Oom Rugby makes some very interesting points

Forum » Rugby » Oom Rugby makes some very interesting points

Nov 07, 2019, 15:52

https://www.sarugbymag.co.za/oom-rugby-breaks-down-the-moments-that-mattered



Read this article, it's perhaps the best description of some of the micro things the Boks did to succeed. I commented elsewhere on Stephanie's rush defence onto Ford. Interesting because Rassie himself used exactly the same tactic onto Larkham in the early 2000 period. The Aussies became so frustrated they put Matt Cockbain on the field who punched Erasmus into oblivion on the deck.


It's cool that this tactic was resurrected for the big game....but it's so disruptive one wonders why every team doesn't do it.

The point on the 3 on 2 running pods echo stuff Augie has written and the double tackles was another interesting observation. This starts to make sense of the English malaise.

Nov 07, 2019, 16:13

Faf also plays a huge role in getting into the faces of the opposition causing an absolute nuisance all the time

Faf is great at blunting sides momentum

Nov 07, 2019, 16:25

Very true..in that move where Kolbe smothers Lawes, I think Faf tackles Vunipola. He was a disruptive force the whole game. But if you haven't had a chance, read the article.....lots of interesting points, eg the 7s defence rotation.

Nov 07, 2019, 18:04

I commented elsewhere on Stephanie's rush defence onto Ford.

Very similar to the way we used Esterhuizen against Foley in the Australia game in JHB earlier this year.

Excellent article.

Nov 07, 2019, 18:26

Indeed, put some things into perspective...this whole RWC was planned in the finest of detail. 

Nov 07, 2019, 21:29

Good read - reinforcing how astute Rassie was in making the changes that threw the Poms and completely outplayed them

Nov 07, 2019, 22:17

The amazing thing about Erasmus coaching is how in the space of a week he transformed a rubbish kicking game(Wales) into a near clinical demolition of England. That takes some coaching. It can be done......but in the space of a week!!!?

Nov 07, 2019, 22:33

Against Wales he clearly wanted us to kick everything and England were expecting the same in the final.

The change in plan threw the Poms like the subtle change of moving the kicking from 9 to 10

We were hoping Rassie would change the plan for the final and he did

Master stroke

Nov 07, 2019, 22:51

Denny

There is one thing that was clear from the article was that the  Springboks play is more related to variation.   Swys de Bruin said that Erasmus in a meeting in May 2018 outlined the way the game should be played,    There were never any changes to the plan.  The plan allows for variation - but  one has to look what happened in the Welsh game.  The only problem for 2018 was to test players to see how they perform and fit into the plan and make sure that this year you end up with a team that could be the best players to execute strategies.   That is why a number of players missed the boat.   

Before the game the players were fully informed how the game would be played,   Some players had an off day at work and there were indeed problems.   Erasmus told he players that in all previous tests over the last 4 years SA tried to beat Wales by pace and it did not work out.   So he instructed De Klerk to kick the leather off the ball.  

The long term plan of Erasmus aimed at getting SA out of a mess was always consistent - hence the higher number of tries scored compared to  tries given away,  I think the key with Erasmus is to study the games of opposition countries and then determine where they have weaknesses and how to exploit those. 

I think Erasmus is a type of coach Australia would pay a fortune for. 

    

Nov 07, 2019, 22:58

Only an Ozzie can coach an Ozzie team. There are reasons why. Don't get carried away.

Nov 07, 2019, 22:59

:D:D:D Just a joke!!!!!!!!!!!

That would be rather difficult,   The senior coach is from the Melbourne Rebels - a South African. Next in Seniority is the Brumbies - an Australian, then the Queensland Reds - a New Zealander - finally the Waratahs,   I do not think there is a multitude of Australian coaches working in the NH or even outside Australia,   

Nov 07, 2019, 23:05

Mike, tx for the invite but my stay will be for short(10 days)......next time.:)

Nov 07, 2019, 23:08

Thanks, Oom's on the ball, with his analysis up there with our Pakie. Yo, & now I know why Stick's on the payroll.

