Three basic things

that would immediately change the Bok pattern of play. It would add an attacking dimension without sacrificing their strong points. Perpetuate an attack with ball in hand as opposed to kicking into neverland.

1) Offload in the tackle instead of crash balling.

2) Attack with a short passing game instead of going wide at every opportunity, it will compress the defence and when that happens there'll be space out wide. Go narrow before going wide. Also with a short passing game there's sure to be numbers to the breakdown. All this adds up to greater use of Bok physicality.

3) Last but not least......time the pass so as to suck in a defender. One less defender = more space.

All valid points but I'd start with one basic thing . . . stop kicking the ball every time you get it!

Watch some of the footage of the last test. There are a number of times when Pollard gets the ball and kicks it away without even looking to see what other options he has. 

I suspect he's under instruction from the coaches to kick in certain areas of the field no matter what. One of my biggest issues with Rassie as a coach is his need to control everything and his reluctance to let the players play the situation. This goes all the way back to his early days as a coach and the disco lights and more recently his appearances as a waterboy, always telling the players what they should be doing.

I'd much prefer a coach who gets his points across in training and then takes a back seat during the match. Having hard and fast rules about when to kick means he hasn't got enough faith in his players to play the situation or adapt to circumstances like being one or two points down with a few minutes to play. It's a team of Rassie robots right now playing to rigid instructions.

Well I think we can forget the Boks ever playing ball in hand rugby, it's just not going to happen with Rassie and Nienaber holding the reins besides it's not in their DNA. But yes I watched Pollard kicking away hard fought for possession when in good attacking territory. One other thing that struck me when they played shuffle ball is it's as if they didn't know what to do when they had the ball in their hands, not sure whether they were scared of the ball or if they simply don't know what to do with it when confronted with the opportunity. I read Nienaber's and Kolisi's comments re kicking away possession.......they gave it a stamp of approval!

The above strategy is a simple enough way forward, my golly they must surely realise another way to get closer to the try line than the bounce of a triangular ball.

The video Kingcorn posted shows how effective that team was in attack with a short passing game.

It was the case that any slow ball was kicked away, even in the red zone, but since 2019, after the disastrous 2018 EOYT, the emphasis was quite strongly on kicking as our primary weapon. Short passes, long passes, we've done a lot of everything, but it doesn't really work for a variety of reasons: 

1. We put the ball in the hands of players who are physically incapable of getting us over the gainline and who cannot distribute, i.e., Damian and Steph. There is a clear preference in this coaching duo for a certain profile of player. This player cannot cope with the modern game. When I say modern game, I am expanding that definition from 1999 to present day. José likes big and heavy plodders. 
2. Structure: I have been at odds with this since the start of the José era. The team structure is very clunky no matter what the designated units are. We are slow developing, heavily scripted and far too deep. I liked the quick fire and flatter cutting edge structure of the Meyer era, shifting the point of attack quickly, but controlling the middle of the field so we had a lot of options. There was clear planning, but players had freedom to think, and communication was key. It was flexible. Against Australia in 2015, the Aussies botched a restart and we unexpectedly got possession. We were instantly quick to set up into three levels of attack: Eben, and two three man pods. We got over the gainline. You don't see the Boks play with any kind of sophistication. It's a basic three man pod structure with a playmaker in-behind, sometimes. The first set play of the first Puma test, off a lineout saw us work a three man play in the middle of the field. We were about ten metres ahead of the nearest defender, but Pollard still transferred the ball nonetheless and our stupid little move was stuffed. What was the point of executing a play without any engagement of the defence? As dumb as Lambie was, at the very least, on every set play, he'd make sure that he adjusted for distance so that his pass was at least somewhat relevant. I saw this play against los Pumas and dispaired. We won, but they absolutely outclassed us ball-in-hand.

Basic things to carry out with what players.

The last game showed SA rugby players confining themselves to an unusually low number of tasks (even by SA standards) and barely compete with players who have a heavy task load.

The problem for SA is they are reaching the bottom of their anti rugby approach started decades.

Changing gear and direction would take a tremendous amount of means which are not available at the moment due to the squandering of the wealth in the past.

It is over. Pipe dreaming is only that: pipe dreaming.

Funny thread…..the two noobs, Peeper and Quisling, who had no problems with our game are suddenly up in arms because we have lost a few. Quisling even has a brilliant 3 point prescription. Boy I bet our players never thought about drawing the defender before passing… .that should change everything!