Kennedy Tsimba’s shift theory worked out far better for the All Blacks than it did the Springboks at Ellis Park on Saturday, and those shifts really mattered.
NEW: Follow Your favourites in the App 📱
You can now follow their favourite teams, tournaments and players in the RugbyPass App!
The first Test featured the lowest ball-in-play time of any international fixture in recent times [29 minutes and 34 seconds] and the same number of total rucks between both sides [138] the men in black were averaging alone at the recent Nations Championship.
The side which built the most rucks – South Africa with 80 – lost ball to pilfer at one in every 13 rucks they set, and there were 20 handling errors and 30 turnovers of possession overall. The game was largely scrappy and unstructured as a result, and the ability to adapt successfully to the chaos of possession shifts was at a premium.
Tsimba left readers with three questions at the end of the last article, and he has now addressed them in the aftermath of Johannesburg. They were as follows:
1. How do both teams respond to contestable kicks?
2. Who adapts fastest when the original structure breaks down?
3. How does each team manage the space behind the defensive line in the shift?
*
Who won the contestable kick battle?
“The Springboks won the contestable battle,11–6 on reclaims and receipts,” Tsimba says.
“However, one of the interesting observations is winning the contest doesn’t necessarily mean winning the shift that follows.
“At 35:42 on the clock, the Springboks regain a contestable kick, but the resulting play ends with a kick directly into touch. It provides an interesting distinction between winning the initial contest and capitalising on the subsequent shift.”
Tsimba’s observation winning the contest doesn’t mean winning the shift that follows was the key to unlocking the Springboks’ performance failure. The Bokke achieved several of their pre-match goals, such as winning penalties from scrum, winning the aerial battle and puncturing the New Zealand defence with power runs by the likes of outstanding number eight Jasper Wiese.
But when it came to exploiting the contest-win, and transitioning from winning the ball to using the ball, there was a mental stop, and the Springbok mindset froze, instead of flowing and expanding with the shift. Tsimba references a clip late in the first half, after Cheslin Kolbe reclaims a high kick on the edge of the New Zealand 22.
— William Bishop (@RPvids1994) August 24, 2026
If you freeze-frame as Sacha Feinberg-Mngomezulu receives the ball after Kolbe’s regather, there is a ‘full house’ available on attack including number six Paul de Villiers, 20 Andre Esterhuizen, 15 Damian Willemse and 12 Damian de Allende, with makeshift wing Jesse Kriel out beyond them on the left edge. New Zealand right wing Will Jordan is defending five metres inside the 15m line so this is a situation South Africa should be well able to exploit with ball in hand. Instead, the young Stormers tyro kicks the ball tamely cross-field, and straight into touch. Opportunity knocks, opportunity lost.
Who reacted and adapted first when the shift occurred and the structure fell away?
“47:22 on the clock: Fabian Holland’s kick block-down try,” Tsimba observes.
“This was a particularly good example of the behaviour I’m looking for within a shift. Holland recognised the change in the situation, reacted and executed faster than the players around him, with his charge-down ultimately producing a game-changing try.
“For me, the important part isn’t simply the charge-down. It is the recognition, reaction and adaptation under time-pressure.”
— William Bishop (@RPvids1994) August 24, 2026
— William Bishop (@RPvids1994) August 24, 2026
The Holland example is notable in comparison with a similar event at a New Zealand exit involving Eben Etzebeth at the start of the game. In the Etzebeth instance, the big man is not reacting to Ox Nche wriggling back toward his own goalline on the ground, and thereby establishing a new offside line at the ruck. He does not adjust to the shift and is penalised, whereas Holland not only blocks down the kick by Grant Williams, he reacts outstandingly to the loose ball created.
How did each team manage the backfield in the defensive shift?
“There were two contrasting examples,” Tsimba notes.
— William Bishop (@RPvids1994) August 24, 2026
“At 65:18, Williams receives an outlet pass from a kick-shift and makes a line-break. The All Blacks’ backfield responds by looking to force a ruck which allows for a contest at the breakdown. This is called ‘danger to dominance’. Jordan recognises the opportunity and wins the race to the contest, resulting in a holding shift penalty against the Springboks.
— William Bishop (@RPvids1994) August 24, 2026
“At 68:36, after a ruck shift, quick passing finds Jordie Barrett who identifies kick space while the Springbok backfield is still scrambling to close it. That then creates an isolation and breakdown contest, eventually leading to a 22 entry, two yellow cards [the first on 21 Marco van Staden at the end of the clip] and a try in that shift sequence.