Nov 07, 2019, 23:24

Looking at a game from above gives one more detailed understanding of a game plan tactics and implementation


It is much easier to see rugby as a chess match from above. No wonder Rassie used to be on the stadium roof for the Cheetas. 

Nov 07, 2019, 23:38

No wonder Rassie used to be on the stadium roof for the Cheetas.


:)


Nov 14, 2019, 15:36

So, what happened to the argument that the only way forward for SA was to get an overseas coach?

Nov 14, 2019, 15:50

There was no argument after the return of Erasmus - other than from some members who nearly ha a seizure about the appointment with deriding posts flooding the site,

Now that there is the fact that the Chief Coach vacancy will be filled the ideas are flooding in again,  If Nienaber does not want the post - to my mind it should go to a foreign coach.  Who else is available?   

Nov 14, 2019, 15:50

There was no argument after the return of Erasmus - other than from some members who nearly ha a seizure about the appointment with deriding posts flooding the site,

Now that there is the fact that the Chief Coach vacancy will be filled the ideas are flooding in again,  If Nienaber does not want the post - to my mind it should go to a foreign coach.  Who else is available?   

Nov 14, 2019, 16:00

What notable thing did Brits say about his retirement and that may stop some of the things written under this thread:-

“It was a season of sacrifice, but it was worth it. When we saw Rassie’s plan – and everyone bought in – we knew what we could achieve and all of us worked towards that goal.

“Everyone knew their roles and how much hard work it would take, and we got stuck in. As a squad, we spent a lot of time together and it was unbelievable being part of this experience.”

 SO THE PLAN SOME MEMBERS CLAIMED DID NOT EXIST - WAS ALWAYS USED - WITH SOME VARIATION.   EVERY PLAYER KNEW HIS  ROLE AND OBVIOUSLY HOW TO ASSIST OTHER PLAYERS AS WELL,     

Nov 14, 2019, 17:45

And yet this was what Muck said in March 2019:

Anybody referring to  "The Bok coach believes the Boks are at their best if they play their traditional power game where they smash their opponents into submission rather than using skill and guile to outsmart their opponents. "  is a total nut case.   That approach was dead and buried  fifty years ago when modern dietary and training techniques resulted in a more equal situation as to forward play - there is no way that that was not total BS.   

......... 


'That approach was dead and buried'.....except that's exactly what the Boks did to win the WC. Allende smashed it up, with 2 offloads against the pasta eaters. For the rest we never had one planned backline movement in the playoffs....a few tries from turnover ball.


And in the WC final we saw the opposite of expansive rugby, the traditional Bokgame of subdue and penetrate.


The  big news,  and it's directly contrary to the Muck doctrine, is that Traditional Bok Rugby elevates us to leadership in the game and is very effective at the WC. My guess is faced with that Pom opposition even HM's newbie handicapped Boks would have won the WC.

Nov 14, 2019, 19:08

Are you referring to what Brits said?  Does not seem so since you were disparaging  of Erasmus from the word go/

What is expansive rugby?   I believe that I normally refer to comprehensive rugby and this is exactly what I always referred to.   What I am dead set against is slow and useless loosies whom you always supported in the past.   Fact is that' story you quoted is 100% the case world wide and factual as well.   So what is required a different plan to beat the forwards within the rigby environment.   There are countries with very strong forward packs - eg Georgia _ yet they get beaten through teams with the right technique,  They also get beaten because their loosies are not mobile enough and lack ball skills.

What you used to support has nothing to do with anything bar ten-man rugby which is as dead as a doornail.  Hence your erstwhile statement that 90% of the requirements of a flyhalf is to kick balls.   Comprehensive rugby as played in the WC by the Springboks has nothing to do with the rugby you used to support and that fact is supported by the  huge increase n try-scoring by backline players.

