In my previous post I’ve stated that I came to the conclusion that the Springboks are not that far of the pace. In that post I’ve argued that the primary reason why the wheels came off in 2010 is because they’ve lost the plot psychologically. 

I also said that some curative work needs to be done in three main areas but after pondering a bit about it I realized there is a bit more to it. So here is what I think need to receive attention in the Springbok team. 

There are three major areas that need remedial work but there are also some secondary issues that need to be addressed. For the purpose of the discussion I’ll distinguish between Major Problems (MP), Secondary Problems (SP) and Flow Problems (FP). 

MP areas are where we are behind the ball game; it is crucial in terms of success or failure. If not corrected the rest of our game sufferers and we’ll struggle to win test matches. 

SP areas are concerns that will improve once MP concerns have been adequately addressed but need attention because it influences the MP areas. 

FP are minor concerns that will almost correct itself once MP and SP have been satisfactorily addresses but need additional consideration and attention because if improves flow, strike rate, ability round off and put teams away. 

The three Major problems that needs to be addressed 

• Most important is the breakdowns. If you compare this year’s AB’s with last year’s AB’s then you’ll see that speed, power, explosiveness and team work at the breakdowns is the primary difference. Everything else flow from the dominance and structure at the breakdowns. The Springboks this year have not shown the same amount of structure, teamwork, organisation and most importantly explosiveness at the breakdown than either the Stormers or the Bulls. Team selections –especially the loose trio combo’s- have been part of the problem but essentially New Zealand has stepped up in that department and we did not. 

I believe everything will fall into place once we step up at the breakdowns. As long as we get forced back at the collisions and get tackled behind the advantage line we will lose and no single players or “possible new star” is going to safe us and change things around for us. What is required is more physical presence; explosiveness and most importantly better team work at the breakdowns. Better team work, lower body positions, and more numbers quicker at the breakdowns that goes in with speed and commitment is the difference between us and NZ in this facet of the game. 

As a side note the role that Pocock played in the Ausssie team was quite fascinating for me. He showed that thefetcher can still be influential towards the outcome of a game. Pocock had crucial turnovers in all his matches against New Zealand, this year, mostly arriving as the second man at the tackle. This allowed him to immediately go for the ball. It seems to me that teams need to practice this namely hunting in pairs with the first player going for the tackle and withdrawing immediately allowing the next player to almost instantly graph the ball; the first player can then re-enter the contest by helping to stabilise the second player. If the tackler withdrew by charging over the player (tackle and then getting up by charging forward) on the ground he prevents the opposition from getting to the ball. 

• More consistency with team selections especially regarding the scrumhalf, no 6 flanker, props, centre combinations and the back three. Rugby is about combinations. There are at least 5 crucial combinations namely the tight three, the locks, the halfbacks, the centres and the back three. The No8 and 9 combo is also crucial and we are constantly breaking these combinations up with starting selections and subbing and then we wonder why we loose the ball in contact and why our backline can’t perform. The halfback, loose trio, centre and back three combo’s are constantly interrupeted in starting selcetions and with subs. It is a bleddy mess. This needs to be sorted if we want to show any progress in the way we play. 

• Defense. We don’t have commitment problems and have won at least one WC with defense. Our defensive structure or pattern is flawed at the moment or there are senior players that don’t stick to the pre-arranged structure. This need to be addressed in no uncertain terms. 

Backline play can probably be added as one of the main three but I placed it under secondary problems because I believe it will improve drastically once we sort the breakdowns and are more consistent with combinations we select. 

Secondary problems needing attention 

• Protection of our ball on attack. Brusssow and Stegman can make a difference in this regard but generally if we blow-over with more speed, explosiveness and numbers at the breakdowns protection of the ball will be less of a problem. We lose the ball because we are either to upright or enter the tackle to slow and with inadequate leg pumping and with the blow-over cavalry arriving to slow. We go into contact with the idea to arm wrestle and not to blow-over. 
• More aggression and speed on the counter. A team is most vulnerable the moment they: a) start with an attack (first tackler is crucial) and/or b) the moment the attack breaks down. We need to be more aggressive and faster with tackling at A and our counter rucking at B but more importantly our counter attacking need to speed up in the golden two seconds after we’ve created turnover ball. Our approach is to stop playing and slow down the game (with high five’s) so we can go back to set piece when we created turnover ball so as if the turnover in itself is the victory. It is what you do with the turnover ball within the first two golden seconds after you’ve won it that determine whether you score tries. We also end-up way to often in an arm wrestle at the breakdowns. The NZ style is to hit the first ball receiver hard and in numbers and blow him over turning the ball over in the process at speed and then to send it away from the contact point at speed with the attackers running into space. We need more aggression and more speed with our first tacklers and our second wave blow-over cavalry need to enter the tackle area in more numbers, explosiveness and speed. We then need to use that turnover ball with decisiveness, aggressiveness, speed and precision attacking space. A classic example of picking up the pace after winning a turnover is to watch how France has beaten NZ in two tests in NZ in 1975(I think it was). Also go and watch that last try NZ scored against us in the Soweto test. De Villiers (I think it was) went into contact with Spies and at least one other player in support trying to protect the ball (attack broke down which is a moment of vulnerability) and NZ just blew us of the ball within seconds and send it wide almost instantaneously; so fast that some of our players still thought we had the ball. 
• Variation on attack. We are way to one-dimensional, repetitive and therefore predictable on attack and if what we are trying to do doesn’t work we run out of ideas after the third phase so we end-up kicking the ball away. We need more starter moves from set piece and our playmakers need to mix it up constantly. 
• Learn or start to attack space and stop trying to smash through the defense. The pods is all about batter ramming through defenders and that is fine but we need variation with the pods itself (bulls with FdP was excellent in this regard during the S14) and we can’t pod for 80 minutes. Angled runners smashing it up are OK every now and again as a variation to the pods but not for 80 minutes. We need to work on our ability to put players in space by utilizing deft passes, clever running angles and quicker recycling of ball after aggressive commitment at the breakdown. 
• Backline play. This will improve once we get the blow-over right at the tackle area. The Aussies played the ball wide on almost every occasion with the Cooper lying flat; receiving flat ball but then passing the ball behind a flat lying dummy runner to a runner coming from behind angling slightly sideways and running with speed onto the ball. This create space on the outside. Cooper scored the Aussies first try against New Zealand in the last test these two countries played this year by being the deeper runner with somebody else acting at the first flat lying receiver. The second try came when they suddenly altered this practice (going flat and then deep behind a dummy runner) with Cooper sending a second flat pass to Gitau who left it for the Aussie No13 who run a clever line slightly against the traffic but straight into space between the two NZ centers. Like a hot knife through soft butter, he went before stepping past Corey Jane for a brilliant try. The most important thing for me is that the Aussies showed that you don’t need to play like the AB’s to be successful in the modern game. The Aussies can of course do this because they have precision at the breakdowns; few teams in world rugby can recycle a ball and maintain phases like they do. We need to get that (ball recycling or blow-over at the breakdowns) right first and then start to work on more innovative backline play. A little more innovation and variation to our backline play is what I would like to see next year. 

