Attacking ails at heart of Bok failure
12 Oct 2011
JON CARDINELLI writes that the next Springbok coach can’t afford to make the same mistakes as his predecessor by favouring a conservative yet ultimately ineffective game plan.
There was disappointment and anger following Sunday’s quarter-final exit, but I don’t know why there was confusion. Nobody with half a brain can say that the Boks, in this incomplete and largely unprepared guise, were anything but underdogs in the matches against more rounded units like the Wallabies and All Blacks.
The Boks lost five out of six in the 2010 Tri-Nations, and three out of four in the subsequent Sanzar tournament. Over the course of both competitions, they were tactically outplayed by Australia and New Zealand who both appreciated the need for a balance between kicking the ball and running it.
In 2011, their coaching staff and senior players believed that there was no need to move away from what worked for South Africa in the past. There was a belief, or more a sense of arrogance, that the Boks would always be able to overpower an opponent, and that the tactics that worked in 2007 would yield the desired result again.
The reality is that Peter de Villiers and his merry men have failed South Africa in terms of developing a national playing style that makes full use of a fantastically gifted group of players.
De Villiers got it wrong when he pushed for the headless chicken approach in 2008, and was just as wrong when he moved to the other end of the scale in 2009. His vision for a total brand was compromised by poor results, and he took refuge in the plodding game plan that has always troubled most nations, but hardly tested the Wallabies and All Blacks as the laws have changed and the game has evolved.
They battled to score tries in the 2010 Tri-Nations, and when their best players returned from the conditioning camp in August 2011, the team scored all of their points through the goal-kickers. De Villiers said the tactical display in Port Elizabeth would be replicated at the World Cup, and the fact that the Boks had failed to score a try didn’t concern the coach, senior players or anybody else that had a stake in how the battle plan was formulated.
They scraped past Wales in their opening game, and De Villiers and captain John Smit wrote it off to the pressure of the occasion, assuring worried fans and stakeholders that they would improve as the tournament progressed. They appeared to improve in games against Fiji and Namibia, as they scored six tries against the islanders and 12 against their African neighbours, but this installed a false sense of confidence, and their shortcomings were highlighted in the following match against Samoa where missed opportunities nearly cost them the result.
Predictably, the Boks fell short when they met a team with the muscle and intelligence to nullify their forward threat. They dominated the set-pieces in the quarter-final against Australia, and controlled possession and territory, although they didn’t get the better of the Wallabies at the collisions and breakdowns.
At that crucial moment, and there were a fair few, they failed to finish. Their general attacking approach was also disappointing, with side to side movements proving largely ineffective. Over the course of 80 minutes the Wallabies turned in a brilliant defensive effort, although when you look at few of the Boks’ attacking ploys you’d have to say that the Aussies weren’t asked to work particularly hard.
The Boks ended the match having scored three penalties and no tries, a record consistent with that of the Tri-Nations games played in Port Elizabeth and Durban. They won in PE and lost at Kings Park but their attacking limitations in those Tests indicated that they wouldn’t pose the necessary all-round threat to top defensive teams.
Will the next Bok coach heed the lessons of 2011? This is the question Saru should ask themselves when they begin the assessment process after the World Cup. South Africa needs a coach with a technical appreciation for the modern game. This will allow him to make informed selections that will maximise all of South Africa’s strengths.
We will always be a country that produces the meat heads capable of overpowering the opposition, but we also possess players capable of alternating between a kicking or a running game.
Unfortunately, the wrong players were backed in decision making positions. De Villiers backed a one-dimensional player at flyhalf when he had the likes of Butch James and Pat Lambie, two players equally adept to kicking the ball as they are to bringing the backline into the game. And, unlike Swingdoor Steyn, these men can defend.
The future is bright if those in charge are willing to tap into the attacking talents of our players. Jean de Villiers, Jaque Fourie, Frans Steyn – these are but a few that have been around for awhile but have been rarely used as more than physical pawns in an abrasive battle plan. The next coach must maximise the strengths of these players, and find a way to blend their experience with the exuberance of Lambie, Francois Hougaard, Gio Aplon, Juan de Jongh and promising outsiders like Johann Sadie.
The pack will always be required to lay the platform, but with the backing of a bold, forward-thinking coach, the Boks will develop into a side that can realistically beat the top Test sides consistently, and play some entertaining rugby in the process.
83 Comments
12 Oct 2011, 05:55 am
way of the dragon skills
12 Oct 2011, 06:05 am
“Defence wins world cups”? Only if you have a good enough attack to score more points than the opposition. And not only by goaling penalties and droppies.
12 Oct 2011, 06:48 am
“Lambie, Francois Hougaard, Gio Aplon, Juan de Jongh and promising outsiders like Johann Sadie.”
Interestingly, all of these players would fall into the “physically small” category.
Like most of our exciting runners of the last few years.
12 Oct 2011, 06:49 am
Mr Jon,
Some have been saying these things for years now right here on this site.
What have you and Keo and Ryan and others been doing all this time?
Tripping out? Sunbathing? As far as I remember you were all behind the ‘structured rugby’ thing. Some of us saw it as crash, crash, crash, turnover. Oh and don’t forget the ‘kick it away and hope and pray’ strategy – plan B, if there ever was one.
Boring, stupid, cowardly, that’s what it was. I don’t remember you saying anything bad about it.
