- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
In the last game of Rugby Championship 2015 we saw team that has evolved magnificently play a team that has failed to evolve.
I remember reading somewhere that rugby in Argentina was introduced by a group of Afrikaans South African expats in the early 1900s (perhaps someone here can confirm?). This origin story seemed about right in my mind as the Pumas played a very forwards-orientated game for a long time which mirrored the traditional South African game: Strong set piece, kicking flyhalf.
Which is why in times past I felt the Pumas had little chance against the big three southern hemisphere teams: Argentina playing SA’s game against South Africa was like, to use a poker analogy, drawing to a lower straight. And the Wallabies and All Blacks had more than enough practice against South Africa to beat the Pumas handily.
However, since 2011, the Pumas have evolved a high tempo, short passing game that floods their players through a narrow attack, keeping the ball alive.
Often, their line breaks come through a short pass to a runner aiming at the close space on either side of the defender defending the player with the ball. The first try against South Africa came from a short inside pass to the blind wing running at this space.
And where the runner gets brought down, the Pumas look to pop the ball up off the deck to the pack of support runners on the ball carrier’s shoulders. Very difficult to defend. Very effective if executed correctly.
Which is not to say that the Pumas have forsaken their traditional strengths. They won a number of scrum penalties off the Boks and the option of a drop goal by Juan Martin Hernandez to widen the scores’ gap with 20 minutes to go was astute.
Add to this harnessed ferocity at the break down, and it’s clear to see that the Bok’s loss to the Pumas had a sense of inevitability to it. If not this game, then soon.
This is probably the best I’ve ever seen Argentina play. It’s been a few years in the making (with a few near misses ala a draw last year against the Boks) and it is my sincere hope that Argentina continue to develop their games to even greater heights.
Now consider the Boks’ attempt to add another dimension to their traditional game: Heyneke Meyer’s (soft option) solution in the form of a play-making fullback and a running flyhalf.
Based on the Wallaby and All Black paradigm, a successful backline requires two play-makers.
Australia usually opts for a 12 that could play flyhalf. This allows flexibility in attack via rotation of 10 and 12 or it allows the option of 10 shoveling the ball on to 12 who can then make play-maker decisions in a wider channel, away from loose-forward traffic.
The All Blacks have opted for a second play-maker at 13 with a battering ram at 12. defence rushes up? Shovel it to Nonu to set up a new phase and hopefully get ball recycled before the defence can set.
Defence sits on its heels a bit? Skip 12 to Conrad Smith who will create space for the wing on the outside or feed the 15 running from depth. Also, the All Blacks have the option of having 15 (Ben Smith or Israel Dagg) step into 10 for variation.
Compare this to the Bok composition: Pollard has shown very little by way of creating try-scoring/line-breaking opportunities for the players around him.
His options are: Kick, run himself or pass on to 12/13. Compare this to the half-break and offload that Dan Carter managed in the build up to Nehe Milner-Skudder’s second try.
The players outside of Pollard are not play-makers either. De Villiers may have been once, but time spent running crash ball at 12 for most of his career have dulled those instincts. Similarly, De Allende is more of a runner than a creator.
Wille le Roux is probably the only player with acceptable play-maker credentials in the Bok setup. And he can be hit-or-miss. Additionally, at 15 he stands a little far removed from the action, he needs to get involved more regularly either at 10 or in the wider channels.
A game-plan based on grinding out scrum and maul penalties has merit if the defence can keep the opposition from scoring.
Ticking over 3-pointers puts pressure on opposing teams and forces them to become more desperate making them vulnerable to counter-attack. However, this style of play does not lend itself to chasing a game.
Here, you need tries and by getting the composition of the back-line wrong, the Boks will always struggle to chase a game (evidenced when the All Blacks went ahead with a few minutes left on the clock two weeks ago and this last game against the Pumas).
I’m not sure that swapping Lambie in for Pollard would remedy the situation. Personally, I feel Meyer missed a trick by not investing more in Elton Jantjies, who is more of a play-maker. Unfortunately, there do not seem to be any play-maker centres available for the Boks.
It’s probably too late for the Boks for this Rugby World Cup. However, afterwards, the new Bok coach will need develop a plan to evolve the Bok game plan. Hopefully by adding a more balanced back-line to compliment the usually strong forwards.
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.