Jake White's comments on Erasmus

The following from News24:-

"Former Springbok coach Jake White says that the current national side under coach Rassie Erasmus is ready for the 2019 World Cup.

In his latest column for All Out Rugby, White heaped praise on Erasmus and the improvements the Boks have shown under his leadership in 2018.

The Boks finished 2nd in the Rugby Championship, but stunned the All Blacks in Wellington with a 36-34 victory before losing a nail-biter to the world champions at Loftus.

For White, who guided the Boks to a World Cup win in 2007, the side has turned the corner.

"Six months ago, the New Zealand media would never have questioned the All Blacks, but after what happened in Wellington and Pretoria I read an article where they were talking about the World Cup opener against South Africa being 'like war' because whoever loses that match will probably have to face Ireland in the quarter-finals," White wrote.

"That reaction confirms that the Boks are legit. We might not have all the stats that people would like to see, but it’s obvious that South Africa has turned a corner, in their performances and psychologically, and that will make other teams very wary of the Boks."

Looking ahead to 2019, White is optimistic.

"Whether people like it or not, it’s not debateable – the jewel in the rugby crown is the World Cup. The champions get four years’ bragging rights and one thing Rassie has continually said is that his plan is to make sure the team is ready for 2019," White wrote.

"He knows the first game against New Zealand is the one he has to be ready for and, if you measure what he’s done this year, there’s enough there to say the Boks are on track."

I know four of he site members started with attacks on Erasmus even before he became coach and those continue to date.   All four of the members concerned also regard White as a top coach.    Will those four members learn something from what White said or will they continue sniping at Erasmus?   My guess is tat they will try and shy away from this thread and continue in their merry ways.   

What White said are bad news for them - but they write so much garbage on site that it is possible that the above article will go straight over their heads.   After all Mozart claims they are the best rugby analysts in the world since they see things nobody else can see in games.  

Nobody has attacked Rassie. I suggest you take the thumb out of your mouth and for the very first time in your life, grow up. It would also help if you kept your forked tongue in check. 

Himmell - and the fact is that this liar can think he can get away with things he cooked up?    Mozart started three threads on Erasmus's coaching career and job  and he was constantly supported by  the three duds who normally support his dodgy posts.  

Go back and see what happened in those three posts.

When you can reconcile Rassie breaking all of your golden rules of tactical kicking and his 2004 Bulle ball, then I'll be prepared to take you more seriously. Until that time this is a moo point. 

This guy iis totally deluded and make BS statements he cannot prove.   Meyer did not have a backline strategy and the kicking game under Erasmus has been effective insofar as follow-ups is concerned - very few kicks could not be followed up - so effective tactical kicking virtually totally absent in the case of Coetzee and Meyer.  

This guy iis totally deluded and make BS statements he cannot prove.   Meyer did not have a backline strategy and the kicking game under Erasmus has been effective insofar as follow-ups is concerned - very few kicks could not be followed up - so effective tactical kicking virtually totally absent in the case of Coetzee and Meyer.  

Read the following comments of Meyer as to the kicking game under Erasmus:-

"Speaking to Sport24 this week from his Parisian base, where he is currently sports director of Stade Francais, Meyer said current Bok supremo Erasmus had put in place plenty of the key tools required to excel in European-staged Test matches, including an uncompromising pack and smarter all-round kicking game."

Game, set and match.

The follow ups successful? Shall we have video of these follow ups? That's actually an interesting topic. I know for a fact that the follow ups were poor. Kriel, Dyantyi, Willie et al weren't every effective chasing, but the kicks were mostly poor. Several tries were scored due to poor kicks, and there were lots of them.

Meyer's backline shape was similar to what Rassie and Coetzee used, but less rigid. It was flatter and wider than what Rassie has implemented. Rassie likes lots of deep lying layers of mini-units and when the players are flatter and receive the ball they'll crash it up. Such as Damian in Brisbane when he was often paired with Kriel, who was largely a decoy or screen. 

AO

I added a paragraph quoting Meyer as to the coaching of Erasmus.   So read that and stop your BS.   As to Meyer's  usage of the backline  lets face it - it stood flatter in defense - and was near to never used for attacking purposes.   Thanks for another pie-in-the-sky daydream,     

Why don't you watch the Japan test and see the backs flatter and the ball being layed wider. Perfect example for you, and of all tests to show it! 

Of course these can be found in every test of that year. I've posted several videos already which challenged your limited perception and assumptions.

