Template to beat the wee All Black forwards- Provided by the Poms

 It seems that Allblacks.com is in agreement-

JAMES MORTIMER    10.DEC.2012GETTY IMAGES

Some would successfully argue that the All Blacks loss to England was the first time their pack had been dominated in 2012, their first and only Test defeat of the season. (Not really, in Dunedin by the boks and also by Australia)

Indeed, while the heroics of centre Manu Tuilagi were noted, it was the ferocity in which the English pack tore into their All Blacks counterparts that may have enthused other heavyweight nations around the world who witnessed a not unfamiliar blueprint.

Often the key for beating an All Blacks side is getting on top of them up front.

However the one aspect that could force a slight shift in the All Blacks thinking is that their fast paced game, while reliant on a powerful pack getting quick ball recycled at the breakdown, may have subconsciously stepped away from the classical New Zealand pack attack that has been a hallmark of their game for decades.

While the concept of All Blacks forwards running with the ball, a time honoured tradition, has been duplicated by this team, there will be an intriguing response from the Men in Black’s pack next season, who won’t appreciate being challenged so effectively up front in the final test of 2012.

The Springboks may in theory lick their lips at how the English went about their business, one threat to the All Blacks who can duplicate the same muscle in the forward exchanges.

Les Bleus, who showed against the Wallabies their desire to impose themselves up front hasn’t dimmed, will be thinking that perhaps if they bring the brutal game seen throughout the fields of France to New Zealand in 2013 they could chase a rare series win in the All Blacks backyard.

Even if not, the French could target the second Test of the Steinlager Series as the ultimate party crasher, where the All Blacks will play their 500th Test.

All Blacks coach Steve Hansen said throughout the season they were looking to effectively run teams off their feet, and that approach yielded over 120 points against Ireland in three Tests including a record 60-0 romp in Hamilton.

During The Investec Rugby Championship the All Blacks achieved significant victories against each rival, blanking the Wallabies 22-0 at Eden Park to follow up on their Rugby World Cup semi-final success, while the 54-15 win in La Plata and the 20 unanswered second half points at Soccer City were among the more impressive victories achieved by Test sides this year.

Rivals may have seen what could be interpreted as a chink up front in the All Blacks armour. (Stop the All Black forwards from playing the ball on the floor to slow down opposition possesion, and their forwards are not strong enough)

here are some important numbers from the duendin test & as a christmas present for my SA brus, i wont post the McCaw vs Springbok loose forward stats, cos that would be depressing if ur not a McCaw fan.

but more importantly, our forwards dominated the Boks at the set pieces & gained parity at the breakdown, where is this myth about domianting the ABs in dunedin coming from, oh right a case of the one eyed blues.
numbers dont lie, Boks did not dominate us in dunedin, im sure ive watched that game a lot more times then any saffa here, so rewatch it & count the n umber of time from 60min mark onwards u see big Bok forwards huffing & puffing their way around the feild, or is asthma impersonations part of meyeres plan???

this whole eng debacle really is much ado about nothing, yes the All Blacks lost to eng, but the way the All Blacks played that day, they should count their lucky stars they werent playing italy, scotland or ireland, cos they would have lost to them too & histroy would have been made as NZ for the first time would have lost to them.

by far it was the most shocking performance ive ever seen from the All Blacks, we were completely outplayed & outgunned and the best team won on the day, but anybody foolish enough to think that its as simple as  beating the All Blacks forwards has no grasp of the concept that its a team game.
All Blacks wernt just dominated for the first time upfront, but we were dominated all around the park, not efficent with our ball, a ton of unforced errors & no urgency except for the last 20-15 mins when all teams trailing usulaly up the ante.

in order to beat the All Blacks the way england did, u will need the following,,,,

-dominate the AB forwards everywhere on the paddock (not like the saffas illusion of dunedin dominace)

-be very efficent with ur ball in hand

-have a better all round kicking game then the ABs both goal & tactical kicking

-hope that key players in the ABs have the worst game of their careers, like aaron smith, dan carter, keirean read & conrad smith

