[EOYT] France vs South Africa 23/11/13

[TRF_heineken]

btw, that Boks scrum separating the French scrum in two was such a strange sight. I'd like to watch this again, not to downplay the very good Boks scrum tonight, but wtf was that ?...what happened there ?...

Statistically for the scrums, France on own feed won 7/9 (78%) vs for South Africa 3/5 (60%) so France still got a good edge. But it's strange, we started with the Boks back-pedalling noticeably. Then very stable. Shortly after collapsing. Then infringements. Then South Africa got a clear advantage on like 3 scrums, including that separation thing..

Anyways: France got exposed tonight. Our scrum isn't indestructible, even if it hasn't been put to fault overall in a game.

France out played the line-outs, interestingly:
11won, 2 lost (85%) vs 12won, 4lost (75%).

Rucks are very similar, we both conceded 16 turnovers each, and both went 3 from 5 on mauls. So no, South Africa didn't have the advantage at the breakdown either stat-wise.

But now, the interesting and predictable stats ridiculously in favor of France, the side that still lost this match. The attack stats (order: France then South Africa):
- Possession: 57% vs 43%
- Passes: 125 vs 92
- Runs: 91 vs 75
- Meters with ball in hand: 350 vs 169
- Defenders beaten: 18 vs 5
- Offloads: 11 vs 1
- Tackling success rate: 94% vs 84%

Some of those are ridiculously one-sided, and yet France lose at home by 9 points. Gotta gotta gotta convert those opportunities ! And South Africa managed to, after they missed a tackle, come back and stop a play. But really France just fkd up too many times. Just one try for France, despite some excellent sequences. Too many butchered good balls.

Also, France conceded 12 to 10 penalties. Two more.

Surely I'm not the only one asking: how does South Africa play such a simple style, and still win a lot, and why don't we all imitate or at least emulate some of it since it's so easy ? I like pretty attacking Rugby and I like our backs a lot atm and they're super technical and everything, but I'd trade those 350m for the 169m if a win's at the end of it.

Sooner or later, France must develop that attack. Today was horrible in parts, very good in parts, but overall a confirmation that we're not where we should be still. Two new articles appeared on a french website, the ***les read:
"Saint-André says 'we're not at the Blacks' or Boks' level'" and "Les Bleus' worst enemies ? themselves".

All those stats mean zip if you don't add territory!

SA played to their strengths, and that is why we play simple. It works for us.

Your arrogance and ignorance are clouding your judgement. How about giving praise to a team that was better than your team?

3 horrible pitches in a row for the Boks! And still it could'nt stop our juggernaut. So proud of the guys! I'm not going to blame the ref here as I thought he had a relatively good game. The TMO however needs to wake the F up!

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Yeah. What a joke of a field. Anyway, scores were close, but we were never in threat of losing. We were more brutal, and as I predicted, our loose trio schooled the french in what a big hit is. We were not even near as good as we can be, and all the people who say we are 'definitely beatable'... yes we are. But the best you can offer still seems to not be good enough on your own turf, against a tired Bok team. We have now, in the last two tours, and at home, beaten all of the NH teams. It's a small testament to how far we have come.

2 unbeaten NH tours, and losses only to New Zealand, one in a game ruined by poor officiating, and the next, a different mindset, and goal of scoring 4 tries, aided in the type of game we played.

If this is what we can accomplish with the mix of youngsters and veterans we have, as well as the sheer physicality, then I will take it any day of the week. In 2 years time, we are going to be very good.

Jer1cho: I don't particularly disagree with anything you said, although I feel you could be somewhat more magnanimous in victory

I don't think the North can make excuses for repeatedly losing these games on our own turf, nor can I think we can really disagree with your assessment of where our two hemispheres are at comparatively:

Discounting Argentina and Italy in the inter-sphere games: Its SH 7 - NH 1 at the moment, and it's simply not acceptable. The only remote crumb of comfort is that the north - well, Wales England and France - are currently playing with significantly more inexperience than the south at present: when England lined up against New Zealand yesterweek, a much more talented side, they also had 857 caps in the starting 15 - England had around 330. I think that although you refer to your own youngsters last night, you had over twice the number of caps France had. Wales are a young side too. My hope is that if our sides keep building growing more experienced whilst adding the new talent we have into a positive existing set-up, we can gradually start to compete.

