Accuracy and innovation key for Boks
7 Oct 2011
RYAN VREDE looks at where, statistically, the Springboks’ strengths and weaknesses lie, and also runs the rule over Australia ahead of their World Cup quarter-final in Wellington.
I’ve written before that their statistics on attack are affected positively (and therefore not completely reflective of their standing) by the Springboks having whipped minnows Namibia and Fiji. They struggled for large periods against Wales and Samoa, particularly but not exclusively on attack, and Australia would have done a close examination of their deficiencies.
The Springboks do, however, lead the tournament in a number of important areas, most notably in territory (19.9 minutes on average) and time spent in the opposition’s 22m (6.5 minutes on average). They are also the top-ranked team for tackles broken in the opposition’s 22m, with 10.5 per Test.
They have, however, not capitalised fully on that dominance. This is due largely to their inability to protect the ball on the ground (3rd highest for breakdown turnovers in the opposition’s 22m) and fundamental handling errors in the red zone (2nd highest with 2.5). They lead the tournament for knock-ons, averaging 7.5 per match. The Wallabies are mostly average in the aforementioned areas.
The Springboks’ potency has been amplified by their defensive discipline. They average the lowest penalty count per match in the tournament, and this is an encouraging sign ahead of Sunday’s clash at the Cake Tin. Australia are placed eighth in this regard, with the bulk of their penalties being conceded at the scrum. Referee Bryce Lawrence has been particularly harsh in this facet of play. Indeed has nailed the Wallabies in the matches they participated in with him officiating. We’ll get focus on Lawrence more closely shortly.
On attack, Australia play through less phases than the Springboks, and they are expected to continue this trend, getting the ball to their back division as early as possible. The options taken by their flyhalves don’t differ greatly, with the Wallabies’ pivots running and kicking as much as the Springboks’ have, although the former have passed significantly more. The kicks, of course, differ greatly in their nature, with Morne Steyn being directed to punt up-and-unders when in his own half. Quade Cooper is more likely to nudge through grubbers and chips or attempt cross-kicks.
The Springboks will look to pressure the kick receiver and force penalties, which will be their main means of points accumulation. If Steyn can build a lead via his boot, the Springboks’ belief will grow. If the Wallabies deny them, the defending champions have problems. They were largely non-threatening with their ball-in-hand attack against Wales and Samoa, and it is difficult to see them scoring tries against the tournament’s second best defensive unit (only nine missed tackles on average) given the lack of innovation they have exhibited.
How they fare in repelling the Wallabies will also be key to their success. Only one team has missed more tackles than the Springboks’ 28 per match. The majority of those have, however, come in the opposition’s half. This should be little comfort against a side adept at scoring from long-range as the Wallabies are.
Lawrence’s performance will shape the contest, and the Springboks will be encouraged by the fact that, in the three Wallaby matches he has overseen, the penalty count has been 33-18 in favour of the opposition. Lawrence awarded twice as many penalties to the Springboks when the side’s met in the Tri-Nations Test in Durban in August (12-6). He is most likely to penalise for scrum infringements, while he is lenient at ruck time, which should make for an almighty breakdown tussle.
The breakdown is where Ireland stifled Australia in the pool phases and it is imperative that the Springboks dilute the potency of Will Genia, Cooper and co by replicating that effort. If they manage this, their task will be significantly less daunting.
By Ryan Vrede, in Wellington.
Stats supplied by ruckingoodstats.com
Follow Ryan’s World Cup coverage on Twitter
Follow ruckingoodstats on Twitter
48 Comments
7 Oct 2011, 00:33 am
Both notions foreign to the dishonest ‘verkrampte’ psyche of the too many decrepit players.
7 Oct 2011, 00:35 am
ag slow dragons
7 Oct 2011, 00:37 am
stats aren’t worth much as they’re against namibia and fiji.
7 Oct 2011, 00:44 am
lies, damn lies and statistics
7 Oct 2011, 00:44 am
Innovation and Springboks are about as natural a fit as pilchards and Kawasakis.
