RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Dodge said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Catogrande said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
I think you’ve nailed it pretty much. You always expect NZ to play the most intelligent rugby, but the Saffers played smarter on the day imo. Odd, because you clearly have some intelligent players. What’s the issue? Leadership? Coaching?
I think the point everyone is missing is that South Africa were the clearest about what they were trying to do and played knock out rugby - ie they did what they needed to do to win. Take the last 10 minutes. They played as deep in NZ half as possible and hit every tackle, ruck and breakdown like their life depended on it, because thats what they needed to do.
New Zealand couldn’t do it because they haven’t spent 4 years doing it, they, like most teams, haven’t spent 4 years practicing winning the tiny moments. Ireland did, but their game is more technical, more things have to work and they didn’t get to practice the intensity of South Africa then NZ two weeks in a row very often - they tried but they were fucked at the end of the NZ game.
However many decisions went each way - and don’t kid yourself that Barnes and team only went one way, South Africa consistently reacted better. I hate that it’s true.
Are you nocturnal or something? Isn't it like 2am over there!
I have a strange relationship with Monday nights
-
@Dodge said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Catogrande said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
I think you’ve nailed it pretty much. You always expect NZ to play the most intelligent rugby, but the Saffers played smarter on the day imo. Odd, because you clearly have some intelligent players. What’s the issue? Leadership? Coaching?
I think the point everyone is missing is that South Africa were the clearest about what they were trying to do and played knock out rugby - ie they did what they needed to do to win. Take the last 10 minutes. They played as deep in NZ half as possible and hit every tackle, ruck and breakdown like their life depended on it, because thats what they needed to do.
New Zealand couldn’t do it because they haven’t spent 4 years doing it, they, like most teams, haven’t spent 4 years practicing winning the tiny moments. Ireland did, but their game is more technical, more things have to work and they didn’t get to practice the intensity of South Africa then NZ two weeks in a row very often - they tried but they were fucked at the end of the NZ game.
However many decisions went each way - and don’t kid yourself that Barnes and team only went one way, South Africa consistently reacted better. I hate that it’s true.
I've mentioned it several times, SA know what they are playing. They could play like the ended the game because they were in front. If they were behind I believe they'd have been stuffed. But they never were
-
@Machpants said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Dodge said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Catogrande said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
I think you’ve nailed it pretty much. You always expect NZ to play the most intelligent rugby, but the Saffers played smarter on the day imo. Odd, because you clearly have some intelligent players. What’s the issue? Leadership? Coaching?
I think the point everyone is missing is that South Africa were the clearest about what they were trying to do and played knock out rugby - ie they did what they needed to do to win. Take the last 10 minutes. They played as deep in NZ half as possible and hit every tackle, ruck and breakdown like their life depended on it, because thats what they needed to do.
New Zealand couldn’t do it because they haven’t spent 4 years doing it, they, like most teams, haven’t spent 4 years practicing winning the tiny moments. Ireland did, but their game is more technical, more things have to work and they didn’t get to practice the intensity of South Africa then NZ two weeks in a row very often - they tried but they were fucked at the end of the NZ game.
However many decisions went each way - and don’t kid yourself that Barnes and team only went one way, South Africa consistently reacted better. I hate that it’s true.
I've mentioned it several times, SA know what they are playing. They could play like the ended the game because they were in front. If they were behind I believe they'd have been stuffed. But they never were
this is the key point. For all this chat, in the end it was a point. They didn't score after the 34th minute. And we missed two kicks at goal that would have won it. There was nothing in this game. there is no great awakening of the strength of one over the other. The game was a bees dick either way.
But, in that frantic last 10 minutes they were in front, and we were the ones who needed to do something. And that's a great space to be in for a team that defends really well. Especially in a world cup final where you know the ref is swallowing the whistle (that's not a ref moan, they all do that in that situation).
-
@Dodge said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Catogrande said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
I think you’ve nailed it pretty much. You always expect NZ to play the most intelligent rugby, but the Saffers played smarter on the day imo. Odd, because you clearly have some intelligent players. What’s the issue? Leadership? Coaching?
