Gold backs defensive system
2 Sep 2010
Gary Gold maintains that individual errors rather than structural failings are responsible for the Boks’ poor defensive record in the 2010 Tri-Nations.
The Boks’ defence has been particularly erratic, with 17 tries conceded in five Tri-Nations Tests. New Zealand have scored four tries against the Boks on two occasions, while Australia did it for the first time in a losing cause in Pretoria.
Compare that defensive record to 2009, where the Boks conceded 10 tries in six Tests and prevented either of their opponents from scoring four in a game, and it’s fair to say there are defensive problems that require fixing. The first half of last Saturday’s game was another example, as the Aussies ran in four tries before the half-hour mark.
Gold, the Springboks assistant coach responsible for defence, said he was disappointed with the showing overseas. He does however, believe the Boks have improved since returning home to play the All Blacks at Soccer City and the Wallabies at Loftus Versfeld.
While they leaked four early on against the Wallabies, they showed some positive signs in the second stanza, the highlight of which was Francois Hougaard’s hit on Adam Ashley-Cooper.
‘It’s been a long time since the Boks conceded four tries in a Test match, so when we got home [from the Australasian tour] we knew it was an area that required a lot of attention,’ Gold said. ‘But what you have to ask yourself when analysing the defence is whether the individuals or the systems are at fault.
‘That ball that Bryan [Habana] dropped off the kickoff is a good example, because it led to a freakish try. I don’t think the system is letting us down, and at the same time a player like Bryan is a very good defender and it was one error that unfortunately led to a try.’
Gold acknowledged the threat of the Wallabies backline, but said the Boks need to trust each other if they’re going to repel the anticipated assault. Will Genia, Quade Cooper and Matt Giteau are fine attacking players, but according to Gold, it’s counterproductive to concentrate on individuals rather than trusting your own defensive system.
‘We have to lift the bar this weekend. Those players can be so lethal, but if we focus on the individual, it can open up space for other players.
‘We have to back our systems and guys need to trust the men outside them. A guy like Cooper has a fantastic step and puts team-mates into holes, but we’ve got to work as a unit to stop that.’
The Bok lineout wobbled on tour but through the efforts of Victor Matfield and Juan Smith during the second half last Saturday, this set-piece is steadily improving.
Wallabies coach Robbie Deans has made some interesting selections, picking Ben McCalman at No 8 and bringing lineout specialist Mark Chisholm into the second row for Dean Mumm. Gold has no doubt these changes are geared towards a a more competitive Aussie lineout.
‘I think they’re slightly worried about Sharpie [Nathan Sharpe]. They lost a lot of cohesion when he went off in the second half last week. Ben is a better lineout option than Richard Brown, and up front, the selection of Stephen Moore suggests they’ll want to match us for experience.
‘I don’t believe the set-pieces were that bad on tour. We lost four lineouts in Auckland but then everybody jumped on the bandwagon.
‘I also believe that we did play with intensity, but a lot of it was taken away when we lost a man [through a yellow card] at the start of every game. These are the kind of things we’ve worked hard to rectify.’
Head coach Peter de Villiers said on Monday that the Boks would ignore all criticism and that if you’re not for the team, you’re against them. Gold said he had no problem with criticism from the media or public, as long as it was directed at the team’s performance.
‘Criticism is healthy as long as it’s not personal. We didn’t perform well overseas, we know we didn’t live up to our usual standards, so we must take the criticism on the chin.’
By Jon Cardinelli, in Bloemfontein
Follow SA Rugby mag on Twitter
65 Comments
Pages: [1] 2 » Show All
2 Sep 2010, 14:04 pm
stooge
2 Sep 2010, 14:07 pm
Well if you play a different backline and different combinations every week your defense is bound to suffer.
2 Sep 2010, 14:16 pm
Surely if we consistently have holes out wide that is a structural issue?
2 Sep 2010, 14:24 pm
with the amount of missed tackles being made in this 3N, benefit of the doubt has to be given to Gold.
Very capable coach imho
2 Sep 2010, 14:33 pm
“We didn’t perform well overseas, we know we didn’t live up to our usual standards,”
Low standards!
