Analysis: The blueprint Gatland provided that shows how to expose the Springboks defence
“There is no innovation and creativity without failure. Period” – Brene Brown
“No matter how organised a defence is, there will always be space on a rugby field”. Any young player, would have at some point, heard these words from their coach, from U12’s through to 1st XV level. Identifying space, and attacking it at a moment’s notice, is what the entire game of rugby is about.
However, doing this often requires a wide variety of skill sets that are so often outside of the box.
Defences nowadays are geared towards the modern game, designed to work against structure and patterns in play, whereas fluidity and the freedom to move away from this, maybe harder to combat.
This gives rise to the term that with the increasing efficacy of defences, that playing it safe, maybe the worst thing you can do.
The South African defence is designed to eliminate the likely options that structure provides. Whereas a change in thinking and a willingness to embrace the risky option may yield better results against this defence.
Set-Piece
Of all teams to play Rassie Erasmus’ South Africa, the team that showed an unusually wise tactical acuity of them was Wales.
New Zealand beat them, but when South Africa’s defence was on point and full-on in its intensity, the team that outsmarted them using established sequences off set-piece was Wales.
They were able to get on the outside using set three-phase sequence plays that allowed them the ability to put the ‘catch-up defender’ (CUD) in two minds, achieved, with the miss-pass or commonly known as M1.
Wales run George North on a short pass to target the No. 9, followed by a forward pod up the guts into the midfield.
This forward pod is very important to the success of this move. It is designed to hold the fold-over of the Bok forwards and result in Welsh backs exclusively targeting Springbok backs.
This is where the genius of this play comes in. Having established a backline against a backline, Wales throw a miss pass from the first receiver, directly to the third receiver, executed by Gareth Anscombe to Liam Williams above.
This circumvents the South African defence’s standard operating procedure of cutting off the second receiver, who was Jonathan Davies.
Because the last defender, Cheslin Kolbe above, has to remain in line with the CUD until the pass is given from the second receiver, he has too much ground to make up.
This allows the third receiver, Liam Williams, time to get the pass away to Josh Adams, who makes a significant break.
Going forward the third receiver must remain at depth, and the pass given early so the CUD can’t block the passing lane.
It has to be a pass given in front of the second receiver, so he can act as the bait for the CUD role to tackle him.
This is not the only occasion that this three-phase framework worked for Wales. The ‘first receiver M1’ play is key to beating this edge defence, as it allows the third receiver time and space to pass to the wing and get around the defence.
Wales were keen to set into this pattern a year later, in one of their most important ever games.
Here, we see Wales packing down for a scrum near just inside the 15m line. Due to the benefits, Gareth Davies picks from the base and runs a blindside scoot, releasing George North.
Significant ground is made, and they start their three-phase movement. The 3-pod carries as above as the first phase, the objective being to generate quick ball.
In the second phase, we see the CUD move forward to cut off the expected second receiver option, but instead, Dan Biggar plays the key move to isolate the backline.
Biggar passes to Ken Owens, who runs an out-in line to target the ‘forward’ portion, restricting the fold over and isolating the backline for the third phase.
This is crucial. The 10/12, as a general rule, will only move over to the blind during the first three phases off lineout in particular, if the ball goes past them, or hits them.
If the attack keeps it tight and only targets the folding forwards, the backs won’t switch which means by the third phase, they’re strictly targeting the backline.
This means they’ve thinned the line, prevented the Boks from numbering up and created the overlap, with a single back in the scrumhalf on the blindside, whom we should keep a note of for later.
The inside angle of Owens has stopped the ‘fold over’ of the forwards, with most of them in the ruck, isolating the backline for the third phase attack and creating the overlap where Lukhanyo Am is seen calling for help.
Because of this, the Springbok backs set into a drift, whilst maintaining their pressure on the second receiver. It must be noted, that whilst a very good player, Sbu Nkosi (14) was targeted by Wales, as he is more likely to be indecisive in this system than his replacement; Cheslin Kolbe.
As we will show later, Wales’ second receiver was given time and space to pass, that they may not have had with Kolbe. This is one reason Kolbe started the final.
Because of the drift, Jonathan Davies as second receiver has the time to make the M1 pass, putting Adams into space, and gaining considerable ground.