-for no All Black to put their hand up & be counted, in other words the All Blacks entire 15 to be weaker in every aspect of the game

despite it all, both team still ended up with three trys a piece the only silver lining in the All Blacks dak cloud.
but importnatly if teams can replicate the above mentioned, then they will have no problem in beating the All Blacks, but how many times has anyone seen the above mentioned to the All Blacks in one game??? o_O

the stars were alligned for the england cause that fateful day, but i have evry faith in the All Blacks to bounce back from the twickneahm disaster.

what im wondering is the last time the All Blacks lost before england was against australia in the TriNats, they then went on to win the RWC, a whitewash series victory over ireland, a clean sweep of the IRC which consists of 2 of the top 3 teams in the world & where they didnt concede ONE championship point and a 20 match unbeaten rugby streak.
the question u should really be asking is whats going to happen now after this loss, cant wait to find out but as usual i will be cheering,,,,

THE MIGHTY MIGHTY ALL BLACKS!!!
 

 @sasuke. I have downloaded the Allblack vs boks test in Dunedin again. I am going to evaluate the performance of the All Black forwards and will update accordingly. 

As for your other notes"  ABs have the worst game of their careers, like aaron smith, dan carter, keirean read & conrad smith"This is what pressure does- with little time and space anyone starts to look average.

This is what I am saying about the model to beat the All Blacks. It is not relying on them to play badly, it is playing in a way that puts pressure on the All blacks and hence resulting in them not playing well. 

If the All Black forwards are prevented from slowing the ball down at the tackle situation, suddenly the team in possesion can use their strong ball carrying forwards to dominate the advantage line and recycle quick ball. This is when holes in the All Blacks defence starts opening like Moses parting the red sea. 

 Sasuke- I just watched the Dunedin test again. I am sure that if Goosen or Lambie had started instead of the useless Morne Steyn the boks would have won the game. Also Dean Greyling was a complete waist of space dropping the ball on the try line. The boks easily dominated in the forwards and just needed the backs to have some direction to score. 

 This is the Pom's Letter to Santa!

Sharkbok the Dunedin game and the Poms splendid win show how one beats the abs.

How saSUE can try to maintain the Bok forwards did not dominate is a mystery. Lets hope the nz brains trsut thinks likewise.

It was ada ywhen we simply coulnt goa a kick and where we fluffed scoring opportuitie. Other tham that it wa saver tsound display that deserved another outcome. abs were extremely lucky to win that one but such luck cannot be relied upon. Engand on the other hand goaled their kicks and took their try scoring opportunitites.

@sharkbok,

ive watched that game plenty of times & i wouldnt be surprised if ive watched it a lot more times than any saffa boys here, but this all im saying if the Springboks dominated the All Blacks in dunedin, explain the follwing stats,,,,

 

when u look at the numbers how anyone can say that the Boks domianted the All Blacks in dunedin is beyond me. our forwards dominated the set [piece and we gained parity at the breakdowns bar the mauls.
did the Boks do enough to win??? they sure did, but im not going to play Bok fans favourite game would have should have could have, end of the day the Boks left dunedin without a single championship point, whcih according to u could have been saved if goosen was playing, yet how did goosen work out for u in sowetto??? and im talking about before his injury.

 @sasuke. These numbers do not include penalties given away in kickable positions. When a forward pack is being dominated they typically give away more penalties especially at the breakdown area. This is how England initially led the All Blacks 15-0 through 5 penalties. 

Morne Steyn just waisted most of the kicking and given that he has been so out of form should never have been in the team. 

Richie Mccaw is a serial offender and it is well documented that he should be penalised more. It is rumoured that Mccaws sabaticals timing with the introduction of a more vigilant video referee is no co-incidence. When the All Blacks pack gets dominated Mccaw lives on the floor and loves to slow down opposition ball even if from an offside position whilst lying on the floor. 

"It is rumoured that Mccaws sabaticals timing with the introduction of a more vigilant video referee is no co-incidence"  You have to hand to mcaaaaw h ehas hi sfinger on the pulse!

Nice ones hAkwa!!!! 

