Well it has been one of those weeks for me. One you want to forget and never ever remember again. Our family lost a dear friend this week past and it hit us quite hard. So because of this I have been loathe to write anything about the Boks loss to New Zealand. However now that the grieving process is over I feel I shall return to my comments on the game I love.
What I cannot and probably will never understand is how, with a dominant pack, we still lost. It’s easy to point at certain players and say they had shockers. It’s the simplest way to point out problems. But is it sorting out the overall problem that is obvious throughout the team? No.
Zane Kirchner has proved now that when it comes to attacking rugby he has no clue as to what to do with the ball. I have played the game and one thing I could never really understand from our provincial players is how they cannot pass the ball into the arms of the person next to them. You don’t have to be particularly skilful to achieve this seemingly easy feat. Zane proved me wrong. Apparently you have to be the most skilful rugby player ever to find a flying Bryan Habana. Or maybe it is Habana’s fault for being just too quick for Zane’s slow brain. It is ridiculous in the professional era to not be able to complete the most basic of rugby tasks, the pass! It’s plain criminal actually!
Ruan Pienaar had a shocker. He looked pedantic and useless. It was like his body was moving to fast for his brain. He was always four or five moves behind in his head. This in turn didn’t help Morné find the form he so desires.
Speaking of Morné, the man should be posted back to Currie Cup duty so that he can work on his game. You cannot and should not expect him to find his form in a green-and-gold jersey. It is a slap in the face to the players who actually do have form. Being a Springbok doesn’t require coaching back into form, it means you should already have the form to call yourself a Springbok. I know Meyer likes to point at Habana but the obvious truth is that Habana was already busy rediscovering his form at the Stormers, so when he played his first game against England he was back to his brilliant best. If you follow Meyer’s logic and believe in the fact that he coached Bryan better then why did it take him less than one game to prove his credentials and it is taking Morné 7 or 8 and still not rediscovering his radar?
If Meyer wants to coach players to become better players then he should go back to coaching at a provincial level. The job of the senior coach is to take the talented and in form players and make them gel. Use their skills as they are because it is with those skills that they impressed you in the first place.
That is what is scaring me about Goosen. We all know he can play and that he has the potential to become the world’s best flyhalf, but what will happen to him under Meyer? Meyer has made no bones about his kicking plan. It is the game he will force on players even if it means his death. Won’t that game pattern stifle Goosen’s natural ability? Goosen is the kind of player who can do anything, kick, run, pass and step, but what if Meyer only ever forces him to kick (which is likely) and the rest of his game turns south? It happened to Morné. He was known as an attacking flyhalf at the Bulls, someone who could run and take on the defensive line. Not any more. Under Meyer’s guidance before he left, that part of Morné’s game has been in steady decline and carried on declining even after Meyer’s departure because the Bulls don’t coach any other way but Meyer’s way. It is now at the point where it is useless to use his attacking skills for there are none.
To give you an idea of how things change in today’s game then let’s have a look at the current table propping Bulls team. They have a kicking flyhalf and recently lost to Griquas. Griquas have bought a Bulls throw away in Francois Brummer. His game at the Bulls was below par. He was made into a kicking flyhalf and it obviously didn’t work for him. At Griquas he is blooming into a very capable flyhalf who can not only kick but attack as well.
Look at all the talent the Bulls have bought over the years, and even with that talent they can not play winning rugby this year. They bought players with huge promise in Sadie, Venter, Engelbrecht, Visser and a few others. Yet those players are not living up to that promise. The things that made them great, their vision and adventurous spirit are being stifled by a kick-and-chase approach.
Hougaard is a player that thrives on ball. He can make things happen. He wasn’t given the opportunities to showcase his talent because he had to play against his natural abilities, not use them. As soon as you turn anyone against their nature how can you expect them to thrive? What you have effectively done is make the person in question fight against himself before worrying about fighting against the opposition. He will be more worried about implementing the game plan than playing the situation.
I know Meyer said the team only needs a few tweaks. He is right, but I bet you he will tweak the wrong things because he will not tweak the cause of the problems, namely the game plan.
And from what I have read between the lines regarding Morné and Zane, he won’t drop the second cause of our problems either.