I think the point everyone is missing is that South Africa were the clearest about what they were trying to do and played knock out rugby - ie they did what they needed to do to win. Take the last 10 minutes. They played as deep in NZ half as possible and hit every tackle, ruck and breakdown like their life depended on it, because thats what they needed to do.
New Zealand couldn’t do it because they haven’t spent 4 years doing it, they, like most teams, haven’t spent 4 years practicing winning the tiny moments. Ireland did, but their game is more technical, more things have to work and they didn’t get to practice the intensity of South Africa then NZ two weeks in a row very often - they tried but they were fucked at the end of the NZ game.
However many decisions went each way - and don’t kid yourself that Barnes and team only went one way, South Africa consistently reacted better. I hate that it’s true.
I’m not here to take anything away from the Boks, but in that match they needed a bit of fortune to get that win. We have had our share of luck too.
In most close games particularly one pointers there are small things that get amplified because the margin between winning and losing is so very fine. We make one of two kicks and all those so called tactics of the Boks come back to haunt them as “not winning rugby.”
I just think it was two contrasting styles that clashed. The Boks gave away a lot of penalties, I doubt that was that part of the strategy? Boks lost 4 out of 10 lineouts, doubt that was in the grand plan especially as the ABs had been well known for attacking defensive lineouts.
I thought our tactics were pretty clear and we countered what the Boks put in front of us for large parts of the game. Yes we made mistakes and got cards but so did the Boks.
In that last 10 minutes there were periods we were in their half attacking. In the last couple of minutes they definitely had it down the right end.
Now the fortune they got against France…
-
@Machpants said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Dodge said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Catogrande said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
I think you’ve nailed it pretty much. You always expect NZ to play the most intelligent rugby, but the Saffers played smarter on the day imo. Odd, because you clearly have some intelligent players. What’s the issue? Leadership? Coaching?
I think the point everyone is missing is that South Africa were the clearest about what they were trying to do and played knock out rugby - ie they did what they needed to do to win. Take the last 10 minutes. They played as deep in NZ half as possible and hit every tackle, ruck and breakdown like their life depended on it, because thats what they needed to do.
New Zealand couldn’t do it because they haven’t spent 4 years doing it, they, like most teams, haven’t spent 4 years practicing winning the tiny moments. Ireland did, but their game is more technical, more things have to work and they didn’t get to practice the intensity of South Africa then NZ two weeks in a row very often - they tried but they were fucked at the end of the NZ game.
However many decisions went each way - and don’t kid yourself that Barnes and team only went one way, South Africa consistently reacted better. I hate that it’s true.
I've mentioned it several times, SA know what they are playing. They could play like the ended the game because they were in front. If they were behind I believe they'd have been stuffed. But they never were
Foster and Cane, and anyone else that was making decisions on the night, should have it etched onto them, "Kick your kicks, get ahead and make the saffas chase you"
-
@canefan said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Machpants said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Dodge said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Catogrande said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
I think you’ve nailed it pretty much. You always expect NZ to play the most intelligent rugby, but the Saffers played smarter on the day imo. Odd, because you clearly have some intelligent players. What’s the issue? Leadership? Coaching?
I think the point everyone is missing is that South Africa were the clearest about what they were trying to do and played knock out rugby - ie they did what they needed to do to win. Take the last 10 minutes. They played as deep in NZ half as possible and hit every tackle, ruck and breakdown like their life depended on it, because thats what they needed to do.
New Zealand couldn’t do it because they haven’t spent 4 years doing it, they, like most teams, haven’t spent 4 years practicing winning the tiny moments. Ireland did, but their game is more technical, more things have to work and they didn’t get to practice the intensity of South Africa then NZ two weeks in a row very often - they tried but they were fucked at the end of the NZ game.
However many decisions went each way - and don’t kid yourself that Barnes and team only went one way, South Africa consistently reacted better. I hate that it’s true.
