For the Springboks, how far do you realistically think they’ll go in the RWC?

[WaterboySA]

The Boks are a massive threat, and a decent chance to win it. Genuine question - what is it about this team that you Boks fans prefer over the 2015 vintage? That team pushed the awesome 2015 ABs right to the edge in the semi final

They were hot and cold.....maybe pushed the AB's but it's still the team that lost to Japan.....

 

[Gena_ZA]

We are better prepared, have a better coach, better depth and a stable support system.
The group are 99% what most expected, they deserve their call-up.
On form going into the tournament with a plan, belief and a dream = united
#StrongerTogether

 

[TRF_heineken]

I read an interesting article today where Rassie talked about the Japan game, and how they used the plan of not playing with the ball, in preparation for the AB's test. We only had 32% possession in the Japan game, and 4 of our 6 tries came from kicks to the opposition and one interception.

It's interesting to see the Rassie has a plan in terms of the conditions, and how to use it to our advantage.

 

[Chief Pete]

From the outside looking in I'd say the Boks are peaking at just the right time, sure the other big nations have gained wins in preparation but they still have question marks over team selection, injuries, form of star players etc whereas SA (Etzebeth story aside) appear to be settled, I think they'll beat NZ opening game...

 

[RedruthRFC]

Also a good thing to note is that the vast majority of our team will be around for 2024. Other than Beast/Vermulen/Willie le Roux most of our squad is more than young enough, so we can always look at this world cup as a stepping stone.

They might be more useful in 2023 though! Good point though, I remember drying my Jannie de Beer inflicted tears on an England team sheet after the 1999 quarter finals and thinking that of that team (not squad), it was only Grayson and De Glanville who definately wouldn't be there the next time around.

 

[RedruthRFC]

I would think the odds on the all blacks winning in 2003 were higher than their odds this time around, simply because the odds in 2003 of the 4th, 5th, and 6th most likely would have been relatively small.

At the moment, the market gives 4th, 5th and 6th (Ireland, Wales and Australia respectively) a ≈21% chance of winning. I'm not sure who would have been 6th in 2003, but agree that they wouldn't have had much of a hope. South Africa were something of a curate's egg at the time, but France were very decent. I have a tough time thinking that 4th, 5th, 6th wouldn't have made up at least 15% of the book.

I'd say the bigger impact on the odds would come from the fact that the hosts regularly beat New Zealand in those days (albeit not in 2003) and that Dad's Army had beaten New Zealand in their own back yard in the lead up and the world didn't realise that they had peaked.

 

[donmcdazzle]

I read an interesting article today where Rassie talked about the Japan game, and how they used the plan of not playing with the ball, in preparation for the AB's test. We only had 32% possession in the Japan game, and 4 of our 6 tries came from kicks to the opposition and one interception.

It's interesting to see the Rassie has a plan in terms of the conditions, and how to use it to our advantage.

I read the same article, I think it's clear the boks will play territory, launch bombs, and back the defence to shut the ABs down.

For reference I re-watched the 2015 semi final. It was basically like the above, ABs had all the ball, SA defended like you wouldn't believe and nabbed points when they could. And they genuinely had a couple of chances to take the game.

The difference this time I think the ABs aren't as good as the 2015 team, and SA have a bit more endeavour and excitement out wide.

 

[mdaclarke]

I read the same article, I think it's clear the boks will play territory, launch bombs, and back the defence to shut the ABs down.

For reference I re-watched the 2015 semi final. It was basically like the above, ABs had all the ball, SA defended like you wouldn't believe and nabbed points when they could. And they genuinely had a couple of chances to take the game.

The difference this time I think the ABs aren't as good as the 2015 team, and SA have a bit more endeavour and excitement out wide.

Not sure if this is the best tactic. Surely it is better to have the ball?

 

[donmcdazzle]

Not sure if this is the best tactic. Surely it is better to have the ball?

Yes, but where you have the ball is equally as important.

The boks won't play any rugby in their own half. If that means defending more often than not, I think that'll suit them just fine.

 

[Umaga's Witness]

At the moment, the market gives 4th, 5th and 6th (Ireland, Wales and Australia respectively) a ≈21% chance of winning. I'm not sure who would have been 6th in 2003, but agree that they wouldn't have had much of a hope. South Africa were something of a curate's egg at the time, but France were very decent. I have a tough time thinking that 4th, 5th, 6th wouldn't have made up at least 15% of the book.

I'd say the bigger impact on the odds would come from the fact that the hosts regularly beat New Zealand in those days (albeit not in 2003) and that Dad's Army had beaten New Zealand in their own back yard in the lead up and the world didn't realise that they had peaked.

Fair point, it feels like there's a lot more competition this time around partly because it's different teams, whereas you can simply substitute one of wales or Ireland for France and you really only have one extra competitive team this World Cup compared to 2003. You could go further and suggest the wallabies this year are as bad as 6th best in 2003.

I was trying to find historical odds and although I failed I found a brilliant article by David Kirk prior to the 2007 World Cup predicting that we would lose because we wouldn't be able to handle the pressure, and due to referee decisions. He also mentioned that we were favourites in 2003 which he rightly said was rediculous because England were clearly the best side going into it.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Not sure if this is the best tactic. Surely it is better to have the ball?

If we look at the past 2 years when the Boks and the AB's played each other, and most importantly the win we got last year in NZ, we scored tries off their mistakes, and throughout the games we had less posession than them.

