The moment it all went wrong for Coetzee

South African rugby is in crisis.

There is little doubt of this. And as has been extensively discussed, the reasons are numerous. But as followers of the Springboks know, South African rugby has been in perpetual crisis since the days of Louis Luyt.

But despite the gross mismanagement at all the levels of rugby in South Africa for the last two decades, the provincial and national teams have found a not insignificant amount of success.

This can largely be attributed to the huge passion and following rugby enjoys in South Africa, and the amount of high-quality players that have been produced.

Coetzee has faced many of the same challenges as his predecessors, but with significantly less success. Previous successful (or semi-successful) Bok coaches have differed in their approach quite significantly. From the discipline and attention to detail of Christie, to the innovation and boldness of Mallet, the pragmatism and structure of White, the freedom given to players to determine their own style by De Villiers, and the passion and organisation of Meyer.

So, there seems to be no clear-cut tactic to creating a winning Bok team. And, furthermore, it’s likely that with the evolution of rugby rules, and general style played around the world, that new coaching approaches are in fact a necessity in the modern game. What worked ten years is not likely to work today.

But what has Coetzee’s style been in his first year in control of the Springboks? Has his lack of commitment to a management style and game plan been his major short coming? When it comes to management of players Coetzee has seemed almost schizophrenic, at times praising players, and moments later pushing them under the bus. Taking blame for losses, and then deferring blame to his assistant coaches.

Coetzee needs to decide what management personality he is going to use, and then stick with it. This chopping and changing is not good for player morale, which is reportedly at an almost Kamp Staaldraad low.

While better player management, or at least consistent management would raise morale, the best thing to raise morale is to win games. And in this regard Coetzee has been woeful.

What is Coetzee’s game plan of choice? It’s been incredibly tough to pin a style to the Springboks this year. After the conservatism of Meyer (particularly in his final season in charge), and the short-comings evident in this approach, it was clear to all rugby fans, players, and coaches that the Boks needed something new, something approaching a more 15-man game plan style.

It also was clear to Coetzee. Looking at the stats of his first game in change, the 20-26 loss to Ireland at Newlands, it’s clear he wanted to revolutionise the Bok playing style.

In that match the Boks enjoyed 56 per cent and 58 per cent of the possession and territory, respectively. They made 141 carries to 93 by the Irish. And ran a staggering 585 metres to the Irish’s 280. Including a 19-8 advantage in the defenders beaten and 8-5 in offloads made. The emphasis on a passing game rather than kicking game can be seen by the fact that Boks made 204 passes that day and just 14 kicks from hand, while the Irish made 117 passes and 34 kicks from hand.

These stats are not typical for modern Bok sides. A revolution was starting. But like all revolutions things don’t work out perfectly first time, and there were definite teething problems for a Bok side used to playing with the ball in hand for extended periods.

The Boks made a staggering 22 handling errors to six by the Irish. This, coupled with the nine turnovers made by the Irish made it tough for the Boks to build some continuity and ultimately score points.

Still, were it not for an outrageously poor finish from JP Pietersen in the dying moments of the fixture, the Boks could have won.

It was clear that this was exactly what Bok fans had been shouting for, for over a decade. “Better to lose trying to play total rugby than lose (or win?) playing tedious 10-man rugby.” But Coetzee crumbled under the shocked media response, and the fans call for blood.

The Springboks had lost for the first time ever to Ireland at home. It was a disaster. And under the pressure, Coetzee gave up on the plan, and within a week the Springboks had reverted to type. Over the next two matches against Ireland the Boks passed a total of 237 times, and only 89 times in the third Test, while they kicked from hand a total of 28 and 21 times in the two matches.

But they won. And the fate of The Boks was sealed. Coetzee didn’t have the strength of his convictions. And for the rest of the season a mostly conservative Bok game plan was employed. Despite often picking players more suited for the passing game that in his heart Coetzee knows is the best approach.

If only he could have known what a terrible year lay ahead of him. I am sure he would have tried to stick out the new passing game plan a bit longer. The response to a few losses to Ireland, by a new look Bok side playing a new passing game plan would have been mild compared to what he now faces.

Clearly, with less mistakes, and a greater focus on the break down, the game plan used at Newlands is what the Boks should be focussed on. Unfortunately, by the time he started to pick players more suited to this game plan he was employing the classic kick and chase and hope style favoured in the past.

Coetzee’s inner conflict over which game plan his team should be playing has been dramatically evident in the style and selections employed by the Boks over the rest of the season. Painful for supporters to watch, and morale destroying for the players who are part of the setup.

After his first season in charge Coetzee is in desperate need of a reboot. But if he did it all over again would he this time have the strength to take a few losses on the chin while the players and coaches adapted to the new style? Who knows.

But just imagine if JP Pietersen had scored in those final moments in Cape Town. This is the moment that everything fell apart for Coetzee, and doomed Springbok rugby for another season.