But better late than never I suppose.
12 Oct 2011, 06:56 am
I have another question. When did this ‘fat-boy rugby’ ever work for South Africa in the past?
How many Tri-Nations have SA won? How many Super titles have SA teams won?
If that is success, than we need never worry about failure!
12 Oct 2011, 06:56 am
JC, you need to point out that leaning too far towards an attacking strategy would do the Springboks no good.
We need a balanced game-plan.
The days we take a backline with only players the size of what you’re talking about, is when we get 50 points put on us in every Tri Nations game (outside of Argie).
12 Oct 2011, 06:57 am
@bozo(genius)-5:
It’s execution that is the problem… not always the game plan.
No coach will ever embrace this all-out attacking rugby that you guys speak of, not for long anyway, because it won’t work.
12 Oct 2011, 07:08 am
Stop blaming the ref for EVERY loss would be a major step in the right direction. Learn how to score points, its a simple game.
12 Oct 2011, 07:21 am
@hendrikp(hendrikp)-7:
I don’t think anyone has advocated an all out attacking strategy. This almost insane focus on defence comes at the expense of developing instinctive attacking skills within the game plan. A game plan is only a strategy, not a play by numbers approach.
12 Oct 2011, 07:24 am
I was thinking during the Aus game that only Fourie and Lambie really looked like players that could make something happen on attack. There are others who might be able to finish, but you have to make something to finish first. I haven’t seen the Boks offload stats, but I suspect (might be wrong) that against the better teams they aren’t that good. It certainly feels like the Bok runners are more likely to take the tackle and go to ground. This does give you better control of possession, and usually territory with that, but you can’t usually break down world class defenses this way unless your forwards can physically rumble over the line.
When you compare the Bok backline to the Aus and NZ backlines the difference in the number of ‘creative’ players is quite strong. NZ are pretty much a threat from 9 to 15 with everyone of them able to individually create something on attack, and Aus is pretty much the same. In the Boks you get the feeling that 10, 11, 12, & 14 are either not such an attacking threat or excellent finishers/seaguls rather than creators of opportunities.
12 Oct 2011, 07:34 am
@hendrikp(hendrikp)-7:
I never said to be reckless. Just a balanced approach that utilizes all 15 players not just 4 or 5 who are the biggest, slowest, clumsiest. What do you expect to accomplish with them?
This is a sport, not a war, you have to try things, and at international level you should be able to carry them off. If you cannot, then get off the park!
We watch to see exceptional skills, but not in John Smt’s book. But he was only interested in what he could do.
One day he will be just an unpleasant memory of a dreary time.
12 Oct 2011, 07:39 am
@aliboy(aliboy)-10:
We must be carefull about concentrating on line breakers. The strength of the AB backs is that create space for each other knowing that there’ll be at least 2 support players on each shoulder to offload to.
12 Oct 2011, 07:58 am
the funny irony is that this was one game where our atttack produced the most linebreaks and our general game plan was to run, keep ball in hand and attack.
12 Oct 2011, 07:59 am
let cheating dogs lie…
12 Oct 2011, 08:00 am
Oh here we go again. I don’t know what everyones issue is with Morne Steyn. If you look at stats provided by Verusco, Morne Steyn has made the 3rd most tackles of any SA player. Yes people, this guy cannot defend because he slips 2 or 3 tackles, like ANY other SA player per game. The more you are made to tackle, the higher the likelyhood that sometimes you might slip one. Jamie Roberts is a freak of nature, he runs over ANYONE! Get over this perception that Steyn cannot defend please, or at least back it up with proper stats. I am not saying he is faultless, far from it. But him kicking the ball continueously is “the game plan”. They get coached to play that way, he gets told to do it. Also, if you look at proper stats, Steyn is the top try scoring flyhalf of all the SA players, ever. If you consider this includes “running” flyhalves like the faultless Butch James and Honnibal this stat might be a surprise to you all. The Bulls have been or close to be the top try scoring team in Super Rugby, with a flyhalf who apparently cannot get the backline moving. Get over yourselves all you Butch James fanboys. Yes, Butch was an awesome flyhalf, but he is not up to the standard anymore. Maybe Morne should also start “tackling” without using his arms. That will surely get him some reputation points!
Lambie is the future of SA flyhalves. He has the allround game to be a great player one day. But then he needs to be managed and coached in such a way as to not force him to play a certain way by his franchise and country, an injustice that was caused to Steyn by forcing him to become a kicking flyhalf. SA have always struggled with decent flyhalves, but now we are spoilt for choice. Lambie, Jantjies, Goosen immediately spring to mind, where someone like Katrikilas and Lionel Cronje have also shown lots of promise. To have all those options available to you, plus the experience Steyn already has, cannot be a bad thing.
One position Sa should worry about though is fullback. Frans Steyn has shown enough to warrent a starting spot as inside centre. That is his best position and he should play there, always. Kirchner has shown, like Wynand Olivier, that he is a good provincial player at best. Nobody else really catches the eye at the moment, and if I was the next coach I would actually be tempted to play Lambie at fullback and someone like Jantjies at flyhalf.
Lock is another position that I feel we are in a bit of trouble. Andries Bekker can take over from Matfield, and the likes of Flip van der Merwe, Juandre Kruger, Steven Sykes surely wont let the team down, but they do not have the same impact like Victor and Bakkies has. Our depth at lock will be tested when these players are injured, like it was in the WC.