Never Mozart

Meyer could not compile a game plan if it hit him in the face.  He was recently fired by Stade Francais because of exactly his coaching incapability,   To come u with that is in fact a real joke



                 

Nov 14, 2019, 20:42

I am referring to your confident assertion that physical dominance was dead....in the aftermath of a WC won by physical dominance.

This would be a good moment to admit you were dead wrong.

Nov 14, 2019, 21:00

Can you read English or are you just plain ignorant.   Planning technique and counter-measures are nowadays needed.   Do you understand  what that means?

Are you still ducking and diving about Erasmus coaching and still think the same as a month ago? .    

Nov 14, 2019, 21:32

The only ducking and diving bellyflops are coming from you ou  groot  pens. You said physical dominance is dead, but fortunately they never gave the Beast the message.

Nov 15, 2019, 07:36

Mozart

I said what is real in rugby and that is that players are getting stronger and bigger in the Tight 5 situations - so technique is to be a major consideration in getting the upper hand.   

The fact is that a lot is being said about Nienaber and defense and nothing yet about Proudfoot insofar as improved scrumming is concerned,   Beast was not so good in 2017 and showed huge improvement in 2018 and 2019.   

But you are ducking in diving about the real issue under discussion and in particular the coaching that you have previously being attacking Erasmus on.   So no amount of personal attacks would help you  out here.  I asked some real questions and you really are just causing your normal  clueless methods in response..  

Nov 15, 2019, 11:35

Come on Moz. Give Ou Maaikie some credit. We all know that Beast is not particularly strong and that it is all about technique. Just check out his superior technique in this picture. 


Nov 15, 2019, 12:19

Ceradunce

You are losing it again - I man that little brain cell of yours is malfunctioning again.   I never said anything about Beast's strength - I merely said technique allows for improvement of his scrumming performance since 2018.

So the total collapse in thinking ability came to the fore again in your case.         

Nov 15, 2019, 12:37

Oh come now, Draad.

The Goats don't have the brainpower to play an intelligent game.

Take a good look at Frans Steyn ... how confident are you that he can even count to 5 without the use of his fingers?

How about Malherbe?

No my friend ... the Goats were guided by some exterior force. A total fluke. It will never happen again.



Nov 15, 2019, 13:08

CC

I am a close friend of the Malherbe family and Frans is not at all stupid as alleged,   Fact is he is investing his money well in property and already amongst others own two luxury homes in the Cape Town area.   He also knows his rugby well and that counts for a lot.  Is studying part time as well. 

A humble and great person to know.     

Nov 15, 2019, 14:54

My apologies, Mike. I'm sure he's a great guy.



Nov 15, 2019, 16:46

Let me be clear about the coaching:

1 Nienaber did a WC winning job with the defence.

2 Proudfoot  did a credible job with our scrums. But let's be honest we never really dominated until the final and that had more to do with Coles than Proudfoot.

3 Our lineout was reliable, but not really aggressive.....apart from Etzebeth at the front. Given our physical resources I would say the coaching there was adequate, no better.

4 Our general tactics were classical Bok strategy.....defence, fast wings to exploit turnover ball.....if in doubt, kick. I'm absolutely delighted we went back to that formula.

5 The head coach gets credit for the defensive coach, reverting to Bok traditions and executing them very well. He gets credit technical changes like 3 man pods and double tackles.

6 The head coach gets credit  for having a happy team and motivating them well. He also gets credit for the best public relations effort in all our WCs. The Kolisi story....the for the people narrative. It all built unprecedented good will, so even our stodgy tactics weren't dumped on as in 99 for example.

7 The main disappointment was the lack of progress in simple forward handling and  backline play. This team did very little with huge quantities of good ball. That could have hurt us in terms of chasing a lead, as in the ABs pool game. But we were never in that position, for which I give him credit for  being lucky....luckiest guy to ever coach the Boks. And that's not a bad thing.