Anyway, disappointed with France because I felt they were the best chance for another Northern hemisphere scalp. And Big Ewis, fair is fair: if you're going to call England boring after the passion and intensity we played with against New Zealand, you have to also accept that France on the last few showings are equally 'boring'.

 

[Big Ewis]

great season from South Africa. The field was a joke in deed, I'm not sure how the Stade de France has gotten so bad and why they keep it that way. France got the worst out of it.

About "South Africa are beatable" you will notice I always look to give credit to sides, but am also very critical, not to look at the negative side but just to attempt to cover the limits of a team which is more revealing than just naming out the qualities (which I still do).

I've praised the All-Blacks in at least 15-20 posts in the last month, because they totally deserve it. They're absolutely amazing, full credit to them.

About SA, there's also personal, subjective frustration because when you know a team's limits and you see they're reachable, it's all the more of a letdown. We start playing really well and South Africa are all of a sudden on the back foot when we're down to 14 vs 15 and Doussain comes in at no. 9....
It just feels like had this French team been just a little more prepared, we'd still have made mistakes but we'd have had more of that 'special' fiber and finished more of those plays. As the stats show, we beat South Africa a good number of times but still just managed only the one try...

Too bad. They were definitely within reach despite great physicality, props to them for that.

 

[Big Ewis]

Anyway, disappointed with France because I felt they were the best chance for another Northern hemisphere scalp. And Big Ewis, fair is fair: if you're going to call England boring after the passion and intensity we played with against New Zealand, you have to also accept that France on the last few showings are equally 'boring'.

That's just ridiculous, what can I tell you. France's backs have consistently put moves on the Saffa defense the whole way, ran with the ball and generally showed great technical control all the while resisting tackles, consistently showing intent on attack...I see that remark has stayed with you and you're now just looking to throw it back at me on the nearest occasion..
Tell me real things: tell me France butchered opportunities, that they should have been more physical, real criticism and I'll accept.

England ARE boring, just deal with it, at least they're winning.

EDIT: and I agree with the youth problem in 6N teams. We could have drawn with the AB and beaten the Boks and didn't, that's correct, but Guitoune's first cap here, Dulin, Kayser, Fofana, Fickou are still very fresh. Tales too. We have important positions that really need some solidifying.

 

[TRF_heineken]

That's just ridiculous, what can I tell you. France's backs have consistently put moves on the Saffa defense the whole way, ran with the ball and generally showed great technical control all the while resisting tackles, consistently showing intent on attack...I see that remark has stayed with you and you're now just looking to throw it back at me on the nearest occasion..
Tell me real things: tell me France butchered opportunities, that they should have been more physical, real criticism and I'll accept.

England ARE boring, just deal with it, at least they're winning.

EDIT: and I agree with the youth problem in 6N teams. We could have drawn with the AB and beaten the Boks and didn't, that's correct, but Guitoune's first cap here, Dulin, Kayser, Fofana, Fickou are still very fresh. Tales too. We have important positions that really need some solidifying.

Every team has fresh players!! PSDT, Willie Le Roux, and Siya Kolisi were all debutants this year. Every year new players come in, that's how international rugby works! What's your point??

Keep on, your credibility (which is already at an all time low) just keeps on taking a nosedive.

And of course a team will be a bit on the backfoot when it's 15 vs 14... Duh!! But in saying that, our defense held. We were man for man better than France.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

South Africa's kicking game (and Morgan Parra) won them the game yesterday, the Boks kicked smart and chased well whereas the French just kicked and asked Huget if he would be so kind as to chase for them. The Boks were happy to play without the ball in France's half of the field but when France got the ball into South Africa's half the Saffas upped the intensity hugely at the breakdown and more often than not came away with it. That, for me, is how they won it. France may have had more possession, line breaks etc... but they were rarely in the "Red Zone" so South Africa could contain them easily enough and beat them by 9, it should have been 16 but whatevz TMO.