Let us start looking forward to a new era of players and coaches to come in, and hopefully bring in a more dynamic approach to the game. Lets hope the new coach can also get buy-in from all the franchised, like they have in New Zealand.
Here is to all the players who have served SA for the last few years, you have done us proud, we will remember you for what you are, not what PdV made of you. John Smit you are a legend!
12 Oct 2011, 08:02 am
It is not important if you think defense wins world cups. I think the WC is important but it is only a fixture that occurs every 4 years. What happens in between this period is more important. Scoring tires wins games – lets attack every game – we need a coach that will insist on winning rugby. Winning by scoring more points than the opposition not defending the line and capitalising on mistakes
12 Oct 2011, 08:07 am
@kesbok(kesbok)-16: Rugby is a game of chess, defense and offense go hand in hand. Same applies with Rugby League, but I am not one for checkers.
12 Oct 2011, 08:07 am
Jeez JC, please mix it up a bit, same old stuff over and over again.
12 Oct 2011, 08:11 am
I disagree.
The boks and the game plan completely overpowered the Aussies and put the Boks into several positions to win the game … easily.
The coach does not coach forward passes or missed kicks.
We were easily the best side on the field and I firmly believe that this team and game plan could have won the RWC.
12 Oct 2011, 09:40 am
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-8: Phew you really are hammering home the whole blaming the ref thing. While I agree there is way too much whingening from us Saffa’s, especially the less knowlegeable bloggers, surely you would have some sympathy after your 2997 experience? Generally speaking there was a lot of whingeing from AB supporters after 2007 as well, I understand you guys took flak on this site back then and it’s sweet revenge for you now but maybe you could cut us some slack?
12 Oct 2011, 09:45 am
@Solo(Solo)-15: Statistically Morne Steyn’s defensive record looks ok but the fact is he makes very “defensive” tackles as opposed to attacking tackles. He rides a lot of his hits and while he eventually brings the man down he has given up 5metres and in many cases a loosie has to also commit to thr tackle to assist him costing us another defender. This not only hurts us defensivley but gives the opposition instant momnetum in that middle channel. We need a flyhalf who can stop runners on the gain line and halt their momentum, that will allow our defensive sturcture to retain their shape for longer. (Jonny Wilkinson is a great example of this)
12 Oct 2011, 10:02 am
@TheTackler(TheTackler)-2: Gotta agree. If the Boks had had a better offensive strategy based on all options including serious counter attack and SCORING TRIES instead of playing Englands ’03 winning plan they may have blown us all of the park.
When their plan started to fall apart,, as we saw against Samoa they returned to the ‘bomb and hope’ strategy and that in itself showed that there was no plan B.
It is sad to see a team that prides itself on toughness (having) to resort to pulling penalties and droppies as the major part of their campaign. They could have and should have bought a lot more into this tournament.
12 Oct 2011, 10:07 am
What you are saying is that an attitude of scoring more points than the opposition is better than one of conceding fewer points.
12 Oct 2011, 10:35 am
@Solo(Solo)-15: you obviously have not been following the progress of Jaco Taute?
12 Oct 2011, 10:41 am
no matter
how many
ails
we had
and have
if lawrence
reffed according
to the rules
the boks
would have been
in the
semis
i personally
suspect
lawrence
acted deliberately
he is not
nearly as bad
as he was
saturday
those lowlife
nzar’s again
playing
dirty
12 Oct 2011, 11:21 am
I have always thought the fact that Oz and NZ kids play and are exposed to Rugby League at a young age seems to benefit their running lines and off load ability. They just seem to have a better understanding in attack than the Bok players. Our handling is never as assured either under pressure. These seem to be basic skills that our senior Boks have not acquired. Maybe we need to invest more heavily in handling and running skills for youngsters rather than showing adoration for any kid who can kick the ball 50+ meters and run into people with power.
On the plus side some of the youngsters coming through appear to be slightly more rounded in their skill set.
12 Oct 2011, 11:58 am
@XV(XV)-24:
Yes I agree, Taute is a great talent. I forgot about him a bit. Louis Ludik is also not too bad. Only time will tell how they will go at international level though. Taute is still very young so I rate give him another season to develop.
@Skeppie(Skeppie)-21:
I agree with you there, but we could be worse off in the flyhalf channel. I am not trying to make Steyn look like a saint, but how many flyhalves in world rugby defends like Wilkinson and Butch? Carter is also not that great at stopping people dead on, and lets not get started on Cooper. All I am saying is, everyone wanting to drop Steyn for apparent “bad defence” should see the bigger picture as well. I was actually saying to my mate during Saturdays game that they should bring on Aplon and move Lambie to fullback about 50 minutes into the game. Anyway, what is done is done. And I doubt whoever is the next Bok coach will pick Steyn in any case.
12 Oct 2011, 12:05 pm
@Solo(Solo)-27: he is only 20 I understand. But will be 24 at the next RWC so definitely one worth investing in. I used to rate Ludik but he has never been the same player after his knee injury.
12 Oct 2011, 12:06 pm
@Skeppie(Skeppie)-20:
tells ya what
name me ONE match – other than Cardiff’07 – where NZ fans openly blamed the ref after a loss.
I cant name one season when Bok fans have NOT.
