SF2 - Match Thread - WALES v SOUTH AFRICA - 27/10/19 - K/O 09:00 GMT

[Guest]

First topic message reminder :

Again, making these early for the sake of ease and consistency.

WALES

Team:Halfpenny; North, J Davies, Parkes, Adams; Biggar, G Davies; Wyn Jones, Owens, Francis, Ball, Alun Wyn Jones (capt), Wainwright, Moriarty, Tipuric.

Replacements: Dee, R Carre, D Lewis, Beard, Shingler, T Williams, Patchell, Watkin.

SOUTH AFRICA

South Africa: Le Roux; Nkosi, Am, De Allende, Mapimpi; Pollard, De Klerk; Mtawarira, Mbonambi, Malherbe, Etzebeth, De Jager, Kolisi (capt), Du Toit, Vermeulen

Replacements: Marx, Kitschoff, Koch, Snyman, Mostert, Louw, H Jantjies, Steyn



Venue: Yokohama
Referee:
AR1:
AR2:
TMO:

[Guest]

Can you describe what th3 core of the England game plan was if not.

Yes. Smash the sheet out of anything in a black shirt, be accurate with the ball, and win.

Exactly. Negatively based, because in works, in that order. In my experience smashing the sheet out of anything hasn’t often reflected positivity.

Pretty fundamental core of rugby.

You also forgot the part where they used the ball.

NZ - it was all just kick, kick, kick. Yawn!

[mikey_dragon]

There’s still an active England vs NZ thread you know.

[Poorfour]

Both sides were trying to play. There was plenty of passing and running play from both teams. And some of it - from both teams - was sublime. 

England made more chances for tries than New Zealand. One of them they didn’t complete because Johnny May was clearly not 100% from the start of the match. Two of them were chalked off by the TMO - one incorrectly, one correctly but the offence came because NZ bit so hard on a dummy runner that it left a big hole and Sinckler couldn’t resist trying to take advantage of it. 

As for the rest of their points coming from penalty kicks, well as Martin Johnson said when faced with similar accusations of negativity “It’s not us choosing to give away the penalties, is it?”

That there weren’t more points scored in total was down to two exceptional defences coming up against each other. But only one of those defences had to resort to giving kickable penalties. What’s negativity on a rugby field if it isn’t resorting to professional fouls and cheap shots?

It looked to me that New Zealand were as overwhelmed by the pace and intensity of the game as Ireland had been the week before, with the key difference being that they didn’t crumble defensively. Well done for that.

[Heaf]

There’s still an active England vs NZ thread you know.

Yeh sorry Mikey ... I tried not to bite but ...

[Guest]

Tell you what, I've watched a fair bit of the 2003 England team in the last 12 months and in terms of the 'boring' tag they had, they come nothing near the current iteration of Ireland, but also the game in general. Wales aren't faultless, and clearly SA aren't, either.

Wonder how the players are feeling now. A sense of missed opportunity, surely. So much rugby left to play but the game just wasn't in Wales' favour.

[Heaf]

I have to admit I expected Wales to play a bit more and win it at the end and was disappointed when it didn't come off ...

[Taylorman]

Hmmmm ... claiming a side that made NZ look average is negative comes over as sulking - which is pretty childish.  

Educate us all then and explain what NZ were trying to do that England weren't doing?

I already have.
But for the misinformed.

At Eden park we dropped the experience of Franks, Ben Smith and the form of Reiko for three new players to big test match rugby. None had started in RCs nor World cups etc though Laulua mah have at some point.

That resulted in a 36-0 win over oz.

Thinking there is youth a vitality tops experience. Versus Ireland, he did it again, dropped Crotty and Ben Smith right out,bring in Goodhue, another who hasn’t done the rounds much.

Vs Ireland, the fast game plan was working. Ireland were not good enough to hold their own and the pace on the ball and in the collisions meant we were able to score seven tries, most from creative movements as we first stretched then broke down the Irish and Farrell defence.

