How does a team that came of such a high in 2009 hit such a low in 2010, more importantly, can it be fixed?
To answer the second question, yes it can be, the problem is when we look to answer the first question, have we correctly identified the problems?
Parallels and comparisons have been drawn in just about every conceivable form to find answers for where Springbok rugby finds itself. Individual analysis of games and players can also highlight what is perceivably, or possibly the source of the problems the Springbok team currently experience.
I have myself ventured into the statistics arena of debates in recent weeks, discussed player selections and game plans and tactics and various other elements which all possibly contributes to the current state of affairs.
But just this weekend following the last test between the Springboks and Wallabies and specifically studying the defensive structures of the Springboks I was reminded of what Peter de Villiers said on the overseas leg of the Tri-Nations where after he studied one of the losses to the All Blacks on video, he could not pin-point where it all went wrong or identify the problem…
Of course that statement has given the media enough ammunition to crucify the Springbok coach but on Sunday, when I watched the game again I realised this is probably the most honest assessment Peter de Villiers gave of the Springboks in his three years in charge and his most accurate.
What occurred to me is Peter, and his management are not so much wrong with their statements like there is little wrong with the defensive structures, because the problem is not the structures.
A couple of months ago I challenged Dr. Ross Tucker to provide us with some insights into the psyche of the Springbok team and management and two things he mentioned, or warned us against, has become evident in the last part of this year and the Tri-Nations and to my mind, the biggest contributor to the fall from grace the Springboks have experienced.
The first issue he touched on was sport cycles, or cycles in sport, and the difficulty for any team or individual to achieve sustained success in professional sports.
Much has been said in recent years on the point and purpose of players like John, Victor, Schalk, Juan and the likes on the reasons they still stick it out, where most believe they have achieved all they needed to and possible needed to step down after the British and Irish Lions series in 2009. The players told you they had one more goal to achieve, and that was to avenge the defeat at the hands of the Lions 10 years ago and for the opportunity to play in such a series, an honour not afforded to every rugby player.
They were motivated, focussed and hungry for success, and they achieved it. Because they are that damn good.
Following that series talk shifted from the Lions series, to be the first team to successfully defend the Rugby World Cup for the first time in history in New Zealand in 2011. And they have the ability to do this, because again, they are that damn good.
But then of course there is the small matter of 2010, the year in-between these two goals which is honestly more of a hindrance than a blessing…
Remember we are talking of players here that has won every single medal that can be won in professional rugby, that has beaten every team in every country they played in, hanging on for that one last opportunity to go down in history as legends of the game of union, the Rugby World Cup in 2011.
How do you manage these guys through a period like 2010, where they will sub-consciously enter into preservation mode rather than defend a title they have won twice already against teams they play 6 times every year?
It is easy to say rest them but you simply cannot send them on a 4 month holiday as tests are there to be won regardless and game time management is also important for players even during times of conditioning or mental rehabilitation. It is a very fine balance.
But it should have been done, and it was not.
The second problem we have comes down to exactly what happens within this team. Mentally teams learn very little from success, and it is quite easy to fall behind the guys chasing you and you are easily caught up in the mentality that you simply have to do what worked for you before.
The reality in rugby union however dictates that you have to continually evolve and adapt, the Springboks did not.
Why?
Well Peter de Villiers’ management style has been discussed many times. Empowering the players or elements within the team is one thing, doing it at the expense of losing all your own power however is quite another, and this is a trap De Villiers has fallen into.
Rugby success or failure is made up of the sum of parts, each part playing a vital role in the sustainability of a team’s success, but having parts of this system (players) drive this system is not a very bright idea.
It seems that Peter de Villiers biggest strength when he started off as a coach of the Springboks, has become his biggest enemy because it was not managed properly.
Jake White realised this just in time to fix his failings in 2006, not the way he managed his players or coached them, but that the system needed forces from outside, sometimes not even directly related to rugby and tactics and game plans, to drive the system to ensure honest, critical and constructive analysis is done on the team and its individuals, including management to ensure you sustain good performances and success.