I don’t know what happens at the training runs, but I very much agree with you that the national coach, shouldn’t coach. He should the be brains behind the brawn. However, I do get the feeling by watching the games that some of the players like you said “fight against themselves first” How does Ruan play so well overseas then come here and look like a school boy? something is not right and some people are too stubborn to admit it. I really hope we get a tell all biography by a senior player in a year or two cause I want to know what happened behind the closed doors
I guess here in SA we are so conservative it stifles creativity. Look at schools rugby, craven week, the SA under 18 side and the under 20′s that won the junior world cup. Adventure was the name of the game. Show us what you are capable of! As soon as they hit proper professional rugby those become second fiddle as winning at all costs is what it is all about. Defence and structure. That is all the coaches want. If you score a try then lucky you.
Great post. I agree that players like Ruan and Houghie and even JdV are not being allowed to play their natural game. I don’t think that Loubscher sp. is the right man for the backline job.
I wonder if the issue is Loubscher… I mean if everyone can see that the game plan kills creativity then the issue becomes the plan and not the coaching. Ricardo can do what he wants, it won’t help players that aren’t built or it. I mean let’s look at Fleck. At UCT he told his backs to express themselves and boy did they. He brought out the best in his players natural abilities. Then at the Stormers everything changed. Defence was the order of the day and it stimmied the attack. Now that the backline has a “licence” if you will, players like Brache and du Plessis are showing what they are capable of.
Good point. The game plan starts at the top and all else has to be geared to that aim.
I like that Brache kid he is playing good rugby and so is dPlessis
I think if Meyer wanted to win with his style he should have picked players that play his style. Problem is the only scrummy that fits that bill at the moment is Duvenhage and he should have picked someone solid and unimaginative at 13. Problem is no provincial coach has picked a 13 like that in their teams. They are all ball players. Du Plessis, Jordaan, Sadie, Engelbrecht, Ebersohn… all guys who liek to play and use the ball… not chase it.
@Powa, Brache is playing some amazing rugby. He won’t make the Stormers starting line-up anytime soon, perhaps a move to the Kings to reunite his partnership with Catrakilis could be beneficial. -
I would like to see him play with Jantjies 10 and deJongh 13 Aplon Habana and Joe. With Groom at 9.
There are so many combinations we can use… point is all those combinations are players who utilize the ball
Pingback: What is the cause of the Springbok rot? |
Excellent post. If meyer continues along these lines and does not provide dramatic improvement in the next two outings he will top Harry Viljoen as the shortest term Bok coach of all times. And somehow at the moment that does not phase me at all.
and that coming from a staunch Bull supporter? Then I shall take note… hahahahaha… I think Heyneke is a good coach. he just hasn’t picked a team that plays his style
If he is, I hope SARU have an iron clad escape or performance clause in his contract
I can’t understand why Ruan Is playing like he is currently. I mean that one time when there was a ruck he was actively kicking/nudging the ball back. I couldn’t understand for the life of me why he was doing that, the maul wasn’t moving forward, there were plenty guys waiting for the ball to come out.
I don’t know, I’m puzzled with this kind of play also with him playing well overseas. Maybe someone can explain to me what it achieves by nudging the ball back into a maul or the fact that he takes an hour to get the ball out on most rucks. It’s dumb, that gives opposition time to organise defence.
It cannot be explained. The only way to try is tell you that that is the game plan. Slow the ball down so the guys get ready to chase a kick… its become sad
Spot on… that’s the game plan. Slow the ball down when his natural instinct is to speed it up
Its easy to explain. The talent is being coached out of certain players such as Pienaar, Morne, Hougaard etc. Even Mvovo looked surprisingly uncoordinated and he is a superb player who has played excellent rugby in Super 15, CC and Boks. I dont get it. For players like Zane and Kirchner where defensive and kicking play is a first and foremost, how do they still not tackle? Players like Lambie who I have seen take down the biggest okes all the time and one-on-one is impressive. Ludik did the same in the CC. And for people who are rating Brache … yeah, he plays a decent game but maybe only coz the rest of the team is not up to scratch. Nothing personal against the guy but his sidestep is almost as bad as Zane Kirchner’s. Nobody has mentioned the phenomenal combination that Paul Jordaan and Whitehead makes for the Sharks. And if the WP supporters want to reply to this post and talk shit about Whitehead, don’t bother please. Whitehead is playing much better rugby at the Sharks than at WP because the coaching is different. These 2 are youngsters and have so much game time left with heaps of talent, just hoping someone will notice the pair and groom them when the time is right.
