Boks have no skill.

by **Biltong** Sun 16 Sep 2012, 2:09 pm

All Blacks 21
South Africa 11

In case the All Blacks had forgotten what real test rugby was all about, South Africa provided a timely reminder tonight. Real test rugby being the kind that is relentless, brutal, passionate and the outcome in doubt for most of the game.

The Springboks have just the one trick - but its a good trick and it took all of the All Blacks' patience, courage, composure, belief and superior fitness to see them through. It also helped that Dean Greyling had a moment of madness in trying to 'clean out' Richie McCaw - with his head - and took 10 minutes in the bin just as the All Blacks were gaining the ascendancy that had been beyond them up until them.

Just before that Aaron Smith had spied a gap round the side of a ruck, skipped through it and run Zane Kirchner to earn some personal redemption and put the All Blacks 15-8 ahead.

It had been a long slog to get there. The game wouldn't break open as South Africa had kept a giant mitt on it - like the cartoon cat clutching the tail of the flailing mouse. Big men, all of them, they made their presence felt.

It was physical, it was direct and it was unforgiving. The Boks, when they had the ball, were in no hurry to do much with it. It disappeared for long periods at a time, apparently in the midst of a green wedge that would trundle forward, sapping the All Blacks.

When they didn't have it, they tackled hard and were suspiciously good at slowing the ball at the breakdown. The All Blacks couldn't build momentum, couldn't inject the pace they wanted and the longer the game stayed an arm wrestle, the longer the Boks were a chance.

To eventually take control of the test was a serious feat. Lesser sides might have wilted, especially after Bryan Habana had scored a ludicrously good try to put his side in front after 50 minutes.

But not this lot - Smith injected some tempo, McCaw started charging, Ma'a Nonu fired up the middle, Brodie Retallick made the clean outs and Israel Dagg boomed the ball long.

And all the time there was this hope that at any given stage, the All Blacks would conjure something as they had in the first half.

Mis-matches are what coaches spend hours hoping to be able to manipulate - leave nimble backs running against not so nimble forwards. There were were precious few times when the game actually broke open for any such thing to eventuate, and when half a chance had presented itself after 20 minutes, the problem for the All Blacks was that their not so nimble forwards were the ball carriers.

There didn't appear to be much on, then, when Sam Whitelock ploughed into Ruan Pienaar. But that was until the big lock flipped a class pass out the back door.

Presumably taking the approach that anything a dopey lock can do, a No 8 can do better, Kieran Read threw an even better offload to Israel Dagg and that was that - the fullback was over and right there was the difference between the two sides.

The South Africans were a little perplexed at that stage. They had enjoyed the better of the physical exchanges. They had owned a majority share in the collisions and their raw power was most evident when they took their time and launched endless rolling mauls.
But rugby isn't just about the beast - there has to be a bit of beauty, too and the Boks couldn't really make their brutality count because they simply lacked the skill to do so. It was impossible to imagine any of their forwards being able to emulate Whitelock and Read; actually, it was pretty tough to imagine any of their backs could do it, either.

Criticised for being conservative in his selections and trying to impose the blueprint of the Bulls on the Springboks, it was easy to see why coach Heyneke Meyer is heading the way he is.

Pass and run rugby is beyond his side - with the honourable exception of Bryan Habana whose try was classic opportunism and electric execution - so why bother with it? When they rumbled tight, hit the big men on the charge and then used Pienaar, Morne Steyn and Frans Steyn to launch the ball quite indecently high, they put pressure on the All Blacks.

Simple rugby works for them in that it keeps them in the contest, makes them hard to beat. It also allowed them to slow the rhythm of the game; to keep it adante rather than allegro. The last thing they wanted was for the game to be fast and loose and for the All Blacks to be given a platform from which they could display their superior fitness and skills.

New Zealand 21 (I. Dagg, A. Smith tries; A. Cruden 3 pens, con)
South Africa 11 (B. Habana try; M. Steyn pen; F. Steyn pen)

By Gregor Paul in Dunedin

We'll talk again once Bismarck, Coenie, Schalk, Goosen, Lambie and JP is in the run on team.

by Taylorman Sun 16 Sep 2012, 5:29 pm

Still think its more than that biltong. The last three years SA have been waiting for players to return. The names just seem to keep changing, and those that did return turned out to be the wrong ones.

Lambie and bismarck have been there all along. They just weren't getting picked. Lambie still isn't. The issue is just as much doing with what the have got rather than waiting for what they havnt.

