36% is high for kick retention...gain in field position plus the resulting front foot advantage in broken play can't be underestimated...

It’s a stupid tactic with a low success rate, as shown by the stats above ( if they are correct ). 

Our box kicking tactic really reaps little reward. 

Ball retention 36%….ball loss 64%. Territory gain probably 20 metres the 36% of the time you retain possession. So the outcomes are 64% you cede possession but gain 20 metres…36% you retain possession and gain 20 metres.

Kick the ball 50 metres down field towards the touchline…64% of the time it’s returned 30 metres to touch  and you get the ball back, 36% of the time it’s run back 20 metres and the opponents retain possession. So the outcomes are 64% of the time you gain 20 metres and retain possession. 34% of the time you cede possession but gain 30 metres.

The deep kick to open space is likely to gain more metres, retain more possession and create less chance of the dangerous  run backs we saw cost the Bargies tries.

Kick deep if you are inside your 10 meter line. Outside that zone use phase play or grubber kicks.The only time box kicks are justified is where there is systematic weakness in high ball reception. 

And counter intuitively when you are contained at the 22 and can land it within a few metres of the try line..theoretically, if these numbers are right….giving you a 34% chance of a try. To me this is an under utilized tactic, particularly under advantage.

Most risky are the cross field contested box kicks around half way, which have worked to some extent probably because they are a new surprise tactic. But by now, any  team that’s not anticipating that tactic from players like Libbok deserves to lose.

Pakie

Under Meyer and Morne as flyhalf  the kick retention was  0%,   36% is a amssiv impromen onn that,     Sacha would b ack soon and that will improve the situation to 70%..  No more aimless and poor kicking will cause that imprvemnt./

Listen dimness -  the AB  rugby comentaors frequently said Sten's kicks are BS because hey were aimless and inaccurate,   Crte made as many kicks as Steyn did but his kicks were accurate and part of the attack plan of he AB's.    frang=kl speakng  rather believe  the ommentaors .tahn you in tht regard/   Mybe you would remember the est in pe gins england when the crowd starte booing Steyn for shit kicking as ell.

Steyn also  missed penalty line-kicks and  as the resut f is shot performanace  of hatand his ackle reord as 15 of hich he ssd 8tackles caused he S pringbks to lse the 2014 ts in Perth.   Tha sucha dif=gusing perormanc that Meyer encver afte that selec hima saring flyhalf for he Springboks - bu had him in he 2015 RWC  series and used him in toal fo 15 inutes off he bech in he whole ournament.   

Coetee - even more idiotic a  coach - played two startingmatches against the A B's were he scores were 57,-15 and 57-0  respectiely.

No wonder  bot Meyer and Coetzee were a ftrwards fired by teir clubs becaus hey wee esroinghteams they were supposed o be coaching in France and Japan respecyively, \

Alberts and Seyn was simaultaneousl fred by stade Francais and they jie Meyer  on the same plane coming backk to SA.   

I do not sprea baselss nonsenc - I leave that ntirely to you and  Mozart,   

What do Morne Steyn and Meyer and Coetzee have to do with ball retention from kicks in 2024 rugby?

Everything mozar and you are  using the presen situation toa ttack Erasmus on issues and I poined  y o u condu ct whn Meyer was coach an Mrne a t fl yhalf - neve a word crticism  of he BS  e apst in eivence on your and Mozart part.   

Oh yeah, I forgot this post was an attack on Erasmus. By bringing up a stat that says Manie Libbok had the best kick retention out of all kickers I am clearly attacking the coach. By further pointing out that the Boks had the best kick retention out of all sides in the RC I am also attacking Rassie. That must also be why I brought up Argentina as an example of the consequences of failure. To show up Rassie.

Man, suddenly I am impressed by my own cunning. Slipping all these chart topping stats in to do a number on the coach.

Nice post and good points raised by Moz and Draad.

I'd only add that the opposition also have a role to play in the coach deciding how much kicking he wants his team to do.

Looking at the likes of Fassi, Sacha, Arendse...I'd think twice about always returning Bok kicks with same.

Fassi setting up Arendse for that try on the weekend is the type of punishment that can come from nowhere if you're execution in kicking to the Boks is off.

It worked spectacularly for us against France - two tries where the French failed to get anyone to cover the space behind where the ball is coming down and we could just run into open space after getting the bounce - bang, two tries. That is rare, but might have been a weakness that the coaching staff identified - as with their motivation for calling a scrum off the mark, it seems they identified the French forwards not being particular to moving around the park all that much.

So often though this tactic seems to just be wasted possession for little gain. In the second test against Ireland this year we were outclassed in the air yet persisted with the kicking tactic and it probably cost us the game in the end. 

I mean, even the best case here of 39 out of 168 kicks recovered is a hell of a lot of possession for any side to hand to the opposition.

I do not like a kicking game - but whn I saw what Sacha is capable of I believe he would b dangeour wwhen kicking balls,   I do believe aimless kicking is what ahppened in the paast - but remains a proble m now as well.    Although the  Springbos kicked less now than they did ten yeas ago.   

For once I agree with you, Mike.

The likes of Sacha, Fassi, Arendse...you don't wanna be kicking those guys.