 

[Chikwa]

Yeah. What a joke of a field. Anyway, scores were close, but we were never in threat of losing. We were more brutal, and as I predicted, our loose trio schooled the french in what a big hit is. We were not even near as good as we can be, and all the people who say we are 'definitely beatable'... yes we are. But the best you can offer still seems to not be good enough on your own turf, against a tired Bok team. We have now, in the last two tours, and at home, beaten all of the NH teams. It's a small testament to how far we have come.

2 unbeaten NH tours, and losses only to New Zealand, one in a game ruined by poor officiating, and the next, a different mindset, and goal of scoring 4 tries, aided in the type of game we played.

If this is what we can accomplish with the mix of youngsters and veterans we have, as well as the sheer physicality, then I will take it any day of the week. In 2 years time, we are going to be very good.

Sa are already very good.Your only hurdle is too overcome the Ab's who you have not beaten in two years. Which is an unusual statistic.There is in my opinion very little difference between Sa and the all blacks.But there is a big difference between the top two and the rest.With England and Wales being the closest.I love the way you never doubt your abilities.

 

[SomeOke]

South Africa's kicking game (and Morgan Parra) won them the game yesterday, the Boks kicked smart and chased well whereas the French just kicked and asked Huget if he would be so kind as to chase for me. The Boks were happy to play without the ball in France's half of the field but when France got the ball into South Africa's half the Saffas upped the intensity hugely at the breakdown and more often than not came away with it. That, for me, is how they won it. France may have had more possession, line breaks etc... but they were rarely in the "Red Zone" so South Africa could contain them easily enough and beat them by 9, it should have been 16 but whatevz TMO.

I agree with this, it was a matter of territory. When we play the All Blacks they have some of the best kick chasers and returners in the game, so it makes it much harder for us to play our favored territorial game. If we can win the kicking game we can usually win, as we can contain most back line momentum and at least compete (if not dominate) with most forward packs.

 

[Big Ewis]

I watched the replays a bunch of times just now at 43', and I do accept South Africa not getting the try.
It's all possible off a Morné Steyn mistake to start with in his reception, a bad pass he grazes with his fingers which finds its way to JDV. At this level and a big match like this one, even if the ball seems to be going backwards following its trajectory, Steyn does make a mistake initially (or the bad pass, regardless) and I understand such a play cannot just be overlooked.
I would have accepted a no-try decision for France all the same. I understand the repercussions of an awarded try, and if there's an element of ambiguous trouble in one of the main 3 stages of a try, I accept it should be refused.

South Africa got unlucky for sure. I'm sorry such moments had to happen, but as comfort that Parra kick was horrible at 1'. How did he take that kick when a 190cm speeding Pietersen is so close ? 7 points handed to SA on a golden platter, so yes, great luck there. France have run after the match the whole way after this, and we'd have been leading at HT, but that's neither here nor there, just saying.

 

[SomeOke]

I watched the replays a bunch of times just now at 43', and I do accept South Africa not getting the try.
It's all possible off a Morné Steyn mistake to start with in his reception, a bad pass he grazes with his fingers which finds its way to JDV. At this level and a big match like this one, even if the ball seems to be going backwards following its trajectory, Steyn does make a mistake initially (or the bad pass, regardless) and I understand such a play cannot just be overlooked.
I would have accepted a no-try decision for France all the same. I understand the repercussions of an awarded try, and if there's an element of ambiguous trouble in one of the main 3 stages of a try, I accept it should be refused.

South Africa got unlucky for sure. I'm sorry such moments had to happen, but as comfort that Parra kick was horrible at 1'. How did he take that kick when a 190cm speeding Pietersen is so close ? 7 points handed to SA on a golden platter, so yes, great luck there. France have run after the match the whole way after this, and we'd have been leading at HT, but that's neither here nor there, just saying.

