RC 2013 Wrap Up

This year's Rugby Championship saw NZ and SA battle it out for tournament honours. I remember being on summer holiday when this tournament began so finishing in October gives me the impression this tournament took an age to complete. Perhaps living this tournament through the winter months makes it seem shorter.

This RC saw the introduction of the new scrum laws. My overall thoughts on this change are positive as I feel it rewards the team who has a powerful scrum. Often the best place to attack is when the opposition has the feed because when the hooker has to strike at the ball, it's much more difficult to hold the scrum steady and then put a big shove in.

We also saw the best and probably the worst of the refs on display. Rugby must be a nightmare to adjudicate for a ref but Owens showed that if you communicate well with the players and the officials, you put yourself in the best possible situation to be consistent in what you do. Often the trouble comes when a ref or touch judge decides on his own what the best course of action is. Making calls should always be a collaborative effort rather than a one man effort. Involve the officials at your disposal and consult them on what you feel and then listen to what they have to say. We don't want time taken away from the game but nor do we want the game to be decided by a mistake. SA were justifiably upset with the Poite decision, for example, but I as a NZ fan was upset as well that the decision made it difficult to extract something meaningful out of the contest. The result was put in doubt as the game was nicely poised. The rugby deserved to have an outright winner that day as opposed to a doubtful one: whoever that might have been.

Here is my assessment of the teams on display.

Argentina: We must not flatter their overall performance. The Australia loss at home was perhaps their biggest shock defeat but given the context of their overall tournament it wasn't their most disappointing. Not even their abject defeat away against South Africa. It's the games to me where the scoreline was a lot closer. Last year they had a draw against South Africa at home. This year they were in the lead against NZ after half time and were within touch of South Africa as well. But like last year they faded in the last quarter. In Australia they came the closest to winning. They didn't. We shouldn't congratulate them for pushing these teams close. That'd be patronising them. They aren't there to make up the numbers. They are capable of winning. But they need to realise you can physically dominate some teams in the set piece but you need to do more than that if you want to consistently beat the top teams. I feel like this year they moved away from their offloading game they tried to implement last year. They thought they could put all their eggs into the set piece. Sure they dominated the likes of NZ at key times but they weren't able to score enough points when they needed to. What's the point of being dominant in an area when you can't take advantage on the scoreboard? It's like getting undressed in front of a beautiful woman, she returning the favour and offering you a winning smile and then turning off the light and falling asleep? What's the point?

I think Sanchez was a good find and he is a wonderful place kicker. My concern is that does he offer much more? I can't help but feel if he were more like the Italian flyhalf Orquera, who can be more of a running threat, they would be better served. What happened to the previous fly half? In many ways I feel he is similar to the dilemma Australia faces with LLF. He offers goal kicking reliability but how much does he give up on attack?

The Argentine forwards are extremely strong but I don't think their fitness is up to it. They seem to thrive better in damp, wet conditions because the opposing teams can't run as much and that makes the field seem a lot narrower. But when the game opens up, they fall off key tackles and the game moves away from them.

Perhaps the psychological barrier of not winning a game is hurting them. They must believe that they are capable of winning but they must also play to win a game. Too often they are trying to play to negate the opposition rather than concentrating on how they can make vital scores. My comments may seem harsh but I don't think they should look back on these performances with much satisfaction. They lost all their games. They must analyse why and seek to make changes to rectify that.

Australia: One last performance and we were shown what an attacking threat the likes of Folau can be. The scrum woes seemed to vanish and the confidence seemed to come back. Is it too little, too late? I'm afraid so. Ewen McKenzie will be relieved that the away win was a lot more convincing their home win but 4 other losses where they were comprehensively outplayed and looked a former shadow of themselves cannot take away from that. They had key injuries but nowhere near as many as last year. Beale, Pocock, Timani, Higganbotham seem more than a few but last year was much worse and somehow they came second. This year a very distant third. Perhaps it's not a coincidence that their best performance didn't have JOC in the team. You can say what you like about him as a player but as a professional rugby player he's about as useful as a half time comment from a player just about to head off to the shed.

