[2013 TRC] South Africa vs. Argentina in Soweto (17/08/2013)

[InsaneAsylum]

Unfortunately I didn't get to see this game. Was it a good indication of the boks strength or were the pumas just having an off day?

apparently the kiwi fans have grown tired of booing Quade and instead will be blowing their boo-boo-zelas this weekend

 

[Jaguares]

A few years ago, SANZAR made a provision to encourage all three partners to allow a few foreign players to play in Super Rugby franchises. That provision has never really been taken up by Argentinian players. I would like to see a concerted effort by the UAR to get as many Argentina test prospects playing in Super Rugby as they can. It would hugely benefit the Pumas if they had a reasonable part of the squad playing here.

Juan Martin Hernandez played for Sharks in 2009-2010:

Regards

 

[RWC2011Fan]

So...was South Africa really good in this game or was Argentina bad? I guess you don't score 73 points by playing badly, so did I answer my own question?

 

[TRF_heineken]

So...was South Africa really good in this game or was Argentina bad? I guess you don't score 73 points by playing badly, so did I answer my own question?

I think it's a bit pf both. SA were poor the first 15 minutes and when Argentina got a penalty, JDV called the team together and from there onwards they were ruthless.

Every facet was done with great execution. Breakdowns, scrums, lineouts and defence were fantastic.

As for Argentina, yes they were poor, but what really let them down was their forwards and their discipline. Penalty tries, tightheads at scrum time and many balls lost at line-out time are just some things which will frustrate a team and force them to make silly mistakes.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

I think it's a bit pf both. SA were poor the first 15 minutes and when Argentina got a penalty, JDV called the team together and from there onwards they were ruthless.

Every facet was done with great execution. Breakdowns, scrums, lineouts and defence were fantastic.

As for Argentina, yes they were poor, but what really let them down was their forwards and their discipline. Penalty tries, tightheads at scrum time and many balls lost at line-out time are just some things which will frustrate a team and force them to make silly mistakes.

Ja, Argentina were poor but a lot of that was down to the Bokke not giving them an inch when they had the ball. And they never got into the game because we dominated the set pieces, our rolling maul had them in reverse, and at the breakdown our guys have shown massive improvements which is why we had so many scoring opportunities many of which was lost. That pressure meant Argentina lost the plot ITO discipline and add altitude and home advantage and it was just a very long day at the office for Argentina. Up till 30 minutes they were still very much in the game though one got the feeling it was only a matter of time that we were going to pull away from minute 1. We'll have to wait for next week to get a clearer picture but we have shown steady improvement throughout the year and I wouldn't be surprised if we won in Mendoza by a relatively comfortable margin (10 to 20ish).

 

[psychic duck]

Firstly, its all very well to say they have had five years (they haven't actually, Longo was the only one of those to retire in 2007, but they don't have a professional league to develop players. They have to rely on mostly the French leagues to do that for them. I'm not saying it can't be done, bnut it is not as easy as form Mew Zealand and Wales, where the Hansen/Gatland get to see all their up and comers in the one competition right on their own doorstep.

All those players you mentioned retired over a period of 5 years. They lost a few after 2007 and 2008 and 2009 were the rebuilding years. There has been a settled team since then an underachievement for other reasons.

Also nobody has ever said it is as easy for Argentina to work within their system as opposed to more established nations.

Secondly, do you really believe that players with 30 to 50 caps have not established themselves? Remember Argentina have played far less tests since 1996 than other Tier 1 countries, 139 to be exact, while England (199), Australia (219), New Zealand (207), South Africa (215) and France (208) have played much more often.

Since the 2007 RWC and prior to joining the Rugby Championship, Argentina played only 24 tests

2008 - 7
2009 - 5
2010 - 6
2011 - 6 (5 RWC)

In the same time period, New Zealand (about typical for tier 1) played 55

2008 - 15
2009 - 14
2010 - 14
2011 - 12 (7 RWC)

A career of 50 tests for a Kiwi or an Aussie could represent as little as four years, while the same number of tests for Argentina could be seven or eight years. Not established? Pfffft!

You've got your facts wrong as Argentina award caps for their annual fixtures with Uruguay, Chile etc. The sort of games that the average players you mentioned were involved in as they didn't have pro contracts for most of their careers.

At no point in Nicolas Fernandez Miranda's career was he ever first choice. Manuel Contepomi never established himself in the team getting 30 odd caps over the period of a decade. Martin Durand was always the fringe back rower in the Pumas squad behind Ostiglia/Phelan/Martin/Lobbe. None of those players were ever established first choice players for the Pumas.

I might just bring up my fears that Argentine rugby doesn't have such a greta future now, something I was laughed at for suggesting not much earlier. We shall see with the rest of this.

Yeah, people also said future, a basic word you clearly have trouble to come to grasps with.

But the difference in years with the leaders of the teams is great.

Felipe Contepomi: 35 years
Patricio Albacete: 31 years
Juan Martin Fernandez Lobbe: 31 years
Juan Martin Hernandez: 31 years
Marcos Ayerza: 30 years

So there is a difference of 10 years between these great generations, in the middle, the Argentine players between 22-29 years simply they don't have the level of these two generations.