The fact still remain, Rassie is playing a game you said you hate. It couldn't be more hilarious that you back him. Why? Only because you have a deep seated hatred for Meyer. It's unbelievably twisted. 

Erasmus's teams have never played a game I hate - Meyer's teams did have a long list of games where I dislike what was happening.   Despite what you theorize on - there is a vast difference between the 15 man game Erasmus is striving for and is showing positive signs to improving as players get used to play such a game and the restricted  and repetitive  game of Meyer.

Looking at especially the World Cup tests in 2015 it was clear that there was no real game plan and a repetitive set of rubbish that has cut out the backline totally and has  been dealt with in the past often enough  on this site.

Well we all know you got it right regarding Rassie - Beeno!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, you do hate these things, they break all of your golden rules that must never be broken! Hilarious. More so that your glazed eyes can't detect it. If only there was a stat for it on ESPN! 

Tell me, how good is Steph at flyhalf? How do you like Pollard and Willie standing so far back on attack? You said this was backward doff rugby. 

This is about as flat as AO can go.   Lets look at the situation as to the WC.   Less than 25%  of the passes of the scrummie  did go to the flyhalf or even another backline player.   This figure was not produced by me but another member, and I accept it as correct.   The passing game was totally predictable. a deadly thing when it came to test rugby.   Passing to the flyhalf and full back factually nearly only happened when there was a need for a relieving kick   For the rest the ball went to a loosie - mostly Burger - and it virtually killed any form of attacking backline play against Japan and against all stronger teams in particular.  .  

Now back to the Erasmus case.   All teams use a certain format when attacking against teams in the red-line/22 of the opposition team and those are two ways of scoring tries, namely -

*   to pass the ball to forwards  who would try and cause the scoring of tries through forward ball carries and often repeat the strategy (was used consistently by the AB's in both the Wellington and Pretoria tests); or

*   use forwards to draw in defenders and when they are successful make sure that the ball comes back quickly in tackle situations and the ball goes to the backline with frequent overlaps created by the forward carry leading to the scoring of tries - used frequently by Erasmus teams.

There are 2 requirements in respect of the second scenario and those are -

*   forward ball carriers must be supported by other forwards so as to go forward in tackles and drawing in tacklers: and

*    some forwards has the ability to place balls quickly when tackled and the attacks can continue.   

The latter part is a problem as well - not all players are capable of placing balls quickly for the attack to proceed.   Some like Du Toit, Malherbe and Kitshoff do it very well quite regularly = others never do and the recovery is slow or even result in turnovers or penalties against the attacking team.   Members will note I did not mention Marx - he is quite effective as well - but not yet on the level of the three players I mentioned.    When backline players get involved in same play - tackles by multiple defenders are also essential - and the placing of the balls for recycling equally so.    Of the backline players in the Springbok team only De Allende meets both those two requirements. 

The above goes totally over the head of  AO - hence his new story about Du Toit  getting balls from the scrummie.  However, Du Toit is not the only recipient involved - the ball can go to any other forward as well.

What I described as to what happened under Erasmus as to attacks in the opposition 22 actually happened under Meyer as well.   The problem was that it did not happen as a variation - in Meyer's case it was totally predictable and happened all over the field of play.   The problem was that most of  the Meyer forwards were incapable of placing the balls for quick recycling - definitely not Burger in 2015.

The above is why the Springboks under Erasmus is capable of scoring so many more tries than the Springboks coached by Meyer could.

Now this has nothing to do with ESPN - and everything to do what actually happens in games.   There is no golden rules as is mentioned by AO - the so-called golden rules are created in his befuddled mind and that is what makes his stories so pie in the sky.    He obviously would scream murder about the performance of the players mentioned by me  in the relevant regard - but that is to be expected.

I am afraid there will be shouts and screams about this posting since it is based on what actually is supposed to happen and used extensively by the AB's = still the top team in world rugby despite the statement to the contrary of AO himself.   

Damian has extremely poor ball presentation. His body position in the tackle, in general actually, is flawed.

What you are referring to are pods. The Boks have been splitting them into groups of 3 most of the time, sometimes with one wide on each side of the field wide. Sometimes with roving duties. What we are seeing are identical shapes in the Boks game of the a Meyer, Coetzee and Rassie era. Coetzee was more Aussie inspired than Meyer. Rassie is also more Aussie inspired, but not so lateral. The usage of 10 and 15 is the same. Of course there are some different shapes and plays but the general idea is the same. Meyer utilised more elaborate patterns, plays etc. More creative use of the backs, making use of each individuals skillset. He also happened to get more out of Damian than either Coetzee or Rassie.