@sharkbok,

LMAO, :oD

sorry buddy, but ur wrong again and let me post u the numbers and penalties involved in the dunedin test.
 

total penalties from forwards,,,

All Blacks - 6 total
t woodcock - 3
l romano - 2
k read - 1

Springboks - 11
beast - 1
f van der mewe - 3
f louw - 3
d greyling - 3
a bekker - 1

the numbers again beg to differ with ur arguments bro, & u must forgive me for taking so much glee in proving this (quotation marks) Boks domainant performance argument wrong, :oP

SA education has let a lot of u boys down big time in the math department, especially with the winning percentage argument on another thread ( not u sharkbok BTW), but if u can possibly wrap ur head around it the butterfly effect makes mornes missed kicks arguments redundant.
end of the day, i dont really want to debate about hypotheticals, u said earlier that goosen would have made all the difference, sowetto test begs to differ.

i do concede that eng nailing their goals made a huge difference, but did ur Boks dominate the All Blacks from No 1 to 15 that day??? no they didint. our backs were far better than urs and the numbers i have provided prove both ur arguments about the Bok forwards dominating the All Blacks wrong.

 sasuke I must admit you are a good statician. It seemed like the boks got more penalties even when watching for the 2nd time. Not sure but it did seem in the whole match that the boks had more oppertunities.

It was just the useless Morne Steyn kicking the ball away aimlessly. Also Dean Greylings stupidity was beyond belief- he dropped the ball with an open tryline and anything he did turned to crap. When I watched the game for the 2nd time it did not appear that either team played very well.

The Springbok backline was totally clueless. Zane Kirchner cant pass and kills every movement going to the ground. He should easily have put Habana in for the try, and his other touches were rubish.

I still feel that if the bok backs could have played a half decent game and the kicking was ok it should have been in the bag easily. Goosen against Australia in Johannesburg was the most funtional backline in years. He did get injured very early on against the All Blacks and did not really get a chance to ignite his backs prior to this as it was mostly held within the forwards or tactical kicks. 

I think we are going to see closer games in 2013 and with the right combinations in the pack, with some more experience in the backline will see the boks more clinical and convert oppertunities into points- yes hypothetical but I am sure they will be better next year than this year. The tournament with Scotland, Italy and Samoa will be a low pressure oppertunity to get the backline functional and play more expansive. 2012 was a tough year as first up was the English with a new team, and England are good. Then straight into the 4 nations. Then the overseas tour. Some home games against some easy teams is a great oppertunity to get Lambie and Goosen experience at 10, and Frans Steyn should be back. 

I really enjoyed the Frans Steyn hand off of Conrad Smith, as well as his overall game. I reckon next year if he gets back into form and combines with a more experienced game time flyhalf of Goosen and/or Lambie we are going to see the backline of the boks play closer to their potential. Given the way our forwards have been progressing games like Dunedin will be put away as wins to the boks, Time will tell

ou saSUE really tthinks his stats explain away the good thumping the ab forwards got. Please saSUE keep it real.

I suppose you are also in denial about the thumping the poms gave the wee ab pack. Head out of sand saSUE!  Boks sho ld have won comfrotably. As with the poms it was men against boys in the forwards.

As forthe penalty count well when do we ever get more penalties than the abs. Always remember Bob Dwyers stats. Abs 43 penaties to 1 yellow. Oz 7 penaties to 1 yellow and Boks 6 penalties to 1 yellow. Explain that please. abs get away with murder.

Sasue

I always have a problem with stats issues and that becomes more evident as is the case with the penalty count in the Dunedin test.   What count to my mind more heavily is the number of penalties given away when a team is under pressure.    On checking the stats the isue became clearer.   The Springboks kicked at goal 8 from 11 penalties conceded - whilst the All Blacks managed to kick at goal five times only.   Of the five two was silly bugger penalties given away by Greyling and Van der Merwe - and cannot really be ascribed to pressure by the All Black forwards.  

The differences come in with penalties conceded by the team under pressure - ie penalties kicked at goal. .   The latter is a much clearer issue ro my mind.   You mentioned 6 penalties given away by forwards - where did the other 5 came from?   You mentioned that Reid gave away only one penalty - but I can clearly remember that his penalty count on the day in question was in fact 3.   McCaw also gave away one penalty that was not recorded as such by you.   ASs to the forward penalties given away by Greyling and Van der Merwe not one resulted from forward pressure - but rather from silly bugger play that should never occur in international games.    In any event Van der Merwe is not a Springbok front line player and the All Blacks were lucky that Etzebeth did not play in that game.   Louw's penalties all came from attempts to recover opposition ball 9in tackle situations - not from concerted All Black forward pressure. 

