- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
When I attend a Test match, I sink into the atmosphere. I remove my analysis cap for once. I chuck all objectivity in the bin.
It’s time to drink, punch, jump, shout and laugh (or moan) and drink again.
When Schalk Burger flipped the ball back through his legs in the Springboks’ win over the Wallabies, because he knew the ball needed to go left, I punched myself in the face because I was so happy.
This meant I was unable to see him get to the next ruck and play scrumhalf, to set the world’s tallest outside centre Victor Matfield free in the wide channel, and time a lovely pass to former wing Jean de Villiers in the corner.
I missed a lot.
But by being there, you also see many things lost on television. The real impact of the tackles, the body language of the players after those tackles, the niggle, the smiles, the thump of the kicks, the dimensions of space (a screen flattens the view).
And then there’s the joy of a scrum in the stands with friends, family and strangers (even Wallaby fans who have specific crushes on Duane “Thor” Vermeulen and Willie “Spiders” le Roux).
I thought Scott Fardy was a really aggressive and fine player on the day. Ben McCalman was better than I’ve seen Wycliff Palu play and Sekope Kepu brought all his bulk to the game. James Slipper continues to impress me, while the pack as a whole played really well. I saw that – Australia stood up.
As I have stated in posts on the definitive summary of the match (Biltongbek, take a bow), I had a bad feeling that something like the Wellington-Lawrence-Pocock debacle was unfolding when it was stuck at 10-8.
Then, just like in the World Cup, Patrick Lambie attempted a drop goal. In 2011, he missed by a whisker. On Saturday, he chipped it over with a quick action, and I honestly wasn’t worried from that point on.
The weight of the game was ours. The incredible number of tackles had to take its toll. The 314 cap ‘Bok bench could go full force. I thought we’d score more, and we did. I did not expect a three-try blitz, but what I was saying was: “this is ours, now.”
But it was a pleasure to see the game again and see what I missed. First, 205 phases in attack by South Africa. Four series in which we strung together 10-plus phases! Twenty of those five-plus phases.
A defending team forced to make 260 tackles knows they must cut off those phases at four (maximum) or hopefully three (picking the right spots). Afterwards Nick Phipps admitted they simply could not curb the phases.
Just before the three-minute mark, the Boks had completed a 20-phase movement, in which Australia missed six tackles. Then again, to end the half, a three-minute, 21-phase onslaught came up empty, but I saw how it was affecting the Wallabies.
Fardy and Sam Carter were almost out on their feet; Carter was in so many collisions.
The best-conditioned Wallaby is the human dynamo Michael Hooper, but even he was looking out of puff. South Africa created 168 rucks or mauls – 71 more than Australia. That takes a toll on a loose forward who is substantially smaller than all the Bok forwards.
At this point, don’t pepper me with measurements. Hooper is small. He has made himself as big as possible. He has great posture. His hair is huge. But he is not lanky. His wingspan is small, he runs low and he is hard for me to judge.
I don’t know if I’m watching a revolutionary player who will redefine forward play, or just an Australian version of Schalk Brits. I think he is fun to watch. But I think maybe I’d always go with Francois Louw or Marcell Coetzee or Schalk Burger before I’d put Hooper in charge.
But at the end, Hooper was the fittest Wallaby and was even able to make a break and outrun his support.
Australia did in fact create 11 series of five-plus phases – more than I remembered at the game, ale-addled.
I thought I saw the Wallabies make every tackle, because I was hoping for misses, but it turns out Australia missed a lot more than South Africa, if expressed as a rate. Australia missed a tackle every five attempts, while our lads attempted 6.25 for every miss.
That’s to be expected when the phases go that long. If, and it’s a big if, the angle of attack shifts, because realignment goes south, and ball carriers can find the wrong shoulder of the tackler.
I felt like we lost possession a million times, but it turns out it was 25 (nine by handling errors and nine by ruck turnover). Since we kept possession for 27:26 minutes, that compares favourably with Australia losing possession 18 times (with their 17:41 minutes with the pill).
If there are two things I hate, it’s being forced into touch (the sign of an amateur) and missing touch with a penalty punt. We did that far too much, but I noticed it more watching it on replay. Handre Pollard, please talk to Morne Steyn about how much that angers Heyneke Meyer.
When I was at the game, I felt like we lacked territorial ascendancy, because I wanted all play to be right in front of me. But I see that 55.78 per cent is the real story, and that’s fine, especially coupled with the possession advantage.
I don’t remember more than a handful of kicks from hand by Pollard and Lambie, and sure enough it was a lovely use of possession from the first phase, with a kick, run and pass. Kicking only six per cent away is a welcomed change from Francois Hougaard’s decisions at Wellington.
I thought Australia kicked way too much, watching it live, but I see now that they only kicked 21 per cent of the time. Perhaps it was more the paltry length of Matt Toomua’s punts, which meant Australia lost territory most of the time when they kicked.
I felt like our lineouts all went to the front, but really, there was a useful mix, while Australia only trusted the throw to the front.
This was a proper Test match. Australia’s depth issues are the issue, how can we get all our players to stay at home?
Also, I felt like Stephen Moore and David Pocock were really missed, along with James O’Connor, Will Genia and Quade Cooper.
I never felt like Israel Folau or Bernard Foley could change the outcome – the first is still seeking a true position in union, and Foley is a very, very nice journeyman.
Phipps was just a bit out of his depth, and Moore’s ability to make hard yards would have helped Australia.
But I might have awarded Fardy the man of the match, even though he lost. He really stuck his nose in the meat grinder.
I think Hougaard won the award more for his amazing cover defence than his (hitchy) delivery. A couple of guys could have deserved it (Lambie, Burger), but in the stadium, I felt like Burger set the whole match ablaze.
And he made me punch myself in the face. So, I don’t care that he carried the ball 15 times in 25 minutes… he was the best.
Join The Roar rugby editor Christy Doran, former Wallaby Matt Toomua and a cast of regular and special guests as they look at the biggest issues in the game on The Roar Rugby Podcast. If you’re looking for great odds on the next game check out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.