There's a saying....

"If it ain't broke don't fix it." Well our rugby is broke, has been for quite a while and the time to fix it is long overdue. The Kiwis and Ozzies have stolen the march on us and the Boks have lost their awe.....teams no longer fear them. The problem as I see it is as we stand at the crossroads, is the direction Coetzee decides to take. He'll be making an awful mistake if he abandons traditional Bok strengths for an all out attacking game. Encouraged by the franchises he might decide to go that way, something that will satisfy a bored public even though it will lead to failure. I say failure as we've seen the next best running side, the Ozzies, fail against the Kiwis and to be honest we're miles behind Oz as an attacking side. So where to from here? It's a tough one and even though our franchises are heading in the direction of more open play there is a need to understand that passing the ball even though it looks spectacular does not convert to tries. I'm not convinced that our players have the nous to crack defences....for that they need a backline coach in the caliber of my man Eddie Jones. So to answer the question, if I was Coetzee I would stay with traditional Bok strengths which are the set pieces and defence. I would also invest in a specialized fetcher like in Heinrich Brussow so as to stay competitive at the ruck and I hope that the new Bok backline coach is the man to pull the switch on some great backline play. There is a need to seal the deal.

 Thanks for that bit of common sense Denny. There is no doubt we can hone our attacking skills....better offloading, improving the forwards handling....fewer aimless up and unders. But as the Lions find against the better NZ teams they just can't afford turnover ball.
My approach is better execution of the Bok way.
1 Lets  really dominate the scrums and lineouts...we have very impressive forward options
2 Make the defence much more predatory...Kriel was a weakness at the WC. 
3 Make the suggested improvements in simple handling skills....Jake made them quickly at the Brumbies.
4 Develop some set plays for scoring inside the 22...Schalk and Groom did this very well in one of the earlier S15 matches
This idea that we have to play NZ rugby against NZ, embraced by every fan and writer, is embarrassingly naive

 There's this notion of utilizing the long ball, Coetzee is a fan, although I see it as an option I also see it as one of several options.
What is wrong with using the short ball as a means of perpetuating the ball downtown as opposed to a Hail Mary kick? The Brumbies in their heyday were great exponents.
What about drawing the tackler, taking him out of the defence before offloading.
How about offloading in the tackle instead of dying with the ball?...that way maintaining momentum.
What about abandoning the chip kick when in the opponents red zone...Helloooo Willie Le Roux are you listening?
What about getting the forwards to punch it up when in the red zone, suck in defences before sending it wide.

What about kicking when necessary but also to kick with accuracy.
These are all basic things which any half decent coach should have no problem implementing.

 Against the All Blacks my number one message would be, when kicking the ball out, get it into the grandstand....how often have we been killed by the quick lineout.
Second caution would be, expect the short lineout throw every time...because it will come.

Third caution would be, don't stop scrumming until the ball is out ...how many times haven't we been surprised by a late, concerted shove.
Fourth caution would be the JJ rule never run into a tandem of defenders out wide against NZ, you will get turned.
Fifth caution would be, play the two minutes before the half like demons.
Sixth caution would be, after scoring don't celebrate start planning the kickoff recovery, because failing to secure that kickoff keeps nailing us.
The thing about these warnings is that it happens to us time and time again....and somehow we don't get it. These practical set backs have far more to do with our losses to NZ than all the expansive rugby they supposedly play.

 I have a few cautions to add:-
Seventh caution - don't select players on the basis of reputation and take into account performance as a selection criteria.
Eighth caution - when awarded a penalty in your own 22 make sure the ball is kicked out
Ninth caution - when the end of a half is seconds away, don't sell your teammates down the drain by passing balls to them in your on 22 - kick the ball into the pavilion.
Tenth caution - don't change your loosies into stand-in flyhalfs since it neutralizes the backline and is easily countered by the AB's because of predictability.   
 

I never understand why people insist on totally polarizing arguments to make a point. EG The Boks under Meyer played a totally defensive game. Now when peoppe suggest that the Boks actually use the back line and attack more, then that suggestion is taken to mean that they should pass the ball around mindlessly and only ever run the ball out of their 22. I think what most people are suggesting is that the Boks play to ALL their strengths, and not just set piece strength. The problem is that skilled passing is not considered a South African strength...when actually IT IS!

