TVNZ rugby experts Scotty Stevenson and Patrick McKendry look ahead to the Cape Town Test after an eventful occasion at Ellis Park last weekend.
Well, Scotty, there's a bit to get through after that Test in Johannesburg. What were your impressions, and do you feel it's a little unfair to blame the All Blacks' bench for that final-quarter collapse?
SS: I don't think you can blame the All Blacks' bench as much as credit the South African bench. Those guys have become closing specialists and they know that's their job and they train for it.
I think you could look to some of the other decision makers in those closing stages and argue it wasn't as clinical as it needed to be.
Rassie Erasmus has been very clever in giving his bench an identity. "The Bomb Squad" may seem just a catchy nickname but it has given the eight reserves a sense of purpose — a personality — and a moniker that suggests they are the difference makers. It is a clever piece of management.
In New Zealand we talk about who will start the Test. In South Africa they look more generally at who makes the match day 23. The All Blacks need to take note of this. For many years their bench was a key point of difference, and the way they used it was innovative.
On that; one thing that intrigues me is this notion of innovation. Do you think New Zealand has lost its reputation as the game's inventors-in-chief?
PM: Not necessarily. I was a little surprised by the All Blacks' innovations at Ellis Park — for example a couple of lineout moves and a nifty piece of kick-off deception between Damian McKenzie and Beauden Barrett.
In fact, I thought they showed more innovation than their opponents, who were awfully predictable at times. Jordie Barrett's intercept came the third time Boks' midfielder Damian de Allende shoved the ball on to loose forward Siya Kolisi in a groaningly obvious move.
The All Blacks in general showed a greater skill level than the Boks, I thought, and showed a greater appreciation and use of space when passing the ball. Caleb Clarke's two tries were evidence of that. They just didn't or couldn't keep it up for long enough.
I get the sense you think otherwise? I thoroughly agree with your assessment of the Bomb Squad, however.
SS: I certainly don't think the game here is as inventive as it used to be, but pressure for results has perhaps been partly to blame for that. The international game has also become far more obsessed with size over skill, which plays into the strength of the world champions.
You are right that the green shoots are there. The All Blacks looked surgical at times against the sledgehammer, but subduing the South Africans saps plenty of energy and the more complicated the plan, the more energy required.
This is where the bench strategy has to be so on point. How can you inject skill into the game while still counteracting the raw power of the Boks bench? I do suspect the All Blacks will include an extra forward this week, which makes the selection of the one utility back extra spicy. I suspect that means a shoot out between Anton Lienert-Brown and Rieko Ioane.
How are you seeing the bench shaping up?
PM: I wonder when the team is named at 5pm today whether we could see Beauden Barrett on the bench? It would allow Scott Robertson to select Will Jordan at fullback and give him the ability to bring Barrett on in the second half when he could provide a real spark.
I'm not sure Robertson got the balance right at the weekend. Ethan Blackadder was having a stormer of a game but was taken off in favour of Samipeni Finau in what appeared to be a planned substitution which was not a success. I think Razor should be a bit more flexible and play what he sees — a bit like the All Blacks, in fact — although admittedly I have the benefit of hindsight.
Codie Taylor was another who was playing incredibly well and didn't seem fazed by the altitude or intensity of the Test. He too was taken off.
I'd like Razor to be a bit more innovative himself and maybe bring on two fresh props to counter the Bomb Squad. Either way, he could probably be a bit more ruthless.
Speaking of which, we haven't got into the officiating yet. Thoughts? I have a few.
SS: I'm trying to recall how many times the All Blacks have been refereed by Andrew Bruce but regardless of actual numbers, suffice to say the South Africans in the URC would have experienced his style a lot more.
This is important. Players know all the nuances of referees they are accustomed to, and therefore understand where that line of transgression is. Even with the best analysis, there is no substitute for real game experience.
I do think the penalty against TJ Perenara was a bit of a chest puff but, again, the incident was illustrative of a lack of experience with the official.