The thing is though the weather in Japan is hot and humid as hell. Go do yourself a favour and look at some of the videos Supersport is sharing on facebook about the Boks in Japan, the sweat is pouring out of the guys, and in the game that will mean the ball will be wet and slippery.

 

[donmcdazzle]

If we look at the past 2 years when the Boks and the AB's played each other, and most importantly the win we got last year in NZ, we scored tries off their mistakes, and throughout the games we had less posession than them.

The thing is though the weather in Japan is hot and humid as hell. Go do yourself a favour and look at some of the videos Supersport is sharing on facebook about the Boks in Japan, the sweat is pouring out of the guys, and in the game that will mean the ball will be wet and slippery.

Saw some of the images of the ABs training as well, apparently 35 degrees and very humid. I wonder how that factors into gameplanning; defending can take up a lot of energy. You wonder in the heat how long teams will be able to keep up the rush defense, also will they tire out a bit earlier if forced to make a bunch of tackles,

 

[TRF_heineken]

Saw some of the images of the ABs training as well, apparently 35 degrees and very humid. I wonder how that factors into gameplanning; defending can take up a lot of energy. You wonder in the heat how long teams will be able to keep up the rush defense, also will they tire out a bit earlier if forced to make a bunch of tackles,

I think the manner in tackling will need to be adjusted as well. The bodies and clothing will be very slippery as well, so you will need to make sure the attacking player doesn't slip off.

But like Rassie said, it's the same kind of weather we have in February in Durban, so the guys know how to train for those conditions.

I don't see us changing our tactics defensively. And because it's our toughest game first up, we will defend like trojans for 80 minutes+ as we can change our tactics a bit for the minnows in our pool later on.

 

[unrated]

They should seek consultation from the Sharks coaches on how to deal with the Rugby in humid conditions. The first thing you need to know is that ugly rugby wins game when its humid and the ball is slippery, Whichever team has less knock ons will win and this can be forced by giving the opposition the ball in their own half and then putting them under pressure. Running rugby in humid conditions is not your friend and it really is just an unnesesary risk, rather play the percentages.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

That;s all fine and dandy but I'd hate it if we were to have to rely on opposition mistakes if we were behind or even only two score ahead.. Time will tell I suppose.

 

[User1245]

I reckon all the guys will be able to deal with the humidity just like all the guys can deal with playing at altitude. They're exposed to the conditions enough throughout the year to know how to deal with it

 

[User1245]

My take on the Boks are chances are as follows:

In our favour:

• The conditions (especially in the pool stages) should favour our playing style.
• With the calibre of forwards we have we can win ugly. Real ugly.
• Following on the former point, our front pack is World Class. We have some real tough brutes who can close out a match.
• We have momentum with us. Everybody is making the right noises. The coach, the players, everybody involved seems to be on the same page.
• Pollard is at his best and is surely in the top 3 of flyhalves in the world at the moment

Not in our favour:

• We have some inexperienced players who are very much in the mix. Kolbe and Mapimpi, our premier wingers, and have 18 caps between them. Our bench scrummie has 4 caps. No saying this is an issue but they are untested in this kind of pressure cooker tournament.
• Hype getting to our players heads. I do think we have some wise heads who will collectively keep the group grounded.
• Lineouts. I don't think we are as good here as we've been previously. Outside of PSDT and maybe Vermuelen we don't seem to have the height at the tail end like we've had previously. Kolisi, Louw and Smith are not tall. Not say we need carbon copies of our previous WC successes but the '07 team had Burger, Smith and Rossouw in the loose forwards. All 3 are tall timber so we effectively had 5 equally good lineout options including Matfield and Bakkies. Add that to how dicey Marx's lineout throwing can be, this set piece doesn't fill me with total confidence.

Some controversial points:

• A lot of our success hinges on Faf de Klerk. Now, I highly rate him obviously but he can have an absolute mare and I don't think I've ever seen him turn it around in a match. He'll just be back to normal in the next match. He's a different type of scrummie to du Preez and van der Westhuizen, our other two WC winning 9's. This could put pressure on Jantjies and we don't how he would respond.
• Willie le Roux. I'm not convinced in his consistency at the back. I think he was at his best for the Boks at 14. He has definitely gotten better though, especially his defence. But he's our best option at 15.

 

[Iron Lion Zion]

I rate this Spring Boks side. It's very exciting to see them strong again.

I do have this feeling though that a nasty surprise is awaiting them in game 1 against the All Blacks.

A very nasty surprise...

 

[Jimbo]

• Willie le Roux. I'm not convinced in his consistency at the back. I think he was at his best for the Boks at 14. He has definitely gotten better though, especially his defence. But he's our best option at 15.

Being a Wasps fan I have watched a fair bit of Le Roux, agree with you about his consistently his defence can be a bit suspect at times but he is one of the finest attacking FBs around, my biggest issue with him was some times he just didn't seem to interested in actually playing that particular match and could be very petulant when things didn't go his way, but he is representing his country so that should be a huge incentive for him to turn up, as you pointed out there isn't really a better alternative.

 

[User1245]

Being a Wasps fan I have watched a fair bit of Le Roux, agree with you about his consistently his defence can be a bit suspect at times but he is one of the finest attacking FBs around, my biggest issue with him was some times he just didn't seem to interested in actually playing that particular match and could be very petulant when things didn't go his way, but he is representing his country so that should be a huge incentive for him to turn up, as you pointed out there isn't really a better alternative.

Yeah he can be a bit of a sulk, which does my head in. But he has gotten better