August 30, 2026 • 38 mins
On the latest episode of Rugby Direct, Elliott Smith and Liam Napier join the podcast from Cape Town to dissect the All Blacks' second Test defeat to South Africa.
Where did it all go wrong for Dave Rennie's side?
The pair break down the key moments that shaped the result, assess the selection calls, and debate whether tactical changes are needed ahead of the next test. With the All Blacks now searching for answers, Elliott and Liam look at the personnel and game-plan adjustments required to bounce back in the third Test at Johannesburg's FNB Stadium.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
You're listening to a podcast from Newstalk ZB. Follow this
and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio. From
(00:31):
every angle, it's Rugby Direct with Elliot Smith and Liam Napier,
powered by Newstalk ZB.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
Welcome into Rugby Direct, powered by Forklift Solutions, lifting you
and your business to a higher level. Elliot Smith, Liam
Napier in Cape Town as we reflect on the second
test of rugby's greatest rivalry and one that has drawn
the series level at one apiece, 33-26 South Africa. win
(00:59):
it and yep it's all set ready for games three
and games four in this test series Liam what did
you make of the All Blacks performance and I guess
South Africa's as well?
Speaker 3 (01:12):
It was another great occasion wasn't it Elliot sold out
Waterfront Stadium very picturesque impressive modern venue reminded me a
bit of Christchurch on a bigger scale without the roof
a couple of 747s or passenger planes Frightening the bejesus
out of most people?
Speaker 2 (01:31):
Yeah, that was close, wasn't it? We were both there.
I thought it was going to skim the roof for
a moment.
Speaker 3 (01:35):
It's 12 metres, one of those planes. And the other
one got hit by the pyrotechnics. So nowhere else in
the world but South Africa, I think you could try
and pull that off.
Speaker 2 (01:44):
You could whack a Jetstar plane over Eden Park or
something like that.
Speaker 3 (01:47):
Do you remember the blitters, though? They rolled out the
Air Force, which.
Speaker 2 (01:51):
Is a very.
Speaker 3 (01:52):
Yeah, nice try, but yeah. Pales in comparison, doesn't it? Look, first,
second test. We knew the backlash was coming. Everyone knew it.
The All Blacks knew it. And I wouldn't say they
were powerless to stop it, but the Bucs were thoroughly
deserving of the win. They came out of the blocks.
They led from start to finish. I never felt like
(02:15):
the All Blacks were going to win that game. They
were always chasing their tail. Once again, they... Won the
last quarter and I think showed a lot of character
and heart because a lot of teams would have buckled
and been blown out under that sort of pressure. And
I think it's a case of being disappointed but not disheartened.
There's enough to take out of that game for the
(02:35):
All Blacks. Their attack still functioning very well on the edges.
But some concerns as well. The line-out faltered big time.
Discipline remains a bit of an issue today. Can't catch
many high balls at all. There's no quick fix solution
in sight there. So some worrying things, but I think
(02:57):
there's enough to unpack there. And then there was plenty
of antics around the game and off the field, wasn't there?
Speaker 2 (03:04):
Yeah, there certainly were. We'll get into that as we
roll through. Completely agree that it was a game the
All Blacks always felt like they were chasing from the
opening 90 seconds and.
Similarly, I guess, to go back six, seven years to
the semi-final against England in Yokohama. Was it Tokyo? I
(03:24):
can't really remember. It was there. I can't remember where
exactly it was. But England started really strongly. South Africa
started really strongly yesterday and always felt like the All
Blacks were behind the eight ball. The All Blacks played
better yesterday than they certainly did six years ago, but
it was a game that they were always chasing and
never quite were able to cut the gap significantly enough,
(03:46):
they were close for periods and would balloon out again.
Speaker 3 (03:48):
Down by 10 at half time, down by 16 in
the second half.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Yeah, and so you're right, they did well to rally
and get to within seven and give themselves at least
a chance of potentially snatching a draw out of it
and again turning the series on its head, but ultimately
they weren't good enough to do so and just left
themselves a lot of work to do in the final quarter.
So Yeah, I think a step backwards, weirdly, from Alice Park,
(04:12):
even though they might have actually played for longer patches
better than that because they were just having to chase
the game. So, yeah, disappointment for the All Blacks, I think, because, again,
we're looking at a test where they haven't been able
to stamp their mark on a test match, and while
that worked out for them last week because they had
a couple of twists in the narrative that were able
(04:35):
to turn the match... Yesterday they weren't able to find
a way to bend the game to their will. And again,
this time it now has them on the losing side
of the ledger.
Speaker 3 (04:48):
It's interesting because there's a lot of statistics which would
suggest that the All Blacks dominated that game. They ran
for vastly more post-contact metres. They made the Springboks miss
39 tackles, which is the most defenders the All Blacks
have beaten since 2009. And that speaks to their attack.
But they weren't clinical enough. There was just top-of-the-head moments.
(05:12):
McKenzie went through early and put that grubber kick in
rather than going inside to Cam Roygate, who was screaming
out for the ball. There was one occasion when they
were hot on attack and Luke Jacobson gives away a
dumb penalty, just unnecessary, off the ball. And I think
the Springboks go on to collect six points after that.
There was a line out five metres out that they lost.
(05:34):
Just really crucial moments that the All Blacks didn't seize.
So they are creating enough, but you have to be
ruthless and take those chances against the box.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
Yeah, Tupo Vai with the obstruction call as well was
another one, and they considered far fewer penalties than Ellis Park.
It was 8-4, but again, that's double the Springboks count,
and that's one every 10 minutes, and for the Springboks
was one every 20, and that does make a difference
(06:03):
in terms of the game. They just weren't able to...
When they did concede penalties, they were silly penalties. Their
discipline was a lot better, but when they did come,
they got themselves in a bit of trouble because of it,
and we saw South Africa more willing to take the
shots at goal through Cheslin Colby than they were at
Alice Park. They were willing to put that scoreboard pressure on,
and when you're steering up at, what was it, 33-16
(06:27):
from memory or whatever it was.
You know, that is when you're in, you know, you
have to chase the game. It gets into your head mentally.
And credit to South Africa. That was really smart rugby
for them.
Speaker 3 (06:39):
Well, they were never going to be as wasteful, the Springboks.
What was it? I think they converted one from 11
or one from 10 entries into the All Blacks 22
at Alice Park. So they were far more ruthless when
they got in range. They took the points, as you said,
with Cheslin Colby, but they also converted scoring three tries.
(07:03):
So what the Springboks did, they did really well. Their
line-out was exceptional. Eben Estibet and Peter Stief de Toit
put a huge amount of pressure. I thought in the
first test it was notable the box didn't contest a lot. Well,
this time they went really hard for it and got
great rewards. Dave Rennie sort of talked about the All
Blacks won 15 of 18 line-outs, but that skews the
(07:24):
picture drastically because Even there was a couple of long
throws that the All Blacks bouncing ball got hold of
and the ball they did win was scrappy. So that
platform was faulty. It was under massive pressure and that
did affect them. But for all that the Springboks did well,
(07:46):
it wasn't frightening because you look at the completion of
the second half, they only got nine points. And the
All Blacks again, Won that last quarter. Their bench added
massive impact. And the Springboks' back line for me is
just not really firing any shots. I know Damien Delende
(08:08):
scored and they might have had moments, but they're not creating,
they're not threatening. It's their forward pack that's their weapon.
And as we sit here now, I don't know how
the All Blacks feel, but I'm not intimidated by what
their back line in particular is bringing at all.
Speaker 2 (08:26):
But is that by design?
Speaker 3 (08:27):
Well, it is because they go to the air so often.
And I felt Kovac Ranak made a massive difference, both
in his control from the base, very astute kicking game.
But that is their game plan. They're not using the ball.
They don't really want to. And their kicking game is
exceptionally effective. But maybe you have to force them to
(08:51):
do a bit more. They were clinging on at the
death of that game, having... dominated for large periods again. So, look,
they deserve their win, but I do feel that, you know,
casting ahead to that third test, that there is enough
for the All Blacks to take out of that.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
Yeah, there was. And they'll be disappointed that they didn't get,
or play their best rugby, I guess, for, you know,
the early parts of the game. I can see that
in the first couple of minutes, you know, a wonky
Geordie Barrett, Clara Insapora, or line-out drive from South Africa
that just sets up that first try. So there are
(09:27):
quite a few moments that individually I think they want back. And,
you know, Jase Ryan said to us today when we
spoke to him media-wise that, you know, little things often,
you know, add up to become big things. And it
felt like there were a lot of little mistakes. that
ended up being quite impactful on the 80 minutes.
Speaker 3 (09:45):
Well, they do need to address the starts because it's
twice now they've allowed the spring box to get a
roll on, to get momentum, to feed off the crowds,
and that's the last thing you want in South Africa.