7 Oct 2011, 00:50 am
@TheTackler(TheTackler)-5: lucky star chille pilchards?
7 Oct 2011, 01:51 am
@rugby_only(rugby_only)-6: Ninja pilchards?
7 Oct 2011, 01:56 am
Ninja from the hit-machine – Die Antwoord?
7 Oct 2011, 02:24 am
Gents,
Sunday approaches with an air of great expectation as well as a huge amount of in trepidation and verves. The neutral rugby world is predicting a cracker of a contest between two world class teams who have nothing separating them in terms of skill, ability and desire to win. The Aussie’s can and should feel confident of victory if recent results are to go by. We haven’t beaten them in the fast flowing, attacking caldron that is Tri Nations Rugby for a while. Will this count for anything? I suggest not. We all cringed and cried as we watched both our 2nd stringers and our first choice teams play a boring kicking orientated game against the convicts in this year’s Tri Nations, and in doing so, losing both games. Michael Jordan is quoted as saying “I have failed many, many, many times in my career…which is why I am so successful!!!”. As painful as that was to watch, the Boks will have to change very little for Sundays big game. They have been playing the style needed in these conditions since July. The Wallabies, will need to perfect a game plan and change a lot of structures if they want any chance of winning. They say they learnt that lesson against Ireland?? Fair enough, but can they rectify it for their game against the defending champs?
Sunday in Wellington will be cold, probably wet and very windy. An all out attacking game plan that the Aussies like to play while have no place here. They will have to rely on forward dominance and an excellent tactical kicking game from Genia, Cooper and O’Connor. This is something they do not have in my opinion. The Boks will employ a tactical kicking game based hugely on Fourie Du Preez and Morne Steyn. A game plan very similar the one used in the Tri Nations in condition’s not particularly suited to that style of play. They have used it well in the world cup so far, as well as spreading the ball when opportunity knocks. Frans Steyn will be missed for his huge boot and attacking width he added, but I do think that on Sunday it will be trench warfare and the team who can control the ball and field position best WILL WIN!!
Let’s not think further than the quarter final. Australia will be vulnerable if the weather is bad, and IF the Boks can execute their kicking and defense structures well, I’m confident we will win.
As much as the kick and defense orientated game plan will be important, another area that I feel will be even more important, and an area that will justify team selections, is leadership, composure and experience. The Boks have a captain that would walk into most international sides on ability alone, albeit not no 1 in his own squad, Smit will lead the Boks with composure and experience. You can see how the players around him respond to him. Add Fourie Du Preez, Victor Matfield and Schalk Burger to the mix and you have a leadership group better than any team at the world cup. The Aussies will rely on James Horwill (who will captain his team for only the 6th time or something), Will Genia (who does not play well under pressure) and Rocky Elson ( jaded and struggling for form – as well as past captain who had the captains arm band ripped off him weeks before the world cup started). This is a HUGE advantage for the Boks. The Aussies will make up a little they lose in this department with natural flair and ability, desire and a never give up attitude , but they will struggle and implode as the game goes on and the pressure starts to mount………..And then the Boks will deploy their bench. The bench is as important in modern day rugby as the starting 15. Players like Hougaard, Alberts, Louw and James will add huge experience and compose come the last 25 minutes. And then there is the human bear…..Bissy Du Plessie!! The Bok bench makes the wallaby bench look like something from a 2nd division club side playing out of Chatsworth!
Am I just pulling the wool over our eyes and trying to convince us that the Boks will win? Maybe…but it makes good rugby sense what I’m saying. This doesn’t mean that the Boks WILL win…but if they execute their tactics the way we know they can, they should be watching the NZ v Argentina game to find out who they will meet in the semi final!
With Dan Carter out, Ritchie Macaw playing with crutches….the stars are starting to align for the Boks. Just like they did in 2007. You need a little luck to win a world cup and the Boks may just be starting to receive theirs!