Here... "So to answer the question, if I was Coetzee I would stay with traditional Bok strengths which are the set pieces and defence" The above isn't total BS. It's more of a half truth.

 And you want to do all this with the tried and tested ... with the old Schalk and the dimwitted Pienaar ... 
Hmmmm ... ???
Pray tell, Mozart ... how are you going to manage this? 
We already saw how capable they were against Japan.
Obviously Coetzee will remain with the traditional style of play. Du-uh!!!!!!!!

Dominance upfront while setting a platform for the backs.   
Mozart ... please join the rest of us in the real world. 

 

 What is traditional Bok rugby over the long decades we ruled World rugby.
Its about forward domination, a tactically astute flyhlaf, ferocious defence and general physicality generally and its also about attacking flair. Some of the games greatest backlines have been Bok backlines!
Now along come the Lions. A bunch of nobodies. Thier coach decides to go back to a more balanced game. So against the chieifs they destroyed them in the scrums but they also could run the ball and score tries.Put very simply to assist dense denise who started this thread. Attack on good ball provided bya domianat pack.Our rugby has suufered greatly by giving away toght five domination courtesy of wee matfiled 105 kg. We have decided up and unders are the way to go and the rolling maul must be our only scoring method.Fortunately, things are changing and the old Bulle approach is being given the boot.
If the Lions can play as well as they do imagine what would happen if the Bulls, Sharks and Stormers followed suit. Imagaine what would happen if the Boks also followed suit!Away with plodding inefficient, stupid rugby and in with inteliigent creative physical, powerful rugby.
We must never neglect our supriority in the physical stakes vis a vis the pap Nz oaks. Scrum them into the turf etc. hahahahahahahhahahaha. Terrorise the mongs as of old! Well I remember Os flattening Lomu, or Joggie Jansen terrorising poor Bryan Williams ! Bring out the traditional offensive tackle again and send them home ta think again!

 Ummmm Hasbeeno, the Boks have never terrorised the ABs just to give you the heads up; and now they don't worry a lot of teams, particularly Japan.....The Boks are just not capable of playing the type of rugby you are fantasising about you dreamer!!

True Plum.....but some of us come at it from the perspective of let's play like the Lions or All Blacks and just hold onto our traditional physicality.....others of us feel there is nothing inherently wrong with a Sharks vs Landers/ Boks vs Oz at Newlands in 2014 game plan, enhanced by improving a few skill sets and focusing our tactics.
Approach 1 abandons everything we have accomplished as the second best team in the world. Approach 2 says we only have to focus on what makes us recent losers against the ABs.

Approach 1 is akin to capitulation .....Approach 2 says Bok rugby has real capital.

Approach 1 says every SA kid needs to be retrai ned....Approach 2 says every kid has to be refocused.
We lost by 2 points ffs and only conceded because of defensive lapses, that should never have happened. We are competitive, do we have to try 2001 and 2008 again?

 Mozart
When a team wins that is held up as "traditional Springbok rugby" - when they lose playing the same style "the traditional Springbok Rugby" is upheld and individual players blamed for the collapse.  
The defense lapses in the WC semi was not because only of defensive lapses as you implied.  Matfield penalty turnover and the ball just be taken out of the hands of Burger is not ever mentioned.  The latter preceded a try by the AB's for which you lied openly about a defensive lapse.   You even went so far as to post a video clip where your lie was exposed.
Whenever anybody says there needs to be variations in the game and not the predictable and easily contained match play used by Meyer - you accused any members suggesting a change of wanting to play NZ rugby.  That is suggested by nobody - but everyone realize that we cannot continue playing poor and predictable rugby.  

Well for a start Kriel was not a weakness in defence at the WC....that is utter rubbish.....but of course Moz will be defining his whole defensive campaign by that one Jap miss.
We should never abandon our strengths.....dominating the physical battles is a must and a given, given the young forwards we have at our disposal
But with this physical domination comes possession and with that we need to be playing with the ball in hand.....not playing for territory using the boot and conceding possession as was the case under Meyer....most of his tenure was with kicking 9's and the robotic Morne at 10......how utterly counter productive.
We have forwards that can dominate and backs that have the x factor in the likes of Willie, Gelant, Combrink, Kolbe, Senatla, Sergeal Petersen, Jessie Kriel, Jantjies, Faf and Hougaard....players that attack space with speed and dancing feet.....added to the physicality and skill that the likes of Ulengo, Vorster, Mapoe, de Allende, Serfontein, Venter and Pollard bring to the equation.
Its simple really......play the Lions game with players that are the best in their respective positions......the Lions are so effective under this plan with such limited resources.....imagine what they could do with the best players in the country effecting that plan. They are nullified against sides that dominate them physically......that would not happen to the Boks. 

