Faf's box kick results

Of the 10 kicks Faf made from the base of the ruck, these were the results:

2 x touch

1 x Australia possession, knocked on (net result scrum SA)

6 x Australia possession

1 x Australia possession deep with pressure (net result lineout SA 25m)

Only the kick that Australia knocked on ended in a regain of possession for SA.

The only other effective one was at 70:42 when a great chase by Esterhuizen (making the tackle) & Kriel supporting trapped Haylett-Petty inside the Aus 22 and they ended up clearing for a lineout to SA 25m out.

The other 6 pretty much handed possession straight back to Aus, with Haylett-Petty in particular being impressive at gobbling them up. The one at 28:34 led to a counterattack by Haylett-Petty and Genia's try.

Not an option we'd want to see too much of against the All Blacks.

He was even worse in the All Black test. I don't know why we persist with it. The box kicks doesn't work for us, and we usually don't have aerially dominant players anyway. Against the All Blacks we Ned to keep hold of the ball more. They can be hurt, but not if we have to soak up that kind of pressure again. We're doing too much defending. Another thing is ball security. In that All Black test we invited more pressure with silly forced offloads and sloppy ball retention in contact. These things combined with the box kicks are not helping. 

It was a mixed bag, JW. HP was better than us in the air.

Those Bulls had a 77% retrieval rate. Ndungane was also another weapon in the air. 

Making box kicks is the most stupid thing to do and the easiest way to give possession handovers to  the opposition.  

The Bulls had nothing of the sort claimed by Mozart and AO - the Bulls were even more subject to possession handovers than th Springboks were on Saturday.   

Fact is Morne was a disaster in out-of-hand kicking - the kicks were inaccurate and aimless - totally aimless and totally counter- productive.   

Incorrect. Also, be careful, you forget so soon your gaff concerning kicking and Folau. Your judgment on what constitutes a good or bad kick is at best outright lunacy, at worst the pinnacle of deceit. Unfortunately, we all know it's the latter. You make no effort to gather information or investigate a matter. You just lie. 

As per normal - Mozart remembers things happened a decade and more ago - and bugger all of what happened subsequently.   What a load of BS - how was  that applicable during the Meyer era and more importantly at present.

The man was a failure as a coach - because he used the Mozart approach for team selection and a non-existent game plan based on the Bulls game plan of 2004.

Get back to the present and start thinking about what should happen now.   Hope you can - but I doubt it very - very much.    

As per normal - Mozart remembers things happened a decade and more ago - and bugger all of what happened subsequently.   What a load of BS - how was  that applicable during the Meyer era and more importantly at present.

The man was a failure as a coach - because he used the Mozart approach for team selection and a non-existent game plan based on the Bulls game plan of 2004.

Get back to the present and start thinking about what should happen now.   Hope you can - but I doubt it very - very much.    

What are you writing about?

During 2009 to 2010 the Bulls were one of the highest powered offence in Super rugby. Their linebreaks and linebreak to try ratio was outstanding. The 2010 season was one of, if not the best, attacking sides in Super rugby history. The motion that the Bulls were a 10 man team is garbage and can be easily debunked. It was twaddle perpetuated by our disgraceful journos. 

Balls - another BS statement without any real substance provided.   Carry on dreaming - it would help to create fictional stories - but no facts whatsoever. 

The Bulls of that era played total rugby. They had a 10 and 12 who fixed the opposition and created the space for the outside backs. This is where Kirchner thrived coming into the line outside 13, sometimes a little further in. It was devastating. 

The plastic fan's Interpretation of total rugby is a team filled with players who can't tackle, no distributors and everyone runs into contact becoming a cul-de-sac. Sometimes, if we are lucky, we'll have offloads squirt out like a bar of soap. It adds to the excitement of this remarkably cutting edge game when one knows not the destination of said soapy ball. Even better, all the fun happens in one's own half, as there will be no kicking. The added risk of deadly turnovers 20 metres out from the goal line adds to the tension of the encounter. There will be no forward carries ala dinosaur rugby, so the backs will be left to fend for themselves. No forwards "in the backline", they'll all be condensed in the middle of the field. We'll do it like New Zealand definitely don't absolutely do. 

We seem to have wandered off the subject... yet again.

Faf's kicking game is not one of his strengths so I'm not surprised about the stats Pakie presented. It has been his problem for some time now. The coach is going to have to figure out what to do about it. Turning over possession like this will not help the Boks cause at all. 

The only thing that can be done is working on his technique and accuracy. Until then, it isn't a weapon to be used. Who do we have to chase who will continually threaten to win it back? We are not an aerially dominant team, and haven't been so since 2009.