International rugby and the kicking game.

For many a year I have been listening to Graham Henry and co, fans from opposite sides and posters in general about the fact that South Africa plays a kicking game. To such an extent that it has taken the proportions of a urban legend.

When people discuss South Africa the immediate comment is about the fact that we play the kicking game and 10 man rugby. There is a perception out there that we seldom use our backs and when you compare meters ran, you will find that we probably average around 300 meters per match, where as other teams such as New Zealand and australia would most likely average 500 meters against us.

So let me first address that issue. The one tactic we use are kicking deep bombs. If in a match 3 of those bombs are not accurate and not chased effectively, that alone will result in 100 meters being ran before meeting defensive lines.

The next factor is that we use our forwards 66% of the time and our backs 34% of the time to run. There for you will find that our runs are crashball, setup the next phase and rarely going wide.

Where as New Zealand and Australia use there forwards about 40% of the time and run wide 60% of the time.

I know this because I did the stats on this with the Tri Nations. THe NH teams I haven't checked so won't be able to provide that information.

THen the kicking game, teams use kicking strategies for different reasons. New Zealand as an example use the bomb less than what we do, but Carter is very astute when kicking for territory. Everyone use the chip kick etc in varying degrees.

So what I did to prove my point that SA does not only kick and the urban myth of us not playing any other type of rugby was to take the statistics from the 5 top six nation sides and the Tri Nation sides to see exactly how many kicks from hand came from each of these teams.

Average per match over last 10 tests.

South Africa 26.7 kicks
Wales 26.2 kicks
Scotland 25.8 kicks
Ireland 24.5 kicks
Australia 23.9 kicks
France 22.8 kicks
New zealand 22.6 kicks
England 20.1 kicks

Surprisingly, england has kicked the least per match of all these teams. Something I didn't expect.

I will agree that south Africa doesn't play the most open, exciting, league type rugby, but to believe the myth that we only kick and do nothing else is a complete fallicy.

We literally kick 4 kicks per match more than New Zealand and 3 kicks per match more than Australia, their games seem more exciting because of the angles that they run, the electric pace they have and skills their backlines posses. Everyone kicks, they just use different game modules.

And sadly the more it is said in the media, the more people believe it.

I hope that with this I have cleared some of the fog surrounding this myth.

Another thing is that we got big kickers which means were most teams will go for touch we go for posts and most of the time we get the points relieveing us of the need to score tries

Nice set of statistics Biltong and I understand where you are coming from but trying to show that SA do not kick as much still showed that they kick the most!

I, however, have absolutely no problem with kicking. It is the way the kick is utilised that is important (i.e. a kick with a decent chase or a deep touch finder to punish a team that is playing its full back in the line). "Aerial Ping-Pong" is where it gets silly and the best way to punish a team that kicks poorly is to run it right back at them.

In general, over the years, I have found that when an opposition team/coach/fan pipes up about “boring” or “not within the spirit of the game” tactics it is generally because they have been at the wrong end of these tactics and had no answers, or are incapable of playing in the way being complained about to the same standard.

As for the fact England kicked the least – well that may be good for the impartial however on a few recent occasions I think England would have been better off kicking rather than running dead-end ball. In my opinion it is all about the correct utilisation and over the years SA have utilised what they have very well indeed.

mcrjfNo7, i don't have any problem with us being the team that kicks the most, not at all.

What I do have a problem with is people denying the fact that their teams use kicks pretty much as often as we do.

I think where this whole perception started was when Graham Henry in 2009, had a few outbursts about our kicking game and the use of the bomb. We were pretty effective with it at the time.

What Graham Henry should have done was send PDV a thank you note, because as you would remember they were pretty poor at the back with handling the bombs. He since had his players working on their skills, and pretty much as we taught them the 3-4-1 scrum, we taught them you must be able to catch in the deep as well.

i remember laughing hard whenever i read GH's comments on the Bok kicking game . At one stage i'd be hoping morne pops a bomb just so i can see rokocoko coughing it up and the look of frustration on GH's face

Wales's Stat is a bit misleading, when Byrne isn't full back we average 3.8 kicks per game

I think over the last 10 we have certainly kicked more so would be interesting to see the 2009/ 2010 version where I believe ours will be much lower and the Boks a little higher, but not much.

Kicking has come back into the game recently though in different versions- the prevalence of the chips over the top and two the wings has come back. Its all about best utilisation of time and space and applying pressure on defensive setups.

SA have a habit of deliberately creating pressure situations within the kickable range and we certainly got sucked into that last week handing away penalties when we shouldnt have.

So for me its not so much about kicking its about using/ passing the ball rather than using the boot or player to create attacking opportunites. I'd like to see the same stats of ball carry from Scrums, lineouts and breakdowns for the same countries- and not just the 10's- from the first receivers as we know its often not the 10 that takes the first ball.