For parts in just about all the tests in this year’s Tri-Nations apart from the opening test in Auckland, the Springboks played some inspired rugby, only for it all to fall apart or for them to conspire against themselves.
The question is not therefore whether we can play the type of rugby to beat the best in the world, the question is why this cannot be done more often and for longer periods.
Peter de Villiers does not have very far to look to find the problem with his team, but I doubt whether he is looking in the right place. There are individuals out there that will compliment the Springbok setup, one of which is the likes of a guy that predicted all this months ago already…
Let’s agree for a moment that motivation is the real problem, and we also agree we need to keep winning, then logic dictates that you remove those elements that are not motivated, and play players who will have all the motivation in the world to perform.
Now i am of the opinion that we need to win at least 75% of our test matches per year. In fact that is the minimum sandard I would expect from a Springbok team as a coach, nothing less will suffice.
There are more benefits than negatives in removing the players who lack motivation, as they are also the players who will most likely be needed next year to win the world cup.
They can rest, even if it was for 6 months of this year, from after the Super 14 until the beginning of the next Super 15.
Imagine the amount of young talent that could have proven themselves and in fact perhaps have become the incumbent in their positions.
This would firstly have provided us with a very clear picture of the talent going forward after the RWC and these guys would then have ensured continuity after 2011.
The fact is that PDV has not thought this out, and neither has he discussed this possibility with his senior players.
It is obvious that he has not listened to any advise from Tim noakes and the like.
He was simply prepared to play these unmotivated players into the ground, and do more harm to Springbok rugby than good.
It all boils down to competence and a readyness to listen to experts.
As much as I want things to turn around, it may already be too late, the harm has been done, we lost badly, have not evolved our game plan, and now sit with not only a bunch of demotivated players, but also a negative enovironment that can only bring more problems to the fore.
It is a fact that when you start losing, animosity builds, and it may be too late to fix it now.
Thats why we need to rest players like Matfield, Smit, Gurthro, Habana, Spies and Burger.
We also have players like Jacque Fourie and Bakkies Botha that have had enforced rest due to suspensions. Fourie has played well due this rest. Bakkies will be well rested by the Grand Slam tour. Fourie Du Preez and Brussow will be coming back from extended lay offs due to injury, and Juan Smith is just hitting his straps after his injury and family responsibility induced leave. That gives us a core of players for the tour to build around. We also have players like Bekker waiting in the wings. All have played for the Bokke and all are proven players when at their best.
Add some of the players who are excelling at CC level, like the Beast, Bismark(both Bokke), Duvenhage, Vermaak, Lambie, Jantjies, Killian, Basson etc., we can have an exciting young side that can pull off the Grand Slam.
I have mentioned random players, but we can put a pretty decent and experienced squad together while resting some key players. And this squad can and should give a good account of itself, provided the selector select the best combo’s, and players whose game would suit the heavier fields and wet conditions of Englan in November.
Look we can analyse all we like, but the simple fact that everybody skirts around is that PDV does not have the ability for this job.
Simple and straight forward.
He could have selected whoever he liked.
He could have chosen any assistants he liked.
His job was to keep Bok rugby on top.
The buck stops with him.
Anybody who believes that PDV can turn this team around is mad.
Either he goes or he gets expert help.
This is about leadership.
And who is just waiting to be called up by SARU for the job? (exclude Jake, because Hoskins has already poured cold water on that idea.) I don’t think we have many coaches who have the necessary stature and experience sitting around.
@ Lion4ever:
That depends how we think.
In a professional world you recruit from the very best internationally.
So ask yourself, who are the good Currie Cup coaches with lots of international experience?
You can start with John Mitchell and then think about Plumtree.
Of course we don’t seem to have people who will accept this line of thinking, which is if you want the best results then employ the best people.
The results then speak for themselves.
@ tight head:
A New Zealand friend asked me the other day if we have any good coaches in South Africa, I told him that I can probably count the ‘good’ coaches on one hand in this country.
Which obviously begged the question which he asked on how if we have such vast resources in players specifically and talent, we cannot produce good quality coaches?