They're already rabid. They're already stoked up on Castle and
Clippies and whatever else. So the All Blacks do need
(10:06):
to address their sluggish start. It's great they're finishing well,
but you don't want to give the Springboks that sort of,
you don't want to fuel their fire.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
No, you don't. I think the All Blacks need to
be a bit more patient and willing to build pressure.
And this has been an ongoing bugbear of mine for
the All Blacks is that And look, under this Rennie
style of play, I get it because they wanted to
play immediately and quickly. But I think they can do
(10:37):
better at building pressure inside the 22. And yet we
had a couple of mistakes and various things or whatever
it might be. They had nine entries into South Africa's
22 during that game. And often I just think that.
Speaker 3 (10:50):
What was the conversion?
Speaker 2 (10:51):
Well, they got 2.8 points from that, so.
Speaker 3 (10:55):
Yeah, it's quite a significant drop from the first test.
Speaker 2 (10:57):
Yeah. I just feel that the more you ask teams
to tackle inside the 22, the more it invites offside penalties,
the more you bring fatigue into the game. And the
All Blacks have talked a lot about wanting to bring
fatigue into the game, and I often think that the
kicking game wasn't right yesterday, but also they're not willing to...
They're looking to score, and I get it, but they're
(11:18):
looking to score off first phase, second phase play, whereas...
the more the Springboks are asked to tackle, and they
missed 40 of them yesterday, you can bring in fatigue
because the players are having to get up and go again.
If you're backing your fitness, then I think you've got
to be willing to ask more questions of the South
Africans inside the 22 when you're on attack. Now, credit
to South Africa. They defused a lot of the New
(11:40):
Zealand attempts at doing so, but I just think New
Zealand can be better at building pressure and trying to
convert that into points.
Speaker 3 (11:47):
Yeah, absolutely. It's good points, I think. there's probably the tendency,
like you say, to want to score a first fave,
to push the pass, to use those quick hands, to
offload off the ground, maybe when it's not on, rather
than to reset and go again. So patience is a
big part of that. And I agree about their attacking kicks.
It was clearly a plan, particularly in the first half,
to chip over or grub a room behind that spring
(12:09):
box rush defense to try and manipulate that defense. And
the All Blacks felt like they got some pay later
in the game by stretching them a little bit. But
For me, it was wasteful. I can't remember many, if any,
of those attacking kicks that they regathered.
Speaker 2 (12:25):
A lot went to Willems, you know, straight down his throat,
or he didn't have to make ground up in the
22 to cover. He was finding them relatively easily.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
So maybe the plan had some validity to it, but
the execution wasn't there.
Speaker 2 (12:39):
Absolutely. I thought the back line was a little bit
clunky as well. Roman Love had a couple of nice
moments in the lead-up to the first try. scored by
Cam Roygard.
Speaker 3 (12:51):
Sweeping move on Will Jordan down the outside.
Speaker 2 (12:53):
Yeah, but I just felt that in a test match
like that, and he wasn't getting the greatest platform, so
there is an asterisk next to it or a reason
behind that. We talk about the line-out, but just felt
like he needs to take the game by the scruff
of the neck a little bit, as the great tens do,
and stand up and get his team out of trouble
or into the right areas of the park and change
(13:14):
that pendulum swing. So I'm sure he would have learned
a lot from it, but I just felt like he
went into his shell a little bit or wasn't really
able to contain that rush defence that South Africa were bringing.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
Yeah, I would agree with that. I think he, there
wasn't as commanding as you'd like him to be. I
think there were moments of hesitancy, both off the boot
and with ball on hand. And I think McKenzie had
elements of that as well when, like we talked about,
when you're having to chase the game, when you're doubting
whether to run, kick or pass, when the space closes
or the defence gets up in your face. So, that
(13:49):
Love-McKenzie axis has worked very well this year. It's still
in its infancy. What are we, five tests into the
Rennie regime, and this is their first loss, first setback,
so it'll be interesting to see how they respond to that. But, yeah,
I think not Ruben Love's best test, but he did
have his moments as well.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
Yeah, no-one had an out-and-out bad test, I don't think.
It was just that no-one had, you know... absolute storming
test that you go, okay, this is the.
Speaker 3 (14:17):
Or Lee Ricciardo.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
Lee Ricciardo was probably the All Blacks best on ground.
But other than that, you know, they didn't have a
sort of a talismanic figure or someone that.
Speaker 3 (14:26):
That says.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (14:28):
I thought it was Ardy's best test of the year. Yep. Yeah. But, yeah,
there wasn't a.
Speaker 2 (14:33):
But I've seen him play better tests, you know what
I mean?
Speaker 3 (14:34):
A defining moment where someone's saying, hey, I'm going here,
you're going to follow me, and we're going to steal
this from the brink.
Speaker 2 (14:42):
And, again, that adds up to... those little things that
we talked about. So the All Blacks are just slightly
off their game, and that contributed to them losing. South Africa,
on the other hand, we've talked a lot about the
All Blacks, but South Africa, a lot more direct. It
felt like it didn't rely on Jasper Wiese as much.
In fact, I thought he was shut down pretty well
by the All Blacks, who was so big for the
(15:03):
Springboks in the opening week. But they were just a
lot tidier. And we talked about the amount of ball
they turned over in the first test, where they cut
that right down. We talked before about scoreboard pressure, but
they just did the smart things well. The Springboks can
be pretty pleased with that bounce-back performance because they're under
a bit of heat after losing that first game, and
(15:23):
they've responded.
Speaker 3 (15:24):
Yeah, I think more effective and accurate. So the conversions
in the 22, taking the points on offer, pressuring and
feeding off the All Blacks' mistakes. Again, it wasn't anything revolutionary.
It wasn't anything the All Blacks didn't know was coming.
But what they did, they did well. And it's the
high ball, it's the maul. The scrum wasn't nearly as effective.
(15:49):
Five penalties in a row at Alice Park. Well, there
was probably only one moment that I recall where having
switched the front rows around just before halftime, the box
get that scrum five metres out from Neil Black's line.
Russie injects Oxnish and Malcolm Marks. The Springboks get a
scrum penalty, put down another scrum, and Khaleesi scores. But
(16:11):
apart from that, I don't recall any moments where you
could say the Springboks scrum dominated the All Blacks.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
No, although Russie Erasmus had a different take on it post-game.
Speaker 3 (16:24):
Well, it was quite bizarre, wasn't it, to see a
winning head coach basically lose the plot. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (16:32):
But I don't think you could do that as a
losing head coach, necessarily. You kind of need to come
from that position of power or gravitas because you've won
the game, then go, what are the All Blacks complaining about?
You know, we had four headshots, the All Blacks couldn't scrum, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
we're not walking around, F bomb this, shit this, that,
(16:54):
you know. It was the kind of rant that was
a little weird to be in the room watching it,
but you can only probably deliver that when you win,
I guess.
Speaker 3 (17:04):
Yeah, it's certainly smack of a sore loser if you
come off like that. But it does add to the
theatrics of it all. And look, it's interesting because the
All Blacks are maintaining their position. Dave Rennie, again, post-match,
putting out the fact that the Springboks are walking around,
stepping to the left. And then Jason Ryan, when we
(17:24):
spoke to him today, doubling down that World Rugby wants
you to scrum square and suggesting that that is in
fact the case. So it's clearly a point of tension,
it's something that Springboks pride themselves on. What about just the,
without going into it too much, the technicalities of it,
that the All Blacks believe that when the scrums are
setting up, that Oxnich is stepping to his left, which
(17:49):
allows Malcolm Marks as hooker and Oxnich to drive through
the tight head prop who has been Tyrell Lomax and
From what we understand, the All Blacks are trying to
step left to align with them and that's where some
of the scrum resets are taking place. I'm no scrum
expert but that's my understanding.
Speaker 2 (18:08):
Yeah, that sounds about right. I'm no scrum expert either
and so trying to offer an opinion on that, I'm
finding it a little bit of a battle because I'm
sure that the All Blacks believe they're genuinely doing things
the right way and I I'm sure the Springboks genuinely
believe they're doing things the right way. And at some point,
(18:29):
it's on a technicality or whatever it is that referees
are interpreting week to week. There's a lot of chat
about the break foot. Out there at the moment, it
was a big bugbear. The All Blacks got pinged there
a lot at the start of the tour. So I'm
sure both camps believe they're in the right and they're
probably not going to... Back down. Back down, exactly. So.
(18:52):
It's going to be a week-to-week proposition probably in the
series for Nick Amishikelli and then Carl Dixon in Baltimore
to try and figure out. So, yeah, there are more
qualified people than I that would be able to offer
an opinion on that.
Speaker 3 (19:07):
Yeah, look, rugby's such a technical game. You can pull
out any instance or clip up. Look, there was that
clip of, was it Damien Delende's try where Dionne Fourie
potentially ran into obstruction. I think it was on Simon Parker.
The All Blacks had a lot of gripes about Angus
Gartner's policing or lack of at the breakdown, managing that,
(19:31):
telling players to roll away rather than penalise them, which
compromised the speed of the ruck ball. Russie Erasmus makes
the point about head contact. So, look, there's so many
instances in any rugby match that you can pull out...