2 Sep 2010, 14:48 pm
Playing JDV at 14 is like playing Brussow at Prop…
My but these guys do seem very Defensive…
2 Sep 2010, 14:54 pm
@ali(ali)-4: Capable ? On the basis of what … ?
2 Sep 2010, 15:23 pm
Why then did PdV require the inputs of the defensive coach of WP a while back? Can everybody who critisized WP please apologise. Nienaber’s help was not required. They actually needed WP players to sort out the problem
2 Sep 2010, 15:25 pm
Gary Gold defending his own defensive strategy is like Bob Mugabe defending his economic policies for Zim.
2 Sep 2010, 15:43 pm
@PissAnt(PissAnt)-2: Indeed.
2 Sep 2010, 15:52 pm
Some of the individual efforts were poor! Habana is a problem. He does not trust the guy on his inside and therefor tends to defend in, instead of pushing the outside attacker towards the sideline. JdV has also lost a lot of his sharpness in Europe. The same goes for Frans Steyn. Butch James still looks OK on defence, but the rest of his game is a shambles.
2 Sep 2010, 16:27 pm
“Gary Gold maintains that individual errors rather than structural failings are responsible for the Boks’ poor defensive record in the 2010 Tri-Nations”
Then get rid of Habana and Smit
2 Sep 2010, 16:53 pm
@Zandberg Jansen(Zandberg Jansen)-12: I thought Gold was talking about himself?
2 Sep 2010, 17:02 pm
Habana destroys the structure everytime he come running in like a headless chicken.
2 Sep 2010, 17:14 pm
@Beast(Beast)-11: Regarding Habs and our general defensive woes:
The classic drift defense blueprint would require the defensive outside centre to tackle the attacking wing, and the defensive wing to defend against the fullback if the latter did enter the offensive line.
Therefore, in theory, the wing will not have a significant part to play in man-on-man defense in a drift system. This is one reason why sides who field smaller wings will use a drift rather than a rush. However, this does not mean that the defensive duties of a winger are subordinate to any other player in the line-up. He has a very important role to play on cover defense and as a supporting player at the breakdown.
I believe that Habs is right to go for the intercept
(a) if the fullback does not join the line, or
(b) if he finds himself in a defensive line where there are not numbers out wide during later phases.
However, to be fair, the ABs almost always had an overlap from third phase onwards against us. There is no doubt that the Boks (including Habs) were extremely underprepared for this.
In addition, if Habana does go for the intercept in the absence of an overlap, there is an important precondition that has to be in place – his 10 or 8 should cover behind the defensive line to cover a possible overlap resulting from shooting in.
When last did you see Spies or Steyn cover behind the defensive line? Or anyone for that matter?
To the naked eye, the defensive lines of our loose trio are as visible as the emperor’s new clothes.
Spies does not run the defensive lines of a classic 8. This in turn makes the linebreaks of opposing sides a lot more significant, as it provides them with additional meters gained in open space that might have been nullified by cover defense.
In a nutshell, our defensive errors are down to structural failings AND individual errors. And as PissAnt noted in post 2, defense is a difficult occupation if you employ different personnel each week.
The good news is that there are several ways to fix our defensive woes, which I think will make for an interesting debate.
2 Sep 2010, 17:45 pm
@willievz(willievz)-15:
“The good news is that there are several ways to fix our defensive woes, which I think will make for an interesting debate.”
Does one of those involve employing a new defensive coach?
2 Sep 2010, 17:48 pm
@Yetirat(Yetirat)-16: I would say a SPECIALIST defensive coach is an important step forward, yes.
2 Sep 2010, 18:17 pm
@willievz(willievz)-15:
As I’ve mentioned endlessly before, what the hell is Spies doing if he’s not corner flagging? He’s the one forward who has the pace to do the job, a la Hennie Muller.
2 Sep 2010, 18:19 pm
@willievz(willievz)-15: Yes Willie, lekker en met jou. En hallo aan die ander.
Willie, this is a good post as can be expected from you. Especially your point re Spies. I think we need a new No 8, sooner rather than later.
2 Sep 2010, 18:42 pm
Another reason why we are hoping PDV gets fired after the Tri-Nations.