Balance to me is the problem for Australia this year. Genia was off possibly because the backrow balance was off and the front five looked equally ineffective. LLF is a great goalkicker but a centre combination of AAC and LLF doesn't seem much better than the Faiaanga McAbe days. Seeing the back of Barnes was a good thing as he could give postdoctorate classes to Morne Steyn in aimless kicking but the whole balance of the Wallaby backline needs an adjustment. Much like the forward pack.

I think not bringing Foley into the team was a mistake. Cooper can be a threat against some teams but he is a liability against others. Toomua is solid in the sense of a frozen fishstick. Not very appealing. Foley to me offers a balance between kicking and running. Similarly Hooper in the forwards catches the eye like Cooper for some things. He gets the turnovers but I'm not convinced about his overall workrate. Pocock has a more all-round game and that sadly isn't saying much as he could increase his work rate in other areas as well.

South Africa: It must be said that South Africa have stepped up. They have improved in their consistency and won all their games against Australia and Argentina, which included their first ever victory in Brisbane. When it came to the NZ games I think they tried two contrasting styles. In Eden Park they went for the physical approach and while they looked good in the set piece and rolling maul and despite the number of NZ players going down injured or battered, I don't think they were winning the physical exchanges or at least they weren't gaining dominance in this area. They were doing better at disrupting us at the breakdown but in terms of moving the ball up, I think the NZ defensive line held. In SA it was the opposite tactic of taking the attacking game to NZ. It paid dividends as they found space out wide and their backrow looked meancing running with the ball in hand but it had a toll on their fringe defence. They fell off tackles where before they wouldn't. They looked more like the travelling team playing at that pace. What's clear is that there is a happy medium SA needs to find between these two styles where they are going to be at their optimum. Solid defence, solid set piece and choosing the right moments to keep ball in hand and run at the defence.

JDV and Meyer have won a lot of support for their calmness and good sportsmanship. No black armbands for justice. JDV is a bit like Habana finding the form that once eluded him. They are key senior men for SA and I wonder how many years they have left in them. There is a raft of young players like Etzebeth who are holding the torch for the younger players coming through and SA seems to be in good hands. There are some minor adjustments they need to make though in order to reach their optimum level. A better lock to partner Eztebeth, a better attacking fullback and flyhalf and you're well on your way.

New Zealand: Two unbeaten RCs is a phenomenal achievement. They haven't been dominant though. Their lineout was wobbly in the first few games coming right against SA in the last game. Their scrum was exposed at key times and they looked a bit lifeless and rushed on attack for long passages. Fortunately, they never lost their knack of scoring at opportune moments. Ben Smith took over the attacking guru and points machine that was Dagg last year. Kieran Read was the shineout forward and a the loss of Carter and McCaw didn't cause panic in the ranks. There are some young players coming through like Barrett, Retallick, Savea, Smith who are fast becoming an integral part of the team. Luatua had a good year and all the players seemed to have a positive impact. I still think there is a lot of room for improvement but you cannot fault their consistency and their ability to turn it on when they need to.

What do you think of this year's RC. Fairly average overall with a couple of standout performances. A representation of the 4 teams fighting it?

good breakdown Kia.

From a bok perspective it showed we have a lot of potential but a long way to go.our basics are letting us down... Our tackling is poor, we drop too many tackles, the technique is poor, high and we have been bounced a number of times. Our lineout was good until the last test when NZ put a lot of pressure on it. I think England, France and Wales with a good performance can still beat the boks from a northern hemisphere perspective. Engelbrecht is a bit of a luxury defensively so against a tuilagi, a fofana the boks are still vulnerable in the middle.

AUS - higginbottom and pocock are badly needed back. Without a full strength side they are very average... A good performance vs. ARG doesn't take that away... I still think the AIs schedule is very tough for them... 5 matches, all bar 1 is a potential banana skin.

NZ - where are the weaknesses? nonu is no longer a one trick pony, dagg is mr perfect, never puts a foot wrong. pack is going well.

Often teams suffer when their best are injured... Take out mccaw, 2 years ago, disaster, now... The others have picked up. Nt a problem,
Carter, cruden looks sharper and Barrett is a big stage player... Always seems to catch headlines.... Big boot, 3/4 pace and a nice step.

To beat this side any team will need a nice dose of luck, kick well and if you don't get at least parity upfront and at the set piece then say goodbye.
Had the boks just played for the win I think they would have had a better chance of winning the game, keeping 
it tight but when you open the door vs NZ it's a suicide mission, death or glory with death being more likely.

