Bok embarrassment as the gap between the North and South closes

HM could of course make up most of the team from the 2007 World Cup squad still in contention and need only six from the later additions.: 15: Pat Lambie 14: JP Pietersen 13: Jaque Fourie 12: Jean de Villiers 11: Bryan Habana 10: Morne Steyn 9: Fourie du Preez 8: Duane Vermeulen 7: Schalk Burger 6: Willem Alberts 5: Victor Matfield 4: Bakkies Botha 3: Jannie du Plessis 2: Bismarck du Plessis 1: Tendai Mtawarira

I have a rules question that I'm hoping someone can answer. Ireland employed a pretty interesting tactic defending lineouts a couple of times in this game. Instead of contesting they all stood back and let the boks land. Then instead of forming a mall they just ran around and tried to tackle the ball carrier. Because there was no mall it was considered general play and, therefore, not joining from the side. I haven't seen this before. It seems completely sensible and a very good way of stopping a mall forming. So can someone answer: - is this a tactic other teams have used? It didn't seem to take the ref by surprise so I suspect they told him about it beforehand - if the mall hasn't formed but there are other players bound to the ball carrier preventing the tackler getting to him, isn't that obstruction? - why did they only do it a couple of times? Why didn't they use that tactic to stop the boks mall that ended in a try?

Stats don't always tell the whole truth rhino. Rewatch the 1995 semi-final between SA and France, you know with Bevan the ref who got offered a golden watch by the saffas and gave all calls to the boks. Rewatch the 2011 SF where the Boks where robbed against the wallabies. How about the 2011 final, the 2007 QF between Fr and NZ etc Stats only tell you who ended up the winner of a game, but do not tell the whole story. That's what frustrate me in all sports: on more than a few occasions the team that should have won was robbed. Sometimes it was political, sometimes a genuine mistake (perhaps) but it hurts the same way.

Right, so those NH teams getting to the final was all luck then? I'm glad we cleared that up. Why have you excluded Argentina? The last time I checked they were in the The Rugby Championship. There has always been a gap but it's never been as big as some have suggested. If there was a massive gap, South Africa wouldn't have lost by 14 points to an understrength Ireland (without key first team players Cian Healy, Sean O'Brien and Rory Best) for example.

Note: Scotland,Wales & Irelad all have Kiwi Coaches !!!! Would expect the NH rugby to show this influence somehow. Guess the Boks found out the hard way. Expect the NH rugby culture/style of game to be affected by this. Hopefully better for rugby all around.

Great stuff Pot, love it! Really shows who's struggling against who. Funny thing, the stats that surprise me the most all involve Ireland (Ir v Eng record, Fr v Ir, SA v Ir) and go both ways. Superb work.

I would have gone to bed but that Diggercane guy kept digging me in the ribs!

Sorry, I meant the wins were in NH, as I checked myself too following the game last weekend ...

Good Effort Pot. Shows Bok fans, Ireland are a bit of bug bear team. Ireland are no doubt on the up, under Scmidt. I was not surprised by this loss at all. The Boks were lucky to win at Ellis Park, and have got out of jail in four games this year. 1. Versus Wales at home 2. Versus Argentina at home 3. Versus Argentina away 4. Versus All Blacks at home Having said that, despite the All Blacks being the number one team for five years ( a truly magnificent record) I still feel they are vulnerable. In fact I think the gap between all the top six or seven teams has narrowed, regardless of Northern Hemisphere, southern hemisphere debates. I think we are heading into a very open World Cup, because for the first time, there are six or seven teams that can win it.

Cheers RT. Took a bit of time, but the individual results I find more illuminating around each team's performance rather than the clumsy NH/SH comparisons. Re your comment on the SA record against Ireland, the 8 matches include 2 matches in SA, but all of Ireland's wins did come at home. Have to wait until 2016 (?) to see how the men in green fare against the...errr men in green. :)

It's not all gloom and doom for the Boks. They previously had just beaten the ABs in a great match. They'll be a big threat at the RWC.

justie, you are right, it all comes in cycles, just that some cycles are larger (in terms of time) than others. The expectations of fans in what is now a global sport (of course dominated by a few but sense the overall standard is rising) is unreasonable. Aussie is ranked No 3 for heaven sake! Where do they rank in Soccer? yet rarely do the fans complain, in fact the teat it as a great achievement to make the world cup, in rugby the fans expect to win the World Cup

thats pretty interesting from an aus perspective, the general consensus from most aus fans is that the last decade has been pretty woeful for us however looking at that its shows that for the most part our win loss ratio against Ireland/ENgland are fairly consistent with our historic results (less than 5% movement) and our poor results against NZ are offset by the improvements against SA/France. I think it shows aus supporters are a bit arrogant and have too high an expectation on the team following the eales/macqueen era.

