There are two issues raised here – the most important is the issue of scrumming. After watching the game a second time it was clear that our scrumming was defective – it was even worse when the props were replaced in the second half and that remains a fact.
So why does the Bulls often have scrumming problems and the Lions are better at it? Why does the Stormers have a scrumming problem at present as well. The answer is simple – the role of the hookers. Hookers are essential in scrumming – they must balance the scrumming effort and must contribute as much to scrumming as he props do. Now lets go back to 2013 and look at the Cheetahs scrumming – it was poor. So where is the scrumming problem originating? The answer is clear – whenever Strauss is at hooker the scumming of any team he represented was poor. The scrumming of the Stormers this year was badly affected by the fact that their hookers are not physically up to standard.
The basic problem relates to the issue of the second shove in scrums as well – that is after the hooker has hooked the ball and when he is supposed to contribute to prevention of the second shove – it just does not happen with Strauss in the team.
The scrumming problem will never be fixed while Strauss is the hooker. The Lions seems never to have serious scrumming problems while Marx is the hooker –or when Van der Merwe replaces him. I think that the problem will never be solved as long as Strauss is the hooker. If he made a reasonable contribution on plays outside of scrumming – then he could be retained – but he does not.
The second problem relates to the loosie situation. In both tests it was clear that our loosies were sub-standard. The real problem is they a pace-deficient and cannot keep up with the pace of the game. As a result the situation was improved 100% after both Vermeulen and Kolisi was replaced on Saturday. Both misfire badly in both tests and the matter was worsened because Louw misfired as well.
I think that the injury to Vermeulen last year was a major contributor to his decline. He was not really up to standard in the WC last year and in all the games he played for Toulon this year he was sub-standard as well. I cannot see him playing himself back into form in the Springbok jersey and at present he remains a reputation as against a performing player. Then there are the other two loosies. In both tests Louw and Kolisi made a few ineffective ball caries and their role in defense was sub-standard while ball protection and recovery were defective. Kolisi for most of the Super season was the bench loosie for the Stormers – if he is not good enough to start for the Stormers – what makes him good enough for the Springboks? Then there is the issue of Louw – he played average games for Bath in the slow NH conditions – but was way out of capacity in the faster game required in SH conditions.
The major problem where all three loosies failed badly was in following the ball and in ball protection and recovery – they arrive at breakdown points after the Tight 5 players. Not one of the three played any role whatsoever in that crucial function.
Possible solutions
The first problem to be solved is the hooker problem – not the so-called prop situation. It won’t happen in the present series – but I would replace the hookers – all three – in the RC series with Malcolm Marx, Akker van der Merwe and Edgar Marutlulle.
When it comes to the loosies – I would definitely put Whiteley at 8 and Kriel at 6 – but that leaves a problem insofar as the crucial no 7 position is concerned. Some members insist that Du Toit must be moved from lock to no 7 – but that leaves question marks as well. Du Toit was by some distance the best performing lock in the past two tests. Will it not be better to look at a real loosie and not a lock replacement? In the past slow 7’s never really was a value usage – they had the same problems as Kolisi had in the past two tests – low tackle counts (ie substandard defense) and deficie nt ball protection and recovery. Du Toit may be a different proposition – he has pace and ball sense and arrive at breakdown points long before any of the present loosies. Other options mentioned are all pace–deficient and sub-standard readers of the game. Du Toit may be an option – but I would prefer to see a real loosie to take on the no 7 position and would favour Arno Botha or Labuchagne as the no 7 loosie and place the other one on the bench.
That would mean that we have four pacy players amongst the forwards – with four slower physically strong players in the Tight 5 – an excellent formulae for implementation of a comprehensive game plan. I believe it would be necessary to back up the Tight 5 lock situation by looking at Jacques du Plessis, Paul Willemse, Snyman or Jenkins. From what I have seen thus far tis year I think Jenkins is the best option as the bench player for the Springboks.
