[2015 TRC] Australia v South Africa in Brisbane (18/07/2015)

[Raggs]

Fairly sure on the replays it showed Hooper still bound until after Burger released. He'd slid up, but was still bound to his own player.

 

[TRF_heineken]

If schalk pleaded it must be correct...

What are you trying to imply here??

I'll admit I'm still a bit fithy about the loss as I felt that penalty for selaing off was a tad arsh and then, habing gone that route Owens wouldn't penalise Aus for sealing off as well while going at it for the last try (which I do belive is a try).

Still, I can't deny Aus just wanted it more or at least looked lke wanting it more. After the Kriel try SA just seemd to become.. mechanical. No more rugby in them. Jst happy to kcik back and defend. That is something that has plagued our rugby on every level for a while now. It just felt too much like looking at a Stormers game. That and our kicking was simply attrocious. I do believe Pollard is our future but he is simply too green in his game mnagement to lead a RWC campaign IMO. I've been backing Lambie since the middle of SR. Reinach and Le Roux's kicking displays (and that one from Bismarck LOL) didn't help. Pollard's defence also let him down. Strange because that used to be a huge strength of his though maybe he is just taking his time to adapt to senior level rugby. The lad is bearly a tween for crying out loud.

The positives though are numerous though I still think this RWC is 2 years too early/too late for SA. Lood de Jager and Etzebeth were immense in defense nd Etzebeth is getting back to form, With PSdT on the mend post Bakkies/Matfield/Rossouw is set. We've been playing without our best loose trio for a while now and have been doing well enough. Mohoje thouh showed he shoudnt be there IMO. I was surprised by Sio dominating Malherbe though. I am still reeling from the fact that Jannie du Plessis will probably now feature for us going forward still. Our backline is very young and I belive the game management will come with experience. This RWC is too early for us but most of these guys are 22 too 24 and already showing heaps of potential. Give them 4 years as a core group and we should see a good team develop around them.

1 Kitshoff (23)
3 Koch/Malherbe/MvdM (25/24/24)
4 Etzebeth (23)
5 PSdT/De Jager (both 22)
6 Coetzee (24)
9 Reinach (25)
10 Pollard/Lambie (21/24)
12 De Allende (23)
13 Kriel/Serfontein (21/22)
15 Le Roux (25)

Add to these up and coming players and there is big potential. Arno Botha, Siya Kolisi and Jaco Kriel also ~24. Some of the more promising loosies are even younger so we shouldn't do too poorly post Alberts/Vermeulen/Flouw. Hell, we've been going without those three all fit for the last 2 years in any case. Hookers we'll have to go from scratch but there are good young hookers bubbling under. Bismarck and Strauss woulld probably still be in squad for another 2 or so years. If none of the promising youngsters step up Akker van der Merwe (24) is good enought o step in even if he is probably not in the same class of Bissie.

Yeah, look we all knew that HM was going to clear out his bench (well nearly, because he didn't put Mvovo on the field), because he is trying some things out before the World Cup.

But what bothered me was the lack of leadership in the second half. Ruan Pienaar was calling the shots (and rightly so as he was Vice-Captain), but it seemed that Schalk did all the talking and motivation, hell, he even did the post-match interview.

I think people are judging Handre Pollard too harshly on this game. He missed one kick to touch, and one kick at goal. Surely that doesn't make him terrible?? No one mentions how good he was on defence, or his kick that he kicked over from the touchline for Kriel's try, or his chip kick that lead to Etzebeth's try.

Yes most of our kicking was aimless, but most of the time it was either Ruan Pienaar or Willie Le Roux that made the up-and-under kicks. I wouldn't have a problem if Lambie starts the game against the All Blacks, it will give him some game time, and it will keep the pressure on both flyhalves going into the World Cup that their spot is not cemented.

Stormer, I'm interested to see who will take Marcell's spot. Mohoje didn't make the cut IMHO this past weekend so the question is if Schalk will be moved back to 7 and Whiteley to 8. Or will Kriel/Kolisi/Botha be called up?? Or will HM go with Flouw/Brussouw/Burger combination??

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

Looking at the Bok side of things...

