The Leinster lesson

I can see Master and Blaster agreeing that this game vindicates them. Some brilliant play by Fassi, Abrahamse and Rohan lead to tries. But defensive lapses by Abrahamse and Fassi led to opposition tries and Rohan was red carded.

Too often the Sharks lost their defensive structure leading to easy long pass and kick/pass tries.

There is a real lesson here…if you open up the game your backs better be dominant. And against the top teams that’s not guaranteed. Which is why we have to keep the lineout, scrum, maul and high kick  dominance we have enjoyed.

But the way the Sharks scored tries today is also a lesson for the Boks. And a player like Rohan could add huge value. There wasn’t a lot of offloading, but there was complexity and pace, something the Boks haven’t provided for years. And it led to tries where in similar situations the Boks have been happy to milk the penalties.

Our coaches need to add a new dimension, not assume that doing the same thing again is enough.

Wasn't that chipping over for the winger the best ever employed by Leinster.
Always a man wide for that option...brilliant.

Mozart\

Your comments are as per normal garbled  and totally weird - you refer to pace and mentioned Rohan - if there is something  Rohan has a deficiency it is pace.   He never was a  pace merchant and his strength was strong carries,    As to defense it went missing - especially in th e second half of the game.    

I found the game to be one-sided  and really nothing to learn from.the Sharks - fact is they were poor at best.    The worst SA side playing this weekend.   

There were much more to consider in the Stormers game.    There were plenty pace in the team wtih Ngomesulu - a normal flyhalf playing at 12  for the Stormers.  I think he is being phazed into the Stormers team  and he did very well.    This is a sign that he would be in the squad in November and play in the club games during the tour.    He is probably being a reserve player if  Pollard fails to recover form and we are left with Goosen and Willemse at flyhalf.   Interesting enough is Ngomezulu did the kicking at goal as well.                       

No lesson to be taken as the game was one of those dummy games.

Commitment, involvement were nothing close to test level games. Both teams play a more open, stand off defense than they would on other days.

Rohan was great but frustrated, Fassi is becoming a defensive liability. Doesn't like physicality. Where as Moody don't mind tackling. 

That said, Leinster always have a man wide, that is how they play, compress and then either lob the ball wide or kick pass. But that was some skill, which means they must practice it all the time.

One thing that did loss me off were the amount of screens. Especially when the made contact and they don't get blown up. 

What I did notice is that they would run the screen, move the ball behind, far enough so it doesn't look obvious, but then switch the ball back to exactly where the dummy runner made contact two passe ago. The players actually get knocked off their feet and can't plug the hole fast enough. 

But Leinster just showed how good they were. 

Not sure a full strength Sharks team would beat them.

Also, one bug hear is that we hardly see full strength teams between SA and Overseas team. We either send weeker teams or they do. 

Where as with the old Super 12, you knew you were going to get the best players week in week out 

I also was a big Rohan fan at the time - but he had a huge deficiency and that was on defense,   Maybe he did overcome it - but him being not played by the Springboks indicate there is still something deficient in his game.   I am not pretending I am an expert so I have to accept that there are real experts who knows why Van Renburg has not played for the Springboks yet,  

What bothers me is that Leinster struggled to beat Zebre - they won by only 3 points - and then went on totally beat the Sharks team comprehensively  - so there may be soemthing wrong in the Sharks team especially since the stormers made mincement of Zebre.         

Agreed Plum, it was a feast of clever rugby. Perhaps not test level in terms of physicality and defence. But many of the running tactics would work at test level…at times the Sharks’ backline structures reminded me of Australia.

I wonder about this competition.

Last season SA manageed to get 2 teams in the final.

Actually if you knew your literature, it’s the Red And The  Black….by Stendhal.

Also, one bug hear is that we hardly see full strength teams between SA and Overseas team. We either send weeker teams or they do.

Nothing specific to teams but to the competition.

International tests are fewer in number so players can bring a destructive mentality in they can not afford to bring in week in week out during a regular domestic league.

Leinster clearly had left the mentality they showed during the last European cup final in the dressing room. This mentality has a price to pay and was paid by Leinster the following game as they came to it diminished.

Unless this kind of teams brings that mentality, no lessons to be taken.

This was the first time I've seen a South African side run screen plays effectively, something which many other sides have been doing for some time. We did seem, in general, to be sticking rigidly to a game plan of playing off 9 and sacrificing a width to our attack but more likely to retain ball. 

I believe if more of our teams were to employ these attacking styles it would benefit us greatly. We have some players with top level footwork, who given that 1/2 second more time can beat the first line of defence. Combine this with the ability to feed our ball carriers and we pose more questions to defences than we have been for some time. 

Welcome Winesy…nice points.

Winesy... you talk like Bark... the same nonsense that resembles KornKob... I reckon all three the same people. Anyways... all teams use screens Winesy/Bark/Korn (WBK for shortness). That's how they yarpie teams have been setup for a reeeeeaaaalllly long time. Defence moves back, more space up front, and that is pretty obvious meaning the attackers have to be in layers to trick the defence. Gone are days of flat lines and trickery with footwork. That's probably part of why the Blocks were more better on attack back in those old highlight videos. They do sometimes have guys with shifty feet BUT it's just as useful anymore. So your points are pretty much wrong. Playing off 9 doesn't actually mean you sacrifice width. If say 9 goes to another receiver that can be a whole pod 5m away... that creates width. You can have a 10/12/13/15/11 or whatever behind that pod and you have a screen. Blockies like to go to the pod and play out the back to a back guy. But going wide doesn't mean your going forwards WBK... and it doesn't mean your more effective. Like I told Bark when he was pretending to be a coach (your other persona)... the pods in other better teams are better because they have more athletic and more skilled forwards. A pod can be like an entire midfield on its own and if they can fricking play the ball with skill they don't have to be bashers like the dumb Blockies. So bleh... you can create numerical advantages ANYWHERE in the line at an point on the field because you haver dynamic players. The Blockies don't have that kind of players. Kwagga is the odd one out I suppose... he is top drawer and super skilled. Wiese is pretty great but a carrier... not a linker... yet! Nobody else at all. So that changes the structure of the Blockies... they are too limited. Forget the crap you see on domestic rugby... you are TOO FUCKING LIMITED TO PLAY MODERN TEST RUGBY. End of damn story. The vbascks are almost worse in lotsa ways. You got guys running randomly and throwing the pill around like a hot potato. The more your guys are "skilled" and "x-factor" the worse they actually are. That Wallaby win was so fucking laboured. It all comes down to this... you are dreaming ... all of you... that these Blockies can be something far better than they are. You blame the coach because the only other option is to blame your lack of talent. It looks to me like the nu gen yarpies players are way less intelligent than the guys before then. I think the school of the mid 00s was the last good vintage for gray matter. It's all going to be cyclic. You were happy with Erasmus because you weren't losing AS badly... but then you clownn bought into the joke #1 tag for so long you actually believed it. Now you think the new coach will bring the "true" Blockies out because you just don't want to let go of the dream that this player group is something special. I laugh so hard every time the big name on the domestic scene gets to test level and gets smoked... always the coach excuse. BUT coach isn't to blame if you can't make those passes, tackles, reads, or you just get physically blown off the map (like Roos and Ebenezer! Hhehehehe!). Previous coaches tried more elaborate schemes and it blew up in their faces and you pitchfork wielding lunatic went for them. Now you do the same stuff. No wonder Erasmus is working behind the other guy... he knows damn well that you are not to be trusted! Smart man, smart man indeed. Genius coach keeping himself shielded from the dummies. 

" No wonder Erasmus is working behind the other guy....." - sounds more like a Coward than a genius.