“So, there is a big contrast in how the two teams managed the defensive backfield once the original structure had been disrupted.”
Tsimba goes on to state how winning small moments in the shift can create a chain reaction further down the line.
“At 55:43, there is an excellent example of what I’m starting to think of as a shift sequence, where one shift creates the next,” he says.
“It starts with a shift penalty to the All Blacks at a crucial five-metre scrum, reversing the penalty trend up until that point. That leads to an exit and then a contestable kick from the Boks. Jordan wins the contest and adapts quickly to evade the defensive pressure, which creates a line-break for Damian McKenzie.
— William Bishop (@RPvids1994) August 24, 2026
“That eventually leads to a scrum five metres out and Luke Jacobson’s try.
“So the entire sequence looks like this:
All Blacks scrum shift ?
All Blacks exit ?
Springbok contestable kick ?
Contest won by All Blacks ?
Adaptation by All Blacks ?
Line-break by All Blacks?
All Blacks 5m scrum ?
All Blacks try
“Sometimes a shift isn’t one isolated moment. It can become a chain reaction where one advantage creates the next, and a rolling wave of momentum in the unstructured moments of the game.”
Tsimba also makes one other pertinent comment on a scenario which arose towards the end of the first half, and how it might be treated differently in law.
“At 37:04 on the clock, the Springboks turn the ball over again at the ruck, creating a shift the All Blacks are beginning to exploit. However, the referee stops play because two All Blacks were lying injured on the other side of the field. It was a head clash which led to Ethan de Groot and Josh Lord being replaced for good.
— William Bishop (@RPvids1994) August 24, 2026
“The question that occurred to me concerned the nature of the restart in this situation.
“If the ball was effectively in the attacking team’s possession and the attacking team was beginning exploit the shift, why should the restart necessarily become a contest again if the ball was already being used effectively in transition?
“The referee’s decision to stop play was clearly the right one, as there are obvious protocols governing these situations. It’s more of a genuine shift/game-design question:
“When an external stoppage interrupts a shift, should the restart rehearse a contest which has already been won? Is there another way in which it can recreate the dynamic change in game state?”
These clips illustrate how the All Blacks reacted to fluid shifts in the game more quickly and more decisively than the Springboks. Even though South Africa won the aerial battle ‘set-piece’, they did not make as much use of the changes in possession they had engineered.
“The interesting story here is although South Africa won the contestable kick battle, the Test provided some fascinating examples of how the quality of the response after the initial shift can be just as important as winning the initial contest,” Tsimba says.
Rassie Erasmus has one week to fix the Springboks’ mindset and their technical accuracy before the second Test in Cape Town.
NEW IN THE APP: Official World Rugby Rankings hub! Compare team rankings side-by-side, with data going back 20 years.
Download the RugbyPass app on the App Store (iOS) and Google Play (Android) now!
I agree it is nicely balanced - I really believe the determining factor will be fatigue in the last half of the next test and the final test. How many minutes have each first choice starting forwards played? I think Ardie as PSDT cancel each other out - they are both machines. And no I don’t think there are no better hookers around than Fourie 🙄 I have no idea why Rassie picked him - I was just sure he was not going to be the disaster everyone was predicting.
Sure I had a little fun with the selection, why not? DF is a middle-aged man after all😉
The key word I used was ‘passive’ and that is what the Bok scrums were - passive. In the first scrum on their own 5m line Steenekamp collapses it to stop them being pushed back. Did you miss that? 13:10.
And no, Fourie was not part of the Springboks’ scrum in the 36th minute when they won two quick pens. Marx was already on. Ditto.
I reckon Rassie might have switched the front rows so that Dean avoided Aumua, which might have been cruel and unusual punishment indeed.
I do feel a tiny bit sorry for you if you really think that no other competent hooker in SA could have matched Fourie’s output, and more in 36 minutes. Any other provincial level hooker could have done as well, and at least three of them could have done better.
Series is nicely balanced, I’m enjoying it.
Common Nick - prevaricating now 😊 - you really didn’t expect Fourie to stand up in the scrums your words to the effect that he will be in trouble if he has to come on early - I think you used the word lucky - I am not debating whether it should have been him or someone else but you categorically said it was crazy to pic a 40 year old lightweight flank converted to hooker - and to actually start with him -surprise? and he would be in trouble if he had to come on early? Rassie (and may I say coyly me too) saw something you did not. No disgrace - just don’t duck the issue. How much earlier did he have to come on - btw they won a scrum penalty with him on and it would have been two if Kolisi hadn’t scored.
