Springboks v All Blacks I
-
As bok supporter im pretty happy with that, we came into the game favourites and played like it. The team had a calm confidence about them where they knew that theyd win if they only did their job right. It wasnt the flashiest performance but didnt need to be and cutting out all risk just made it impossible for the All Blacks to fluke a try to bring them back into the game.
Couple of work ons though - the maul isnt working and even if New Zealand defended well it wasnt great against wales either. But mauling is such a part of our game that im pretty sure we'll get it right soon enough.
We should also have found a way to score few more points in the first thirty when we were camped in the All Black 22. It has been a consistent issue in 2021 and 2022 so i have less fiath that we'll find solution to that one.
But my god NZ were poor. Its hard to say if the players or the coaches are to blame, but there are bunch of guys that dont look up to the standards of all Blacks of the last 20years. Also a couple of the old heads were poor and having three test Centurions all misfiring at the same time makes you wonder whether they have time left in their career to turn things around.
I have never seen New Zealand have so many different issues all at the same time and the next coach will have some very tough calls to make about personnel and game plan.
-
@Old-Samurai-Jack said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@Tim But then after that, he came right and put the SA prop under pressure. Is it a concentration thing?
First scrum with this AB pack, and that Bok pack with Angus’s calling, is always likely to cause initial scrum instability. Many good refs make allowances.
-
@pakman said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@Old-Samurai-Jack said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@Tim But then after that, he came right and put the SA prop under pressure. Is it a concentration thing?
First scrum with this AB pack, and that Bok pack with Angus’s calling, is always likely to cause initial scrum instability. Many good refs make allowances.
Just rewatching. I'd be interested in @NTA view, but it looked to me as though Kitshoff pulled that down.
In which case, file with kickable penalty against PSDT for non-release on first Marx jackal, and non-penalty for Cane jackal which AG missed and penalised him for fishing on deck.
-
@Bones said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@pakman said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@stodders said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@kev said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@stodders you have to win the contact.
I thought ABs did that at times. Problem was, ABs committed too many men to breakdown, so after 2 or 3 phases they were running out of players and Boks were picking them off.
ABs body angles at clearout aren't good enough to clear bodies, so it is taking an extra man to effect it. It doesn't help that refs are allowing players to slow ball down whilst clearly not supporting their bodyweight, but hey, c'est la vie.
What seems to be issue is that oppo tacklers good at impeding ball placement. Then second man patient and gets the latch. Our cleaners aren’t taking him out.
Noticed Ardie several times looking to do same, but all but once Boks body smashed into him, in some cases arguably before he’d joined the ruck.
Yeah, but Marx has awful technique and gets away with it. It's supposed to be exactly what they're looking for to penalise - hands on the floor first, hips well in front of feet, knees leaning on the player on the ground, taking advantage of his own players impeding cleaners and ball placement. It literally ticks all the fucking boxes, almost everytime and then that fluffybunny Gardiner has the gall to penalise Scooter for offside on the charge down and Cane for being off his feet despite never being off his feet.
He's lined himself up nicely for a RWC final gig.
First penalty PSDT was all over carrier like cheap Italian suit. No release, clear or otherwise!
-
@pakman and if we are going relitigate the entire game, kickable penalty against Barret for the intercept and no kickable penalty against De Allende as Smith was offside first.
Gardner wasnt perfect, but hebis not reason the game wasnt even close
-
@SidBarret said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@pakman and if we are going relitigate the entire game, kickable penalty against Barret for the intercept and no kickable penalty against De Allende as Smith was offside first.
Gardner wasnt perfect, but hebis not reason the game wasnt even close
Yep. Sometimes certain penalties can arrest momentum. But on the whole Gardener was good (apart from his non-calling of the Bok fliers which is just a blight on the game). But that wasn't the case yesterday. ABs were not even close to a contentious decision being a game changer.
-
@pakman said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@pakman said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@Old-Samurai-Jack said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@Tim But then after that, he came right and put the SA prop under pressure. Is it a concentration thing?
First scrum with this AB pack, and that Bok pack with Angus’s calling, is always likely to cause initial scrum instability. Many good refs make allowances.
Just rewatching. I'd be interested in @NTA view, but it looked to me as though Kitshoff pulled that down.
In which case, file with kickable penalty against PSDT for non-release on first Marx jackal, and non-penalty for Cane jackal which AG missed and penalised him for fishing on deck.
Kitschoff was a sub in minute 39.
Nyakane was up against Ta'avao. I thought Nyakane was clever...he pulled back ever so slightly because Ta'avao had overstretched on the engage. Only one way Ta'avao was going. Good lesson for him.
-
@stodders said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@pakman said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@pakman said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@Old-Samurai-Jack said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@Tim But then after that, he came right and put the SA prop under pressure. Is it a concentration thing?
