The biggest problem in Test rugby to solve is how to beat the magnificent All Blacks in New Zealand.
It remains unsolved; the sample size of scalps by visiting nations is tiny, and soon, the number of active players in the world who can remember how they did it will dwindle to less than 15.
Since South Africa defeated the 2009 version of the All Blacks in Hamilton, the men in black have won 36 straight games at home, eight times against Australia and six times over South Africa.
The most points scored against the All Blacks during this run was 33 by Australia, but the Wallabies still lost by eight. The Irish scored the second most (28), but lost by 38.
Some on The Roar have opined that a loss is a loss and there is no difference between the attempted solutions. This sounds wise, except that’s an odd way to solve a tough problem.
I think we should look at the three closest calls for the All Blacks during that prodigious phase of success.
The 8-7 win over a resolute France in the World Cup final featured no advantage in tries scored, loads of controversy and a real arm wrestle. However, in a subsequent match, France lost 33-0 to New Zealand, so we cannot find any sort of doctrinal consistency in their rugby theory to solve the big problem.
A 28-27 win earlier this year against the English tourists in Dunedin just shows that you must be able to sustain pressure for the full 80 minutes.
The third close call, and I would say the closest call, just happened. A 14-10 squeaker in Wellington over the Springboks, described by Ben Smith, the miraculous man who can play any position in the backline except scrumhalf as “panic stations” at the end. All the Kiwis interviewed directly afterwards, except Keiren Read, admitted it was up for grabs, with nothing in it, and the result was in absolute doubt until the last second.
In the denouement of the Cake Tin Test last weekend, South Africa mauled from a deep lineout, came close, tightened a cordon of pressure around the ball they’d not had enough of in the first 70 minutes and finally dominated New Zealand at scrum-time. They won a five-metre put-in, which gave man of the match contender Duane Vermeulen (surely, he would have won that award if he’d scored) clean ball to pick up and have a crack at the line.
If you are playing a Test match in Wellington, and you play well enough to put yourself in a position to win a scrum five metres from the line and one of your best heavy ball carriers can bulldoze towards a try, you have by definition posed a possible solution to the big problem.
Vermeulen has been one of the top players in the Rugby Championship, and in world rugby, for the last two seasons. He is even with Israel Folau for the most defenders beaten in the tournament. He rarely falls backward in contact.
Having played all 320 minutes of the possible four matches, Vermeulen got across the gain line, made the hard yards in and after heavy contact, but was brought down short, giving replacement scrumhalf Francois Hougaard one of those big moments.
This was the moment when the problem could have been solved.
The All Blacks never leave the blindside of a ruck undefended or even lightly defended. You can go back to 1976, you can go back to the 1950s, or as far as you can see televised footage. You won’t see an open channel up the touchline near a New Zealand try line.
You cannot solve the big problem there, in that way, in that tight corner. Well, perhaps if you were feeding Jaque Fourie at full speed, or maybe even a nose-to-the-ground Willem Alberts at his version of full speed.
But really, the blindside was the least probable place to problem-solve. At these moments, game are won and lost.
Hougaard, who had contributed to the problem with excessive and inaccurate kicking in the second half, chose to feed an upright, half-speed Lood de Jager, who was fairly easily bundled into touch by more than one waiting All Black, who could not believe their luck.
There was a dicey lineout thereafter with a fluttering Keven Mealamu throw that quacked as it flew. But that was a fact outside of the Springboks’ control.
The ball was in South African hands, without pressure on our halfback and a couple of metres from the All Black line in Wellington. All the statistics that came before this phase mattered as much as how many deuce points Roger Federer has won to get a tie-break point in a Wimbledon final against Novak Djokovic. Big moments matter, and you cannot do them over.
If you look at moments before the last five minutes, you are ignoring the most important part of the big problem. It’s the All Blacks’ ability to play 80 minutes that is the key to the solution.
They will not give you anything unless you force them into extraordinary pressure, and concomitantly, they will punish you as harshly at 80 minutes as they will at one minute, because they take the field as the fittest team on the planet.
The Springboks, as the French had done in Auckland in 2011, ended the match as fit as the All Blacks. This alone was part of the potential solution. But it was not enough.
Yes, the Springboks have, during this long streak of futility in New Zealand, cut the margin of losses from the 20-33 margins of 2010-11, to 10-14 in 2012-13, and now to four. That’s not a bad trend. But in this calibre of Test match, which I would argue was as high as any played this year, there are these moments that must go your way.
