1
All Blacks dealt second major injury ahead of Greatest Rivalry test series
8
{{item.n}}
Why the Springboks' rush defence won't bother the All Blacks
115 Comments
Share 
Former Springboks lock Victor Matfield is confident that the Springboks will bring their “aggressive defence” on the edges for the All Blacks, and that New Zealand hasn’t yet faced a defence like this so far in 2026.
Matfield said it’s been “easy” against passive defences for the All Blacks, and that the Springboks’ rush defence will be “up there” in their faces.
“The one thing they haven’t been able to consistently get right is to play against this rush defence and, again, they haven’t faced it so far this year, so it’s nicer going to the outside channels,” he told John Kirwan on the Rivals podcast.
“I actually showed a few clips on our show where Ireland’s wingers are hanging back, giving you opportunities, whereas for South Africa the guy will be up there, in their face. It will be a completely different picture they see when they attack against South Africa.
“It’s easy to go into the outside channels if guys are giving it to you.”
While he’s right that Ireland’s passive defence allowed the All Blacks to eat up easy metres on the outside, it’s not certain that the Boks are the defensive powerhouse that they used to be, and that Matfield possibly thinks. And secondly, the passive defence employed by Ireland is the harder option to crack.
The system that the All Blacks are using prefers the oncoming rush as it allows for more defensive errors.
On the Boks’ defence not being what it once was, the Springboks conceded five tries and 31 points to the Barbarians, three tries and 21 points to England, and four tries and 28 points to Scotland.
Despite rotating through a number of players through the July period, these numbers are far in excess of what the defensive-minded Boks would concede at the height of their rush defence system around 2019.
England bombed a couple more try-scoring opportunities to boot. Marcus Smith sniped for the line with numbers begging and coming up inches short, before being turned over.
England had five 22 entries in total and averaged 4.2 points per entry. But the most advanced attack the Springboks faced over the period was Scotland’s.
Scotland left a lot on the table with 11 entries into their 22 for a return of just 2.5 per entry, but they still came up with 28 points.
The alarming stat from the Scotland game for South Africa is conceding 15 line breaks. If the Springboks concede 15 line breaks to the All Blacks, they will put up over 50 points.
Many will point to Cheslin Kolbe and Kurt Lee Arendse not being available. The outside channels still had Jesse Kriel, the first-choice No.13, and Ethan Hooker, who started in Wellington last year.
The All Blacks have a similar attack philosophy to what Scotland showed. It’s an eerily similar attack shape and plays, which is not surprising given Dave Rennie’s time as head coach of Glasgow and with ex-Scotland halfback Mike Blair in charge of attack.
The Hurricanes inside backs core of Cam Roigard, Ruben Love and Jordie Barrett have mastered this layered attack plan under another Scottish coach, Clark Laidlaw.
There is a lot of Scottish influence in the current All Blacks play.
It’s not about firing the cutout pass into the space, it’s about using extra depth and short, sharp passing. The defensive line comes up too far to close and the ball escapes to the outside. The short passing commits the defenders, stopping them from floating wide to tackle if a bridge pass is thrown.
Early against Ireland, there was a bit of pressure on the second-to-last attacker, fullback Damian McKenzie. McKenzie was forced to cut back inside a lot, and he often beat that man to keep the play alive.
But as the game wore on and Ireland went very passive, the All Blacks had too much space to play with. Love would shift the ball onward with no pressure. Same with Jordie Barrett.
The ball players had too much time and space, but were committed to the plan to move the ball to width instead of straightening up and challenging the line. That allowed Ireland to identify the final ball carrier and attempt to make the tackle.
And that’s why the passive defence might be a harder one to crack than a rush defence. The All Blacks’ new shape wants a blitz defence. It lives on rush defenders flying out of the line.
Both Ruben Love and Jordie Barrett proved over the Super Rugby season that they thrive on that pressure, and that’s when the Hurricanes attack would open up a defence. Both are very skilled distributors in contact and at the line.
Love played almost exclusively out the back of forward runners the entire year. Any time a team tried to pressure Love, they couldn’t close on him. The ball moved onward and the defence was already beginning to fracture from the disconnection.
Over the first three All Blacks Tests, they are playing a similar structure which allows him to have that same picture, along with the extra time and space.
The second reason why the Hurricanes attack thrived against rush defence was having Cam Roigard. The All Blacks haven’t yet seen the best of Roigard against these passive defensive lines, but South Africa invites a different opportunity.
When the rush defence starts pushing up too fast on the first pod and Love out behind, Roigard exposes them around the ruck. His running game is lethal, and the moment they start switching off on the threat of the No.9, he will gash them.
Roigard’s last and only game against the Springboks was the 2023 Twickenham game. He got on with the game lost and scored a 65-metre solo try. He’s missed every Test since, and the Boks are not familiar with him. Roigard is a trump card up Rennie’s sleeve for this series.
The cat-and-mouse game between attack and defence will be a great hallmark of this series. But Matfield should be aware: the rush defence is what New Zealand wants to play against.
So send all the blitzers you want. Dial up the line speed, Rassie.
Register your interest to receive priority updates on RWC27 ticket releases. Don't miss out, stay in the loop!
