FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Is the All Blacks forward pack going to be able to withstand in 2014?

Is the All Blacks forward pack going to be able to withstand in 2014?

Started by sharkbok10 REPLIES284 VIEWS· 29 Jul 2014, 05:19
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,294 posts
29 Jul 2014, 05:19
#1
29 Jul 2014, 05:19#1

We saw the All Blacks pack struggle at times in 2013, especially on the end of the year tour. They were out muscled by Ireland, France and England in succession for each of their close wins. 

If the games had been 65 minutes the All Blacks may well have lost all of 3 matches they played in. 


The backline came to the rescue in each of these matches in the last 15 minutes when space opens up as players get tired and the benches are emptied. 


The All Blacks play a pack that are more fetcher orientated than strong ball carriers which can dominate the advantage line in order to win the territorial battle via front foot ball from pick and go's, mauling and drives, tackle backs etc.


The ABS are sacrificing some of the traditional eras of forward play in order to be more competitive at rucks.

This allows their backline to run the ball from side to side of the field because as soon as their is a tackle/ruck, they have more fetchers are at the point of breakdown. 


The ABS rely on the strength their backs handling skills to pass the ball until a mismatch happens- like a back against a prop, or a gap opens up. 

A player like Conrad Smith is very dangerous at outside centre towards the end of matches. He seems to have eyes on the back of his head because he knows where all of his supporting runners are.


The approach of having more fetchers works better on harder pitches, but also on slower pitches towards the end of games. If France or England had got the same lead that Ireland had, it would have been unlikely for the ABS to have struck back at the end of the match. 


This year England also pushed the ABS in the physicality stakes for the 1st 2 games vs New Zealand. 

I think allot of forward packs will be licking their lips to have a crack at the ABS forward pack in 2014. 

Their forwards are very good at rucks but not that good in the physicality of dominating territory - collisions, pick and carries and mauling.


In terms of game plan:


  1. Forwards keep it tight and direct to tire out the smaller New Zealand pack. Have big forwards running onto front foot ball at pace, with quick pick and carries to dominate the collisions and advantage line. The breakdown is easier to win when keeping it tight amongst the forwards. Space will open up either through the middle or out wide as the defence is sucked in through multi-phase play. 

  2. Only go wide with the backs when their is space.
  3. With more fetchers in their forwards which fan across the pitch, the ABS will win the breakdown battle out wide. 


  4. Allways kick the ball out, unless when kicking it deep into the All Black's half. Chips kicks and grubbers are an option but only within in the ABS half. Nearly any ABS counter attacks from kicks that do not not go out in your own half will result in points. (Jaco Taute in 2012 was a prime example). The ABS like broken unstructured play to counter attack or kick for position. 

  5. If the kick is not a good option, just keep it in the forwards through multiple phases. Kicking from 1st phase is rarely a good option because the opposition wings and fullbacks will have it covered. If a kick is going to be aimless make sure that it is either as high or as far away as possible. 


This would prevent opportunities for the All Blacks to counter attack from loose kicks or turn overs. 

Then assuming the forwards dominate the territorial game - more of the game will be played in the All Blacks half. Any mistakes made by ABS are opportunities for points.


I think allot of teams will have learnt from the 2013 EOYT weaknesses of the ABS forwards.. 

The All Blacks strengths is their backline's passing skills so they will sacrifice some of the traditional forward requirements to win the battle of the breakdown out wide. 

PA
PapamoaClub Pro683 posts
29 Jul 2014, 07:31
#2
29 Jul 2014, 07:31#2
 Oh good, so how long do we have to wait and see the Springboks, Wallabies etc make the most of this "weakness" ...You think this year. England pushed the All Blacks until they modified their approach and dismantled them. All Blacks rugby has a way of adapting and overcoming, even more so when under high pressure. A rugby team doesn't go a full season unbeaten if it cant handle and deal with pressure. 
However they cant go on unbeaten forever.
PA
PapamoaClub Pro683 posts
29 Jul 2014, 07:45
#3
29 Jul 2014, 07:45#3
I cant wait for that Cloudy. It will be... AB rein over, AB peaked, new world order bla bla then they win the rest and it comes back to cheating, paying refs off. Cant wait
RE
redsmanPro1,710 posts
29 Jul 2014, 08:13
#4
29 Jul 2014, 08:13#4
 Perhaps you could concentrate on winning one that wasn't rigged and in your backyard... lol
PA
PapamoaClub Pro683 posts
29 Jul 2014, 08:31
#5
29 Jul 2014, 08:31#5
 .... And it begins. Your back Red!! thought you might have been playing in traffic or something.
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
29 Jul 2014, 08:48
#6
29 Jul 2014, 08:48#6
For some reason people are not noticing that the ABs have some big boys as forward backups. We can plug these big fellas in, AB pack did ok against the English bulldog pack in the last test.
I agree overall with the generalizations of Sharkbok about the relative strengths of the AB forwards and backs but ABs are adding beef lately. Even Brodie Retallick has beefed up & added more grunt to his game.  As said, the ABs are always evolving & now they are including a deeper analysis of the opposition & are adjusting their game plan accordingly.
I know ABs can't keep winning for ever but us fans are enjoying the ride 
RE
redsmanPro1,710 posts
29 Jul 2014, 09:19
#7
29 Jul 2014, 09:19#7

 Howd that 7s go for you kiwis... saffas smoked you.... ahahahahahahaha super hilarious...


