The Boks have made no progress...in fact we've gone backwards

In any of the years 2004 through 2011 we would have put away this Pom team with much bigger margins. So what have we learned.

Firstly the coaching has not been disastrous. The team was cohesive and understood what was expected of them. Any time the Boks aren't confused they should put away the pasty Poms and they did.

But what is our playing strategy? To me it seems much like the pattern that Rassie evolved for the RWC....a kind of mindless high energy game. Our back play is totally without guile. Do you ever see a player at pace before he gets the ball?

More concerning we are at best breaking even in the lineouts, our dominant platform for the last eight years. Our scrum creaks as soon as the subs come on. And our loosies couldn't even match a poor English trio on the ground.

In terms of players we have learned that Lambie, JP, Habana, Fransie and Jean among the backs......and Bismarck, Beast , Jannie and Alberts among the forwards......are players who can impact tests. They can match or outplay TN level opponents. But we knew that.

We have also learned that Morne has a serious kicking problem, from which he may not recover. That Hougaard is a long way from an accomplished test scrumhalf.

That Etzebeth and Kruger are a big step down on Matfield and Botha....and in fact in 3 tests neither lock put in a really convincing performance. And in spite of some fine play, I'm not convinced that Coetzee showed he is ready yet....he may just not be physical enough for a NZ pack.

We also saw Werner Kruger is a disaster, Strauss is not the force he is in S15, and Potgieter is just more dumb muscle like Deysel....ready to be tripped up by smarter opponents. And that Spies will occasionaly wake up, but can't be counted to give his all.....his best attribute is now his lineout play. As for the other loosies Daniel and Kankan they never had the playing time to really make their case....if there is a case to be made.

We also saw every time our bench went into action our play dropped.

Apart from the player selections that are amply debated and every poster has his own views.....there is the question of coaches. Do we have a backline coach that can outthink the Aussies? Nope....and we need one.

And then there is the Rassie factor, the seer from the Grandstand roof. Has this guy really succeeded coaching anywhere.....or has it been smoke and mirrors, and constant maneuvering to avoid accountability. This guy produced nothing at the RWC and he will produce nothing for the Boks. I would say if Heyneke doesn't act boldly to address obvious weaknesses.....players, coaches and tactics....he is shortly going to be in serious trouble.

Making the point another way....not one Bok makes the Rugby 365 Team Of The Week.

I think the main problem here relates to coaching.  Meyer would do well with the forwards if he can get over his selection of players like W Kruger, Daniel and Kankowski and even Spies - they are not really up international standard.   Must say I was disappointed in Strauss as well.    To my mind he did not bring stability to the scrum when he came on and we all blame Kruger - but Strauss also contributed to poor scrummaging.   I mentioned it elsewhere - but his supporters on the board made no comments - so I assume that they agree.

I know that they talk about the issue of injured players that could not be utilized - but that is no real excuse.   We cannot entirely depend on a handful of people at forward.   In thaqt respect Burger is also now not ready yet and according to an article this morning - he will not be for the foreseeable future.   Is it the end of his international career as well?

We can start afresh insoofar as back line coaching is concerned.  I cannot see how Loubser can really be a backline coach.   He was not top notch when he played rugby himself and how can he caoch any backline.   Yes we never have seen any back line player get a ball at speed and we won't either if they do not get a top class back line coach into the armoury.

By the way - I said before the third test  that I am worried about the back line.  I also previously said I am not sure about Hougaard.   Even though it was bad conditions - the ball went to Hougaard, who kicked aimlessly - or when he did pass, Steyn would kick and if he passes Olivier would play chrashball.

 There never was one full backline passing to the wings on Saturday.   The fact that Pietersen scored was due to a very good pass from Pienaar directly to Pietersen.   If he played like Hougaard did earlier there would have been no try scored.  

To summarize - I think Meyer made some selection errors, but it is early days and he can correct them - but the main problem relates to backline play - which was non-existent.    The inside three did not fire and that was the problem.  

Somewhere else you mentioned that Goosen would be out for the year - but he will in fact be back in September 2012 at the latest.   You will also find that Dave is not going to find it easy to swallow - especially size wise.  He is only 1.85 and 85kgs.      That would make him too light to feature according to the norms set by Dave  - but he keep on punting him.  Consistancy?

For a start I have to completely disagree with you on Etzebeth, he did plenty of grunt work and was good in the line-outs, for a 20 year old he has been far better than Bakkies or Matfield at the same age. I am not convinced about Kruger, he lacks physicality. We need Bekker back and we need to bloody the very impressive and physical Steph du Toit.

Potgieter had a solid test,  how on earth did you expect him to counter Poms throwing themselves at his feet?

Spies was great in the second test and solid in the other 2. Coetzee was one of the finds of the series, certainly provided a better option than say Schalk would have. The frontrow was good, with Bismark's power play the standout. Beast was quiet in general play, which was uncharacteristic. Jannie was solid. Alberts was the suprise package as he has been off the mark for some time.

