The All Blacks’ comprehensive win in the first two Tri-Nations tests against the Springboks depended in part on crucial decisions made by the referees before the team that eventually dominated had scored a point.
Whatever the justice of the sin binning calls (and certainly the one in the second test seem anything but just) the effect was to undermine the South Africans using their favoured strategy of putting immense pressure on early and squeezing 6 or 9 points from the first quarter of the game. This approach usually involves no frills hard running by their massive forwards and strong backs, along high kicks and early attempts at drop goals to supplement the penalties their pressure works to provoke.
No team does this as with the muscular efficiency of the Springboks, and when it works (it normally does), it forces the opposition to play risky catch up rugby. South Africa are usually impregnable defensively, which makes that attempt difficult and dangerous.
In the first two tests, not only were key ball carriers in the bin (weakening the preferred method of attack while putting extra strain put on defense and the set pieces), the All Blacks scored 10 points in 10 minutes through their own skill and adventure.
By the time Botha and Roussow respectively returned, the script that the Boks try to write for test matches had been ruthlessly scrapped, and their team was in the far more uncomfortable position of having to show the same skill and adventure as its opponents.
It wasn’t able to do so in either test. Ironically, what had seemed a great strength (the use of strong ball carriers) was nullified in both tests by a massive defensive effort by the All Blacks and by the South African big men, too often dying with or losing the ball.
In contrast, the All Blacks repeatedly looked for support runners to carry on the movement. This was the result of a different mindset and superior handling and passing skills that enabled them to carry out what was a well-devised plan of continued attack – Read’s deft off-load to Jane and Weepu’s long, gloriously weighted pass that set up Muliaina’s try being only two of many examples.
Schalk Burger’s all too late try was one of the few times when South Africa used the ball to beat the man, but the failure of Burger’s loose forward partners to impose themselves on the game had much to do with a mentality that tries to bust through opponents rather than deceive or outflank them. It can work at close quarters, as Roussow’s try showed, but when the opposition tackles with the vigour and venom the All Blacks showed in these tests new ideas need to be tried.
What was apparent was that (until Pienaar came on) the Springboks had no plan B. Januarie’s sloppy handling kicking and Steyn’s unimaginative use of the ball (usually by foot but occasionally and ineffectively by hand) wasn’t helped by the midfield players plugging dully on, seemingly expecting to break tackles rather than beating their markers by guile.
Kirschner’s searing break in the second half showed that he at least has real attacking flair and skill, but it was telling that his break was so good and perhaps so unexpected that he left his support floundering.
It’s also illuminating that both the Springbok tries last night were scored by forwards, while the four All Black tries were scored by backs. Pace and vision triumphed over rigidity and strength.
Obviously, while there were pieces of individual brilliance by the All Black backs (Dagg’s trying recalling Christian Cullen’s ability to ride tackles through a freakish combination of strength, speed and balance), the whole team played with speed, enterprise and purpose. Four or five players vied for player of the match, so that where in the earlier tests Carter and McCaw stood out, in these two games all fifteen players stood up, as did their replacements. Even though Carter had a poor goal kicking game, who would swap him for Steyn?
It says a lot for the quality of their opponents that the All Blacks still needed to play far better than they had done in the June Tests to beat the Springboks, who against most other teams still would have dominated with their proven methods.
It’s intriguing to consider whether de Villiers will change their game plan and their players. Kieran Read’s superiority over Pierre Spies must be cause for real concern, as is the general play of John Smit. Rouw was decisively outplayed by McCaw, and while the All Blacks lineout was rickety they were able to stifle the South African rolling maul.
The absence of du Preez is the equivalent to that of Carter last year, if he was playing last night so much of the looseness in the Springbok’s attack would not have occurred.
Given Pienaar’s play when he came on it’s hard to imagine that Januarie will start again in the Tri-Nations, but Piennaar can be inconsistent and Genia will test him if both are selected.
Positional naivety should mean that even once his suspension is over, de Villiers won’t play on the wing again in this series.
The Springbok midfield also has to show far more than brute strength. But the real problem is Steyn, a very average fly half whose brilliance as a goal kicker saves him from being dropped, while simultaneously hamstringing those outside him. Steyn’s accuracy and the number of points he accumulates per game probably ensures that he’ll be retained unless the Boks lose to Australia, but he seemed a woeful figure on the field last night, not even able to attempt a drop goal. His inability to modify his general play will be noted by Robbie Deans.