Nov 15, 2019, 17:10

Moz, there is one slight, but very significant difference...and I'm going to compare Rassie to Meyer here.

I'm not a Meyer hater and think he is a good coach, but IMO he gambled too much on his older players like Jean, Matfield and FdP...but I can live with that too. 

The difference: Under Heineke there was a strict game plan and players had no autonomy to make decisions that deviated from that plan.

Under Rassie the game plan is basically the same, but players are given the freedom to express themselves if they see opportunities, hence the slight variation in our game...and the odd try more. He brought a bit of fun back for the players and some team culture...like Razor did for the Saders. I think the stress of the job got to Meyer and he and the players lost the "fun". Rugby should by fun...it's a game after all. 

That's how I connect the dots. 

Nov 15, 2019, 17:22

Sure - but the ball handling story is tommyrot,  The team had the highest try-scoring record in the WC and of the 50 tries scored in 2019, 37 was scored by backline players and only 13 by forwards,  A lot of backline tries involve forwards in the attack  - two typical examples was in the two tries in the final.  

Then about the kicking story - fact is the kicking was in the main strategic - not the madness we had in the Meyer era and under Coetzee.   There were some mistakes made - but not a constant stream like under previous coaches. 

In essence  I disagree about the scrumming in all WC tests,   In the AB test the situation was not as good as it was in all other tests and the fact is that the scrumming improved when De Jager replaced  Mostert as a lock in the major tests.     Even in the final the same level of scrumming remained while Beast and Malherbe was on the field - thereafter it weakened substantially.

        

Nov 15, 2019, 17:36

Scoring of tries by backs and forwards doesn't indicate style of play Lügnerin. In fact, a lack of participation by the forwards would tend to indicate a lack of involvement or inadequacy of those forwards. 

You are from a bygone era, a time when rugby was played in such black and white terms. The structures you think of don't exist today. The game has changed a lot. It's best you try and catch-up. 

Nov 15, 2019, 18:09

That's fair comment Draad. The injury to Jean against Wales was pretty horrible and it would have been a miracle if Jean came back 100%. But he was the captain and HM gambled on his fitness, the way Eraser did on Kolisi's fitness.


Matfield was injured during the WC and the semi was his game back. He should have been playing 20 minutes in a low key match, but the schedule never allowed for that. 

Matfield subbed on for Lomp at minute 60, and had little impact barring the neck roll penalty. Mind you Lomp missed Kaino for a crucial AB try and did nothing of note.....and Matfield was a worthy MOM in the Bronze. So was HM really unwise.....I don't see it.

What is certainly true is that Eraser had a happier team and more support from the media. They went for a very similar game plan....but Nienaber was more competent than HM's defensive coach. Eraser also faced NZ at a better time.

Nov 15, 2019, 18:27

Lets face facts - it was not a gamble to select De Villiers - he had a poor game against the Argentinians  in Durban in the RC and was no good in that test.   Beside that he was injured in that game too so it was not a gamble - it was stupidity of Meyer.  He should have read the signs as to selection on the basis of performance - there was zero on the part of  Morne Steyn and Willem Alberts - yet they were in the squad - two of the unplayables  I always referred to,   The other really poor squad selection who  was also a  zero performer in the SR series - in the few games he did play in - was Matfield.   His contribution in the 2015 WC  series was valueless at best.

       

Nov 15, 2019, 18:40

But you said the same things about Vermeulen, Louw and the Beast in 2019 and they were crucial to our wins. F du Preez won the Welsh test in 2015.


Your arguments dont hold water. The old guys never lost the WC in 2015 Lomp, Allende and Kriel did. 

Nov 15, 2019, 18:58

“ The difference: Under Heineke there was a strict game plan and players had no autonomy to make decisions that deviated from that plan.”

Any critique about Faf’s kicking in the games leading to the final was met with “... yeah, but he was instructed to kick, that was the game plan, he had no choice, etc, etc....”

 
You need to Log in to reply.
Back to top