Heyneke Meyer needs to put his thinking cap on

By Andrew Jardine / Roar Guru

Springbok coach Heyneke Meyer could take a tip or two from Socrates, who died about 400 years BC and was around long before William Webb Ellis picked up a ball and ran with it.

The early Greek philosopher, who earned his colours in battle during the Peloponnesian war, encouraged the troops to also “think” when confronted by the enemy. And he insisted that might is not always the right game plan. He would never have gone for a “skop and donder” (kick and bludgeon) battle plan.

No one would suggest that Meyer swallow poison, which Socrates took to end his life when facing his critics, but our coach should ponder taking a more insightful reaction after another gut-wrenching defeat by the canny All Blacks at Ellis Park.

Meyer is right when he says the match could have gone either way and should be encouraged by the positives from a much better performance by the Springboks.

Centres Jesse Kriel and Damian de Allende had inspirational games as did ‘loosie’ Heinrich Brussow, who for so long has not been included in Meyer’s plans.

Lood de Jager, too, played well at lock and almost scored a try that might have paved the way to a Springbok victory. And don’t blame the TMO. Only visually impaired fans thought the ball had touched the line.

Afterwards, Meyer bemoaned the injuries in the squad, the close call on what he thought may have been a try and that uncontested scrums had be to be used. All true. The Springboks out-scrummed and outplayed the All Blacks in the first half and the 10-10 scoreline at the break flattered the visitors.

However, it should be noted that our golden greenhorns got their chances only because of injuries to members of the old brigade, who have hung onto their places under Meyer’s insistence that experience is almost everything.

In Ruan Pienaar, Fourie du Preez and Bryan Habana, we have experienced old-timers who have defied Old Man Time, but with the younger Handre Pollard, de Allende, Kriel and Cornal Hendricks, we now have a backline that can match the All Blacks and Wallabies.

Whether Jean de Villiers, who is suffering from a knee injury, can make a late comeback is a big question. De Villiers is Meyer’s first-choice captain if fit for the World Cup, but he will have his work cut our dislodging either de Allende or Kriel.

It’s a pity that for so long Meyer has hung on to the ageing players in the hope that experience will win the World Cup. Because of this, South Africa has been dropping younger stars into the cauldron and tension of Test rugby too late. Meyer should have been doing this long before the World Cup in September. You need game time, and they have been given too little of it in the past two years.

Injuries have been a problem, but older players are more susceptible to injury and the Springbok coach is now paying the price for hanging on to many of them.

One of the problems is the Springboks lack depth in most positions. It should be noted that Lima Sopoaga, who had an excellent game, is the New Zealanders’ number five flyhalf after Dan Carter, Colin Slade, Aaron Cruden and Beauden Barrett. Generally, the All Blacks have a better bench than the Springboks.

Meyer talks about the Springboks’ mental strength. But too often, we have let slip matches that we could have won. A positive approach is one thing, but we have to play smarter and that takes thinking by the players on the pitch and not following orders barked into a walkie-talkie from a box high in the sky.

The try that sealed our defeat came from a Richie McCaw move at the lineout that bamboozled the Springboks. It was described by All Blacks coach Steve Hansen as an “old song” and probably would not have fooled our wise old fox Victor Matfield.

Two tries killed off our hopes: the one on the stroke of half-time and McCaw’s late strike, both of which caught the Springboks napping.

The Springboks have a way to go before the battle for the Webb Ellis Trophy begins. It is vital that Meyer settles on a set of Test ‘probables’ as soon as possible. There is little time left and it appears that the Springboks line-up is far from sorted out.

There is time to assess our game plans and fine-tune our handling skills. We tend to run into a tackle, drop to the ground and recycle the ball. What about off-loading the ball in the tackle?

When the match ended, fans at the club where I watched it were stunned by the outcome. They had cheered the Springboks throughout the match and had often hollered for the ref to send off All Blacks for tackles that they deemed dangerous.

They trooped out of the club, carrying some positives about the Springboks’ improved display, but nevertheless disappointed by yet another defeat. Even the club dog’s tail, which had been wagging furiously at times, slipped between his legs.

Meyer’s beer must have tasted bitter after the defeat. Hemlock, the poison that Socrates drank, is of course no serious option. The Springbok coach remains confident of success. Why not? It’s the only way to go. But a touch more time under his thinking cap might be a good idea.

