Springboks Greeff: Bok woes more deep-rooted than just coach

Ex Sport 24

Whilst many realize raced based selections rather than merit by definition weaken the Boks and SA sides generally we all also know, unlike some mentally challenged KBBS that quotas are not the only problem. I had to spell this out to the kbbs and sincerely thank other posters for also doing the same. I think poor crusader fan got the message and went off to consider the error of his ways!

Cape Town - Changing the coach will not solve the Springboks' problems overnight, former fullback Werner Greeff believes.

Springbok coach Allister Coetzee is in the firing line after two below-par seasons in charge of the national team.

Under his guidance, the Boks have won only 11 of 25 Tests for a meagre 44% win-record.

Several reports have indicated that Coetzee, who has a 65% win-mandate, will lose his job in the coming weeks.

But Greeff, who played 11 Tests for the Boks between 2002 and 2003, believes simply sacking the coach will not improve matters.

The 40-year-old Greeff was speaking on kykNET'sAfrikaans TV show, Toks en Tjops, on Friday night when he shared his thoughts on the state of rugby in South Africa.

The show is hosted by former Springboks Toks van der Linde and Breyton Paulse.

“It’s not always nice to see how things are going,” Greeff said of the Springboks. “But I think the problems go way deeper than just the players and the coaches. I don’t think much will change if you put in a new coach. There are more things that need to be changed than just the coach.”

Greeff, who played in Western Province and Stormers teams renowned for their attacking rugby, said he was unimpressed by the current game style employed by South African teams.

“The game style of the other (countries) is completely different to what we’re playing. We’re still playing this negative type of rugby, trying to play defensive rugby and I’m not a big fan of it. It started coming into the game roundabout the time I retired (in 2007)... I didn’t like it, being dictated how you should play. The guys are not allowed to play the way they’d like. I don’t think they’re getting the freedom they’d like,” Greeff continued.

He warned it could take a while before improvement is seen at the top.

“The reality is that we’ve played very negative rugby over the last 10 years. It has filtered through to the Super Rugby teams. If you look at how New Zealand and the other teams play, they breed attacking rugby. They want to move the ball around. The New Zealand forwards’ ball skills are unbelievable. We’ve just had a total negative game style and now when we try to change it, the players aren’t necessarily equipped to do it.

“I think it’s going to be a process. To be honest, I don’t think it’s a quick fix. It doesn’t matter who they put there, it’ll be a process of putting systems in place and to say ‘right, we’re going to play more attacking and attractive rugby, score more tries’. But we’ll have to sharpen up the players’ skills.”

Greeff also believes there’s an over-emphasis on gym work in the South African game.

He used All Blacks Beauden Barrett and Damian McKenzie as examples of slightly-built players who perform at the highest level.

“I’m not a fan of all the gym work the guys are doing. Look at New Zealand’s flyhalf, he’s slightly built, and he rules (the game). McKenzie the fullback is just as good.” (It all depends on who you are talking about and their function. Mckenzie is not by any means the complete fullback. His defence near the line is a risk. At 92 kg Beau is hardly a small flyhalf)

Greeff also called for players to be given time to grow accustomed to the Springboks’ team environment.

“There’s so many changes that I don’t think the players can find their feet - one of the reasons for the sevens team’s success if that they have structures in place which allowed the players to grow around it, they bought into it and things are going well.”

(Sorry but two years is enough to produce. A 43% success rate are you kidding! )

