Predictable Boks

If the Boks are going to bash it up with the forwards the whole game, they at least need to vary the moves. We were thoroughly beaten at the breakdown last night because we had almost no variation in play. From basically every ruck we pass it to a waiting pod of forwards or Schalk or another loosie if there was not time to form said pod. The problem was Wales knew exactly what was coming, tackled the ball carrier and had their fetchers ready and waiting to pilfer our ball. They were stealing ball at will, and that loss of possession nearly handed them the game. We may have big strong ball carriers, but when it is utterly predictable, they will be exposed. Even Pollard, although he attacked well, was so predictable! We got away with it last night, but if I were Hansen, i'd be licking my lips at the prospect of such a simple strategy offering easy pickings for my fetchers. 

I'm reviewing the All Black game and laughing at all the hype. Don't fret Bluebok, NZ had a very easy game. Of course, New Zealand will always be a challenge, but that French team was absolutely hopeless. On the rare occasion they applied pressure they had New Zealand going backwards and fumbling the ball. It was a total implosion by the coaching team who obviously had no conviction in leading or preparing their team to actually win. 

 Your kidding right Desert Fox? Seriousley give your certificate up, your lack of rugby knowledge is laughable. Ask anyone that was the performance of the wc. If NZ play with that form, they well put 20 on SA, stop twisting things. Seriousley if don't think NZ played that well, maybe you should re watch it. And what turnaround? Seriousley mate your in the minority, their would be a lot of people that would disagree with you, I mean open your eyes.

So tell me how NZ can play against a scheme when they have such a think spread shape? Against the Boks they'll have to concentrate many more resources to secure possession. Louw is the second leading pilfer threat in the competition, and the Boks are more physical than France. Can you see how they will require a different approach? New Zealand will play as they have done before, dominate the territorial battle with the boot and pick us off with opportunistic strikes. The team Meyer is likely to go with cannot compete with an aerial battle. French committed very few numbers at the breakdown and defended with a passive drift on the inside that turned into a jockying/scramble defence out wide. The French back three were terrible on defence. Why did their opensider wing always hang in behind the line a long way back when it was clear that NZ were looking to exploit the overlap? It allowed NZ to attack on their terms, picking and choosing their spots with numbers. Many tries were scored through this alone! On the rare occasion that France used an umbrella they cut out NZ's wide game and started to apply some pressure, they caught NZ well behind the gainline each time they did this and once got a good turnover that should have been a try had they handled the ball properly. When France played directly in the early second half they made NZ's defence look ordinary, but after conceding that early try they became passive again, backing off from NZ and allowing their wide-wide game the space to work either flank any way they pleased. The All Blacks have two forwards allocated to each side of the field. So it was easy pickings as they advanced into the open flanks with overwhelming support. If NZ play this game against the Boks, though, fhey will be beaten. But don't worry, Hansen is much brighter than you are so they won't. 

 DF,

yours is pure verbosity, verbal diarrhoea,....... you don't even know WTF are you talking about,..... if you think that using some apparent and attractive words in endless sentences like "rushing out-in Defence with a pod of forwards on the outside cut off" or "defended with a passive drift on the inside that turned into a jockying/scramble defence out wide" make you look like you had any idea of rugby, you are very wrong. You just look like a pedant who has no f*cking idea of rugby.


"NZ had a very easy game"

this couldn't be more funny coming from a bok supporter. We all could see yesterday the boks playing their usual antedilluvian gameplan, the most predictable gameplan one could imagine.
As bluebok said, and any other knowing the elemental would have said, the boks "bash it up with the forwards the whole game",... "We were thoroughly beaten at the breakdown last night because we had almost no variation in play",.....
The AB played the total-rugby, they were attacking from everywhere on the field, counter-attacking, every player became a menace in attack and the French couldn't even know what was hitting them.


"If NZ play this game against the Boks they will be slaughtered"

we'll see next weekend who is slaughtered

Basque, you are in danger of looking like a fool. You are quick to criticize me but unable to bring any facts to the table. What I speak of is what happened in game. Shall we take this further and have a full video review? So... 

1. You deny the French defended passively for almost the entire game? 
2. You deny the French failed to seal off the outside and allowed NZ to advance in numbers out wide? You deny that France were tracking back instead of applying pressure?
3. You deny that the back three were positionally caught out and allowed NZ to repeatedly out flank France? 
4. You deny that NZ used a wide spread of pods to stretch the French defence, playing a wide-wide game (especially earlier on when the game had more structure)? 

I just want you to confirm exactly in no uncertain terms exactly what you think happened. I also want to know this.

1. Do you think Wales applied less defensive pressure than France? 
2. Do you think it was easier to attack wide against Wales than it was to attack Wales wide?

Again, a simple answer will do. Then we can proceed from there. Oh, and one last thing:

1. Do you think NZ can run the same pattern and gameplan against a faster line speed cutting off the outside? 
2. Do you think NZ will be more or less susceptible to turnovers spreading their forwards out? 

That is all.

 "I do enjoy a good scalp to add to my ever growing collection."

how old are you, 6 or 7?


"Quick to criticize me but unable to actually bring any facts to that table"

South Africa 23- Wales 19
New Zealand 62-France 13

The rest of your post is pure Bs,.... verbal diarrhoea,....... in every match ended in a thrashing anyone could make the same exercise you did to dismiss the victory and put all the blame on the defeated team but a team is as bad as the opponent force them to be (or as good as the opponrent let them be). As I said yours is pure verbosity.