So again, emp,owing the ‘kids’ worked. Who needs experience when they’re running free like that.

So he does it again. Takes a Cane off versus England in an effort to make the open play even faster, totally ignoring the fact that Mitchell has been brought in, and as losing coach of the AB side in 03, and dumped by NZ rugby after it, clearly had views on why his side lost and how he can help Eddie and England here.

So the ABs went in with a whole bunch of new players and left fit, and in form, experienced World Cup winning players, out.

All on the basis of two months ago. Meanwhile, Eddies been plotting this for two years. He knew he would meet the ABs

So they simply negated the ABs time and space and it meant we had inexperience on when the tough got going.

Had players like Ben Smith, Crotty, even Owens and a less extreme open game plan been deployed we would have had a better chance.

That is a NZ viewpoint of the loss. It’s being commonly discussed here. We certainly accept the loss, we just need to get back up, and start again. It’s not a sign of our rugby deteriorating, but it is a sign we need new ideas.

[Guest]

Think that's fair Heaf. We had our moments in the first half off some strike moves - one called back for a forward pass - and nearly make a scoring chance from the same way we scored 4 years ago: a Biggar up and under, regathered, and offloaded.

But losing North, with a centre on the wing, 1/2P at full back, and two clearly half fit centres, with Biggar at 10. Not only do we not really have a backline to attack, but the forwards were getting dominated and barely provided the opportunity to.

SA won penalties at a very high rate in Wales' half. Seemed to come much quicker than Wales'. Overplaying might have just meant we lost earlier and heavier. After all, had Patchell kicked that drop, or had we engineered another 3 points, we'd be in a world cup final. Both teams tightened up and got more and more negative as the game went on - in spite of the tries coming as teams tired.

[Guest]

T, are you aware of the title of the thread? That rant seems more fitting in your journal?

[Taylorman]

Both sides were trying to play. There was plenty of passing and running play from both teams. And some of it - from both teams - was sublime. 

England made more chances for tries than New Zealand. One of them they didn’t complete because Johnny May was clearly not 100% from the start of the match. Two of them were chalked off by the TMO - one incorrectly, one correctly but the offence came because NZ bit so hard on a dummy runner that it left a big hole and Sinckler couldn’t resist trying to take advantage of it. 

As for the rest of their points coming from penalty kicks, well as Martin Johnson said when faced with similar accusations of negativity “It’s not us choosing to give away the penalties, is it?”

That there weren’t more points scored in total was down to two exceptional defences coming up against each other. But only one of those defences had to resort to giving kickable penalties. What’s negativity on a rugby field if it isn’t resorting to professional fouls and cheap shots?

It looked to me that New Zealand were as overwhelmed by the pace and intensity of the game as Ireland had been the week before, with the key difference being that they didn’t crumble defensively. Well done for that.

Yeah agree with that. We were certainly snuffed out. The 50/50 collision moments tended to go Englands way as well, the number of times England forced ABs over the sideline is something Ive never seen before. Far more aggression and prep.

Second half we needed experience on the field. We could have had Crotty or Ben Smith but who now covered those? Jordie Barrett. The only player in the squad who shouldn’t even be wearing the AB jersey. Caught in his own 22 he didn’t know what to do so ran straight into contact and lost the ball. Boys doing a mans job.

Those selections will haunt this side. They took England far too easy. And it just shows how Ireland really were at this tournament. They were easy compared to a England. Chalk and cheese.

[Guest]

Again, please, this is the Wales v SA thread.

[Taylorman]

Anyway, on the wrong thread, apologies, you lot will all be beddy bize anyway. Enjoy the week.

[BamBam]

Again, please, this is the Wales v SA thread.

Yes sir, forum captain sir

[Guest]

Thanks for backing me up, Bam. Appreciate it. Knew you'd come good in the end and weren't just a WUM.