I agree with some of that. This guy is right that sometimes the Boks play "negatively" but under Alistair they used a wider pattern and actually tried to use the ball, but it didn't work. I said in my thread that the players look confused and we see lots of mistakes because they are trying too hard to figure out what is in front of them. You can be positive all you want but if you don't know what you are doing what good is that? Pretty useless. In NZ players are taught how to identify and breakdown specific defensive patterns, I think McGeechan (sp?) does sdomething similar in the UK. I know for a fact that the All Blacks run drills that do exactly the same thing. What do the Boks do? Run through plays against static defenders with emphasis on executing the play shape. Not much thought in that. The ex-England coach and a lot of rugby league teach two and three man plays that the entire team must be able to do so they can beat any point of the defensive line with any combination of players. I forget the percentage has changed but the All Blacks roughly use their forwards up to 40% more. There's some plays we run off of lineouts where our forwards form a box and they lead attack into the inside of the defence like the normal midfield would do and then on the next phases the 10 12 and 13 attack the middle of the field and our outside attackers are free to go wider or wherever they need to be. Our pods don't stand so close together all the time so they are more fluid, and they can play like another 10 12 13. The Boks always have that pick and drive like setup or watch a isolated forward run right into a cluster of defenders. I think your players aren't taught to think at all at any level and its not going to get any better. Right now New Zealand and England are the best teams by far and both are pretty structured and organised. Its kind of an insult to say we play headless chicken brain dead rugby. I also said in my thread that the Bok pack looks weak, way weaker than ten or so years ago. Their weaker but they have poor handling so their mobility is pretty meaningless. Poor scrummagers too and weak lineout now. In the North they put more emphasis on the breakdown and set pieces than Super rugby and are more tactical. The All Blacks are versatile enough to adjust but maybe the shift to more lighter running is hurting Australia and South Africa because since that time both have become much much weaker than they used to be. Who knows, but I definitely think this guy is a little out of touch with how things are played. Wasn't 2007 when South Africa first won super rugby? There were some strong teams then and years after. I remember before that people were calling for South African teams to be ditched bervcause they were so weak! Yeah he definitely is off some. Just my opinions though so don't take it too seriously.

Eric the R eed could you please use paragraphs - spaces etc.  makes for better read!

An international coach that could select their own Bok team would be a massive improvement. 

Their are other issues, like how poor the SA SuperRugby teams backlines are, and how slow and ponderous some of the forwards are to the breakdown- aka Bulls

Hopefully, John Mitchell will become Bok coach at some point. He has experience teaching adult "professional" players how to catch and pass.

Yeah quotas are stupid. I still say that the skills breakdown are mostly because of the inability to think. The best defences give you no time or space so you have to think quick and create space. It takes at least two players to create space, two and three man plays. If you watch the Boks closely you'll see their players don't have a feel for the flow of the defenders movement. You should be able to feel the outside shutting off or the inside flushing you out. Or a solid press straight ahead. They make runs and passes which show they don't see or feel that and put each other under pressure. Practicing the mechanics of passing won't make that go away, some great Bok tries have been scored which show they can pass and catch look at YouTube! I can't see Mitchell being Bok coach though and it'd be a sad day to see an ex All Black coach pander to South Africa's regime.

Been you such a bossy little madam! Pedantic little thing.

If anybody has watch our sevens side you can only marvel how any creativity is coached out of our players. 

Red Reed makes some good points. JW are you paying attention!

...Bean Brain we've already established that old quota nutshell is just a pathetic excuse dragged out whenever the Springboks look like losing....Nobody talks about the Blitzeboks as being the quota Blitzebokke because they are always winning....therein lies the difference

...not all South Africans are as fickle of course as the resident Bean Brain, Naas Botha for instance talks a lot of sense and not one to hide behind feeble excuses...

The reason quotas dont affect the 7s game is it is far better suited to our small fast players of colour.

...Fijians are hardly small so that sort of makes a mockery of the assertion that 7s players need to be small and fast..... More likely explanation for the Blitzebok success is the racial diversity has become one of it's greatest strengths...such a great culture they have built and no doubt the Springboks could learn from that...

Other pertinent points being made: Springbok players are greedy and hog the ball not to mention spend too much time at the gym - no doubt gazing at themselves in the mirror instead of working on their fitness...and of course South Aficans are'nt renowned for their coaching ability either ....difficult to explain really how NZ produces so many excellent coaches and SA can only produce muddlers...

To be fair you can't compare the two codes. Union is a power game 7s is faster and there's so much space. The structures are different. I mean, if I was wrong the results would be the same. What's the success rate of players converting to union? That's where the answer is. 

What's the success rate of players converting to union? That's where the answer is. 

With Sir Gordon Titjens it was over 50 players that went on to become ABs 

Brycy

The fact is the AB's 7 has been going down over the last few years,   The reason being that the Tietjens approach has more to due with bigger physical players with ball sense - disregarding speed as of minor importance.  

It was difficult to replace the players with ball sense and the signs were clear.  Even yesterday the  US team beat the AB's sevens by 22-0.   It is really unbelievable that the AB's Sevens could not even score a single try.   Fact is they came near not to qualify for the quarters.     