The bottom line is that our forwards produced the goods and our backs misfired.

The reason for the backs misfiring is obvious, the wrong players were selected. Only Habana (to less extent), JP, Lambie, Frans and Hougaard should have been selected.

Hougaard has already proved himself at test level as a 9 and is going through a rough patch.

Morne was a disgrace, Olivier and Jean offer nothing new, they are past it - as are Kirchner and Aplon, with Habana closing in.

Its early days for Meyer, but unless he realises quite quickly that he needs to move on from the deadwood in the backs, we have no hope in hell of taking advantage of the ball the forwards are providing.

The solution is simple, continue with the forwards as they are, with Bekker coming in for Kruger at lock, replace Werner Kruger on the bench with one of the class young props coming through. Start bloody physical youngsters like Kitshoff, Steph du Toit, Elstadt, Kolisi and CJ Stander to give our forwards depth.

Discard the likes of Morne, Olivier, Jean, Kirchner, Aplon and Habana and bring in class youngsters like Taute, JJ Engelbrecht, Mvovo, Serfontein, Jordaan, Goosen and Jantjies and lets start using the platform the forwards provide, instead of kicking possession away or charging into the opposition and being as uncreative as possible. Its time to let these talented youngsters express themselves.

The wrot starts at 10, get rid of Morne first and foremost and we are halfway to sorting out our sterility in the backs

Moz, you have brought up some good points, but you are overlooking a few very important things. Firstly, and probably most importantly, preperation time...the Boks didn't have any. They, and NZ and Aus, were up against it in these tests. And all three countries in the South battled, especially Australia. They won all their games, but all of them were by the skin of their teeth. NZ looked better than Aus and us, but they also VERY nearly lost one game. It comes down to lack of contiunity, and all three countries suffered because of it, so you can't look at the Springboks in isolation because all three nations underperformed. Secondly, new coach and lots of new players that don't know each other. Thirdly, the two new locks held their own, it was not the best lock pair performance in history, but they were more than just competative. Seriously, do you think that Matfield and Bakkies would have performed any better if they both played their debut test together, not having played together before, under a new coach, with one week to prepare? Nope, they wouldn't have.

You bring up the Rassie not having performed as a coach, well, that is not true, he won a couple of currie cup trophies for the Cheetahs, their first in years and with a bunch of "no-name" players, and he turned the Stormers around in 1 season. Also, and probably even more importantly, HE IS NOT COACH!!! If you are trying to say he can't do his job, you nead your head examined, because as a manager and a tactician he is brilliant! Basically, give me this coaching stup over the PDV era ANYDAY!

As for the kicking problems, M Steyn is playing terribly, so no argument there and that put the Boks under a lot of pressure that they would never have been under had he just kicked as he usually does. That one fact alone changed the whole face of the series. We would have won all the game comfortably, if we just had a reliable goal kicker. We must not forget that.

We are all disapointed about the series, but in the big scheme of things, it was a success. We won the series, didn't lose a game, and have identified weaknesses that can be fixed before the "Tri Nations" starts.

You talking about Engelbrecht who was  gassed by Kolisi through the outside gap?

Just a quick one Clevermike, just because Laubser wasn't the best backline player, doesn't mean he won't make a good coach! By that logic H Meyer will be a total flop, because he wasn't a stand out Springbok. Nope, kak logic. And Saff, I don't agree with you regarding your comment on forwards and backs. In the periods where the forwards were dominant, the backs looked dangerous, when the forwards were under pressure, the backs looked rubbish. Your comment does not make sense. So at this very moment, the backs are OK, but I agree with you regarding the talented youngsters, start exposing them to the Springbok setup.  I also agree with you regarding Morne.

Oh give it a bloody break, are you telling me Kolisi is faster than JJ because of that one incident? Boy oh boy, you dont half make a fool of yourself at times.

Lambie handed off Schalk does that make Lambie stronger than Schalk?

Okay....so what did JJ do in that match against the Stormers.....nothing. He is just a concept in your mind so far. And I'm not saying Kolisi is faster, I'm saying JJ made a complete hash of his angles.....something any decent opponent will exploit.

Yes he is new to 13 and is learning, but showed in that one S15 game what a class act he is and why Meyer has faith in him.

So because of that error you want to write him off????