The coaches really don’t understand defensive systems. How many times does the defense have to get beaten in the outside channel before the coaches realise that the players aren’t drifting enough?
2 Sep 2010, 18:48 pm
I am also wondering how many speculative articles about PDV are going to be written before this site reports that John Mitchell is now the permament head coach of the Lions. That is the biggest real news of the last few days.
2 Sep 2010, 21:00 pm
It’s hard for a team to keep structure against quick turnover ball.
Against the AB’s Schalk missed a tackle against Thorn in structured play and from the subsequent quick ruck ball a prop scored against Habanna. Habanna came off his line when McCaw scored. That should never have been a try. The last try originated again from a quick turnover when JdV was caught in midfield and after that a big fast centre had to beat a slowish hooker.
Even WP’s invincible defence faltered when FS got quick turnover ball and won the game even though they were otherwise outplayed.
It is not just about tackling, yes there were individual errors and the biggest culprit is Habanna, but even more important not to turn over ball, then the best defensive system will falter.
What we missed was someone to generate quick ball and slow down that of the opposition.
2 Sep 2010, 21:29 pm
@diewareouboet(diewareouboet)-22: your last line….
absolutely spot on
2 Sep 2010, 21:36 pm
Man what a shambles SA rugby seems to be in.
I really envy the calm, rational, disciplined approach of every other rugby major playing nation. NZ & Australia in particular.
On and off the field.
We seem to live in a perpetual state of hysteria and “noise”.
2 Sep 2010, 21:45 pm
@SodaJoe(SodaJoe)-24: it is a terrible year…..i am not sure if we can get out of this quagmire in time to salvage 2011 wc soda.
Next week thurs is exactly a year to kick off.
And i reckon a few hectic events to still hit us.
seriously imploding….should have been a great year….sadly very little true leadership.
2 Sep 2010, 22:03 pm
Gold is the actual cancer in the conundrum, reminds me much the same as a certain J. White in the Mallet administration who got sacked because Mallet and Solomans said they didn’t need a walking lap top as an analyst statistition. Gold brings f’all to the equation and I’m convinced its him pushing for the negative defensive patterns and supporting Smit in the kick n chase strategy against the heads up approach of Muir and De Villiers.
I’m willing to bet this oke is the cancer in the setup, get rid of Gold and Boks fortunes swing around immediately. De Villiers is hampered by him and his negative influence and has had to swallow his contempt for the destabalizing factor he brings for the sake of patching up team morale, but Gold was a grave mistake as assistant, worse than Muir who at least is on PdV’s side while Gold got his own agenda he’s stoking in the furnace.
2 Sep 2010, 22:17 pm
@grant10(grant10)-25: ‘should have been a great year’
with around a third of the run-on team unavailable including some key players, why do you think that?
@SodaJoe(SodaJoe)-24: aren’t Oz on the verge of sacking Deans?
2 Sep 2010, 22:18 pm
@grant10(grant10)-25: last sentence spot on – should have been a great year.
Will the Boks ever reach a point where they perform consistently in line with their potential?
The knock out format of the WC is such that we might still take it. We have the players
2 Sep 2010, 22:18 pm
PDV should have been more firm …..something freaked him out earlier this year with his assistants…..but then all cosy again.
That set up a shambles…..not sure it can be fixed….sometimes best to sweep clean…..but time is against us.All in all a bit of a fark up…
outt here
2 Sep 2010, 22:21 pm
@Big Hit(Big Hit)-27: could have built proper depth…..tried some new things….rested seniors better…etc.
All we did was flog the dead horses…..
anyway….for me its about 2015…..the 3 stooges and plod deserve each other…..
outts here
2 Sep 2010, 22:23 pm
(Warning: a novel!)
@willievz(willievz)-15:
Finally, someone who knows what they’re talking about. I’ve been defending Habs for a while here. (This is not to say that the man is faultless. He had a poor game on Saturday and actually did move out of line out of turn on a few occasions.)
The Springboks currently use a hybrid of the drift and rush defensive systems. The idea is to form a long solid line, pick a “zone” to defend, and come up in a “lasso” towards the end of that line. You drift to the end of your zone and pick the first ball-carrier to approach from that zone. If that creates an overlap, you’re covered, because the job of all free parties (typically read “loose forwards, scrumhalf, flyhalf, centres”) once the ball has left their zone is to trail behind the line, follow the ball, and pick up a new “zone” at the end of the “lasso”.
