Moz

Don't forget DDA.

It’s touching that you two chaps need my approval….but no, I’m about to watch the match again and I’ll give you the real scoop. On a first pass yesterday Dud Toit blew two try scoring opportunities and Dud Allende..one. Stand by

As for Erasmus he has the best squad of players ever, the result of fully benefiting from players of color for the first time. The squad created for him by his predecessors.

And he is playing the weakest Aussie/AB and English teams (the only other sides to win WCs) in the last 30 years. As Joe Schmidt, the supposed architect of Irish rugby is demonstrating with Aus, the players are 90% of the solution.  Rasmus’ one series against a decent team, Ireland, was drawn despite home field advantage.

And the  evolution to ball in hand rugby has gone nowhere. We won both the games against NZ with the rolling maul. There is zero evidence of anything more sophisticated in our back play, just the occasional broken field pyrotechnics by Kolbe and Arendse.

Is that fulsome enough for you? As I explained before the RC started we couldn’t have a better schedule….next year the old chickens come home to roost.

Man of the Match Allende……hahaha….stand by.

Rassie has been building this team since Snorre was the Bok coach....his predecessors could do Jack with the same players...Meyer could only beat the Allblacks twice...Rassie beat them in NZ with his first attempt.

Rasmus was 7 and 7 in his first year. Lost to Wales twice…..keep it real.

Dave

Mozart is a prejudced rugby dud  so he cannot be embarrassed.

I’m never embarrassed repeating facts.

Rassie is more real about it than some of the fans:

“The Ireland game was a drop goal, the game we lost in the World Cup, with the last maul we could have scored a try. Then there was a lot of games which we only won by one point so we’re very realistic of where we are, a lot of the games could have gone against us.

“I think it’s important to understand that, for us, four wins is nice to have but they’ve beaten us six times in a row which we were part of,” Erasmus explained.

“We’ve had big scores against them… there’s nothing to brag about, they’ve done worse to us. But it feels good that we can pip a team like this again."

Yes,  he's humble and obviously the margin is slim, but it's a sight better than under Coetzee and Meyer before him...for whatever reasons...Rassie has to feature amongst the factors for Bok success. 

Rassie is writing a brilliant chapter in Bok history, I pity the coach who takes over from him.

The facts don't lie and knockers like myself should relax and enjoy the ride.

It doesn't matter how the Boks win as long as they win........with the amount of changes he makes every week it's understandable for the Boks to evolve at a slower pace.

Rassie has to feature amongst the factors for Bok success.

I'm sure he does. I'm an outsider so I can't make a call on how much Rassie has influenced the side. I don't have an issue with him though. Having read his book you also gain a better understanding of the man and what makes him tick. There are many shortcomings in the Bok game, like we still rely largely on defense to win and the maul to score tries and we still do stupid things tactically like persisting with high balls onto the wing in the second test against Ireland despite losing every aerial battle in that game. We've won many games where we weren't even close to being the dominant side, but then what's worse - winning while not dominating or losing while dominating (like France, NZ, etc.)? 

I think the Boks right now are struggling to find a pattern in their play. Brown's stuff seemed to be positive at first, but we didn't look comfortable in attack in either game against the All Blacks. We have Kolbe's occasional bursts and Willie's distribution and Sacha's breaks and some individual countering like Fassi the previous week, but outside of that it's still looking pretty disjointed and uncertain on the attacking side.

Agree.

Pakie

You are mixed up on the issue as well.   The usgae of losies to partake in attacking backlne lay is aready in evidence and  that key element already getting to scoring of tries in the test in Australia by Du Toit and by Kolisi on Saturday/   

In fact maul tries are scored when the player remains part of the maul and when any player separate from the maul after it stopped going forward it is not a maul try at all.   In fact there were at most two maul tries scored thus far in he RC series by the Sprigboks - the rest stemmed from players leaving the maul - like happened in the tries by Mbonambi and Marx against the AB's.   