I do think the All Blacks had cause to request clarification around the process that led to the awarding of the Bongi Mbonambi try, but they should be more intrigued by some of the breakdown rulings. It was clear the Springboks sought to slow the ball down — and all power to them — but often that kind of play went unpunished. It has a huge bearing on momentum and flow.
Ultimately, though, where is World Rugby in all this? Is it time the organisation took a more educational approach and openly discussed some of the more contentious calls made in games? I'd like your thoughts on that after you hit us with your take on Saturday's adjudication…
PM: I would describe Brace's penalty against Perenara, when the All Blacks were hot on attack and potentially about to score another try after their excellent start, as unprecedented. There was no abusive or foul language, just frustration directed at the official based on the Boks' slowing tactics.
I have never seen that before — a normal reaction would be a warning at the next stoppage — and it affected the All Blacks significantly. I think they felt unable to question Brace's decisions from there, which may have explained the passivity around the debatable try decision, and others.
As for Brace's breakdown rulings? Bizarre at times and hugely significant. Remember Cortez Ratima being penalised (on the touch judge's call) for entering the ruck from the side. The All Blacks had won a counter-ruck and the halfback couldn't come straight on because a Springbok forward was lying in the way. Ratima was onside. I could go on.
I agree 100% that World Rugby have a role here because utter confusion and frustration at the end of a Test isn't good for anyone, least of all the players. They deserve better, and so do we the viewers/consumers/fans.
Anyway, I'll put aside the disquiet I felt at seeing that Englishman Matt Carley will have the whistle in Cape Town to ask: What do you think about it all?
SS: I think South Africa is a tough place for any official, but they are professionals and must not let themselves be affected by the environment. Easier said than done in front of fans like that, but Carley is experienced, and you would hope he has taken the time with both teams to discuss the way he sees the game.
The All Blacks should have plenty to build upon after that first test, so that should be their focus — taking that 60 minutes of good stuff and welding on a close they are capable of producing.
The All Blacks don't have the luxury of an experienced bench so your point about Beauden Barrett has some resonance. The difficulty is in managing his expectations and breaking up that combination with McKenzie which is showing signs of growth. That development is progressing, but not in the linear way you might hope. Even so, I still think starting them both is the best option.
I agree wholeheartedly that the All Blacks have to be more flexible in their substitutions. There will be some relief to be found at sea level, and that should allow the team to go deeper into the well.
I would say I think they will be loath to make too many changes. I think the starters stay the same and it's on the pine where the shift in style will be evident.
How do you call that start/bench mix?
PM: I would be very surprised to see any changes in the pack because the starters all acquitted themselves well. A side note here: I like the way lock Tupou Vaa'i is progressing. Loose forward Dalton Papali'i may be back in contention after his thumb problem, but I'd put him on the bench. Could Razor go for a 6-2 forwards-backs split? Maybe, and I'd quite like to see it given the versatility in the backline.
No matter what, the reserves must show more aggression when they come on, particularly the forwards. They were too passive for my liking but after enduring that Ellis Park cauldron, the less experienced should know what to expect in Cape Town.
Wrap it up for us with some final thoughts on what we should expect in terms of the team and the bigger picture.
SS: Stay the course.
If this team believes in what it is trying to produce, then Sunday morning is another chance to prove it. There is a lot at stake here. The All Blacks pride themselves on a cabinet full of Southern Hemisphere trophies, and the Freedom Cup has been gathering dust in there for 15 years. This is also a gilt-edged opportunity to take a bit of wind out of the Boks' sails. That would go a long way to assuaging the growing discomfort among All Blacks fans.
I think this team is capable of a winning performance. I was impressed like everyone else with the Boks finish last weekend, but not so much by their opening 50 minutes.
I think the composure of the game drivers is key. I don't think it's all about a power competition off the bench. I think it'll come down to superior game IQ.
You?
PM: Totally agree.
SHARE ME