So What wen wrong yesterday

I think I would  say preciously little went right – that is much easier than to say what went right.

The game itself was a stark reminder of the rubbish dished up in the November 2014 tests – especially the tests against  Ireland and Wales – as well as the Japanese  debacle.   There was no game plan at all – the forwards try and p retend they are backline player and buggered up every backline usage possibility.   

The players themselves gave away penalties like it was Christmas gifts to beloved people.   The first ten minutes the senior players in the team gave away 5 penalties – that must be an all-time record.  Then the players seems to have butter-fingers – catching a ball seems to be an impossibility.  In one case for example  the ball was passed to Etzebeth.  He had his hands open with the hands pointed towards the player by whom the ball was passed – as if he did not want the ball at all.   Nobody can catch balls like that.   The main problem as that there were too many forwards standing around in the backline and when they got the ball – one of two inevitables were on the cards – either a crashball (if they even catch the balls) or a possession handover. 

The main problem with the team was the fact that the loosies  -  all of them – were deplorable.   They are never near breakdown points and the turnovers and penalties resulting from such breakdowns caused major havoc.   The lesson that a team should have loosies with some pace never hit home yet.   All the loosies were poor with Louw and Vermeulen even worse than Kolisi – that really take some doing.

Now lets look briefly at key player positions:-

*    Le Roux cannot be accused of a lack of trying.  When he tried to pass the ball – the recipient (even forwards)  were certain of knocking on the ball or bugge up the attaking play comprehensively. 

*   Pietersen – can he still run?  He was so slow the props were faster than he was.

*    Mvovo was at least trying to perform.

*    Mapoe  was pathetic.   He was competing with some others  in the incompetency stakes – probably the winner of that dishonourable race. H e looks good on Super Rugby level -  yesterday he was deplorable. 

*    De Allende is a much better player than he was yesterday – I think the balls he got was so poor there was not much he could do with them.   He should gt his mojo back – he is becoming the present Frans Steyn.

*    Jantjies is a real phenomenon – he made one good pass yesterday – and when he tried to repeat it  it did not work out.   His out of hand kicking was a farce and basically ineffective.     His defense borders on the non-existent.  

*     Vermeulen  -  poor and of no consequence in the game.

*     Kolisi apparently believe if he carries one or two balls in a game and make a few meters in the process that is all that is required from a loosie.   Useless otherwise.

*     Louw -   poor and of no consequence in the game.

*     De Jager had a very poor game – not the player he was last year

*     Etzebeth  was acceptable i line-outs and that is where his game participation ended.  For the rest his game was not acceptable

*      Malherbe  was solid in the Tight 5 – and in defense,  Giving away two unnecessary penalties was totally unacceptable. 

*      Strauss  -  poor and of no consequence in the game.

There are things to be fixed.   The first one is to get decent loosies on the field of play.   Kriel as opensider is essential – but we have to find another acceptable loosie at 7 – not a slow ad ineffective one.

We must get at least a performer on the wing and serious attention must be paid to the  ceter pairing .

We must find a reasonable and thinking flyhalf – with Lambie out,  we are in trouble. 

 I thought the following had decent games: 
fafJantjiesdu ToitBeastMvovo Out of 23 players that's not good. Mind you all three SH teams had a hard time yesterday (Boks & Oz lost & ABs were nowhere near their top form). In part SH teams have had turnover & not enough time to get their game sorted while NH teams have been playing for months. Plus, Boks have new coaches so that's a lot to deal with.   

 JW there were far too many mistakes and a clueless approach.Hopefully next test will be better.

 CleverMike, Stats on loosies for Boks
AttackLouw
Carries 5Meters gained 8Clean breaks 1offloads 1Passes 6Turnovers won 1
DefenceLouw 7 tackles madeMissed tackles 1


KolosiAttackMeters gained  52Carries 9Defenders beaten 2Passes 3Turnovers conceded 1
Defence6 tackles made2 tackle missed

Duane                             K. Ried (1 try)Meters gained 56              47Carries  13                       12Defenders beaten 0           1Clean breaks 1                  1Passes 4                            8 Offloads 2                         1Turnovers conceded 2         

DefenceTackles made 8                10Tackles missed 2               0Turnovers won 0              2
I compared Ried to Vermeulen & as you can see they are not too far apart. Ried passed twice as much & didn't conceded turnovers. Ried made 2 more tackles and missed 0 compared to 2. Ried also won 2 turnovers to 0
But Ried played the full 80 minutes & Vermulen was subbed.

My point is that Vermuelen didn't have a great day but he was not a disaster. Kolisi & Lowue didn't do much on defense.

 No gameplan can endure the lack of basic skills to execute it.

On the last game, it looks as if half of the team already let Coetze down (for his first game as a head coach)

Half of the team worked to try to win the game while the other half made their best to ruin that effort.

As a result, the team effort was poor.

The red card was a turning point. Up to that point, the loss could have been engineered without showing too much. During the second half, it turned out clear that the efforts had to push to a greater level.

A lot of waste in SA play but because of the man down, SA could afford a bit of waste.

What SA could not afford, waste at critical times.

Critical times:
- near the conclusion of an action. Goofy actions to break (like failing to pick up a ball behind a scrum five meters off the try line)
- when trying to build up momentum to apply pressure. Goofy actions to break (like failing to collect a pass without any immediate pressure)
-when Ireland eased the pressure (like failling to collect a deep kick in the field )

A lack of cohesiveness that appeared any time a SA player managed a run. The support was slow to come.

Unwillingness to run during second half time as some had cardio issues.


TV commentators are used to trying to protect the product they sell. They avoid stating that a game is poor as long as they can. During that game, though, the commentators considered that SA crossed the line. Their performance was so poor that commentators could not ignore it and stated it.
Usually a strong indicator.

SA players made a lot of mistakes yesterday. But some of them were professional mistakes: being a professional player means a minimal level of skill.
When you are unable to collect a pass an untrained person can, the minimal level of skill a professional player is supposed to display is not there.

This kind of professional mistakes happened at critical moments. As if there was a conscious effort to ruin the efforts of the other half and prevents the team from winning.

Even if there was no game plan, it cant explain why such blunders happened. All players are supposed to provide a minimal level of skill. Some displayed it. Others did not.

The next game in the series will tell whether or not players went on strike against Coetze.
Of course, hopefully, the opponent team wont be one man down. Meaning that players wont have to ruin efforts as they had to yesterday.

Nevertheless, if the same attitude keeps going on, with players ready to destroy a team result in order to get their point accross, showing no love nor respect for the jersey, it is going to be hard to avoid the conclusion that Coetze must go.

 Hansen gives a good explanation of how hard it is for national teams to put together a test team & perform well in the first test. This was part of what went wrong with the Boks this past weekend. Here's the link to the video:
One explanation of what went wrong

This article also makes the point that Boks have a new coach & a new system & that they have to believe in what the coach's vision. They can fix the lack of directness on attack & also the problems at the breakdown & this will make a big difference.
IMO when you have so many good players playing badly it points to the fact that they haven't played together & the confusion points to the fact they are learning a new system.
Article

Coetzee's view of what went wrong, in part it was the lack of discipline 
Coetzee's view of what went wrong