In the end you can't change the fact that you were bested tactically, as Heineken said it's no good having possession if it's not in the right areas I could just as easily say if SA didn't kick as much we would have had more possession, runs, passes etc, but often we got more out of giving it to you and pinning you back. France played a good game but you seem to be implying that France may have been a bit hard done by to lose, on the balance of the game I never really felt the threat of a French victory, in some ways the French try was also a bit of a fluke as well, it popped out of the ruck strangely on an SA ball - and in terms of the Steyn pass, I may not have a really good grasp of the forward pass rule, but making a "mistake" is not grounds for being blown up you see players "drop" the ball backwards all the time and it's not blown up, however I do see a little bit of a case for the fact that the momentum of the pass going backwards was enough to overcome the knock forward, i.e. if the forward force of Steyn was not enough to overcome the backwards force of the received pass it shouldn't change the fact that there was forward force.

 

[Big Ewis]

In the end you can't change the fact that you were bested tactically, as Heineken said it's no good having possession if it's not in the right areas I could just as easily say if SA didn't kick as much we would have had more possession, runs, passes etc, but often we got more out of giving it to you and pinning you back. France played a good game but you seem to be implying that France may have been a bit hard done by to lose, on the balance of the game I never really felt the threat of a French victory, in some ways the French try was also a bit of a fluke as well, it popped out of the ruck strangely on an SA ball - and in terms of the Steyn pass, I may not have a really good grasp of the forward pass rule, but making a "mistake" is not grounds for being blown up you see players "drop" the ball backwards all the time and it's not blown up, however I do see a little bit of a case for the fact that the momentum of the pass going backwards was enough to overcome the knock forward, i.e. if the forward force of Steyn was not enough to overcome the backwards force of the received pass it shouldn't change the fact that there was forward force.

I feel a heated user behind that comment. Let me clear out some things:
- those stats are only there to prove France's good back work and ability ball in hand, all those meters, offloads, passes, beaten defenders - AND how incapable they were this match, and the whole entire year, of finishing off good opportunities. Those stats aren't there to say France were sorta better. They're just not.
- I don't read heineken's comments anymore.
- It's cheap to call France's try a fluke. France mounted a composed attack off the pressure they applied and finished off professionally, they easily could've butchered that one too.
- mmm I see what you mean, but I find it's fair to not award that try. Plays are observed a lot more carefully and judged more strictly when they're tries than when they're just anything else. I'm just saying at least Steyn does commit a mistake, it's not like they were all good on that play, definitely an ambiguous situation and position for knock-on despite a visual forward motion to the human eye.
- Believe it or not, France were within a converted try of beating South Africa. It does seem overall, and it is true as well - that SA were a level above France, but they committed bad mistakes themselves, did not have an edge on France anywhere as the stats prove (rucks, ball in hand, passes, scrum, line-outs, defense) and in fact were outplayed in many main categories.

My conclusion is SA were better, out-muscled us in parts, had some impressive pushes in the scrum, completely deserved their victory no question, and were unlucky but just as we were and we were worse (Parra slip-miss, Parra-Pietersen chargedown, Huget high bounce with every beaten...).
No worries friend, South Africa won fair and square, it's just frustrating for France given the match.

 

[TRF_heineken]

I feel a heated user behind that comment. Let me clear out some things:
- those stats are only there to prove France's good back work and ability ball in hand, all those meters, offloads, passes, beaten defenders - AND how incapable they were this match, and the whole entire year, of finishing off good opportunities. Those stats aren't there to say France were sorta better. They're just not.
- I don't read heineken's comments anymore.
- It's cheap to call France's try a fluke. France mounted a composed attack off the pressure they applied and finished off professionally, they easily could've butchered that one too.
- mmm I see what you mean, but I find it's fair to not award that try. Plays are observed a lot more carefully and judged more strictly when they're tries than when they're just anything else. I'm just saying at least Steyn does commit a mistake, it's not like they were all good on that play, definitely an ambiguous situation and position for knock-on despite a visual forward motion to the human eye.
- Believe it or not, France were within a converted try of beating South Africa. It does seem overall, and it is true as well - that SA were a level above France, but they committed bad mistakes themselves, did not have an edge on France anywhere as the stats prove (rucks, ball in hand, passes, scrum, line-outs, defense) and in fact were outplayed in many main categories.