Watch the game on Sunday as a true South African. Support our Boks no matter which province they play for or no matter which of our favourite players are not selected ahead of other players. South African rugby will not be in a position to achieve glory like they have the chance to achieve at this world cup for many, many years to come. Legends of SA rugby and World rugby will be retiring and leaving our shores after this world cup. As supporters we have often been unappreciative and over critical of players not realizing how much they actually do for SA rugby. This is truly an end of an era for many Bok players and Bok supporters alike!!
Lets stand behind them together and scream and cheer till the final whistle…..cos whether we like to agree or not….every 22 players on Sunday will be playing their hearts out for the Boks, their country and their supporters!!! We owe it to them!!
Boks by 5.
7 Oct 2011, 02:36 am
Aussies just named their team – Barnes on the bench, Higgenbotham omitted.
Deans seems to want them to lose.
We will win by 12
7 Oct 2011, 02:38 am
i like this article. excellent Ryan.
it will be interesting to see based on this statement: Only one team
has missed more tackles than the Springboks’ 28 per match. The majority of those have, however,
come in the opposition’s half, how we counter Kurtley Beale. problem is that when we put up the bombs, we only have 1 chaser who can effectively chase, and its Habana. So if we dont close Beale down quickly he is going to run amok.
7 Oct 2011, 02:43 am
Full Australian team to play against South Africa
15. Kurtley Beale
14. James O’Connor
13. Adam Ashley-Cooper
12. Pat McCabe
11. Digby Ioane
10. Quade Cooper
9. Will Genia
8. Radike Samo
7. David Pocock
6. Rocky Elsom
5. James Horwill
4. Dan Vickerman
3. Ben Alexander
2. Stephen Moore
1. Sekope Kepu
Reserves
16. Tatafu Polota Nau
17. James Slipper
18. Nathan Sharpe
19. Ben McCalman
20. Luke Burgess
21. Berrick Barnes
22. Anthony Fainga’a
7 Oct 2011, 02:45 am
O’connor shoud be playing 12. but its fine, im glad his not.
7 Oct 2011, 06:33 am
Good article, I disagree with Bolski as the oz have made headway with the tight-loose facet of their game, scrapping part of theor game.
Scrums are still dodgy but they have had the measure of Vic in the lineouts.
Loose forwards are playing well for them and we better hope Spies decides to get his shorts dirty or even hammer someone back in a tackle … !!! Also how the hell has our no8 never had a blood bin ???
Add in FdP who is not up to contact and you will see plenty of counterrucking and interfearance at the back of scrums and mauls from oz.
Smit should not be starting as Biz is the best in the world, again as soon as he starts lumbering around 9/10 position at rucks and mauls haul him off and we may have a chance.
NOW IS NOT THE TIME FOR SENTIMENT !!!
Same goes for Spies, Fdp and Habana. Others will do ok but only if clean ball is protected. Head says Oz by 5, heart SA by 3.
7 Oct 2011, 08:01 am
@TheTackler(TheTackler)-5:
tackles and objectivity are about as natural a fit as all blacks and world cups…
7 Oct 2011, 08:02 am
@bananas(bananas)-14: You are right! How the hell has our No.8 never had a blood bin?!
7 Oct 2011, 08:57 am
Great article – nice to see good reporting, substantiated by stats!! Well done.
Just 1 thing, best defence shouldn’t be how many tackles missed, tackle % would be much better, but really it should be how many trys against.
7 Oct 2011, 09:16 am
@Bolski(Bolski)-9: Are you John Robbie? LOL
7 Oct 2011, 09:50 am
@TheTackler(TheTackler)-5:
You are just a little hater, you come on every thread to post something nasty against the Boks.
The Springboks have a glorious history full of hard men and exciting players. And in their current guise there are still plenty of players capable of ripping a game apart.
You know it’s true and you are secretly hoping its the Aussies make it through.
7 Oct 2011, 10:36 am
You need to be innovative before the game as well as during the game, the latter being more difficult.
In the last TN i saw the AB`s change their approach in the second half to wipe out a huge lead by the Aussies.
How many teams really do have this capacity.