Ive just watched the Aus vs SA QterF again. Bad calls, BOTH ways. Good calls, BOTH ways. And it was a really great match. But the reaction from Boks fans is always the same. And yet they always cite ONE match where AB fans blamed the ref as at fault. The AB Capt didnt point any fingers – unlike Smit. And did the Aussies score a try from a fwd-pass (like France at Cardiff) ? No. Did the Boks go an entire 2ndH without ONE penalty awarded to them, like ABs at Cardiff ? No. Did the Boks score atleast ONE try from their wealth of possession & territory, like the ABs did in Cardiff ? No. Did the Boks score a DG despite not having their flyhalf injured (DC) – let alone the reserve-flyhalf (N.Evans) injured as well ? No.
Instead, they blame the ref anyway.
12 Oct 2011, 12:08 pm
@Solo(Solo)-27:
Dan Carter is an incredible defender as a flyhalf. Wake up and smell the guffaws.
12 Oct 2011, 12:15 pm
@David(David)-3:
Same as Cooper,Beale,O’Connor…Add Mitchell & AShley Cooper who are no hulks……But rip teams to shreds regardless of size…..Come to think of it those “small players have shredded NZ/SA the last 18 months at will at times….Likes of Cruden,Dagg,Tom Marshall also coming through in NZ…”smaller” but what they can do….I would want that for SA and likes of Aplon,Hougaard,Lambie,Jantjies,Goosen,Sadie,De Jongh can do as well.
12 Oct 2011, 12:17 pm
@mshiniwami(mshiniwami)-31:
that ‘Jack’ Russell terrier was superb, but badly handled by SA.
12 Oct 2011, 12:19 pm
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-29: Bloemfontein 2009.. there you are
12 Oct 2011, 12:26 pm
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-32:
Yeah Russell was very good,badly handled indeed which was unfortunate.
Same could be said about NZ & Orene Ai’i,Todd Miller,Sam Tuitupou,Ben Herring,Steve Devine,Regan King etc all little men that deserved better
12 Oct 2011, 12:32 pm
@XV(XV)-24: Jaco Taute has had a good Currie Cup and an average Super 15, how does that now qualify him as the next Springbok 15? We are far too quick to judge talent based on one good season or on performances against weak opposition. IMO the currie cup does not give any indication of whether someone will cope at international level. Lets see how he does in the Super 15 next year before singing his praises too loudly.
12 Oct 2011, 12:36 pm
@Test(Test)-35:
I question his out and out speed as well…Taute
12 Oct 2011, 12:36 pm
For those bloggers on this site who disagree with JC’s article…Ask Graeme Henry if he would relish coaching a team playing against an BARBARS SIDE with the best of SA’s forwards (read: Bismark to start) coached by Robbie Deans with a smattering of OZ backline players in it (Cooper, Genia, O’Connor etc). The boks played an arguably ineffective (What is their win ratio against NZ and Aus again?), outdated and unentertaining brand of rugby. We watch Sport and rugby to be entertained and not bored to death! I’m glad to see the back of the clown Devilliers…give us an astute coaching TEAM, with insight and leadership. not the imposters that have been there for the past four years. Its been painful to see the best EVER Springbok team that should have dominated international rugby, not reach the heights of their potential. It was sad to see the end of the Smit and Matfield era ending with the boks bowing out in the quarters, particularly the manner inwhich it happened (Plonker Bryce Lawrence), but arguably it was the best thing for springbok rugby. Could you imagine another four years of Devilliers and co.???
12 Oct 2011, 12:44 pm
I have no doubt that Taute is the future Bok fullback. He is very quick, very strong in contact, spots opportunities well and now he seems to have added a kicking repertoire to his skills (including long shots at goals).
12 Oct 2011, 12:47 pm
@Solo(Solo)-15: EXCELLENT post Solo! While I am not the biggest Morne’ fan, I do like reporting and perception to be fair and objective. His tackle stats were actually very good in RWC and he was best kicker and so on.
The lack of running and tries is a problem with the team overall, and to a degree in South Africa with the “golden generation”. The Stormers stopped scoring tries too, the Bulls didnt continue their Super Rugby dominance and it went from there.
But calling Morne “swingdoor” is not good journalism. Surprise.
12 Oct 2011, 12:50 pm
@Skeppie(Skeppie)-20: 2997?
12 Oct 2011, 13:42 pm
Ok JC, now explain to me which of the SA S15 teams this year look imaginative in attack? I’m struggling to see how you expect the national coach to create great backline plays if it does not start at S15 level.
The Bulls (who I support) have had the exact same approach and game plan for at least 8 years now, i.e. channel 1 crash ball rugby.
I’ll agree with you on the blame lies with the coach once we have one or two S15 teams who can create tries like the Crusaders or Reds
12 Oct 2011, 13:44 pm
It is just not about attacking , it is about finishing with points when you are in the strike zone – lets be honest SA attacked like demons on Sunday , and basically camped in the Aussie half , but they could not convert this advantage into points , many will claim the false forward pass , FDP dropping the ball over the line etc but SA have not looked there attacking self since 2007 – option taking is critical in the strike zone but it certainly seems very confusing that Springboks most with over 50 caps cannot take the right option in the strike zone ?????
12 Oct 2011, 13:54 pm
This gameplan was sound. Apart from Smit and Habana, the selections were sound too.