I was talking about South Africans. Black South Africans are not Polynesians in any like way (I mean no offense by saying that). What is the success rate of black south Africans transferring to the 15 man game? Anyone got any info? 

...notso clevermike as you know its a balancing act between speed and power...i expect NZ still to be competitive despite the new coach...

...But the Blitzbokkes should win this home tournament , no disputing that...No disputing either Titjens 10 Sevens world series titles for NZ, all his Sevens gold medals in 4 out of the five Commonwealth games,and a couple of WC crowns to boot... what is largely forgotten is all the All Blacks he has produced for the 15 a side code - well over 50 players...no mean feat

So the skills are transferrable to emphasise my point no matter what country you play for.

No matter what cfountry ? The mixed race and black South Africans are unique compared to Samoans etc. Different size and athletic qualities. Its like you are saying that there is an agenda to not play them and I just don't believe that is true at all. There's a lot of pressure on coach's to play non white players so the simple solution is to just play them. If the numbers aren't there then the assumption that its a huge untapped resource has a flaw in it. As I said 7s is different from 15 man rugby, the smaller players I have seen across the board are not common in the 15 man game. I haven't been keeping up with 7s enough to know how big the biggest guys are but you said NZ went big, bigger than South Africa. South Africa having more success and NZ having less success but better transferability of players to 15 man rugby tells me that you are wrong. It would be good to have a look at the players South Africa have brought from 7s to 15 man code and evaluate that. Doesn't anyone have any info? I really don't reel like looking for something like that.

Mozart:
The usual nonsense from Greef....we need a process. It took Eddie 6 weeks to fix the pathetic 2015 Poms.

Agreed. Just like it took Jake White barely half a season to turn Straeuli's clueless rabble into 3N champions.

..Whether it's Reiko Iaone, Senatla, Kwagga Smith  they are all equally as lethal exponents of both 7s and 15/s... And switch backwards and forwards between the codes with ease....The skills required are transferable. The basic rules of rugby still apply.  As said the main difference is players have more space to manoevre.

But as we were saying before we got sidetracked, the quotas blame game is a sideshow - quotas are'nt even being fully enforced so a very convenient excuse for mediocrity, a crutch for the bewildered to lean on....like Ceradyne said it's an oversimplification of the issue....

...the 13 a side version of the game is'nt bad but it's called rugby league

From my perspective South Africans like to complain but not do things differently. You want to play the game differently then why not chanhe the way its taught. Its really simple. It was pretty interesting what Hanson had to say about the Boks, he said thnwere very emotional. Its either the best if times of the worst of times, completely bipolar even within a single season! But nobody is doing anything. Your players are athletic enough and skilled enough end of they aren't as skilled as Austlians or New Zealanders etc but they can't think. I mean you watch any game and yuou see they pass into heavy traffic, they don't get back into alignment, they arenflat footed or in the wrong place and run into the stronger parts of the defence. I have to laugh when I see them pass along the line as the defenders are shifting one out each time as they drift and push them into the touchline. The do that repeatedly. If there is a blitz they totally do the wrong moves and the never fix their man. I think Willie is the only South African I can remember who fixes before passing. Maybe play him at 10?? Really basic things make the overall package a mess. When the Boks do well in those one off efforts its through emotions but you can't make that the core of your blueprint. Think more. Wayne Smith is a genius, far far better than Eddie Jones, and he trains constructively to have players identify defensive shapes and how to beat them. I've never seem or heard of South Afrcians do that! I don't get why this is so hard to take in, you guys are gluttons for punishment! You'd think humiliation would force an change but I guess not in this case. I don't know what sentiment is like in South Africa but I personally feel there's a ship happening. A point of no return. The Boksnhave hadntheir problems in the past but this one feels different to me. Maybe its an generational thing and the new gen of thinkers and players etc just don't have that core Bok instinct, or however you'd say it. Well, we'll find out soon enough I suppose. Until you guys want to do things differently and learn nothing is going to get better any time soon or the little possitibve things won't be sustainable.

"Perhaps rugby should be reduced to 12 players to make more space on the field"

Blasphemy at its most foul.

I like you Sharkbok but in no way, regardless of the context, should you ever utter those words in that order again. 

Draad and I shall gather a mob and lynch you. We won't sharpen the pitchforks either! I think CC is already on his way to your house.

lol Plum!...and hear hear!

