Springboks v All Blacks 2
-
-
@Bones said in Springboks v All Blacks 2:
@Crucial or maybe they countered the counter counter.
@Bones said in Springboks v All Blacks 2:
@Crucial or maybe they countered the counter counter.
Just showed this to Mrs Meldrew and she's still laughing. Top Ferning, bro.
-
@Victor-Meldrew I will never take the credit Beaker deserves. Him and Chef rank right at the top of my childhood heroes/idols. Say hi to the wife.
-
@Crucial said in Springboks v All Blacks 2:
@sparky said in Springboks v All Blacks 2:
Squidgey's take.
One of the few of his I have managed to watch right through (maybe because he was being complimentary to the ABs
)Makes a very good point at the end. The ABs have shown that they have the ability now to adjust to what the opposition showed the week before. That is a very different proposition to an EOYT where you go in fresh each week against a side waiting to ambush you (just like the RWC) and it will be very interesting to see how that goes this year. Last year it didn't go so well especially against a French team that, since their resurgence, was a bit of an unknown quantity. In that game we did adjust on the fly but couldn't make the adjustments stick long enough.
Looking way too far forward to the RWC we have one game that will presumably be our biggest hurdle and that is the quarterfinal.
Let the opener against France play out. It doesn't really matter if we come first or second in the pool. Take a standard game against them and gather information for a possible future meeting. It is the quarter against SA or Ireland that we need to target and plan for. Luckily for us both of these teams have pretty set styles. Sure they will tweak some stuff up but we know that Ireland base themselves around being very organised and drilled. Disrupting that is the key and we can watch their game against SA to see what happens there.I rewatched the game slowly AND Squidge. Squidge reminds me why I stopped watching him ... he gets orgasmic about pod systems and ends up equating a lot of micro in-game stuff done well with actual "strategy"
I saw much simpler things than Squidge like Frizzel improving the backrow balance and overall workrate, the pack being far more cohesive, Mounga's movement and passing giving a lot front-foot ball (Rieko in space etc), that patterns work better because he doesn't drift, that Jordie plays a traditional 15 role (strong boot, hits the line at the right times), and no Beauden 'golden-boy' Barrett trying to play 10 and 15
Looked like the coaches did KISS principle, people knew exactly what they were doing and credit to the coaches however that happened
Tactically I got the impression the AB's are caught between trying to move from a drift defense to a rush defense as the line seemed disjointed ... ironically it may have helped as SA played more open rugby which suited the ABs, and tired the Boks. Credit for a win at Jo-berg but I really wonder if that performance would have beaten Ireland with Sexton, or France. Part of that defensive line may be that the ABs were putting an extra forward into the breakdown though? ... anyway that's what decent analysis might have looked at
I know the ABs love a power winger but even his missed tackle aside, I'm unconvinced on Caleb Clarke - yes he'll make a bust or maybe two each game but ... decision-making / heads-up rugby, workrate, finishing, linkage all doesn't seem AB level. The Boks negated him by kicking to him, that breakdown in comms with Jordan etc.
I didn't notice in-game but THAT Mounga turnover if you watch it again?
Mounga changes his mind and decides to take the hit ... there are 3-4 forwards who were meters ahead of Clarke who have read it (5,7,16,17). Clarke is ball-watching and remains totally static (gametime 57:47-57:50) meaning first Mounga has to go around him, and then Clarke's total lack of movement then ends up also slowing them getting to the breakdown too. Yeah it's all split second stuff - but hey, that's rugby at this levelIs Sevu Reece injured? Sevu actually always surprise me and seems to offer more than I expect
Not a kiwi, just a fan
-
@Mario said in Springboks v All Blacks 2:
Looked like the coaches did KISS principle, people knew exactly what they were doing and credit to the coaches however that happened
Maybe it was the assistants making stuff too complicated to get right which is what the players didn't like. Foster and Schmidt stripping it back a touch.
@Mario said in Springboks v All Blacks 2:
Tactically I got the impression the AB's are caught between trying to move from a drift defense to a rush defense as the line seemed disjointed ... ironically it may have helped as SA played more open rugby which suited the ABs, and tired the Boks.
Like taking away the cover fielder to get the batsman nibbling outside off stump?
-
@Mario said in Springboks v All Blacks 2:
Is Sevu Reece injured? Sevu actually always surprise me and seems to offer more than I expect
No. Not now anyway. He played for Ta$man yesterday
-
@Mario yeah I made a comment along the same lines (but much less well thought out) on Clarke after the game. He's just really rough - plus I don't know if he's always been like that or if it's a result of injury, but his balance is fucked, which is not a good thing for a winger. Half the time he tackles himself.
-
@Bones said in Springboks v All Blacks 2:
@Mario yeah I made a comment along the same lines (but much less well thought out) on Clarke after the game. He's just really rough - plus I don't know if he's always been like that or if it's a result of injury, but his balance is fucked, which is not a good thing for a winger. Half the time he tackles himself.
