Stage one: the strike
The game was initiated by the reveal of NZ strategy: they gave up on the task of trying to play rugby. The highlight of that attitude materialized during the numerical superiorty situation that happened early in the game.
The NZ side kept playing at their own pace, without taking advantage of the circumstances. They stuck to their gameplan based on managing their fitness level. NZ went on strike.
Stage two: the quick sands
As a Seminole could tell, moving when caught in quick sands is not lethal, moving inappropriately is.
From this point, the challenge was set for SA rugby. By refusing to play rugby, NZ would no longer lend their side to the attrition strategy, removing SA rugby's main asset.
Not only, since NZ played ball conservation, SA rugby had to claim the ball back to do anything.
This challenge proved way too much for SA rugby. They were exposed during that period as a side unable to milk penalties.
The options on the table were not. SA rugby could not play rugby and they could not tire their opponent as the latter would not try to play rugby.
A timer was on.
Especially, as NZ, through bursts, flashes and sparks, appeared closer and closer to score.
Phase three: the SA rugby coach's gamble.
As the game was going, the SA rugby team had no way out. The NZ side would not get tired before the finishing line, they would run the distance.
At this point, the SA rugby coach decided that overcommittment was the only available option in order to keep pretending.
He first shook his side with early substitutions (not his first and this time too, this shock therapy happened at the expense of quota players) which signaled the start of the overcommitment.
As the half time was nearing, the NZ side got more and more tired. At this point, with two fresh legs among forwards, the SA rugby side turned on the gas and overcommitted: they prematurely exhausted themselves in order to close the gap.
It worked. Especially as NZ did not falter, they kept to their original plan. The overcommitment from SA rugby was not meant by an overcommittment from NZ.
Nevertheless, the tribute was paid.
The resources that were burned at this early stage would go missing at the end of the game.
The morale of the story:
SA rugby are very experienced in relying on attrition to keep pretending.
NZ refusing to play rugby was enough to expose them and their lack of rugby.
In a sort of a way, NZ beat SA rugby at their own strategy.
