It what has been heralded a more important victory than in 1995, SA took home the William Webb Ellis Cup and returned home to joyous celebrations. Whilst these celebrations are extravagant, creative and incredibly colourful, they are the opposite of SA’s gameplan which was pragmatic.
While this may sound like I am another turning the knife into a boring team, they were anything but. Their attack, based on percentages returned a great victory and should be a model that teams build from not throw in the bin in the hope of an aesthetic attack.
South Africa work by an ethic of restricting the opposition and stopping them playing their own game. This can be seen in the game against England. England prior to the game had averaged 56 platforms, with an average of 47 alone in the knockouts. This shows how England had an attack based on a dominance of possession and controlling as much as they could. However against South Africa, they had 37 attacks.
This drop of 19 from their tournament average is a significant drop in ball retention and game control. For a team so well drilled, as Squidge Rugby pointed out, and wanting to control the instances they can, a drop of 19 is deadly. Throughout the games preceding the final they averaged, 0.67 points per platform. In the knockouts alone, they averaged 0.63 points per platform. This drop therefore can be seen to lead to a drop of roughly 12.73 points, (11.97 in knockouts)
While this alone would not have overturned the difference, it is a crucial consideration in assessing how extraordinary SA’s tactics were. They brought a game plan which disrupted England and stopped them getting what they needed, possession.
However, South Africa also slammed the door shut when England had possession. They dropped England’s success from 0.67 to 0.32. The rapid line speed is nothing new from SA, having showed it in previous games. They restricted England’s access to their 22, to just one start.
England obviously didn’t help themselves, some poor errors as well as a break from their traditional structure made the SA defence’s job easier. The Springbok took full advantage and stopped the progression and forced England side to side.
Take this example from an attack in the 20th minute.
England have just come from a line out, slightly shy of the 22m. Then they go through a few phases and have had 2 phases prior, May trying to cut inside and a crash from Mako Vunipola. The pace at which the move flows is was what normally helps England to strike. Therefore the crucial aspect is the double tackle from Kolisi. Not only forcing Tom Curry back but also having him present the ball upward slowing the ball down.
This is crucial as it allows SA to organise for a split second and crucially, it allows their defence to align for the next phase when England switch the ball.
The lack of momentum from the previous carry forces England to try and play blind, whilst also possibly trying to expose a naturally narrow blindside South African defence. However, SA are wise to the danger with Faf de Klerk shooting and making a strong tackle against Billy Vuinopola , with his slightly larger friend Eben Etzeberth working to cover the offload to Farrell.
These two tackles are clearly linked and the series of events, were synonymous with England’s failure, not due to a poor start but due to a game plan which was found out by their opposition. By trusting a physical game plan you have got to hope that you win the battle of the gainline, however England didn’t.
SA were so strong they recorded a firmness rating of 94.5% in defence. This means that England not only made few breaks from which to generate momentum but rarely made a dominant carry which allowed them to gain any advantage.
This was the beauty of SA throughout the tournament. They consistently prevented teams playing their style and a bruising and efficient defence helped to curtail any sides aspirations, of making history.
Instead, the trophy was lifted by it’s first black captain. A marker for Rugby, and South Africa. But while the politics was incredibly important. I am not the person to right about it. Therefore, I hope I have shown it was the manner in which SA went from final favourites, lucky to be there and a walkover, Champions of the World, all based on their strength of nullifying the opposition. Which created the secondary storyline in a most emotional game.
The Analysis Guy 