My conclusion is SA were better, out-muscled us in parts, had some impressive pushes in the scrum, completely deserved their victory no question, and were unlucky but just as we were and we were worse (Parra slip-miss, Parra-Pietersen chargedown, Huget high bounce with every beaten...).
No worries friend, South Africa won fair and square, it's just frustrating for France given the match.

Haha!! Am I a threat to you?

Here's a stat for you. Since last year the team that has kicked the most, has won the game. Possession doesn't provide the basis of winning games, it's what you do with that possession that makes you win games. If a team has only 30% possession, but is 90% of that time in the opposition 22, then chances are a lot higher of converting that into points. Oppose to that, if a team has 70+% possession but is stuck in their own 22 for 80% of the time, chances are very slim that they will score points, and most often than not, be under immense pressure, be forced to make an error and then get points scored against them.

So fine, don't read my posts, just another indication that you refuse to be objective and reasonable.

 

[Gena_ZA]

Would love to see the following stat:

- How many metres in total was a team driven back in the tackle - bet you France will take this one by a country mile

 

[SomeOke]

Would love to see the following stat:

- How many metres in total was a team driven back in the tackle - bet you France will take this one by a country mile

I absolutely love this aspect of our game, one thing that the Stormers lads have brought into our game in a big way as seen by Duane, Eben and Siya (although now implemented by others as well). Completely stops teams momentum, a Willem "cut them in half" style tackle is great but it still allows for quick recycling.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Watched the game again last night.

I was very chuffed with Jaque Fourie's defensive organisation. I wish all the players could communicate like him. Did you see at one stage when France was on the counter attack, how he directed Habana to go for the outside man as he got him covered. That was just great to watch.

And I think this acid test for Coenie was passed with flying colours. We were worried for nothing...

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

btw, that Boks scrum separating the French scrum in two was such a strange sight. I'd like to watch this again, not to downplay the very good Boks scrum tonight, but wtf was that ?...what happened there ?...

Statistically for the scrums, France on own feed won 7/9 (78%) vs for South Africa 3/5 (60%) so France still got a good edge. But it's strange, we started with the Boks back-pedalling noticeably. Then very stable. Shortly after collapsing. Then infringements. Then South Africa got a clear advantage on like 3 scrums, including that separation thing..

Anyways: France got exposed tonight. Our scrum isn't indestructible, even if it hasn't been put to fault overall in a game.

France out played the line-outs, interestingly:
11won, 2 lost (85%) vs 12won, 4lost (75%).

Rucks are very similar, we both conceded 16 turnovers each, and both went 3 from 5 on mauls. So no, South Africa didn't have the advantage at the breakdown either stat-wise.

But now, the interesting and predictable stats ridiculously in favor of France, the side that still lost this match. The attack stats (order: France then South Africa):
- Possession: 57% vs 43%
- Passes: 125 vs 92
- Runs: 91 vs 75
- Meters with ball in hand: 350 vs 169
- Defenders beaten: 18 vs 5
- Offloads: 11 vs 1
- Tackling success rate: 94% vs 84%

Some of those are ridiculously one-sided, and yet France lose at home by 9 points. Gotta gotta gotta convert those opportunities ! And South Africa managed to, after they missed a tackle, come back and stop a play. But really France just fkd up too many times. Just one try for France, despite some excellent sequences. Too many butchered good balls.

Also, France conceded 12 to 10 penalties. Two more.