All the local kiwis are starting to get anxious as they feel this is the start of the collapse.... funny as............


And Cloudy headed I know youre lacking in intelligence but to claim the kiwis beat the aussies at the Olympics... or ANYTHING other than rugby truly is laughable...

BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
29 Jul 2014, 11:25
#8
29 Jul 2014, 11:25#8
 Some nervous clucking away by the kbbs.
The problem is highlighted by the rapturous glee the nz press and fans were about how the crusties pack got the better of the Sharks. They entirely ignored context and conveniently forgot how the 14 man and then 13 man Sharks beat them away from home.Unfortunatelky they were EGGED on by that noted blogger Dr Mozzzzzz who also got carried away and lost his bearing (marbles) for a moment!
Its this denialism that will trip them up. 
Beeno - sagely advising the kbbs to get off the strong stuff and face reality. The writing is on the wall oaks. Now please dont shoot the humble messenger of these tidings. Also please dont shoot yourselves rather face up to the challenges life brings.
Beeno the saige councelling the erring kbbs and preparing them for what the future holds. What would they do without me I wonder.

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
29 Jul 2014, 11:44
#9
29 Jul 2014, 11:44#9
 Sharkbok
Lets forget about the issue of the above pleasant arguments in general.  There are a number of issues raised by you that are pertinent in this case.    However, there are other issues as well pertaining in particular to the SA teams:-
First of all - the tight control in contests among forwards must in the main be exercised by the Tight 5 and here there is a major problem.   Despite the presence of the gruntless Kruger in the last two tests - the Springboks had 60% ball possession in for instance the Ellis Park test - yet they lost the test.
What does that imply?    The answer is on the one hand simple.   Strengthen the Tight 5 by  making sure that the Tight 5 has grunt and forget about any passengers.   Problem is that Meyer is not sharing that thought - he wanted the even more gruntless Matfield in the team and expect miracles.   That is going to weaken the Tight 5 ability to maintain the required level of competitiveness and even though we might succeed in getting our own throw in line outs - driving mauls will not be successful at all.   
 The Ellis Park test was lost because we were not competitive enough in respect of our loosies.   Some of the functions of loosies are not to be regarded as of less importance than others.    The latter includes  breakdown ball protection and recovery.   That is where we fell short - since only 2 of our 3 loosies were capable of doing that.   If we want to beat New Zealand - we need to up the capacity of all three loosies and especially select three loosies that will be able to compete more efficiently with their counterparts in Australia and New Zealand.   Here there are two possibilities, namely to move Coetzee to blind side flank or bring in Jacques Potgieter in that position.   
If Meyer select the right combination up front and forget about passengers like Alberts and Matfield we should be competitive up front.
The real provem then remains - why do the teams lose against New Zealand despite forward superiority.   The answer is simple.   It lies in the combination of back row and backline players to beat the opposition.   Once you ensure that you force their back row players to play a tighter roll - an advantage is gained.  
The second issue is that although the All Blacks kick balls even more frequently than opponents do - their kicking is much more strategic and objective-orientated than those of their opponents.    Their kicks allows for effective follow-up and attacking opportunities - ours are so far down the middle of the park to allow for any effective follow-ups and leave the AB's with time to decide on what to do with the ball in such situations.   In those situations  it often enough merely leads to the AB's gaining a massive advantages - in other words we hand possession over to them on a platter.
The moral of the story is kicking should be strategic and that was not the case in the past.  we kicked when we should keep the ball in hand or we keep the ball in hand when we should kick.   Both of those things apply in essence to our half back situation.   Unless we have a case where we have a thinking player as a pivot - when who can read the game and decide on options - we are going to be dead meat again. We habe now had Morne Steyn in the pivot position for years and it has produced nothing but negatives for the Springboks when playing the All Blacks.   We need to get it right in that position as a priority.
The other backline problem we have had is at 13.   The selection of players in that position was like a revolving door.   We had  alternate between the useless in attacking play, the useless in defending play and the useless in both attacking and defending play  - and then hope for success.    It is time that Meyer finds a way to solidfy that position by selecting the right player for that position.                  
        
   
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,294 posts
29 Jul 2014, 17:26
#10
29 Jul 2014, 17:26#10
The most physical players in the ABS pack are Retalick, Messam and Read. Although both Retalick and Messam have been average for the Chiefs this year. Their pack has been thrown around like rag dolls for most of the season.

Kicking from 1st phase is rarely strategic because it is to easy too defend against. It just goes straight down the throat of the back 3 who are in a position to counter or return with a better kick
I would like to see Goosen at 10 with his long accurate kicking game, with a Springbok pack of 
1. Beast2. Bismaark3. Malherbe4. Eztebeth5. Matfield6. Coetzee7. Schalk8. Vermuelen
9. Faff Dekler k10. Goosen12. Jean13. Delande14.11. Habana15. Willie Leroux
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
29 Jul 2014, 18:05
#11
29 Jul 2014, 18:05#11
 You are correct with most of your selections - but I think that maybe Hendricks or Pietersen should be on the wing.
I think that Matfield is physically-deficient and I would prefer De Jager in his place.   If we wanrt physicality up front - we need to have physical players.   
I wonder about Burger as well.  I would rather see Louw at 7 or even Potgieter.   The longer the games went on the more Burger's performances went down. 
Faf is an inteersting selection - pity Ackerman left him out of contention by playing him from the bench in the later matches in the Super series.     I believe that for the time being Reinach would be a better proposition.          
— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news