[Guest]

Wait...beddy bize? Bize?!

Errrr...

[Heaf]

Anyway, on the wrong thread, apologies, you lot will all be beddy bize anyway. Enjoy the week.

Apologies all - just got back from walking the dog so one last one on this thread ...

TM that was all very interesting about NZ selection errors but doesn't explain why you say England were negative just because they were adept at shutting down NZ - that's just one part of the game surely. Pourfoor put it much more eloquently a few posts earlier.

Thanks guys - back to the proper thread now ...

[Taylorman]

That’s because you are not looking at things from a NZ point of view. Have to say, the analysis skills on this site aren’t very high. More bickering and name calling than actual analysis. Armchair fans with little technical appreciation of either the complexity of the game, nor its trends, and certainly not its potential.

I’m no expert either, but Ive certainly seen forums that are.

[Cyril]

Jog on then, there’s a good fellah!

[123456789.]

I thoroughly enjoyed that game, it's been a while since we had a proper slugfest for the purists. I am bitterly disappointed that the Welsh didn't get through. An England-Wales final would have been enormous and the Gatland-Jones slanging match in the build up would have had it nicely simmering. I don't think anyone who's ever supported British and Irish rugby could have begrudged Alun Wyn Jones lifting that trophy. In terms of Wales' performance over the tournament and on the day I think you should be really bloody proud. The backs coach, albeit an apparently inept backs coach, was given the boot after a scandal five minutes before the tournament. The fly-half that had dictated much of the best Welsh play over the last twelve months got injured in the warm-ups. Your winger was pulled off with a hamstring injury. I'd rate Faletau as the best Welsh player when fit, and he wasn't. And after that you were a stone's throw from the World Cup Final. Best of luck for next week. Frankly, having a wee read through this thread, to paraphrase Kevin Keegan (hopefully with a more favourable result) I would love it if you beat them.

[BigTrevsbigmac]

Should really be the third/ fourt play off game.

That'll be England vs South Africa.

I have a surprise for you

But it can wait till Sunday.

Merry Christmas

[Old Man]

Should really be the third/ fourt play off game.

That'll be England vs South Africa.

I have a surprise for you

But it can wait till Sunday.

Merry Christmas

Thanks

[Taylorman]

Interesting where Ireland and Wales go now. Both get new coaches, neither have coached internationally, as head coach at least as far as I know.

Both have never got to a final of this tournament despite one being Grand slam champs, and ranked no. 1 around the time of the tournament, the other ranked no. 1 going into the tournament.

Clearly the WCup jinx remains for these two, especially Ireland. And with new coaches, up against the might of Eddies ever improving England....massive challenges ahead. Ireland also probably carry a few long termers who will need to be replaced.

Big challenges ahead, as there are for NZ, and Oz, also going forward with new coaching, and leadership.

Interesting the two finalists are the only potential winners being coached by coaches that are staying on!

Hard case.

[Gooseberry]

Interesting where Ireland and Wales go now. Both get new coaches, neither have coached internationally, as head coach at least as far as I know.

Both have never got to a final of this tournament despite one being Grand slam champs, and ranked no. 1 around the time of the tournament, the other ranked no. 1 going into the tournament.

Clearly the WCup jinx remains for these two, especially Ireland. And with new coaches, up against the might of Eddies ever improving England....massive challenges ahead. Ireland also probably carry a few long termers who will need to be replaced.

Big challenges ahead, as there are for NZ, and Oz, also going forward with new coaching, and leadership.

Interesting the two finalists are the only potential winners being coached by coaches that are staying on!

Hard case.

Im not sure finishing joint 3rd ( )  really counts as a jinx for wales, their world cup record has pretty good in recent years and reflective of their ranking pingponging between 9 and 1. 

