some strange so called infringements but it’s all history now. These games are a lottery week in and week out.
It seems that the attacking team get the better of the calls….especially so with Dickinson. Anyway I’m no guru…it’s hard to make those calls unless you actually study the rule book.
12 May 2011, 07:28 am
A ref is a fallible human. Just as how Dan Carter can miss a kick or Victor Matfield can lose a lineout off his own team’s throw without damning their overall competence, every ref CAN and always WILL get something wrong sometimes. As long as they don’t err too often, they’re a good ref.
12 May 2011, 07:38 am
@Great White Shark(Predawn)-68:
jA……
i was at the game…..I knew the ref had erred straight away……
But what is done is done…….and at the end of the day Stormers were there own biggest enemies….
12 May 2011, 07:49 am
@grant10(grant10)-70:
..which can happen. It’s pretty difficult to expect the Crusaders to win every single game with this year’s format. The ref’s also have a heck of a schedule so that puts extra pressure on them too.
Pages: « 1 [2] Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.