I don't think Pollard is the answer right now. Lambie?
If Coetzee is seriously injured that's a giant kick to the nads.
Conversely, I don't think Matfield was missed and that Lood de Jaeger had a big game
Agree with those who've been questioning Le Roux's presence at full-back - he's magical but unreliable. What's the options there?
I was led to believe JdP should be put down, yet on the basis of that game it should be the sub front row taken out back with the shotgun en masse. What gives, Saffas?

Pollard is very much not a complete player yet but by a country mile the guy with most potential for us at 10 and as is still a pretty handy guy to have around. I am all for backing him and having him learn on the job. It's probably not a good idea looking at the RWC but I am all for not having the RWC as such a priority that it derails continuous development. That said I feel Lambie is in the mix as well and the more mature and rounded of our 10s going forward. The tricky thing is beyond Le Roux, Lambie is probably our best bet at 15. So with that in mind my feeling is still that our best run-on XV has Pollard at 10, Le Roux at 14 and Lambie at 15 with JPP taking the cut to the bench which would take the decision making away from Le Roux when not on attack.

Matfield is only their for his supposed line-out mastery. Many (myself included) question his presence. TBF though we seem to have leadership issues ATM so maybe having him there isn't so bad with Vermeulen out as I'd rather have Matfield there ahead of De Jager/Du Toit for this year than JdV there ahead of De Allende personally.

On Jannie though lets be honest this was his first good game in a bloody long while. IMO one shouldn't judge a player on one game but on the balance of the whole and Jannie is still tight head no.5 in my book. I would wait on judging Malherbe and Koch when they get starts alongside the rest of the starting pack so we can compare apples with apples.

Coetzee is some player to lose but we've had to deal with losing Alberts and Vermeulen as well. We have depth, the question is will the right people be called in. And by 'the right people' I mean Jaco Kriel. He shouldn't be a step down and is very much a like for like replacement. If we continue t swap Burger all voer the place and keep Mohoje.. yes, we are in trouble.

Yeah, look we all knew that HM was going to clear out his bench (well nearly, because he didn't put Mvovo on the field), because he is trying some things out before the World Cup.

But what bothered me was the lack of leadership in the second half. Ruan Pienaar was calling the shots (and rightly so as he was Vice-Captain), but it seemed that Schalk did all the talking and motivation, hell, he even did the post-match interview.

I think people are judging Handre Pollard too harshly on this game. He missed one kick to touch, and one kick at goal. Surely that doesn't make him terrible?? No one mentions how good he was on defence, or his kick that he kicked over from the touchline for Kriel's try, or his chip kick that lead to Etzebeth's try.

Yes most of our kicking was aimless, but most of the time it was either Ruan Pienaar or Willie Le Roux that made the up-and-under kicks. I wouldn't have a problem if Lambie starts the game against the All Blacks, it will give him some game time, and it will keep the pressure on both flyhalves going into the World Cup that their spot is not cemented.

Stormer, I'm interested to see who will take Marcell's spot. Mohoje didn't make the cut IMHO this past weekend so the question is if Schalk will be moved back to 7 and Whiteley to 8. Or will Kriel/Kolisi/Botha be called up?? Or will HM go with Flouw/Brussouw/Burger combination??

IMO Kriel has to be called up. Sure, it's a slap in the face of the guys who were selected to the Bokke above him but IMO it is called for as Coetzee is a specialist and we don't want to lose any more workers at the breakdown and lets be honest Kriel should've been there in any case.

On Pollard though its not the kicks at goal that are so much the issue as his general lack of being able to control a game and the poor quality of his in play kicking though I agree its exasperated by the even poorer quality in kicking from his (more senior) team mates. I thought his defense was quite poor though. Not sure how we got different impressions. Between him, De Allende and Le Roux that's a pretty tasty looking avenue for attacking opponents. I'm sure we'll get it right though- it's more a case of positioning than ability for the first two IMO and we shouldn't forget their ages and lack of experience in this discussion.

The lack of leadership is an issue but there is only so much one can do with all 3 your 1st choice captains off the field. The others just need to stand up, not much Meyer can do there. I do question Meyer's policy on substitutions though. It has caught us out in other games as well. I understand he wants to give players game time leading up to the RWC but I fee it's stupid not valuing each game in itself and taking each game seriously and building momentum, a winning culture and just plain keeping up standards is exactly the reason why the All Blacks are no. 1 in the world. Injury will give those fringe players their chances, no need to force unecessary substitutions when the momentum is on your side with 30 minutes to go.

