Worldwide criticism of Meyer- Predictable, poor Skills

 ex Planet Rugby

This week we will mostly be concerning ourselves with the highs and lows of the Rugby Championship

Are the Springboks entering a transitional phase? We'll see, but there's an air of tension surrounding the new coach and his side not seen since Jake White's barely-concealed spat with Victor Matfield and the 49-0 defeat to Australia.

But at least that was a weaker Bok team. Most worryingly for SA fans, the insipid effort in Mendoza was delivered by Heyneke Meyer's strongest-available side. Admittedly that takes into account the absences of the likes of Schalk Burger, Pierre Spies, two first-choice hookers and a couple of backs, but there's no doubt that the rugby delivered by this team was distinctly sub-standard.

Among several peers in the rugby world, the gut feeling was that Meyer's appointment came perhaps a couple of years late, that Bulls rugby is no longer enough to conquer all in the modern era, that South Africa produces some fine physical specimens but that the skill level - and attention to skills generally in the rainbow nation - is tumbling into the dust kicked up by the acceleration of other nations.

On Saturday's evidence, you'd have to say that gut feeling was right. Every time the Boks got the ball, it either went up in the air or got shipped out to backs running nondescript lines and forwards running in predictable pods. It was a defence coach's dream, and Argentina lapped it up.

The same fate ultimately befell the Stormers and Bulls in Super Rugby. Predictable rugby well-executed was tough to cope with, but once the physical defensive veneer was broken there was no substance under the surface. Both SA's flagship teams crashed out unable to chase down opposition leads. Had Frans Steyn not got a lucky bounce on Saturday, the national team was heading the same way.

The leading rugby culture in South Africa has long been based on the smash, suffocate and strangle rugby that brought home the 2007 World Cup, delivered by a corps of experienced players who had it down to a tee. Those players have gone and the rest of the world has been busy moving on, as South Africa are now discovering.

Without a willingness to admit the game has changed and an initiative to try and weave those changes into the national culture from Meyer et al, the Springboks could find themselves facing - relatively - a lean few years ahead.

 If Meyer does not remove Morne Steyn, Kirchner from the Backline and inject more skills and vision he is crazy. The loose forward combination also needs changing and surely Jaques Potgieter is the first to go.

I cant understand how a coach who I considered to be without doubt the number one candidate for the job has failed to deliver with so many obvious mistakes

If he just improved his selections, forget about coaching he would get better results. A major part of being a coach is to select from the best resources available and then decide on a game plan around these players strengths and weaknesses. Just imposing the kick and chase is poor- he seems to stuborn and pig headed. 

I sometimes wonder about what is going on in the World.   In a book Dinner with Mugabe it was said that he was kept completely in the dark about the situation of his people - he was told by the only State-owned papers he read and by radio and TV how wonderful a life they were leading and never told of mass starvation and murderous campaigns initiated by some of his supporters.   He lived completely isolated from reality.

Now back to rugby and our coach Meyer - does he ever read the stinging critical comments of people on performance of his team?   There is no sign that he knows that according to serious criticism the key to the problems encountered by his team is related to two issues, namely -

*    a totally out-of-date game plan; and

*    the obvious lack of a skills development programme to cater for modern rugby.

If indeed he is as reported of the opinion that we do not have skillful backline players and are forced to play a sterile type of game what is he doing about changing all of that?   I believe nothing is being done and the only thing he is doing is to enhance skills to implement the said sterile game plan.   Can this really be a successful formula?   Nobody seems to think so.

I think that we have lost the plot in rugby and unlike the case is in cricket - we arre in rugby going down the drain.   Like in soccer we are going to go down and down - not because of poor players, but because of poor coaching.    The lack of performance in both those two codes of sport resulted in the coaching job being regarded as a poisoned chalice - but I believe that the coaches are bringing it onto themselves.   

Now lets look at the situation and compare the issue of coaching.   There is little doubbt that the best coach in cricket is Kirsten.   He was not appreciated in SA as a coach and went to coach India with remarkable success.    After taking Indian cricket to new heights never experienced before - he decided for personal circumstances to SA and through some strange circumstances was appointed as SA coach.   Within six months SA is the top cricket team in the world - no 1 in all three formats of the game.   he basically had the same squad of players available than his predecessors - but was also prepared to bring in new blood and particularly to develop the skills of existing players.

In the case of rugby - the indications are exactly otherwise.   Meyer came in with a group of coaching staff with completely outdated beliefs in how rugby is to be played.   He apparantly does believe in a certain format of the game and that format has been used in SA for years with relatively isolated successes like in the 2007 WC.   However, there were some issues in 2007 that is different from today - the game plan did allow for variation.   Coachung allowed for a more comprehensive game plan as well.

Back to 2012 and we have a case of a game plan that is so limited and centered around a kick and chase game and poor backline play that it is really destructive.   I have noticed that even players with potential as top players in the world like Francois Steyn and Hougaard have becoime robotic and there is little enthusiasm displayed by the players.  

I think there are key players that has lost heart and are only going through the motions - not playing with enthusiasm.   We were lucky to win in the English series against a English team that had more inexperienced players and a new coach han ever before in the last ten years.   Wins were with smallish margins and was drummed up by people as the start oif a new era of competitiveness by the Springboks - but was that really the case.   It was becoming evident that the new coaches in the English squad analyzed what happened in the first two tests and in the thrid test devised the counter-measures needed and we were lucky to draw that game.   In the case of the Argentinians it also took only one test to devise counter-measures against the Meyer game plan and we were indeed lucky not to lose the test in Mendoza.

