D
daz
Guest
Violent crime would be worse.
Ah, yes. That is my fall back plan if we lose really badly. 6 o'clock news, here I come..!
Violent crime would be worse.
Ah, yes. That is my fall back plan if we lose really badly. 6 o'clock news, here I come..!
The Springboks’ defensive statistics make for woeful reading from a South African perspective, says GRANT BALL.
It is said defence wins Test matches and World Cups, and on the evidence of the past two weekends, the Springboks need a notable improvement in their defensive structure and commitment if they’re to defend their title in New Zealand next year. Two bonus point losses and eight tries conceded (three less than the Boks conceded in six matches in last year’s competition) should be enough of a wake-up call, and the stats of certain individuals are alarming.
After the loss in Auckland, John Smit said it’s difficult to defend for so long with so little ball, but Bok sides in the past have often thrived when the opposition have possession and they have the opportunity to smash them back. In Wellington, Smit got his wish and the Boks shaded possession, but what they did with it was the problem, while defensively, they weren’t good enough in tackle completion rate and physically imposing themselves at that area.
In Auckland the Boks missed 29 out of 195 tackles, or one every six and a half tackles. The All Blacks missed seven out of 125, or one out of every 18. Smit said there would be an improvement in Wellington if they had more ball, but the Boks were just as bad. The Kiwis were actually worse defensively in Wellington, but the Boks couldn’t take advantage.
In the second Test, the Boks completed 166 tackles and missed 25. The hosts made 139 and missed 10, or one in every 14, and while it was a poorer showing than in Auckland, the Blacks were still far superior.
Schalk Burger was monumental in defence at the Cake Tin, making 19 tackles and 11 assists, missing just two. BJ Botha made 13 tackles in 40 minutes, while Gurthro Steenkamp has completed 33 tackles in two Tests – an enormous work rate for a prop. Along with Francois Louw, the above quartet have repeatedly got through work, but importantly, have also showed the hunger to try knock the opposition back. Victor Matfield also got through lots of work in making 19 and missing three, but his effectiveness in driving back opponents was sub-standard as players such as Ma’a Nonu and Richie McCaw bumped him off.
Smit missed five tackles and made four, and Zane Kirchner was only asked to make three, but missed two. Pierre Spies has also been woeful in this regard, and although he made 12 and missed two, a player with his power should be more imposing.
The Blacks dominated the collision in both Tests, as they breached the gain line 76.29% of the time in Auckland, compared to the Boks’ 60.34%. The Boks improved slightly in Wellington as they got over the gain-line 65.75% of the time, but the hosts were again better at 67.86%.
The most talked about change ahead of the Australian Test has been the axing of Louw. Yes he was tired in Auckland, but bringing in Ryan Kankowski out of position in an unfamiliar role won’t aid the Boks. Louw made 17 tackles and missed just one and hit 33 rucks – 21 on his own ball and 12 on defence or in a counter-ruck. Will Kankowski near those numbers in an unnatural position?
Stats can’t show the effort in scramble defence or defensive lines in the kick chase, but it doesn’t take a defence guru to note the Boks have been poor. Australia are set to try run the Boks off their feet and counter-attack as much as possible. With many Boks looking jaded, the Wallabies will try move them around and from side to side, while Will Genia and Quade Cooper will also take ball through the middle with the defence spread, as they’re at their best when they run at tired forwards.
The visitors have stated their intention to try keep more ball in hand, but no matter how much their attack improves, if they aren’t defensively better individually and as a unit, they can’t expect to win their first game on tour.
Bruce we are not that far off.
I indicated that the Wallabies don't have the strength and power of the Boks so they shouldn't try to match them in that department for 80 minutes. Trying to match them would just tire them out as they have been so many times in the second half in recent years.
They should use those rucking techniques I talked about to make the superior strength and power of the Boks less relevant and to generate quick ball which would give the Boks strength nowhere to go.
By avoiding as many of the blowfly against the windowpane situations as is credible the Wallabies will be able to finish fresher and that's what I meant when I said they had to exhibit better fitness. I assumed folks wouldn't think that I meant such fitness could be increased between one test and another.
I'm no expert but I'm sure that you can't get a relevant increase in strength without a long managed conditioning programme. I also think that by keeping an up tempo game we can tire the Boks out so their strength is blunted.
In our days of pomp either side of the 1999 RWC we were known as the smart team as we made up for our strength issues and technical issues by avoiding or defusing those things we were not good at and playing to the things we were good at.
I would like our team to be a strong team in body, mind and technique and still a smart team. Until those strength issues are addressed we have to play with smarts and technique so our players can finish test matches in a fitter state.
.
Maybe even a good one. Quick ruck ball will be absolutely crucial.
Good thing we have the 2 best fit halfbacks in the world.
Good thing we have the 2 best fit halfbacks in the world.
Ah c'mon laddy, you're drawing a long bow by saying 2. Possibly best fit halfback. You're only as good as your last game, and Genia was pretty average.
He looked to be battling to raise a gallop out there. That knee was obviously still bothering him.
Yeah. He did the thumb while he was out there too, didn't he? Still, those factors in mind, I thought he still did way too much dicking around at the base of the ruck.
Some very good points there jay-c.
I agree that Dunning should not be considered as despite his experience, his s14 season was not great.
Baxter would be an option for me, if he wasn't injured, for a couple of reasons - his s14 form, his international experience. I recall very well the Wallaby scrummaging disasters of the past, the latest being all too recent (although many of them didn't involve Baxter at all). The unfortunate thing is that having suffered through Baxter's rough initiation into international scrummaging, we are not now benefiting from what he has learnt (which is quite a lot - you don't put one over the English front row if you haven't), because he has not been selected.
Waugh is close to the end of his career, no doubt, but whilst he is around I'd like to see the things he has to offer utilised. I'm not saying I'd pick him ahead of Pocock, but it would be nice to have him in the team to add that all so elusive 'mongrel', see also experience, will to win, leadership in a tight match...what a shame he doesn't play in one of the many positions the Wallabies are weak in.
In the case of all 3, you haven't made clear how they didn't 'do it', nor what the other options have done better.
by the way anyone checked the current tri nations standings?
aussies in second > woo hoo!!!!!!
Lee, I think we've always been and I hope will always be just about the smartest team in world rugby. But rugby is in large part about the collision and the contest for the pill and those are areas that we've struggled with in the last couple of years. We regularly get blasted off the park by the AB's, especially at the tackle and that shits me to tears, frankly. Against the Boks, I agree that an up-tempo game to run their big forwards around is the way to go. It's our more natural way to play anyway. Australian rugby has always been about ball in hand and I think if we stick to that and play with great precision we have a chance. Maybe even a good one. Quick ruck ball will be absolutely crucial.
He looked to be battling to raise a gallop out there. That knee was obviously still bothering him.
it was the lunacy of sending TPN back into that second BaaBaas game and he re-injured or re-flared-up his ankle/foot problem which then definitely ruled him out of any June Test (or Tris so far)