England made use of the 10/12 reload dynamic themselves in the Rugby World Cup final.
Off the first phase, they use Jonny May to target Faf de Klerk on the scissors.
Then run two phases off No. 9 to the right, making sure to target only forwards and leaving Pollard and de Allende alone.
This ensures the ‘1-set’ of backs is maintained on the blind, with the ‘4-set’ to the open.
England attempt to exploit this by switching play but were shut down by de Klerk. The ‘M1’ pass is not used by England squandering the opportunity.
If England was able to ghost Elliot Daly into support May, this is a run-in try.
Exploiting the scrumhalf
The change that could prove fruitful against the Springboks is for a winger to come into the midfield channel off the third receiver, where a lock switches with them on the wing.
This is the first example, of where structural innovation and particular skill sets could prove useful, and it makes use of the scrum-half position off lineout and scrums within the 15m line outside of the 22.
Within the 22, Malcolm Marx is assigned at the front of the lineout, to prevent any trick plays involving the hooker and to assist in the maul.
In any other position on the pitch, the scrumhalf stands at the front of the lineout, a staple of Jacques Nienaber’s system.
But first, it requires getting outside of the ‘catch-up’ within the first three phases. This is required to commit the Bok back-three.
As shown below, Wales have played a two-phase sequence from the right touchline, specifically targeting Nkosi’s indecision as the CUD. In doing so, they get around the CUD, drawing in both wingers and fullback.
This position sets up the cross-kick option back towards where the lineout originated, where the No. 9 is isolated after defending at the front.
Whilst a 3-set out wide, the result shows why the most athletic, tallest lock should be opposite the No. 9. The backfield doesn’t have time to move over, hence the immediate cross-field kick is the right option.
De Klerk and Herschel Jantjjes are beasts in the tackle but can’t out-leap a 6’5 plus lock.
This option takes away the initiative the Boks want and puts the tallest man, very skilled at fielding balls from restarts, in a mismatch any scrumhalf wouldn’t want.
We saw the break earlier, with an exquisite M1 pass made from the first to third receiver by Wales.
On this occasion below, Pollard and Damian de Allende did not reload on the blindside with the No. 9 as the carriers never hit or passed them on second phase.
This left the scrumhalf alone and Kriel having to urgently fulfil the ADJ role.
The result is worse, with the backfield cover not present and the No. 9 even more isolated.
If a team can employ the ‘three-phase’ framework and target the forwards on first and second phase, an ‘All Blacks special’ in the low hanging cross-field kick could play dividends with the No. 9 isolated against a lock.
The mismatch between the tall man and the short one has been used before, for some players in their most important ever game.
Rather than sticking to the structure on the fourth phase, doing the expected and sending the ‘3-pod’ in, teams can identify and create real mismatches, if they have the daring to do it.
Going forward, teams could look to use this as an alternative to targeting the scrumhalf.
South African scrumhalves are machines in the tackle. Hence, they need to be targeted a smarter way.
“Lil” Floater
The outcome of success in the floated pass, depends on two inputs, the first is the delivery of the pass, and the actions of the receiver.
A floated pass can allow a lot of outcomes. Done incorrectly it can result in an intercept. Done well, it can result in a massive gain.
The problem is that many receivers (often the winger) take the ball while static, allowing the incredible work rate and natural agility of the Springbok outside backs to catch him.
If a player can run onto it, though, they may be able to get around this drift before it catches up.
Again, we look at Wales. In contrast to their three-phase framework, they were able to use a two-phase framework designed to target Nkosi in defence.
Wales send Parkes up the No. 10 channel, automatically setting in stone the forwards fold and Pollard/De Allende’s reload to the short side.
The long pass is given to Jonathan Davies, which skips the forwards and pits the Welsh backline against the “2-set” rather than “4” of the South African edge, forcing Nkosi to make the CUD decision, their objective.
This allows the Welsh attack to get on the outside.
While effective, the time taken for the link passing and depth means the Bok defence has the time to close down the outside backs and prevent any try-scoring opportunity.
An alternative that may work is the floated pass, with the winger taking it on the run
International rugby is a game of fine margins. If Davies is able to “double-pump”, to bring Nkosi up on Biggar but instead execute the floated pass, it would lead to the winger accelerating onto the ball.
