Captain30,741 posts
13 Sept 2021, 23:42
#1
13 Sept 2021, 23:42#1
Good read by Gavin Rich
The Springboks have grown a great deal over the past few years but at this point in time one thing remains constant with the trends of the professional era - Australia remains the country where they self-destruct. Hopefully it will also be the land where lessons are learned, and learned quickly.
One consolation following the latest example of the Boks finding ways to lose Down Under is that they have a chance to bounce back and recover from their frustrating and disappointing 28-26 Castle Lager Rugby Championship loss to the Wallabies and end a win drought there that stretches back to 2013.
They will need to as the All Blacks were ruthless in their destruction of Argentina in the earlier of the two double header Championship games played on the Gold Coast on Sunday. It’s not a long turn-around though and there is some soul searching to do for the South Africans before the two teams play each other again in Brisbane.
NOT HARD TO PINPOINT MAIN PROBLEM AREA
Not that it’s hard to target the main problem area. Bok coach Jacques Nienaber wasn’t wrong when he suggested afterwards that when you score three tries to one it is an indication that there isn’t that much wrong with your plan. Add the missed South African kicks at posts, which amounted to 10 missed points, and the predictions of a 10 to 15 point win for the Boks weren’t really that wide of the mark.
But the focus on the indiscipline that cost the Boks can’t just focus on the 21 points given away through seven penalties. What also needs to be looked at was how the Wallabies had enough territory to be in kicking range with so many penalties.
The Boks dominated the second half with their driving maul and they also had the expected ascendancy in the scrums during that period. But in the first half the possession and territory statistics were against the Boks and at that point of the game the Australians were significantly the better side. Why? Well, part of it was the headway they made through the momentum gained from the starter moves around the lineouts and fringes of the breakdown, and the rare indecision the Boks experienced in their defensive game when the Australians attacked them through the middle.
REMINISCENT OF BEAST’S YELLOW AGAINST JAPAN
The yellow card shown to skipper Siya Kolisi for driving Wallaby fullback Tom Banks through the horizontal in a tackle was also a significant factor. The Boks looked composed and comfortable and were winning the aerial battle and mostly camping in the Aussie half before that 15th minute incident. Going a man down against a team that wanted to speed the game up and stretch play was the last thing the Boks needed at that point, and was a bit reminiscent of Beast Mtawarira being carded in the World Cup quarterfinal against Japan. For a while the Bok game went a bit pear-shaped there too.
Talking of the aerial battle, it also needs to be noted that while generally English referee Luke Pearce and his assistants had a good game, and there’s no need for a Rassie video this week, the Wallabies were guilty of a lot of off the ball stuff, mostly beyond the ball, that the officials didn’t pick up. And on a few occasions we heard the Boks complaining about the Aussies blocking the path to the catcher when they launched contestable kicks.
As the world’s No1 team though the Boks should have been able to deal with those obstacles put in their path better than they did, and the lack of composure that was evident at times, and the mistakes it led to, were uncharacteristic of this particular Bok team. Indeed, given how poor Argentina also were in the earlier game against the All Blacks, it might not be off the mark to question what sort of impact the isolation both teams were in during the two weeks building up to the game might have had on them. The Boks just somehow looked off their game, perhaps a yard off the pace in that first half in particular, and it wasn’t all down to Aussie tempo either. This wasn’t a game where the Wallabies played touch rugby like they did against the All Blacks. Their attacking game was mostly through narrow channels and short passing rather than throwing everything wide.
WHY THOSE WHO CALL FOR VARIATION HAVE A POINT
What was also factor in that first half struggle for the Boks, however, and this is something they need to think seriously about if they are to continue to rely so heavily on their set-piece game, was the dearth of throw ins they had at the lineouts before halftime. There weren’t that many scrums in the first half either. It was no coincidence that it was in the second half, when there were more lineouts for them to drive off, and more scrums that they placed their imprint on the game and came back from their deficit and would have won it were it not for that mistake at the end.
That first half wasn’t the first time this winter that the Boks have suffered from not having many lineout throw-ins either. It was largely because they managed to limit them to just four throw ins during the whole game that the British and Irish Lions beat the Boks in the first test.
This is where those who call for more variation to the Bok game, meaning their attacking play, do have a point. The South African suffocate and subdue strategy has won them a World Cup and a Lions series and the core of their approach is the right one for the strengths of the team. But on the days when the execution isn’t perfect, where the kicks don’t all go over to build scoreboard pressure, where there’s the odd scrum that goes against you like it did shortly before halftime and again, fatally, right at the end, then you are sitting ducks for the sort of “game of narrow margins” defeat the Boks suffered on the Gold Coast.
To use a cricketing analogy, having a strong seam bowling quartet is an asset but those teams that just go all seam are found wanting on the days where either the wicket is flat or the opposition batsmen are just good enough to negate that strength. On those days you need the spinner to bring variation.
NOW IS TIME TO START GROWING THEIR GAME
And variation is the operative word when it comes to what the Boks need. The plan itself wasn’t what went awry at the CBUS Stadium, it was the execution, but a bit more variation and ability to focus on other strengths might have enabled them to win despite the poor execution and the off-day experienced by some key players (Handre Pollard and Lukhanyo Am).
The Boks had to focus on their World Cup strategy to beat the Lions simply because they hadn’t played in 19 months. The ultra-conservative game they played at times was a non-negotiable because you need to play in order to grow your game. You also need to remember that although they have won a World Cup and Lions series, the current coaching regime is still a relatively new one in terms of games played.
However the Boks are now beyond the Lions tour and it is now time for them to start growing their game. In that sense, as it is usually only when you lose that you start to become introspective, and it is after defeat that you can no longer use that hoary old phase “if it ain’t broken don’t fix it”, maybe the wake-up call provided by the Gold Coast defeat will ultimately prove a good thing for the Boks.