Goosen is yet to be started and has yet to run a test backline, have his ups and downs. I just hope that meyer affords him even half the eternity he afforded steyn to come right.

It was a good last twenty though. Let's see what meyer does over te next two home matches.

by kiakahaaotearoa Sun 16 Sep 2012, 8:48 pm

When they rumbled tight, hit the big men on the charge and then used Pienaar, Morne Steyn and Frans Steyn to launch the ball quite indecently high, they put pressure on the All Blacks.

I don't agree with that at all. I hear what he's saying but those aimless kicks placed no pressure on us whatsoever. In fact they did the opposite. They relieved pressure. Where we looked suspect was when SA held onto the ball. The movement was lateral and didn't look fluid but there were enough holes for encouragement. SA could've kept plugging away. When they kicked the ball away they managed to slow down the AB ball and stop their continuity. But they weren't tiring them out in defence and they weren't asking questions of the AB defence. The kicks only served to hand back possession to the ABs who were otherwise starved of the ball. The forward plan went to plan. The kicking game was atrocious and effectively took the game away from SA. There are players who can come back but the tactics of Meyer in the backs is what's really hurting SA. They can play territory for sure but they also need to hold onto the ball when they're in the AB half.

by Taylorman Sun 16 Sep 2012, 9:09 pm

Yes exactly. Goosen is key to the SA backline but it depends how meyer uses him. If he tells him-and you'd expect he will given this team from all accounts believe in his gameplan- to do the same but be more effective with the placement of the kicks, then he will have missed the point.

The other thing meyer is assuming is we'll drop the balls. This plan alone has meant both NZ, in jane and dagg, and beale of oz have become the worlds best at taking these kicks in and are returning them with interest- even when surrounded by players. They're fearless because SA sides have given them years of practice.

by Mr Fishpaste Sun 16 Sep 2012, 9:17 pm

It is a specifically 'bok-tactics' thing: On Saturday afternoon, the Sharks played W. Province at a Kingspark that had received 300mm of rain in 24hrs. Despite the fact that they were virtually swimming, both sides were keen to run, offload etc, and did a fantastic job of it despite the conditions....Saffas can do that sort of thing, except, it seems, when they put on a green jersey.

by **Biltong** Sun 16 Sep 2012, 9:20 pm

It doesn't matter what Meyer says, the Boks will continue to use the territorial kicking game, what will change is the effectiveness of our attack.

What does Carter do so well that makes his backline effective?

He attacks the gainline, so when he passes flat, or drifts before he passes to his outside or inside player they get the ball on the advantage line and when they hit the line they are in space.

That is what is nit happening with the Bok backline when Morne plays, Goosen attacks the gainline so in contrast to Morne who passes the ball without hitting the line or creating doubt his centre gets the ball way behind the advatage line.

With Goosen the opposite will happen.

We currently have a situation where Morne isn't even there half the time to recieve the pass at pivot.

The main reason why our backline isn't functioning is because they never play on the advantage line. That has little to do with gameplan, but all to do with Morne.

by Taylorman Sun 16 Sep 2012, 10:45 pm

With the match on Saturday two things went wrong...steyn...goalkicking, steyn, with help from ruan, terrible kicking away of the ball. Both key elements in meyers gameplan.

Will meyer so readily cast him aside knowing a steyn improvement and a return to home ground, combined with that brutal defence and pack? I've my doubts.

He still has room to move with steyn. He can tell him, and the rugby public, that its steyns last chance. And most will buy it. And you know what...he'll play a blinder...and pick me one more time steyn will be back for another year.

Meyers a control freak. Having goosen run to the line as a primary means of attack is something meyer can't identify with. He's never coached it it seems so he won't know how to manage it or fix things when they go wrong.

I think he will find whatever excuse he can to get steyn on the field for the first return match though I hope not. I didn't really get absorbed in the outcome of the game until goosen came on.

by GunsGerms Mon 17 Sep 2012, 12:29 pm

I think the Boks are so obsessed with playing ugly because they have won two world cups that way.

The '95 team had great players with incredible skill that have played some of the most exciting rugby that I can remember. However, when it came to the semis they played really ugly v France and scraped a win and were lucky to do so. It was terrible weather that day mind you. Similarly v NZ in the final they were pretty conservative and again scraped a win.

Same deal in the 2007 wc.