I think it will be a big ask to keep this going, teams will catch up, set a marker and people will have something to aim for. Doesn't mean they won get worse but I expect SA and England to get better in the next 2 years... the question is will they be able to bridge the gap??

NZ will need to solidify the scrum. I heard Dane Coles saying in the media that feeding the scrum straight was unfair because hooking the ball was impossible. That's just a sign of whats been wrong in the front row for too long, and I feel the new emphasis on scrummaging forwards has swung the balance of the game away from NZs high tempo plan. We need to evolve with that.

What can you say about SA? Most teams would've stuck to their guns and played out for a grinding home win and whinged about the Poite call until next year. But no, they went for it and showed that they have talent and ball handling skills to match most. 

I worry a little about NZ in the EOYT because if the NH can do anything, it's scrum. We generally see a messier break down and slower ball for whatever reason. This is a challenge that needs to be met with better tactics than last year. We will need more men at the breakdown and a calmer approach to points accumulation. 

We need to see what effect the self imposed selection rules will have on SA but they seem to be heading in the right direction. Let's hope they don't get turned around again.

Australia - well I've given up predicting what they're gonna do. One week they look like the wheels are about to come off and the next their flat attack hits full pace and the scrum backs up Argentina.

England won't get close to NZ this year. It's just in the stars, and their two key men from 2012 are injured and out of form. But I wonder about a chance for some other northern sides who we might've taken our eye off.

think we're being harsh on the expectations of argie. We need to remember this comp is 1,2, 3-or 4, and 10.

Would all of those in between 4 and 10 have done as well- some yeas- others no. I said before the entire tournament started that argie would struggle to get a win in this tourny- the first draw blew that thinking out quickly but nonetheless here they are- winless. Not following the entry to the RC up with at least one sxv side in the original thinking after 2007 was poor vision.

SA are the big movers afer 20 years of limited game. With probably 5 backs worth a mention in the pro era they will now start to have more with this more open game. You simply cannot expect to be number one with an imbalance of forward vs backs ability. Now the challenge is to find a better 10, 15, sort the defence and fitness and have a tight 5 with more skills in the pass, tackle area. These flaws were all highlighted for Meyer last weekend'

Its nice to say Argentina needs to start competing, but heres the thing: Sanzar play in the S15 every year, and every year, the competition gets faster and faster - S15 gets the first taste of any new rules, as well. Argentina, in comparison, are a collection of guys playing mainly in the more measured NH, they simply cant live with the pace. Whether they get a team in Super Rugby, or get more players to play in Super Rugby, they need to get involved. Ruan Pienaar was spoken of as possibly being the player of the year in Europe, but he probably couldnt justify a spot at 9 in any of the local franchises at the mo'.

Even before Argentina players went to Europe they were of lesser quality. Remember that du preez plays in japan that's even worse then Europe. It's not the style of play, it's the quality of the players.

Without du preez or pienaar SA would have been in trouble. They both play abroad.

When you're saying pienaar was player of huge year I think you're thinking of 2012 not 2013. It's a big diff and from the HC his performances weren't as strong.

FA, the reason we keep using Fourie du Preez and Pienaar is because there are no other experienced scrum halves a trick Meyer keeps on missing.

I sincerely hope he picks youngsters for November.

Hes also going to be asking more of his tight 5 Biltong. The ante on that has just gone up pn that one. The beauty of this game is that it taught us so much about where SA can improve both as individuals and as a team. and for all their defensve, fitness and apparent skill deficiencies coming from the match, they were awesome. Imagine when those levels all lift across the board. If I were Meyer I would be so excited about the future now- though I dont think its possible to get more excited than he is in the box...fascinating to watch...

du Preez has been the premier 9 in rugby for the best part of a decade, and he played S15 in all its guises until 2011, so he learnt a lot in Super rugby.

Pienaar wasnt too hot in 2012 either tbh.

back to back RWC semi-finals suggests Argentina are decent enough quality

Taylorman wrote:Hes also going to be asking more of his tight 5 Biltong. The ante on that has just gone up pn that one. The beauty of this game is that it taught us so much about where SA can improve both as individuals and as a team. and for all their defensve, fitness and apparent skill deficiencies coming from the match, they were awesome. Imagine when those levels all lift across the board. If I were Meyer I would be so excited about the future now- though I dont think its possible to get more excited than he is in the box...fascinating to watch...