That's not the fault of Phelan, is a more complex problem, when Argentina lost their best players simply can't replace them because their good players are still very young.

How old were those players when Phelan took charge in 2008? Phelan had those players when they were 26 or 27.

 

[William18]

A few years ago, SANZAR made a provision to encourage all three partners to allow a few foreign players to play in Super Rugby franchises. That provision has never really been taken up by Argentinian players. I would like to see a concerted effort by the UAR to get as many Argentina test prospects playing in Super Rugby as they can. It would hugely benefit the Pumas if they had a reasonable part of the squad playing here.

But you have to get a reasonable part. Who is going to be the first? There just isnt enough room in Super Rugby under its current structure for 30 Argentinian players. Even 15 players would be a bit of a stretch. I agree that Argentina are going to find it tough the way things are going. Their team is old and I'm unsure if they have the talent coming through. Then they can't get their players together often enough. I think long term they will get better but there is no easy solution to the predicament in the short run.

 

[TRF_heineken]

But you have to get a reasonable part. Who is going to be the first? There just isnt enough room in Super Rugby under its current structure for 30 Argentinian players. Even 15 players would be a bit of a stretch. I agree that Argentina are going to find it tough the way things are going. Their team is old and I'm unsure if they have the talent coming through. Then they can't get their players together often enough. I think long term they will get better but there is no easy solution to the predicament in the short run.

I think the problem is that Argentina expects some sort of hand-out from the Other SANZAR nations. SA have allowed the Pampas to be part of the Vodacom Cup, where guys like Juan Imhoff has come out to be a player for the National team. But these hand-outs stop at some stage, and then the Argentine Rugby Union will have to start their own system. Getting a local league surely can't be that difficult. Even if you start with only 3 teams. It's still a start. something to build from.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

I think most posters on here are overreacting to the score-line. Better teams have had near enough similar results against them only to bounce back stronger which I expect from Argentina as early as next week (though I'd be surprised if they managed a victory). It was something akin to a 'perfect storm';

- new scrum sequence was always going to have at least one of the teams at a disadvantage and the Bokke probably had better info/preperation on it due to it having been implemented in the Currie Cup the previous week
- SA played well
- at home with a partisan crowd
- at altitude
- with extra motivation with it being 'Nelson Mandela day'
- SA players were match fit after SR while Argentine players had time off
- SA has been focussing on break-down since Scotland while Argentina missed arguably their best man on the deck in Lobbe
- Argentina made some bad decisions/discipline under pressure which resulted in yellow cards and an inflated score line.
- Argentina didn't play their usual disruptive game which meant SA could build a lot of momentum

Almost all of that might change next week but I am hoping SA can build on a good showing in the set pieces and break down but we will need to be more accurate in finishing chances off if we want to have a chance to win the tournament.

 

[Colombia]

The return match will give a far better indication of the Pumas and what judgements need to be made on.

It will be interesting. I really hope Argentina can put in a good performance. For me, their pack didn't turn up last week but their backs actually looked dangerous with ball in hand.

I'm fairly sure Argentina had a prop who was giving Andrew Sheridan the business the other night in the Top 14. Why did they pick an under-20 ahead of him?

What's the word on the injuries?

Albacete - hamstring tear
Hernandez - leg injury
Lobo - dislocated something in his hand
Leguizamon - injury to his nose
Carizza - sprained shoulder

If Lobbe and Ayerza are still out then I don't think they even have the personnel to draw never mind win.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

Difficult to read too much for SA in this game other than HM's game plan surely works on the Highveld and a focus on the break-downs is reaping rewards. What I would like to see looking forward is just development of the squad and game plan to get these guys playing together as much as possible. When I say 'these guys' though I am referring to the injured players as well who won't be injured forever. Some of those coming back from injury will lessen the dependence on overseas-based players many of whom aren't required any way (there are better options for SA in SA than Guthro Steenkamp for instance) but there are soft spots for SA:

9, Ruan Pienaar, Jano Vermaak and Fourie du Preez all based overseas is a worry IMO. I don't mind going without Pienaar but I'd have loved if the other 2 could negotiate something to remain in SA. Hougaard and Van Zyl COULD do it but I have my doubts. Pretorius and Schreuder are better options than either looking ahead IMO. Morne Steyn can go play in France and won't be missed if only Johan Goosen can stay fit. Kirchner won't be missed while we aren't missing anyone in the centers. On the wing we'll have to look at options with Petersen and Habana based overseas. Basson just isn't test quality. Mapoe? One of the other centers or fullbacks? Pity Ludik is moving off but I don't blame him. Maybe Le Roux can move to wing if Taute could come good at 15; he has lots of potential in that position but time/injury is an issue.