I think, again, as with the first test, I would
say there was no one flashpoint or officiating moment of
that game that determined the result.
Speaker 2 (19:51):
No, I don't think so either. I thought Angus had
a fine game. There was complaints from Seik Alisa. after
the All Blacks first try because Thomas Dettoy was getting
some treatment and he felt the game should have been stopped,
but they played on. The high shots, as you mentioned,
via Russie and Seah Khaleesi also brought those to Angus
(20:13):
Gardiner as well. But I didn't feel like it was
a big call either way that swung it. It was
South Africa who being the dominant team and ultimately being
good enough to win it. The All Blacks bench, I
don't think they got the selections of this right. And
it's easy to say this in hindsight, but Josh Mulby
(20:35):
wasn't the kind of player that could have come on
and had an influence in that game. And he didn't
come on the field at all. I think they would
have been better off And I don't know that he's
a bench player full stop. I think he either starts,
and he's been very good in that role, or he
isn't in the 23. I'm just looking for a bit
more out of a bench player like that. And again,
(20:55):
easy to say the way the game panned out, but
whether a Rico Ioane might have been a better pick
or a bigger body like a Fiji potentially. Yeah, I
just felt like that maybe they got that one wrong.
Speaker 3 (21:09):
Yeah, in hindsight, it feels like a bit of an
insurance policy, doesn't it? That if a wing goes down,
you've got another one there. But I agree. If I'm
selecting the bench right now, Rico Awani is my midfield
cover because you've already got two capable second fives in
Quintipaia and Geordie Barrett. And then I'm having probably Amoni
(21:31):
Narawa because he can cover wing, fullback. He's a big
body guy. Very skillful. I think he's played well on
this tour. This game was probably a bit early, wasn't it,
given those guys played 80 minutes on Tuesday. But I
think they come very much into the reckoning for this
third test. And at this point, I'm taking the risk
(21:54):
and I'm starting to suffer more as well. I think
he's been excellent off the bench. He's such a dynamic
presence with ball in hands. I understand the risk with
the line-out throwing, but I don't think Cody's been perfect either.
and so I'm willing to go that way. And you
could either put Cody Taylor on the bench or you
could give him a week off and put Samersonia. That's
(22:16):
a huge call because this is a test centurion. He's
in the leadership group, highly valued by Dave Rennie, but
I just feel like the All Blacks have looked so
much better with Asafa Amu on the field.
Speaker 2 (22:27):
I'm going to go a different tack and say Asafa Amu,
apart from the line-out throwing, which needs sorting out, that's
exactly what the All Blacks should be wanting out of
their bench in the closing stages of the game.
Speaker 3 (22:38):
He could bring it from the start where they've struggled.
Speaker 2 (22:41):
He could, but you're playing against tiring defences and you've
got this big but also short wrecking ball that's coming
through and carrying against tired defences. I think if you're
going to make a change at hooker, I'm starting Samisoni
and keeping Asafa Amor on the bench and giving him...
We've talked about this room with Bomb Squad for so
(23:02):
many years. Now, we'll get into their selections, what they
did yesterday in a moment, but You know, they used
to have Malcolm Marks come off the bench. Now, Malcolm
Marks probably still is the best hooker in the world.
He had an issue with the line-out throwing for a
little bit, but seems to have overcome that. He's a
better player than Bongi Mbanambi, but he'll come off the
bench as part of that bomb squad and be able
(23:23):
to change the game. So I think we're too quick
sometimes to go, he's playing well off the bench, put
him in the starting side.
Speaker 3 (23:30):
Yeah, it's a fair point, but I'm still starting him.
And I'm giving him 60 minutes to... and then bringing
either Cody on to close out the game or Samsoni.
I just think the All Blacks ball pack, I know
they ran for a lot more metres, but that was
again out wide. I think there's very few players in
that forward pack that are bending and breaking the spring
(23:51):
box line. I think Asafa Amor is one, and I
think Peter Lakai is another to a lesser degree. And
I think at this point you need to be harnessing
some fresh legs, some impact, and I've been... Really impressed
by our sufferer. Jason Ryan also said today that Luke
Jacobson had the flu, and that could potentially lead to
(24:14):
a change. Jacobson's had a big workload. Fabian Holland and
Tupu Vai have also played two 80-minute shifts. What, if any,
other changes can you envision, particularly to that forward pack?
I don't envision maybe many in the back line.
Speaker 2 (24:30):
No, I don't think there'll be many in the back
line either. It's interesting, isn't it? This is the first
time in, what, 30 years they're going to play the
Springboks three weeks in a row, and this takes it
out of you. But the best players in the world
should be able to play three big weeks in a row.
You have to do it at a rugby World Cup.
But I also don't think it's realistic, you know, given
the tour game load before then. Not everyone played, you know,
(24:53):
big minutes, but they did play quite a lot of minutes.
And there's also the injuries. We've talked about Anton Cegner, obviously,
not being part of this tour anymore, although I did
see him walking on a clip on Instagram yesterday, and
it sounds like he's going to be good to go
for the Bladders Live. Regardless, I think there'll be... I
can see that hooker change, potentially. I wonder whether they
(25:16):
might look at bringing Lomax off the bench this week
and just switching him and Fletcher Newell around, just to
present a little bit of a different picture, potentially, assuming
that Oxenchair starts... the test in Soweto.
Speaker 3 (25:32):
We've got Ethan De Groot and Josh Lord. Probably sounds
like they'll both be cleared from their HIAs. Ethan De
Groot's a bit more doubtful because he's got a bit
of a ligament issue with his knee. What are you
doing with Josh Lord?
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Well, I think you have to consider that the scrum
in the first test wasn't working and it changed markedly
obviously when they replaced the front row but also when
Tupo Vai went back into the second row. So I'm
in two minds about what to do. I think Josh
Lord probably starts. Fabian Holland's had a big workload coming
(26:10):
back from his shoulder. He's played two 80-minute test matches
in a row. We thought that maybe he'd come back
for Cape Town. He's ended up playing 160 minutes. I
wonder whether you start Sam Derry alongside potentially Josh Lord.
Speaker 3 (26:24):
I think that's too lightweight in the front row. It
compromises your scrum. I think... Josh Lord comes into the picture.
Maybe it's for Paddy on the bench.
Speaker 2 (26:37):
Right. Would you start Simon Parker again at blind? So
I thought he had probably his best test.
Speaker 3 (26:42):
I think he did as well. Yeah, it would be
rough to drop him on that performance. They do need
to find a fix for the line-out, but you don't
want to do that with compromising your scrum, so it's
a very delicate balancing act. The All Blacks have favoured
Josh Lord in a big way. He would have played
this test, probably started... maybe, but I agree with you.
(27:03):
I don't think Holland and Lorde work as a starting combination.
I think that compromises your scrum. So I think Tupu
Vai probably starts at lock again, maybe with Holland, but yeah,
I don't know if those guys could go 80 minutes again.
Speaker 2 (27:21):
Parker, again, a blindside, or do you look to someone
like Peter Lukai? potentially on the open side.
Speaker 3 (27:28):
Yeah, I think Luck I could come in at open side.
Speaker 2 (27:30):
And then maybe if Jacobson doesn't play, and look, he
came off the flu last night, in theory he should
be better, but I just wonder with that workload he's had,
whether they do look for something different. Do you bring
a Blackadder off the bench?
Speaker 3 (27:42):
Yep, he's another guy that comes into the picture. You
could drop Jacobson to the bench or Blackadder comes into
the mix. It probably depends on how they assess a
performance against the Lions as opposed to the Springboks. It's
one thing to look good against a franchise team in
a midweek match than a trilogy game. And just on that, Elliot,
(28:09):
this game for me definitively decides the series. Baltimore can
get in the sea.
Speaker 2 (28:16):
You're not going to Baltimore.
Speaker 3 (28:17):
Exactly.
Speaker 2 (28:20):
Nobody counts if you were there.
Speaker 3 (28:22):
No, no, no. There's just such a contextual difference to
winning two tests, two out of three tests on South
African soil than there is in a money-making test in
the States. For me, if the All Blacks win this weekend,
they win the series. And the same for the box,
to be honest. You can't have a bob each way.
(28:44):
I understand the financials around rugby and why the game
is going to Baltimore, but winning on South African soil
is so much more difficult, so much more special in
the context of history than something on neutral venue.
Speaker 2 (29:07):
Yeah, I agree. Look.
Speaker 3 (29:09):
The team would never say that, but I'm allowed to
say that.
Speaker 2 (29:11):
You're allowed to say it. Exactly right. I completely understand
why they've gone there. And maybe the money would have
been different if it wasn't part of the official series.
But I would have, whether it's a week later or
two weeks later even, I would have labelled it the rematch.
And it wouldn't matter what happened, whether it was South
Africa 3-0 or New Zealand 3-0 or 2-1, whatever it is.