 

[goodNumber10]

Pollard is a very good player, it's a bit late now with WC in mind but i think they could run him at 12 for a season to learn the ropes - he reminds me of Honnibal.

Personally i'd drop De Allende who was a massive massive issue for you on Saturday, and either bring back JDV or a bit more left field i'd move Pollard to 12, and bring in Steyn or Lambie.

 

[austingtir]

i understand that SC, but there is a reverse angle where you can see (i feel) Hooper still bound as burger puts his hands on the ball although he is certainly sliding up the prop and his bind isn't tight I feel his shoulder is still engaged.... I guess my question is is he allowed to slide up the props back like that? pretty much all the opensides in the NH do that.

It totally depends on what you call bound to me standing basically directly beside the prop with one arm over is not bound anymore his shoulder should be up the props ass still. I agree with you that it usually is not ruled like this but in cases like this they need to be pedantic about it because that is a huge advantage Hooper has gained from doing what he did.
And I have seen Mccaw pulled up before on this (probably years ago) but I think the refs need to get onto it because is not allowing a fair challenge to happen.


132:14
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olkiqZk87gA

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

Pollard is a very good player, it's a bit late now with WC in mind but i think they could run him at 12 for a season to learn the ropes - he reminds me of Honnibal.

Personally i'd drop De Allende who was a massive massive issue for you on Saturday, and either bring back JDV or a bit more left field i'd move Pollard to 12, and bring in Steyn or Lambie.

You're not wrong. Horses for courses and with the RWC as a priority we might even be best served with a backline of 9FdP, 10Steyn, 11Habana 12JdV, 13Jaque Fourie 14 JPP 15 Frans Steyn playing for territory with those huge boots, picking up 3 pointers and closing up shop in defense.

I would hate that though and as a fan would rather bow out of the RWC all while looking to develop more dimensions in our approach. I don't want to read too much into our backline players' defensive woes on the weekend as we were under all sorts of pressure and these are new combinations throughout and they won't gel better off the field or at least not as quick as they would under pressure. The bigget culprit on defense was Pienaar in any case. If we change our approach though and not go for up-and-unders on Folau but rather keep the ball in hand and good kicks (actually going for territory) when needed I'll back De Allende, Pollard, Le Roux and Kriel to cause enough concerns for most opposition than what we give up in selecting them.

 

[Raggs]

It totally depends on what you call bound to me standing basically directly beside the prop with one arm over is not bound anymore his shoulder should be up the props ass still. I agree with you that it usually is not ruled like this but in cases like this they need to be pedantic about it because that is a huge advantage Hooper has gained from doing what he did.
And I have seen Mccaw pulled up before on this (probably years ago) but I think the refs need to get onto it because is not allowing a fair challenge to happen.


132:14
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olkiqZk87gA

He's still bound to his lock, never released, after Burger has released with both hands. If we want to get pedantic, the SA prop is on his knees and it should have been a pen to Aus for preventing a fair challenge (Hooper is still bound and behind his prop at this point).

Laws

(f) Binding by all other players. All players in a scrum, other than front-row players, must bind on a lock's body with at least one arm prior to the scrum engagement.

(g) Flanker obstructing opposing scrum half. A flanker may bind onto the scrum at any angle, provided the flanker is properly bound. The flanker must not widen that angle and so obstruct the opposing scrum half moving forward.

 

[goodNumber10]

You're not wrong. Horses for courses and with the RWC as a priority we might even be best served with a backline of 9FdP, 10Steyn, 11Habana 12JdV, 13Jaque Fourie 14 JPP 15 Frans Steyn playing for territory with those huge boots, picking up 3 pointers and closing up shop in defense.

I would hate that though and as a fan would rather bow out of the RWC all while looking to develop more dimensions in our approach. I don't want to read too much into our backline players' defensive woes on the weekend as we were under all sorts of pressure and these are new combinations throughout and they won't gel better off the field or at least not as quick as they would under pressure. The bigget culprit on defense was Pienaar in any case. If we change our approach though and not go for up-and-unders on Folau but rather keep the ball in hand and good kicks (actually going for territory) when needed I'll back De Allende, Pollard, Le Roux and Kriel to cause enough concerns for most opposition than what we give up in selecting them.