The answer is quite simple isn’t it?
South Africa in its approach to the game are very insular, there is absolutely no succession plan or platform in place for coaches to progress in this country.
A few rugby academies has sprung up in recent years, but very few of them are closely related to their representative unions, personally I can only think of three and not one coach currently in their senior ranks came through their respective academies.
In fact, when we look at all of our top unions, 4 out of 5 are coaches or are directors of coaching at the union who were former players, some as recently as 2005 (Naka) (not too sure about Ludeke). There seems to be a common perception that past players make great coaches, and where it is true in some instances, it is the most overstated or overrated belief.
We ask why we lack innovative coaches?
Well players who did not make it to the top always had to apply themselves innovatively to the game of rugby, think outside the box to stay ahead of the pack, yet these guys are almost never seen in rugby or rugby coaching in South Africa.
From school to club coaching, and club to union coaching there is no natural progression or a natural structure of progression for aspiring coaches. Unions goes back to the ‘tried and tested’ resource base of ‘the old boys club or old/ex players’.
The problem is, these guys normally end up coaching and doing what they have been doing and how they have been coached as players in their times of success, thinking it will work again – the cycle then is quite simple, no progression of ideas or innovative thinking and coaching.
So apart from a structure to promote coaching in South Africa to make it a career, it is also one of the most unappreciated jobs in the world, and if not practiced at union level, the most shitty paid one too.
This for a sport which brings in the most revenue in this country?
But like most things in SA rugby, I guess the more things change…
I wanted to add, some of the best rugby brains in this country are currently coaching schools rugby…
Maybe Cliff Woodward could do with a bit of the African sun đŸ™‚
bos_otter wrote:
meant “Clive Woodward”
Hoeveel keer moet die Bulle afrigting- en bestuurspan (insluitende HM) hulself nog oor en oor bewys vir SARU om kennis te neem ?
Wat het ander CB afrigters al bereik in vergelyking met hulle ?
Ludeke en kie sit met 2 S14 titels en ‘n CB, en van sy afrigting- en bestuurspan sit met nog meer titels. Verder maak die Bulle die kern van die bokspan uit.
Alles feite.
Maar nou ja, on de udder hand Derm, los die Bulle se afrigters en bestuur net waar hul is, om die goeie werk in Pta voort te sit. ‘n Mens wens jou grootste vyand nie die politieke bynes toe daar in die bokkamp nie !
This is a genuine question so please accept it in the spirit it is offered :
Have senior Boks play so much more rugby than senior ABs in he last 12 months ?
I see many Saffas wanting senior players rested & I really don’t know how many minutes of rugby they have played compared to (in my case) senior ABs. I am assuming the numbers cannot be vastly different & if that is the case surely that in itself defines the tipping point between maintaining form & burn out ?
@ Rugby_Princess:
If you can give me the NZ numbers I can do the comparison for you.
@ Morné:
Exactly right Morne, and excellently put by you.
As for the rugby intellect at school level I also agree with you.
The short term fix is to let go the shackles and appoint the very best from the international pool based solely on merit.
Of course pigs will fly before that ever happens, so we are back to the circle of mediocrity that you so aptly describe above.
The reality again is that with all of our rugby resources we control and manage rugby with politics and not excellence in mind and we simply will always suffer the consequences of that.
Now this just p*sses me off!!!
When De Villiers took over in January 2008 the Boks were ranked No 1, with 90.81 points.
Top 20 in the latest IRB world rankings:
1. New Zealand 94.29
2. Australia 86.04
3. South Africa 85.22
4. France 82.75
5. Ireland 82.03
6. England 81.82
7. Scotland 79.81
8. Argentina 79.70
9. Wales 78.58
10. Fiji 74.39
11. Italy 72.97
12. Samoa 72.74
13. Japan 72.49
14. Canada 69.43
15. USA 67.86
16. Tonga 67.06
17. Georgia 66.38
18. Russia 65.80
19. Romania 65.10
20. Namibia 62.69
biltongbek wrote:
You want us to bite his head off when he cheapens the Springbok jersey. He tried it but was almost castrated for it.