(29:33):
It's a chance of revenge in a week's time. And...
That's what I would have branded it as. It's still
rugby's greatest rivalry, but it's the rematch. It's not part
of the series. It's still a test match. It's still
a capped game. It's still very important, but it doesn't
form part of the series. They would have had to
change the trophy, but that could be done. But I
(29:55):
agree that because of the travel factor, because of removing
a host country out of it, there are so many...
different things and the series has always been open to
interpretation and I agree whoever wins next week is is
you know can classify themselves as a serious.
Speaker 3 (30:11):
Winner yeah I think you'll see that with the nature
of the teams come Baltimore as well I think there
will be potentially mass changes for that team given you've
just played three brutal tests you're traveling to the other
side of the world all those sorts of things so
um look this weekend's the trilogy it's like a Heavyweight
title fight, some of the great matchups over the years
(30:32):
should be a cracker.
Speaker 2 (30:33):
Let's hope it's better than Godfather 3.
Speaker 3 (30:36):
One other technical aspect with the antics off the field
and Rusty's changes I want to make is that, look,
he's flaunting the grey area here, Rusty. At a World Cup,
he would not be permitted, I've done a bit of
research into this, he would not be permitted to make
changes that are not injury-enforced. 48 hours out from a game.
(30:59):
So on the Friday before the Saturday test here, he's
put Cheslin Colby on the right wing for Aronson. That
wouldn't be allowed. Aronson's fine. There's no injury there. He
hasn't bracketed him. That would be not allowed. And same
with your, you have to submit your starting team and
your bench, and there can't be any changes unless they're injury-related.
(31:22):
Because this series is a joint venture between New Zealand
Rugby and Saru, there's blurred lines. And because Saru's running
this on the ground, they're not going to tell Rusty
he's in the wrong. So, look, he's flaunting it. He's
pushing the envelope. The All Blacks say they're not worried
about it. Do you have an issue with it? Is
(31:44):
there any rugby ethics or anything like that?
Speaker 2 (31:48):
Well, I don't have a huge issue with it per se,
but why are you naming your team on Monday when
you don't know the fitness of all your players? It
only has to be named 48 hours out from kickoff.
So what are you doing? Releasing it publicly when you
have all these question marks, he's like grandstanding. Yeah. We
were at the media conference last week. He said, I'll
(32:08):
see you might come in. He was bracketed at that
point or slashed. What do you want to call it?
With the portavillas. He did mention, uh, Rusty on Monday
that she was on copy was a chance of being included.
But again, why name your team on Monday when you
don't have to, um, So it's subject to change. There's
an asterisk next to it. And then, obviously, the change
they made... Like an hour before. an hour before kick-off
(32:29):
and switching out the starting front row for, you know,
Sten Camp, Dion Frey, and Thomas de Toey.
Speaker 3 (32:37):
And what about the crock of shit excuse?
Speaker 2 (32:39):
Oh, no, no, no.
Speaker 3 (32:41):
We did that because we thought it might be wet,
so that front row was more suited.
Speaker 2 (32:45):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (32:46):
Nobody's buying that, Russie.
Speaker 2 (32:47):
No one's buying that, but.
He's entitled to do it because it falls within the
rules of World Rugby outside of a Rugby World Cup.
I guess the question is, at a World Cup, who's
judging whether these players are injured?
Speaker 3 (33:00):
I.E.
Speaker 2 (33:01):
Colby. Or, sorry, Aaron's... You know, they could just go,
he's taken a knock to his knees. He's no good
this week. You can flaunt the rules as much as
you like. Again, at a World Cup, you wouldn't be
able to make that bench change, presumably, because it's not injury-related,
so you couldn't make it for tactical reasons and switch...
those players. So, yeah, he's flaunting the rules a little bit.
(33:23):
I've always thought that, and this would be terrible for
a commentator like myself, but you should reveal your 23s
now before kickoff.
Speaker 3 (33:31):
Well, I think you go one way or the other.
Either you do it or you don't.
Speaker 2 (33:34):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (33:34):
Right? So, from a fan's, a punditry perspective, it makes
a bit of a mockery of the whole build-up, doesn't it?
Because you could talk about a player like Pollard most
of the week and And I think there was a
genuine injury with Pollard, but say you're talking about Aronson,
and then he's completely irrelevant a day before the game.
(33:54):
Same with the starting front rows. I don't know if
I feel for the All Blacks, but it would pose
some challenges. You're potentially preparing for one front row, and
then that flips on a dime an hour before the game.
So I think there probably does need to be some
sort of metric or stipulation around that, but look, Rusty's
(34:15):
going to get away with anything he can.
Speaker 2 (34:17):
Yeah, and Rusty's trying to push the boundaries and good
on them to an extent. You know, a lot of
rugby things are just done because that's the way they've
always been done. You have to name a team on
a Thursday for a Saturday game, which obviously Rusty does
not do. But, you know, or you have to, you know,
that team's got to be public. And part of it's,
you know, headlines and stories and media coverage that you
(34:40):
name a team and people can talk about the team
48 hours out. But look at a sport like, football
and the Premier League and Champions League and FIFA World
Cups different game because you kind of know the first
choice team is going to play most games anyway but
they only name it an hour or so before kickoff
and that creates drama in and of itself because you're
still debating it'd be a very long week but you're
(35:00):
still debating who's going to be in the you know
in the side up until an hour before kickoff.
Speaker 3 (35:06):
So but but it should be the same for both teams.
Speaker 2 (35:09):
Oh I agree completely yes whatever it is yeah I mean,
the All Blacks are going to go on, actually, we're
going to put Richie Wong on the bench yesterday, or
whatever it might have been.
Speaker 3 (35:17):
It's an interesting scenario for the players, too. I don't
know how that plays out behind the scenes, whether they're
actually told what's happening on a Monday and what changes
throughout the week. But if you're an Aronson and you're
preparing to play and then you're told, sorry, mate, Colby's back,
or if you're the front row preparing to start, it's
a lot going on in the week. I guess you've
(35:38):
got to just be prepared for that sort of carry on. Yeah.
If you're in the box.
Speaker 2 (35:41):
You do.
Speaker 3 (35:41):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (35:42):
It's part of, it comes with, with being in camp,
you know, feverishly awaiting the media advisory from South Africa
as to when Rusty's going to name his preliminary team
for this week, whether it's Monday or he's going to
go back to Thursday or whatever it might be. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (35:55):
There's a bit of theater, isn't it? It is.
Speaker 2 (35:57):
Just before we wrap up, do you think the spring
box will make many changes? Talked a lot about the
All Blacks. I mean, A couple of big test matches
in a row. We saw Sir Khaleesi come back from
his hamstring injury. Peter Steph's had a couple of big matches.
Ed Seberth, you know, he's the most capped springbok of
all time. Can they go into the well again? They've
got fantastic depth, but do they make changes for Test 3?
Speaker 3 (36:19):
Yes, they do. I'm not sure exactly what they'll be,
and I'm sure.
Speaker 2 (36:22):
They'll change throughout the week.
Speaker 3 (36:25):
But I think if Pollard's fit, he starts. because this
is the defining game of the series. Russie picked that
from the outset, and I guess it was always going
to be the three of four. And I think he
wants him there from a goal-kicking, from a game management.
I don't think Sasha's been great. Maybe that's him not
(36:46):
being allowed to play his natural game or a lack
of game time leading into the series, but I think
Russie will want Pollard there, so I can see him
coming in. I don't see him. Willemsen's out, so they'll
have to put somebody in at fullback.
Speaker 2 (36:59):
Yeah, they put Lebock there. He came on off the
bench yesterday. They may have some other options there. I'm
not sure if Fussy's fit.
Speaker 3 (37:07):
Yeah. I'm sure they've got... They could potentially put a
Colby to fullback or somebody like that. So, yeah, they
will make changes. I'm not sure about how many up front.
I think your usual suspects, Peter Steff and Khaleesi, will start.
But Khaleesi played, what, 42 minutes? So... They have phenomenal depth.
(37:28):
There's many levers they could pull, but I do expect
some changes.
Speaker 2 (37:32):
Yeah, we'll wait and see what the Springboks do this week.
Going to be another big week of build-up, isn't it?
For a third test, the stage is set. We head
back to Johannesburg midweek and at the 90-odd thousand FNB
Stadium in Soweto. So, obviously, we've got another podcast coming
once the teams are named. But, yeah, looking forward to
what should be a pretty special occasion next Saturday.
Speaker 3 (37:54):
Our time. Yeah, hopefully no... No aerial, no plane incidents.
They might push them. Maybe they'll go from 12 to
6 metres.
Speaker 2 (38:05):
Exactly, yeah.
Speaker 3 (38:05):
It's like a game of chicken amongst the South African parlours.
Speaker 2 (38:10):
Absolutely. Right, that'll wrap us up for Rugby Direct. We
will catch you later in the week. Thanks as always
to Mark Kelly for producing this podcast, and we're powered
by Forklift Solutions, lifting you and your business to a
higher level.
