The Lions game

Two weeks ago the dimmest member of this site went over the moon about the Lions poor game plan and how they failed miserably against the Hurricanes.   The lions had problem with injured props in that game - so they rarely got clean possession - but that did not count with our dimmest member - he was going bananas about what is wrong with playing the type of rugby they played,
Today they played exactly the same style of rugby and beat the Blue by 38 points.   Bu t the dimmest member will obviously not take this match into account in his constant waffle about playing "traditional rugby".       

 Lions are the best coached outfit in SA by far.It shows you Sa sides properly coached and with the right skills and mindset can play attacking rugby.Blues were wiped out by a far superior side. Scrum was back to its dominant best. Pulverised the poor Blues.
Jantjes had great night as were so may of the players. Mapoe staked a bok claim and his defensive. Mnisi showed his defence is not up to it but he could have a future on the wing.Mostert works so hard as do all the Lions pack. Very alert and quick to react.Hats off to the Lio ns theyare a pleasure to watch

Jantjies attacks space and gets his backline running. His selection will be dependent on the tactics of Coetzee. 
It must be said though that the Auckland Blues of 2016 are poor. The backline is not as good as the other teams- and the forwards are average at best. 

The lowest NZ team with a win on tour and it's mind on the flight to Oz loses interest....not much to be gleaned from this. 

 Sharkbok 
If my memory does not fail me the Blues beat the Highlanders in the first round and has never this year been beaten by more than 30 points.
   

 As I expected - the dim doos does not reckon that the Lions match proved anything.  He is as stupid as they come insofar as rugby is concerned.    

The Kings made a game out of it when playing Auckland- and the Kings are without doubt th e worst team in the tournament.

 The Kings also beat the Sunwolves - which the Stormers could not do this weekend.   I do not think the win was as significant as the size of the victory was.          

 At some point Bob Skinstad will have to stop referring to Jantjies as mercurial. Willie Le Roux is mercurial, Jantjies has been the opposite or Mercurial for two years now. Moz, i will yet again remind you that the Lions beat the Chiefs at home. By the reasoning you use above, what are we to glean? In my view the Blues are not a great team, and neither are the Kings but you still have to beat them on the day. Yesterday was about as bad as it gets for running rugby and the Lions made relatively few errors considering. We just not gonna give them any credit then? Faf also continues to show why he will be emulated for generations to come. Regardless of the fact that he looks like a lesbian from Brakpan.

 Lions look good to me, not just based on this game but there overall season. 
The have a 7-3 record and are on top of the Africa 2 league (for whatever that is worth) with a respectable 32 points.

 Mozarrt aka Dof Doos
This is a classic:-
"The lowest NZ team with a win on tour and it's mind on the flight to Oz loses interest....not much to be gleaned from this. "
The above applies to the Blues, but it does not apply to the Lions facing the Highlanders.   Standard rubbish from the biggest idiot and greatest liar on this site.    

Actually it does apply to the Lions....Having surprised an unfocused Chiefs team, I never expected them to beat the Landers. But it's their losses at home to the Saders and Canes that defined their problem....they have the same weapons as top NZ teams. But the top NZ teams are unfortunately that little bit better.
So in an even contest, with both parties fully engaged, they will tend to lose.

As for the Lions players they benefit from a very established playing style. Put them in a Bok team playing to different strengths they will struggle. 
Ironically our most succesful S15 team so far, may not provide one Bok starter by the time the season matures.

 Still a classic - the Lions will be lost playing for the Springboks using them to "different strengths" they will struggle.   What different strerngtths are not mentioned - but one can assume it is having to play what Mozart says is "standard SA Rugby".
It never enters his head that the poor situation in SA rugby is due to -
*   a dud game plan comprising repetitive junk so easy to read it cannot produce results; and
*   the selection of dud players who knows no better than to play duyd and unthinking rugby.
For the Lions players the Meyer environment would have been deadly - and I suppose that Mozart is hoping that the new coach will use the same junk Meyer did.  One thing is good iro the new coach.  Most of the way past their sell-by date players are gone.        

Moz I agree that way what you say about Lions vs NZ teams in even circumstances. But the Lions are the fourth best team in SA as concerns personell. The question is whether SA teams would be able to dominate by playing more expaneively. For me the answer is yes.

 Plum, I start from the premise that NZ have stronger players in every backline position. That their bigger backs will tend to win the ball on the ground in out wide tackles. We on the other hand could be better at set pieces. So my approach is to play to that strength. That doesn't mean we don't attack with turnover ball and when we have their  defence under the cosh. 
It doesn't mean the skills we admire of slick passing, offloads, cuts onto the ball at pace are not relevant. But if we start playing phase rugby just outside the 22, especially if we go wide, we will lose badly.