But yes its a big change for both teams. Ireland very much need it, they look stale and at the limit of what they can do playing an outdated brand of rugby. One thing that really set NZ apart in that game and that England seemed able to match possibly even better was the fitness and mobility of players. The way these two sides move about and work rates the forwards put in are setting a new standard. The fast play is also helped by the new tackle laws. 
Ireland got some good success under Schmidt but him moving on is coming at the right time. 
Its also wrong to cast Farrell as some virgin to international rugby, maybe as a head coach but he has stacks of experience in test rugby coaching at a high level. Whether that translates in to him being any good or not I'm on the fence with tbh, he was instrumental in pushing some dodgy decisions with England. But given Irelands standing in world rugby and lack of home grown coaches with any test experience  hes about as good as they will get ...some notion of being a bit Irish, bags of knowledge of the NH game, years of experience under a number of coaches at test level, young enough to stick with it. 
Where some Ireland fans are pointing to an issue is that hes not a clean break from the Schmidt era, hes part of the current set up, an inside man promoted up from a set up that has been found out. Does he still have baggage with existing players that makes it harder to clear out those who probably wont make the next world cup or who wont be able to adapt to the way the game seems to be going? 

With Wales its a little different. The world cup wasnt quite what they'd dreamed of, but a chunk of that was down to injury andI think most fans recognise that after being written off time and again Gatland keeps coming back and reinvigorating Wales. He made some big calls 18 months ago, and led a change in style as well as a change in playing personnel that bought an very successful 12 months leading up to the world cup (plus something something Lions). 
He still seems to have the backing of the fans and squad, and has shown he can make changes. 
Gatland is going to be a very tough act to follow for any coach coming in. The senior players will only ever have played test rugby under him, even on Lions tours (Howley stand ins aside). Winning over a dressing room when your coaching cv is leading a mediocre Pro 14 side might not be all that easy, his test coaching role with Fiji was so long ago now as to be almost meaningless. 

Aus have the challenges whatever. their game just doesnt have enough depth of talent any more, and the test coach can still only work with what comes through from an increasingly failing domestic game. 

NZ I guess following up on Hansen like Gatland is going to be a tough act to follow, but maybe it will do the new coach some good that they bowed out gracefully and let someone else have a go at winning the world cup. They wont be walking into an atmosphere where the team feels like they know better than the coach, but one where they are very much switched on to right the failings and get back to dominance. 

SA and England will be glad to be keeping their coaches thats for sure, but will also face having to replace some players and possible world cup hangovers. 

Interesting times ahead, its been great having real competition between a group of 6 teams rather than 3 or 4 as has often been the case. Its good for the global game if that continues. I do have some concerns about Wales, Ireland and Aus for the next couple of years though. Lets see though!

[whocares]

Interesting stat that summarise a bit that game :

Kick in play:

Wales 36-37 South Africa

19 - Faf de Klerk
14 - Gareth Davies
9 - Handré Pollard
8 - Dan Biggar
5 - Willie le Roux
4 - Hadleigh Parkes

Basically very similar distribution across both teams, a testament of how mirrored their tactics were.
Can’t find anywhere the « ball in play » overall time but I won’t be surprised that we would get one and a half kick per minute ...

[Old Man]

It is doubtful that Rassie will remain as Springbok coach, it was clear that as the Director of SA rugby he would do a caretaker job until the RWC, and then another coach will be appointed.

He did say though that as Director of rugby he would work very closely with the new coach.

[Scottrf]

Interesting stat that summarise a bit that game :

Kick in play:

Wales 36-37 South Africa

19 - Faf de Klerk
14 - Gareth Davies
9 - Handré Pollard
8 - Dan Biggar
5 - Willie le Roux
4 - Hadleigh Parkes

Basically very similar distribution across both teams, a testament of how mirrored their tactics were.
Can’t find anywhere the « ball in play » overall time but I won’t be surprised that we would get one and a half kick per minute ...

I'd be much more scared if they put Reinach at 9. They wont win a kicking game.

