FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Rugby: All Blacks lose in Johannesburg thriller; NZ Herald.

Rugby: All Blacks lose in Johannesburg thriller; NZ Herald.

Started by Just_win14 REPLIES175 VIEWS· 04 Oct 2014, 20:09
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
04 Oct 2014, 20:09
#1
04 Oct 2014, 20:09#1

SOUTH AFRICA 27
NEW ZEALAND 25

A brilliant game. A bad result. But the All Blacks can't feel too down about suffering their first loss in who knows how many games.

The Boks took their win. They fought for everything. They were superb everywhere and maybe they were a bit lucky with the final penalty - but no one could begrudge them their win.

It was yet another epic encounter between these two and what's become clear is that while there is nothing between them - there is a big gap back to everyone else now.

While the All Blacks can take some solace in the fact South Africa had to win with a superb performance - they will still feel a little upset that they didn't quite shut the door after a clawing their way back in front.

To get back into the game when they were 24-13 down at half-time was a huge effort by the All Blacks.

South Africa were running rampant at that point and Ellis Park felt like the scariest place in the world. But the All Blacks, as they have done so often, believed in their game.

They spurned shots for goal and opted to keep the pressure on. And on. They camped in the Bok 22 and eventually the pressure told. Two tries came and the All Blacks were in front 25-24 with seven minutes remaining.

They looked like they had held on when they turned the ball over with two minutes left to win a scrum. But the crowd howled as a the big screen showed that Liam Messam had caught Schalk Burger earlier in the move with a head high.

It was accidental but it was a penalty which Pat Lambie nudged over from 55 metres to win. Well, the Boks had to survive a handy All Black attack before they won it.

It was a fittingly dramatic, epic ending for an epic game. The pace of the game was different world. No other teams could have lived with these two. It was at times a little difficult to comprehend how ferocious it was.

The breakdown especially. The Boks were superb at getting numbers and bodies in good positions and it never relented.

Perception about the Boks couldn't be any more wrong. Somehow they have become the world's great entertainers.

They were heading that way a little bit last year with the unearthing of Willie le Roux. But now they have Handrie Pollard as well - they are a team with the ability to cut teams up with basic catch-pass and run.

They were easily the more dangerous backline in the first half. Nearly everything they did troubled the All Blacks and perhaps most interesting of all, was their ability to turn defence into attack and launch deadly counter attacks from deep.

Francois Hougaard's opening try began pretty much on the Springbok goal-line and owed everything to awareness, pace and perfect support lines.


Francois Hougaard of South Africa on his way to scoring a try. Photo / Getty Images

Cornal Hendricks would have had another just before the break had it not been for a miracle recovery run by Malakai Fekitoa. He had no business beating the flying wing to smother the loose ball that had been booted downfield. But he got there and at least forced the Boks to make one more play to score the try.

That duly came when Pollard hit the line flat and hard and had the strength to spin over in the tackle.

The Boks looked just about unassailable at that stage until the All Blacks dug deep and pushed back to within a whisker of victory.

South Africa 27 (F. Hougaard, H. Pollard (2) tries; H. Pollard pen, 3 cons; P. Lambie pen)
New Zealand 24 (M. Fekitoa, B. Smith, D. Coles tries; B. Barrett 2 pens, 2 cons)

JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
04 Oct 2014, 20:13
#2
04 Oct 2014, 20:13#2
 NZ press fair about the result. Messam's penalty looked bad in slow motion by real time it didn't look so bad. I thought the penalty was fair - no yellow was required.
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,294 posts
04 Oct 2014, 20:22
#3
04 Oct 2014, 20:22#3
"while there is nothing between them - there is a big gap back to everyone else now". No other teams could have lived with these two. "
This is what I was thinking during the match. If the Boks had lost, the All Blacks were the only team that could have won with that performance. 
"Perception about the Boks couldn't be any more wrong. Somehow they have become the world's great entertainers. They were easily the more dangerous backline in the first half". 
The Backline play of the Boks has improved massively. This proves that Meyer is an excellent coach. The handling skills of the backs was really good. Lots of quick passes down the backline. 
I would like to see our SuperXV teams improve their game plan to be like the Boks in using the space of the field to attack from. Sometimes it does not look our SuperXV backlines practice during the week as they are not aware of where each other are on the field. 
Today it seemed like both teams were influencing each other. Mccaw made that excellant tackle to then win a turn over, and then Jean attempted exactly the same thing in the next movement and allowed a team mate to make the turnover by slowing it down. 
Both teams are really pushing each other to win. The Boks won today and were probably marginally the better team, but it could have gone either way. 
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,294 posts
04 Oct 2014, 20:25
#4
04 Oct 2014, 20:25#4
JW. Agreed it was not a yellow card. 
I think their is a difference between foul play and over robust play. Foul play is intentional, and over robust play is by accident. Rugby is a physical game and accidental errors sometimes happen. Like the high tackle on Burger by Kieren Read was most likely in accident. 
I dont think accidental play should get yellow cards unless it is extremely dangerous
BR
BrycyPro4,671 posts
04 Oct 2014, 20:28
#5
04 Oct 2014, 20:28#5
 Yup, good win to the Boks, I see Hansen is also  contemplating his future so good news for Dave Rennie who is the obvious choice as successor....wasn't expecting us to win without Cruden and Retallick so fair result...Barret out of his depth and completely outplayed by Pollard but hopefully dopey Hansen has learnt some valuable lessons going into next years RWC...
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
04 Oct 2014, 20:43
#6
04 Oct 2014, 20:43#6
Yes Brycy, we missed Retallick for sure. Barrett was ok IMO but who knows if Cruden would have made the difference.  SBW will be putting pressure on the 12 spot but Fekitoa looked good. 
BR
BrycyPro4,671 posts
04 Oct 2014, 23:46
#7
04 Oct 2014, 23:46#7

.. JW, not sure what game you were watching mate but Barret missed the tackle on Hougard that led to the first try...and then his opposite number scored two additional tries after that...so completely embarrassed by the teenager...

...pity it took a loss to make so many, dopey Hansen included, come to their senses and realise that Cruden is a much better option at 10...combined with SBW that's already a proven winning combination.....at least we're getting all these misconceptions sorted before the 2015 RWC so all good.


BE
becsPro4,378 posts
05 Oct 2014, 00:58
#8
05 Oct 2014, 00:58#8
 I hear Jake White is after a job, if Hansen does feel the need to jump ship  
SH
ShezzaPro2,471 posts
05 Oct 2014, 01:39
#9
05 Oct 2014, 01:39#9
Handre Pollard
New Zealand would be bloody stupid if they got rid of Hansen, as much as I hate the man he's a decent coach and is a lot better than Graham Henry ever was.
Handre Pollard
BR
BrycyPro4,671 posts
05 Oct 2014, 01:58
#10
05 Oct 2014, 01:58#10

 No ones getting rid of anyone...Hansen will be standing down on his own accord.

He's currently undecided but wants to make a decision on his future well before the RWC so that it's not a distraction. Sounds like he has a big family and his coaching commitments are putting a strain on things.

3K
3ku1Pro2,580 posts
05 Oct 2014, 04:53
#11
05 Oct 2014, 04:53#11
 Sorry Brycy your being incredibly unfair and very biast towards Barratt. SA had all possession in the first half. I thought Barratt was good under pressure. It was only his first two starts in intense surroundings. To say he was out of depth or write him off is short sighted. We all no how useless Cruden was in his first few tests, he was just like Barratt. Imo Barratt is far better then Cruden potentially just give him time. Pollard looked good becausd he had time and space, Barratt did not. 
BR
BrycyPro4,671 posts
05 Oct 2014, 09:32
#12
05 Oct 2014, 09:32#12

 ...Sorry 3ku1 maybe I'm being a bit harsh but for me Barret's game is too one dimensional. He's too predictable compared to Cruden who 's constantly keeping the opposition guessing..., Barret's kicking game is lacking  - kick off's often not contestable... he lacks the vision on attack you see from Cruden i.e Crudens Xfactor....you can blame the ref for the loss but for me we should have put away an aging Bok team easily - wasn't even there best team and should've won despite any ref - there will always be contentious decisions so we need to be far enough ahead to take the ref out of the equation....


