At the start of the 2015 WC SA were at 5 and slipped to 6 after the Japan debacle. So we have moved up in the rankings from 84 points before the start of the Super rugby season and two warm-up games to 87, Well done Erasmus.
For the most of the time from 2012 up to before RWC2015 we were at no 3, slipping to 6th for one week, then up to five for one week, then down to six again for one week, then up to three again for the rest of 2015. We only slipped again in September 2016, to fourth and then the paw paw hit the fan. Although it was only in November 2016 when hit no 6 again, and that was under Coetzee.
We stayed at 6 until end the second week in March 2017 when we went down to no 7. June & July 2017 was up to five again. August 2017 we hit the third spot again, and that under Coetzee even!!. But October saw us back down to no 5 until Dec when we slipped down to six again.
It makes me wonder why we have to get so breathless and fuming about the few weeks at no 6 in 2015.
And then came King Raz. We spent the largest part of 2018 at six before we saw movement in the rankings for the first time in the third week of September. Unfortunately it was down to 7. Luckily it was only for one week before got up to no 5. We got up to no 4 in July of this year, for the first time under King Raz, but straight down to no 5 again the next month. And now we are still at four.
Ceradyne
I will be polite - the first 5 tests in 2015 was terrible and that caused SA to go down to 6, The first five tests this year moved SA up in the rankings and the points gap became much less. The top five teams are within 2.15 from the ranking leader,
Did Billy - or was it Vinnie (?) Vunipola not play against SA and achieve preciously little?
Do you know what gives away your true position? Your desperation. You are straining desperately to believe that Rassie is the hero.
With 22% possession, in our worst venue on earth, the Bok backline ran for 292 metres; the 2019 iteration 183 at home, at altitude, against game one of an Aussie experiment. When was the last time Willie ran for 106 metres, getting runners away into space under Rassie? An anomalous occurrence? 78 metres against New Zealand, 4 clean breaks. The Boks notching up 10 clean breaks and 22 defenders beaten in that All Black test. Two tries to the 2019 Bok's 1 opportunistic and lucky last ditch effort. The 2015 Boks ran for 326 metres to the 2019 Bok's 162. Then there is the Puma loss in 2015. The Bok backs running for 244 metres. The other attacking stats aren't far off the 2019 Boks (5, 11, 7; 8, 13, 3). It was in the forwards where the 2015 Boks were inferior, carrying for 69. The likes of Lood and Coetzee (attempting to replicate Alberts) being key carriers for that famed blunt, static ball we've come to know and love today.
I think we see where this is going, don't we. The Meyer gameplan created space, created opportunities. When I evaluate a gameplan, I look at the shape and direction of the attack, the personnel groupings etc. It becomes clear if the team is struggling due to a vulnerable/flawed/untalented player (Australia 2015. Damian), or if the gameplan isn't putting players in positions to succeed. We have a mix of both under Rassie. The attacking blueprint is a failure. Much of these problems are self-inflicted, as Rassie has access to personnel who would open the Bok game up, if utilised to any degree of effectiveness. Andre is one, Dan is another, Kwagga is another. Three players to instantly upgrade the team. As for the gameplan? We'll have to see what happens post World Cup. What makes these comparisons all the more shameful is that rugby changed after the 2015 WC. Attack numbers spiked significantly. Initially Coetzee failed, but the team's output increased considerably in 2017. We've witnessed a regression under Rassie. A game that lacks ambitious, ideas, or any kind of threat. The Battle of the Somme. Tractors led by Erasers.
" Posted by: clevermike (37665 posts)
Sep 14, 2019, 00:07Ceradyne
I will be polite - the first 5 tests in 2015 was terrible and that caused SA to go down to 6 "
Oh really? Check again. "For the most of the time from 2012 up to before RWC2015 we were at no 3, slipping to 6th for one week, then up to five for one week, then down to six again for one week, then up to three again for the rest of 2015. "
By implication it means this. We were at no 3 and we slipped down to no 6 in one week. Then up to five the next (the second) week. Then down again to six again in the third week. That, to me, looks like one bad week, followed by a better one, followed by a bad one again and then it was back to no three again where we stayed. Five terrible tests? Only down in the rankings twice.
"
Lizatjie
Whatever you go on about has zero to do with rankings and is total garbage as well, since unless points are scored carrying distances effectively means NOTHING.
Wins and losses determine rankings and apparently you still believe that 4 losses in 2015 did not occur. Amazing!!!!!!!!!! LMAO