WOW Pot, a lot of work, but thanks, when it is detailed like that, it illustrates what has been happening. And taking a decade, I think is fair,as it 'evens out' the odd upset which will happen. If I interpret it all correctly, South Africa : v Ireland, Ireland has improved their record (I wonder if this might have something to do with games being played in NH only? v Australia, Aussies have been more successful v NZ, the AB's have been more successful v England they have continued their dominance v France, they have lost ground Overall the trend is not pretty reading for our SA friends... Ireland v England, Australia and South Africa, they have improved over the decade v France they have lost ground v NZ, status quo really England The big losers here ... they are down against all nations.... Australia v Ireland and NZ, their record is deteriorating v SA, Eng and France, they have shown improvement France v Australia and NZ, they have lost ground v others they have picked up their record.. New Zealand The record supports their present status. Of course statistics can be manipulated to suit an argument but what you have presented cannot be disputed and the time frame is reasonable. In summary, for some "the gap has widened' for others 'it has narrowed' .... Nice work

Given the topic and discussion about gaps closing and SH vs NH dominance, I decided to do a little bit of research on the records between the teams from North and South. To make it fairer and more comparable, I took the top three teams from each, bearing in mind their test match records against each other and against their hemisphere rivals. England, France and Ireland have won more matches in the 6N since 2000 - 51, 50 and 49 respectively - Wales are next on 40 (despite their Grand Slams) - who also have a poor record against the SANZAR teams. The table below shows the individual performance of the teams, rather than a collective of 3 vs 3. It's fairer to do that simply because of the outstanding record of New Zealand in both hemispheres. I've included all matches that were deemed test matches between the two countries whether tours, championships, RWC or RWC warm-ups. I've picked a timeframe of ten years, starting in 2004 simply because it was a decade - no more than that. I could have gone for 2005 but that wouldn't have been ten complete years. The first team in each line of the list is the team that is first in the win-loss-draw column, followed by their overall win record and then win record of the last decade. The last column shows whether the team's more recent decade performance has gone up or down on their overall record. 10 year Review 2004-2014 SA v Irl - 8 matches 4-4-0 72.7% 50% Down AB v Irl - 11 matches 11-0-0 96.4% 100% Up Aus v Irl - 8 matches 5-2-1 67.7% 62.5% Down SA v Eng - 13 matches 10-2-1 61% 77% Up AB v Eng- 15 matches 14-1-0 80% 93% Up Aus v Eng - 13 matches 8-5-0 57% 61% Up SA V Fra - 7 matches 3-3-1 56.4% 42.9% Down AB V Fra - 15 matches 13-2-0 76.4% 86.7% Up Aus v Fra - 12 matches 9-3-0 57.8% 75% Up Aus v SA - 29 matches 15-14-0 42.5% 51.7% Up AB V SA - 26 matches 17-9-0 57.3% 65.4% Up AB v Aus - 33 matches 26-5-2 68.4% 78.8% Up Fra v Irl - 14 matches 10-2-2 59.8% 71.4% Up Irl v Eng - 12 matches 7-5-0 35.9% 58.3% Up Fra v Eng - 15 matches 8-7-0 38.8% 53.3% Up

Apologies for my last line Redsfan, it wasn't aimed at you and rather just a generalisation. Basically, all I'm trying to say is that past results, statistics and rankings mean something and they are self explanatory.

Australia vs 6 nations in the RWC. Played 19, won 13 lost 6. New Zealand vs 6 nation teams in the RWC. Played 23, won 21, lost 2 South Africa vs 6 nation teams in the RWC Played 7, won 6, lost 1

Okay Colin, well how about you go and do your own research and bring up the stats for how many times 6 Nations (or even just Ireland, Wales, England and France) teams have beaten SANZAR teams during a World Cup, including pool matches. I don't know these stats but I think you might be surprised :-) I think England have the wood on Australia during WC playoff games, and France have beaten NZ twice in playoff games, which are the only two losses I can recall for NZ against NH opponents. SA have only ever lost 1 game to a NH opponent ever in a World Cup, and that was England in the pool match in 2003. That's 1 loss in 5 World Cups.

Well, you see that is not entirely correct. I reviewed the first half, there were only about 4-5 up and unders kicked by South Africa, Ireland kicked more up and unders than SA did. So it wasn't the kick and chase that failed them. It was execution, Ireland made near 150 tackles in the match, we only made 18 kicks from hand, made 135 passes, 120 runs, f you look at the match stats we played with ball in hand 50% more than the Irish. However it was the errors that cost us, between handling errors and turnovers conceded there were 19 from SA. You are allowing your perception of the Jake Ball era cloud your judgement.

Redfans - how would define 'superior' and 'inferior' in terms of rugby teams and results? It's really not rocket science..... Are the All Blacks not a superior team to Wales? No-one is saying that we're 'superior' people. That would be nonsense. But the SA rugby team has consistently been superior to NH opponents. As have the All Blacks and the Wallabies. I can't understand how people who are clever enough to use the internet can't understand this????