However, in the case of Australia and New Zealand an initial loss would not be required - they know exactly what to expect from the Super 15 experiences and one can only wonder what is going to happen over the enxt three weeks.   Ending up bottom of the log in the Championship is going to be a disaster - and a further one can be expected in the End of Year Tour.   What will happen then?   

There will be two consequences - both with potential positive outcomes - but not necessarily so.   Meyer could be forced into changing his game plan and introduce modern rugby techniques or he can be fired if he is not ppared to adjust to the latest rugby game scenario.   Why does he not realize that - or is he not really interested and aware of the unhappiness already shown in the media and can he not read the danger signs emerging?

I am waiting with interest to see what is going to happen when he announce the squad for the away legs of the Championships - he has a chance to come up with something special and start afresh - but the indications are all negative and he will be trying to coach Steyn ad Hougaard "how to improve their kicking skills" and nothing else.

The other danger sign is that players can lose their own beliefs in themselves and play like robots - already in some way in evidence.   We do not really know what happens behind closed doors - but such things in the modern era cannot be kept under wraps.   The quoted article refers to the major breakdown between Mattfield - who wanted to be captain of the Springboks - and Jake White.   That resulted in the main in the end of Jake White as a coach - and there was some indications that Meyer was also involved in efforts to get rid of White and replace him as SA coach.    If that was the case - we can expect to see all the negative results that is coming through now.       

MikeI have for years lamneted our lack of skills and brain power oftens tating we ar ebeing out thought.

However here we have a coach who has shown he can build a side and anybody thinking the bulle never played good attacking rugby are plain wrong - yes with Morne at flyhalf nogal.

Yes of course changes are needed and will come. Meyer has been bedevilled by injuries and putting together a new side. He is not the clown some think he is. I cannot believe things will not get better.

Seems wee matfield may have been an even bigger disaster for Bok rugby than I had thought. Bwahahahaha

beeno

I am all for giving a new chance to build up a team - but am becoming disheartened by the way Meyer is going about it.   He first wanted Mattfield back and then Fourie du Preez.   These guys could offer nothing in the new developments in the game and were way past their sell-by dates.   That was no way to start with a team building process using them as key elements..   Then he made remarks about our lack of skilled players in the backline - but offered nothing to improve that deficiency.

The next objective was to "improve the kicking skills of Morne Steyn and Hougaard" - not improving other components of their game.

The next issue raised by you is the issue of injuries - but are those not the result of an over-emphasize on a bad game plan?   The main injury list include players from the Stormers - who played accoring to a game plan not dissimilar from what is being applied at present.  

Meyer is making a number of statements that is not really aimed at improving his image as a coach.   That may be a major problem.   Another one is a lethargic play of players - especially in the third POM test and the one last Saturday.   Is there nothing that can be done to fire up the players?  Is that not a result of a disfunctional game plan?

Are these not danger signs to be addressed?   My own advice would be for Meyer to be open about isues and not lament on certain images he has created thus far.   He should be much more explicit about the game plan and what he intends doing about backline play - and the moves he is to initiate to remove the image that the game plan centers on the :kick and charge" strategy.   Unless that is done the general criticism will persist here and throughout the rugby world.

now beeno you have been saying we lack skills for years hey ???? suddenly ????

magicly none of your previous posts made mention of this. or maybe after the hords of posts about size power ext you finally came around seeing the way the rest of the forum sees it...all i can say is thank goodness. it took you a bloody while hey

meyer's knowledge of the game is vast. yes he had a great record on super level and yes he help build a team from nothing ness. that being said we had a great super rugby season having 3 teams in the play offs. played a different brand of rugby all together. the rugby public is tired of seeing this style of play but as i said to me the pumas game might have been a blessing in terms of removing some of the repugnant conservative views that some has.

i agree with mike that meyer should do more to let the rugby public know that there is major flaws in certain areas and that there is a "bigger plan" to evolve another level. total rugby is the ideal to move towards. forwards doing there thing and the backs more importantly being skillfull. the statements he makes in the public shows where his mentality is. that fact worries everyone involved and that fear turns to hate. one cant go around and say we dotn have the backs to play against the ab. same as beeno saying we must not copy nz. (i am referring to one post by docter rehash aka beeno). in beenos words van graan is our attacking coach as well....a forwards coach is also the attacking coach. wow how does one respond to that.

SINCE WHEN IS PLAYING MORE ATTACKING SKILLFULL RUGBY PLAYING LIKE THE AB BEENO.....

well then the french and wallies are copying the ab too hey ???

i have been harsh on a lot of posts but HM and co need to be more open and sit plans in motion to indentify the problem areas. there is not major issues wrong from a technical side but he needs to stick to rugby basics better player role management and needs to address certain playing areas like the breakdown and backline play.

he needs to make a mental shift from there the rest is not a mountain to climb. there has been injuries but there is such a huge amount of depth in our country that if the right type of game is played we can compete with any one of our top 100 players on any given game.

its HM and the beenos of the world that cling onto a type of rugby that does not work. that is forward obsessed/size that leads to skills thinking and tactics being left behind.

the game is played on grass not a weight scale.

p.s. meyer needs a media liason it will also save him a lot of bad press. he sure as hell needs it