[Taylorman]

Interesting where Ireland and Wales go now. Both get new coaches, neither have coached internationally, as head coach at least as far as I know.

Both have never got to a final of this tournament despite one being Grand slam champs, and ranked no. 1 around the time of the tournament, the other ranked no. 1 going into the tournament.

Clearly the WCup jinx remains for these two, especially Ireland. And with new coaches, up against the might of Eddies ever improving England....massive challenges ahead. Ireland also probably carry a few long termers who will need to be replaced.

Big challenges ahead, as there are for NZ, and Oz, also going forward with new coaching, and leadership.

Interesting the two finalists are the only potential winners being coached by coaches that are staying on!

Hard case.

Im not sure finishing joint 3rd ( )  really counts as a jinx for wales, their world cup record has pretty good in recent years and reflective of their ranking pingponging between 9 and 1. 

But yes its a big change for both teams. Ireland very much need it, they look stale and at the limit of what they can do playing an outdated brand of rugby. One thing that really set NZ apart in that game and that England seemed able to match possibly even better was the fitness and mobility of players. The way these two sides move about and work rates the forwards put in are setting a new standard. The fast play is also helped by the new tackle laws. 
Ireland got some good success under Schmidt but him moving on is coming at the right time. 
Its also wrong to cast Farrell as some virgin to international rugby, maybe as a head coach but he has stacks of experience in test rugby coaching at a high level. Whether that translates in to him being any good or not I'm on the fence with tbh, he was instrumental in pushing some dodgy decisions with England. But given Irelands standing in world rugby and lack of home grown coaches with any test experience  hes about as good as they will get ...some notion of being a bit Irish, bags of knowledge of the NH game, years of experience under a number of coaches at test level, young enough to stick with it. 
Where some Ireland fans are pointing to an issue is that hes not a clean break from the Schmidt era, hes part of the current set up, an inside man promoted up from a set up that has been found out. Does he still have baggage with existing players that makes it harder to clear out those who probably wont make the next world cup or who wont be able to adapt to the way the game seems to be going? 

With Wales its a little different. The world cup wasnt quite what they'd dreamed of, but a chunk of that was down to injury andI think most fans recognise that after being written off time and again Gatland keeps coming back and reinvigorating Wales. He made some big calls 18 months ago, and led a change in style as well as a change in playing personnel that bought an very successful 12 months leading up to the world cup (plus something something Lions). 
He still seems to have the backing of the fans and squad, and has shown he can make changes. 
Gatland is going to be a very tough act to follow for any coach coming in. The senior players will only ever have played test rugby under him, even on Lions tours (Howley stand ins aside). Winning over a dressing room when your coaching cv is leading a mediocre Pro 14 side might not be all that easy, his test coaching role with Fiji was so long ago now as to be almost meaningless. 

Aus have the challenges whatever. their game just doesnt have enough depth of talent any more, and the test coach can still only work with what comes through from an increasingly failing domestic game. 

NZ I guess following up on Hansen like Gatland is going to be a tough act to follow, but maybe it will do the new coach some good that they bowed out gracefully and let someone else have a go at winning the world cup. They wont be walking into an atmosphere where the team feels like they know better than the coach, but one where they are very much switched on to right the failings and get back to dominance. 

SA and England will be glad to be keeping their coaches thats for sure, but will also face having to replace some players and possible world cup hangovers. 

Interesting times ahead, its been great having real competition between a group of 6 teams rather than 3 or 4 as has often been the case. Its good for the global game if that continues. I do have some concerns about Wales, Ireland and Aus for the next couple of years though. Lets see though!

Nice, thanks for that. Haven’t seen much of Pivac since he coached various sides in the Auckland area, to some success. That will be interesting.