Well that is why this weekend's game was an absolute necessity.

We needed to have the guts to go all out to assess all possible weaknesses and strengths.

If we played a conservative game this weekend we would have been none the wiser.

Now Meyer can extrapolate data from that match, pull apart every player's performance in a high octane match and decide who fits and who doesn't.

Then once he has his key indicators can set out a plan of action to achieve his goals.

Argentina definitely should get involved in the Super comp. They need to transfer their players from the NH season. But that shouldn't be used to disguise the fact that they could've won games in the RC already and haven't closed out games. I'm really glad they're in the comp but they shouldn't settle for five years of losing their games to adjust their players. They should be angry with themselves for losing games that were within their reach.

I really don't think Argentina will win a game until their players are playing SR. It's not just the skill levels and fitness but the mindset that's so different.

Look at how the T14 is played; it's always started through the forwards, every game is an arm wrestle to start with and only opens up once one team has been bludgeoned into submission. Argentina are trying to take a similar approach Internationally and it just won't work.

They need to play SR, get used to running the ball more often and dealing with the problems that causes and get used to facing the AB's and SA internationals more often for their clubs.


Also as a reference when France joined the then 4nations it took them 10 years to win a match! Likewise Italy beat Scotland in their first ever game of the 6N's (taken by surprise?) but only beat France for the first time in 2011 and still haven't beaten England.

I agree Yappy, but I think the other issue that might be more pertinent is the fact that only for the Rugby Championship to they put together their best players.

If they want to progress they need to have their best players in the squad for every test they play in a calendar year.

How does one build continuity without this?

The problem is the pace of the Rugby Championship catches them out, in the first game they weren't ready for it and got smashed, they then became more adept to handle the pace, but then by the time they met Australia this last weekend you could see their hearts weren't in it.

They need a professional domestic league, access to the SR tournament and their players coordinated with the SH. That is clear and that will take time to get those changes. I don't subscribe to the theory though that they shouldn't be expected to win any games until those things occur. They're better than that and have won games before despite their handicaps.

If you go into a tournament thinking you're not expected to win, surprise surprise this is what happens. So far it's possible to see a pattern. A spanking away to SA to an improved performance at home. Staying in touch for part of the game against NZ and thinking they will destroy Oz in the set piece and this not eventuating. The first away game against Oz was an exception but they should be bitterly disappointed they didn't close out that game as they were in a position to do so. Don't worry no one expects you to win is more of an insult to me than criticizing a team not for winning. At least with respect to this side.

A few points THE SCRUM,for to long Props have been picked for running about NOT there
key roles in Scrum/Lineout.Scrum Halves now have to feed straight and QUICKLY but
under current IRB directives. Have to wait for REf to call feed,the second shove means
that is now very difficult to feed.The IRB needs to do one of two things allow the feed as
soon as the Scrum is set or ban the second shove.ALL Scrums have had problems even
Argentina who have the best Scrum in the world under new laws on feeding.
Argentina like France/Italy need time to bed in and a Super based squad would certainly
help.BEFORE writing them off in there first year they drew with the Boks,and this suffered
2 one point defeats.The Boks if they continue to pick NH based Players must expect them
to be happier with the slower NH paced game.NOT because they are less skilful or less fit
simply because it is how they will normally play the game.Also a lot of the 3/4Ns is how you
cope with injuries the AllBlacks lost for much of the season.Messam.McCaw,Carter,Cory Jane,
Romano,all first choice players 2012,and also others during the season.Other players have
stepped up the Boks also have replaced many injured or veteran players.If they want to
move to a more fluid game in my opinion they will need to pick from SH based players.
Purely because they play regularly at a faster paced S15 style game.
Australia`s set piece at full strength is very under rated,a New Coach,many injured players
to come back.A more settled game plan by 2015 they will be leading RWC contenders and
up for it in 2014.
SA will be very much there or there abouts there progress is obvious to any intelligent
observer and will continue.SA/AUS RWC Final seems likely to me.
Finally NZ with Carter ,Conrad Smith on sabbaticals,Nonu too or France bound new mid
field.Crudon established,Barrett maybe even super ceding him,Ben Smith at 13,12 is a problem.Players like Tom Taylor or Ryan Crotty are competent maybe others coming thru.
SBW ?who knows a very clever man for himself,Jumps contracts,decides he wants to
play RWC.Where does he go Crusaders the most likely route one for an AB place then
the Chiefs as the coming team.Then back to league for cash and a place as NZ defend
there RWC League title.Back to Union for 2014?in an attempt at a second RWC and the
Olympics 7`s squad 2016.
He maybe an effacing man,and loyal to his team when playing for them BUT being an
All Black is about loyalty and continuity and that cuts both ways.As Kaino and SBW ma
well find out.

