Zero backs

I'm so confused after this season's SR.

I'm honestly starting to think that winning this last WC was a curse. It just seems like it has cement SA into low IQ rugby for the foreseeable future.

One looks at the Sharks. Fassi is an insane attacking player. Give him a slight bit of space and he has the speed in combination with the instinct to cut an angle and either get straight through or put defenders into bad positions and put someone else away for a try. They have Hooker and Esterhuizen too. Guys that want the ball. Guys that make things happen and have excellent Rugby IQ.

But then we watch them play and they simply refuse to run even the most basic of attacking plays after the forwards have set them up. On so many of the match threads you see comments like "Sharks going through many phases from a standing start and making zero ground." It's over and over and over again. There seems to be no idea about compacting and expanding the attack...no drawing in and going wide. No forwards running on to get a pop at pace from a ruck. It's just completely braindead.

Then you watch the Lions and it's exactly the same thing. They have a Runa Venter, an absolute monster. The Lions go through phases on opposition try line and again everything happens from standing starts. It's bash bash and get nowhere...bash some more.

And then the final with the Bulls against Leinster. For the love of all that is holy, you have Willie, Moodie, De Klerk, Stokke...and it's kick, bash, kick bash, kick bash. The Bulls got to the final because they have good synergy in their pack. But the backs are yet again an afterthought. Similar to the Sharks, they will smash up the middle, have 11 of the opposition team all around the ruck to stop the Bulls fowards from getting through...but the call to go wide just never comes.

This is an honest question. What is going on?

I have a problem solving mindset so I'm not happy to simply say that our rugby is low IQ. I want to know why we are seeing what we are seeing because to my mind there has to be a solution. Is it really low IQ? Is it a misguided confidence in jock rugby? Is it arrogance?

For me, the forwards should set a platform for the backs to exploit. And all our teams, even the Lions, have the personnel to create that platform...but we just never use it.

To my mind, cycling between the backs and forwards not only capitalises on the advantages that the forward pack deliver, but it compounds the forwards ability to create an even better platform because the opposition can't just stand around the ruck and tackle players getting the ball from standing starts.

What is the solution?

Seriously, I'm interested in your thoughts.

Explain to me what I am missing. Where am I wrong in my thinking?

We know for a fact it’s not a lack of rugby IQ that accounts for how the players react, so it has to be down to the instructed direction given by the coaches

Not surprising given how frustrated we have become with the direction given by Plumtree, Dobson and Jake (in the final).

It doesn't help that we have Nienaber that keeps winning trophies with his defense. World rugby has now for years been trying to keep changing the laws of rugby to make it more of spectical. That is why we see the 50/22, drop out in goal like ball is held etc.

However, when it really matters, it is body on the line and defend at all cost.

The Stormers with their attacking mindset has regressed over the past 5 years.

Rugby is a simple game and you have to earn the right to go wide. However, this doesn't work if it is easier to defend rather than attack.

They have made a mess of the ruck. My biggest bug bear is protecting the 9, the game has slowed down so much. You can't compete for the ball in the ground. How many players go off their feet these days at the ruck and it never gets blown up. Or players just falling on the ball.

I for one believe this area needs urgent fixing.

"Rugby is a simple game and you have to earn the right to go wide. However, this doesn't work if it is easier to defend rather than attack."

There is merit in that statement, K.

But it doesn't feel to me like the game has been stunted to the point where never using your backline is more viable than balancing the forwards and backs.

We'll see it in NZ in a few months. The ABs will rumble through a phase or two, suddenly the ball will go wide and they'll gain ground there. Then you'll see a Savea or somebody else coming onto the ruck at pace and getting a pop pass. Because he has momentum he'll get his arms through tackle and offload to someone else...ruck...repeat.

And let's not forget that from set piece, there is no excuse to be completely 1 dimensional on attack. From a lineout or a scrum, it's your backs versus theirs.

The Saffas are a bit like the Klitschko's rugby. They live behind a jab. No matter how many times that jab opens up an opportunity for them, that right hand will stay put.