Here’s how New Zealand rugby writer Chris Rattue rated the Springboks:

“Willie le Roux 7: constant threat, fine try and heavily involved although not a great tackle effort on Coles.
Cornal Hendricks 5: late replacement showed little to suggest he is in original selection JP Pietersen’s league.
Jesse Kriel 8: maybe some defensive questions but made and created tries in superb Test. The Boks have found a centre pairing with big future.
Damian de Allende 8: power game and loads of defence … making the most of Jean de Villiers’ absence.
Bryan Habana 6: a few good touches but certainly not the Habana of old.
Handre Pollard 7: ran to the line, gorgeous work for Kriel try. The Boks faded again though and so did he.
Ruan Pienaar 7: has all the skills but another Springboks fade is a worry.
Schalk Burger 9: matched Read and McCaw and clever ball work. Late life captaincy and No 8 jersey suits.
Francois Louw 5: injury troubled perhaps and not a big influence.
Heinrich Brussow 7: punched above his weight, but the Boks still might have needed more punch from their loosies.
Lood de Jager 8: big game from Victor Matfield stand-in, from lineouts to crunching the ball up. Millimetres away from crucial try.
Eben Etzebeth 7: good tough game from the senior lock, at 23.
Jannie du Plessis 5: strong start but injured on half hour and departed early.
Bismarck du Plessis 7: this is the real Beast, but mighty showing hurt by three costly lineout misfires.
Tendai Mtawarira 6: good solid performance without living up to the imposing Beast name.

Reserves
Adriaan Strauss (Mtawarira, 69m) 3: called upon in strange uncontested scrum bizzo but offered no attack.
Trevor Nyakane (Koch, 61m) 3: his fault? Bizarre… his lack of tighthead ability cost the Boks via Golden Oldies scrum rule.
Vincent Koch (J du Plessis, 41m) 4: some decent work but butchered two try chances.
Flip van der Merwe (de Jager, 59m) 4: close to anonymous.
Warren Whiteley (Louw, 42m) 4: disappointing.
Cobus Reinach (Pienaar, 74m): a forward pass his only contribution.
Pat Lambie (le Roux, 62m) 3: no match-winning heroics or anything much else this time.
Lionel Mapoe (Kriel, 77m): token gesture.”

The Crowd Says:

2015-07-28T06:50:53+00:00

Will Lawton

Guest


Hear! Hear!

2015-07-28T06:46:58+00:00

Will Lawton

Guest


@Blue. I agree that Ratatouille is an ignorant cuss but he appears less ignorant than you on this matter. The team sheet lists the loose and tight heads and did not list any of the amidextroas variety.

2015-07-27T14:13:26+00:00

Harry Jones

Expert


Agree they're smarter, but it's not a 20 IQ point difference

2015-07-27T14:05:18+00:00

etienne marais

Guest


I hate agreeing with you (or singing your praises) all the time, Harry. But you are absolutely right; all four points should be perfectly obvious to the objective observer. In fact, in various post since last week, those very same points were made in varius different guises by AUS and NZ commenters. I would add one more point though. As far as "smarts" are concerned, it seems to me that the AB's, at a few critical moments (both on defence and attack), were indeed a little bit smarter. Much of this "selective smartness" though, is probably due to their lack of panic at those critical moments.

2015-07-27T13:49:59+00:00

Harry Jones

Expert


I'm not sure this makes as much sense as the conventional wisdom crowd claims. 1. NZ was much smarter than SA? NZ was penalised more (13-11), carded once, won only one more turnover than SA, and looked a bit at sea in the midfield. I'm not arguing that the Boks were smarter overall, nor in that fateful lineout, but I don't think the "big edge in brains" argument holds up under close scrutiny. 2, SA just kicks and bludgeons? No. SA forced NZ to miss 28 tackles. SA passed 17 more times than NZ. The Boks made 3 more clean breaks on 17 more carries, and beat 9 more defenders. Aaron Smith kicked more than Ruan Pienaar; and the overall kick tally was 20-19. 3. SA is too old; only youth can win? I support Meyer's "forced" youth movement, but let's be honest: young guys make a lot of mistakes. Our missed tackles came mostly from the pups: Kriel (4), Pollard (3), Lood (2), de Allende (2), le Roux (1--and what a one!), and Koch (1). The worst knock ons (of the team's 17) came from le Roux, Kriel, Koch, and Reinach. Reinach made a silly forward pass at the end to end any comeback. And the young guys conceded penalties at a higher rate. In contrast, Burger and Bismarck (old guys) played smart and made 4 offloads. 4. The only reason SA has youngsters is the old guys got hurt? Meyer chose and started youngsters like Etzebeth, le Roux, PSDT, Pollard, and Kriel when there WERE older options. Matfield was not Plan A. He is Plan B; and just happens to be an incredibly fit old man. If PSDT hadn't been injured, Meyer would've had Etzebeth-PSDT paired in 20+ tests. We aren't in horrible shape; not great. Stay tuned to get an accurate read on Meyer's IQ.