Yes agree with your last statement completely, and the Boks are going to going to get better.
I just don’t see how the AB’s close the physical gap - they have played so much super rugby - you saw what Currie Cup physicality is as a comparison -they really have forgotten how to be competitive at close quarters.
They might prove me wrong but as I said earlier the Boks have a technical problem to fix the AB’s have a structural problem. I know which I would rather try to fix - and don’t take this to mean I think the Boks are going to go 3/1 or even 2/2 and yes the AB’s scored more tries but scrum, lineout, maul, maul defence, aerial battles - they have far more to fix than the Boks at the half way stage and and I have said the crazy Rassie rotation means that the key Boks are playing towards their peak game time - a lot of the AB’s are already past that.
Game time fatigue is going to become an increasing factor.
Was there any real point in picking Fourie ahead of the other specilist hookers in SA? In the cold light of day, aside from the sentimentality of the selection - probably not.
He made three tackles in 36 minutes and the starting front row lacked any authority in the scrums. He threw competently to the lineout. The late swapping of the front rows failed as an experiment. That was all she said.
I agree that the Boks are proving to be better at set-piece overall than the ABs, but then they have scored nine tries to four! Don’t you feel that says something about both teams’ attitude towards use of the ball?
The AB’s were fantastic in the last 20 minutes but not nearly as good as last week during the last quarter. Player fatigue is catching up and will only get worse. The Boks are able to rotate like for like far more efficiently and it will become more and more of a factor as the tour wears on.
I am far happier than I was before the start of the first test. In the air, in the scrum, in the line out and on the maul defence - the AB’s have some catching up to do.
BTW I told you Fourie could scrum in his sleep - not bad for a 40 year old starting against the ALL Blacks - pin point line out throwing - better than either of the AB hookers who both missed crucial throws - and some really decent carries and heavy involvement on the ground. Got tired and missed a vital tackle in build up to DMac’s try and was hooked immediately, but another game full of surprises wouldn’t you say Nick😉
Ok NB I think we are on repeat here 😂
It’s more ‘counter-fantastical’ if somehow you think you’re winning the bench battle when the points differential is minus 30 over two games. 🤣
NZ have won the final quarter by sticking to the 5/3, but SA have been better in the first half. Simples.
The counterfactual has 6 forwards coming on and taking the game to another level of intensity
Yeah but that’s a false comparison. The counterfactual has 6 forwards coming on and taking the game to another level of intensity. And it’s the mix across the 23 right and the intensity of play from minute 1. Load up the starting pack with your big and fast boys and finish with big and fast boys in equal measure. I actually think this is consistent with your chaos theory about intensity and speed too - we have not seen the ABs play at the levels achieved in the NC. I accept that it may not in the end make a difference - it did not really help the Boks - though they were out on their feet by the end. But surely it’s worth trying?
If we stick to the facts, the ABs won the last 20’ 12-3 in Cape Town and 21-0 in Joburg.
If my maths are right that’s 33-3 against the 6/2 bench? 😁🤣
Of those you mention, you know my feelings about Aumua starting, and I’d have Lakai for Jacobson at 7 deffo.
The mass numbers have it right again 🤣. And don’t the ABs need to start with Aumua and Paddy next week, and perhaps even Lakai - they need to try to dictate the shape of the game through their dynamism.
Will be a great contest today .. gotta favour the Boks in this one
Ahhhhh….😉
A special kind of mass 😂
Fascinating article NB. For so long the power of the Boks have so overwhelmed opposition that nuanced analysis like this was unnecessary. But as this article shows, the small moments between the big moments are assuming far greater significance. It will genuinely be a quantum “shift” if set piece dominance is no longer the defining characteristic of rugby as it has been for 8 years now. As you may recall I have a simple mass theory that in most games over the last two years has accurately predicted the likely outcome - as between the top 5 teams the team with the larger collective mass (height and weight) in the forwards has won. Only a handful of games fell outside this - and usually those are cases where yellows rained down. The game on Saturday could be the start of a watershed. The Boks have amassed 4300 in collective weight and height in the packs - assuming Esterheizen is used as a forward. The ABs are about 4000. That’s a decent sized forward down. Usually I could predict an easy win for the Boks based on those numbers. But what the “shift” theory is highlighting is that the small moment between the big moments may now be defining the outcomes. If so, the 5 tries to 1 may not be a one off.