Speaker 1 (38:27):
For more from Newstalk ZB, listen live, on air or
online and keep our shows with you wherever you go
with our podcasts on iHeart Radio.
You're listening to a podcast from Newstalk ZB. Follow this
and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio. From
(00:31):
every angle, it's Rugby Direct with Elliot Smith and Liam Napier,
powered by Newstalk ZB.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
Welcome into Rugby Direct, powered by Forklift Solutions, lifting you
and your business to a higher level. Elliot Smith, Liam
Napier in Cape Town as we reflect on the second
test of rugby's greatest rivalry and one that has drawn
the series level at one apiece, 33-26 South Africa. win
(00:59):
it and yep it's all set ready for games three
and games four in this test series Liam what did
you make of the All Blacks performance and I guess
South Africa's as well?
Speaker 3 (01:12):
It was another great occasion wasn't it Elliot sold out
Waterfront Stadium very picturesque impressive modern venue reminded me a
bit of Christchurch on a bigger scale without the roof
a couple of 747s or passenger planes Frightening the bejesus
out of most people?
Speaker 2 (01:31):
Yeah, that was close, wasn't it? We were both there.
I thought it was going to skim the roof for
a moment.
Speaker 3 (01:35):
It's 12 metres, one of those planes. And the other
one got hit by the pyrotechnics. So nowhere else in
the world but South Africa, I think you could try
and pull that off.
Speaker 2 (01:44):
You could whack a Jetstar plane over Eden Park or
something like that.
Speaker 3 (01:47):
Do you remember the blitters, though? They rolled out the
Air Force, which.
Speaker 2 (01:51):
Is a very.
Speaker 3 (01:52):
Yeah, nice try, but yeah. Pales in comparison, doesn't it? Look, first,
second test. We knew the backlash was coming. Everyone knew it.
The All Blacks knew it. And I wouldn't say they
were powerless to stop it, but the Bucs were thoroughly
deserving of the win. They came out of the blocks.
They led from start to finish. I never felt like
(02:15):
the All Blacks were going to win that game. They
were always chasing their tail. Once again, they... Won the
last quarter and I think showed a lot of character
and heart because a lot of teams would have buckled
and been blown out under that sort of pressure. And
I think it's a case of being disappointed but not disheartened.
There's enough to take out of that game for the
(02:35):
All Blacks. Their attack still functioning very well on the edges.
But some concerns as well. The line-out faltered big time.
Discipline remains a bit of an issue today. Can't catch
many high balls at all. There's no quick fix solution
in sight there. So some worrying things, but I think
(02:57):
there's enough to unpack there. And then there was plenty
of antics around the game and off the field, wasn't there?
Speaker 2 (03:04):
Yeah, there certainly were. We'll get into that as we
roll through. Completely agree that it was a game the
All Blacks always felt like they were chasing from the
opening 90 seconds and.
Similarly, I guess, to go back six, seven years to
the semi-final against England in Yokohama. Was it Tokyo? I
(03:24):
can't really remember. It was there. I can't remember where
exactly it was. But England started really strongly. South Africa
started really strongly yesterday and always felt like the All
Blacks were behind the eight ball. The All Blacks played
better yesterday than they certainly did six years ago, but
it was a game that they were always chasing and
never quite were able to cut the gap significantly enough,
(03:46):
they were close for periods and would balloon out again.
Speaker 3 (03:48):
Down by 10 at half time, down by 16 in
the second half.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Yeah, and so you're right, they did well to rally
and get to within seven and give themselves at least
a chance of potentially snatching a draw out of it
and again turning the series on its head, but ultimately
they weren't good enough to do so and just left
themselves a lot of work to do in the final quarter.
So Yeah, I think a step backwards, weirdly, from Alice Park,
(04:12):
even though they might have actually played for longer patches
better than that because they were just having to chase
the game. So, yeah, disappointment for the All Blacks, I think, because, again,
we're looking at a test where they haven't been able
to stamp their mark on a test match, and while
that worked out for them last week because they had
a couple of twists in the narrative that were able
(04:35):
to turn the match... Yesterday they weren't able to find
a way to bend the game to their will. And again,
this time it now has them on the losing side
of the ledger.
Speaker 3 (04:48):
It's interesting because there's a lot of statistics which would
suggest that the All Blacks dominated that game. They ran
for vastly more post-contact metres. They made the Springboks miss
39 tackles, which is the most defenders the All Blacks
have beaten since 2009. And that speaks to their attack.
But they weren't clinical enough. There was just top-of-the-head moments.
(05:12):
McKenzie went through early and put that grubber kick in
rather than going inside to Cam Roygate, who was screaming
out for the ball. There was one occasion when they
were hot on attack and Luke Jacobson gives away a
dumb penalty, just unnecessary, off the ball. And I think
the Springboks go on to collect six points after that.
There was a line out five metres out that they lost.
(05:34):
Just really crucial moments that the All Blacks didn't seize.
So they are creating enough, but you have to be
ruthless and take those chances against the box.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
Yeah, Tupo Vai with the obstruction call as well was
another one, and they considered far fewer penalties than Ellis Park.
It was 8-4, but again, that's double the Springboks count,
and that's one every 10 minutes, and for the Springboks
was one every 20, and that does make a difference
(06:03):
in terms of the game. They just weren't able to...
When they did concede penalties, they were silly penalties. Their
discipline was a lot better, but when they did come,
they got themselves in a bit of trouble because of it,
and we saw South Africa more willing to take the
shots at goal through Cheslin Colby than they were at
Alice Park. They were willing to put that scoreboard pressure on,
and when you're steering up at, what was it, 33-16
(06:27):
from memory or whatever it was.
You know, that is when you're in, you know, you
have to chase the game. It gets into your head mentally.
And credit to South Africa. That was really smart rugby
for them.
Speaker 3 (06:39):
Well, they were never going to be as wasteful, the Springboks.
What was it? I think they converted one from 11
or one from 10 entries into the All Blacks 22
at Alice Park. So they were far more ruthless when
they got in range. They took the points, as you said,
with Cheslin Colby, but they also converted scoring three tries.
(07:03):
So what the Springboks did, they did really well. Their
line-out was exceptional. Eben Estibet and Peter Stief de Toit
put a huge amount of pressure. I thought in the
first test it was notable the box didn't contest a lot. Well,
this time they went really hard for it and got
great rewards. Dave Rennie sort of talked about the All
Blacks won 15 of 18 line-outs, but that skews the
(07:24):
picture drastically because Even there was a couple of long
throws that the All Blacks bouncing ball got hold of
and the ball they did win was scrappy. So that
platform was faulty. It was under massive pressure and that
did affect them. But for all that the Springboks did well,
(07:46):
it wasn't frightening because you look at the completion of
the second half, they only got nine points. And the
All Blacks again, Won that last quarter. Their bench added
massive impact. And the Springboks' back line for me is
just not really firing any shots. I know Damien Delende
(08:08):
scored and they might have had moments, but they're not creating,
they're not threatening. It's their forward pack that's their weapon.
And as we sit here now, I don't know how
the All Blacks feel, but I'm not intimidated by what
their back line in particular is bringing at all.
Speaker 2 (08:26):
But is that by design?
Speaker 3 (08:27):
Well, it is because they go to the air so often.
And I felt Kovac Ranak made a massive difference, both
in his control from the base, very astute kicking game.
But that is their game plan. They're not using the ball.
They don't really want to. And their kicking game is
exceptionally effective. But maybe you have to force them to
(08:51):
do a bit more. They were clinging on at the
death of that game, having... dominated for large periods again. So, look,
they deserve their win, but I do feel that, you know,
casting ahead to that third test, that there is enough
for the All Blacks to take out of that.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
Yeah, there was. And they'll be disappointed that they didn't get,
or play their best rugby, I guess, for, you know,
the early parts of the game. I can see that
in the first couple of minutes, you know, a wonky
Geordie Barrett, Clara Insapora, or line-out drive from South Africa
that just sets up that first try. So there are
(09:27):
quite a few moments that individually I think they want back. And,
you know, Jase Ryan said to us today when we
spoke to him media-wise that, you know, little things often,
you know, add up to become big things. And it
felt like there were a lot of little mistakes. that
ended up being quite impactful on the 80 minutes.
Speaker 3 (09:45):
Well, they do need to address the starts because it's
twice now they've allowed the spring box to get a
roll on, to get momentum, to feed off the crowds,
and that's the last thing you want in South Africa.
They're already rabid. They're already stoked up on Castle and
Clippies and whatever else. So the All Blacks do need
(10:06):
to address their sluggish start. It's great they're finishing well,
but you don't want to give the Springboks that sort of,
you don't want to fuel their fire.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
No, you don't. I think the All Blacks need to
be a bit more patient and willing to build pressure.