2015-07-27T09:20:32+00:00

etienne marais

Guest


"The rules are clear. In test rugby, props are designated to play on one side. If both the players on one side go off, the scrums go uncontested." Hi there Blue, can you perhaps guide me to the Law where this is stated so clearly, please.

2015-07-27T04:53:13+00:00

splinter

Guest


mirror image of 2014 will he give he freedom to the backline to run i doubt it.

2015-07-27T04:27:01+00:00

Suzy Poison

Guest


You can look at the negatives. 1. Poor bench 2. Poor decision making in pressure situations 3. Poor Captaincy (Failure to take the 3 points on offer) 4. Handling errors and skills 5. Too late before the world cup to make a massive game plan switch. Or you can look at the positives. 1. Most exciting centre partnership in a while. De Allende and Kriel are the real deal. 2. Raw but exciting number 10. 3. New young Lock pairing has great potential. Etzebeth and De Jager can rival Matfield and Bakkies. 4. New found backline expression But either way, I am getting sick of watching the Boks losing in the last five minutes, and it’s become a habit. At least the Boks now have a chance to build up momentum, and lose this habit. The Boks will play Argentina twice and they have an easier pool (Easier than the Group of Death). No disrespect to Scotland, Samoa, Japan or the USA, but none of these teams are the All Blacks. So there is a chance to build up momentum again, with a couple of wins under the belt.

2015-07-27T03:39:39+00:00

Old Bugger

Guest


Andrew You said "Meyer is right when he says the match could have gone either way and should be encouraged by the positives from a much better performance by the Springboks." I think for me, this particular match has been the apex of SB rugby for the past 3/4 seasons but, are you convinced that there has been a much better performance or progress, for that matter, since the 2013 blockbuster?? It just seems the SB's rise for this one occasion at Ellis and, to hell with the rest of the season. Is that progress in your view?? If it is, then sadly I think you are caught up in the same vortex that HM is in, atm - one game does not a summer make, but it seems after each of these matches, we are treated to the same record playing of a better performance. I accept that the SBs played magnificently on Saturday but 2 observations - (i) it only seems to happen at Ellis against the ABs (ii) it hasn't been converted into a season of improvement....just a one-off game of all-out confrontation to secure a win that over a 5-6 years previous period, has been a rarity....until last year, of course. I can understand the frustrations of some SB bloggers when they, like us all, witness a match of this excellence, only to spend the rest of the season watching, in some instances, mediocrity. Is the players' attention span so minuscule that seeking improvement during a test season, seems beyond their reach?? HM can very well be responsible for his selections but the bottom line is, he doesn't run onto the paddock....his selections do that and yet, for all but one brief moment where they play at their home fortress, it seems that these same selections are quite prepared to frustrate the hell, out of their supporter base. This IMO, is not just an HM thing going on here.....there is more to this than meets the eye, if I may say so.

2015-07-27T02:39:47+00:00

John

Guest


Any reason why you think Victor would not have been fooled by the lineout try?

2015-07-27T01:28:20+00:00

Blue

Guest


"Trevor Nyakane (Koch, 61m) 3: his fault? Bizarre… his lack of tighthead ability cost the Boks via Golden Oldies scrum rule." Chris Ratue doesn't know what he is talking about:1 1. Nyakane genuinely plays both sides 2. The rules are clear. In test rugby, props are designated to play on one side. If both the players on one side go off, the scrums go uncontested. That a journalist in New Zealand doesn't know this is quite simply abysmal.

2015-07-26T23:08:58+00:00

Bakkies

Guest


Heineken haha

Read more at The Roar