[2015 RWC] Semi Final 1: South Africa vs. New Zealand (24/10/2015)

[Cruz_del_Sur]

He has his moments yes. But he's been terrible of late. His defence is the most shaky I have seen from any fullback. And his kick return has been rather poor too, He missed the tackle that directly resulted into tries against all 3 RC teams during the RC. His could retrieve the kick Biggar made which resulted in a try for Wales, and he could'nt tackle North in the corner...

Plus he was an injury doubt for this match due to an ankle injury.

Just curious: was Montgomery regarded as a good tackler/defender in RSA?

 

[TheOvalBall]

Just curious: was Montgomery regarded as a good tackler/defender in RSA?

I just remember him being very suspect under the high ball. Never jumped, just stood there and waited with arms open.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

Interesting. So counting that he'll have to face Savea at least once during the game, what do you think S.A.s defensive plan will be? Also I seem to remember D. de Allende having some suspect moments in the RC as well.

I'm not concerned about Savea; I mean I'm not concerned about Savea any more than any other of the players around him. That's the threat NZ brings; all their players are capable of finishing off or creating space. Sure, some more so than others but in some manner its the 'unexpected' sources that are more likely to down us.

Savea has actually not scored a single try against SA (yet); just another interesting similarity with Lomu.

Just curious: was Montgomery regarded as a good tackler/defender in RSA?

I can't 100% remember. I don't think he was seen as a particularly good defender. I actually don't think he was considered as anything special other than a trained boot TBH and somewhat taken lightly (mostly because of his looks). Time has a way of skewing perceptions though as does a RWC winners medal.

 

[ZeroTwo]

I'm not concerned about Savea; I mean I'm not concerned about Savea any more than any other of the players around him. That's the threat NZ brings; all their players are capable of finishing off or creating space. Sure, some more so than others but in some manner its the 'unexpected' sources that are more likely to down us.

Savea has actually not scored a single try against SA (yet); just another interesting similarity with Lomu.

Same question then but pick any Kiwi player. What defensive players do SA have which could counteract their east to west style of playing?

 

[TheOvalBall]

That's because in the last few years we've been trying to expand our game. We've scored those tries because we found a way to create space and had the speed to do that.

In the NH we revert back to the traditional style of play, due to the conditions. And that is the way we know how to win. It has absolutely nothing to do with altitude, because unlike KeybaordWorrier's petty attempts, we actually have stadiums in South Africa at Sea Level!! (Durban, Cape Town, Port Elizabeth), where we have beaten plenty of teams...

In this world Cup we used a more conservative approach because we found that there were too many gaps being created in our defensive lines during the Rugby Championship, and because of it now being knockout rugby, we rather focus on winning the game than getting bonus points...

Heyneke said today the team can play the conservative approach and play the ball wide. So maybe a mixture of both on Saturday.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

Same question then but pick any Kiwi player. What defensive players do SA have which could counteract their east to west style of playing?

I'm not sure I follow you. Every single player in the SA team will be part of a system of defense rather than marking specific opposition. Not that we've been playing the likes of NZ this RWC but take away (if I may) the intercept from Scotland and the rather soft kick and gather try from Biggar (credit where its due though Biggar spotted the opportunity marvelously) and SA hasn't conceded a try since Japan. That's not down to one-on-one tackling but good scrambling and a sound (if slightly untested) system of layered defense.

Teams have had trouble putting us under much pressure because of our dominating the collisions around the ruck and our pressuring subsequent opposition rucks into penalties (Louw, Vermeulen, Du Plessis, De Allende and Habana out wide all proficient on the deck) so they don't get to put a lot of phazes together. We'll have to see how effective this will be against NZ but I suspect it'll be a tad more resillient than what France offered.

My biggest fear is that we possibly aren't going to be able to play to the ruck like we have been doing because of Garces' interpretations (who officiated in our game vs Japan as well). We just seem to struggle HUGELY at the breakdown with French referees officiating and we havn't seem to be able to come up with a means of coping/adjusting.

Am I answering your question? I don't claim any of this as fact- just one man's perspective open to broadening or change.