And it’s also fascinating that these observations are coming from a prominent SA source, not from the outside CW.
Whether that voice is fully accpeted may be another matter!
The ABs picked a 5/3 with two loose forwards on their benche last weekend, but still won the last 20’ 21-0.
The name Tsimba rang a bell from my time in Zimbabwe, as I recalled there was a centre of that name playing for the national team. A quick but of research showed he was Richard Tsimba, and the elder brother of Kennedy. Sadly killed in a car crash at only 34 yo.
I had not been aware of the younger(by 9 yrs) Kennedy Tsimba. I see he was educated at Prince Edward School in Harare. I have heard claims that at it’s peak it was arguably the best school in the British Empire.
A government school, so on independence in 1980, a lot of white parents moved their children to private schools, due to more black children coming into schools like PE. Thus the govt. schools rugby teams suffered for some years. My first year coaching at the Jesuit St George’s College was 1981, and PE still had a powerful team that year. We were hammered that year.
I had not been aware either that the Tsimba brothers had been inducted into the IRB Hall of fame.
Thanks for the background as always Miz.👍
The Boks just need to fix their execution . Which was p….. poor.
Or move towards an undertsanding of the game which they had, but have temporarily lost.
Just to understand. Kennedy defines a shift as a short period of play when the structure of the game breaks down? And this can be for any reason and teams need to react on attack and defence?
Also an interesting thing in the first clip is how quickly the All Blacks defence sets. Its fast ball but even then they manage to reduce the precious window of chaos to a minimum.
The chargedown examples were a little harder to understand but the shift happening is the change in the offside line due to the hindmost foot?
Regarding kicking I think we will see even more aggressive kicking (looking for grass or 50/22s) off «shifts» from the all blacks as the tour goes on.
Yes, and he’s saying that these situations are now more important than the structured bits around set-piece. Which was kinda the lesson of Ellis Park!
DMac makes good decision to close eearly in the first clip, and I think he expected he cross-kick even before SFM thought of it..😁
I feel a little uncomfortable challenging Tsimba, after all he is a highly regarded coach, and Nick a world class analyst, but I think they are both overcomplicating things, bringing up terminology more likely to be found in Linkedin posts than in rugby.
I see it in a simpler way. Boks tried a structured approach and forgot or didn’t prepare well to what happened after you start Plan A. Hit hard, run at them, kick the ball. But the other team worked on what to do once the Boks implement their Plan A. The ABs didn’t control the physicality as much as an aikido fighter uses the opposition strength against himself.
Maybe Rassie and his crew didn’t think it through, or maybe his players did not react to what the ABs were doing. The ABs were better “reacting” than the Boks, but likely trained to do so for this game.
Sorry Nick, but rarely I see things slightly different than you.
I do agree with you that there is so much analysis now Carlos and the emphasis changes depending on which side is dominant.
I remember old Naas Botha once being asked how he thought his team could beat an opposition side and he replied: '‘Score more points than them.”
That’s another way of putting it Carlos, so I don’t see that we are having an ‘argument’ about it!
First clip is great, Sacha will be really disappointed with his option taking, the cross kick being one of the most glaring.
BUT, you have to feel for him, Williams should be lightning quick there as the ball was secured so quickly, it’s 10\10 ball on the 22 and exactly what they are trying to create. But Williams stalls, gives a slightly looping pass which means Esterhuizen overruns, making himself less of a threat and blocking the skip pass option to PdV. So Sachas time and options are gone by the time he gets the ball.
If Esterhuizen stays slightly deeper as de Allende shifts wider to run hard at Jordan and keep Willemse and Kriel in space with just the Fullback to beat its a certain try.
The small errors from inside and outside him kill a 10/10 opportunity for Sacha. You can see the lack of cohesion really clearly here and with the makeshift backline things were really off
Contrast that with Jordan’s take and you can see exactly why they have him and DMac as a constant selection. Instinctual players. Jordan looks like he knows there will be a bok player ahead of the ball and a gap before he hits the ground. DMac said he just worked hard off the ball to get to Jordan as he knew he can cause havoc and that was all it took.
We may be average at certain aspects of the game but this is what we live by.
The boks will be better though, they won’t give up so many chances twice
Good post, Toko.
It’s cos they are not conditioned to expect an play LQB Toko. So the 9 takes steps even after a break, the attack loses its alignment and 10 doesn’t have clear sense of what to do.
I hear they are planning to pull Handre and start Manie, which would be a good call!