If the players were in the form they are capable of, then De Villiers’ pass would not have been forward, Du Preez would have been over the line before Cooper could knock the ball out of his hands, Jacque Fourie would not have lost that ball in contact or passed that ball forward.
In short, the Boks would have won comfortably. But unfortunately, none of these guys, INCLUDING geriatric Butch, are the players they used to be.
We don’t have the attacking players to match a NZ type of game. We can attack through relentless pressure if our ball retention is good enough, and if we have a Bismark/Brussouw combo defending the breakdown, but we that is not an all out attacking game.
Anyway, not really responding to JC’s article as such, because any knowledgeable coach would print it out and use it as toilet paper. That’s about the only bit of value it contains.
12 Oct 2011, 13:56 pm
@stew(stew)-42: Yes, but don’t you think that might be due to lack of game time under pressure as well? Maybe these guys would have been better at finishing if they played the TN?
Eddie Jones commented something interesting, in saying that we seemed to have moved from the Bulls game plan last year to the Stormers one this year. He thought that our backline and players did not look confident yet to implement that …
12 Oct 2011, 13:58 pm
@danuk(danuk)-44:
The Stormers have a gameplan?
12 Oct 2011, 14:01 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-45: Yes, different to the Bulls, i.e. not channel 1 crash ball with WO
12 Oct 2011, 14:05 pm
@danuk(danuk)-46:
Oh. Thanks for clearing that up.
So this gameplan. It produces results then, does it?
12 Oct 2011, 14:06 pm
Whilst it seems the Bok’s attack was clueless the Wallabies must be lauded for their most impressive defensive stats in the history of tests between the two!
They made a huge 251 tackles at 81% success rate, which was almost 4 times (unprecedented) more than the Boks who made 69 tackles at 65% success rate!
Now one must ask why a team with 67% possession (more in the second half) would persist with slogging it up and not attempt a few more drop-goals from the many pockets that were available?
Or why a team that was pilfering 30% of Wallabies LO throws would not kick for touch more when failing to break the granite defence?
Or why at only 5m way from the line on several occasions in the 2nd half, kept swinging the ball wide frenetically, would not attempt a few power mauls?
Not my fellow rugby brethren… the Bok’s continued sloggin it up against the granite Aus defence and failed to revert to their own strengths…
It would have been bitter-sweet irony to have kicked one or two more drop-goals with all that possession and avenge the last time the two met in a RWC and Larkham did the same!
12 Oct 2011, 14:10 pm
@danuk(danuk)-44: Look i am sure we all agree the step up from Provincial to International is a huge step – the Boks did play well on Sunday fact , they tore Aus a new one , and i am sure the Aussie players must have wondered how they won this game – Pocock wasnt as brilliant as the press are making out …. The boks just couldnt finish , this maybe down to basic skills development or like Tac says old age ??
12 Oct 2011, 14:11 pm
@Test(Test)-35: Fair point. I did say he is a player worth investing in. 20 is still young and for me he has shown much promise. That does not make a Bok….but is he any worse now versus Kirchner?
12 Oct 2011, 14:16 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-47: Apparently
12 Oct 2011, 14:20 pm
@Tacitus(Deucalion)-47: Anyway, what the hell is your point? I’m saying that to have creativity does not start at national level, but rather at provincial. I know you have a hard-on for the Bulls and the way they play. Good for you.
I support them as well and in the S15 this year they where terrible and I think need to build some creativity. Thank goodness Heyneke is investing in players to do just that, like Johan Sadie
12 Oct 2011, 15:53 pm
The moment Butch James missed that penalty against the Aussies in the tri nations South Africa lost the World Cup. PDV reverted back to Morne Steyn and the game plan that accompanies him. I am not attacking Morne as a player as he can win you matches with his kicking but he is NEVER going to win you 3 knockout matches in a row. Had the boks beaten the Aussies they would have had to replicate the forward dominance again this coming weekend against the All Blacks as shading their pack would not be good enough and then if by some miracle we got past them do it all again against Wales/France. This was never going to happen.
Some on this blog say we had no option because Butch James is not the player he was but what is that based on? He played one 50 minute game for the Boks at fly half in the last 3 months. James offered us the best mix of good distribution, adequate kicking and robust defense in the position and I cannot see how if we had him (having played adequate minutes leading up to this game) playing we would not have crossed the Aussie line on a couple of occasions with 70% go forward possession.
12 Oct 2011, 16:16 pm
@malcolm(malcolm)-53: hindsight…
12 Oct 2011, 17:25 pm
@malcolm(malcolm)-53:
“PDV reverted back to Morne Steyn and the game plan that accompanies him”
Actually he did not…
They kept ball-in-hand, maintained possession and rarely kicked the ball!
Never before have the Aussies had to make 251 tackles, almost 4 times the amt the Boks did…
Steyn and FDP kicked less than their counterparts (neither team more than 35m’s) and passed almost 3 times more than their counter-parts…
So in fact this was about as far removed from the game-plan that some say normally comes with a champion kicker like Morne Steyn…
12 Oct 2011, 18:03 pm
@bryce_in_oz(bryce_in_oz)-55: Too true…..i do feel that Lambie especially….or Butch definitely…..would have made a lot more of that possesion….with Bryce not awarding penalties our attacking prowess was found out with mister predictable at the helm
12 Oct 2011, 18:12 pm
Aussies vs Boks more attacking? Whilst I agree that the Boks do not score highly on the attacking game my question is how much more effective the creative Aussie game was in the WC vs SA. They scored one try from a penalisable position. Then there was Beale’s line break and that’s it. Jean made a break and we crossed the line but the pass was forward. My point is judging from the blogger’s opinions the Aussie running game should have ripped the Boks to pieces. It did not happen andthey should have lost the game. The Boks lost the game through their own incompetence nothing to do with the famous Aussie attacking style.