I really can't understand why.

I do take your point about the laws, and about how WR are trying to remedy it. But then I watch France versus the ABs and aside from minor gripes, the laws don't seem to be changing the flow of the game too much.

I've started to think that the Saffa coaches actually don't trust the players. Like, they believe that the forwards should just keep the ball because the attacking contingent will simply stuff up and lose it. It's been difficult to watch our teams this season and come to any other conclusion.

Nienaber's defensive setup is impressive, but you barely need it to stop the pick and go or the static isolated runner. The worst that happens when a team get stuck in this rut is they become blind to opportunity. We saw it on Saturday for example when Marcell managed to get an offload out of the tackle with space in front, yet instead of someone running onto it at pace to exploit the gap, there was just another static prop to receive it.

Part of the problem is ingrained attitudes. How often do you hear a South African commentator enthusing about a sidestep or an offload. But force a scrum penalty or more tellingly send a long kick for a 50/22 and the praise is effusive.

The other attitudinal problem is judging everything in terms of winning. If the Bools won on Saturday all those toothless charges into a stacked Leinster defense would have been forgotten.

Discussing the quality of our WC final win was regarded as disloyal and the fact we were outplayed ball in hand by the ABs was not to be mentioned. So if fans demand only winning, coaches are going to do the things they believe makes that most likely.

We have evolved a set of tactics that are very successful at meeting that objective…..scrumming, defense, goal kicking and avoiding risks. Face it the Springboks aren’t encouraged to offload. We play very conservative, joyless rugby that wins knockout competitions.

It’s no surprise when the chips are down our provincial teams default to that formula. But they don’t do it as well….the Bools were out scrummed and out defended on Saturday.

But with the running talent we have with the huge Black talent pool, we could be the Brazil of rugby. Perhaps not always winners but the country that plays the game beautifully and for the joy of the game.

Fat chance of that given the fans, the press, the old boys and the coaches….all mired in win at all costs.

Who has beaten the AB’s in their last 4 encounters?

The Bulls have played nice attacking rugby all season, but for the final

The Stormers and Lions have done the same, despite the Lions lacking big player names and the Stormers losing Malherbe and Kitshoff to give them forward clout and the lack of class at centre

It’s only the Sharks under Plumtree that have played shit rugby

We play attacking rugby as an embellishment when we are winning….only when it doesn’t count or when we are clearly stronger, would we play attacking rugby to win.

SA teams are not getting quick multi-phase possession, which is making them do more aimless kicking. The breakdown has been a problem. It is hard to move the ball down the backline on first-phase play, on slow and clumsy phase ball.

Not this year, but the SA teams have been more expansive over the last few years than during Super Rugby. The SA teams started playing better towards the end of the season, but the breakdown was particularly bad in the first half of the season.

SA teams need a specialist at 6 who is effective at the breakdown, like Deon Fourie.

Malcolm Marx and Vermuelen are good at the breakdown, but each team needs players who can compete on the ground.

We've discussed this topic numerous times over the years and my thoughts on the matter hasn't changed simply because our attacking strategies haven't changed.

Long story short, our backline unlike our defensive play is not structured and lacks intellectual property.

That is why we are forced to rely on individual brilliance to score tries.

We have an enormous advantage in our scrum and forward play but it's wasted because our backs don't know how to use the ball effectively.

Imagine our forwards with Ozzie backs.

Disagree 100%

"Who has beaten the AB’s in their last 4 encounters?"

Saffex, the ABs have been the worst in at least 18 years. They've never been as vulnerable. For heaven's sake, England almost turned them over last year in NZ.

What's the point in comparing us to them when they are weaker than they've ever been? And let's remember that, Twickers aside, we just scraped past them on all of those occasions.

Everybody here admits that the current crop of players the Boks have is superior to anything that has come before.

So it begs the question, are the Boks actually performing to their potential and if not, then where is the problem?

"I'm honestly starting to think that winning this last WC was a curse. It just seems like it has cement SA into low IQ rugby for the foreseeable future."