7 Oct 2011, 13:35 pm
Everybody knows Bryce is harsh on scrums so Aussies have problems already. Which makes me wonder why some people whinged (hallo Puma), seeing his name for that QF instead of thanking their lucky stars.
7 Oct 2011, 14:22 pm
@Namblack(Namblack)-20: Uhm… the Aussies changed THEIR tactics to defend the lead… and win. ABs just got frantic.
7 Oct 2011, 14:26 pm
@TheTackler(TheTackler)-5: Oh please. To be innovative means to adapt to your situation. The Boks did this in 2 World Cups. NZ didn’t. ABs innovative? Don’t make me laugh! Always the same old, same old. This time without their only talisman.
7 Oct 2011, 14:27 pm
Argentina WILL win against the All Blacks. NZers have shown they simply do not have the passion.
7 Oct 2011, 14:45 pm
@Bouts(Bouts)-24: You must be joking.
I think the Argies are fully aware of the fact that they are going home on Sunday. NZ like last week, were the only team assured of a quarter final spot before the last round started, and NZ realistically are the only side pretty much assured of being in the Semi finals. From that point on, it’ll get interesting.
7 Oct 2011, 14:48 pm
@rossoneri(rossoneri)-25:
7 Oct 2011, 15:06 pm
@Bouts(Bouts)-24: When and where they have shown, could you please elaborate?
7 Oct 2011, 16:18 pm
Boks are a bit like the French; capable of exploding or imploding. Unfortunately the latter trend has been more evident for a while. Anyone who is observant, growls in dismay every time they kick possession away again and again. There are seemingly aimless kicks, kicks that don’t find touch, the Boks exhausting themselves by defending for long tracts during the game. Then there are moments of brilliance; usually too little too late – almost as though they discover they can play running rugby after all; by which time they’re too far behind. The Boks like to talk about their “traditional strengths” as if there are none others to be had. They continue to play a ten man game with good backs who seldom see the ball. The difference between Boks and ABs is that the latter develop their game. They can play a forward dominated game and a running game. What will it take for the Boks to grow their game? Once they do, we won’t see these nervous threads of comments, which all recognize at some level the Boks one consistent feature – inconsistency.
7 Oct 2011, 19:50 pm
I see that wanker Tackler has not
cut his wrist and bled to death yet.
He was grootbek before the last world cup and all
and then just dissapeared.
Like a true all black.
7 Oct 2011, 20:08 pm
@Bouts(Bouts)-23: To innovate is to do something new. From the Latin “novus/nova/novatum” = new.
7 Oct 2011, 20:09 pm
@Duiwel(Duiwel)-29: dis + appeared = disappeared. Not dissa+ peared. Poor schooling’s to blame, is it?
7 Oct 2011, 20:11 pm
@rex(rex)-28: Whether it explodes or implodes, the edifice collapses.
7 Oct 2011, 20:16 pm
@wpjoulekkading(wpjoulekkading)-19: History, certainly. But history is in the past. RWC2011 is settled in the present and very near future. And that’s where they’ve run out of petrol with the over-the-hilllbilly, ill-coached, one-dimensional team. Dead men walking.
7 Oct 2011, 20:17 pm
Plaudits where they are due; well done on a great article, Ryan. I had been beginning to despair with all the stories that were obviously conjured up to create hits.
This was balanced and more objective. Also, it seems that you took the time to analyse some statistics and present them to us, ones which I was certainly unaware of..
Well done, chap.
7 Oct 2011, 20:19 pm
2011: Australia won 14-9, Durban
2011: Australia won 39-20, Sydney
2010: Australia won 41-39, Bloemfontein
2010: South Africa won 44-31, Pretoria
2010: Australia won 30-13, Brisbane
2009: Australia won 21-6, Brisbane
2009: South Africa won 32-25, Perth
2009: South Africa won 29-17, Cape Town
2008: South Africa won 53-8, Johannesburg
2008: Australia won 27-15, Durban
7 Oct 2011, 20:26 pm
@TheTackler(TheTackler)-31: Much like “Poor schooling’s to blame, is it?”