Important point: your position in covering the new zone is not to be beside the far “curling point” of the lasso, but rather in-line with where the defensive line originally started from. Not only is all of this supposed to take care of overlaps if implemented correctly, it also takes care of any gaps that open in the middle, because there are always a few players “trailing” with their eyes on the ball-carrier. We’ve become used to commentators calling this a “scramble defense”, but in reality, it’s not a scramble at all — it’s a cool, calculated, bend-but-don’t-break system that works not only laterally but also vertically. It’s also the reason why players with exceptional speed and hand-eye coordination like JdV and Habs are backed to take those extra few steps and go for the intercept — if they miss, the system guarantees that someone is there to cover them. Of course (and Habs did NOT do this on Saturday), they can’t “shoot” at the end of the “lasso” before they’ve checked that their cover defense is on its way — that’s their responsibility within the system.
This defensive system is fantastic, but it requires one critical element to work at all:
1. Every player has to stick his first-up tackle.
It’s that simple. If you stick your tackles, everyone else can cover. If a player gets into that space between the line and the trailers because you missed the tackle, all it takes is one or two good offloads and the opponent’s off to the races with only a fullback and maybe a wing to beat.
When you play teams like France or Wales, you can get away with slipping a couple of tackles here and there. That’s because they’re not as consistently deadly at offloading to supporting players coming at pace running into space. The All Blacks and the Wallabies, on the other hand… well, we’ve all seen what happens.
So what’s the point of that whole post? Just this: Gary Gold is right. I’ve had a great time mocking the coaches this year, but in this case, the coach is correct. It’s not the system that’s at fault. The Boks have not been nearly as clinical in 2009 as they were in 2010 at sticking their first-up tackles, and this has cost them. Of course, this failure is severely exacerbated when you can’t slow down ruck ball because you don’t have a man to compete for the ball on the ground — what was merely a bad break suddenly becomes critical mass and before you know it, some cocky Antipodean is dancing around behind the posts like he’s the king of the world.
I’ve said it time and again, but it bears repeating. The Boks of 2010 aren’t fatally flawed. Three very simple things have happened this year that have been brilliantly and ruthlessly exploited by their foes — if they can even halfway fix these things in the coming year, they will be the favorites for the World Cup:
1. Their two best players (one their on-field general) have gone down with injuries. Fourie du Preez and Heinrich Brussow are not in the team. That’s like NZ playing without Dan Carter and Richie McCaw… Hey, wait, that happened last year. What was NZ’s record again? (Note, also, that Juan Smith, the world’s best non-fetching flanker, was also out of action for most of the season.)
2. They didn’t play a proper fetcher under the new law interpretations. That’s like everyone playing with one hand tied behind their backs. Yes, I blame Snor. This was, is, and always will be idiotic. You don’t have to play your BEST fetcher, but you have to play A fetcher.
3. They didn’t stick their first-up tackles. Plain and simple. There is no excuse for this. I don’t think any of the players are giving excuses, either. I would chalk up half (if not more) of NZ and Aus’s tries this year to this simple fault. It’s elementary, really. Rugby’s about tackling and not dropping the ball. If you can do those two things, you’re looking good.
2 Sep 2010, 22:29 pm
@diewareouboet(diewareouboet)-22: Wrong , the first try was scored because the defensive structures had broken down long before putting Schalk in an impossible position to make the tackle. Gio Aplon kicked the ball straight to their wing who was able to set up a counter because our chase was poor. Why, because no-one knew what Aplon was going to do and they didn;t respond in time. The try scored off a turnover of JDV was a wrong decision to spread the ball to JDV when he only had 1 player on his outside against 5 defenders waiting at the ruck line. The ball should have gone the other way and been carried in by the big boys and the game slowed down, however the leader was off the park.
Wonder what Skop has to say about Genia’s hero worshipping of Fourie du Preez seeing as that he doesn’t rate. Genia reckons he is the best scrumhalf to have ever played the game. Some high praise indeed.