The Springboks haven’t gone from being a very good side to being a bad one, but with the World Cup a year away, the form of some of the older players (even Matfield, so often the key to his side’s supremacy, and Habana, who looks lost without du Preez’s kicks to give him something to do) needs close scrutiny.
The team needs a new script; lucky for Peter de Villiers, Henry and company have shown that you don’t need to sack the old scriptwriter to achieve this. But wins against the Wallabies and a home win against the All Blacks are vital for him (and some of his selections) to survive beyond September 11, the hugely symbolic date for the last test in the series. That test is between the All Blacks and the Wallabies, so its result is beyond his control, but he needs to have his team in a position to grab what at this stage seems an unlikely series win.
Despite the humiliations of the last week, the title is still available for the South Africans, but they cannot stumble from here.
The All Blacks, by contrast, have a healthy buffer of points scored and bonus points gained as well as plenty of options in several positions. Better still, Henry has dropped the disruptive philosophy of putting a new team on every second week. And Sonny Bill waits tantalisingly in the wings. No wonder Henry has been making heroic if still not quite achieved efforts to crack something approaching what the rest of us recognise as a smile.
Ai Rui Sheng
Guest
That the Bokke only got one YC is a travesty. I counted four and a red. Nice argument though except for one thing, the Bokke don't have muscle anymore, they have fat and the ethics of Dutchmen, who showed us at the WC how empty that book is.
Geoff
Guest
Would agree with most of your team, but my main change would be to drop Brian Habana to the bench and bring in Bjorn Basson.
Ben J
Guest
The Boks problems is again one of selections. John Smit, great man as he is, looks like a prop and a leader can't be huffing and puffing his way around the park like a heavyweight boxer fighting 3 featherweights. The AB's play everything at speed ala 2005/2006 and the Boks are missing du Preez badly. Here is my preferred Bok team for the future, many players remain but key positions need a kick up the backside. These players all had a great S14 but there is "something" missing, the Stormers dominated every New Zealand team and I believe that John Smit has now become the biggest liaibility for the Boks moving forward. For the life of me I cannot understand why SA's best players are not in the Bok team? John Smit, Beast, CJ van der Linde, Jean de Villiers, Ricky January, Kirchner etc etc are not the best available players in their position and were not the dominant SA players in the S14, so why on earth are they being selected? 1. Werner Kruger 2. Gary Botha/Tiaan Liebenberg 3. JC Kritzinger 4. Danie Rossouw 5. Matfield/Bekker 6. Burger 7. F Louw 8. Duane Vermeulen 9. Francois Hougaardt 10. M Steyn 11. Habana 12. Juan de Jongh 13. Jacque Fourie 14 Gerhard van den Heever - the best SA wing in the S14 languishing because he is white 15. Francois Steyn
Jerry
Guest
Well, the Boks closed the gap to 3 points just after half time, which suggests they didn't keep their roll on from there. The All Blacks responded by scoring the next 18 points - that's actually where the match was won.
Geoff
Guest
Why don't you try commenting on the Rugby instead of showing off your biased stupidity.
Francois
Guest
I agree mate. Kinda anyway... I didnt agree with the second yellow card but I wont argue with you on the second part of your comment. We as rugby fans pay to see the contest that is international rugby. We are the only one's being deprived when a player is sent off. An approach similar to the soccer yellow red system could work maybe?
warrenexpatinnz
Guest
Higginbotham did this during the Super 14 turning up in the next phase just when you think he was buried at the bottom of the ruck. Hopefully he can translate that into International rugby. Frustrates me McCaw gets away with more than the average player but you have to admire the guy for his skill and guts on the park as well as his captaincy, a genuine bloody good player.
Spence
Guest
Blinky, I totally agree. I never focused much on the off the ball running of McCaw. It is extremely impressive and shows the true level of his fitness and commitment to the team. He is always in the right place just waiting for the right time to pounce.
Go_the_Wannabe's
Guest
I'm not saying they didn't deserve their yellow cards. All I'm saying is I would have liked to see 15 on 15 for both games. I would have liked to see the no. 1 & 2 teams in the world play a game with a full complement of players. I think you'd find that the Boks would have been a lot closer than they actually were. Yes, it did change the complexion of both games. Yes the kiwis did gain ascendancy during the periods when the Saffer's were in the bin and the kiwis kept their roll on from there....surely there's no denying that.