Gats could end up as AB coach given the trend towards the strengthening of the north. With the current crew we’ve lost touch with NH rugby, Hansen not having been there for 15 years or so. None of Foster nor Scott Robertson have coached overseas and Gats for me looks more and more the obvious choice. Our naivety showed in this semi and Gats would be one to reign in the tendency to go wide ‘at all costs’. The thinking being what could he do with, presumably, better players at his disposal.

[Gooseberry]

Interesting stat that summarise a bit that game :

Kick in play:

Wales 36-37 South Africa

19 - Faf de Klerk
14 - Gareth Davies
9 - Handré Pollard
8 - Dan Biggar
5 - Willie le Roux
4 - Hadleigh Parkes

Basically very similar distribution across both teams, a testament of how mirrored their tactics were.
Can’t find anywhere the « ball in play » overall time but I won’t be surprised that we would get one and a half kick per minute ...

The number of kicks alone doesn't tell the whole story. 
Passes : Wales 115 SA 67
Runs: Wales 114 SA 71 

The tactics were different, Wales were often taking several phases and dominated both possession and territory. The game really seems to have been won by South Africas physical defence and taking low risk options to kick from their own territory. Or possibly Wales' lack of attacking flair and composure. They had the ball in their hands in the SA half often enough to have scored more. 


That said I still have a hard time getting my head around the fact that this game yielded significantly more points than the other semi which seemed to be played at breakneck speed with two free flowing teams.

[Collapse2005]

The way I see it Taylorman is that its NZs forwards that arent as dominant as they used to be. They are still good but teams with good packs will get the odd win against them.

NZ used to be quite dominant in the lineout and breakdown in particular and at times in the scrum. I didnt see mich of this dominance at this RWC or in the lead up.

[Guest]

I thoroughly enjoyed that game, it's been a while since we had a proper slugfest for the purists. I am bitterly disappointed that the Welsh didn't get through. An England-Wales final would have been enormous and the Gatland-Jones slanging match in the build up would have had it nicely simmering. I don't think anyone who's ever supported British and Irish rugby could have begrudged Alun Wyn Jones lifting that trophy. In terms of Wales' performance over the tournament and on the day I think you should be really bloody proud. The backs coach, albeit an apparently inept backs coach, was given the boot after a scandal five minutes before the tournament. The fly-half that had dictated much of the best Welsh play over the last twelve months got injured in the warm-ups. Your winger was pulled off with a hamstring injury. I'd rate Faletau as the best Welsh player when fit, and he wasn't. And after that you were a stone's throw from the World Cup Final. Best of luck for next week. Frankly, having a wee read through this thread, to paraphrase Kevin Keegan (hopefully with a more favourable result) I would love it if you beat them.

Admirable comment and agree 100% here - cheers 123.

[whocares]

Interesting stat that summarise a bit that game :

Kick in play:

Wales 36-37 South Africa

19 - Faf de Klerk
14 - Gareth Davies
9 - Handré Pollard
8 - Dan Biggar
5 - Willie le Roux
4 - Hadleigh Parkes

Basically very similar distribution across both teams, a testament of how mirrored their tactics were.
Can’t find anywhere the « ball in play » overall time but I won’t be surprised that we would get one and a half kick per minute ...

The number of kicks alone doesn't tell the whole story. 
Passes : Wales 115 SA 67
Runs: Wales 114 SA 71 

The tactics were different, Wales were often taking several phases and dominated both possession and territory. The game really seems to have been won by South Africas physical defence and taking low risk options to kick from their own territory. Or possibly Wales' lack of attacking flair and composure. They had the ball in their hands in the SA half often enough to have scored more. 


That said I still have a hard time getting my head around the fact that this game yielded significantly more points than the other semi which seemed to be played at breakneck speed with two free flowing teams.

I agree it doesn’t and that is why I wanted to know the effective time of play .
For instance Wales kicked almost as much against France but they ran almost twice as many metres against them (and that’s with not getting much decent ball during the 1st half ) so it seems there was more « rythm » and they played at higher pace.