The chickens always come home to roost, think for example of those who were full of criticism of Plumtree after the S14. I bet that will be put down to the good fortune of not having to select JS – Load of C,rap that is.
2 Sep 2010, 22:35 pm
@bananaboy(bananaboy)-32: sharks better off without plod….
and you know it.
2 Sep 2010, 22:36 pm
@grant10(grant10)-30: to be fair g10, as far as experimentation goes this season they’ve tried those below, there’s only so many changes they can make without starting from scratch.
CJ at 3
Chilliboy at 2
Van der Merwe at 4
Bekker at 5
Kankowski at 6 (SA 7)
Louw at 7 (SA 6)
Potgieter at 7
Van Niekerk at 8
Hougaard at 9
Juan De Jongh at 13
Butch at 12
De Villiers at 13 & 14
Aplon at 14 & 15
Basson at 11
Kirchner at 15
2 Sep 2010, 22:38 pm
@MaraudingJ(MaraudingJ)-31: Agree – “The Boks of 2010 aren’t fatally flawed”
We would have been better with better selections (i.e. best fetcher and add to that no Ricky) and more could have been done to develop depth in the squad. Still scope for that at the EOYT. Then make sure that players are in top physical condition and we will give the AB’s a run for their money.
2 Sep 2010, 22:43 pm
@grant10(grant10)-30:
What has 2015 got to do with it? Every test is important.
This obdurate fascination with World Cups has got to stop. There is far too much rugby to be played between now and 2015.
Stupid comment.
2 Sep 2010, 22:45 pm
@Big Hit(Big Hit)-34: mate….you can slice it and dice it….point is youngsters , even those who proved themselves, like aplon,de jongh, dewalt, were summarily shown the door ….the fat boys club rule supreme.
No steggmann….when he was available….butch at 12…[ a farken insult ]…..
ag it just goes on and on…its a mess mate.
Roll on 2011 wc….lets do the deal, get outta there and rid ourselves of plod and the 3 stooges…..and pray we take enlightened steps thereafter.
I am done with this fark up….seriously done .
2 Sep 2010, 22:45 pm
@grant10(grant10)-33: No I don’t know it. They are playing well against sides without their Bokke and injured players so how can I compare performances. All is hunky dory now but there will be a difference with full squads no doubt.
2 Sep 2010, 22:45 pm
@I am a stormer(I am a stormer)-36: ja…agree….mean that i have written off 2011 wc….
2 Sep 2010, 22:47 pm
@bananaboy(bananaboy)-38: bissy vs smit….
ferrari vs mazda bakkie….
over 1000 m …
dont be a bloody fool man.
2 Sep 2010, 22:47 pm
First try was scored because Aplon kicked it instead of running it up, we would have gone into half time a whole 5 points better off (or was it 7)
Second try was scored because M.Steyn kicked a penalty over dead ball line looking for that extra 5 mts which was totally unnecessary, all we needed was possession inside their 22 with 3 min play time to go and we were still ahead by 5 at that point. Factor in that entire second half we played kick n chase and were tackling more than twice to every tackle of theirs, we were out on our feet which was stupid play to our strengths strategies.
3rd try was scored because M. Steyn bamboozled himself to sell JdV a hospital man and ball pass when he should have played it the other way. we would have still come away with a 22-22 draw instead of a last minute loss.
Moral of the story is we kicked and chased our way to death, when ball in hand rugby was as simple to do as the opposite and we would have cantered that test match home. Smit lost his 100th game bonanza hero worship sendoff because he played the wrong game plan yet again, and we choked through sheer exhaustion and coughing up possession to the tune of 70/30 over the 80 min.
FdP or no Fdp would have been same result, same as Ireland and France Eoyt 09 when FdP as much a culprit as any if not worse, just another clay footed hero we saffas love to bow and scrape our obeisances to.
2 Sep 2010, 22:50 pm
I cannot understand how bloggers continue to rate players on the basis of individual performances rather than how they fit into the team structures. Now I like Aplon for example but having him at fullback , no matter how good he was as an individual, disturbed the balance in the team. It put extra pressure on the back 3 (familiarity) and on Morne as there was no fall back kicker (bearing in mind FDP was not there). Balance in the team is more important than individual performances.
