On the September 19 this year South Africa will open their Rugby World Cup campaign against Japan, and Heyneke Meyer will be hoping to bring the Springboks their third World Cup trophy.
When considering which players Meyer will be looking to take to the World Cup it is important to understand his rugby philosophy and the requirements of each position and what he will be looking at.
His game plan requires a strong set piece, be it at line-out or scrum, and his starting props must first and foremost be able to scrum.
>> 2015 Rugby World Cup fixtures
Next on his list will be work rate in defence and the necessary strength to pick and drive, a facet that has been under utilised by South Africa. The props are mostly used as first receiver to draw in defenders and they are rarely required to shift the point of attack via offload or short passes.
The contenders are Tendai Mtawarira, Trevor Nyakane, Schalk van der Merwe and even though still very young, Thomas du Toit.
Tendai ‘The Beast’ Mtawarira
Tipping the scale at 115 kilograms and reaching 1.83 metres in height, Beast is not a small man. He is a good scrummager and like all props has a tendency to scrum in at times, he does, however, get away with these tactics most of the time and is a solid first choice for Meyer.
When in top form Beast is an impressive ball carrier and defends well most of the time, however he has been overplayed in the last two years which saw a drop in form last year.
Beast has played 64 Tests for South Africa and has crossed the line on two occasions. At 30 years of age, Beast will be in his prime come the World Cup, but the most important aspect for him will be to be well managed during the Super Rugby season as fatigue played a huge role in his performances during November 2014.
Trevor Nyakane
Trevor made his debut for South Africa during the June Test series in 2013, he was subsequently dropped for ill discipline but has since found favour with Meyer and now boasts 13 Test caps for South Africa, most as a substitution.
Weighing in at 117 kilograms and 1.78 metres tall, the 24-year-old from Tzaneen has lots of potential. Although at times a tad inconsistent with his technique, he is a strong scrummager and a mobile prop who carries the ball well and possesses good ball skills for a front rower.
He has a good work rate in defence and the tight loose, his focus this year will be to find consistency and improve his scrumming technique. Other than that, improving his fitness will be key. He is most likely the number one choice on the bench and does have the ability to make a strong impact from there.
Schalk van der Merwe
At only 105 kilograms and 1.84 metres, Schalk is not the epitome of the usual South African prop, in fact when considering the combined weight (313 kilograms) of the Lions pack, it is hard to believe that they were one of the leading front rows during the 2014 Super Rugby campaign.
Technically very astute at scrum time, being one of the more mobile props in world rugby, Schalk stands a very real chance of making the World Cup squad if he continues to impress Heyneke Meyer.
He does it all, cleans rucks, offloads, carries well and defends like a Trojan.
It is doubtful that Meyer will see him as a starter and although he is likely to see very little game time, his value as an impact player in the last quarter with his speed and mobility can be a real asset to South Africa.
The benefit of these three aforementioned props is variety, something that could be of benefit in an otherwise predictable game plan. Props are seldom seen as game breakers, but it is the unexpected that often makes the difference and that is what Meyer will be hoping for.
I doubt Meyer could take a better combination of loosehead props to the World Cup, each of them bring their own strengths, and whether Meyer wants to play open rugby, tight rugby or anything in between, these three players bring all the necessary skills required.
If I was Heyneke Meyer these would be the three props I would watch and manage most keenly during the upcoming Super Rugby season.
Blue
Guest
Jannie du Plessis invokes that same feeling you get when you have to go to tea at the relatives on a Sunday afternoon and what you really want to do is have a nap rather than sit and listen to their whinging.
Harry Jones
Expert
We are all trying to rush Biltong to get to the controversial positions
Harry Jones
Expert
Agree. Jannie is not an AB-style prop. Wooden hands. Terrible tackler. Sloppy carrier. Never passed a ball. But .... Jannie is the "incumbent." I've been calling for us to move beyond him. Malherbe and Marcel were clearly better; hell, even Coenie offers more, despite his scrum frailties.
Harry Jones
Expert
First XV I actually agree w that I don't like the inflexible incumbent concept that Meyer (and many) stick to I'd like us to be able to give opposition teams different looks
Firstxv
Guest
Each to his own though I wouldn't say Jannie Du Plessis is like an AB prop.
Blue
Guest
The real talking point should be TH prop. There's Jannie, the ever breaking Malherbe, the broken Coenie, and then a mob that are all stopgaps. We have not had a really good TH prop since I can remember so people like Jannie have had a nice free ride.
We're talking props. The All Black props aren't that much different to the Bok props. Your suggestions about siill in every position is becoming a little ludicrous now. We get it, the AB players are a step above, but let realism set in a bit. As for the Substitutions, Bismarck and Adriaan is substituted on a predetermined time which doesn't take in consideration the match situation and it is the inflexibility that is a problem because it is not wise to substitute in pressure situations. The line outs that you on (three) had to do with hookers coming on in pressure situations without being in tune with his locks, wayward throws have little to do with the skills of loosehead props as discussed here and is completely irrelevant to your suggestion that set phase focus doesn't win matches.