One good thing he seems to be doing consistently at the moment is knocking out opposition players
-
@Mario said in Springboks v All Blacks 2:
Squidge...ends up equating a lot of micro in-game stuff done well with actual "strategy".
Spot on, I think.
Post game narrative tarted up as analysis.
-
-
I rewatched the defensive system as they were cut apart out wide so many times. The loose trio defended very narrow to negate the Boks strengths (maul - watch Cane and Savea each side on every maul, plus pressure at scrum time):
- Mounga is more exposed without loose forward cover
- Havili tends to cut in to help Mounga, leaving Rieko unsure at times
- Rieko imo has a natural tendency to (a) cut in anyway or (b) track Havili too close
- Either way it leaves them narrow and either the winger having to shoot or Rieko having to make a cover tackle or both
Gametime: 36:04, 39:53, 41:02, 43:48, 45:47 (well tbh the whole defense system doesn't reset here - 6/7/8/10/12/14 all within about 10 metres). 51:22 looked perfect defense by Mounga, Havili, Rieko and they still got flanked at 51:40
(not sure if anyone noticed in-game but Lomax gets lucky at 25:46, a no-arms tackle on Vermeulen looked a dead-set yellow)
-
@Mario said in Springboks v All Blacks 2:
I rewatched the defensive system as they were cut apart out wide so many times. The loose trio defended very narrow to negate the Boks strengths (maul - watch Cane and Savea each side on every maul, plus pressure at scrum time):
- Mounga is more exposed without loose forward cover
- Havili tends to cut in to help Mounga, leaving Rieko unsure at times
- Rieko imo has a natural tendency to (a) cut in anyway or (b) track Havili too close
- Either way it leaves them narrow and either the winger having to shoot or Rieko having to make a cover tackle or both
Gametime: 36:04, 39:53, 41:02, 43:48, 45:47 (well tbh the whole defense system doesn't reset here - 6/7/8/10/12/14 all within about 10 metres). 51:22 looked perfect defense by Mounga, Havili, Rieko and they still got flanked at 51:40
(not sure if anyone noticed in-game but Lomax gets lucky at 25:46, a no-arms tackle on Vermeulen looked a dead-set yellow)
Flipside on this is that we are forcing teams to look wide to attack which increases the risk of them making an error and takes away their strengths in close. If you look back to 2019 that's how teams were marching up field. We were defending wide and pushing RM out which allowed close in run and recycle for phases before going wide.
-
@Daffy-Jaffy said in Springboks v All Blacks 2:
Once again our best player, consistantly. Bloody Ardie, if he'd been unavailable this year so far, Foster would've been gone!
-
@Crucial Yeah
, what I wrote was partly aimed not so much at Squidge etc but more why we don't get decent mainstream rugby analysis, apart from maybe Nick Bishop who's a pro, plus in the UK the Telegraph can be okay e.g. this analysis by Steffan Thomas - paywalled but disable JS 
What New Zealand changed to pull off an unthinkable victory over South Africa
Telegraph Sport analyses how the All Blacks got back to winning ways in impressive fashion over the Springboks
Tactically it was deliberate trade-offs right? That maul defense pinching in with Cane and Ardie flanking is a thing of beauty. It worked just, negates the Boks and plays to the AB's strengths i.e. more mobile out wide but jeeze the Boks could easily have score a couple more on another day? (foot in touch, Rieko and Jordan at 43:49 snuff out a 3-on-2)
Maybe related that for Argentina, SA have brought back Kwagga Smith into the 23 albeit on the bench
Next RwC, not so much between have the Boks, Ireland, France, ABs and Eddie can always knock out at least one of them. Gonna be so tactical and game-by-game. Please shoot anyone (normally an aussie) who wants to remove the maul from the game btw
-
@Mario I wouldn't want to remove the maul from the game but it is still heavily weighted toward the attacking side whether by refs only watching for defensive infringements, application of one law strictly while ignoring others......
One of my current bugbears is that if the attacking side can 'roll' the maul they then get awarded a penalty for any defender trying to stop the side they have rolled to. It's always a call of side entry even though the side is now, in reality, the front.
Easiest fix to avoid over-complication is to allow mauls to be brought down. -
@Crucial said in Springboks v All Blacks 2:
Easiest fix to avoid over-complication is to allow mauls to be brought down.
didnt they try that?
Thing is, an attacking team can bring it down, why are they not pinged, the defending team might be doing a good job of holding it up and keeping it stable and reducing options, but the attacking team can only get it out by collapsing it to set thier attack platform.
Situations like that, the penalties should be fair, not lop sided as you say whereby 99 times out of 100, the defending team will be pinged, sometimes carded.
