The Boks finished the series with a blowout in Baltimore for a 3-1 win. 1News rugby writers Scotty Stevenson and Patrick McKendry look back on a compelling tour.
Scotty, there’s a bit to unpack from the weekend before we take a wider look at the All Blacks’ performances in “Rugby’s Greatest Rivalry” series, so I’ll get straight to the point: do you believe New Zealand are as on track as head coach Dave Rennie believes after that 43-28 defeat in Baltimore?
SS: That is very direct! I think even the most blinkered All Blacks fan would be forced to concede the All Blacks failed to address the weaknesses exposed by the Springboks in the second Test in Cape Town, which is the major reason they were bettered in the third and fourth Tests as well.
This may be a case of the All Blacks having to lose the battle to win the war, and I have no doubt exposing a large squad to such a long tour will have downstream benefits for next year’s World Cup.
That said, the very best All Blacks sides contained the quickest of students, and I don’t think this group have provided compelling evidence that they have learned from their mistakes and addressed their obvious shortcomings.
There is much to admire about the side’s attacking approach, but ambition without execution is folly in Test match rugby, as is making the same errors week after week. I think the final Test would have been especially deflating for the fact the All Blacks lost control of the second half and could not win it back.
All of which is to say a 3-1 scoreline does not offer much by way of supporting evidence.
There are elements of the All Blacks’ game that do look improved, so how about we look at the positives? What have you found most pleasing despite the results?
PM: One of the main positives is something you’ve touched on – exposing a large group to the realities of Test rugby at the highest level. The eight weeks away (for those who remained intact injury-wise) would also have been valuable for the collective in terms of the players becoming familiar with the game plan, expectations and overall “culture”.
They were also very much in all three of the Tests they lost, although as you say, it got away from them in Baltimore as they chased the game. Still, there were no collapses reminiscent of that shocking meltdown in Wellington last year.
They appear more connected and resilient. And they showed flashes of an attacking potential that would probably badly hurt most other nations. But they could not continually stack the big moments together like the Boks could – a testament to their rivals’ greater experience and knowledge of a game plan that is simple but very difficult to beat.
But as you say, one of the main frustrations for all concerned will be the players’ apparent inability to learn and adapt. The lazy offsides (Patrick Tuipulotu’s early one in Baltimore comes to mind) and some daft breakdown penalties (hello Tupou Vaa’i) heaped on the pressure by taking it off the Boks.
Some players grew considerably, too, and we’ll address them later, but in the meantime let’s grapple with one major issue: is the All Black pack good enough to go deep into next year’s World Cup?
SS: As a collective, yes. But I think the demands of this game plan require exactly the right athletes in exactly the right positions. We have a desire for highly-skilled, ball-handling big men in New Zealand, which we have in abundance. South Africa does not have the same expectation on its low numbers. They are there to tackle, scrum, lift, jump, and clean out. We ask our pack to do all of that and to also set offensive patterns, throw good passes, offload in tackles and do it all at breakneck speed. It’s a huge ask.
Just on the first point above, I don’t think the cost of losing Ardie Savea early in the third Test, and his subsequent absence for the fourth, can be understated. With the utmost respect to the rest of the loosies, Savea seems tailormade for this type of game, and his boots are hard to fill.
I know you point out there were no Cake Tin collapses in this series, but if you shrink the timeline, there were periods in each of the last three Tests during which mistakes or a failure to contain South Africa’s strengths effectively extinguished a chance of victory.
In the second Test, two quick penalties to start the second half allowed South Africa to build a 16-point buffer, allowing them to control the game. In the third Test the All Blacks saw a second-half five-point lead become a 12-point deficit with nine minutes to play. In the final Test the Springboks built a 15-point buffer by the 53rd minute and held a two-score advantage for the remainder of the match.
The All Blacks scored last in each of those matches (77th minute, 82nd minute, and 81st minute) which is laudable, but each must be filed under too little, too late.
The other factor to consider is how hard the All Blacks had to work for their points. It’s a hard road to victory when you have to put up enormous phase numbers before scoring. That takes a toll on the offence as much as the defence.
There were three areas of the game that came under intense scrutiny on this tour: Scrum, lineout and kick receipt. Are these easy fixes? And are they the right things to be focused on?
