FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Buklks take two steps back

Buklks take two steps back

Started by clevermike7 REPLIES427 VIEWS· 22 Feb 2015, 18:10
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
22 Feb 2015, 18:10
#1
22 Feb 2015, 18:10#1

The following article is from rugby365:-


"In the wake of their second consecutive defeat at home, the Bulls seem to be taking one step forward and two step backwards with the Hurricanes beating the hosts 17-13 at Loftus Versfeld on Friday.


Bulls coach Frans Ludeke conceded that their struggles at the scrums and lineouts were further compounded by giving away turnovers at the rucks.

"It was a tight contest going down to the wire and in a contest like that small margins make a huge difference.

"We had good opportunities in the right areas and almost losing your bread and butter position, that is costly," Ludeke said.

As was the case a week ago in their defeat to the Stormers, the Bulls made a promising start to the match with a dominant display in the opening minutes.

Failing to convert this pressure into points, they allowed the tourists into the match and with that they lost their sense of urgency.

Bulls captain Pierre Spies said their inability to capitalise when they had momentum on their side was a concern, but he was confident they would be able to bounce back against the Sharks at Loftus Versfeld next week.

"We are not converting pressure into points, what happened in the past two weeks is that we get into the right position and we make mistakes. That is something we need to work on, we believe we are doing the right things but we are not executing it well enough.

"We believe we are on the right track and the players know we need to step it up and hopefully next week we can get a better performance," Spies said.

Ludeke said there were some improvements from last weekend with their scrum looking a tad better.

"We were in the contest especially with the scrums. In the secondhalf we were creating huge pressure.

"There were maybe one or two calls that could have created penalty opportunities but if you lose your set-piece ball, like last week, you miss out on some golden opportunities to build pressure.

"We created opportunities from broken field, the set-piece was a battle from both sides. Jesse Kriel's line break just before halftime was a great convert and that is more of what you want," Ludeke added.

The breakdown area was of particular concern to Ludeke which he termed a lottery.

"I thought we needed some numbers, there were two or three opportunities at the breakdown and we just had one or two guys there.

"It was from linebreaks where the carrier was isolated and we needed support to get there quicker. We won't whine and we need to look after ourselves at that breakdown area.

"You need to win your own set-piece and you need to have the ability to keep it at the breakdown area," he stated.

While the Bulls were scratching their heads over their start to the season, the Hurricanes could not have asked for a better tour of South Africa.

The New Zealand franchise leave these shores with victories over the Lions and the Bulls, the first time since 2010 they had won their first two matches of the season.

While Hurricanes coach Chris Boyd was happy about leaving South Africa with eight points in the bag, he cautioned that all the good work could be undone if they did not improve.

"We are certainly happy with the eight points but I am not overly happy with the way we played. But at the end of the day we came for points and we got it, so we are delighted.

"It is a 16-round competition, to get two [victories] is great but if you lose your next two or three you've wasted the opportunity. But we are certainly delighted to start well especially at Ellis Park and Loftus," Boyd said."

There are three problem areas that needs urgent attention insofar as the Bulls are concerned.   Those are -
*   In Matfield the Bulls have a PAP lock in Matfield - who lacks the physical strength to make a positive contribution to their Tight 5;
*   In Spies a substandard no 8 - serious consideration should be given to play Liebenberg in that position; and
*    A malfunctioning center combination - which shows up a lack of penetration insofar as backline play is concerned.    
This could possibly be traced back to the way the Bulls utilize their centers.   The bulls cannot comprehend that a center should be a player with keen ball sense and the ability to read games so as top create opportunities for backline attacking play.    The fact is clearly illustrated with the Sadie case - useless when playing for the Bulls and really showing up well for the Cheetahs.
It is difficult to find a solution to that problem - since all potential skill has been coached out of the present and potential Bulls centers.   Since the present combination is really toothless from an attacking perspective - I think they should perhaps move Serfontein to 13, Engelbrecht to 14 and then see what can be done insofar as a 12 is concerned or keep Serfontein at 12 and look at another alternatives at 13.         
BL
BlikkiesPro1,526 posts
22 Feb 2015, 20:22
#2
22 Feb 2015, 20:22#2

I was quite impressed how the Canes nullified the Bull's rolling mauls by not contesting it and once it was formed to come around and attack the back of the maul. This must have had a very disruptive influence on the Bulls. 


MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
23 Feb 2015, 00:35
#3
23 Feb 2015, 00:35#3
The Irish are using this tactic regularly....it helped them against the Boks and Wales. I must say I find the rules confusing. If the defender can't get to the ball quickly enough around the back,  is the attacking team guilty of obstruction if the maul finally makes contact. 
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
23 Feb 2015, 06:32
#4
23 Feb 2015, 06:32#4
 This tactic has been used in the past to nullify rolling  mauls and is easily countered.   If the tactic is used it can only be successful if the ball is kept by the catcher until at least one opponent makes contact before the ball  is shuffled to the back of the maul.  Otherwise what happened is that the ball carrier can score a try with ease since he has the support of all his forwards to score a try without any opposing defenders.
The Blues used that tactic more against the Stormers than the Hurricanes used it against the Bulls.   The countermeasure could be effective - but then you cannot have PAP ouma Matfield as the catcher of the ball - he can be pushed around too easily by any player and brought down since the catcher can be tackled in such a case as a maul has not been formed and  the ball carrier can be tackled.           
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
23 Feb 2015, 06:46
#5
23 Feb 2015, 06:46#5
 This was the conclusion agreed by various participants on refs.com:

 Re: Maul Forming from a lineout

 Originally Posted by AlexThomas Quick question guys; if the attacking team decide to bring the ball down from a lineout to form a maul, and the defending team do not engage in the maul and drop back so technically a maul has not formed, is this a penalty to the defending team as the maul shouldnt of been formed and the players in the maul are technically obstructing?
I am aware that the defending team can go anywhere they want as there are no offside lines.
Cheers.Right on all counts.

Its a legitimate tactic, and probably the only way to defend a rolling maul when the opposition are killing you with them.....don't let a maul form in the first place. 

There are no offside lines once the ball has left the line of touch, so defenders can go straight for the ball carrier and tackle him.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
23 Feb 2015, 07:19
#6
23 Feb 2015, 07:19#6
 Sure that tactic works but becomes seriously defective when the ball is held up front and not pushed back to a carrier at the back of the line-outs.   If the tight 5 p[layer catching the ball retain possession the opposing player or players must go for him and once they try to tackle him a maul has commenced and the maul can then proceed accordingly.   As long as he has the ball the off-side line is where the ball is and any player taking out a supporting player is penalised since he is tackling a player without the ball.
The secret is not to shuffle the ball back to the carrier before contact by the opposition happens.  The shuffling back process commences when the first contact is made by an opposing  defender(s).   
Tries have been scored by ball-carriers up front when the opposing teams have not made contact in mauls to avoid rolling mauls - so that tactic can be negated with ease.    
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
23 Feb 2015, 07:48
#7
23 Feb 2015, 07:48#7

If the ball is not cycled back, the player with the ball should be an easy target and brought down before the maul can form. If the ball is shuffled back and the maul doesn't move, the Irish tactic of running round the back works.

 

We were surprised by this in the Irish test and again in the English  and Welsh tests. I have yet to see a team figure out what to do against this tactic....so I doubt if it's that easy to nullify.

JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
23 Feb 2015, 08:12
#8
23 Feb 2015, 08:12#8
 One of the main weapons of SA forward play has taken a serious hit. Will teams standardly use this tactic from now on? There must be a reason why all teams are not using this tactic. Perhaps it is that you have to rely on the ref making the right call & if he get's it wrong you are in big trouble? Interesting discussion.
— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news