@ tight head:3
You made up your mind and no one will change it on PdeV.
In post 5 you want Plumtree, the oke was nearly fired earlier this year, he is now having decent results because almost all the opponents are weakened by Bok call ups. Look what poor Frans had to do , bild with his young players, now we start getting results again…. well i hope so.
@ superBul:
Of course my mind is made up about PDV.
He has shown himself to be way out of his depth.
I was using Plumtree as an example of broadening our thinking, which is something that we are very bad at.
I did not say that I would appoint him Bok coach.
@ Morné:
Sorry, I don’t have them – was just wondering … Will see what I can find out.
Sure, NOTHING THAT CANNOT BE FIXED…. but saying there is little wrong astounds me!
Our Coaches need to be replaced with people who value defensive structure and has the bloody “pitte” in the head to do it… first and foremost
Secondly, get rid of the dead wood…….. NOW ALREADY!
Condition only overplayed and fatigued players, not just freegin haphazardly… eishhhhhhhh
Arghhhhhhhhh, what the hell…………. neuk maar net aan…. fok!
@ grootblousmile:
What is wrong with the defensive structures? Why is it not working?
19@ Morné:
22 tries in 6 matches against us, is what’s wrong….
No permanent Defensive Coach at the Bokke, is what is wrong!
Players who do not know whether to drift or use umbrella defence, is what’s wrong!
Players who should not even be in the fold at present, is what is wrong!
Tricky Dicky who ably led the Lions to 0 from 13 in the Super 14, is what is wrong!
Not being effective at the breakdowns, is what’s wrong!
You want me to continue?? Forget it… trek af en plak toe, MornĂ©… steek die kop in die grond… ek voel ‘n veer!
Apology, I’m not in a good mood today…. just ignore me…
Jake took the Boks from 6th on the IRB rankings to nr 1. PDV has taken us from nr 1 to nr 3 thus far. Enough evidence to give the job back to Jake White.
@ grootblousmile:
Firstly you highlighted the result of a problem, not the cause of it.
Secondly, Gary Gold has been the defense coach in just about every team he was involved in, he an Brenden Venter being the first to employ the so-called rush-defense in the UK.
Thirdly, you mention execution of a system or structure by players, not highlighting actual flaws within it.
Fourthly, you highlight issues that has nothing to do with the defensive structures being players YOU feel should not be there.
Fithly, you refer to a person not involved in the defensice organisations or coaching.
Sixthly, you again mention something that has nothing to do with the actual structure (defense) but the execution of players in a completely different aspect of play.
So yes, please continue because what I read you say, is more or less what I read on every single rugby website.
Saying something is wrong, without knowing what about it is wrong, meaning offering no real solution to fix it, yet you want people’s heads for it…
It is no wonder you do not give a shit.
But if you are in a bad mood, rather leave this for another day.
I am out.
@ rugbybal:
21
i give up you just want to crucify Peter. Jake went up and down too.
Somewhere i posted the players , the most obvious ones that Jake inherited he did not pick them at first they were already Boks. Look at his stalwarts and then this list is not even complete, there was more. Look i was anti Jake then , nothing changed since.
Why bother at least my chommies in SARU đŸ˜† wont be so stupid to apoint him again.
@ Morné:
Hi Morne, Do you think that PDV is able to fix what is wrong(whatever the problems might be) in the Bok setup? Who do you think will be able to lead the Boks to win a back to back WC? Who should be the captain? I am just interested in you opinion.
@ rugbybal:
I am on my way out so this is a quick response.
Can PDV fix this? Yes I think he can but my biggest concern is that he identifies the underlying problems at hand first and fix that – refer to article.
No other coach who still has a future in this game will take up this position one year out from the World Cup, I believe PDV is capable but there is a lot of shit he needs to sort out right now.
Captain, John Smit.
@ superBul:
đŸ™‚ Yip, if JW gets appointed as caretaker coach I will be extremely surprised. It’s not gonna happen. South Africans need to get used to it. Settling for second, third, fourth etc. best because of racial shlt.