The No. 9 can operate as support on the inside, and the No. 13 can operate on the outside.
The winger has to run onto the ball for this, but this would circumvent the link passing and allow him to catch at a much flatter alignment, allowing him the time and space to get around the inside drift of the Boks and engage the backfield.
Similar dynamics have been seen before. In 2003, the willingness to do this existed, whereas current adherences to pattern can quell these moments of endeavour when they are exactly what defensive patterns aren’t designed to contain.
This dynamic will be further explored in the next article in the series.
Doing this requires a new way of thinking and the openness to embrace skill sets that have in some ways been lost. It’s not easy to do, but there is no easy way to beat a team like South Africa. Embracing new ideas could be the way.
Comments on RugbyPass
Looking forward to the Wallabies being competitive again. No doubt that Joe can get them back on track.
1 Go to commentsThanks, Nick, not only for this fine article, but for all the others during 6N 2024. I really enjoyed this 2024 tournament, and felt it was one of the best for many years. That final match in Lyons was really good. England were certainly unlucky when that speculative hack by Ramos lead to a French try. It could just so easily have landed in English hand.s, and they score at the other end. I did think though that the French played some great rugby, and some of their driving play in the forwards was just fearsome. I watched Meafou with interest, and he has a good start to his career. It is interesting to compare him with Will Skelton. Lot of similarities, though so far Meafou has not shown any offloading threat. All credit to Borthwick for being prepared to change, and what great result, even if that last game was lost at the death. I feel they are a real chance to cause the AB’s problems this winter/summer. Finally a comment on Ireland. I thought their last game was their worst, and they did not look like the world’s No 2 side at all. What really worries me is that the loss to England was, in my view, down to poor decision making by the coaching group, and ofc Andy Farrell wears that. It was a big mistake to move JGP away from scrum half. Murray should have been the one to go to the wing. And the “finishers” should have been on the field earlier. And this is the second time this has happened. The RWC Qf against the AB’s, and not getting Crowley onto the field was a huge mistake. Finally, finally, watching Italy play was a joy. How wonderful that they are no longer the punchbag of the 6 N.
41 Go to commentsGreat story. Rugby needs new investment in teams like Brussels another pro league in Europe would be great.
1 Go to commentsAlso, looking at the data from last year, it seemed like by far the two biggest predictors of success were (1) kicking more than your opponents, and (2) having a higher rate of line-out wins than your opponents. I haven’t gone through the stats this year with a fine tooth comb, but the increase in kicks per game and the increase in tries from lineouts would suggest that these two metrics are only getting more important. England’s move away from a kick-heavy game to win against Ireland was seen by some as evidence that running rugby is on the rise. Alternatively it could be taken as evidence that if one team kicks more, and the other team wins more lineouts (as England did) a match is bound to be close to a draw.
2 Go to commentsI have been finding it odd that points per 22 entry has become such a talked about stat, given that your points per entry can be driven down by having more entries. These data would seem to confirm that it isn’t a useful metric, or at any rate is less useful than total entries.
2 Go to commentsI think the last two games England have played is some of their best rugby they have played under Borthwick. There has been a lot more attacking instinct and as a reward have created some well worked tries. Ollie Lawrence is a good foil at 12 as he offers the hard direct lines whilst the rest of the backs can play open. As much as it pains me to say but I do hope England keep playing this way. On a side note my favourite try of the weekend was Lorenzo Pani’s for the nice loop play that put him away and his finish was excellent. Thanks as always Nick.
41 Go to commentsMost exciting player on the planet right now, worth the price of a ticket.
1 Go to commentsBen Smith and Ireland live rent free in Safa’s heads. Their comments only triggers because its true. If the Boks had dismantled a 14 man AB’s, then there would be more respect. But they didnt, in fact quite the opposite, the 14 man NZ were clearly better. And the Bok have always been ordinary between RWC’s, thats why their supporters are now ‘only RWC’s matter’. They know thats BS. Its BS to both AB’s and Bok’s due to their history. But now its all the Safas have. Now we’ll hear excuses when they lose “oh we didnt have all our players available, the ABs/France/Eng/Irel were at full strength”, forgetting for a minute that its because of their own dumb policy. Oh well, makes a change from blaming ‘cheating refs’.
