Bob Dwyer Rugby Workshops

AUSTRALIA V SOUTH AFRICA

Suncorp Stadium, Brisbane.Saturday, 5 September 2009.

In the hours prior to kickoff last night, a young friend of mine enquired “can the Wallabies win tonight, Bob ?”. My response was that certainly they could – after all there are frequent upsets in all levels of sport, including at this elite level. I explained further, however, that there were only two ways in which we could win. One was if our scrum could dominate the Springbok scrum. The other was if the Springboks were complacent, and performed below par.

It is hard to know the answer to the second comment, but my impression is that the Springboks were certainly up for it. Their phenomenal response in the in-goal area to three certain Wallaby try scoring opportunities gave me the proof that they were.

As to the question of the Springbok scrum, it was certainly rendered ineffective and at times destroyed by the Wallabies. For the last couple of weeks I have advocated the inclusion of Ben Alexander and Tatafu Polota-Nau in the starting line-up. Despite the very good form of incumbent hooker Stephen Moore I believe that Tatafu P-N is destined for greatness, and on top of his fantastic general field play, he is a most destructive scrummager.

In the first half, especially, the Wallabies destroyed the Springbok scrum and with it the negation of the vastly important Fourie du Preez bomb. This played havoc with Springbok confidence.

This Springbok team has been has recently been described by numerous critics as perhaps the best Springbok side of the professional era, an era which contains two Rugby World Cup winner’s trophies. Without arguing the fine detail of these claims there is no doubt that this is a Bok side to be reckoned with. Australia’s victory was therefore significant.

At two tries to nil, a further three denied in-goal by freakish Springbok defence and another inexplicably bombed by Matt Giteau who failed to see the unmarked Berrick Barnes on his left, early in the game, it could be described as comprehensive.

The specific reasons for Australia’s therefore comprehensive victory could be described thus.

1: The Scrum.

The dominance of Ben Robinson and Tatafu P-N over John Smit and the subsequent wheel of the Springbok scrum negated two important Springbok attacking, and psychological, weapons. The afore-mentioned Fourie du Preez bomb was effectively removed from the Springbok armoury. The damaging runs to the right by Number 8 Pierre Spies were much more easily cut down and the easy yards that he has been able to achieve, especially out of defence, failed to materialise. This frequently kept the Boks under pressure and searching, sometimes floundering, for another way out.

2: We Ran Straight!

How simple a statement this is, and how frequently do we hear its exhortation. Yet how infrequently do we see it . Thank goodness we saw it last night. Straight running puts pressure on defence one-on-one, and makes it difficult to slide. It makes accurate passing & catching much more simple. It brings support players, almost subconsciously, in behind the ball carrier. This has been long awaited and was a joy to see.

With this arrival of support play in numbers we had the collective leg drive in the tackle contest needed to thwart the previous Springbok dominance in this area. Possession was recycled reasonably quickly and our attack was therefore able to threaten.

3: Defence.

The foundation stone of quality defence is quality tackling. This is real tackling, the type where the shoulder makes contact with the feet still on the ground and powerful leg- drive continues through the target. This is not too dissimilar to the leg-drive required at the tackle contest, and it was back in large dollops. Polota-Nau was also dominant in this area in his time on the pitch, and on four or five occasions his Exocet-missile hits took the sting out of more than the current threat. I am sure there were a few Springbok players looking over their shoulders wondering when the next one was coming.

4: Scrambling Back.

Coach Robbie Deans described it thus “we had a lot of energy going backwards to give options to our kick receipt”. Last week I questioned why we ran backwards to support a kick receipt a lot more slowly than we ran forwards to put pressure on one of own kicks. This week we had a lot more energy and enthusiasm, and indeed desire, to use the ball with which they had wanted to threaten us. It was a big turnaround.

For the Springboks, their lineout was very good as usual but this week they couldn’t dominate on opposition throw. Their attacking bombs were limited at the source or frequently defused by good Wallaby catching and numbers behind the ball.

Their midfield attack was first class, and both de Villiers and Fourie made a number of clean slices through the Wallaby frontline defence. Only fantastic scrambling defence by the home team denied certain Springbok scores.

My impression was that the Springboks wanted the win but they didn’t have quite the appetite to work for the win that they had shown on many occasions previously this season. They tried too often to talk their way to a win, constantly arguing with referee Wayne Barnes. On the television screen they appeared to frequently berate the ref, never in my experience a recipe for maintaining one’s positive focus.

It was a hard fought match with the result well in doubt until the final quarter, but one felt that for most of the time the Wallabies held a slight, if precarious, edge.

The result will do both sides a world of good.

Bob Dwyer

p.s. I thought Tatafu P-N’s injury was as a result of a deliberate and illegal charge by Heinrich Brussow blocking TPN’s  kick-chase. I trust that this will be examined and action taken if deemed necessary.