Bok performances no surprise

Looking at the performances of some of the starting line-up Boks during the S18 are we still so surprised at barely beating the Irish? Starting with Strauss. Poor all season and has shown no signs of being even an average leader. Eben. Poor for my money also, and fails to be the game breaking forward that he is touted as being. Slow to breakdowns and never off loads. Gets stripped too often and makes too few tackles for a guy of his age and ability. Beast. Not been good this season either and aside from having a lot of heart there is not much more left in him. Gets to some rucks though. Malherbe. Need I say anything about him. Poor scrums, too many penalties and a hardly ever gets to a ruck. Duane and Louw are both better than their performances would have suggested. PSDT continues to impress and looks like he actually wants to play which is more than can be said for any of the above. Unless the above changes the Boks will continue to get slow ball and the back line will continue to be labeled as toothless. The lumbering performances by the above forwards are the main reason the Irish tests were as close as they were. It's no surprise that the Lions have seen all the other SA teams as well as two NZ teams off this year. They circulate the ball quickly and that is the catalyst for their attacks. Unless the Bok forwards can provide the same they will be just as unsuccessful as the Sharks, Stormers and Bulls. Again. Tell me if I'm crazy but his is how I see it. Getting to rucks is something in your power. Nothing but you can stop you getting there. Why is it that the Lions are able to perform so much better in this area than any other SA team? I am almost certain that if one were to take the time from tackle to recycle in Lions games this year and lean that average against the same stat in the Irish games, you'd probably find that Boks take twice as long to do the same. Is this becsuse we have Strauss instead of Marx, Beast and Malherbe instead of Reds, Smith, Eben instead of Mostert etc etc. My feeling is that we fall for the same BS that Meyer sold us. New team, new plans and building for the future. The same old story to hide poor selections, poor performances and bad game plans. Even when building, there should be some positive signs and there were none, aside from the impact of the Lions players...where Kriel and Redlinghuys got some credit but not the credit they deserve for speeding up rucks they way they did. For me, every single clue points in the direction of slow forwards in the Bok squad being the cause of most of the problems and faster forward at every turn seem to yield more positive results. It would be great if one of you smart rugby guys can put me out of my misery and she'd some light in this for me. Tell me what I am not understanding?

To add to what you are saying. The NZ sides often get dominated at scrum time, and it has just about zero negative impact on them. When their teams are being dominated in the scrums, they just get the ball out straight away, and start playing rugby. By the time our forwards stop celebrating their scrum domination and feeling like they own the opposition, our backs are already defending for their lives. We have such emphasis on unimportant things in SA, that we have completely lost sight of the ball. 

@Bluebok. 100% Correct. That was exactly one of the things that I was talking about in the post on the thread about members' reactions to the SR QFs.

Cera, it was something I especially noticed it this past weekend. I'd get all excited because their scrum was getting pushed back, and then I found myself questioning why. The penny finally dropped for me. Unless you are completely annihilating your opponent and getting a penalty each time, a strong scrum has become almost irrelevant. To the traditionalists out there, I understand there is a psychological advantage gained if your scrum is able to dominate your opponent, but I can't shake the feeling the NZ'ers get just as much of a confidence kick (and a laugh) out of us thinking it means something.   

A strong scrum is not irrelevant. The Brumbies should have beaten the Landers with their stronger scrum.....totally blown by the ref.
You guys are in Cloud Cuckoo land. When the opposition is dominating your scrum and has the feed inside your 22....getting the ball out fast doesn't apply.
By the way, the Lions strong scrum is a big part of their success. Plum I gather you haven't read the stats I supplied you on Etzebeth and du Toit.

I did check the stats Moz. But, one luck break set up by somebody else can mean your running meters look good. And the same goes for many,of the other stats. They depend in small variables that could go either way. A stat I would like to see is amount of rucks participated in amount of meters covered, because those are stats that are well within ones power to do well at. As JW pointed out, the Chiefs made a lot more tackles. Meaning the Stormers attacked more. Though one has to ask why their attacks so often amounted to nothing. My feeling is that one of the reasons this happened is because ball was recycled keep checking to slowly and gave the defence too much time to re-organise. Still you guys haven't answered me. Am I crazy to think what I wrote above? Having watched most of the S18 games this season I can get around thinking that most of our teams are just way too slow to the breakdown. It's like we still think more time in the gym means more success on the field. And it's not working. Look at the Lions pack. Aside from Kriel nobody looks like a monster. Even Kriel, is a big guy but not so big that he loses any pace. Marx is a big guy too, but he looks like he'd be a similar size whether he was in the gym or not. Compare that to the Bulls who basically look like a bunch of body builders. Hell, look at the Sharks. I'm surprised some of those guys ever make it to practice because they look like they lift 4 hours a day. It seems like our S18 forwards are becoming bigger and less effective with ever year that passes.