If you want to know what happened yesterday, read the press:

All Blacks as close as it comes to rugby perfection

and the same is said in every other article about the game

You are side-stepping the questions Basque. Just a yes or a no for each one will suffice. You claim France were better value than Wales and that France did not contribute to their own demise. Of the tries NZ scored I counted two that weren't soft or the result of a total implosion on defence. I will deal with each at a later date. For now, just answer my questions. I make it very easy for you.

 "For now, just answer my questions"

Who the f*ck do you think you are to tell me what do I have to do?
I don't waste my time with this kind of BS and verbal diarrhoea

"You claim France were better value than Wales"
never said so

 Poor old Basque. He does get so indignant when somebody expresses an opinion contrary to his. How dare they!

So one has to ask. Are the Abs who were well handled in games by Oz, the Boks and even the Bargies earlier in the tournament.....suddenly supermen? Or did they encounter very weak opponents. Logic would suggest the latter. France missed almost every first up tackle, had their best player binned and totally lost interest after 5 minutes in the second half. 
Of those factors by far the most important was first time tackles. France gave every NZ runner a psychological shove in the back with pathetic tackling. Early in the game when they were trying they turned over a few balls....but you cant compete on the ground if you miss your first tackle.....that's the target point for the fetchers.

NZ are an awesome team....but the French could not have been worse. Their right wing for example was embarrassing...scared of contact. Only Spedding, Fofana and Picamoles came to play.
If the ABs remaining opponent(s) make their first tackle all that hoopla will disappear.

 You put yourself o n the spot buddy boy. But if you choose the way of the white flag I won't think any less of you. LOL! 

 @mozart,

"Poor old Basque. He does get so indignant when somebody expresses an opinion contrary to his."

this was not an opinion at all: "For now, just answer my questions".
This was an order, you'd rather put your deficient understanding in order before coming to defend your fellow rugby ignorant.
And I don't accept orders from nobody,.... much less from such an insignificant poor man


"So one has to ask. Are the Abs who were well handled in games by Oz, the Boks and even the Bargies earlier in the tournament.....suddenly supermen?"

no, they're just the best team in the world,...... light years far from where the boks with their predictable gameplan are after loosing against a minnow like Japan,.... after loosing against Argentina at home,.... after loosing against the aussies,..... after loosing against the AB at home,..... after loosing against Wales,..... after loosing against ireland,....... only this last year

 @DF,

I don't side-step the questions, I don't put myself in any spot,.... it's very simple, your questions are a waste of time, you have no f*cking idea of rugby

and I don't choose any white flag,... I keep my statements:
the AB gave a masterclass and the boks showed how poor they are and how predictable their gameplan is.

The Boks played the vastly superior opposition. It's not even remotely close. It's questionable whether New Zealand would have beaten Wales. 
I'll leave you to retire with your ego intact. 

 the french stretched the all blacks a lot more then the welsh did the boks....if you think a few point stretch against a injury ravaged team like the welsh qualifys more than the french then i am sad to say thats not a fair reflection. the french was just blown away. the all blacks made then look bad and our bok team was lucky to streak this game with a absolute rubbish display. if wales had there first choice team we would be heading home. 
aimless kicking defending and pick up and goes is not a rwc winning game pattern......a quality side like the pumas nz and the aussies will eat this mindless crap up for breakfest. if we want to win the rwc you need more to challenge for the cup.
meyer once again showed his brainless tactics.....

 the only one in "egg-to-face territory" is you yourself. You are the only one (probably in the whole world) who can say and back such a brainless statement after yesterday's performances:

"Boks played the better rugby in an actual test"

You'd rather read what all the press, and everybody who knows the elemental, is saying,... and learn a bit

For about 10 minutes into the second half, yes they did stretch NZ. Overall, France were the weakest performing QF team by quite some distance. Their attack was putrid, one off runners with support standing still about 2m back. Not enough men at the breakdown. Weak under the high ball all game. Back three were a mess on defence, not coming up when NZ went wide instead they jockeyed passively back, ruck after ruck. If you allow New Zealand quick ball from uncontested rucks, you have to form a strong line and apply pressure. It's suicide to gift them free ball and space on the outside. There was no edge defender to beat. It was the reverse umbrella defence! Every kind of mistake you can think of was made. The players looked hesitant. They clearly didn't mention know how to cope with New Zealand and execute this ridiculous gameplan. 
Wales were far more dangerous than France. We faced the most physical opponent and had by far the toughest game. They place their 9 and openside wing in the line. The weakness is that the fullback has to cover an enormous amount of space out wide, but the strength is that they have a solid line across the width of the pitch. The outside rush is very quick and they are physically and aggressive all across the line. It's hard to exploit the space at the back as the rush is in your face so quickly. So, you have to find for every inch inside. It was an absolute arm wrestle. 
We had to fight for what we got. New Zealand got it for free. To insinuate that New Zealand was is adequately tested is ridiculous. The problem here is that New Zealanders can't cope with criticism or even another nation receiving praise. Of course New Zealand are going to defeat the Boks in all likelihood. However, I guarantee it will be significantly harder. They will play a different game. New Zealand won't ever approach the Boks with such a loose gameplan. We can discuss this again in the aftermath of the Bok game. 

 "Basquetcase, when you can put your money where your big fat ignorant mouth is then come talk to me. Until then, sit there with your dimmy in your mouth waving your white flag. Comprende? Good."

really????'
what a poor man you are

 ab dont waste your time mate....this plonker is clutching at straws and cant function with other normal adults hence the childish name calling and poor comebacks.