For South Africa, they stopped the try-scoring machine of New Zealand. There were no barnstorming runs by Julian Savea or Ben Smith that unlocked the second and third layers of a magnificent scramble defence. It might seem odd to praise a defence that misses 31 tackles, but let’s be honest.
First, the rate of missed tackles was the same (New Zealand missed one in 4.9 tackles attempted, and South Africa missed one in every 4.5 attempts) and it was the sheer number of tackles, which begins to exponentially exhaust the defending team, that makes the effort staggering.
Second, I think we can all admit that any other team forced to defend that much in New Zealand against an All Black team in mid-season form, firing on all cylinders, would be happy to concede only one try.
I would not complain about penalties for not rolling away against both Victor Matfield and Beast Mtawarira (the latter led to the four-point margin). The breakdown was a war zone all day, and that’s the breaks.
I would look only at our own team. In that situation, driving to the try line with no time left, what is the best alternative? Next time, make the right choice, fast and decisively, and pound with quick, strong presentation of the ball, until you gain the two metres you need.
Is any loss the same as any other loss? No.
If territory-and-possession statistics or dancing, weaving runs are the be-all and end-all of the rugby observer, we should either kick more against the Kiwis, or employ a team of sevens specialists.
Or we can say that solving the big problem will probably come down to a key decision right before the final whistle, because this version of the New Zealand squad will never, ever solve the problem for you.
StrYdeR
Roar Rookie
True and "playing to lose" is different to "playing not to lose".
Common Sense
Guest
There is a difference between 'playing to win' and 'playing not to lose'.
Chan Wee
Guest
@ Rugby Tragic : impatient in 4 matches thus far. they have bombed a few opportunities even in the matches they won easily. last season they were more patient in attack. this season they are more patient in defence. for example , SA got very few kickable penalties within the first 70 minutes. so either reffing was bad or the ABs were disciplined :D cheers
IvanN
Guest
Zack, I dont think people are saying that the ABs should have stopped playing, this is Rugby - Nobody stops when the opposition has been hurt.... Whats being said, is that the ABs, for all their attacking brilliance and running game and and and - were not able to penetrate the Boks defenses until the Boks were a man down, whilst the Boks ran a backline move through theirs.
StrYdeR
Roar Rookie
Smart moaman (on the right-click) and even more to the point, 4 losses in 65 odd tests!! It's a truly impressive record, as a supporter of an opposing team there is no point in highlighting the "close" would've/should've games because the fact is the ABs still won those, period. Before RWC 2011 the All Blacks were setting new standards of excellence, what they have achieved since then will enter the realms of legend. Once the rest of us catch up, it is unlikely that any single team will again dominate in this fashion, so now as supporters, we wait for the next win and hope it signals the end of a long dark rugby winter... because even if the next All Blacks loss doesn't signal the end of their dominance, the end of their dominance will start with a single loss... okay that turned morbid pretty quickly, but I still like the way it reads so publish and be damned, but to be clear I don't think the All Black dominance has been a dark winter for rugby, but rather for the opposition, if anything it's been a revelation of what the game can be and our rugby winter has been the lack of progress in matching them.
Ball'n'all
Guest
The AB coaching brains trust has also demonstrated it is good at adjusting AB tactics to nullify opposition strengths in second game after a tight first game.
moaman
Guest
How about highlighting the whole response and right-clicking to 'copy' before posting your comment? Then you can have a second crack at it...... STRyDeR----I am really glad you mentioned that weak-point in the Rating system.I have been thinking about that too recently.....A team that has only lost 4 in the last 65 odd tests could be usurped in ONE game by a far less consistent foe---that doesn't seem to make any sense!
Chivas
Guest
But they are, morally, physically and mentally. They had their chance to change things and were blown off the stage by 50 odd points. In seriousness I'm sure everyone has huge respect for Habana and Jean. I think the gesture from the AB's is a bit more important because of the history between the two countries and the current gulf that separates the Wallabies and the Bok. That is not to downplay the Wallabies and their own genuine and honest respect they show to all teams. Australia is largely a proud sporting nation and have a track record of the best administration when it comes to sporting events anywhere in the world. If you want to rail against every perceived slight even if it is blatantly untrue, you will find yourself writing forever... especially here where facts are light and knowledge of the game is even less, but opinions are shared with abundance :-). And amazingly these things have no national boundaries.