And you claim that Esterhuizen should be the inside center of the Springboks when he has no idea abut playing thinking rugby at all. That in fact si the ebst joke I have seen on site for years,

Mike,

I know AE has never played for WP.

I can read team sheets.

You're the only poster here that thinks AE isn't good enough for Bok 12.

Don't believe me? Ask around.

Bullshit are NZ the weakest they have been what utter rubbish. Their side is as good as ever - difference is all the sides have caught up. Rugby had evolved - no single side will ever dominate for decades like the AB’s did in the years the SA rugby was compromised by the quota system

On paper that AB side is as good as ever - fact

Fuck you and Moz are such sad fucks - you spend your lives trying to devalue our Boks - you are such sad excuses for Bok supporters. In fact do you really support them

I mean clearly being number 1, winning back to back WC’s, a Lions series, RC’s is not good enough for you

New Zealand have recently had the worst period of play in over 20 years, and the facts don't lie, they back it up completely

Dave just wants to plead ignorance again, and pretend he knows better than anyone else ....again....so what's new ....

2020 2022 - First back to back home losses in 25 years versus Ireland and Argentina

2022 - First series loss at home in 27 years 1 - 2 to Ireland

First ever loss to Argentina in NZ

Worst ever defeat by South Africa - 35 - 7

Their previous low point was in 1998 to1999 when they had 5 consecutive test losses, including a first ever series loss to Australia in 1998 and a historic defeat to South Africa 13 - 3 in 1999

Couple that with Foster's abysmal win ratio during his term of 69%

The All Blacks also ended up conceding 28 points per game in their first 5 games of 2023, when this only happened twice in 4 years under Hansen

Then you look at the tries they have conceded over 25 years.... the first time they have ever conceded more than 2 tries per game over a 5 year period

2000 - 2004 - 57 tests - 98 tries - 1.72 per game

2005 - 2009 - 62 tests - 86 tries - 1.39 per game

2010 - 2014 - 67 tests - 79 tries - 1.18 per game

2015 - 2019 - 62 tests - 96 tries - 1.55 per game

2020 - 2024 - 56 tests - 117 tries - 2.09 per game

2022 was also their worst year ever, conceding 29 tries in 12 tests, which equates to 2.4 per game

So no Dave........sugar coat it and swing it as much as you want to, and pretend to know what you are talking about, but the last few years have not been that great for the All Blacks, in fact it has been record setting for all the wrong reasons.

Lol Dawie

Saying things could better doesn't mean you don't appreciate what you already have.

It's just how YOU interpret it. Nothing more.

Not really very complicated logic to follow.

Ah so it’s not the other sides getting better like Ireland, Boks, Scotland, France, Argentina and Italy it’s just the AB’s declining??

What a bunch of rugby ignorant muppets

Typical Dave reply, it doesn't suit your narrative, so everyone else is wrong

Everyone has apparently caught up with Australia as well.

Okay so let’s accept Dave’s thesis just for argument’s sake…everybody has caught up to NZ. That still means, relative to world standards our defeats of NZ aren’t the accomplishment they were….the Bargies and Ireland have done it in NZ.

We have done better against them because they are worse, which is pretty obvious….but if you don’t want to believe that so that Bok accomplishments look better….the wins by the Bargies represent a far bigger lift in performance.

Either way our wins against NZ don’t prove much.

Imagine being stupid enough to believe that the likes of Dan Coles, Codie Taylor, Joe Moody, Scott Barrett, Brodie Retallick, Sam Whitelock, Sam Cane, Ardie Savea, Kieran Read, Perenara, Aaron Smith, Beauden Barrett, Richie Mo’unga, SBW, Jordie Barrett, Ben Smith, Rieko Ione, Ethan de Groot, Lomax, Williams, McKenzie and Will Jordan are some how inferior to their predecessors

Fucking dream on

Some of those names are amongst their best ever in Beauden, Ardie, Read, SBW, Aaron Smith, Retallick, Ben Smith and Will Jordan