Rassie's Boks are primarily a kicking team. That's how they get their game going. His Boks kick far more than  Meyer's Boks. His attacking play is less fluid. 

Is that the reason why you have become such a keyboard warrior who venomously attacks everyone who dares not to share your opinions, no matter how flawed they may be.?

The minute things get a bit heated you retract and start accusing everyone of exactly everything that you yourself are the main culprit of."

AO

I will be easy on you today.  The whole last posting si totally decepetive and as far removed from reality as possible.   

If you do not see how De Allende drawing in more than one tackler and place balls for quick recovery you are either not watching the games or need a new set of glasses.   

I still wonder how your imagination works.    Meyer himself admitted that the Springboks do not have the players to play a ball-in-hand game am\nd effectively curtailed backline attacking play - yet you write about how wonderful his backline functioned as an attacking unit.  Nice question - who must we believe - Meyer or or you?

As to Coetzee - he never knew anything about backline play and he never modelled a game plan on anything at all - fact is he really had no game paln when coaching the Stormers and even less so when coaching the Springboks.

The above was evident also from the drastic low try scoring figures by backline players in both the Meyer and Coetzee years as test coaches and even worse results in the time Coetzee was the Stormers coach.

You are onto the so-called kicking game under Erasmus.  I think you should read what Meyer said about the kicking game of Erasmus.  There is a huge difference in respect of evaluation of the kicking game.   The number of kicks is not as important as some state it is.    The AB's for years kicked more balls than the Springboks did and the real fact relates to the quality of kicks and what happened as a result of kicking.

There are in fact two definitive difference for evaluation,  namely -

*    the kicking away of balls aimlessly and for the sake of kicking balls;

*    the usage of kicks as a strategic measure iro of defense and attacking options.

The problem is that under Meyer and Coetzee the aimless kicking became a real problem.    Kicks were either too far ahead to allow for decent follow-up opening up the way for counter-attack or when finding touch allowing for quick throw-ins with counter-attacks being the result.   The fact is that the AB's virtually never put themselves under pressure and gained territory in the process - while the exact opposite applied to the Springboks.

For kicks to be strategic they have to be effectively followed up putting potential recipients under pressure.   Then there is also dribble kicks in the opposition red zone - which often leads to tries and even cross klicks in the opposition 22 used for the same purpose.    

Basically I think - 

*   there was a minority of kicks where the Springboks under Eramus did not meet requirements and I believe that problem will be reduced in future; and

*   Meyer's comment above is interesting and probably the best guide in this regard.

Lets just explain further.   Fact is that Meyer implied that Erasmus got the kicking situation right and his thoughts on the issue seems to be that his players did not get it right.   After all he got rid of his predominant flyhalf  Morne Steyn once in 2012 and twice in 2014 based on the main on serious out-of-hand kicking deficiencies and after the departure of Morne was veering  from Pollard to Lambie regularly.  

Then too - most of the box kicks were made by De Klerk.   I have not seen any scrummie ever in SA making more box kicks than what was done by Fourie du Preez - even when he was  in his prime.                        

Damian slows down the attack and does nothing in particular to ease the recycle process. He often leaves us having to apply more players at the breakdown to secure the ball, players who were often going to be used on the subsequent phase! 

Aimless kicking? You have absolutely no business speaking of aimless kicking when the Boks have been kicking aimless all season and you approved of it. Your hypocrisy is disgraceful. You even had the gall to say the tries conceded were "tactical concessions". 

"I have not seen"

You don't say. It appears to be a common  problem for you.

You claim you'll go easy on me. Perhaps you should go easy on yourself. You're getting old, you don't swim out of a river of egg like you used to. 

It seems strange to my eyes and probably other Kiwis too ,the way you goes go after each other over various players and coaches .Heck even a win sees bickering over some obscure point or other .

Is this the case because the Boks havent been as success ful of late or is it just a Saffa thing and it wouldnt matter ?

Wardad, the South African rugby community is very dishonest. They often attack their better players and laud the chaff. To think, Pollard was booed off the field for Lambie. The Americans Lambie who was humiliated on the previous EOYT. When Lambie played badly, truly horribly, he received enormous praise. Morné was hounded for missing a touch findergoing into strong winds, Lambie did the same thing from short range and it was never mentioned. South Africans aren't as honest as New Zealanders. So most discussions involve a few of us correcting outright lies. You've surely seen how Lügnerin lies so profusely. He represents the minds infecting our game.