says Dr Brendon Venter
Ex Supersport
I believe South African rugby has reached a crossroads – it’s time to seriously rethink the direction in which we are headed.
The more the oval game has developed, the less effective certain tactical strategies have become.
While the “suffocate and strangle philosophy” is not outdated, South African sides are being left behind by their international peers owing to the ineffective implementation of said strategy.
While there was a time when it worked without any questions asked, this is no longer the case in a South African context as the principle is not being applied properly.
To boot, an obsessive kicking game used ad nauseum has reached ridiculous proportions.
In the oval game, tries primarily emanate from three main sources: counter-attack/kick return, turnover possession and strike play from setpiece.
Therefore, by all accounts, the first three phases post a turnover or kick return offer the best opportunity to outfox the opposition defence because the blanket of bodies are not yet spread across the field of play.
However, as the game has developed from a defensive perspective, the first two scenarios outlined above, are effectively when a team is at its most disorganised, which thus represents an opportune time to attack.
Firstly, if we examine the kick return, antipodean sides are well ahead of their South African counterparts in this regard because primarily they attempt to play the ball on merit.
For example, if a counter-attacking opportunity arises from a kick return, Australasian sides will instinctively have a go with ball in hand and see what develops from that point.
I’ve observed, for instance, that when Jurgen Visser gets the ball, his Bulls teammates primarily stand still in anticipation of him returning the kick.
If said players would instead fall back, Visser would then be presented with an option from both backs and forwards: forwards to ruck and backs to become an attacking option.
Granted some of these kick returns are contestable but the problem is compounded by the fact South African sides, at large, are not sending players on the chase. In addition, they are not creating a cradle for the catcher, which the Force, for example, executed effectively against the Bulls in round 11.
The primary reason the kick-and-chase tactic is not working anymore is because teams are getting numbers back.
Therefore, if they get numbers back, they then have to take numbers from their frontline, effectively opening themselves up massively to a kick return.
Secondly, with regard to turnover possession which often stems from offensive defence, a reason SA sides have faltered this season is owing to the fact that they have generally been too passive on defence and possess what one could best term a ‘’soft defensive line”.
In my opinion, our local sides continue to pay the price for failing to introduce line speed on defence.
Moreover, SA sides have a propensity to hold players up which then leads to a scrum – a more structured platform – rather than win a turnover where the defensive line is by all accounts in its most fractured state.
In reference to the third source which tries emanate from, because South African sides drive so many lineouts, there is no strike play off setpieces anymore and our teams play a target off scrums.
As such, I would argue that our local sides' style of play guarantees that a plethora of tries will not be scored because in effect they have nullified all three of the aforementioned source areas comprehensively.
I’m well aware of the current state of injuries, personnel changes and player exodus but somewhere along the line, South African sides have lost the plot owing to an unhealthy fixation with a territorially-driven philosophy.
To offer an analogy, at present we’re being exposed to a single cultivar – bitter to the taste – rather than a well- blended wine.(you are following DR Moz!)
The bottom line is that if South African rugby does not discover the right blend, we will never deliver a world class product…
The ultimate challenge is found in striking the right balance between all facets of the oval game, and I must stress that in terms of tactics, it’s never one or the other.
In closing, if our rugby is to evolve it’s imperative that broken-field runners such as Willie le Roux, Raymond Rhule, Lwazi Mvovo and SP Marais are empowered in training and allowed to embrace a more rounded game.
I feel Jake White’s non-selection of the latter player, for example, is doing the 25-year-old an injustice. The fullback is an elite counter-attacker, the likes of which we don’t possess many of in South African rugby.
How close is your preferred Super Rugby side to discovering a well-blended game strategy?
Now you explain why this guy is not coaching a Super 15 side!!!!!!! Another huge problem we have.