Zack
Roar Rookie
"So theres only one gameplan for Ellis for the AB’s. High octane, wide and relentless attack..." And a referee who won't tolerate delaying tactics. Much is being made by Bok supporters of the 2 "injured" Bok players on the ground when McCaw scored: do they actually believe the All Blacks should have stopped playing so they can "recover"? There was a lot of gamesmanship in Wellington, including attempts to slow down the game. All's fair in rugby and war...
Old Bugger
Guest
Right on the button mate...my fingers are x-ed for a fine, hot day with a firm to hard track and let's see some fireworks like last year.
Zack
Roar Rookie
I'll back our mindset from where the Boks were in the last 30 seconds :-)
SOS
Guest
That is tosh. The WBs invited all the Boks into their dressing room after the Perth test and Link presented Habana with a jersey for his 100th game. Give the sniping a rest and focus on the rugby rather than trying to put down the WBs as morally inferior human beings.
fredstone
Guest
Biltong, ek voel jou pyn. But with all due respect, it's an execution problem, not a game plan problem. We were unlucky, the scrumhalf that wasn't executing, started executing and then we were back back to a scrumhalf executing poorly. If there had been cooler heads about we may have pulled it through. NZ had to revert to kicking the ball to score a try and Flow was down in backplay. It was close, not close enough though, but everybody is a little more up beat after last weeks doom and gloom. By the way did any of you see the Flo injury, I've had some technical difficulties and can't watch it again, my initial impulses were that it was a pretty ugly no arms high shoulder charge. It happens just before the McCaw try.
Firstxv
Guest
youre right about Ellis. Thats a different matter. The aura of playing there isnt as intimidating as it used to be an altitude isnt a problem any more. The ABs will adapt again and like last year the close in tight stuff will be replaced by some much faster play. In watching the game again the AB's skills in spinning the ball left and right time and time again only to be thwarted by the tremendous Bok defence so many times, was still very slick and was screaming out for a faster ground to execute on. So theres only one gameplan for Ellis for the AB's. High octane, wide and relentless attack. The Boks won't control the game by any sort of kicking strategy as they don't have the dominance up front theyre used to. So Meyers going to be forced to find ways to score tries, because kicks, no matter what kind, won't win it for them, nor will defence. The ground, if like last year, will simply demand tries be scored to win.
Firstxv
Guest
I think they just didnt know who to play with all the club final stuff. First its Burns and Edmonds at 10/12 (might have name wrong) and they played ok, largely because the AB's had their own problems getting started for the year. Then they changed the 9, 10, 12 etc and reverted some back in the 3rd, this time the inexperienced Burns and co playing awful. The club thing gave them the worse case scenario. Those seconds acquitted well in the first, then they got dumped for the incumbants and played Tuilagi out of position and they all played poorly anyway. Overall Lancaster simply got his selections wrong, not helped by injury and poor form of some. But take away that 2012 result and Englands efforts versus the AB's are fairly mild in comparison. Saying they'll be the favourite next year or near to it isnt really backed by much substance. Slightly better these days but still largely the same old England.
Back in black
Guest
Piece, I completely agree with you re the significance of that Sydney test. The AB's finally threw away the kicking for territory dominated game plan to play 'total rugby'. It was an amazing breath of fresh air for our team and set the foundations for the success we are now enjoying. I am a Hurricanes supporter, so understand this style needs some forward starch added to it a la the crusaders, but ì know where you are coming from.
StrYdeR
Roar Rookie
Spoken like a true supporter of a team that's never won the RC... must admit I am stuck in two minds, don't want to give up on the RC but also desperately want the Boks to focus on winning at Ellis Park and nothing else (after the Wallabies game of course!!). History suggests that come Ellis Park I'll have my wish.
StrYdeR
Roar Rookie
Keep spreading the word.... the truth will prevail!!
StrYdeR
Roar Rookie
I've tried watching league a few times... sorry it's like watching Wrestlemania, lots of show, but it's all choreographed and conducted, where is the real contest? I truly hope Aussie Rules has more to it than league does or I may have to reevaluate my views of the Australian male :-)
StrYdeR
Roar Rookie
Last 30 games can open up... didn't on Saturday I know and Willem would've been worth his weight in gold in that last 10 minutes, but generally you want someone fleeter of foot to take advantage of tiring defenses... oh wait, the All Blacks never tire... time to rethink.