If you ask me what the real problem is that we all think that every team should play like NZ but I have a theory why NZ play like and I believe that. They are a small country with limited funds, if they didn't play winning attractive rugby then nobody would want to really play against them or spend money watching them. 

NZ rugby is a powerful brand. They pack out stadiums where ever they go. Every country want to see them play. If you look at Italy. When the boks played against them they are taken to a smaller venue with no more 20 000 people. Even then the stadium doesn't get packed out even though Italy might win. 

NZ show up and Italy try to get biggest stadium and every seat is sold out. 

That is because the Fans know that they are going to watch a great game, even though their own team will get hammered. 

The franchises know that they can't exist if NZ is weak as they are not a strong brand on their won to sustain themselves or their players. 

So the Franchises are happy to invest.

If you look at SA, the provinces are very powerful. Even more so than Saru in some instances. Bulls, Lions, Sharks and WP (Stormers) all own their own stadiums and in the not to distance past were able to pack the stadiums just for local currie cup games. 

Back in 2011 their were at least 3 SA teams in the play-offs in the super rugby. 

The problem is that the provinces got arrogant and squandered their resources. They are very happy to jump onto the next u 21 star and get rid of a good player that is 23. They believe that they have the talent and can continue to use this abundance but now the younger players are not even hanging around. Which means that they pool they select is much smaller

To add injury to insult, they no longer have the so called journeyman to add valuable experience to their squad and the core of their team.

Take a player like Rynhardt Elstadt of the stormers. He added huge value and could gotten a few more caps, but hanged around but decided it is time to move on. Brad Barrit nearly got a bok call up but decided to move on. 

In recent times we are seeing the likes of Serfontein and Lambie packing their bags and they are only 25! with 30 caps at least. 

Why aren't the unions working with the SARU to make sure that we have a good core of professional players.

NZ really look after their core of squad players. 

So I know i have made 2 points

1. NZ simply has to play attractive winning rugby which all franchises are bought into and is showing in they way their teams are performing

2. SA provinces are to powerful that squander youth and experience players that allow the good players to leave to soon by not paying enough money. 

It took Eddie 6 weeks to fix the pathetic 2015 Poms.

He started from a much stronger base and actually expanded on the platform provided by his predecessor.

EN situation has nothing to do with SA situation, especially as EN has produced a few non white players that can make it the squad. Not SA case.

No matter what cfountry ? The mixed race and black South Africans are unique compared to Samoans etc. Different size and athletic qualities.

Makes non sense. They do not come at a substitute for PI players. It sounds like SA rugby would like to reserve positions to certain kinds of players.

If indeed, the majority of people in SA are not fit to play rugby, then rugby must go. There is no place in the world that bear a professional sport in these conditions.

Beside, SA avoid to look elsewhere since in the North, they have released players from the same background.

Watched a EC match, MOM was a white SA player. Three tries were scored by english non white players. It begged the question to know where the SA non white players who could challenge for the positions are.

NH clubs have home grown non white players.More convenient to look at NZ.

TheTraditionalist

Bok regular

1117 posts

It was a mishap from what was the toughest group ever. Results were not poor before that and the WC was a misperformance rather than a regular performance.

Beside, and more importantly, the base means more like full coffers or empty coffers, support from the public like full stadiums or empty stadiums, training of decent players or not training of decent players.

SA do not compare to EN, even on the last item, EN does what SA can not do: train decent non white players.

SA are on their own boat and less and less in the same league as other major nations.

Trad, stop being an arsents hole. Rugby is an inclusive team sport. Let the people who wants to play and support it be. You sound like little Johnny who wants to take his ball and leave because he can't be the star of the team. Prime example of sour grapes. You and your ilk fcking up the world for the rest of us. Get a life bitter balz!

True Sharkbok. I should add that he backed out of his attacking vision the closer the world cup got. I think being on home soil and knowing how fickle the Brits are it was just too much pressure to try something different and be called reckless and stupid if it failed. The change actually started with Martin Johnson who had the backs firing better than any time since the 2003 side. 

. Rugby is an inclusive team sport.

Sure, as shown by SA, that is forced to dress the lack of non white players by forcing representation in the SA squad.

People can dream. No matter what, reality knocks at the door.

Delusion: rugby in SA is an inclusive sport.

Reality: SA have not trained one single decent non white player over the past 25 years.