....going into a World Cup year that approach we saw today isn't gunna be good enough to beat the top teams at the RWC...wasn't just Barret's fault we lost but can't see Barret leading us to victory somehow with performances like that - shown up by a teenager in Pollard not a good look...he tried his best I know and that's all you can ask from anyone.....But what you saw from Barret today is typically what you see at the Canes, despite a plethora of talent they fail to go on to achieve higher honours...yr probably forgetting the last NZ games they played they lost to the Blues, the Chiefs and the Highlanders...hardly confidence inspiring performances from Barret...I know he's not solely to blame there either...then there were the England (B team) tests when 30 pt  differentials decreased to narrow wins when Cruden was replaced by Barret..  


...Barret 's position is on the bench as an impact player as fresh legs to exploit tired bodies after Cruden has done the damage early... that is where he is more valuable as cover and has made a niche for himself there covering fullback , wing and standoff - such an incredibly versatile player he's indispensable in that role and a totally awesome impact player ...the Cruden/ SBW combo a much better option at 10 and 12 for the ABs RWC campaign...the Cruden SBW combo being already a proven winning formula and IMO that's the way forward...


..Plenty of other changes to consider on the back of that loss...plenty of very average performances by many and will be interesting to see what changes Hansen makes ahead of the next game but changes are a must if the ABs are to remain the greatest modern sporting franchise, that's excluding the Mighty Chiefs...

BO
bobbok...Captain10,129 posts
05 Oct 2014, 10:17
#13
05 Oct 2014, 10:17#13
 Brycy don't blame Barrett ....... Pollard's second try came after he ran over Sir Richie .
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
05 Oct 2014, 10:25
#14
05 Oct 2014, 10:25#14
 Richie was doing a cover tackle so did not have the angle to stop him. For sure it was the 9 Barrett's & loose forwards channel. They missed, Pollard scored.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
05 Oct 2014, 12:04
#15
05 Oct 2014, 12:04#15
 I have not commented on the issue of the AB performance - and feels that I do not want a fight with my NZ friends on this ite.
I have ben fair insofar as performances are concerned - and has criticized some Springboks endlessly and even in victory did that.   Now lets react to some ppoints made above and make my own unbiased observations:-
Hansen
Lets be fair Hansen is a top class coach - a bit on the conservative side to my liking - but still a very good coach.    However,  I do not think any of the Super 15 franchises in New Zealand  has a better coach than Hansen is.  Rennie defiitely is not a better coach - one only has to look at what happened in Super 15 to realize that.   To my mind Rennie is a one-dimentional coach - Hansen is a much more comprehensive coach.   
A decision as to what Hansen is to do as to his future is to my opinion his personal decision.   What I do know is that Hansen is a gentleman and even though he keeps quiet in public about unsavoury situations concerning his team - like the Hall incident a few years ago - I am sure he is not quiet within the change room of the AB's.   
As far as I am concerned my best wishes is with him - many Happy Kentucky Fried Chicken and McDonalds Great Mac's days for him for years to come!!!!
Barrett 
New Zealand is fortunate to have four exceptionally good flyhalfs -  my all time favourite is Dan Carter - but I hav a high opinion of Barrett, Cruden and Slade as well.
Unfortunately I sincerely believe that Carter is coming to the end of his illustrous rugby career.   Now lets look at the other three and in the case of barrett and Carter at their last two matches.
Cruden is an excellent attacking flyhalf - in fact an outstanding one in that Department of the game.   However, in the Wellington test there were negative signs as to his performance.   There is nothing wrong in his attaclking play - but he has a tendency to go astray in matches and to show deficiencies.  That is what happened in Wellington - and towards the end of his time on the field of play he made a number of uncharasteristic school boy errors.   That made e think he finds pressure hard to take and try and perform miracles to get an advantage for his team.   Miracles are rare in test rugby - and that did not happen in Wellington.   I have some question marks about his defense though - he gets run over at times.
Barrett is also an excellent attacking player - I do rate him as high as Barrett in that regard.   He is a player with much he same character and abilities as Cruden.   Yesterday Barrett did not really show the deficiencies that Cruden showed in Wellington - but his defense against Pollard was questionable.   
My favourite player of the three is Slade - a less effective attacker - but a better and more stable/relaiable  all round center.   
I do not think Cruden would have made a difference yesterday and it is unfair to criticize Barrett for his performance yesterday.
Kaino 
To be quite frank Kaino really was the weak link in the AB team yesterday and the question arises is the guy still an international level player?   I think that Luatua would have made a difference yesterday and  he should have started ahead of Kaino.               
— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news