Bullsbok wrote:i remember laughing hard whenever i read GH's comments on the Bok kicking game .

I'm pleased our coach gives you a laugh or two... whereas...

Taylorman, you want to tell me our coach has never made you laugh?

Not even a smile?

the most important thing that these stats dont tell you is for what purpose these kicks are made,

SH sides generally kick bad ball (in NZ's case) or to be used as an attacking weapon (SA) NH sides generally kick either due to clueless attacking or fear of counter attacking and being turned over

biltongbek wrote:Average per match over last 10 tests.

South Africa 26.7 kicks
Wales 26.2 kicks
Scotland 25.8 kicks
Ireland 24.5 kicks
Australia 23.9 kicks
France 22.8 kicks
New zealand 22.6 kicks
England 20.1 kicks

Surprisingly, england has kicked the least per match of all these teams. Something I didn't expect.
We literally kick 4 kicks per match more than New Zealand and 3 kicks per match more than Australia, their games seem more exciting because of the angles that they run, the electric pace they have and skills their backlines posses. Everyone kicks, they just use different game modules.

So the Boks execute on average 6.6 more kicks than England. Understandable considering England's dynamic centres quickly, creatively and deftly moving the ball all over the pitch enabling the back three to run open and freely through opposing defenses.................

na, tis Rob Andrews now no longer plays for England...

OK seriously. I love data, and this is great stuff. This is the kind of thing which can be analysed to death. I do agree with your conclusions, however: Not so much the number of kicks since the averages all all within the 20-26 range, but how the kicks are executed.

Also, the Boks choose to take the ball up through the forwards more than do most other teams. I agree that is what gives the impression of a less open team, not actually the kicks. But, that does not mean it is bad Rugby, just a different approach.

doctor_grey wrote: So the Boks execute on average 6.6 more kicks than England. Understandable considering England's dynamic centres quickly, creatively and deftly moving the ball all over the pitch enabling the back three to run open and freely through opposing defenses.................

...........................only to not score for some reason.

facts, facts, facts! I write a perfectly good line of rubish and you ruin it with........facts.
Besides thats only when going against the defensive dynamo which is Shane Wiliams.

Yeah, the problem with shane williams is if you aren't a high jumper it is difficult to clear that 4 foot 3 inches, and if you aren't able to side step the only options left is through him or inbetwen his legs, and for that you have to crawl. which will award a penalty to the welsh.

... a winger is suppose to be able to side step, no??

or at least a decent hand off!!! LOL!

i have missed the direction of this joke completely is it at english ineptitude in the backline or williams defending? lol

A side point here. side steps versus the Swerve.

Before I was lumped into hooking, when at high school I was wing, and I tried sidestepping quite often. hence moved into hooker position due to the success. Then we had centres that could side step and some that could swerve, and I guess must have been some that can do both.

But now all players seems to just side step. Whereas when watching I think a swerve is so much prettier to watch, and for a defender must be the equivilant to being nut megged in soccer, that is, left with egg on face and feeling very foolish.

Now the only person I think that does swerve now is QC, though he does do little sidesteps. But wingers like Campo I have seen swerve, so deceptivly easy and loses no pace as opposed to side step.

Anyone else think of good swervers??

you went from winger to hooker?!?! thats one hell of a transformation!

Craig Burden of the Sharks did as well, and he is successful at Super rugby

Well i played breakaway for a while, flanker called nowadays, open as well! But I stayed same height whilst keeping and increasing the girth... so got moved to hooker where I played.

But in league, which I played at the same time as union, and more often, I played centre!!

Stuck his name in youtube to see if I could see some clips and turns out he is a singer, drummer and musician..... Guess not him then...

What do you describe as a swerve Ozt?

I agree that a kicks only as good as its chase, and i think SA can be very happy last weekend that it looked like Habana had got back on track and was chasing well. Which is good as it seems like FDP is living in '09, if in doubt box kick.

Swerve is simply swing the hips out thus leaning with one foot on the ground whilst running out and next forward foot placement will be where or very near where it would have been if he was running straight.

That made sense? Obviously not as severe a change of direction as a side step but great for running centres when not facing a full head on challenge but when the oppo is to one side attempting a frontal but to one side tackle. Side step would have needed an extra step, and then a change up after, swerve just goes thru at same pace.

Cullen was the master of the swerve.

Dont Worry yappy FDp is just fine tuning the box kick which he will happily abuse in 2 weeks

As for Mr Banahan .........any 100+ kilo man who gets tackled by Shane Williams should be ashamed of himself . i couldnt believe it when i saw the big man fail to run through the vastly smaller man .

And before Cullen Glen Osborne