Firstxv
Guest
Unfortunately Biltong the AB's lost the match because of the substitutions as well- Cruden not getting on the plane meant the AB's played with Barrett effectively in Morne Steyns boots. My point being that losing the lineouts was no big deal. Harry I'm not talking about total incompetence as a prop, just a broader range of skills. I think its the key to Bok improvement. Against the weaker teams for example the Boks don't need to play the biggest, toughest, meanest prop in the land just to assert this macho dominance to beat them mentally and physically. It provides the opportunity to go a little further down the rankings in a propping sense, to try a more mobile one, to allow the 15 man game to open up more against slightly weaker opposition. Its just about selecting smarter over the old age adage that the power will always come through, because, as its been proven, it doesn't.
Harry Jones
Expert
I think the point about the first skill in picking a prop being NOT A WEAK LINK IN THE SCRUM is about penalties. You cannot afford unnecessary penalties at this level. If it was only about restarts, you'd pick 4 Vermeulens and 4 Louws.
RobC
Roar Guru
yep. I agree. Adriaan almost lost the game for them In Wellington, BdP as replacement #2 actually did ;)
Hooker, he didn't find his jumpers once. In fact by memory the first was completely overthrown.
RobC
Roar Guru
BB, re the subs. Referring to the jumpers? Or the hooker?
Boks lost those three line outs because of substitutions.
Adsa
Guest
Great playing in bare feet, I remember those days (36 years ago).
Firstxv
Guest
and it also makes it a more attractive proposition for budding players. Big fullas seeing other big fullas carrying and getting around the field with the ball makes it an exciting option.
RobC
Roar Guru
Yes good pointers again, esp for ABs. And something for everyone else to think about. As it relates also about structures both in terms of coaching (how teams play games) and administration (how coaches and teams are organised to deliver 'best practice')
RobC
Roar Guru
I had a similar concern too about HM: - Then he chose Julian Red as reserve, though he's 10kg+ off the mark vs Franks Kepu Hererra - On the other hand, he had limited choice for 3? - Schalk is only 5kgs off Ayerza weight, but an excellent scrummager and loose player. SB choices will be interesting
Firstxv
Guest
yeah I'm not advocating sacrificing the tight, I'm merely widening the selection criteria for the position to take more of the responsibility of the non set phases as a rule rather than as a secondary consideration. There's a subtle but critical difference. It means a prop who is not necessarily THE best scrummager but is clearly the better all round in ball carrying, one on one tackling, fitness etc may be a better option. By not allowing for the wider consideration it increases the relative number of opportunities lost, and places more responsibility on the rest of the team. Lose one scrum, and gain 5 or 6 runs for 20 or 30 meters and several more tackles- which is best? Push those numbers out to the other 4 of the tight and the trade offs are possibly worth considering.
RobC
Roar Guru
Good reminder, firstxv re role of set piece. And the set plays that AB have in their arsenal. I not sure though, of the value of having a prop who wins in the loose but not the scrum. re the game won by SA and lost lineouts. From my recollection SBs almost lost the game because of it - due to the lost territory and lack of attack opportunity.
Firstxv
Guest
The inherent difference between the two being in the planning. The Barrett try versus Wales was thought up before the scrum. Perenara took the ball from Read and while the Welsh backs were sucked in to thinking the backs were going to run from the inside instead Slade sat in the pocket waiting for Perenaras pass, who kicked for the wing where one player was defending. The Barrett kick earlier for kaino's try was similar. The point here is the plan was to effectively create two restarts- the scrum, and from it draw the defence in, then the kick, where the defence was thin. The team knew this from before the first set piece, which was the scrum. That is what I mean about creating restarts. The kick was a better option to attack from than the scrum due to the defences, and the scrum itself was used as a decoy to create space with the kick. In moving the ball at Ellis park the Boks didn't plan for Habana to go over in the corner. The skills of Vermulens got them into that position so that Habana 'could' get the chance at the line. But before the initial set piece theres no way the Boks planned the try that way. Yet 'before' the scrum the AB's already had the second restart (kick) in the mix. They are doing this regularly where I don't believe anyone else is getting close to breaking the game down to that sort of thinking in terms of planning and execution. That is why I come back to the original post in that the future of the game is in opening up opportunities and to do that you can't have props who think their priority is to scrummage- the rest supplementary. Jannie De Villiers particularly is so far from supporting the modern game I'd be questioning Meyes comments whenever he suggests they're opening their game up. He and M Steyn are literal dinosaurs in the modern game. I know you know that already but I'm not sure to what extent in terms of the possibilities they deny their side unknowingly.