23 Go to commentsNo Nick, they did not, in fact, justify any ‘probables’ label. At no time did they seriously compete for the championship. Ireland led from start to finish and in the end, as a result of glaring referee errors, were never under serious pressure to lose their crown.
41 Go to commentsMoney for him, and his family, has been the sole motivator since he signed for Queensland aged 17. Why else sign for Melbourne. Tupou is poorly advised. If he’d stayed and developed in NZ he would have had a long Test career. If Leinster offer him a few more coins than he’s currently earning, he’s goneburger.
4 Go to commentsFinn. No one would say Ford had played well up until the last game. One standout performance in 5 is hardly in form . It should be a given that a 10 will control play . Not in Fords case be praised for suddenly doing so. Where was he against Scotland ,Italy. The pundits were saying how far away from play he was standing and one even said that the Ireland game was his last chance saloon to perform . Not exactly top form catching anyones eye. If he can play like this game after game then great. Keep him in . But after 90 odd caps we all know he just doesnt keep it going . By all means keep him there but the issue is that Borthwick will persist even when he plays poorly. Which is more often than not. Thats why i am concerned that Smith ,despite fab form , cannot get a game at his preferred spot. Can you imagine Ford at full back .
5 Go to commentsI do not really get why put Ollivon at 6 when he’s a 7, while Cros was the best Frenchman of the tournament, playing at…6. His only game replacing Aldritt at 8 doesn’t change much in terms of his impact. Lamaro was also outstanding in that brilliant Italian side, probably better than Reffell. So putting 2 Welsh players from the wooden spoon holders, and none of the 4th nation (Scotland) is also strange. Is it about showing that in this harsh transition Wales is, there were some standouts…?
6 Go to commentsThe events at this year’s six nations should undermine many of the arguments made against promotion and relegation between the six nations and the REC. If Italy had been allowed to yo-yo between divisions it conceivably could have really hurt their development, but if Italy, Wales, and Scotland are all at risk of relegation, with none of them being relegated more often than once every 3 or 4 years, you’d have to back all of them to muddle on through it, especially when you factor in the likelihood they’ll still be guaranteed world league matches against tier 1 opponents. Another way of looking at italys resurgence would be to say that the development model of adding an extra team to the six nations has worked, and now must be done again. Georgia could join to make it a 7 team round robin, and if and when Georgia demonstrate an ability to consistently win games, Portugal can also be added to make it an 8 team 2 conference competition. Frankly at this point I think it falls to world rugby to demand that the 6N act in the interests of the game. If the 6N won’t commit to expansion then the 6N teams should be handicapped in world cup draws (i.e. world cup seedings would not be based on their ranking points, but on their ranking points minus a 5 point penalty).
6 Go to commentsSteve Borthwick deserves credit for releasing the shackles on his England side and letting them play in a manner that somewhat resembles the top sides in the Gallagher Premiership. Will they revert to type in New Zealand in July.?
41 Go to commentsJames Lowe wouldn't get in any other 6N team. He's a great example of Farrell’s brilliance, and the Irish system. He is slow. His footwork is poor. But he fits perfectly in that Irish system, and has a superb impact. But put him in another team, and he'll look bang average.
6 Go to commentsCrusaders reached their heights through recruitment of North Island players, often leaving those NI teams bereft of key players. Example: Scott Barrett and Sam Whitelock robbed the Canes of their lineout and AB locks. For years the Canes have struggled at lock. This rabid recruitment was iniated by rule changes by a Crusader dominated NZR Head Office. Now this aggressive recruitment has back-fired, going after young inside back Hamilton Boys stars. They now have 4 Chiefs region 10s and not one with the requisite experience at Super level. Problems of their own making!
2 Go to commentsOver rated for a long time…exposed at scrum time too.
4 Go to comments“Firing me” should have been Gatland’s answer.
2 Go to commentsFinn Russell logic: “World” = 4 countries. Ireland may be at or near the top. FR’s bigger concern should be he and his fellow Scots (incl. the Bloemfontein ones) sliding back down to below top 10
42 Go to commentsMind games have begun. Ireland learned their lesson after saying they could beat England with 13 players or whatever. Still, if they win at Loftus, that would be impressive - final frontier etc.
58 Go to comments