The equivalent is: “Poor schooling is to blame, is it?”
Excessive use of “is” in a “lesson” on sentence construction shows an inferior “teacher” at work.
Ahem… Model “C”, I presume??
7 Oct 2011, 20:46 pm
My two cents, and it’s based mostly on a faulty memory, but it seems to me that in the last 3 world cups the side that one was tho one that was the best coached and thus well drilled.
When White’s men took to the field every man knew there role and I found that they were calm, composed and clinical in their execution. I don’t think that anyone can argue that Woodward’s poms were extremely well prepared in 2003′.
The Aussies in 1999 (it was Rod Macqueen was it?) I remember were also superb in their defensive tactics.
Now i know the Kiwi’s will jump on my back and say that in all these cases the winners never had to meet the AB’s., but I don’t think it’s unfair to say the AB’s choked themselves out of that scenario.
One could argue that old Kitch was also a great coach, but I will remember those performances more for passion that being well coached. Also it was the start of the professional era and I think that helped SA a bit in terms of the game was not as scientific as it is now (this is all hearsay which is up for debate as I was only 17 at this stage)
So now not to be a negative nanny, but the worrying thing for me is that the Springboks look like they are playing solely on instinct and passion. There defense is more desperate and covering than ordered and decisive, and Oz is a team that can exploit this. In short I felt more confident of White’s team than the current one. You can bash White all you want but he did his homework on the tightness of World Cup games and executed his plans masterfully.
Having said that no matter what happens I will be proud of John Smit and the boys. Let’s hope the Bokke passion completely annihilates the nancy boys from Down Under! Go bokke!
7 Oct 2011, 20:54 pm
@Heavens Game(Heavens Game)-36: Points to ponder, pilgrim…
Don’t teach grandmother to suck eggs. (Quevedo)
Unless context fully sustains the whole meaning, do not omit finite verbs in a compound sentence. (Fowler)
The apostrophe is used to indicate elision. (Fletcher and Sceales)
7 Oct 2011, 21:24 pm
Tackler,
poor dictionis not corrected by a quick browse
on the google translater,boet,
Does your mum know you’re up late?
7 Oct 2011, 21:30 pm
What’s dictionis? Or translater? (Perhaps the opposite of transsooner?)
Shoemaker, stick to your last.
8 Oct 2011, 00:10 am
@TheTackler(TheTackler)-35:
The only loss that counts is to Ireland – ouch mate…
8 Oct 2011, 08:32 am
@TheTackler(TheTackler)-40: Pedantry and condescension on spelling and grammar are poor choices of one-upmanship in general towards a nation whose first language is not English, and towards a blogger whose nickname is Afrikaans in particular. McCaw and Carter would not stoop to it; as a rabid supporter, try and be worthy of them.
8 Oct 2011, 17:31 pm
Tackler, don’t be so condescending with your elision and stuff. You wrote “poor schooling’s to blame, IS IT ?” I’m sorry to say, but even 6th graders here in France know that your sentence should have ended with “ISN’T IT ?” and that it’s called a question tag.
In your face.
9 Oct 2011, 02:31 am
You posit a positive by questioning “is it?”, expecting the answer “yes”.
It’s a grammatically-perfect alternative to positing the negative, expecting the answer “no”.
“This is the route to Paris, it it?” (Implied positive: I think it is. Am I right?)
“This is the route to Paris, isn’t it?” (Implied negative: I’m unsure. Am I wrong?)
More than one way to skin a cat. (Subject and finite verb understood.)
Grandma + eggs, pilgrim. (Metaphor)
9 Oct 2011, 02:54 am
@TheTackler(TheTackler)-44:
Get a life
9 Oct 2011, 02:55 am
or better still, go blog on a site that gives a sh it about this kinda BS
Doos
9 Oct 2011, 04:08 am
You responded, ergo you care.
9 Oct 2011, 04:29 am
Tackles is a disciple of the prescriptive school of linguistics, which is on the retreat.
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.