Surely I'm not the only one asking: how does South Africa play such a simple style, and still win a lot, and why don't we all imitate or at least emulate some of it since it's so easy ? I like pretty attacking Rugby and I like our backs a lot atm and they're super technical and everything, but I'd trade those 350m for the 169m if a win's at the end of it.

Sooner or later, France must develop that attack. Today was horrible in parts, very good in parts, but overall a confirmation that we're not where we should be still. Two new articles appeared on a french website, the ***les read:
"Saint-André says 'we're not at the Blacks' or Boks' level'" and "Les Bleus' worst enemies ? themselves".

Some interesting reading but not really surprising; the stats in relation to the result. These stats are for cursory browsing only and the main point of influence is; Territory 1st half SA 73%, France 27%. The reason being when the pressure tells wee are in position to score points which is what wins the games. Territory alone won't be enough of course and you won't get or retain territory without; good kicking and applying ample pressure. This is where SA won; better positional kicking and more robust at applying pressure through kick chases and being more physical at the contact point.

Look at the games where NZ won SA;
Kick/pass/run for NZ vs SA; 32/110/88 vs 26/108/89, so that means NZ kicked nearly 20% more, but passed and ran only about 1% more than SA. NZ had the territory advantage 56% over 44%. So that tells you NZ kicked more effectively, had the territory advantage and thus were in better position to capatilize on opportunities.

In the 2nd game:

Again kicks/passes/runs

NZ 35/139/89 vs SA 20/163/132 (SA also made half again the amount of meters ball in hand NZ did). This was a bit of a strange game though so I don't really want to use it as an example but if you look at those stats, you'll see it comes down to the better kicking team as defences are just too well organized these days, at least at the top end.

So the winning formula is easy even if the execution gets tricky.

Even then you need to qualify some of those stats above and I don't mean to take anything away from France- I just think one need to put stats into perspective; two scrums SA lost was through the fault of the scrummie where Pienaar got blown up for incorrect feed (Barnes just wanting to stamp his authority as it wasn't more skew than half the other feeds throughout the game) and an early feed at the end. The one where Coenie was blown up for collapsing was debatable at best.

In the line-out Bismarck continued with his overthrows from last week. You can say the pressure of the game got to Bismarck or he was just continuing in the way he ended last week; without rhythm but that is something that isn't.. typical; we didn't lose line-out like we did against NZ; through pressure applied by the opposition locks.

Defenders beaten is one that irritates me and France certainly were better in that aspect on a man-on-man level apart from the work of our 'enforcers' where the quality of the tackle was better, actually stopping opposition momentum in it's tracks. Modern defences also have layers and redundancy so beating a defender or even making a clean break is not enough in itself; you have to beat the defensive system not the 1st tackler these days.

Watched the game again last night.

I was very chuffed with Jaque Fourie's defensive organisation. I wish all the players could communicate like him. Did you see at one stage when France was on the counter attack, how he directed Habana to go for the outside man as he got him covered. That was just great to watch.

And I think this acid test for Coenie was passed with flying colours. We were worried for nothing...

The scrum doing so well was the highlight for me for this test. Tight head was a perceived problem area, at least in my eyes, as we've been dependant on Jannie for so long now and with him so off form in general play ATM, well.. but Coenie and earlier Malherbe have shown they are up for it in the scrum. Forestier was scrumming in on Coenie and putting him and Bismarck under a lot of pressure but boy he held his own and it backfired bigtime when the French scrum tore itself in two with both sides scrumming in and us, keeping shape, just driving through the middle. How many sides would rather have buckled under that pressure! So we have Mtawarira, Steenkamp at loose head, Jannie if he can recover some form along with Coenie, Malherbe and Adriaanse at tight head, Coenie can cover the loose as well. And then there is Marcel van der Merwe who'll have his break out year next year.. looking good in the porps actually even if our tight heads beyond Du Plessis don't have the caps to their names yet.
Some other things this match showed me is that Pienaar is just not a Bok 9. Jano Vermaak and Piet van Zyl should have had chances IMO. Pienaar may well perform for Ulster but, damn, I can't remember a good game at 9 for the Bokke. Le Roux has the 15 jersey nailed! Lambie is just back-up and I suspect will fall behind Goosen at 10 and Taute at 15 throughout next year. It's gonna be hard for anyone to break into the starting loose trio. Louw needs to realize away from home we are gonna get sent off for the slightest bit of ****le so he needs to keep a calm head.