My contention is that the All Black forwards in particular was under more pressure than the Springbok forwards were - especially since they blundered when in a rather vulnerable position.   Take for instance two mauls during the game where the All Blacks were pushed back at least 20 meters - something never done by the All Black forwards.   Both cases resulted in penalties against the All Blacks.

You left out some telling   stats on the issue of mauls, rugs and turnovers that basically was all in favour of the Springboks.   Also left out are stats on territory and possession - which also favour the Springboks.

We all know that the All blacks backline was vastly superiror to the Springboks and that is reflected by the fact that all the points scored at the Dunedin test was by backline players.   On the day the Springbok forwards were definitely substantially superior to the All Black forwards - whether you like it or not.   The Springboks poor backline performances and the poor goal kicking record of 22% converted penalties was a major impact and a negative that could not be overcome by the Springbok forwards 

@clevermike,
its important that posters realise that im not saying the All Blacks were dominant in the dunedin test, only that the Boks were not as dominant as some are making it out to be.
the england forward pack that beat that All Blacks is what i would call a dominant performance, but the Boks in duendin, i would say that was a strong perforamnce and they laid enough of a platform that they could have won the game, or at the very least walked away with a championship point, but as we all know they didnt.


but excllent point there mike about penalties given away due to pressure, but before i address some of the finer points of ur post, the other 5 penalties that were conceded by the All Blacks were from the backs and they were from dagg, jane, savea and two from from conrad smith.
All Blacks gave away a lot of penalties for holding onto the ball, well over 50% of the penalties given were for that and that was due to good pressure from the Bok forwards, but two of the shots at goal that the Boks went for were not forced from pressure, one was conrads obstruction whcich francois steyn milked for all he could and the other was for taking a lineout jumper in the air, neither of which i would put down to good Bok forward pressure.
the last 20mins of the game saw a change in momentum with the forwards where the Boks literally seemed to be out of gas and running on fumes, cos the All Blacks won the lions share in the battle upfront.
BTW after watching the game again i couldnt find theother 2 penalties on read that u mentioned or the one on McCaw, if u have the exact time in the game in which u are referring too i would be more then happy to watch it again, but McCaw not getting penalised and read getting pinged once are accurate as far as i know and according to the espn stats.

i never mentioned the stats on possesion and territory cos they were pretty much 50/50 but they were in favour of the Boks
 

as u can see neither possesion or the territory stats paints any kind of picture of who was domiannt.
but i did post the stats on the rucks and mauls if u look at my above posts??? o_O,,,but here they are again and IMO it dosent potray the dominance of the Springbok forwards,,,
 

as u can see the ruckes were very even but the mauls were a one way street, but add to that the set pieces and again i say the Boks were not dominant.

again chaos theory/butterfly effect says the penalty kicks dosent really prove that the Boks chance of winning would have been greater, but as sharkbok correctly pointed out the england test begs to differ, except heres another way of looking at those penlaty goals that the steyn boys and goosen missed.
when morne landed his first penalty goal for the Boks the All Blacks scored a try straight away, so what if the Boks converted all their penalty goals and the All Blacks scored trys straight away after every kick, of course its a hypothetical imporbability, but so is saying that morne kicking converting all his goals, but i will leave the would have should have could have.
one can also only really wonder how much of an influence ezebeth would have had on the game, but if the sowetto test was anything to go by, then the All Blacks wouldnt have to worry about a thing, cos ezebeth was president kak in sowetto.

i still maintain the Boks didnt dominate the All Blacks and reading some of the articles on supersport, some of the saffa journos agree. i will say that the Bok forwards did enough to win, but then so did the All Blacks, end of the day each to their own and we can agree to disagree, but now to get back to writing my thank you letter to the All Blacks and steve hansen for a great season, LMAO, :oD

Sasue

Thank you my friend.   I never really believed that the Springbok forwards dominated the All Blacks - but they had some really bugger-ups as well.   Greyling was a very good player for the All Blacks  - he definitely do not play for the Springboks - and I thinl the absence of Etzebeth was also a negative for the Springboks.   Not too happy with Kruger as well - and the absence of Bismarck was also a problem.

Bearing in mind the above - I think the stats on territory and possession probably more or less reflect the strength of the two forward packs -   something like the All Blacks being about 47 and the Boks 53 out of 100 

Domination would be sonething like 60:40 - not 53:47