Then why not write off Schalk for that Lambie miss - double standards - no player is perfect

the boks biggest issue is playing pattern and cohesion....the forwards are always there and there abouts. the boks have never turned out a poor pack in memory that i can recall. the biggest burning issue for me it the backline or the lack thereoff. hougaard and steyn has not been on par the whole series. now can debate that there has been to much rugby which i tend to agree with but morne steyn is on his own little island and is not up to standard. the talent is there its just a matter of choosing the correct players. i feel saffex is correct in saying we need more younger players. but there needs to be a selective process wereby the seniors mentors the juniors.

backline coach is not even topic for me because every here knows i am very critical of the backline play in south africa because we tend to treat the coaching role as a BEEE poster position. no cups coetzee case and point. that is why we need a backline consultant like the likes of eddie jones to come and get the players running lines and support play sorted out. we dont have a plan b if our forwards are matched. in our loosies we still need a fetcher to balance them out...sort that areas out and we will be unstoppable

Bluebok I am saying Rassie's "technical coach" role is highly questionable. His early CC success was no more laudable than Mitchell winning the CC last year....and what can we say about Mitchell now? Since then his whole career has been orchestrated to avoid direct responsibility. He is a staff type.

Supposedly a great rugby mind, I see no practical evidence of that. The Stormers have built a great defence....but their attacking play is non existent. There is no guile in any backline that falls under Rassie's influence. The Boks in 2011 were way less innovative than the Boks in 2007.

I think the man is a fake.

rassie is analytical. his abilty to analise is world class. he is also very process driven from working with players to working with unions management ext. its he has setup structures in WP union of which we are seeing the effect of now....players coming through the system ext...he is not directly involved with playingy style and coaching...that is the domain of the coach...and to be honest no cups coetzee's stormers cant even score in a brothel at the moment.

Hard to prove how good his analytics are, absent an exam. And if he is good at organizing structures and linkages that's laudable. Perhaps he'd make a good middle manager. But we need somebody who can devise winning rugby tactics on the field of play. I can think of nothing he has done in that regard. Our team against Oz was totally predictable with nothing up our sleeve. Not even one set backline play.

LOL @ CM!! Moz, Rassie immediately turned both the Cheetahs and the Stormers around when he arrived at the respective unions. As an analyst he is exceptional, and that is where he is being used now in the Springbok setup, as an analyst. As for Mitchell, failure can make people nasty. The Lions implosion was initially caused by a mass of injuries, that was the initial reason for their poor season. But regardless of that, the pressure of failure still eventually lands up on the coaches shoulders. Under that pressure, and the real possibility that his union would not even play in next years competition, it would appear he crumbled and lost the plot. I just see no comparrision between him and Rassie.

the lions has no depth in players thats there biggest issue...not even the best coach in the world can fix that. give them more depth then they can be at least decent

Hasbeen there are lefthanders and righthanders......there are also staff guys and line guys. The distinction is that sharp in my experience. Line guys have a compulsion to take charge, to make their own decisions, to be held accountable. Staff guys feel uncomfortable with that....they'd rather give advice and criticism from the sidelines.

Rassie is a staff guy.....every line assignment he had, he converted as quickly as possible to a staff type role, with a guy beneath him promoted to take the heat. Even now, he is not the coach, he is the advisor....that's how he likes it.

The question is whether he is a good advisor. And face it, in the chaotic PdV setup, he had a great deal of influence. I think Eddie Jones did a great job, his fingerprints were all over our 2007 win. I see nothing Rassie did to improve what was there before.

Even in this current Bok team, you have to ask what he is acheiving. Surely as an ex Bok flank he has to have some influence on the loosie strategy. So is he the guy who authored the no fetcher policy? And if not, do they pay any attention to him at all.

Rassie needed to remove Luke Watson from the mix as soon as possible. He didn't.....and that lack of guts defines the man. He may be a nice guy, a great rugby historian, a fine school organizer and an interesting speaker. He will not help us win rugby matches.

You are asking premature questions. The consensus was he made a big difference immediately he spent those two weeks with the Boks last year!. Now we have a new team with a new coach and who knows the dynamic. Its actually far too early to jump to conclusions.Injuries and poor kicking made these atches closer than they would hacve been otherhwise. So many prominent rugby men who know Rassie have been very impressed with him. Brendon Venter thinks he is outstanding and he is a rugby brain himself. jake wanted rassie on his staff. Jake should also know.

Anyhow time will tell. I will be surprised if Meyer and Rassie cant do well. Meyer also has proved himself surely.

I suppose a step or what backwards was to be expected with all the old hands that had to be replaced by either new ones or playing others out of position. Then, obviously Morne's kicking went bonkers and there was no other kicker on the field. Even when Pienaar was on, the ball still went to Morne, because everyone expected him to catch his form any minute....It did not happen and we drew a game against the poms. Hopefully we will have a backup kicker in the starting 15 for the next game.

You are asking premature questions. The consensus was he made a big difference immediately he spent those two weeks with the Boks last year!. Now we have a new team with a new coach and who knows the dynamic. Its actually far too early to jump to conclusions.Injuries and poor kicking made these matches closer than they would hacve been otherhwise.

So many prominent rugby men who know Rassie have been very impressed with him. Brendon Venter thinks he is outstanding and he is a rugby brain himself. Jake wanted Rassie on his staff. Jake should also know.

Anyhow time will tell. I will be surprised if Meyer and Rassie cant do well. Meyer also has proved himself surely.