Looking good but a lot of room for improvement and development still, which is a good thing.

EDIT: What I like is that under HM we are coming back to what we know and what works for us; the rugby that we were all taught and played in school and know by heart and here with the Bokke just finding it's ultimate expression with the players most able to execute it correctly; the type of game and philosophy of rugby that suits our bodies and minds both and that we are as familiar and intimate with as with our lovers (if I can go that far LOL and if you'll excuse my abuse of the semicolon).

Sa are already very good.Your only hurdle is too overcome the Ab's who you have not beaten in two years. Which is an unusual statistic.There is in my opinion very little difference between Sa and the all blacks.But there is a big difference between the top two and the rest.With England and Wales being the closest.I love the way you never doubt your abilities.

We are very restless and will be counting the days for another chance to match ourselves against the best. I expect the team more so than the fans.

 

[Big Ewis]

Our territorial kicking game was one of the main things ppl criticized in France. South Africa managed good pressure often with Steyn, when our kicking was just giving the ball back with no aim. It's a bit strange...but I'll just attribute this to us being a young side, we'll improve.
Yes I checked out those SA NZ stats too. Very interesting to see the losing team can often have much better stats on paper, when they actually still lose a game by a 'good' margin.

SA have also asserted themselves in the scrum. A 60KG difference with France and good technique aren't negligible. Beast had a very good day against Mas, I was surprised, but I'd like to see a rematch of those teams just to see the scrums again. I'm glad Forestier held, he seems to be a world class scrummager after all despite thin reputation in that domain. Domingo just wasn't all there, we'll have to wait for the 6N to see him warmed up again.

Boks forwards coach Pieter de Villiers must have been incredibly torn over this battle in Paris...
It seems the only team that's managed to put South Africa at fault in the scrum has been Italy this year, but they sure made it obvious despite a large loss otherwise.

I think a good test for us will be when we play in Cardiff, if Jones is back. I want to see Mas-Kayser-Domingo against a fully healthy Welsh scrum.

For South Africa:
* the attack needs to improve. Though they were brutal in the rucks, they looked very European in that they couldn't make more than 3 passes before a handling error occurred. They blew a number of good chances. If they can get some quick ball and fast execution on a turnover and counter efficiently, that'll add even more threat to their presence on the field. I'm not saying NZ/AUS level, but just insure possession and 4-5 clean, quick transmissions and off they go with Habana/Le Roux/JPP.
They have the single fastest man in int'l Rugby (at least from Tier 1 Rugby), and he's considerably faster than whoever's 2nd. They don't use him enough, or well enough. He's soooooo fast, he avoids tackles off sheer speed. He doesn't even need good footwork, just his raw speed and he's avoided 3-4 tackles and SA are off for a try.

* I think defense was very good, but while they'll defend things like mauls and rucks very well, they're not quite as good with quicker movements where the opponent has the ball in hand. Bulkiness has its vices too. But we had a lot of trouble getting through though, that's also true.
Lineouts can be a problem on occasion, but that's still a Bok strength.

Another thing I don't think anybody's touched on: Steyn's penalty kicking. What quality. He made all his kicks in Paris, and was good in Wales. I know he's had the kicker's curse, i.e. going into a slump like authors have writer's block, but what quality. In comparison, Parra has missed some key, easy ones lately (NZ and SA). A big plus for SA.

So I think SA are all set.
Note: The only reason I'm naming some flaws is out of pure Rugby interest, and I'm just trying to identify what they could improve. I'm not putting my nose where it doesn't belong, but just interested in a little analysis.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Keep on, your credibility (which is already at an all time low) just keeps on taking a nosedive.
.