Flow problems 

We are not using our back three enough and could benefit by bringiong them more into the game ala the Crusaders. We’ve got some exciting players in the back three players like Habana, Basson (if he survives his drug issue), Mvovo, Aplon and even JP Pietersen (what happened to him?) but we never use them. We need to work on ways to get the ball to the back three with quick long passes and then play of them with locks and props also showing up in support out wide –how many tries have NZ forwards like Tony Woodcock scored this year by showing up on the wing- close to the goal line. The inter passing and supportive runners coming from different angles at speed once the ball are spread to the fringes is something we need to work on. The Crusaders’ main game plan and attacking strategy against the bulls was to play the ball wide and attack channels 3 and 4 with numbers. They did this in the following manner: 

• The backline lined up a little deeper and they used blockers or dummy runners (forwards standing flat on the defensive line in front of the backline players) which allowed them to get the ball wide.
• They used long passes (mostly only two or three passes) to quickly get the ball wide.
• They had numbers waiting in dept out wide (mostly No 15, the opposite wing, the centre’s doubling back and one of the big forwards). They always had more players than the bulls out wide.
• They varied this strategy of taking the ball wide with two long passes by having players (mostly the flankers and no 8 or Brad Thorne) coming from outside inwards on an angle to set the ball up. This drew the drifting defence in. They then quickly recycled the ball and send the ball wide with Ellis breaking blindside and 15 coming in at speed to create the man over situation.
• Whenever they went into contact they recycled the ball only once or twice which kept the bulls big players and fetchers out of the game and limiting the risk of losing the ball.
• In the line outs they didn’t take any risk and went for the safe throws on 4 and 5 and then spread the ball wide at speed away from the bulls pack.
• Generally the whole Crusader team knew the strategy was to attack the outside channels and every one made sure they supported on the outside. They never allowed the bulls to get momentum because they kept the ball in hand. 

Our tactical kicking needs some consideration. Kicking has become an art in the modern game. Kicking to re-arrange the back field and how the wingers defend is crucial to keeping the ball and attacking with purpose. The Kiwis initially in the Tri-nations basically ran everything. Then, tactically, they introduced the short kick – grubber and chip kick behind to push the wingers back and make the 9 defend out of the line. This reduced the front line to 11 defenders, creating space. Then, they (the AB’s) started kicking long – forcing the wingers further back – and therefore taking 2 defenders right out of the line which meant the next time they receive the ball they can explore this space by running and passing. They kept the defence guessing allowing them to have various attacking options – run, pass or kick plays. A kick or run philosophy in attack is now vital. Look at how the defence position, then use kicks or running, passing plays to manipulate the defence. Both the Aussies and the All Blacks use the kick quite a lot; grubbers and long kicks to push the defenders back. It was not all just smash-up and blow-over. The latest tendency seems to be to play what is in front of you; read the defence and apply counter tactics to manipulate and change the defensive line-up in order to create space. 

More aggression and speed at the start of a maul. We are way too static when we set ourselves up for the maul at the line-outs. The catchers should drive-up with more aggression immediately after catching the ball in the line-out and the rest of the pack then needs to join at speed enveloping the ball carrier with two players driving in on his sides. Essentially, the catcher turns with his back towards the defenders as he catches the ball but starts driving into the opponents with the help of his two supportive players, on either side, the moment he touches the ground. 

What happened to the rolling maul? The idea with the rolling maul is to act like water if it gets blocked going one way it just roll around in the direction of least resistance. We are driving the ball up lately and are not using the rolling maul any more. I think we can take our mauling to the next level by starting to incorporate some old fashion rolling. 

These are the things I would have been discussing and working on with the team if I were the coach. I would like to hear exactly what PdV learned from this year and what he think need to be improved.