All Blacks vs Springboks II
-
@dagrubster said in All Blacks vs Springboks II:
agreed, it is a 'whatever' moment, no point moaning about it as you only look like sore losers!.
I think the reason Janties didn't pass was because his target for the pass ran into another bok and then fell over.
What do you mean by 'double pumped'?
How is it different from a 'dummy pass'? he picked it up from the ruck as he started his passing movement...
the dummy or double pump movement was the reason for our defensive line to be considered offside.
cheers
The traditional dummy from a ruck was the halfback throwing his hands without the ball leaving the ground. I'd have to watch again but I did notice the delay when watching live. I'm not sure if a double-pump is 'legal'. If it is, then it will be used a lot more in these situations because the defence is on a hair trigger and will come offside.
I thought we were offside from the previous phase myself.
The ref had his back to the ruck and the pass delay was subtle so hard to blame him but he was also on a hair trigger at that stage. -
The relevant law after they were simplified.
A player must not......Take any action to make opponents believe that the ruck has ended when it has not.
And in this instance....The ruck ends and play continues when the ball leaves the ruck or when the ball in the ruck is on or over the goal line.
The ball 'left the ruck' when he picked it up. A double-pump is legal but the defence was also entitled to break forward the moment he picked it up.
I'll look at a clip to be sure but I think it may have been clever play with a very slight but obvious feint while the ball was on the ground still. It was more a move of the head and shoulders without actually lifting and passing.
'Illegal' but unlikely to be picked up in real time.NB: as a side issue I watched the Bristol v Bath game the other day and they must be running on very different protocols for the TMO. This is the type of thing that the TMO was chipping in on all the time. Not necessarily interfering or second guessing the ref but letting him know things that he wouldn't have spotted on the ground. It actually seemed to work quite well. The TMO was virtually reffing from his different viewpoint and calling out blatant or game affecting things that the onfield ref didn't/couldn't see. They worked quite well together and the game wasn't noticeably slowed down.
-
Yes thats right, it was, its been so long since we have seen a proper 'dummy' pass like that with no ball in the hands - I forgot what they were like!
As I mentioned, I thought he did it because his intended target in the backline smashed into another bok and fell to the ground.
At that point though, another penalty did seem inevitable at some stage.
we won the title and banked some invaluable experience. I think it was 8 players in our side who hadn't faced the Boks before?
At this stage of our development, we will learn far more from this loss and look at it with a far more critical eye than if we managed to hold on. Lets hope we manage to understand and learn those lessons so we can ultimately improve our side.
-
Here's the clip. I'll let people make their own minds up based on the explanation of the laws.
Edit: Doesn't seem to be starting at the right point. FFWD to 5:36
EDIT again: I will comment again as much of what I said before doesn't apply.
I have no problem with the penalty being correct technically. It was actually a messy situation made worse by the double pump but the penalty wasn't manipulated.
AB defenders were on a hair trigger and if you watch their feet are making efforts to stay onside by stepping back and halting. RI misreads the initial clearance and shoots but stops himself (at this point the ref doesn't react). Ofa (IMO) shoots legally but it looks bad because of the delay and the very fractured looking D line with some players caught stepping back, some halting.
The call may have come from the far side AR who wouldn't have seen the halfback timing as well.
There is certainly an argument for not calling the penalty but if it hadn't and SA lost there would also be a strong argument that it should have been called.
The margins are so tight that you can't tell by frame rate. -
@dagrubster said in All Blacks vs Springboks II:
I must admit, I didn't think the boks were capable of that performance based on how they have played this year. That performance was one of their best in 4 years and on a par with how they played in the RWC final.
I didn't think we played particularly well.
Our line-out misfired at times, the defence wasn't as physical as it can be (but a millions miles better than the flaccid bullshit they played against the Aussies).
Kick off receipts damn near cost us the game.
There were too many attacking chances that fizzled out
(Willie's lame grubber to nowhere,
Mbonambi making the wrong choice to try and reach out to score,
the missed line-out where no one jumped,
De Ellende's break that broke down immediately,
Koch knocking on a pass from Smith after a turn overI am not saying each of these should have been points , but we should at least force our opponent to make a big play in each of these cases rather than coughing it up.
Oh and Pollard missed 3 kicks from positions that he would expect hit 75% of the time.
It was an entertaining game, but I don't think either team will feel they were at their best in this game.
-
-
@nta said in All Blacks vs Springboks II:
DISCLAIMER: have only watched the game once
I thought i was a cracker, particuarly the first half.@antipodean said in All Blacks vs Springboks II:
How is it the Wallabies can put the Boks to the sword?
Well you can talk about the Boks "lifting" for the ABs
I guess, as a few others have done.I think first in favour of the Boks it was selection: they've played mostly the same players all tour, particularly the spine of the side, and they finally clicked in terms of lowering their error rate - that's the first key in beating the ABs. By contrast, the ABs are missing a few of their best and that hurts them in the pivot - Aaron Smith probably adds 5% to any team he's playing in.
Second point was Kwagga Smith. That guy changed the dynamic of the back row battle significantly, and gave the Boks a ruck presence they didn't have against the Wallabies. They learned from having the 2 Pommy refs against us that they needed more at ruck time in addition to Kolisi. Kwagga was MOTM for me in both games. Against us, the Boks played Mostert instead, and tried to out-do us physically, but that didn't happen because their fitness led to poor discipline.
But it must be said the main difference is game plan. Someone said on Twitter last night that the Trinations were a bit of rock/paper/scissors and to a degree, that's true.
ABs haven't changed in several years - the aim of the game is being fitter than everyone, and racking up turnover runaway tries. "You miss I hit" being the basic premise.