Is this guy for real or just a south african sock puppet?

Just ignore him Big Ewis, he does not understand the concept of humility in victory. He does not respect other teams.

It's a tragedy because the Boks are in the ascendancy right now with a powerhouse forward pack and a backline with talented individuals, he should be happy to revel in their impressive improvement but there are always a small minority of ignorant arrogant loud mouths who feel the need to ruin the moment.
No respect at all.

Congratulations to all the other Saffers on the forum for a good win away from home against a French team that has some serious quality in its line up.

For France it's still a time to find their feet under relatively new coaching and management. When they do they'll no doubt roll the All Blacks again.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

It's very difficult; talking about SA's defence and attack; there are just sooo many variables to consider.

On defence a midfield of 12Frans Steyn, 13Jaque Fourie is our best. For all out attack it's either 12De Villiers/Serfontein 13Engelbrecht. So, it's either finding a marriage of the two that works well enough on both fronts, choosing which priority suits a particular match best or develop on of those into a combination that'll be very good at both. The Serfontein/Engelbrecht combo has youth going for it so if we go for the developing route one would assume you'd take the young combination. The difficulty here is that Jean de Villiers is captain, has been confirmed as being captain for 2014 and TBF has done very well at 12 and as captain this year...

The halves are key here; Fourie du Preez and Morne Steyn as a combination has been the one to put the outside backs into scoring opportunities. Pienaar and Lambie have just not been able to replicate. We have Goosen at 10 who was a magician in attack and had the flat delayed pass, the pace, willingness and vision to take the line on himself etc but having been injured for a 1 1/2 question marks are there; has injury 'blunted' him? Is he just too frail? Can he develop the physique and defence necessary for test rugby? If so will that take away what made him special in the first place? I hope these questions get answered next year and that he stays fit, steps up and deliver on the promise shown. Handre pollard will also have the opportunity to show what he can do at a higher level next year. Finding a back up 9 is another goal we should aim to settle by this time next year. Pienaar is out IMO. Will we continue selecting Vermaak while he is based overseas? I hope not. Pienaar has been- allegedly- in form in the NH but that hasn't translated for SA. I'd hate for Vermaak (even Kockott in form in France) to turn out as another Pienaar while we overlook our talent at home; Piet van Zyl first and if he can come good Francois Hougaard (though I expect personal problems and injury will keep him back still) and both of these guys will be at the Bulls which complicates the issue. Beyond them someone will have to step up. Sarel Pretorius seems to have been placed on the shelf like Heinrich Brussow.

Willie Le Roux I think has now consolidated the fullback position. Habana and Pietersen are a class above what we have beyond them playing at wing for the franchises/provinces. I am hoping Jaco Taute will stay fit and fire to cement that no.22 jersey for the Bokke covering fullback and center. I see one of our young centers being back-up for wing; JJ Engelbrecht or Damian de Allende.

I think our pack as is are in fine form. Its just a case of guys like PSdT and either of Malherbe or Oosthuizen to push for a starting berth. Arno Botha when fit to duke it out with Kolisi for the bench spot.

 

[The Jones Boy]

You can't go past Jaque Fourie coming back from Japan and slotting in at no.13.
That guy is a world class act.
He does for the Bokke backline what Conrad does for the AB's.
His marshalling of the defence, his guile on attack, he is always a pleasure to watch.
De Villiers has been in superb form and it was clearly an inspired choice to make him the captain. Francois Steyn is a distant second to JDV's form this season.
Willie le Roux has been the find of the season for the Springboks. He runs like a Rolls Royce and never looks flustered. He doesn't kick the ball unless he has to and that means livewire talent like Habana gets more than his fair share of ball and thats what he needs because thats when he does the damage.
This is the best looking Bok backline since Japie Mulder took to the field.
The Boks are on fire this season, I haven't seen this depth of quality in their back line since the great teams of 1995 and the 1981.
They are an enormous threat to the rest of the world at the RWC.