And this has been an ongoing bugbear of mine for
the All Blacks is that And look, under this Rennie
style of play, I get it because they wanted to
play immediately and quickly. But I think they can do
(10:37):
better at building pressure inside the 22. And yet we
had a couple of mistakes and various things or whatever
it might be. They had nine entries into South Africa's
22 during that game. And often I just think that.
Speaker 3 (10:50):
What was the conversion?
Speaker 2 (10:51):
Well, they got 2.8 points from that, so.
Speaker 3 (10:55):
Yeah, it's quite a significant drop from the first test.
Speaker 2 (10:57):
Yeah. I just feel that the more you ask teams
to tackle inside the 22, the more it invites offside penalties,
the more you bring fatigue into the game. And the
All Blacks have talked a lot about wanting to bring
fatigue into the game, and I often think that the
kicking game wasn't right yesterday, but also they're not willing to...
They're looking to score, and I get it, but they're
(11:18):
looking to score off first phase, second phase play, whereas...
the more the Springboks are asked to tackle, and they
missed 40 of them yesterday, you can bring in fatigue
because the players are having to get up and go again.
If you're backing your fitness, then I think you've got
to be willing to ask more questions of the South
Africans inside the 22 when you're on attack. Now, credit
to South Africa. They defused a lot of the New
(11:40):
Zealand attempts at doing so, but I just think New
Zealand can be better at building pressure and trying to
convert that into points.
Speaker 3 (11:47):
Yeah, absolutely. It's good points, I think. there's probably the tendency,
like you say, to want to score a first fave,
to push the pass, to use those quick hands, to
offload off the ground, maybe when it's not on, rather
than to reset and go again. So patience is a
big part of that. And I agree about their attacking kicks.
It was clearly a plan, particularly in the first half,
to chip over or grub a room behind that spring
(12:09):
box rush defense to try and manipulate that defense. And
the All Blacks felt like they got some pay later
in the game by stretching them a little bit. But
For me, it was wasteful. I can't remember many, if any,
of those attacking kicks that they regathered.
Speaker 2 (12:25):
A lot went to Willems, you know, straight down his throat,
or he didn't have to make ground up in the
22 to cover. He was finding them relatively easily.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
So maybe the plan had some validity to it, but
the execution wasn't there.
Speaker 2 (12:39):
Absolutely. I thought the back line was a little bit
clunky as well. Roman Love had a couple of nice
moments in the lead-up to the first try. scored by
Cam Roygard.
Speaker 3 (12:51):
Sweeping move on Will Jordan down the outside.
Speaker 2 (12:53):
Yeah, but I just felt that in a test match
like that, and he wasn't getting the greatest platform, so
there is an asterisk next to it or a reason
behind that. We talk about the line-out, but just felt
like he needs to take the game by the scruff
of the neck a little bit, as the great tens do,
and stand up and get his team out of trouble
or into the right areas of the park and change
(13:14):
that pendulum swing. So I'm sure he would have learned
a lot from it, but I just felt like he
went into his shell a little bit or wasn't really
able to contain that rush defence that South Africa were bringing.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
Yeah, I would agree with that. I think he, there
wasn't as commanding as you'd like him to be. I
think there were moments of hesitancy, both off the boot
and with ball on hand. And I think McKenzie had
elements of that as well when, like we talked about,
when you're having to chase the game, when you're doubting
whether to run, kick or pass, when the space closes
or the defence gets up in your face. So, that
(13:49):
Love-McKenzie axis has worked very well this year. It's still
in its infancy. What are we, five tests into the
Rennie regime, and this is their first loss, first setback,
so it'll be interesting to see how they respond to that. But, yeah,
I think not Ruben Love's best test, but he did
have his moments as well.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
Yeah, no-one had an out-and-out bad test, I don't think.
It was just that no-one had, you know... absolute storming
test that you go, okay, this is the.
Speaker 3 (14:17):
Or Lee Ricciardo.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
Lee Ricciardo was probably the All Blacks best on ground.
But other than that, you know, they didn't have a
sort of a talismanic figure or someone that.
Speaker 3 (14:26):
That says.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (14:28):
I thought it was Ardy's best test of the year. Yep. Yeah. But, yeah,
there wasn't a.
Speaker 2 (14:33):
But I've seen him play better tests, you know what
I mean?
Speaker 3 (14:34):
A defining moment where someone's saying, hey, I'm going here,
you're going to follow me, and we're going to steal
this from the brink.
Speaker 2 (14:42):
And, again, that adds up to... those little things that
we talked about. So the All Blacks are just slightly
off their game, and that contributed to them losing. South Africa,
on the other hand, we've talked a lot about the
All Blacks, but South Africa, a lot more direct. It
felt like it didn't rely on Jasper Wiese as much.
In fact, I thought he was shut down pretty well
by the All Blacks, who was so big for the
(15:03):
Springboks in the opening week. But they were just a
lot tidier. And we talked about the amount of ball
they turned over in the first test, where they cut
that right down. We talked before about scoreboard pressure, but
they just did the smart things well. The Springboks can
be pretty pleased with that bounce-back performance because they're under
a bit of heat after losing that first game, and
(15:23):
they've responded.
Speaker 3 (15:24):
Yeah, I think more effective and accurate. So the conversions
in the 22, taking the points on offer, pressuring and
feeding off the All Blacks' mistakes. Again, it wasn't anything revolutionary.
It wasn't anything the All Blacks didn't know was coming.
But what they did, they did well. And it's the
high ball, it's the maul. The scrum wasn't nearly as effective.
(15:49):
Five penalties in a row at Alice Park. Well, there
was probably only one moment that I recall where having
switched the front rows around just before halftime, the box
get that scrum five metres out from Neil Black's line.
Russie injects Oxnish and Malcolm Marks. The Springboks get a
scrum penalty, put down another scrum, and Khaleesi scores. But
(16:11):
apart from that, I don't recall any moments where you
could say the Springboks scrum dominated the All Blacks.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
No, although Russie Erasmus had a different take on it post-game.
Speaker 3 (16:24):
Well, it was quite bizarre, wasn't it, to see a
winning head coach basically lose the plot. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (16:32):
But I don't think you could do that as a
losing head coach, necessarily. You kind of need to come
from that position of power or gravitas because you've won
the game, then go, what are the All Blacks complaining about?
You know, we had four headshots, the All Blacks couldn't scrum, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
we're not walking around, F bomb this, shit this, that,
(16:54):
you know. It was the kind of rant that was
a little weird to be in the room watching it,
but you can only probably deliver that when you win,
I guess.
Speaker 3 (17:04):
Yeah, it's certainly smack of a sore loser if you
come off like that. But it does add to the
theatrics of it all. And look, it's interesting because the
All Blacks are maintaining their position. Dave Rennie, again, post-match,
putting out the fact that the Springboks are walking around,
stepping to the left. And then Jason Ryan, when we
(17:24):
spoke to him today, doubling down that World Rugby wants
you to scrum square and suggesting that that is in
fact the case. So it's clearly a point of tension,
it's something that Springboks pride themselves on. What about just the,
without going into it too much, the technicalities of it,
that the All Blacks believe that when the scrums are
setting up, that Oxnich is stepping to his left, which
(17:49):
allows Malcolm Marks as hooker and Oxnich to drive through
the tight head prop who has been Tyrell Lomax and
From what we understand, the All Blacks are trying to
step left to align with them and that's where some
of the scrum resets are taking place. I'm no scrum
expert but that's my understanding.
Speaker 2 (18:08):
Yeah, that sounds about right. I'm no scrum expert either
and so trying to offer an opinion on that, I'm
finding it a little bit of a battle because I'm
sure that the All Blacks believe they're genuinely doing things
the right way and I I'm sure the Springboks genuinely
believe they're doing things the right way. And at some point,
(18:29):
it's on a technicality or whatever it is that referees
are interpreting week to week. There's a lot of chat
about the break foot. Out there at the moment, it
was a big bugbear. The All Blacks got pinged there
a lot at the start of the tour. So I'm
sure both camps believe they're in the right and they're
probably not going to... Back down. Back down, exactly. So.
(18:52):
It's going to be a week-to-week proposition probably in the
series for Nick Amishikelli and then Carl Dixon in Baltimore
to try and figure out. So, yeah, there are more
qualified people than I that would be able to offer
an opinion on that.
Speaker 3 (19:07):
Yeah, look, rugby's such a technical game. You can pull
out any instance or clip up. Look, there was that
clip of, was it Damien Delende's try where Dionne Fourie
potentially ran into obstruction. I think it was on Simon Parker.
The All Blacks had a lot of gripes about Angus
Gartner's policing or lack of at the breakdown, managing that,
(19:31):
telling players to roll away rather than penalise them, which
compromised the speed of the ruck ball. Russie Erasmus makes
the point about head contact. So, look, there's so many
instances in any rugby match that you can pull out...
I think, again, as with the first test, I would
say there was no one flashpoint or officiating moment of
that game that determined the result.