As for the coaching of the Boks … HM took all the coaches from the Bulls including the Forwards, Backline and Defensive coach so there’s your problem first and foremost!!! The game is evolving and every other country is too except for us. Argentina is exactly where were a while back and thats where HM should have slotted in better as coach, not now. Argentina will overtake us in level of play unless SA pulls finger and stop relying so much on the ancient Bulls game which worked wonders because at least they had a kicker in Naas who actually kicked superbly. That being said, kicking is and always will be a part of the game but it HAS to be utilised properly, at the right time and on the right place on the field. And for Pete’s sake, when we have an overlap on the one side, DON’T KICK DAMN BALL, RUN IT!!! Up and unders work but has a success rate of 50% as its actually anyone’s ball, whoever jumps the highest, whoever catches better or whoever infringes the player going for the ball better, will win the aerial war. Rather keep the ball in hand and take it through the phases with quick rucking, quick passing from the rucks by the Scrummie and feed the backline, let them show us what they have!!! And so what if they mess up now and then, the % mistakes or ball lost does not exceed the % when kicking and chasing!!!
When you keep ball in hand, you take control of the game, you dictate what happens next. No team can win a game if they starved of possession unless they get given ball from poor kicks and silly turnovers or penalties. But if you kick most the time, the opposition isn’t likely to kick back and if its a quality side/player, they WILL punish you. Its not rocket science and I didnt play professional rugby so if I can see it and so many other people see it, why the hell cant the coaches and SA Rugby see it …
Brache might sidestep like Kirchner but his distribution is top notch. I have always and will always be a Whitehead fan. He has great defensive capabilities, has excellent distribution skills and can run a back line. He is a tad on the slow side but can still break the line often enough. If there was one player that WP let go that upset me the most it was him. I don’t mind letting Pollard, Sadie and JJ go. What I did not like was Flouw and Whitehead leaving. Whitehead I could understand, he would always be second fiddle and was never really given a chance to prove his worth. And you are right at Sharks he has shone and that is based on a game plan where the guys on the field get to play the situation and not just the plan. He was the same under Dobson and Fleck at UCT before structure at WP curtailed that a bit.
@Jacques Brache is only shining for WP at the moment but he has a way to go before he can even think of Bok colours, With dVilliers and deJongh there I doubt he will even start for the Stormers. Whitehead and Jordaan are also playing well. There is a wealth of talent in SA and it must be extremely difficult for the Bok coach to pick a team.
Totally true, I have watched Brache and he doesnt seem to be as skilled as JdV on his day or F Steyn, even Jordaan but he definitely does have a good pass and can run with the ball which is essential of course for a center. Glad someone sees the talent of Whitehead but you right, he does lack pace that De Jongh, Jordaan, Steyn and even Jordaan has but his quick out the blocks as he has broken quite a few defensive lines and his tackling is pretty good too. I just think it would be fantastic to groom 2 youngsters from provincial level all the way through to Bok. And I think HM has a chance here to watch Jordaan and Whitehead closely and maybe after next years Super15 to bring them into the mix. As far as I’m concerned, when the halfbacks gel, things go well and when the center pairing gels things only go better. Just as with J Fourie and JdV for a very long time.
Perfection takes times and we all know that but there is actually no point in playing guys for the next 2-3 years if they wont even feature prominently in the WC. Am I wrong in saying that or are us as South Africans happy to see old players in the line matching up against players younger, faster and stronger?
Flouw was a big loss for WP and SA but its good to see him back. I always rated him but in the same breath, what about Brussouw? He is also one of those guys who is all over the field just like Schalk.
I personally feel that one of the best loose trio’s we could field would be:
6. Brussouw / F Louw
7. Alberts / Marcell
8. Schalk / Kanko
or:
6. F Louw
7. Marcell/Schalk
8. Kanko/Daniel
I do believe that Daniel or Alberts could be used at no8 as well depending on the game plan and the tactics employed. Daniel moves to all 3 loose positions in any given game depending on the field position and the tactics. It just shows the versatility of the players. Hence why I have to stick to the Sharks backrow with the right gameplan in mind. Only other player/s I would bring in would be Schalk, Flouw and maybe Spies when he is actually on top form.