The one Jap miss lost a WC match.  

 Hougaard is no class act, he is another who promised a lot but for an unknown reason lost his way and failed to establish himself as a top class player just like several others before him eg Spies, JJ Engelbecht. Kolbe is far too small to be the last line of defence and I have doubts about Senatla being as effective in the fifteen man game.

 Mozart
The Japan test was lost because the has-beens and never has-beens -  the most experienced team ever fielded by the Springboks - badly failed to produce the goods.   Most of the players were atrociously bad.
Your comments on that one is simplistic and of no real value.     

 Nicely put, Dave ... 
The Lions have a powerful scrum and have worked on their line- out as the season's progressed. 
This forward dominance has set a platform for us to challenge the top boys with some innovative running lines and we've scored some amazing tries.
It really is amazing how we've managed all this with our weedy props. 
Our "small" openside flank has been outstanding against all comers and with the quick service from the base of the ruck we've found ourselves actually competing against the big boys.
We're one of the few SA franchises who actually bring the 10 into play and rely on him to dictate terms from there.
As you've said ... what would we be able to do if we had the best in the land.

CC and Saff, you are on the money. we should play to our usual strengths, forward dominance in line-outs, scrums etc...which we have the players to execute effectively. And then improve where we have been lacking in the recent past with ball retention, handling, effective off loading and back line play in general. Which is something the Lions are doing very well, even though they may lack the high level players. If we can lift our standards in the above areas there is no reason why we can't compete with NZ. It does not have to be 10 man rugby OR expansive rugby, with a decent coaching strategy it can be both.
Just a side thought, it is not as if the NZ sides never kick the ball. They kick plenty, but they don't use kicking as a default move. It is just another option available. The South African mentality needs to change from kick first and consider alternatives later, to what is the best play right here and right now.  

Moz. I completely understand what you're saying. It's just that it doesn't feel like we are able to consistently carry out a Sharks v Landers game plan. It also seems as though that system relies too heavily on the opposition making mistakes. What if they don't make any and what if you don't get turnover ball? The Lions gameplay relies heavily on defence. And their discipline is 90% of what makes it work. Here is something very overlooked in these forums. Nobody mentions how quickly the Lions retreat when they get a whistle against them. Nobody talks.about how quickly they are up off the ground after tackle/ruck. And this helps them counter attack also. They are far and away our best countering team and apart from one game this year they have been beastly at the breakdown. To my mind they have the balance just right. Maybe they're just hungrier than anyone else but there is a core of players there that are breeding an environment of camaraderie, and I'm not sure if the Boks will emulate that. Here's an example. Take the 2015 Bok squad...and then this current Lions team. Which of the two seem closer as a unit? The answer is clear right? So maybe that's where we should start. Build a unit of brothers, not a bunch of headboy's and prefects. Watch Jaco Kriel's interview after last year's CC final and listen to what he says. That's what the Boks need more than any game plan or foreign coach. The Sharks on the other hand have struggled. Why? Because their game plan likely dictates few scenarios where attack is allowed. They don't seem to be playing with freedom. To my mind the Landers blew their wad the previous week against the Lions and the ref was watching their offside line a lot more closely. So I dunno how much one should read into those two results. Maybe a lot maybe nothing at all, I dunno. What I do know is that the Springboks have a serious amount of very skilled players to make use of. And looking at the Lions, considering the teams they've played this year...best in SA and best in NZ, they're topping their conference and leading the SA log. One cant ignore that evidence. On top of that, look at what has happened to the Bulls and Stormers since they retreated back into their shells. They look like half the teams they were at the start of the season.

 There's just this little matter that needs a bit of attention....
"I'm not convinced that our players have the nous to crack defences....for that they need a backline coach in the caliber of my man Eddie Jones."

 Dennys right just stick with mono-directional bok forwards [ dont wanna confuse them ] and get rid of yer wingers the space saved could be used for more forwards ! Add someone who can kick goals from 60m and thats your boks for ya !When you have people with the mentality of beansh!t who think its clever to constantly put down your opponent and blame your constant losses to them on refs or whatever-the-fark-nonsense gets in its head its no wonder you cant catch up.