[Old Man]

Where do you guys get the stats from?

[Scottrf]

Where do you guys get the stats from?

ESPN is the best I know of:

https://www.espn.co.uk/rugby/matchstats?gameId=292934&league=164205

[Old Man]

Where do you guys get the stats from?

ESPN is the best I know of:

https://www.espn.co.uk/rugby/matchstats?gameId=292934&league=164205

Thanks

[Guest]

Agree with Guns. It's pretty simple. NZ had the running game to beat anyone, but the forwards were a soft touch.

As we all saw last year, Kieran Read was hanging on and looked like he'd lost it in 2018. Against Ireland, it was a rare performance aided by his side's/pack's dominance. In the end, with his team on the back foot, he offered nothing - couldn't offer anything - to get them going forward, to kill the opposition like McCaw did, or burst over the gainline with a few big carries. It's always useful looking at the captain and working down, and in the end of the writing was on the wall for Read and Hansen got that one wrong where so many others were 'retired' relatively early. He held on to Read and, likewise, the pack was probably undercooked.

Got away with being dominated by the Boks, but couldn't against England.

[Guest]

Old Man - do you still want Rassie to leave if he wins?

[Old Man]

I have never wanted him to leave, the risk of new coaching appointments is scary.

[Old Man]

Agree with Guns. It's pretty simple. NZ had the running game to beat anyone, but the forwards were a soft touch.

As we all saw last year, Kieran Read was hanging on and looked like he'd lost it in 2018. Against Ireland, it was a rare performance aided by his side's/pack's dominance. In the end, with his team on the back foot, he offered nothing - couldn't offer anything - to get them going forward, to kill the opposition like McCaw did, or burst over the gainline with a few big carries. It's always useful looking at the captain and working down, and in the end of the writing was on the wall for Read and Hansen got that one wrong where so many others were 'retired' relatively early. He held on to Read and, likewise, the pack was probably undercooked.

Got away with being dominated by the Boks, but couldn't against England.

The reason why England were successful vs the AB’s was that they attacked more, South Africa didn’t

England used their dominance to use possession in attack, South Africa didn’t

[LondonTiger]

The 60 minutes I saw Wales seemed to be typically using one up runners, taking contact and repeating (won 97 rucks to SA's 55).

It should also be noted that Wales missed 16 tackles (of 90) with SA missing just 11 of 158.

[Guest]

Ah ok, I assumed this was a judgement on his ability - but it's more to do with what he wants? He genuinely sees himself as a caretaker and would prefer to be DoR in a hands off way?

It is doubtful that Rassie will remain as Springbok coach, it was clear that as the Director of SA rugby he would do a caretaker job until the RWC, and then another coach will be appointed.

He did say though that as Director of rugby he would work very closely with the new coach.

[Old Man]

He has a six year contract, which I thought he would coach until 2023.

But he is more involved with changing the structures, coaching structures and infrastructure in SA rugby due to his Directorship.

He started last year with getting the Super Rugby franchises on the same line with regards to player condition etc.

[Guest]

Is he not just, effectively, going to do both jobs? A bit like Jamie Joseph in Japan?

[BamBam]

I can't remember if Biggar or Patchell was the fly half in that long string of phases that ended with the Adams try, but thought that told a lot of the story about the game

Wales didn't really look like they were ever going to punch through the defensive lines with the forward pick and go game, and it never really looked like the ball was going to come out to the backs, even when there was a hint of an overlap. Maybe a more creative fly half (Anscombe?) would have forced the issue and demanded the ball there

I know Wales scored anyway off the scrum, but how much did 20 odd phases of pick and drive take out of the forwards - I do think Wales backs would have managed to score given how narrow the SA defensive line was, and it may have meant there was a bit more energy left in the Welsh forwards legs to try and get back down the field again later on

Might be overthinking it, but that really felt like a key few minutes in the game even though Wales did score

[Old Man]

Is he not just, effectively, going to do both jobs? A bit like Jamie Joseph in Japan?