PM: I agree with your summation about the demands on the forwards – they are under enormous pressure to be multi-skilled and key decision-makers on attack. No easy task.
But the forwards, and their coaches, must take responsibility for all three of the issues in your question and I’m adding kick receipt here because their big men were not great at taking re-starts either.
It should be noted though that the All Blacks’ scrum was constantly good on their feed. For whatever reason, the problems came on the Boks’ put-in. I do think that many of the match officials too easily bought into the idea of the home side’s total scrum dominance, though, and failed to see or turned a blind eye to the loosehead prop angling in or “walking around” – the latter a term that got a bit of air-play over the last few weeks. And the curious thing was the All Blacks’ only Test win came despite the Boks being at the most destructive in this area.
Overall, the lineout was pretty good, I felt – even yesterday when Eben Etzebeth was a constant menace in the middle. The All Blacks found a way – often at the front – and that at least was a good example of their ability to learn and adapt on the fly (although front-of-lineout ball isn’t the best to attack with).
But the contestable kick remains a big problem for the All Blacks. The Boks kicked better yesterday (as in, the kicks were actually contestable), and they claimed the vast majority of them. It provided easy in-roads and raised the question about whether the All Blacks’ tactic of trying to claim them while facing their own try-line is fit for purpose. This area needs urgent attention.
I would add try-line defence as an area of required improvement. The All Blacks conceded their first two tries far too easily in Baltimore. I know Jordie Barrett can’t be everywhere but it would have been helpful for a defender of his quality to be closer to the action for the tries to Damian de Allende and Morne van den Berg.
What are your thoughts here and what about the other side of the ball – the All Blacks’ backline attack? Right track?
SS: By and large. The attack supplied some breathtaking moments in the series, and it looks like at the very least there is total buy-in from the side. Former All Black Israel Dagg asserted that the attacking shape has both pros and cons: On the plus side, the system does succeed in drawing out defenders but, on the downside, the almost maniacal desire to get wide as early as possible allows those same defenders to reposition and to thwart outside channel attacks.
The system certainly looks complex, but all the moving parts provide multiple options on each phase. Again, we have to go back to execution at key moments – dropped balls, passes behind players, isolated carries – and assess the merits of the system against the accuracy of individual components.
It could also be argued that halfback Cam Roigard wasn’t given a lot of room to move around the ruck, which meant he wasn’t able to get the defence on its heels as much as we know he can. That reduces the efficacy of the attack and requires a lot of organisation behind the gain line. When it goes to plan it can leave defenders horribly exposed. When it doesn’t quite work, it can cause panic in the transition.
There will be a lot of emphasis on decision making between now and the Bledisloe Cup fixture against the Wallabies.
You mentioned the growth of certain players on this tour. Who for you has really stood up and enhanced his standing in the side?
PM: Jordie Barrett is my player of the tour. He’s been outstanding and lord knows where the All Blacks would be without him. Ardie Savea was badly missed in the second half of the Test in Soweto and again at the weekend. His leadership qualities are obvious and that buy-in you mentioned is applicable to Savea’s captaincy, too. Will Jordan has been good again, with Damian McKenzie well suited to the game plan. I’ve been impressed with Ruben Love too but it’s clear he found it tough in those first two losses. Anton Segner was very good before his injury.
I’ll leave you with the last word on your men of the series and early thoughts about next month’s series against the Wallabies.
SS: So many players had moments, but I agree wholeheartedly with you regarding Jordie Barrett. Another for me was Fabian Holland who has the potential to become a great All Black. Wallace Sititi finished strongly in a beaten side which will be a great boost for him personally, and Luke Jacobson and Ethan Blackadder were workaholics who add depth to the loose forward mix and enhance competition for places.
With 49 players used across this tour, there will be no excuses come the Wallabies series. New Zealand may have been beaten by a better side in South Africa and the USA, but they must surely become a better side for it.
The Wallabies at Eden Park on October 10 will give them the chance to prove that. The Eden Park record is not the only thing on the line, either. It pays to remember the All Blacks have not lost four consecutive matches this century. Should they fail against Australia, they’ll quickly find the leash they’ve been given gets an awful lot shorter.
SHARE ME