@ rugbybal:
25
I know you asked Morne, i just want to say this , Jake on his own wont be able to fix it either. He will need a few assistants and specialists. So why not just offer Peter his support.And why dont we just keep the heat on Peter until he get these specialists.
There is no single coach with the magic wand.
22@ Morné:
So you recon the Bokke are ALMOST there….
I recon we have regressed to the point that it is embarrassing.
The root problem is that whatever Gold or Muir or Snorrie is doing, or teaching… is sub-standard and has not worked.
So what if Gold started Rush Defence in the Universe, boo-farking-whoo…. he’s a kak defensive coach… we’ve seen it 6 times in a row in the Tri-Nations this year…. yes 6, because even the Test we won our defence was uber kak! We are playing last year’s rugby still and they’ve employed measures to counter that outdated style… in fact they read us like a book!
Where in the world do you get backline players next to one another where the one shoots up in a rush-like defence whereas the guys both sides of him uses drift defence…. not on the same page at all!
The result of the problem, there has to be a problem if 22 tries are leaked otherwise if there was no problem it would read 5 or 6 tries leaked, MATTERS. It matters so much that it will either be fixed or it will mean we do not even see the semi’s of the World Cup next year…
Go have a look again and see which side of the field was favoured by both the All Blacks and Wallabies to target, for the soft belly of Bokke defence… yip… right… on the Bokke’s LEFT WING side of the field… time and time again, like clockwork…. wham bam, thank you mam… points in the bank!
Come on, be serious for just a teeny-weeny moment.. do you honestly recon that Habana should have been on the left wing for the Bokke in the last 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 matches… and I mean it, do you really freegin believe that??
Do you honestly believe breakdown competence and being more effective at the breakdown has NOTHING to do with defence?? Surely slowing down ball results in defensive lines setting themselves properly in the real world, surely getting more than 50% possession means having to defend less and being less vulnerable… so surely you cannot argue with ANY BLOODY CONVICTION that being more effective at the breakdown has nothing to do with defense…. well I certainly hope you don’t!
Maybe what you read on every web site has some basis of truth to it and MornĂ©’s singular view that nothing much is wrong, is gospel only to Morne himself and does not need to be gobbled up, just cause MornĂ© says so….
Let me give you solutions..
1. Solution No 1: Replace the coaching staff with competent people.
2. Then decide on the method of defence, whether it be rush defence or drift defence, or a hybrid of the 2 given the situation, but spell it out to players where it applies…. and do those drills, even in the guys sleep, so that instinctively they are on the same page…
3. Select players capable of employing the defensive structures… ie Mvovo in place of Habana, PLUS a fullback whose field positioning is virtually flawless…
4. Do not kick down the throats of either the Wallabie or All Blacks back 3 and when you kick out, kick it so that quick throws cannot be taken. We’ve been vulnerable on the counter, too many times to mention.
5. Chase kicks better.
6. Be awake for the short throw at the line-out. It has been employed by both the All Blacks and Wallabies with success.
7. Value possession more and work on keeping possession, they cannot attack without the ball.
8. First time tackling is vital… and we’ve been found wanting there, big time!
9. Limit the 50/50 passes, it often results in turn-over ball and the counter from there has been lethal.
10. Cramp the opposition space, play in their faces, force the inevitable mistakes which WILL FOLLOW.
11. Be accutely aware of the opposition overlap and how they manage to manufacture the overlap, we’ve had countless situations where they had a man or 2 more than the Bokke out wide…
Fundamental aspects of Bokke defence, which even every schoolboy team employs or at least tries to impliment is lacking… basic stuff.
Errors in selection and when and how to implent substitutions have cost us.
Planning and preparation in the pre-season or June Test window was wayward and hap-hazard.
Almost anyting in rugby is fixable…. but can and will it be fixed? Will it even be identified, to be fixed?
Take the fall coaching staff… take the fall!
Users Online
Total 17 users including 0 member, 17 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 39,391,926 Page Impressions
_