First scrum with this AB pack, and that Bok pack with Angus’s calling, is always likely to cause initial scrum instability. Many good refs make allowances.
Just rewatching. I'd be interested in @NTA view, but it looked to me as though Kitshoff pulled that down.
In which case, file with kickable penalty against PSDT for non-release on first Marx jackal, and non-penalty for Cane jackal which AG missed and penalised him for fishing on deck.
Kitschoff was a sub in minute 39.
Nyakane was up against Ta'avao. I thought Nyakane was clever...he pulled back ever so slightly because Ta'avao had overstretched on the engage. Only one way Ta'avao was going. Good lesson for him.
Nyakane played Ta'avao, sure. But the penalty I'm talking about in second half.
-
@SidBarret said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
@pakman and if we are going relitigate the entire game, kickable penalty against Barret for the intercept and no kickable penalty against De Allende as Smith was offside first.
Gardner wasnt perfect, but hebis not reason the game wasnt even close
I disagree on first, but De Allende did seem harsh.
But the first Marx jackal ought to have been a nailed on 3 for ABs. At 7-3 after 20 it's a different ball game.
-
@canefan said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
Doesn't change the fact that we suck balls right now. This must be the worst AB team in memory in my lifetime
There seems to be no sense of calm belief. But I've got to feel sorry for Fozzie, oddly enough.
At 55 we're getting on top, Havilli kicks us 5m out. Cue Frizell inability to understand English, albeit Strine, and then Rieko unforced Hail Mary which Pollard smartly converts to another 3.
Hard to come back after that!
EDIT: Then Coles drops 5m out, then crooked throw.
-
I am replying to myself but whatever.
I watched the game secomd time and want to amend some of my earlier comments.
The maul was actually pretty good, we just didnt get any lineouts within strike range.
But our attack is even worse than i thought at first. In the first 20 we got around all black defense three times but kinda drifted into touch twice and De Allende failed to pass when we had an easy two on one.
We had further two shots in the 22, but was way to predictable with carries off nine. The All Blacks did well to fold round, but we didnt make them having to make any hard decisions. Very dissappointing that there isnt any evidence of improvement.
Its pretty clear that SA went into their shell in the second half. I understand the call, but they could have gone for the throat.
-
One very marked difference between the breakdown work of the teams.
Boks always have a player beside or directly behind carrier in close stuff. As soon as Bok is tackled, ‘shadow’ shoots in over him and crouches down over him supporting weight with hands. Tackler then places ball back between shadow’s legs. AG seemed to be comfortable so long as shadow didn’t put knee on ground. Very effective method of sealing off.
We seem to follow more traditional cleaning strategy. But a couple of times Bok tackler managed to roll out our side of ruck leaving nowhere for cleaners to put feet. Noticed Irish also did that. AG also didn’t seem bothered.
I’m not clear off top of my head if the legalities!?
-
@pakman and @SidBarret that period was largely due to something that hasn’t been mentioned much - the massive lift in defensive intensity from the boks in this test.
Barrett has a PSDT tattoo from the first three minutes. And that intensity lifted again in the 3rd quarter.
Yes the ABs looked lost but better versions of AB have also looked lost in the face of that sort of onslaught.
But the bok attack is woeful. You see crisper passing, more accurate attack patterns and better support lines at every SA high school game.
Huge part of it is we lack a linking loosie. But we also over rely on the maul and scrum to generate points. That’s fine when Pollard is kicking well. But we should’ve been 20 points clear at half.
-
-
You can look at individual pieces of play as much as you want, but the reality is the Boks played basic rugby pretty well. They didn’t have to be that good and were never looking like losing. As many decisions that went against NZ, there were many that went against SA.
This was never a close game and not decided by officiating by a looong way. Without the Boks playing that well
-
@Catogrande said in Springboks v All Blacks I:
You can look at individual pieces of play as much as you want, but the reality is the Boks played basic rugby pretty well. They didn’t have to be that good and were never looking like losing. As many decisions that went against NZ, there were many that went against SA.
This was never a close game and not decided by officiating by a looong way. Without the Boks playing that well
And that's the thing. Bok losses in SA to NZ were generally because NZ stepped up and played really well. Boks didn't really have to dig deep. That's what should alarm NZ coaches and players.
NZ aren't making teams raise their game to beat them. In fact, most opponents are probably happy to give NZ the ball to attack with at the moment and defend patiently (because NZ's attack aside from individual magic or a Savea inside pass is non existent), knowing they'll make a mistake, gift a penalty or kick it away aimlessly.
I've rarely if ever seen such a toothless AB attack. Opposition defences aren't stressed enough to create the space to attack into. And ABs kicking and kick/chase game is not forcing any mistakes from which to attack in the broken field.
So many areas to look at. Foster needs to focus on 1 or 2 this week to give the team half a chance next week. Lots of ball catching practice this week I imagine!