We are indeed vey lucky that the Springboks team is not selected by site members often suffering from real rugby ignorance and prejudice, They love to quote stats but does not know what these stats implay, Seeing the aboe would assume that the Springbok team is BS and Erasmus a rugby idiot, For me it is clear we have priima donnas on site that dream about attacking backline play without understanding what is required to score tries,

Dave - I am on your side in this case, In 2024 after Browne joined the coaching set-up the Springboks in tests scoed more tries than any other test team in the world - but the lamentations continue unabated. Insofar as White is concerned Pakie gave a very apt description on what happened in finals - it happened in the WC final in 2007 and happened in all the thee finals the Bulls wer invovled in ove h last three yeas,

When I was stil in school my father took us to see test matches and he often made a remark that stayed with me still today. He always said we need a Jewsh player in the abckline wth rugby inteelligence setting up scorung of tries. I always believed what he wa driving at and Sacha is a typical example - his father is a Jew. If a person really understands rugby as a game those people who actually played will tell you that ball sense is an essential - people who see what develops turns up unexpectedly at points where they made top contributions. We have player like Willie, Du Toit, Kolbe and Kwagga who show those ability very clearly and that is an essential in playing winning rugby, In the past we had Schalk Burger and Jean as well. Somehow those players are always are where the action is and most players are clueless about that, .

In the professional era since 1995 we had a period in 199t to 1998 there was a slight asriation in play orginating from Carl du Plessis - whom Luyt apponted a coach, The media went into hysteria about his appointment and he clearly stated at the time that the Springboks seems to be unable to score tries - which in fact was factual While Du Plessis was coach he selected a team that could score tries and after the first few losses Du Plessis developed a team that beat the BRI Lions and Australia by the biggest margins ever achieved by the Springboks - by scoring tries. However the media screamed blue murder and Du Plessis was replaced by Mallett - who took over the squad put together by Du Plessis and used it for the next 18 months. He made only two changes to the backline - he moved Montgomery to full back and brought in Moore as inside center. After Mallett took over the Spingboks won 16 tests in a row, However some players wanted to retire from playing and the relationship beteen Mallett and Teichmann deteriorated badly, He fired Teichmann as captain and then had to start replacing players from the squad put together by Du Plessis and the system went down the drain rapidly. I was at the test in Durban after which Mallett retired because entry tickets to matches were too expensive - that is before he would have been fired.

After Mallett the new caoches were either clueless or became addicted to kick the shit out of balls and that continued under White, De Villiers, Meyer and Coetzee. Erasmus started to change that and the Springboks started scoring more and more tries. The nature of the tries scored changed as well. But sie members pretend what happened does not happen and numerous videos about Try sscoring on site never impressed the site know-alls, Matter of fact I have watched test rugby since the 1950;s where tries counted 3 points and through the past 70 years saw many things in rugby that rugby is better if intelligent palyers with ball sense play for the Springboks and I never changed my mind on that one.

In essense you are one of the few that think about rugby - the rest are just not thinking about clever play is totally absent, That is why I believe that the Springboks are still en route to win the 2027 RWC - that is if the thinking of the site members somehow does not take over in the selection of players - if that happens the team is doomed, ,

.

Yep apparently we only score tries from turnovers bwhaaahaaaa

How fortune for our wings who have the best strike rates in the game - all down to turnovers

All we can do is shove, kick and score maul tries and tries from turnovers

Given how shit we are on attack one wonders how on earth we retain the number 1 spot and back to back WC’s - oh yes I forgot - it was luck

I'll bet you that not a single Kiwi believes the current ABs to be nearly as good as those from 12 years ago.

Their win/loss ratio would back up those sentiments.

For Dave it's easier to assume that everybody else got better rather than one team got worse.

...the answer that requires the fewest assumptions is generally the correct one, Dave.

Well that list of AB’s tells me they are great players and it’s a fact that the Boks, Ireland, France, Argentina, Scotland and Italy have got better

England are a good as they have always been

Oz and Wales have declined, although Oz showed signs of recovery on their EOYT

These are all facts

Great players who lost to Ireland at home.