I rate Kriel very highly, he's an exciting player and actually pretty solid on defence - De Allende on the other hand, most missed tackles by a SA back in super 15 (only person worse was Beale). On Saturday he missed 7 tackles and was very much targeted by Australia in defence - i've just done a video on it should be online later today.

 

[austingtir]

He's still bound to his lock, never released, after Burger has released with both hands. If we want to get pedantic, the SA prop is on his knees and it should have been a pen to Aus for preventing a fair challenge (Hooper is still bound and behind his prop at this point).

Laws

If you honestly think that is legally bound then iv just got to laugh really.... Because im not surprised at all.

 

[Raggs]

If you honestly think that is legally bound then iv just got to laugh really.... Because im not surprised at all.

You appear to be missing the bit in your quote where the Laws agree with me...

 

[TRF_heineken]

He's still bound to his lock, never released, after Burger has released with both hands. If we want to get pedantic, the SA prop is on his knees and it should have been a pen to Aus for preventing a fair challenge (Hooper is still bound and behind his prop at this point).

Laws

Maybe Smartcooky should assist here, but according to me there is a difference between binding and holding onto a team mate at scrum-time. As far as I know, the action of Binding is that your hand must hold onto a team-mate, and the arm must touch that player he is holding onto. He might have been holding onto the lock, yes, but he was in no way anymore part of the scrum. he was standing upright, and not crouched like he was when the scrum started and he's touching an opposition player before Burger picks up the ball. Now correct me if I'm wrong but I think it's law 20.3 (f) that states only a prop may hold onto an opposing player at the scrum...

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

I rate Kriel very highly, he's an exciting player and actually pretty solid on defence - De Allende on the other hand, most missed tackles by a SA back in super 15 (only person worse was Beale). On Saturday he missed 7 tackles and was very much targeted by Australia in defence - i've just done a video on it should be online later today.

The thing with his tackling is I think it can be sorted out and that its his positioning/anticipation that's the problem rather than his actual physical ability to effect a good tackle. What he brings at 12 we simply can't ignore. I mean, yes, his defense has been poor on the wekend and has been an issue in SR but at the same time looking at SR stats he is tops overall for defenders beaten and top South African in both clean breaks (5th overall) and offloads (9th overall).

We have a pack that can or at least should more often than not (all fit) dominate territory and possession and we've in the past not been able to capitalise fully on this. I think a player like De Allende will help 'make things happen'. IE we should be the team attempting the least tackles more often than not.

 

[Raggs]

Maybe Smartcooky should assist here, but according to me there is a difference between binding and holding onto a team mate at scrum-time. As far as I know, the action of Binding is that your hand must hold onto a team-mate, and the arm must touch that player he is holding onto. He might have been holding onto the lock, yes, but he was in no way anymore part of the scrum. he was standing upright, and not crouched like he was when the scrum started and he's touching an opposition player before Burger picks up the ball. Now correct me if I'm wrong but I think it's law 20.3 (f) that states only a prop may hold onto an opposing player at the scrum...

If we're getting picky then I don't believe he's holding any opposing player, just touching .

However:

When a player binds on a team-mate that player must use the whole arm from hand to shoulder to grasp the team-mate's body at or below the level of the armpit. Placing only a hand on another player is not satisfactory binding.

It's a tricky one, but it's something that is never called in my knowledge, as long as that initial grip is held, which it was. As such, unless we're going to start insisting players bind for rucks, as defined in the Laws, then it's an acceptable play for me.

EDIT - And as I said, first offence was the Bok prop going to his knees, so it should have been a pen to Aus anyway.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

It's pointless though to start going into what should've been called or not by the ref as there were a ton of instances where he let things slide or got things wrong. I do feel Aus got the rub of it but the fact is they were at home and were the attacking team for the most part so one would expect them to get the rub of it more often than not and on the balance the 'feel' one got was that Owens had a pretty decent game. There was generally a good flow to the game and as a spectacle, a game to be enjoyed by spectators, it was worth wathing with no real howlers even if we might've got home with a bit of luck/consistency one shouldn't leave it in the hands of the ref. I have no complaints really.