In fact is much the same as a player scoring after a scrum or a breakdown ball recovery or turnover.    

There ar also factors that does not meet with the difference in games played by the AB;s and the Springboks.   There are still some problems in applying te game plan used by players,   It is very difficult to change the habits of players and their play psychology.   After 24 years of forward based rugby with no real game plan for backline players it s diffcult to implement a new basis of play for players.   Rassie started with changes in  approach  when backline players in 2018 scored more tries in 2018 than the whole Springbok team scored in 2012 - those years the first years respectively of Meyer's and his year of coaching respectively.   Since 2018 backline coaching was to an extent neglected by the backline and attack coaches of the Springboks and reliance on penalty kicks became the norm.

That brings me back to the AB's game plan.   Carter kicked the ball even more times than Morne did - yet kicking is part of their game plan.   The difference  is wether kicks are straegic or not.  - in the case of Carter his kicks were strtegic and in the case of Morne it was not.   In the case of the last five tests the difference in game plan became more evident.    In the second test aganst the Aussies this year  the playing conditions was atrocious that cause a more kicking orientation and more realiance on corner kicking when it came to he game plan and usage to mauls and in two of the three tries scored againt the Aussies of 2 tries came from breakaways from mauls by players - the same applies to scoring of tries by a player still part of he mauls when scoring.- when a maul stopped making progress and ball carriers get awa in carrying the alls it is not a maul try anymore.   So be very careful about description as to what maul tries mean.

There is a probem though and that relates to two key players of the team and those are Pollard and Le Roux and those were very evident on Saturday.   Pollard and  Le Roux lost a lot of pace and tend to be non-participants in attacking play.   That is why Pollard was replaced rather early on Saturday.   After Pollard was replaced the backline of the Springboks functioned better than when he was on the field.

None of the tries scored on Saturday were maul tries - anyway.    Both had elements of  play the AB's used effecively for years and to condemn the new playing style after 7 matches and saying it is not in evidence is nonsence .   It will develop further and become much better in future as players get used to it and get better in execution.   

In the emantime I am happy about the Springbks winning 6 of the 7 tests played and the fact that the losing one came from a 2 drop kicks by the Irish flyhalf and nothing bar silly mistakes by a player giving away penalties is not the result of any game plan anywyay,   

Pleazse give the players a chance oer the next year and we ca n discuss the topic again.   

                    .      .          

Dave 

I am with you as to the above -  I am seeng a better furure  uder tie coaching of Erasmus and with the help of Browne  more attacking Springbok team.   Both Meyer and Coetzee destroyed Springbok rugby and players and makng wild statements about Erasmus inheriting players from Erasmus and Coetzee is the joke of the century.   The fact is the players he inherited was  - like in the case of Pollard - who never played in a test in 2016 and 2017 and the center combination of Krieland De llende partnered each other as centers in three tests in 2016 and 2017.    The match losses against Japan in 2015 and Italy in 2017 showed a disastrous level to which the teams deteriorated under Meyer and Coetzee resspecively.   To claim that Meyer and Coetzee had a positive role in player development is a farce.   After all both were fired  by the clubs they coached subsequently because of thei gross incompetence and now the greatest rugby idiot ever on site - claimed that Easmus inherited functioning players from them. is the biggest joke ever  this  century by the biggest and most prejudiced site idiot ever.

   .   

    .   

Which games have we been dominated and won - what a load of rubbish

I said "We've won many games where we weren't even close to being the dominant side".

World Cup against France, as an example. We had to make double the tackles, only managed half the rucks, we had 40% possession and 37% territory. France beat almost 4 times more defenders than we did, made double the clean breaks, made six times the offloads, almost double the passes and double the runs.

World Cup final against 14 NZers - again we had to make more than double the tackles, they beat 3 times the tacklers, won double the rucks, made almost three times more passes, made almost double the runs.