2 Sep 2010, 22:51 pm
@bananaboy(bananaboy)-32: Agree ball should not have gone to JDV. Boks should have had more composure and taken it up with the forwards to milk penalty or set up drop goal. But Schalk should have made that tackle.
@I am a stormer(I am a stormer)-36: Spot on: “This obdurate fascination with World Cups has got to stop. There is far too much rugby to be played between now and 2015.”
Great to win the WC but also great to win any test and agonising to loose any test.
2 Sep 2010, 22:51 pm
@MaraudingJ(MaraudingJ)-31:
Very interesting post.
Will watch more closely.
Now it’s the Boks turn to open up other defences as well as the AB’s have achieved to many bonus point victories.
We have to start returning the compliment.
2 Sep 2010, 22:52 pm
@grant10(grant10)-40: Who’s the fool? If was in a race i would want the ferrari of course but if I’m on the farm the bakkie – what an idiotic comparison G10 come on man you are losing it.
2 Sep 2010, 22:56 pm
@bananaboy(bananaboy)-45: What I mean is you choose based on your objectives taking into account all the factors – horses for courses.
2 Sep 2010, 22:56 pm
@bananaboy(bananaboy)-45: your protectiveness of plod is bordering on the ridiculous.
I wonder how you sharks are going to react when he plays for lions against sharks and bissy.
i look forward to your undying adulation then.
Now have to say goodnite.
2 Sep 2010, 22:57 pm
A chain is as strong as its weakest link, Gary. Your chain has far too many weak links.
2 Sep 2010, 22:57 pm
@bananaboy(bananaboy)-46: bissy is better….in all aspects…
2 Sep 2010, 22:59 pm
The Springboks’ problem in this year’s Tri-Nations is not so much down to fatigue or Irish referees as it is a case of simply missing Fourie du Preez.
Will Genia, who has showed that he is ready to follow in the footsteps of George Gregan for the Wallabies, singled out the injured Springbok scrumhalf as his big hero and believes South Africa have lacked a dimension without him.
“Fourie controls the game and is their lynchpin. I think Morné Steyn is a better player when Fourie plays because he does not have to concern himself with anything but his own game as Fourie controls everything,” said Genia.
“I have to say that Francois Hougaard is doing really well and there appears to be life after Fourie. Only time will tell. Hougaard definitely gave the Boks the spark that they had been missing.”
Hougaard won round one against Genia in the battle of the halfbacks at Loftus Versfeld. The talented young Bok was named man of the match in South Africa’s 44-31 win over the Wallabies.
“His strength is that he gets across the field so quickly,” Genia said of Hougaard.
“He gets to the breakdowns quickly and allows the experienced players on his outside to be the play-makers. His pace means that he can run good support lines and often be the second player to be able to score tries.”
The 22-year-old is humbled by regular comparisons with Gregan, but for him Du Preez is the player by which a scrumhalf should measure himself.
“Fourie is the best scrumhalf I have ever seen play. He has everything,” said Genia.
“He can run, kicks superbly, passes well and has very good vision. What I really admire about him is his uncanny knack to always make the right decision. You seldom see him make a mistake or take the wrong option. He is definitely one of my heroes and someone I enjoy playing against.”
Genia is viewed as a potential Wallaby captain for the future and his ability to lead is probably another reason why he is likened to Gregan.
“George Gregan achieved so much because he was good for a long period. I’m only just starting out my Test career,” said Genia.
“I’m happy with my progress, but really want to start winning Tests on a regular basis now. We are struggling to achieve success as a group and would like to be more consistent and win more often.
“We’re making critical mistakes at critical periods. Sometimes we try to play too much rugby. South Africa’s balance is good because they kick the ball to the corners and shift the pressure to their opponents rather than play in their own half.”
Genia wants to continue doing the simple things well.
“The things I pride myself on are my passing, kicking and being instinctive. You must always have the confidence to have a go and never hesitate,” he said.
Genia hopes the Wallabies can seize the moment in Bloemfontein and does not want to use youth as an excuse for not performing.
“There are a lot of young guys like myself, Quade Cooper, James O’Connor and Kurtley Beale. But you can’t stay young forever,” he said.
Pages: [1] 2 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.