Spies will never offer anything but speed. So I won’t consider him unless Kanko, Duane and Keegan are injured. But loose forward is such a difficult thing to choose in this country. So many dynamics and so many brilliant players. Here would be my choices:
6 – Flouw\Brussouw\Marcell\Kolisi\Deon Fourie (i know he is a hooker but boy has he been good here, plus he is quick)\Keegan
7 – Schalk\Alberts\Marcell\Keegan\Deysel\Kolisi
8 – Duane\Kanko\Keegan\Schalk\Spies\Kolisi
That would be my pecking order more or less… problem is that its just too close to call. And if I was a coach I would never pick a loose trio without a player who plays to the ball. In Flouw, Brussouw, Keegan, and Deon Fourie you have those players.
So true hey. We actually have an abundance in loose trio’s and no matter who you select, it will be formidable!
Schalk, Daniel and Kanko may not be “specialist” fetchers by they get the job done and especially Daniel and Kanko going through the middle of the ruck and rolling maul which is important at any level but especially International.
D Fourie has really been great and a real menace at the breakdowns, I cant even count how many times he has either ripped the ball, slowed it down or got his team penalty turnover. He should definitely at least be considered.
What about when Juan Smith comes back? And you think HM will actually pick Spies when he returns? I’m sure he will and if thats the case, who would you pick from current players to join him in the loose trio? (2 choices per position)
I have doubts that Smith will ever come back
I don’t think Spies will be a shoe-in… HM made it quite clear that he fancies Kanko and Duane ahead of Spies because they are more physical, something sorely lacking in Spies’ game. He showed it against the English. I don’t think Juan will walk in either. He has been out too long and will need to prove himself again. But if HM does pick Spies again then i would go with Alberts and Flouw as his pairing because those two can do the donkey work so that Spies can be freed up.
Spies will be back. Heyneke is blindingly loyal and he had Spies under his wing since u19. Religion also plays a role … and Afrikaans. Keegan/Lambie too English. Why else will the Bulls invest in Ludeke (he was chased away from the Lions/Cats) and Pine Pienaar (Cheetahs were VERY happy to get rid of him). Heyneke’s first training camp had 16 or 17 Bulls – he just wanted to make sure everybody gets the message on “his culture” … and if you do not follow his dictator style coaching, you’re gone. He is coaching the flair out of Hougi because he expects him to play like Fourie du Preez. Even Ruan is forced to try and he is also not a constant box-kicker – that is why his kicked led to the first AB try. Too deep. If your game-plan is based on up-and-unders you are hoping for a bad catch or a good bounce so you will not win with skill, but with luck. And watch him pick Morne and Zane again “because Loftus is their home ground and they will bounce back!”…
At least you’re passionate! Hahahahaha… we might actually win the Loftus show because that’s an area where our game plan works. But Aussies will be wiser to the kicking nonsense that almost cost them the test against us in Ausland. They tried to play our game and lost but when they kept the ball in hand and did more “attacking” kicks they beat us. They won’t try to play our game again. They will keep ball in hand from the beginning
I will be seriously de moer in if we lose to Oz on Saturday
if we change two things we will one… if we don’t we will lose. If we keep ball in hand we win. If we drop Morné we win. If we keep ball in hand but still play Morné we lose
I thought we had a good game overall. NZ was lucky to win. Some schoolboy errors cost us the match in the end. I thought our game was mostly executed better and I thought with Ruan at scrumhalf, he made mostly the right decisions at crucial times, like passing a bad ball from a failed maul to Habana, getting us a try. Also remember he is playing under instructions to kick from his own 50.
I feel overall positive about the team, and I agree, there are many areas to improve, but this is a totally different side than we’ve seen in Mendoza.
That was Flouw that passed to Habana. It was a better performance but it was against an All Black team that played badly. I am sorry but if we carry on the way we are I think we might actually lose to the Pumas. Our confidence is going south and theirs north
So true. The changes that HAVE to be made in order to win the next 2 games against 2 of the world’s best teams would be Goosen for Steyn and Lambie for Kirchner … Its that simple.
And then of course execution of goal kicks and the basics but I can guarantee you that the whole team will play better as a unit if Lambie and Goosen are included from the start. The Boks looked a different side when these 2 were on.
Not to mention Alberts, Marcell and Flouw. I’m really not that convinced by Vermeulen but time will tell and we hope HM sees what talent he actually has on offer …
Give Duane one or two more games to find his feet. He tackles well, does an 8th man’s job and has lots of grunt. Only thing he doesn’t have that Kanko possesses in abundance is attacking flair and speed. But he is streets better than Spies, even on his worst day