Province tried to do the running thing in the past with powder puff forwards – did not work. Stormers reached the S15 finals with a monster pack to then unleash the backs. We need a balanced approach but need to work on our attacking game and dominate the breakdown,get more forwards to clean out quicker and a scrum halve who concentrates and not throw his hands up in despair every time he gets frustrated.
12 Oct 2011, 18:14 pm
But in the meantime, back home…….a glut of flyhalf talent has popped up in South Africa as of late (courtesy of strong junior feeder systems), wiff Vrystaat leading the stakes with their recent star performer (who might well have been a wildcard in a more adventurous coaches’ world cup deck) being relegated to their Currie Cup bench due to the prodigy that rose from their ranks….again…..boy, it is goingn to be fun watching the S15
12 Oct 2011, 18:27 pm
JC, on the article, no comment.
My backline for the future is
9. Francois Hougard / Sarel Pretorius
10. Elton Jantjies / Goosen from FS
11. Ovovo( sharks ) / Bjorn Basson
12. Frans Steyn / Jaun De Jong
13. Johann Sadie / Robert Eberson
14. Gio Aplon / JP Peterson
15. Pat Lambie / Jaco Tuate
12 Oct 2011, 18:43 pm
@MG(MG)-59: Good choices but heard from a good source Sadie is not a team player – demanded millions from Province and threatened to leave which he did.
12 Oct 2011, 18:48 pm
NagouGrote@60 : No problem, there should be enough depth if he is not a team player.
12 Oct 2011, 18:51 pm
@Siyavuna(Siyavuna)-56:
I wouldn’t blame Steyn for that… he gave the centres insane ball to run with… blame the coach and their predictable moves off him… no centres off the angles, no wings swapping positions, no switch-balls etc etc etc…
Oh make no mistake those Keo-ites that have for months screamed for no ‘skop-en-jag’ but ball-in-hand got exactly what they want this game (funny they’re quiet now) and it almost worked…
But the biggest failure (other than not clearing out ferociously en-masse on Bok ball to counter Pocock as they did to Brussouw) was not being able switch back to game plan A (their strengths) when the above wasn’t working…
At which point in the game when you have all the possession and all the territory, yet just cannot break the iron Aussie defence, do you rather kick the drop-goal (plenty of opportunities)… or maul your ball over (or get the penalty) rather than keep swinging like madmen?
All moot now…
12 Oct 2011, 21:49 pm
@Transformation(Transformation)-33:
utter cr@p and you know it, von Trapp.
And thereby proving my point.
12 Oct 2011, 22:19 pm
@bryce_in_oz(bryce_in_oz)-62:
Yes, given the situation where the ref refused to give penalties for blatant infringements we should have gone for drop goals. FDP should have shown better leadership here. About 12 mins from the end with the Boks 9-8 ahead and about 10m from the Aussie line one can see MS dropping back in the pocket for a drop goal and sticking out his arm like he did with the first drop but FDP chose to pass to Hougaard. Shortly after this Pocock again pilfered the ball.
The romantic notion of ball-in-hand run them off their feet only works against weak oposition or with quick turn over ball. Even for the talented AB’s.
Our game plan looked suspiciously like that of the Stormers. On the plus side good defence and dominance up front, but blunt on the attack. Too many forwards (especially Schalk) in the back line who look spectacular with the ball in hand but does very little damage. Get speedsters running at slow forwards and you’re in business.
12 Oct 2011, 23:28 pm
Absolutely sickening this attacking and blaming Bryce for the Bok loss vs Aus. This after 4 years of mocking Kiwis for the aftermath from Cardiff’07. What are the similarities ?
Did the AB Capt did point any fingers at Barnes ? NO, unlike Smit, within hours of defeat.
And did the Aussies score a Try from a fwd-pass (like France at Cardiff) ? No.
Did the Boks go an entire 2ndH without ONE penalty awarded to them, like ABs at Cardiff ? No. In fact, they were awarded 2 penalties in kickable positions, both converted, including the 2nd penalty which put SA in from 9-8 having trailed 3-8 at HT.
Did the Boks score atleast ONE try from their wealth of possession & territory, like the ABs did in Cardiff ? No.
Did the Boks score a 2ndH DG despite not having their flyhalf injured (DC) – let alone the reserve-flyhalf (N.Evans) injured as well ? No. They ended the match with 3 x fit flyhalfs (M.Steyn, B.James, P.Lambie).
soooooo NO EXCUSES……?
again, NO
and they just dont stop. Now SA referees are in on it too – remember A.Watson who did his very best to keep Aus in the RWC 2003 Final with terrible rulings at the scrum ? Line up the apologists, one and all….
“New Zealand rugby referee Bryce Lawrence continues to cop widespread criticism for his performance in the South Africa-Australia World Cup quarterfinal last Sunday.
South African referees manager and former test referee Andre Watson is the latest to put the boot in, saying he was surprised by the Lawrence’s performance in Australia’s 11-9 win in Wellington.