In the forwards I don't think we have any problems. Louw being the only overseas based player we should look at (ignoring Brussow). Kruger is very replacable and so is Steenkamp and Ralepelle.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Difficult to read too much for SA in this game other than HM's game plan surely works on the Highveld and a focus on the break-downs is reaping rewards. What I would like to see looking forward is just development of the squad and game plan to get these guys playing together as much as possible. When I say 'these guys' though I am referring to the injured players as well who won't be injured forever. Some of those coming back from injury will lessen the dependence on overseas-based players many of whom aren't required any way (there are better options for SA in SA than Guthro Steenkamp for instance) but there are soft spots for SA:

9, Ruan Pienaar, Jano Vermaak and Fourie du Preez all based overseas is a worry IMO. I don't mind going without Pienaar but I'd have loved if the other 2 could negotiate something to remain in SA. Hougaard and Van Zyl COULD do it but I have my doubts. Pretorius and Schreuder are better options than either looking ahead IMO. Morne Steyn can go play in France and won't be missed if only Johan Goosen can stay fit. Kirchner won't be missed while we aren't missing anyone in the centers. On the wing we'll have to look at options with Petersen and Habana based overseas. Basson just isn't test quality. Mapoe? One of the other centers or fullbacks? Pity Ludik is moving off but I don't blame him. Maybe Le Roux can move to wing if Taute could come good at 15; he has lots of potential in that position but time/injury is an issue.

In the forwards I don't think we have any problems. Louw being the only overseas based player we should look at (ignoring Brussow). Kruger is very replacable and so is Steenkamp and Ralepelle.

I want to disagree about Guthro. He is a special kind of prop, and should be wrapped in cotton wool. When he is on form, he is a tremendous asset. With Nyakane dropped from the squad, because of his discipline and eating, Lourens Adriaanse has been called up, so at least we have some more tighthead prop coverage. If I look at the props left in SA, I can only see Morne Mellett, Pat Cilliers and Werner Kruger being in contention. Steven Kitshoff who used to be one of my top picks to be a springbok, needs to shape up, and with these new scrum laws, he has been struggling.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

Lourens Adriaanse is a great prop for the next couple of years. Great stand-in for Jannie. He moves to the Sharks at the end of the year, by the way

 

[nickdnz]

I want to disagree about Guthro. He is a special kind of prop, and should be wrapped in cotton wool. When he is on form, he is a tremendous asset. With Nyakane dropped from the squad, because of his discipline and eating, Lourens Adriaanse has been called up, so at least we have some more tighthead prop coverage. If I look at the props left in SA, I can only see Morne Mellett, Pat Cilliers and Werner Kruger being in contention. Steven Kitshoff who used to be one of my top picks to be a springbok, needs to shape up, and with these new scrum laws, he has been struggling.

I don't agree with SA's policy, but I certainly think Steenkamp is the best LH prop South Africa has.

 

[Peat]

Pienaar's contract is up at the end of this year. If going home improves his Bok chances, or if the IRFU plays silly buggers, he'll go, but elsewise he stays. Heard there's thinking in the Bok camp that having him acclimatized to the conditions for 2015 may be no bad thing.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Pienaar's contract is up at the end of this year. If going home improves his Bok chances, or if the IRFU plays silly buggers, he'll go, but elsewise he stays. Heard there's thinking in the Bok camp that having him acclimatized to the conditions for 2015 may be no bad thing.

He'll stay. Our guy playing in the North is a massive advantage when we eventually go there.

Ruan Pienaar is the best scrumhalf we have when it's wet and muddy and slippery. But I think that is the only time he is the best of the lot.

 

[Jaguares]

So...was South Africa really good in this game or was Argentina bad? I guess you don't score 73 points by playing badly, so did I answer my own question?

SA began a little shy, making a basic rugby as they always do. Advancing with forwards, without playing with their backs. A game without so many phases and taking every opportunity with their kicker, Morné Steyn.

With the passing of the minutes, Pumas was losing the battle of the scrum, they retreated in all rucks, overtaken by South Africans. Anyway, at 20,25 minutes South African party began, breaking lines and making tries easily anyway.


The second time is NOT analyzable, there was no equality between players, much difference of level, then we all know what happened.

Regards

 

[dasNdanger]

Just watched the match (thanks, TRF_Ezequiel!) and was really disappointed in Argentina's showing. I'm hoping it was just first day jitters, but I doubt it. I'm listening to what others say about bringing Argentina into the competition too late, like Italy in 6 Nations. I think the difference is that with 6 Nations there's at least usually two, sometimes even three, underperforming teams in the competition. That gives 6N some balance, and gives teams like Italy and Scotland a chance to be competitive, even if it's just to avoid that dreaded wooden spoon.

I don't want to see Argentina pulled out of the RC, what I would like to see is a team or two added to the RC to help balance out the playing field.


das

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I don't want to see Argentina pulled out of the RC, what I would like to see is a team or two added to the RC to help balance out the playing field.
das

Who would you add? There aren't many teams out there that could compete in the RC and would see themselves being beaten like Argentina were in pretty much every game.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

Samoa would be a good option, but financially and logistically that might be a problem. Samoa doesn't have a proper stadium to host RC games and the union doesn't have the resources to play in a competition that includes 4 trips overseas within 2 months.