Initially he wasn’t going to coach the Boks, but due to the gutter Allister Coetzee took SA rugby SARU had no choice as to get rid of Allister.

Can’t tell you why Rassie appointed himself though, I suspect it had to do with the fact that Allister’s contract was poorly written and he had to be paid out his full contract value. I might be mistaken, but that is how I understand it.

I think Rassie’s initial appointment had more to do with correcting coaching levels, rejuvenating rugby skills and focusing on how to make professional temas performing better on a national scale, rather than just one team.

[Old Man]

I can't remember if Biggar or Patchell was the fly half in that long string of phases that ended with the Adams try, but thought that told a lot of the story about the game

Wales didn't really look like they were ever going to punch through the defensive lines with the forward pick and go game, and it never really looked like the ball was going to come out to the backs, even when there was a hint of an overlap. Maybe a more creative fly half (Anscombe?) would have forced the issue and demanded the ball there

I know Wales scored anyway off the scrum, but how much did 20 odd phases of pick and drive take out of the forwards - I do think Wales backs would have managed to score given how narrow the SA defensive line was, and it may have meant there was a bit more energy left in the Welsh forwards legs to try and get back down the field again later on

Might be overthinking it, but that really felt like a key few minutes in the game even though Wales did score

I think you are talking about the long passage of pressure Wales had inside the SA 22, I was thinking similarly, they could have gone wider much earlier, the defence on the SA left side was extremely narrow.

[LondonTiger]

JD2, Parkes & Biggar all played like guys carrying knocks (which they were).

It was a shame for Wales that they ended up with so many injury issues - but arguably it was exacerbated by not applying enough rotation. Parkes for example started 3/4 warm ups and all 6 world cup games.

[TightHEAD]

Gatland didn't manage the squad well and that has cost them as they were more than capable of beating SA.

[LondonTiger]

Gatland didn't manage the squad well and that has cost them as they were more than capable of beating SA.

There is an article in the Times (Steve James ex Glamorgan cricketer) that suggests Gatland has in the 12 years helped Wales to overperform, and that with the resources available to them there is no way they should be making RWC semis. It talks about the number of players, praises Gats for building a level of depth but states that there is not the depth that other countries may have and bemoans regional performances.

I think a lot of that is fair, and Gatland has done a pretty awesome job getting Wales to where they are now.

[mikey_dragon]

Gatland didn't manage the squad well and that has cost them as they were more than capable of beating SA.

There is an article in the Times (Steve James ex Glamorgan cricketer) that suggests Gatland has in the 12 years helped Wales to overperform, and that with the resources available to them there is no way they should be making RWC semis. It talks about the number of players, praises Gats for building a level of depth but states that there is not the depth that other countries may have and bemoans regional performances.

I think a lot of that is fair, and Gatland has done a pretty awesome job getting Wales to where they are now.

Yep and it’s another reason why Gatland should be held in higher regard, but more often than not he is shown nothing but contempt. I hope he goes well with Chiefs.

[Gooseberry]

JD2, Parkes & Biggar all played like guys carrying knocks (which they were).

It was a shame for Wales that they ended up with so many injury issues - but arguably it was exacerbated by not applying enough rotation. Parkes for example started 3/4 warm ups and all 6 world cup games.

The injuries have been an ongoing thing though, it restricted some of the opportunities to rest players short of using ones they didnt want in the final squad in the warm ups. Eddie trimmed his training squad much earlier. 

How many games this year haven't Youngs Ford and Farrell played in? England don't really have a third choice fly half (and the second choice plays 12 when hes not starting 10) , and barely have a second choice scrum half. Theyve been very lucky with injuries, but in some areas would've been badly exposed had that hit in the warm ups/mid tournament. 

Some of it may be better player management and fitness, but some of its luck too.

[Sponsored content]