Denny, we don't have the backline players the NZ has, nobody can really argue that, but our players are still good enough, when using an effective strategy, to be dangerous. If our forwards, man for man, are good enough to get a certain level of dominance of their NZ counterparts, that small advantage would nullify, to some extent anyway, the advantage they have over us in the backs. 

 Comb-Over is sadly clueless when it comes to rugby.
If you want his opinion you should rather save a little time and ask Mozart for it.

 BlouThe common sense thing to do is to launch the attack from  set pieces.....but then we must have strong and consistent set pieces. We would still have to retain a bit of kicking but it has to be meaningful. Sorry to say but Willie lacks a good boot...when the ball needs to be kicked out it has to be kicked out...again this has been mentioned in the above posts. What Mike says is true, we have possession but we don't close the deal and this goes back to the fact that we don't know how to score tries. Again, some examples of where we fall apart and the remedies thereof are mentioned in the above posts. Finding a good backline coach is like hen's teeth....I look forward to what the new backline coach brings to the table.

 Wow ... !!!
So much to say ... and yet nothing said in the long run.
Good thing we have the ability to edit, Comb-Over ... use it and try again.
Let's see if you can improve on the above attempt ...  

Lolz...Wardad there's some truth in your humour

I have a problem with the way we conservative Saffers think...that is what has worked before must be the corner stone of the way to play...and even when it now occassionally does work (in fact if we are truthful getting worse and worst)  it still is nowhere to compare with the men in black.

Are we forever cursed with this staid mindset. The lions style shows a glimmer of hope, maybe Ackers has the courage and intelligence to think beyond this stumbling blockage of thought patterns that bedevil 90 % of SA rugby coaches. The Lions are incredible in the way they have overcome their past with good team players and virtually no prima donnas but with good rugby in most departments and yes balanced.

Why cannot we play the full 15 man game...indeed are we forever doomed to stick to our boring style like England has for many a year...

Is the desire to win at any cost...costing us in the bigger picture...it's certainly costing the "character" of the game...if you understand what I'm trying to say.

Watching schoolboy rugby and our schools are good...youth starts well but gets lost in the abyss of senior rugby administators and coaches.

To change our mindset will no doubt bring on the sheep bleets from the verkramptes here...but none the less that fact is true in a real and wider context.

There is absolutely NO reason why we cannot master the full game.

Dr Win you should change your name from Just Win (not Kiwi- like) to Win Convincingly...doesn't always work in your favour...poor Chiefies...you should support the the Mighty 'Saders...the masters of NZ 15 man rugby

Seb, you don't have to win convincingly you just have to win, 1 point is enough as history has shown 
Anyway, my user name was established after the loss to the French in 2007 RWC when I simply had had enough of us losing RWCs & decided that we just had to do what it took to win from now on. So far so good

 JWs voodoo is working just fine Seb ! I have watched Bok games from way back in the 30s [ newsreels on you-tube]  to the present and you guys used to have a far more complete game between the world wars and into the 50s and early 60s .Then came the age of huge forwards and sniperish goal kickers and now it seems set in stone .The ABs seem to be more amenable to change so long as it keeps us in front and they arent too scared to take from other codes too such as AFL [ kicking ,catching high ball etc] and league .

Anyone know where in NZ Craig Joubert will be retiring? I hear he likes fishing.

For your interest Wardad (perhaps you scholars of the game already know) my friend Beeno (turns a blind eye...and is stumped or stormered)

Here are the records...the stats...

SOUTH AFRICA                     NEW ZEALAND

Played 452                           538
Won 287                              413
Lost 144                              106
Drawn 21                             19
Win% 63.5                            76.77
For 10,480 points                   14,362
Against 7042                          6984
Differerence 3438                    7378

That tells the full story and the truth nobody will ever come close enough, not even SA especially now when we don't compete with the high game standards we once had.

Certainly even if we improved substantially we don't have a snowballs hope of catching them ever.

So yes, I support the Bokke but have the huge respect for the All Blacks and like NZ'ers and give credit when it's due...what is ridiculous is that we will ever surpass them...yes the odd game but they are the undisputed champions of rugby.

And yes, we have as Springboks lost to 12 TEAMS represented...not games and NZ only 7...this includes the likes Br/Irish Lions and Jaguars and even a club.