SA dont really have very exciting back right now anyway. JdVs is a great player but not very creative nor is Morne Steyn etc.

by Taylorman Mon 17 Sep 2012, 12:56 pm

Kind of agree. Those two wins have probably costed SA many matches over the years. Fact is they weren't the favourites for either and had unfortunate circs not hit NZ in both, they might have lost and had a better chance to reflect more. Not taking away the wins, but a false sense of security appears to have been created when neither was actually won purely based on that gameplan...other just as important factors played a part.

by **Biltong** Mon 17 Sep 2012, 1:49 pm

You know, I am myself fedup with some of Meyer's selections and also the attacking part of our game.

However the constant criticism of our gameplan and the insistence that we have no skills is getting rather tiresome.

Firstly it is not our skills or gameplan that costs us games, but rather our conservatism and selection policies.

I will pick you a backline with all the necessary skills in the world.

Watch our Currie Cup and you will see tries being scored from all over, run back from team's own 22's, offloading capability to rival most teams, players running into space and putting players into gaps.

Look at the cheetahs, the lions and the sharks and there is ample prrof of the fact that we have skills.

It is only at national level since Nick Mallet that we for some unfathomable reason approach tests in such a conservative manner.

by anotherworldofpain Mon 17 Sep 2012, 2:52 pm

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:When they rumbled tight, hit the big men on the charge and then used Pienaar, Morne Steyn and Frans Steyn to launch the ball quite indecently high, they put pressure on the All Blacks.

I don't agree with that at all. I hear what he's saying but those aimless kicks placed no pressure on us whatsoever. In fact they did the opposite. They relieved pressure. ...

Exactly right. Every time SA went through 4 or 5 phases and looked like they were gaining momentum I just set the stopwatch for 10 seconds and waited for a kick. It happened every time. And every time deep to Dagg, Savea or Jane. It was like shaking up a 1.25l coke and then partially untwisting the top. Fzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt.

by fa0019 Mon 17 Sep 2012, 3:09 pm

seems like an age since I've been on but anyhow....

Well if they made their kicks they would have won the game, NZ made theirs and that was the difference. SA dominated possession, something NZ should worry about given they were at home and SA missed players such as Spies, Burger, Etzebeth and Bismarck in the pack.

ANyhow, thats what happens when you employ a coach who's favourite player of all time is Derrick Hougaard.

Skill is there, players are there.... but if your main attacking tactic is to kick up and unders to a very secure 15 like Dagg, you don't kick accurately and your chasers aren't up to speed then its a useless play.

Wins in NZ are very very rare... die bokke played ok in patches and when your kicker misses 75% of his kicks against the top teams in the world, no matter who you play or where you play, victory is unlikely.

by emack2 Tue 18 Sep 2012, 4:06 am

The Title is wrong for a start SA have players able to play any game plan the coach chooses.Teams winning in NZ are very rare only about 33 matches since 1903.OZ 14,Boks13,France 4,England 2, AB v BOK has been THE defacto world Championship since1921.[with brief intervening periods]In that Stadium Goalkicking was a lottery even for the AB`s.Missing Spies what a joke?Kankowski or Alberts would be my choice at 8,The ABs were excellent at Lineout/Scrum.TheBreakdown was a lottery the ref did`nt let it develop much,the Scrums ditto.McCaw was the best man on the park AGAIN,AB`s were behind for one minute in the game and won by 10 they also missed goals too.
At least 3 of the attempts by Boks were lets have a go,none were gimmes in the whole match.In my opinion the ABs beleived the hype mentally that the Boks had no chance and nearly got burned.Don`t right off that AllBlack pack once the new boys are settled in it will be formidable too.You have the the players to play another game plan but willyou? RWC `s won by that style of rugby only 1987 was won by an expansive game.The rest forward s.grind em down,kick the goals not just by the Boks but every one.I expect to lose to the Boks in SA and win in NZ indeed you have only won 3 in NZ in the Professional era 1998,2008,2009,plus one on neutral territory.

by Sponsored content

Boks have no skill.

Boks have no skill.

Re: Boks have no skill.

Re: Boks have no skill.

Re: Boks have no skill.

Re: Boks have no skill.

Re: Boks have no skill.

Re: Boks have no skill.

Re: Boks have no skill.

Re: Boks have no skill.

Re: Boks have no skill.

Re: Boks have no skill.

Re: Boks have no skill.

Re: Boks have no skill.

Re: Boks have no skill.