 

[TheOvalBall]

I see some people complaining on another site that the Boks naming their squad today, and the AB's naming their squad tomorrow, puts the Boks at a disadvantage.

LOL! (shaking my head)

 

[Larksea]

yeah Hansen likes to name his team as late as hes allowed to keep internal competition up, ensure players pass fit and also keep the opposition guessing. but the reality is very little with change with selections week. Probably nothing. only real question mark is if Crockett is fit or not and it seems like most likely not and Ben Franks will come onto the bench. Moody to start.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

I see some people complaining on another site that the Boks naming their squad today, and the AB's naming their squad tomorrow, puts the Boks at a disadvantage.

LOL! (shaking my head)

yeah, its pretty laughable I suppose. I mean barring one or two at most positions I'd imagine the NZ coaching staff could probably predict which side they'd play and vice versa.

 

[The Jones Boy]

South Africa have named an unchanged starting line-up for Saturday's World Cup semi-final against New Zealand.
Lock Lood de Jager and hooker Bismarck du Plessis have both recovered from injuries sustained in the 23-19 quarter-final win against Wales.
In the only change to the squad, lock Victor Matfield is on the bench after recovering from a hamstring injury.
Matfield, 38, will hope to win his 126th Test cap after being preferred to Pieter-Steph du Toit on the bench.
The influential De Jager is fit to start despite suffering a foot injury last weekend, while Du Plessis will play with the hand wound he suffered in the quarter-finals strapped up.
It is the first time since 2007 that the Springboks have not changed their starting XV between successive World Cup matches.

 

[Jaguares]

Because, this is what I said a few days ago on these forums; it's all about sea level. RSA cannot be competitive outside of high sea level environments.

- - - Updated - - -



I doubt there will be no dirty play with an RSA team :lol:

ps; food poisoning counts as 'dirty play' too.

All the South African players live in high sea level?

 

[KeyboardWorrier]

All the South African players live in high sea level?

Yes.

 

[ABs2011]

Yes.

Crazy isn't it. The only country in the world where the coast line is lined with 1000m cliffs, and people dont seem to know. Good thing you are around to put people right!

 

[WaterboySA]

Yes.

You serious??????

 

[TRF_heineken]

Crazy isn't it. The only country in the world where the coast line is lined with 1000m cliffs, and people dont seem to know. Good thing you are around to put people right!

Yeah! And That you can park your car at Durban's Kings Park stadium and walk 50m to the beach.

But it's just a ploy to get us Saffas al riled up. De minimus non curat lex!

 

[BakkiesBokke]

I reckon at least half of the professional players in South Africa can throw a klippie in the sea from their stoep.

 

[KeyboardWorrier]

You serious??????

Yes. Minimum height above sea in South Africa is 800m. The maximum is around 2500m, I believe, and the average South African resides at about 1100m above sea level.

 

[nickdnz]

Crazy isn't it. The only country in the world where the coast line is lined with 1000m cliffs, and people dont seem to know. Good thing you are around to put people right!

RIP those brave ships that crash into the mighty cliffs of Port Elizabeth, Cape Town and Durban.

Yes. Minimum height above sea in South Africa is 800m. The maximum is around 2500m, I believe, and the average South African resides at about 1100m above sea level.

Must make surfing tough.

Interestingly, if you were correct in your second point, it would make the highest peak of South Africa shorter than Mt Ruapehu. Mafadi is the tallest point in South Africa, which is 3,500m.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

Yes. Minimum height above sea in South Africa is 800m. The maximum is around 2500m, I believe, and the average South African resides at about 1100m above sea level.

That would explain why my eyes feel so dry ATM. I thought something must have happened during the night!

 

[Sker]

RIP those brave ships that crash into the mighty cliffs of Port Elizabeth, Cape Town and Durban.



Must make surfing tough.

Interestingly, if you were correct in your second point, it would make the highest peak of South Africa shorter than Mt Ruapehu. Mafadi is the tallest point in South Africa, which is 3,500m.

"Because #### tourists"