He also said that the South African referees association will aim to take action against Lawrence.
”His opening game [at the World Cup] was outstanding, I had no problem with his appointment, but (in the quarterfinal) he allowed a free-for-all, giving (David) Pocock a field day,” Watson told a Cape Town radio station.
”It’s not what you would expect from a referee of his calibre. He didn’t referee the breakdown the way he was supposed to. He just didn’t step in.”
The breakdown was a mess at stages during the match, and both sides expressed dissatisfaction post-match. Naturally South Africa reacted most angrily, with retiring captain John Smit saying he was delighted he would no longer have to be refereed by the New Zealander.
Rugby fans in the Republic have united against Lawrence, and a Facebook page titled ‘Petition To Stop Bryce Lawrence Ever Reffing A Rugby Game Again’ has attracted an incredible 64,827 ‘likes’, as of 9am today.
There are also a handful of other anti-Lawrence pages on the social networking site.
South Africans accused Lawrence of getting several key decisions wrong, and allowing Wallabies openside Pocock to illegally spoil the Springboks ball and flow in a match they lost despite an overwhelming advantage in possession and territory.
Watson believes the Kiwi whistleblower, who is now to South African fans what Englishman Wayne Barnes was to New Zealand supporters four year ago after the All Blacks’ quarterfinal exit against France, will be punished in some way.
”He will be punished, but that’s up to the IRB (International Rugby Board). I do not believe we will see him in any Rugby World Cup again,” Watson said.
”It’s done and dusted now, but we (South African referees association) will be taking action. We want to make sure it doesn’t happen again.”
sickening.
12 Oct 2011, 23:43 pm
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-65:
two faced a$$holes.
Where were these guys in 2007?
It seems if they are not happy with officials they will seek action. Why now and not the other 20 odd times SA has lost a game in the last 4 years. Going by posts on here the refs are to blame for all SA losses.
13 Oct 2011, 00:02 am
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-65: BP there are some on other Saffer rugga blogsites who would agree with you. The unemotional response to the loss to the Aussies is that the Bok players and coaching staff are as much to blame as the ref because they went onto the field without a plan B, executed their gameplan poorly, failed to protect possession of the ball because of poor ball handling skills and showed an inability to adapt to the referee’s interpretations at the breakdowns.
I guess the rest of the world is going to tire of our tirade and just like the kiwis in post 2007, we along with the less than perfect A Watson will be told to get a life and move on.
13 Oct 2011, 00:26 am
@out wide(out wide)-67: totally agree. Pretty disgusting this whole thing with Smit. As i said earlier he as captain is as responsible for guiding his ship on to the reef. They have openly admitted they were( the senior players) in charge.
This is also a team that got really stretched by Wales and Samoa so to play the Wannabees was always going to be a step up….but as you say, after the first step there was no more plan. Tough titties as far as I’m concerned.
BOKS ITS TIME TO SWEEP THE CLOSET OUT AND START OVER WITH BETTER COACH AND MANAGEMENT AND CAPTAINCY!!
13 Oct 2011, 00:41 am
@out wide(out wide)-67:
Im yet to see ONE incident or decision where the Boks can hold up and blame the ref/B.Lawrence. Not ONE.
Ive watched the match 3 times.
Actually, I think its exciting when the breakdown has players flying in. As long as they stay on their feet and dont come in from the side, it resembles the modern version of the old-school ‘ruck’ with fwds going hammer’n'tongs. It was an excellent match, now just soured by a team and nation completely unable to accept defeat without blame.
No Tries scored from fwd-passes.
PenaltieS awarded in kickable positions.
No sympathy here, none whatsoever.
13 Oct 2011, 01:19 am
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-69: I watched the game twice last night – breakdown was a free for all. Decisions could have been given all over the place to both sides.
Some ridiculous ruling both ways – still not sure how we got the scrum feed when Habana knocked down a Cooper pass when the Aussies were on attack.
So in summary – Referee was atrocious and deserves to be attacked – but by both teams.
Reason we lost could be down to a number of points but dropping the ball on three separate occasions with the try line in sight was probably one of the main ones. Can’t blame the ref for that.
13 Oct 2011, 01:49 am
@mshiniwami(mshiniwami)-31: Unfortunately in SA, coaches and fans alike are obsessed with size. Once we got over this obsession we can start selecting players who genuinely deserve to be there and have the right skill set and not based on how they weigh and how big they look.
Spies is a perfect example. Massive hulking piece of meat and more tender than the finest ribeye. Lambie’s defence is harder than Spies. He goes down like a sack of **** everytime. He should be much stronger for someone his size. I would’ve expected Spies to be much more of a handful but he is easier to bring down than JPP.
13 Oct 2011, 02:03 am
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-69: Bryce Lawrence is not the reason Boks lost, though some of the decisions irked us a bit for sure. I just hope Craig Joubert doesn’t pi$$ off any Aussie or Kiwi fans on Sunday night.. Wouldn’t like you guys to blame a ref like we do.
13 Oct 2011, 02:18 am
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-65: Remember that old saying BP, ” facts are sacred but comment is free.” It’s a small point but in your over-written diatribe, lecturing and denigrating Bok supporters, there is an error of fact. You state:
“Did the Boks go an entire 2ndH without ONE penalty awarded to them, like ABs at Cardiff ? No. In fact, they were awarded 2 penalties in kickable positions, both converted, including the 2nd penalty which put SA in from 9-8 having trailed 3-8 at HT.”
