Dwyer’s View: A good set piece and applying pressure

Bob Dwyer July 29, 2012 7

No Gravatar‘We’re just looking for a good set piece and applying a lot of pressure.’ This was the response last weekend to commentator  Brendan Cannon’s pre-match question to champion Sharks hooker Bismark du Plessis.

Clearly, this is the simply-stated-but-more-difficult-to-achieve plan for success in finals rugby. The Chiefs and the Sharks were able to achieve both these goals, each in the most testing of arenas. Both the losing teams went close, but not quite. Surely, these matches were as intense as rugby can get – I’m thinking just outside of the very highest level of international matches.

Chiefs v. Crusaders

Pre-match thinking was that the Chiefs would be under the cosh from the all All Blacks front-rowers (four of them) of the Crusaders, but Taumalolo’s focus at the first scrum was clear for all to see. His performance followed and stayed in place for the 80 minutes. On the other side of the scrum, Tameifuna’s work was equally admirable and he made some amazing tackles for a 120-plus-kilogram 20-year-old in his first season of elite rugby. He is one right out of the box. And so one of the Crusaders’ most powerful advantages was somewhat nullified.

The Chiefs played the game at an almost frantic pace, in both attack and off-the-line defence ,and this, together with their clearly no-nonsense attitude in the contact zones, appeared to unsettled the Crusaders. McCaw seemed a bit off-colour at times and Daniel Carter was not quite up to his usual very high standard. When did he last miss-kick a crucial, relatively easy (for him) shot at goal? On top of this, the loss after 15 minutes of Luke Romano was significant. Sure, Tom Donnelly is an All Black, but Romano has been in top form and, in the tightest of contests, every single per cent counts.

I loved the physicality of the contest – even though Craig Joubert didn’t, at times – and the speed of recycle and use of the ball. The dreaded pod system was nowhere to be seen – praise the Lord – and urgency of realignment meant that defences were always stretched. Passion and commitment, however, allowed that, for the most part, scrambling defences were up to the task. But consistent, maximum-level pressure exposed the slightest flaw and I, from the comfort of my living room, had my heart in my mouth for pretty much the whole game. It was fantastic!

Cruden has gone ahead in leaps and bounds. He is now a mature player with great innate skills. His uncanny footwork is a great foil for the more direct, but equally talented, style of SBW and Kerr-Barlow, on either side of him. Add Retallick, Messam and Robinson and, at home, the Chiefs could go one better in their second Super Rugby final.

Stormers v. Sharks

Meanwhile, back in South Africa, the Sharks continued their phenomenal run after a less than encouraging start to the season. To travel to ‘Fortress Suncorp’ for a win over the Reds, then back to Newlands for victory again, is something to be proud of. Coach John Plumtree spoke of his team’s ‘growing’ as they’ve cleared one hurdle after  another over the last weeks. Now they have momentum and perhaps this vital commodity can somewhat balance out the huge load of yet another long flight and an eight-hour time difference. Hardship can harden the resolve and these Yappies are seriously tough hombres.

The midfield threat of the Sharks is balanced by the singularly non-South African qualities of Freddy Michalak. He has never played better and, I figure, has developed even more under the disciplined, never-say-die attitude of his new home. He may yet have a lot more to offer the French national team. For my money, JP Pietersen is also in the best form of his career and he would have been my man-of-the-match. He would not be out of place at centre for the Springboks and they do have a few wingers. They have a few centres also.

The Sharks front row is an enormous advantage to them, even though, in this match, Bismark du Plessis was somewhat handicapped by a huge knock after only 5 minutes (see video below). There was some thought that he may have to leave the field, but his courage and durability prevailed. That advantage will be vital against the Chiefs and I hope that next week’s referee does a more accurate job than Joubert and his assistants. I continue to be amazed – along with a few NZ commentators – that the Crusaders avoid consistent penalties at their scrum.

The Sharks’ game has nowhere near the same speed – in terms of ball use and movement — as that of the Chiefs, but they will impose their own game, whenever they can, and their huge physicality can carry this slower approach. They also have a bench that can make a significant contribution – and they’ll need it.

This will be a great final and, if the Sharks can win it, it will be the greatest of all Super Rugby championship victories.

Discussion

  • ooaahh

    I’d say the saffas have found their new Bakkies. That kid Eben is incredible for a 20yo.

  • Brax

    I didn’t know it had become legal to use your forearm to fend off a defender.

    • ooaahh

      I’d call it brute force… his arm was near or around the ball. He get’s his body height in a great position leaning well forward which makes him difficult to tackle.

      • Brax

        Look again, he fends with his right forearm, he’s holding the ball in his left hand.
        Regardless, it was a very powerful run.

    • Nabley

      Brax raises a very interesting point. Law 7 Mode of Play says A ball carrier can hand off a player; where hand off is defind in the definitions section as An action taken by a ball carrier to fend off an opponent by using the palm of the hand. That clearly does not cover it so I went toLaw 10 on foul play. Law 10.4(a) states a player must not strike an opponent with the fist or arm, including the elbow, shoulder head or knee(s). The question becomes did he strike? My viewing says his elbow was against his body when Bismark first made contact trying to tackle and he was then fended off by Etzebeths forarm without loss of contact, so clearly no strike. On that basis it seems OK. A powerful statement though and could not happen to a more deserving character.

  • http://www.bobdwyerrugby.com Bob Dwyer

    I agree about Etzebeth. When the Stormers subbed Bekker off, I thought, “What have they done”. But Etzebeth actually lifted and was phenominal in the final 20mins. A genuine world star in the making – and not too far away.

  • Nabley

    Did you notice how travel tiredness impacted the Sharks from about 65mins on. They knew what they had to do, but like a runner coming down the final straight in a 400m race, they could not do much more.

    The saving grace was the Stormers were also tired and really have very few attacking options and that is reflected in their low try scoring throughout the tournament. Their second row represents their brut size, but their front row is only average and their back row is made up of midgets. Fourie at No 8 for example is only 178 cm and just over 100 kg. Hard to believe isn’t it. Grant a great kicker but not much else. De Villiers no where near what he has been although desperately unlucky not to score. Dejong where was he; stopping the ball getting to Aplon and Habana.

    The Sharks play a much more physical game, not that dissimilar to the Higlanders. But through the season it took its toll and that really is why they are so low on the ladder. But so long as you have fit players, I think it is the style of rugby that wins finals. Not this time though. The Chiefs will run them off their feet and I think the travel will get to them.

    It is going to be interesting to see if Lambie plays given how well Michalak has gone. I agree with you Bob, Michalak has really bloomed. I have seen Lambie, since he arrived on the scene, as the eventual hier to Dan Carter in world standing as a 5/8. However, the way Cruden played on Friday I think he may have eclipsed them both.

Close