I've mentioned it several times, SA know what they are playing. They could play like the ended the game because they were in front. If they were behind I believe they'd have been stuffed. But they never were
Foster and Cane, and anyone else that was making decisions on the night, should have it etched onto them, "Kick your kicks, get ahead and make the saffas chase you"
you think that would help the kickers not miss?
-
@junior said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@nzzp said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@akan004 said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@gt12 I wrote us off at half time too but it was far from over as it played out. Poor goalkicking and a lack of rugby smarts cost us the win in the 2nd half. A very winnable game even with only 14 men.
I thought we dropped a huge amount of ball as well, and we don't seem to be talking about it. It was one of the keys to losing - drop ball, missed kicks, TMO/discipline (choose your poison) and arguably lack of rugby nous.
When Mbonambi went off, I thought we should be kicking for lineouts and putting pressure. If that starts disintegrating, you create space in the middle of the field.
In the second half, we should have kicked the ball out in their half much more and really pressured their line out. I can't recall a single pinout in that time that was contested and that they won. We should have turned the screws on them in that area the entirety of that second half. The breaks in play that the line outs would have created would have allowed us - the team playing with 14 men - also to get some rest and preserve energy for late on in the game.
First we need to find kickers who know how to do that!
-
Only got ourselves to blame. It felt like the stars were aligning - easy pool, hard quarters but getting Argentina over England meant that the semifinal was always going to be a breeze, and then a final against a fatigued Bok team. For once, we were the ones with the easy path and SA had to slog to reach the final.
Apart from the draw, we didn't have any injuries either which is so rare in a RWC campaign. We had every advantage available to us, all we had to do was to keep 15 on the field. Opportunity blown.
-
@akan004 I wouldn’t necessarily classify playing France and Ireland before reaching a semi final is an easy path.
One could very much argue that the Boks had an easy semi also given the way England had been and were playing. Not much different between them and Argentina in terms of performance output.
-
-
@His-Bobness said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@akan004 Interesting that Razor chose McDonald where there seems little evidence for the selection. Is this because they’re old Crusader mates or is there a real respect there?
MacDonald and Holland don't exactly fill me with confidence, while it's great that 2 NZSR coach's got the assistants gig's it does, for both of them, seem to be a case of failing upwards.
Still if they can fail upwards to a 2027 RWC win I'd be delighted.
-
Can we keep this thread about the final please
All Blacks 2024 thread is here:
https://www.forum.thesilverfern.com/topic/6385/all-blacks-2024/Or start a new thread about something specific in the Sports forum
-
@KiwiMurph said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@akan004 said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
Apart from the draw, we didn't have any injuries either
You mean aside from Lomax, Frizell, Cane and effectively Retallick all missing the opening game?
I meant in the games that mattered. We had a full deck available for the knockout games. That French game was of no consequence. By losing it we actually ended up getting on the easier side of the draw.
-
Just an interesting what if...What if SA had beaten Ireland and we face them in the QF. Would have been fascinating to see how that game went down.
-
@KiwiMurph EDG with his rest too
-
-
@Nevorian said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
So many ifs and buts.
I guess we should be grateful when only a few weeks ago people were even considering if we would make it out of the Pool Stage.
The thing that bugs me is we have to wait 9 months for redemption.
Those people were just fucking idiots.
-
@Nevorian said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
The thing that bugs me is we have to wait 9 months for redemption.
Four more years, in fact.
I was sick of the ABs being the best team in the world but not RWC Champs. But I would take that back in a moment compared to Foster's 3/4/5th best team in the world, and still not RWC Champs.
-
Foster, as with Hansen circa 2019 before him, didn't seem to grasp what IMHO constitutes a winning style of rugby since the last cup. Foster's early teams played a helter skelter brand that felt like a poor imitation of the free running style that won us the cup in 2015. But it didn't work when we came up against England in Yokohama, and it won't work now. I think winning rugby for us is solid setpiece, an improved kicking game in terms of distance kicking and kick and chase, direct running in the forwards and midfield which can allow us to quickly recycle and open space to set our outside players free. Take points on offer to develop scoreboard pressure that forces our opponents into mistakes when they have to chase the game. If Razor can bring some or all of this I'll be happy