However here’s an extract from many “as it happened” records of the match. This one is from TVNZ and reads:
“59min Aus 8 SA 9
“Steyn lands a dropgoal. Straight down the middle and they’re in front for the first time.”
As I said, it’s a small point but if you want to point the finger and criticise Bok fans’ comments, you need to ensure that any statements you make are 100% correct. That’s assuming, of course, that you know the difference between a penalty goal and drop goal.
13 Oct 2011, 03:41 am
@diewareouboet(diewareouboet)-64:
Aussies 251 tackles @ 81% success rate
Boks 69 tackles @ 65% success rate
Sorry I’m not buying that the Bok’s (Stormer’s) defence was any good at all…
A plus this RWC was the temperament shown against the filthy Samoans, the downside their soft ruck attendance on own ball allowing Pocock free reign… the Aussies did to Brussouw exactly what Boks should have done to Pocock all game…
3 heavy men clearing out at ruck at all times, Vickerman’s cheap-shot that put Brussouw out of the game was vintage Bakkies!
Japies are too staid in their thinking as per normal… ie one fetcher negates another fetcher… it’s rubbish and I’ve said it before… Aussies don’t buy into that and the T5 or anyone else arriving at the breakdown simply smash and clearout anyone threatening their ball… Bok’s left this to one man… and he had free reign all game (ref or no ref)…
13 Oct 2011, 03:48 am
@jeest(jeest)-70:
Adapt or die… when someone who I don’t rate at all in the modern game (Naas Botha) can come out at half time and say…
“Right chaps, you’ve seen how the ref is policing the break-down… so damn welll adapt and protect your ball more, up the ante with clearing out and counter-rucking… and play the breakdown the same way the Aussies are…”
… Then you’d damn well think the Bok brains-trust could see the same thing… how obvious was it at half time… how obvious was it Joubert let things go too in the Welsh game… not that obvious to the brains-trust though…
Adapt or Die in a RWC… there are ALWAYS going to be many dubious ref calls or lack of calls…
13 Oct 2011, 04:01 am
@bryce_in_oz(bryce_in_oz)-75: Yeah you make a good point. Totally agree.
Most of my animosity towards Bryce has built up over a few seasons – it certainly isn’t based on his game on the weekend. In fact, I think, it was one of his more even performances. Not that it was good.
13 Oct 2011, 04:08 am
Having watched the game just now I have no idea how the Boks lost it. It was there for the taking. I’ve never seen Aus get so completely and utterly dominated. Had we some attacking nous we would’ve smashed them. The Wallabies were very lucky to win that game.
We can’t blame Bryce Lawrence. He played a part but we had so many chances. If FdP had held onto ball as he went over the tryline it would be the Boks in the semis now. We lost that game because we have no decent backline and no attacking strategy. I don’t understand why we didn’t just go for another drop goal. Another 2 drop goals and then a try to land that killer blow. I think there was nerves and desperations on both sides but the way I see it is that some Boks playing for their careers just gave up in the end. Habana shouldn’t have been taken off. I was disappointed in Fourie. JdV had a good game but he is terrible at hardly ever passing or offloading in the tackle.
If you swapped the Boks for the ABs with that amount of dominance, territory and possession they would’ve put 40 past Aus. We have to put our hands up here. We failed to adapt to Lawrence’s reffing of the breakdown coupled with a poor attacking strategy. The Boks threw this game away. The ref cannot take the blame here. Aus quite simply played a more intelligent game.
13 Oct 2011, 04:21 am
@Samba Bok(JayDaFiveOh)-77:
Clap Clap Clap, excellent post.
13 Oct 2011, 06:42 am
@cambok(cambok)-73:
and you are bl00dy well right about the ‘pen to go up bu 9-8′ – I read that wrong off the RWC-app thingy. It most certainly was a DG by Steyn.
Notwithstanding that, Steyn DID kick a pen to go 6-8 and SA WERE awarded 2 pens in the 2ndH (on 51 and 55mins).
The point I was trying to make is that SA were awarded penalties in the 2ndH – hardly an indication of unfair treatment by Lawrence. This contrasts, starkly, with Barnes in Cardiff’07, the very point I was trying to make.
13 Oct 2011, 06:44 am
A.Watson
B.Lawrence “allowed a free-for-all”
ALL
has it *clicked* yet, Ladies ?
13 Oct 2011, 08:16 am
click… ALL
13 Oct 2011, 11:36 am
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-69: Geez BP, I have been reading this website everyday for the past five years or so and I have mostly enjoyed your typical Kiwi honesty but that statement is a bit harsh. While I am also getting sick of our moaning (I am sure you know what’s it’s like to be this gutted) to say that the reffing was not poor is totally incorrect. Pococks hand in after a ruck was formed 1m from their line? In fact Pococks hands in all day after rucks were formed not before. I don’t expect you kiwi’s to tolerate our whining after you guys copped heaps in 2007 but at least stick to the honesty.
13 Oct 2011, 11:40 am
@Hurricane(Hurricane)-66: Come on that’s not fair, trawl any blog site and you will get some tools who have no rugby knowledge and talk out of their behinds but a lot of us saffa’s are not maoning and are trying to take this on the chin.
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.