Speaker 2 (19:51):
No, I don't think so either. I thought Angus had
a fine game. There was complaints from Seik Alisa. after
the All Blacks first try because Thomas Dettoy was getting
some treatment and he felt the game should have been stopped,
but they played on. The high shots, as you mentioned,
via Russie and Seah Khaleesi also brought those to Angus
(20:13):
Gardiner as well. But I didn't feel like it was
a big call either way that swung it. It was
South Africa who being the dominant team and ultimately being
good enough to win it. The All Blacks bench, I
don't think they got the selections of this right. And
it's easy to say this in hindsight, but Josh Mulby
(20:35):
wasn't the kind of player that could have come on
and had an influence in that game. And he didn't
come on the field at all. I think they would
have been better off And I don't know that he's
a bench player full stop. I think he either starts,
and he's been very good in that role, or he
isn't in the 23. I'm just looking for a bit
more out of a bench player like that. And again,
(20:55):
easy to say the way the game panned out, but
whether a Rico Ioane might have been a better pick
or a bigger body like a Fiji potentially. Yeah, I
just felt like that maybe they got that one wrong.
Speaker 3 (21:09):
Yeah, in hindsight, it feels like a bit of an
insurance policy, doesn't it? That if a wing goes down,
you've got another one there. But I agree. If I'm
selecting the bench right now, Rico Awani is my midfield
cover because you've already got two capable second fives in
Quintipaia and Geordie Barrett. And then I'm having probably Amoni
(21:31):
Narawa because he can cover wing, fullback. He's a big
body guy. Very skillful. I think he's played well on
this tour. This game was probably a bit early, wasn't it,
given those guys played 80 minutes on Tuesday. But I
think they come very much into the reckoning for this
third test. And at this point, I'm taking the risk
(21:54):
and I'm starting to suffer more as well. I think
he's been excellent off the bench. He's such a dynamic
presence with ball in hands. I understand the risk with
the line-out throwing, but I don't think Cody's been perfect either.
and so I'm willing to go that way. And you
could either put Cody Taylor on the bench or you
could give him a week off and put Samersonia. That's
(22:16):
a huge call because this is a test centurion. He's
in the leadership group, highly valued by Dave Rennie, but
I just feel like the All Blacks have looked so
much better with Asafa Amu on the field.
Speaker 2 (22:27):
I'm going to go a different tack and say Asafa Amu,
apart from the line-out throwing, which needs sorting out, that's
exactly what the All Blacks should be wanting out of
their bench in the closing stages of the game.
Speaker 3 (22:38):
He could bring it from the start where they've struggled.
Speaker 2 (22:41):
He could, but you're playing against tiring defences and you've
got this big but also short wrecking ball that's coming
through and carrying against tired defences. I think if you're
going to make a change at hooker, I'm starting Samisoni
and keeping Asafa Amor on the bench and giving him...
We've talked about this room with Bomb Squad for so
(23:02):
many years. Now, we'll get into their selections, what they
did yesterday in a moment, but You know, they used
to have Malcolm Marks come off the bench. Now, Malcolm
Marks probably still is the best hooker in the world.
He had an issue with the line-out throwing for a
little bit, but seems to have overcome that. He's a
better player than Bongi Mbanambi, but he'll come off the
bench as part of that bomb squad and be able
(23:23):
to change the game. So I think we're too quick
sometimes to go, he's playing well off the bench, put
him in the starting side.
Speaker 3 (23:30):
Yeah, it's a fair point, but I'm still starting him.
And I'm giving him 60 minutes to... and then bringing
either Cody on to close out the game or Samsoni.
I just think the All Blacks ball pack, I know
they ran for a lot more metres, but that was
again out wide. I think there's very few players in
that forward pack that are bending and breaking the spring
(23:51):
box line. I think Asafa Amor is one, and I
think Peter Lakai is another to a lesser degree. And
I think at this point you need to be harnessing
some fresh legs, some impact, and I've been... Really impressed
by our sufferer. Jason Ryan also said today that Luke
Jacobson had the flu, and that could potentially lead to
(24:14):
a change. Jacobson's had a big workload. Fabian Holland and
Tupu Vai have also played two 80-minute shifts. What, if any,
other changes can you envision, particularly to that forward pack?
I don't envision maybe many in the back line.
Speaker 2 (24:30):
No, I don't think there'll be many in the back
line either. It's interesting, isn't it? This is the first
time in, what, 30 years they're going to play the
Springboks three weeks in a row, and this takes it
out of you. But the best players in the world
should be able to play three big weeks in a row.
You have to do it at a rugby World Cup.
But I also don't think it's realistic, you know, given
the tour game load before then. Not everyone played, you know,
(24:53):
big minutes, but they did play quite a lot of minutes.
And there's also the injuries. We've talked about Anton Cegner, obviously,
not being part of this tour anymore, although I did
see him walking on a clip on Instagram yesterday, and
it sounds like he's going to be good to go
for the Bladders Live. Regardless, I think there'll be... I
can see that hooker change, potentially. I wonder whether they
(25:16):
might look at bringing Lomax off the bench this week
and just switching him and Fletcher Newell around, just to
present a little bit of a different picture, potentially, assuming
that Oxenchair starts... the test in Soweto.
Speaker 3 (25:32):
We've got Ethan De Groot and Josh Lord. Probably sounds
like they'll both be cleared from their HIAs. Ethan De
Groot's a bit more doubtful because he's got a bit
of a ligament issue with his knee. What are you
doing with Josh Lord?
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Well, I think you have to consider that the scrum
in the first test wasn't working and it changed markedly
obviously when they replaced the front row but also when
Tupo Vai went back into the second row. So I'm
in two minds about what to do. I think Josh
Lord probably starts. Fabian Holland's had a big workload coming
(26:10):
back from his shoulder. He's played two 80-minute test matches
in a row. We thought that maybe he'd come back
for Cape Town. He's ended up playing 160 minutes. I
wonder whether you start Sam Derry alongside potentially Josh Lord.
Speaker 3 (26:24):
I think that's too lightweight in the front row. It
compromises your scrum. I think... Josh Lord comes into the picture.
Maybe it's for Paddy on the bench.
Speaker 2 (26:37):
Right. Would you start Simon Parker again at blind? So
I thought he had probably his best test.
Speaker 3 (26:42):
I think he did as well. Yeah, it would be
rough to drop him on that performance. They do need
to find a fix for the line-out, but you don't
want to do that with compromising your scrum, so it's
a very delicate balancing act. The All Blacks have favoured
Josh Lord in a big way. He would have played
this test, probably started... maybe, but I agree with you.
(27:03):
I don't think Holland and Lorde work as a starting combination.
I think that compromises your scrum. So I think Tupu
Vai probably starts at lock again, maybe with Holland, but yeah,
I don't know if those guys could go 80 minutes again.
Speaker 2 (27:21):
Parker, again, a blindside, or do you look to someone
like Peter Lukai? potentially on the open side.
Speaker 3 (27:28):
Yeah, I think Luck I could come in at open side.
Speaker 2 (27:30):
And then maybe if Jacobson doesn't play, and look, he
came off the flu last night, in theory he should
be better, but I just wonder with that workload he's had,
whether they do look for something different. Do you bring
a Blackadder off the bench?
Speaker 3 (27:42):
Yep, he's another guy that comes into the picture. You
could drop Jacobson to the bench or Blackadder comes into
the mix. It probably depends on how they assess a
performance against the Lions as opposed to the Springboks. It's
one thing to look good against a franchise team in
a midweek match than a trilogy game. And just on that, Elliot,
(28:09):
this game for me definitively decides the series. Baltimore can
get in the sea.
Speaker 2 (28:16):
You're not going to Baltimore.
Speaker 3 (28:17):
Exactly.
Speaker 2 (28:20):
Nobody counts if you were there.
Speaker 3 (28:22):
No, no, no. There's just such a contextual difference to
winning two tests, two out of three tests on South
African soil than there is in a money-making test in
the States. For me, if the All Blacks win this weekend,
they win the series. And the same for the box,
to be honest. You can't have a bob each way.
(28:44):
I understand the financials around rugby and why the game
is going to Baltimore, but winning on South African soil
is so much more difficult, so much more special in
the context of history than something on neutral venue.
Speaker 2 (29:07):
Yeah, I agree. Look.
Speaker 3 (29:09):
The team would never say that, but I'm allowed to
say that.
Speaker 2 (29:11):
You're allowed to say it. Exactly right. I completely understand
why they've gone there. And maybe the money would have
been different if it wasn't part of the official series.
But I would have, whether it's a week later or
two weeks later even, I would have labelled it the rematch.
And it wouldn't matter what happened, whether it was South
Africa 3-0 or New Zealand 3-0 or 2-1, whatever it is.
(29:33):
It's a chance of revenge in a week's time. And...
That's what I would have branded it as. It's still
rugby's greatest rivalry, but it's the rematch. It's not part
of the series. It's still a test match. It's still
a capped game. It's still very important, but it doesn't
form part of the series. They would have had to
change the trophy, but that could be done. But I
(29:55):
agree that because of the travel factor, because of removing
a host country out of it, there are so many...
different things and the series has always been open to
interpretation and I agree whoever wins next week is is
you know can classify themselves as a serious.