Rusty
Roar Guru
SP - very very valid points. The interesting thing is one minute Smit is saying they have the right formula because it worked in the Super 14....unless I have become totally blind as well as stupid then I would have to say the Boks played nothing like the Bulls or Stormers. Especially not the latter who liked to vary the attack and werent scared to put some width on things. So facing up to it we need to adapt the game plan... or more importantly we need to be able to vary things. This has always been the Boks issue. At a national level we tend to stick to one plan and do it very well. Problem is when we cant we have no plan B. Look l am a big fan of Smit for all that he has done for the Boks, I include in this the other senior players but its time to put them under pressure with the younger players who are just that much hungrier. I dont agree with wholesale guard changes but tweaks here and there to ensure nobody is complacent
Suzy Poison
Guest
As soon as the Boks stop blaming the Refs, they may have a glimmer of a chance against the AB's, at home on the highveld. I find it unbelievable that the Bulls and Stormers adapted so well to the new rules and spanked the Kiwi teams. The Stormers beat all five New Zealand teams with a mixture of the territorial (kicking for the corners) and ball in hand. Yet at National level the same players, can't play the same game, suddenly it's all kick and chase. Interesting the Stormers kept Ricky on the bench. I can't see the Boks beating the Wallabies with this approach. Actually I hope the Boks lose in Brisbane, that way we will drop Smit and Ricky. Sadly a win in Brisbane, will keep these non performers in the team.
Blinky Bill of Bellingen
Guest
Okay I've moved on. Happy? Kafe's Chalk Board - I've always enjoyed tuning into Fox Sport's The Rugby Club to hear & see what Kafe makes of things. Recently he showed just how much running Richie McCaw does in his new approach to the game and I have to tell you it was impressive to watch. Richie never seems to stop following the ball around the paddock and he is always anticipating where & when he will be needed next. There's none of this attitude of 'leave it to the other bloke to do the hard yards'. The man is a machine.
Auabob
Guest
Unfortunately all this talk that the Boks would have been competitive with 15 men is really pointless. They didn't have 15 end of story and both cardings were fair like it or not. Richie didn't get carded move on and deal with it, it really gets tiring listening to disgruntled fans. The Boks were never in this match and even with 15 men I find it highly unlikely they would have won. They were spanked well and truly two weeks in a row and have no one else to blame except themselves. The refs are damned if the do and damned if they don't!
M.O.C.
Roar Guru
I want to see a 15 on 15 game as much as the next guy but surely you can't hold the ref responsible for ruining the contest because he binned a player for an infringement like this - if anyone has a gripe it should start and end with the infringing player and if I were his coach, i would kick his a$$ because he just lost the game for the sake of starting a petty squabble.
ohtani's jacket
Guest
That's rubbish. Ten points is nothing in the context of a Test match and the Boks were right back in the game by halftime. I'd love to know how the Boks being a man down caused both tries. Mils' try in particular was a counter attack from a South African mistake at the ruck.
Go_the_Wannabe's
Guest
Yes, I know both the Saffer's deserved their yellow cards, but by the time they came back both games were over as a contest. The ref's may as well have blown the whistle for full time when he yellow carded both guys. Personally, I would have liked to see a contest with an even number of players. Give a full penalty by all means, but punish and suspend them after the game, not during.
Sylvester
Guest
"This approach usually involves no frills hard running by their massive forwards and strong backs, along high kicks and early attempts at drop goals to supplement the penalties their pressure works to provoke." This was an effective approach last year when the ABs were getting penalised off the park for contesting the breakdown and couldn't catch a cold. However, they've rectified these issues and the Boks haven't evolve their own game plan.
jokerman
Guest
Indeed Apelu. The whistle had gone, so no Rugby in that moment, and Rossow flicks at McCaws eyes. Have a look on youtube on spiros article. If Rossow applied the same treatment to someone on the street, he would be put in jail. There was no ambiguity here ie. A tackle slipping up close to the head, an acidental head clash provoking someone. It was dead time, whistle had gone, and Rosso's asserts his violence on a nice respectable man, McCaw. It's thuggery, don't condone it
Rin
Guest
How the man didnt get a card in that game is beyond me!!
Warren
Guest
Haha, reminds me of a school match I palyed in many years ago - I got a clout right in front of the ref. He stopped the game and gave me a stern warning - he said I'd obviously done something really stupid to receive a shot like that...