Pakie - 

So despite all your facts the French lost the match  and so did the English and the AB's.   I find your comment as to the red card in the final that decided the outcome rather weird, espeially since .ignore the red card on Etserhuizen as no factor at all.   Aside from that the Springboks had two yellow cards in the test against the AB's you referred to.   Yet despite all our stats he Spingboks won he WC  and comment that they won it unfairly is not an issue..

We also won the match on Saturday and with it the Freedom Cup - the first time since 2009 and we effectivly also won he RC tournament already even if we lose both tests against the Pumas.  

I do not dispute facts I believe in the final outcomes that decide who wins and who losess.   That in the end is the decisive issue.

Incidentally - De Allende scored two decisive tries - namely the try in the semi against Wales in 2019 and the one zgaisnst te French in the 2023 quarterfinal - and for those he gets no credit at all.    Be fair for a change in that regard.    .    .   

 .   /         

Draad

"Meyer could only beat the Allblacks twice.'"

I must be going dilly - I only remember one victory in Johannesburg in 2014 - when was the other match he Springboks beat the AB's.?   

Aside from that the Springboks had two yellow cards in the test against the AB's you referred to.

And your point is? Once you get a red, you are permanently at a disadvantage. If the opposition gets a yellow, that doesn't put you a man up, it just gives you parity.

So, the ABs had an early yellow, and then Cane red in the 27th minute. That's 63 minutes with 14 men.

The Boks had two yellows, Kolbe's with 7 minutes to go, so they were 17 minutes at 14 men.

In the first half the Boks thus had a man extra advantage for 23 minutes.

In the second half they had a man extra advantage for 40-17 (yellows) minutes = 23 minutes as well.

The Boks thus had 46 minutes with a man up, never a man down.

The All Blacks had 46 minutes with a man down, never a man up.

Yeah, the yellows really evened things out, eh?

espeially since .ignore the red card on Etserhuizen as no factor at all

Wot, against Portugal? Yeah I'm sure that was a huge factor.

"Draad

"Meyer could only beat the Allblacks twice.'"

I must be going dilly - I only remember one victory in Johannesburg in 2014 - when was the other match he Springboks beat the AB's.?   "

You are correct Maaik...the other post 2009 Bok victory was also Snôrre's in 2011...in PE before the RWC...when Rassie also coached them...

HM’s last team in 2015. Nine years later 6 members of that team started on Saturday. 7 members started in the last WC final. 9 members started in the 2019 WC  final. 

Here’s the NZ team who played against the Bok team above. Not one player survived . The point is Rasmus was given a great start by HM’s team. The idea he rebuilt our team is nonsense,

New Zealand: B. Smith; Milner-Skudder, C. Smith, Nonu, Savea; Carter, A. Smith; Moody, Coles, O. Franks; Retallick, Whitelock; Kaino, McCaw, Read

He never rebuilt the team….he took us back to our traditional strengths with essentially the same team. Something you were dead set against…see the old string above.

HM failed because his defense….Lomp and Dud Allende…,failed in the crunch. The 2023 defense held tight….just.

Why did they….because they didn’t!

Tries scored:

Clean breaks

Defenders beaten

Offloads

And then the stat that shows what we were doing instead of attacking:

Tackling:

Even worse these are 2023 stats. But Billy was talking shit NZ scored the most tries in 2019 even though they played a game less. We played boring rugby, as you call it, in both WCs….with bright moments against the minnows.

Same reason you were negative about our 2007 team Dave….I don’t feel we are playing to our potential. In competitive life ( I learned this in the consumer products business) it’s all about getting better. 

What’s happened is, with the addition of Fassi, the magnificent Kolbe, Arendse, Am, Sacha, Ox and even Bongi to our team….,we are much better than we would have been. We now have the player pool NZ always had.

So it’s time to set our sights higher….to win using all the weapons. If we keep striving to do that and crucially, remembering not to forget the forward and defensive platforms….we can dominate rugby.

That would be my vision..,,not being satisfied beating a team of NZ youngsters on our home turf.