Team of the RC from the Sydney Morning Herald.

http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/the-chosen-ones-rugby-championships-first-xv-20131010-2va2m.html

Team of the Rugby Championship
1. Tony Woodcock (New Zealand)
2. Bismarck du Plessis (South Africa)
3. Juan Figallo (Argentina)
4. Eben Etzebeth (South Africa)
5. Brodie Retallick (New Zealand)
6. Liam Messam (New Zealand)
7. Richie McCaw (New Zealand)
8. Kieran Read (New Zealand)
9. Aaron Smith (New Zealand)
10. Morne Steyn (South Africa)
11. Julian Savea (New Zealand)
12. Jean de Villiers (South Africa)
13. Conrad Smith (New Zealand)
14. Ben Smith (New Zealand)
15. Israel Dagg (New Zealand)

Show how much Aussies don't know about rugby in general.

Steyn? Seriously? And what exactly did Bismark do? Copped a red card and then was yanked early at Ellis Park after being utterly ineffectual.

Nonsense.

Hmmm, and McCaw played exactly how many games?

He was also pretty quiet at Ellispark.

Hard to argue with a lot of that team. Don't think the NZ front row deserves any place. I think Messam stepped up with Luatua giving a strong account of himself and Cane was a big improver but a place in team of the year is debatable. McCaw is playing a different role but I think his leadership got him in the team as opposed to his playing exploits. SA deserve a back row spot.

Steyn is like Messam for me. A big improve this year but unlike JDV questionable of a place. Sanchez is a great goal kicker but limited elsewhere. Australia's 10s were disappointing and Cruden was overshadowed by Barrett who didn't play enough so really I think his spot can be argued.

Wait a minute, McCaw was the top tackler with 15 tackles and the top player for arrivals to the breakdown, being in the first three players on 34 occasions. Didn't he also pop that pass to Savea for Read's last try which was brilliant.

He certainly contrasts with Hooper who catches the eye for some things but looks short on work in other areas. Read is pilfering more ball but he is allowed that with more the 6 work of McCaw. That McCaw was able to survive a full game after injury at that pace is testament to his heart. We expect that from him though I know we shouldn't. Still think we could squeeze in one of the Sa backrow players as they added another dimension to their okay and deserve recognition.

The one man not mentioned and was THE best Lock on show Sam Whitelock does`nt
get a mention.Won all his own Lineout ball and did all the graft when others were just
running around Etzebeth was good Whitelock GREAT.

Whitelock comes up against Etzebeth though Alan who was immense in other games. If he wore the 5 shirt he'd be a clear choice. You have to recognize what Eztebeth did throughout the tournament. We're lucky to have Whitelock but there's no shame in saying Etzebeth had a great tournament. McCaw is similar but at the end of the day the team is what counts. This is all just a bit of lighthearted fluffy dalliance well after the act.

As a neutral, I really enjoyed the RC this year. Plenty of good rugby, some drama and at Ellis park one of the better games I've seen for a while. For me, Read was the stand out player of the tournament but I was also impressd by de Villiers as a captain and his form was excellent. I think it will take a long time for Argentina to start winning (much like it did with Italy in the 6N's) and they could easily regress.

Cant say id have steyn in there. Our guys would get frusrated. he had poor matches at eden park and ellis where he could have been better.

Whitelock as the senior lock now i think we take for granted. Retalik stepped up for this series so possibly in for that reason.

Who else Tman? Cruden, Barrett and Carter didn't get much game time. Giving it to Barrett is like giving an Oscar to Judi Dench for Shakespeare in Love. Blink and you missed her performance!