Great players who won 2 RWC's and 2 RC Championships and as well as 2 trophies for matches between SA and Australia and New Zealand respectively

"Everyone has apparently caught up with Australia as well."

LMAO

Lot's of catching up these last few years ...

Um yes because that happens to be the best Irish side ever - hellooooooo

Dave, I see it like this.

That great Ozzie cricket side, the virtually perfect Spanish football team, Carter's ABs...they're practically unbeatable.

But then they lose one or two players to retirement, then one or two more...

And before you know it, they are just as beatable as everybody else. No nation has the system or talent to maintain a generational team forever. That's why it's called a generational team.

Now, the lesser teams have improved and Test rugby has gotten tighter. That much is obvious.

But let's not confuse the gradual and marginal improvement of other Test sides with the clear difference between the ABs of yesteryear and the guys we see today. A percentage can be attributed to the improvement of others but the majority of the AB decline has been down to simply not having the coachibg and the players they had before.

So, back to the question. If we are the best we have ever been, and they're coming down off a high, yet we seem to just scrape past them, does it mean that the moment their chart bounces slightly, they'll be better than us again?

And if that is the case then are we really that good? And if we aren't really that good then where is them problem because it's very difficult to place the blame on lacking talent pools when we have hundreds of players playing in every league in the world.

Plum

Team selection ties in with strategies in the game plan and that is why some players are tried and in the end does mt make it. I think the 12 of the future is Willeme - but I am sure tat the positions to look at are 13 ad 15 when it comes to tem development. That is where I belief Hooker fits in. We will have to see what happens next week and also after next wek.

The problem is ll wants tos ee changes in the team - but it does not mean what what we would like to see happening is going to be successul. A player like Esterhuizen of 31 years of age - whe have been tested and never really prduced canything in tests is suitable to play at 12 and expect to see something different from him. I dont - he is a very slow and strong player - but is never where the action is - in other words he lacks ball sense I mentiond earlier as an essential in backline play, Let me go on I likeHooker a a player lot - but he as not goodenoug at 12 since he is not physical enough t play in the 12 position. Ithink he ould eb more successful at 13,

,

.

Mike are you able to talk about anything other than AE?

I told you, I know he has never played for WP.

Plum

I lived for 18 years in Riversdale before going to Pretoria for 14 years I lived in Durban and Tinley Manor Beach for 45 years. In the end I fled from KZN back to Riversdale - which in act is part of the SWD provincial team area . The only team I really supported was the Sharks. But I also support SA Franchises hen the play in fr instance S uperrugby or now the URC,

However, there are things I learned and one is rugby requires ball sense from players and those who develop the skill-set I do beleive top class players all had ball sense as a winning form of playing rugby. The idea that rugby is a simple game must surely be lauged at,

I can remember an incident Jean de Villiers once wrote about. Gainsford the famous Sprngbok center came to vist his father. Gainsford saw that Jean and his brother kicking a rugby ball and asked them whether they are going to play rugby in future. They both answered yes and Gainsford said then if you do you must know that ot is far btter to use differnt mehtods to do better with balls than kicking it/

Insofar as individual players are concerned I have seen how in his 5 test-appearances h did vey littl hen t came t winning matches, I have seen AE play in the 2014 under 20 Rugby World up and he managed to lose the match all on his own in the final. I sa him playng fo the Sharks - but did not see him play in any matches until 2018 - when he played in 5 tests and did not contibute much to the backline he made 22 tackles and missed 5 - while in the same year De Allende in five tests made 42 tackles and missed 5, I think that Erasmus was not really impressed b his performances and in the end he did not select for the 2019 RWC squad/ When Jesse Kriel was injured in the first Round Robin match - Erasmus called up Willemse to join the squad.

In the end I have seen AE playing in matches where he out-muscled players he got it over the gain line Aftr what I have seen ove the years was that AE needs ball sense and is not capable of being playing a thinking game That type of player find it impossible to make the step up from franchise rugby to test rugby.

In the end I do not hold out much hope that AE will play in test macthes this year,