From where I'm sitting, they are not actually creating much except opposition mistakes to run at a fractured line, and fitness to keep doing that all game. Once the turnovers dry up, or you get the ball against a set line with a high percentage tackle success, things get sticky.
When this happens, the AB back line doesn't appear to run anything like a complex move or any subtletly with bodies in motion. They just expect something to happen.
The Boks kick it, the ABs run it back against a set line, with a structure you'd basically teach to juniors - space out, run straight, support each other at the ruck. Rarely any changes of angle or dummy runners. I can't even remember a decent cut-out pass that found the man because the Boks were just rushing it so easily.
If you're going to run wide, run from depth. So many times it appeared an AB player got the ball with little chance to run onto it at pace and make a directional change at the same time. In the first Boks v Wallabies, Kellaways' try came because FdK rushed a deeply-set Kerevi and he shifted subtly to avoid it - suddenly there is space, and that was the 5th phase after the lineout.
So you could say the Boks have the right game plan for the ABs.
The Wallabies have the right game plan for the Boks.
The ABs have the right game plan for the Wallabies.
Excellent post, @nta. To illustrate, Boks knew ABs wanted to win by scoring tries so lined up across the park. No obvious gaps (and very mediocre AB Backline alignment). But if BB has heads up acres of grass in behind.
Meanwhile, Ardie spent two minutes on extreme touchline (out of sight) whilst we got agressively counter rucked in centre of field.
From where Iām sitting a chip over the top would have been the smart play? -
@taniwharugby what that picture does show is how slow the ball was , plenty of time for the defence to reset.
-
@steven-harris Aaron Smith would have known where he was wanting the next 2 phases to go so when he arrived he shifts the ball for the next phase before they can reorganise, if we don't breach the line we wun a penalty.
-
@pakman said in All Blacks vs Springboks II:
Meanwhile, Ardie spent two minutes on extreme touchline (out of sight) whilst we got agressively counter rucked in centre of field.
From where Iām sitting a chip over the top would have been the smart play?Could have been that or a grubber for players to run onto. Either way there's nothing to hold up the rush defence, and no reason for the Boks to play a fullback in that space if they know the ABs are never kicking it.
I just booted up Stan to have a look at that exact moment - there are 2 ABs on the ground (ball carrier and assist), 2 Boks on the ground, Laulala standing there doing nothing, and Weber. Already you're 2 men down. The Boks have numbers there to match because Savea is still hands on knees on the wing - and very deep.
BB gets the ball but hesitates under the rush - he's got nowhere to run or pass, so should have takent the contact or nudged it through.
The subsequent ruck is a mess, but Weber recovers. Then Kolisi pushes BB and Jacobson clear off the ball at the ruck forming over Weber, and Retallick is forced to toe it through as it squirts out.
-
@steven-harris said in All Blacks vs Springboks II:
@taniwharugby what that picture does show is how slow the ball was , plenty of time for the defence to reset.
It was about the same speed as the ones leading up to it - on or just under 2 seconds from the player hitting the deck to the ball leaving the halfback's hands. A touch longer. The issue is you're doing nothing with the ball you've got, so going faster isn't going to achieve much.
-
Reason raised an excellent point in his article today. When Aumua was instructed to fake his injury before the last scrum, it resulted in the ref stopping the clock until both scrums were set. Had Aumua not done that that, a further 20-30 seconds would have ticked on before the scrum would have been completed and we possibly would have only needed one more ruck before booting it out. Dumb play.
-
@akan004 said in All Blacks vs Springboks II:
Reason raised an excellent point in his article today. When Aumua was instructed to fake his injury before the last scrum, it resulted in the ref stopping the clock until both scrums were set. Had Aumua not done that that, a further 20-30 seconds would have ticked on before the scrum would have been completed and we possibly would have only needed one more ruck before booting it out. Dumb play.
Yes read his article this time he is correct on most of his article.A few well made points in it.
-
@chris said in All Blacks vs Springboks II:
@akan004 said in All Blacks vs Springboks II:
Reason raised an excellent point in his article today. When Aumua was instructed to fake his injury before the last scrum, it resulted in the ref stopping the clock until both scrums were set. Had Aumua not done that that, a further 20-30 seconds would have ticked on before the scrum would have been completed and we possibly would have only needed one more ruck before booting it out. Dumb play.
Yes read his article this time he is correct on most of his article.A few well made points in it.
Monkeys and typewriters and all that.
It does surprise that every now and then he can stop being a shit stirrer and actually write a good piece. -
@chris said in All Blacks vs Springboks II:
@akan004 said in All Blacks vs Springboks II:
Reason raised an excellent point in his article today. When Aumua was instructed to fake his injury before the last scrum, it resulted in the ref stopping the clock until both scrums were set. Had Aumua not done that that, a further 20-30 seconds would have ticked on before the scrum would have been completed and we possibly would have only needed one more ruck before booting it out. Dumb play.
Yes read his article this time he is correct on most of his article.A few well made points in it.
Surprised me too. Hardly a touch of bitterness* and even just the one I watch other sports and good coaches do too comment.
*He's probably in love. Poor bugger. -
@nostrildamus said in All Blacks vs Springboks II:
@chris said in All Blacks vs Springboks II:
@akan004 said in All Blacks vs Springboks II:
Reason raised an excellent point in his article today. When Aumua was instructed to fake his injury before the last scrum, it resulted in the ref stopping the clock until both scrums were set. Had Aumua not done that that, a further 20-30 seconds would have ticked on before the scrum would have been completed and we possibly would have only needed one more ruck before booting it out. Dumb play.
Yes read his article this time he is correct on most of his article.A few well made points in it.
Surprised me too. Hardly a touch of bitterness* and even just the one I watch other sports and good coaches do too comment.
*He's probably in love. Poor bugger.HaHa or poor women or man.
-
