I cant understand that their is no mention about Malherbe and Kitschoff being good enough for the springboks, strauss is also in the team on borrowed time cause bismark is almost back to his best and when liebenberg recovers i dont see how strauss could make the springbok sqaud
dont get me wrong i think bismarck is a awesome player but strauss is the best bok hooker i have ever seen. bissie seems to play his best rugby as an impact player so i think coming off the bench is better for him. strauss is so calm under pressure and everything he does is really accurate he brings so much more to the table it kind of rounds off a very hard edge in the pack. i think i said it before but ill say again anyway strauss is alot like keith woods to me and he was the best hooker of the pro era. not bad to have both on the squad though but i dont think meyer will drop strauss.
The bok props are very poor scrummagers and schooling kruger is not saying much at all. coenie and kits have potential but again its outside the scrum. thats a big prolem. weak scrums cost you guys two tests last year in the championship. aussies will expose your fattys again :)
Maybe he should change his name from Ihi to Ahaaahahahaaaa!!!
Moz there are no dominating looseheads or tightheads in any of the teams. Props suffer ups and downs and much of that has nothing to do with the individual and plenty to do with the scrum as a whole, the refs interpretation which is so often wrong.
Our young prop prospects are better than what I have seen with other countries. Adam Jones did a good job at 3 for the Lions but has hardly been known as a dominating tighthead for Wales over the years.
Franks has been good for the AB's at 3, but even he has struggled at times. They dont have a loosehead worth anything. Oz props are pretty average. I rate Corbeserio at loosehead for England, but thats where it ends.
There are no dominating props out there - the nature of the game and the laws of the scrum and their different interpretations have negated dominating props.........much like we see centres struggling to impose themselves at test level given the nature of the modern game, we see the same with props.
Hell you get no more a physical imposing figure than Etzebeth, but modern players are up to the task of containing physical brutes like him - he is an advantage in a side, but hardly has it his own way.
Our props are shit. One reason is the that we use one to fill a goverment quota and the other to give us more mobility. Look at the once might Blue Bulls pack. The once power of SA rugby and our scrum. Being outscrummed by everyone.
@SAffex. November last year did the English dominate the AB pack.
If a scrum becomes the shambles that Australian became in the 3rd test, the Lions could knock the ball on purpose and just use the scrums the milk penalties on opposition ball.
@Polyboy
TRC 2012
New Zealand’s approach to, and success in, open play was enhanced by a successful set piece:
· The scrum proved to be an effective possession source of tries
· Two tight heads were won – the other three teams won none
· More lineout steals were won than any other team
· Fewer lineout steals were conceded than any other team
South Africa and Argentina did not score a single try from scrum possession
50% of tries originated from lineout possession
South Africa had the least successful kick at goal rate
The team with the least possession won the majority of matches
South Africa failed to recover a single restart, losing all 27 short restarts. The other three teams
recovered total of 29
New Zealand contested more lineouts than any other team, and won the most steals
· Penalties at the scrum went 5:1 in favour of the team putting in the ball. Scrum free kicks were 1:1
· New Zealand tapped only three penalties/free kicks in six matches. The other three teams tapped a
total of 25
Of the seven Championship tries scored from scrum possession, New Zealand scored five
Tri NAtions 2009
SOUTH AFRICA
Over recent years, the South African senior team has developed a clearly identified but
highly effective and successful playing strategy. It involves, in broad terms, exerting
territorial pressure on its opponents through tactical kicking combined with intense
physical pressure while minimising risk and effectively converting opponents errors into
points - Possession is not a priority.
This means that an analysis of South Africa’s matches invariably fall into a clearly
identifiable profile
¨ they obtain less possession than their opponents.
¨ as a result, they make fewer rucks
¨ and make fewer passes than their opponents
¨ but make more kicks because of the importance attached to territorial advantage
This approach is then enhanced by a highly competent scrum and a hugely successful
lineout.
Their lineout figures were hugely impressive
¨
their success rate was 88% compared with 78% and 74% for the other 2 countries
they had a success rate of 38% on their opposition throw – an exceptionally high figure that contrasted with the 10% and 15% of their opponents
their lineout was stolen only 6 times compared with Australia’s 16 and New Zealand’s 14
¨ they stole their opponents lineout 24 times. Australia and New Zealand managed just 6 each.
¨
this superiority was recognised by the other two teams who only challenged the South Africa lineout on 44% of occasions while Australia’s was challenged on 65% of
occasions and New Zealand’s on 58%. conversely,
South Africa challenged their opponent’s lineout on 64% of occasions compared with Australia’s and New Zealand’s 49% and 56% respectively
The ability to dominate the lineout was one of the core elements of a playing formula that
is currently producing success for South Africa. What is now going to be of interest is to
see how successful South Africa will be in maintaining such an approach, how effective
other teams will be in challenging such an approach and whether certain teams will look
to emulating the South African strategy in their search for success.
The other area of interest lies in seeing whether the shape of the game will change. Will
the constricted pattern of play evinced in Tri Nations 2007 and 2009, for example, be
maintained or will the organic nature of the game produce a platform upon which tries and
not penalty goals become the most important imperative as experienced in the Tri Nations
ELV experiment of 2008.
So NZ aew just doing what SA did so well. That is having a solid set piece to attack from.
As you can see our scrum and line outs were pathetic and hence the reason we did so badly. Nothing special
I was going to say that a dominant scrum does not fall squarely on the front row's shoulders. The tight five are all responsible for this ... with support from the back three.
Bakkies was an incredibly strong scrummager while Victor struggled a bit.
During their era we hardly ever got a good right shoulder in.
The Argentinian scrum dominated for many a year because of everyone partaking.
Bottom line is that we win or loose up front and our set piece needs some serious attention. It's an awesome attackng platform and why we blow hot and cold here is beyond me.
I am still hoping that Pieter De Villiers as an ex french prop will improve Bok scrumming trechnique. France scrum well especially when they pick a decent sized pack.
We have great front row resources and young guys coming of age. We should be able next year to field a formidable pysical AND mobile pack. No wotrries about forwards.
As to hookers start with Bissie in certain conditions and Strauss in other. I am glad Nongaklong mentions Tiaan. A very good all round package of power, physicality and mobility. These three are the top hookers we have.
Spoony some interesting info there. Where do you get that stuff?
Agree, we have tended to scrum below our potential due to poor technique. Bit like our backline performance.