 

[goodNumber10]

Giteau is out fo the Argentina game, sternum injury, Lealifano back in..

http://www.rugby.com.au/News/NewsAr...tt-Giteau-ruled-out-of-tour-to-Argentina.aspx

 

[smartcooky]

i understand that SC, but there is a reverse angle where you can see (i feel) Hooper still bound as burger puts his hands on the ball although he is certainly sliding up the prop and his bind isn't tight I feel his shoulder is still engaged.... I guess my question is is he allowed to slide up the props back like that? pretty much all the opensides in the NH do that.

No he's not. If his bind slides up onto the prop then he breaks Law 20.3 (f) which effectively states that all loose forwards must bind onto the body of a lock.

It may seem like a trivial point, but it really important especially, as @austingtir pointed out, so close to the goal-line, where there is less room to move and less margin for error.

- - - Updated - - -

Maybe Smartcooky should assist here, but according to me there is a difference between binding and holding onto a team mate at scrum-time. As far as I know, the action of Binding is that your hand must hold onto a team-mate, and the arm must touch that player he is holding onto. He might have been holding onto the lock, yes, but he was in no way anymore part of the scrum. he was standing upright, and not crouched like he was when the scrum started and he's touching an opposition player before Burger picks up the ball. Now correct me if I'm wrong but I think it's law 20.3 (f) that states only a prop may hold onto an opposing player at the scrum...

[TEXTAREA]LAW 20.3 BINDING IN THE SCRUM
DEFINITIONS
When a player binds on a team-mate that player must use the whole arm from
hand to shoulder to grasp the team-mate’s body at or below the level of the
armpit. Placing only a hand on another player is not satisfactory binding.[/TEXTAREA]

 

[Raggs]

The Bok prop was still the first offender by going to his knees.

 

[SomeOke]

I rate Kriel very highly, he's an exciting player and actually pretty solid on defence - De Allende on the other hand, most missed tackles by a SA back in super 15 (only person worse was Beale). On Saturday he missed 7 tackles and was very much targeted by Australia in defence - i've just done a video on it should be online later today.

While it's true that de Allende doesn't have the best tackle stats, it isn't a matter of who missed the most tackles, but rather one's ratio of missed tackles.
For instance DdA missed 30 and made 112 giving him a tackle miss rate of 27%, while Jan Serfontein made 57 tackles and missed 18 meaning he had a tackle miss rate of 32% and Fekitoa missed 28 and made 72 giving him a tackle miss rate of 38%. Now I'm not picking on Serf or Fekitoa, I'm just pointing out that stats mean nothing without context, in the past a few loose forwards have topped the tackles missed category, but a lot of the time it's because they make more tackles than anyone else.

 

[goodNumber10]

While it's true that de Allende doesn't have the best tackle stats, it isn't a matter of who missed the most tackles, but rather one's ratio of missed tackles.
For instance DdA missed 30 and made 112 giving him a tackle miss rate of 27%, while Jan Serfontein made 57 tackles and missed 18 meaning he had a tackle miss rate of 32% and Fekitoa missed 28 and made 72 giving him a tackle miss rate of 38%. Now I'm not picking on Serf or Fekitoa, I'm just pointing out that stats mean nothing without context, in the past a few loose forwards have topped the tackles missed category, but a lot of the time it's because they make more tackles than anyone else.

oh, i agree, you're preaching to the converted on Stats, tackle % rates are even less important than impact on defence - not an issue missing a tackle in the opposition 22 but in your own? That's far more important.

I only point this out because it was clear Australia were targetting De Allende, AAC's try for example is a direct result of them exploiting his atrocious defence - when the article is live I'll post a link here.

 

[ZeroTwo]

Watching the game again: I think Toomua was poor. So many times he sees three defenders in front of him and chooses to hit them despite there being men running off him. Stifles the free flowing movement.

- - - Updated - - -

oh, i agree, you're preaching to the converted on Stats, tackle % rates are even less important than impact on defence - not an issue missing a tackle in the opposition 22 but in your own? That's far more important.

I only point this out because it was clear Australia were targetting De Allende, AAC's try for example is a direct result of them exploiting his atrocious defence - when the article is live I'll post a link here.

I also think he got away with it a bit due to Kriel defending well. However I think on AAC's try you're being harsh. He had to commit to one of two players and Pollard wasn't close enough to cover.