Speaker 3 (30:11):
Winner yeah I think you'll see that with the nature
of the teams come Baltimore as well I think there
will be potentially mass changes for that team given you've
just played three brutal tests you're traveling to the other
side of the world all those sorts of things so
um look this weekend's the trilogy it's like a Heavyweight
title fight, some of the great matchups over the years
(30:32):
should be a cracker.
Speaker 2 (30:33):
Let's hope it's better than Godfather 3.
Speaker 3 (30:36):
One other technical aspect with the antics off the field
and Rusty's changes I want to make is that, look,
he's flaunting the grey area here, Rusty. At a World Cup,
he would not be permitted, I've done a bit of
research into this, he would not be permitted to make
changes that are not injury-enforced. 48 hours out from a game.
(30:59):
So on the Friday before the Saturday test here, he's
put Cheslin Colby on the right wing for Aronson. That
wouldn't be allowed. Aronson's fine. There's no injury there. He
hasn't bracketed him. That would be not allowed. And same
with your, you have to submit your starting team and
your bench, and there can't be any changes unless they're injury-related.
(31:22):
Because this series is a joint venture between New Zealand
Rugby and Saru, there's blurred lines. And because Saru's running
this on the ground, they're not going to tell Rusty
he's in the wrong. So, look, he's flaunting it. He's
pushing the envelope. The All Blacks say they're not worried
about it. Do you have an issue with it? Is
(31:44):
there any rugby ethics or anything like that?
Speaker 2 (31:48):
Well, I don't have a huge issue with it per se,
but why are you naming your team on Monday when
you don't know the fitness of all your players? It
only has to be named 48 hours out from kickoff.
So what are you doing? Releasing it publicly when you
have all these question marks, he's like grandstanding. Yeah. We
were at the media conference last week. He said, I'll
(32:08):
see you might come in. He was bracketed at that
point or slashed. What do you want to call it?
With the portavillas. He did mention, uh, Rusty on Monday
that she was on copy was a chance of being included.
But again, why name your team on Monday when you
don't have to, um, So it's subject to change. There's
an asterisk next to it. And then, obviously, the change
they made... Like an hour before. an hour before kick-off
(32:29):
and switching out the starting front row for, you know,
Sten Camp, Dion Frey, and Thomas de Toey.
Speaker 3 (32:37):
And what about the crock of shit excuse?
Speaker 2 (32:39):
Oh, no, no, no.
Speaker 3 (32:41):
We did that because we thought it might be wet,
so that front row was more suited.
Speaker 2 (32:45):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (32:46):
Nobody's buying that, Russie.
Speaker 2 (32:47):
No one's buying that, but.
He's entitled to do it because it falls within the
rules of World Rugby outside of a Rugby World Cup.
I guess the question is, at a World Cup, who's
judging whether these players are injured?
Speaker 3 (33:00):
I.E.
Speaker 2 (33:01):
Colby. Or, sorry, Aaron's... You know, they could just go,
he's taken a knock to his knees. He's no good
this week. You can flaunt the rules as much as
you like. Again, at a World Cup, you wouldn't be
able to make that bench change, presumably, because it's not injury-related,
so you couldn't make it for tactical reasons and switch...
those players. So, yeah, he's flaunting the rules a little bit.
(33:23):
I've always thought that, and this would be terrible for
a commentator like myself, but you should reveal your 23s
now before kickoff.
Speaker 3 (33:31):
Well, I think you go one way or the other.
Either you do it or you don't.
Speaker 2 (33:34):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (33:34):
Right? So, from a fan's, a punditry perspective, it makes
a bit of a mockery of the whole build-up, doesn't it?
Because you could talk about a player like Pollard most
of the week and And I think there was a
genuine injury with Pollard, but say you're talking about Aronson,
and then he's completely irrelevant a day before the game.
(33:54):
Same with the starting front rows. I don't know if
I feel for the All Blacks, but it would pose
some challenges. You're potentially preparing for one front row, and
then that flips on a dime an hour before the game.
So I think there probably does need to be some
sort of metric or stipulation around that, but look, Rusty's
(34:15):
going to get away with anything he can.
Speaker 2 (34:17):
Yeah, and Rusty's trying to push the boundaries and good
on them to an extent. You know, a lot of
rugby things are just done because that's the way they've
always been done. You have to name a team on
a Thursday for a Saturday game, which obviously Rusty does
not do. But, you know, or you have to, you know,
that team's got to be public. And part of it's,
you know, headlines and stories and media coverage that you
(34:40):
name a team and people can talk about the team
48 hours out. But look at a sport like, football
and the Premier League and Champions League and FIFA World
Cups different game because you kind of know the first
choice team is going to play most games anyway but
they only name it an hour or so before kickoff
and that creates drama in and of itself because you're
still debating it'd be a very long week but you're
(35:00):
still debating who's going to be in the you know
in the side up until an hour before kickoff.
Speaker 3 (35:06):
So but but it should be the same for both teams.
Speaker 2 (35:09):
Oh I agree completely yes whatever it is yeah I mean,
the All Blacks are going to go on, actually, we're
going to put Richie Wong on the bench yesterday, or
whatever it might have been.
Speaker 3 (35:17):
It's an interesting scenario for the players, too. I don't
know how that plays out behind the scenes, whether they're
actually told what's happening on a Monday and what changes
throughout the week. But if you're an Aronson and you're
preparing to play and then you're told, sorry, mate, Colby's back,
or if you're the front row preparing to start, it's
a lot going on in the week. I guess you've
(35:38):
got to just be prepared for that sort of carry on. Yeah.
If you're in the box.
Speaker 2 (35:41):
You do.
Speaker 3 (35:41):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (35:42):
It's part of, it comes with, with being in camp,
you know, feverishly awaiting the media advisory from South Africa
as to when Rusty's going to name his preliminary team
for this week, whether it's Monday or he's going to
go back to Thursday or whatever it might be. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (35:55):
There's a bit of theater, isn't it? It is.
Speaker 2 (35:57):
Just before we wrap up, do you think the spring
box will make many changes? Talked a lot about the
All Blacks. I mean, A couple of big test matches
in a row. We saw Sir Khaleesi come back from
his hamstring injury. Peter Steph's had a couple of big matches.
Ed Seberth, you know, he's the most capped springbok of
all time. Can they go into the well again? They've
got fantastic depth, but do they make changes for Test 3?
Speaker 3 (36:19):
Yes, they do. I'm not sure exactly what they'll be,
and I'm sure.
Speaker 2 (36:22):
They'll change throughout the week.
Speaker 3 (36:25):
But I think if Pollard's fit, he starts. because this
is the defining game of the series. Russie picked that
from the outset, and I guess it was always going
to be the three of four. And I think he
wants him there from a goal-kicking, from a game management.
I don't think Sasha's been great. Maybe that's him not
(36:46):
being allowed to play his natural game or a lack
of game time leading into the series, but I think
Russie will want Pollard there, so I can see him
coming in. I don't see him. Willemsen's out, so they'll
have to put somebody in at fullback.
Speaker 2 (36:59):
Yeah, they put Lebock there. He came on off the
bench yesterday. They may have some other options there. I'm
not sure if Fussy's fit.
Speaker 3 (37:07):
Yeah. I'm sure they've got... They could potentially put a
Colby to fullback or somebody like that. So, yeah, they
will make changes. I'm not sure about how many up front.
I think your usual suspects, Peter Steff and Khaleesi, will start.
But Khaleesi played, what, 42 minutes? So... They have phenomenal depth.
(37:28):
There's many levers they could pull, but I do expect
some changes.
Speaker 2 (37:32):
Yeah, we'll wait and see what the Springboks do this week.
Going to be another big week of build-up, isn't it?
For a third test, the stage is set. We head
back to Johannesburg midweek and at the 90-odd thousand FNB
Stadium in Soweto. So, obviously, we've got another podcast coming
once the teams are named. But, yeah, looking forward to
what should be a pretty special occasion next Saturday.
Speaker 3 (37:54):
Our time. Yeah, hopefully no... No aerial, no plane incidents.
They might push them. Maybe they'll go from 12 to
6 metres.
Speaker 2 (38:05):
Exactly, yeah.
Speaker 3 (38:05):
It's like a game of chicken amongst the South African parlours.
Speaker 2 (38:10):
Absolutely. Right, that'll wrap us up for Rugby Direct. We
will catch you later in the week. Thanks as always
to Mark Kelly for producing this podcast, and we're powered
by Forklift Solutions, lifting you and your business to a
higher level.
Speaker 1 (38:27):
For more from Newstalk ZB, listen live, on air or
online and keep our shows with you wherever you go
with our podcasts on iHeart Radio.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Bobby Bones Show
Listen to 'The Bobby Bones Show' by downloading the daily full replay.