Yes, one does have to clear your lines. Obviously running everything out of your own 22 is not a great idea and can be predictable. But, how often do we see the following: Defending team has ball on 22 and a ruck is formed. 9 passes ro 10 who is near his own try line and he clears it to halfway between 22m and 10m lines. Opposition now has attacking lineout and after one phase find themselves on the defending team's 22. Basically the attacking team have just been given the ball been given the opportunity to make a go of it. Much too often. In my view, SA teams will sometimes play one or maybe two phases near their line and then feel compelled to kick. Nobody is saying they gotta swing the ball wide and run 80m for a try. Just that being more attack minded will sometimes make defence a lot easier. Play some safe phases, work better positions and then clear it. But if the opportunity presents itself then give it a go. Again, I'm not saying run the ball out of your 22 everything. I just wanna see more unpredictability in our play. Looking at the 2015 AB side, there were no monsters in their backs. Savea(spelling) being the exception.

 Nice point Plum. That description sums up a great deal of our WCSF. These territory stalemates are tough, Saracens choked the life out of their opponents yesterday by pinning them deep. Sometimes long kicks straight down the middle are better than touch kicks...very often eliciting up and unders which only get the opponent 50% of the way back.

There is no rule against running a ball back, but there has to be a seam or space, otherwise turnovers as so likely. But lets keep this debate going.

 This story is really funny.  Lets explain and deal with practical examples.  First example is in the WC semi.  The Springboks won a scrum in their own 22 and the ball is passed by Du Preez back to Burger.  Barrett just take the ball with ease from his hand and the ultimate result is a try by the AB's.  
Second example is in the Montpellier game, There is a turnover in possession just outside the Montpellier 22.  There is a 5 on 2 overlap - but instead of using the advantage the ball is kicked away aimlessly and handed over to the opposition.  The game is soon back to where the initial turnover happened.
Third example is in the Perth test.  The Springboks got a penalty in their own 22 and instead of finding touch with the penalty kick - Morne Steyn kicked the ball inaccurately and the ball is caught 6 meters in the field of play and the Aussies counter-attacked - scoring a winning try.
Fourth example was in the Highlanders game against the Sharks in Durban in 2014 - were the Shark lost by a wide margin.  The Sharks won a turnover just inside the Highlanders half of the field and all that Fransie Steyn did was to kick the ball over the tryline and all Ben Smith did was to touch down the ball and the opportunity was lost.           
Long kicks down the middle is more often than not is counter-productive - since it takes out the possibility of effective follow-ups.  It can be used to get the opposition recipients out of position - but that virtually never happens.   
So lets get it straight.   There is always the need for strategic and objective-orientated kicks in games.   However, the problem is that our key kickers do not know when to use long kicks strategically placed or when to find touch.  We have had a long history of aimless kicks by Springbok flyhalfs and on Super Rugby level.  The situations remains - kicking the ball away aimlessly is what is the problem in SA rugby.
Players should know when to kick and when to keep the ball in hand.  In the heavy and slow NH conditions a kicking game is more feasible than in the faster SH playing conditions.   However, to advocate that the ball should never be kept in hand is a farce - especially against the AB's.  The best try in years scored against the All Blacks in the Ellis Park test.  The try started in the AB' s 22 when instead of Pollard kicking the ball away he counter-attacked and the ball came back to the Springboks. the ball came back to De Villiers -who dribble kicked the ball and the ball was picked up by Hougaard and he scored a try under the AB's post.   This was an exact opposite to the moment of Morne madness - the year before when with seconds remaining in the first half decided not to kick for touch and passed the ball deep in the Springboks 22.  Engelbrecht got the ball was tackled with ease and Read took the ball - passed it to Messam who scored a try under the post.   A typical example of not knowing when to kick and when to pass a ball.  
The rule should be that kicking should be strategic and not aimless and kicks too far down the middle of the field is normally aimless and counter-productive.        
             

Mike you should by default support the Lions system since I can hardly remember a game this year where aimless kicking was an issue for them. Saturday's game was hijacked by Jantjies' great kicking...granted everything he did came off and this won't always be the case. I also have an example I'd like to share. Comes from a game vs Oz last year. Boks have the ball inside their 22. Willie is in the in goal area on Ruan Pienaar's left and Pollard on Pienaar's right. Pienaar doesn't look at Pollard for even a split second. He passes to Willie. The problem being that a) Willie has three attackers charging him down with no Bok defenders in front of him that Oz attackers have to run around and b) He has a very bad angle to clear from. Pollard on the other hand had Bizmark and another defender in front of him as well as being much nearer to the middle of the the field. This was a solid ruck with no chance of a turnover and Pienaar had years to decide who to pass to. Willie's kick is almost charged down as he has three Oz attackers Rushing him and the pressure results in a poor clearance that then leads to a try by Oz. There is a situation where you have to clear your lines but because the 9 is defence minded he doesn't for a moment think of anything other than getting to the nearest kicker for clearance immediately. The opposition know that you only want to kick it and will thus throw everything at pressuring the kicker. For me. There is nothing wrong with working a better position. Especially when you have the loosies that SA does. If you sit in the corner and block all day, at some.point a shot will get through and you'll unravel. So while I agree with both you and Mike on certain points I also think we should be a tad more positive because guys like Eben, PSDT, Du Preez Bros, Kriel, Marcel, Louw, Lappies, Duane and RG Snyman as well as some mobile props mean we can easily work more attack minded defensive plays and get more bang for our buck when clearing. Of course if we have a knucklehead like Pienaar at 9 it all goes to pot though. PS dammit that list of locks and loosies I just typed out gets me excited :)