Destroying the flawed assumptions with the Springboks' loss to Ireland
Cue the conspiracy theories popping up left, right and centre that we didn’t see the ‘true’ Springboks against Ireland and they were holding back.
There are questions over the decisions to kick for goal over kicking for the corner when they had 15 forwards in the line up to maul.
There are also suggestions that the Springboks “left” 11 points out on the field.
Both are fallacy with flawed logic that becomes clear when you take into account the game situation and how events unfolded.
The Springboks are notorious for taking the three points when available particularly in a tight contest where points are at a premium.
There was nothing suspicious about the intent to take points, which the match situation demanded they do so.
Faf de Klerk’s first long-range attempt came with the Boks down 7-3 early in the second half.
Jasper Wiese managed to pin an Irish ball carrier and win a holding on penalty for the Springboks just inside their own half. In that six minutes to start the second half they had no possession and were forced to manage an exit situation.
The traffic lights came on from the coaches box to signal a shot at goal. The chance to make it a one point game at 7-6 after a period of play where Ireland had most of the running was irresistible.
They ended up in possibly a better situation than kicking for the corner as the ball hit the post and was recovered by Eben Etzebeth about eight metres out.
Ireland defend for multiple phases before Etzebeth rides the chairlift and is lifted up by James Lowe. Other Irish defenders come in, hold him up, and force a collapsed maul turnover.
At that exact moment, the Springboks unload the 7-1 bench to inject fresh meat for the defensive scrum on Ireland’s five. Both locks, Etzebeth and Franco Mostert sub out, No 8 Wiese also leaves with one front rower Kitshoff.
The decision and timing is a masterstroke.
They turn the screws on Ireland’s feed, win a penalty, call another scrum and Cheslin Kolbe scores their first try. The unpredictable back-and-forth sequence of events ends up in South Africa’s favour massively.
Here is the kicker: if De Klerk makes the penalty kick then Kolbe’s try doesn’t eventuate. The field position and the scrum platform for the try all come from De Klerk’s penalty hitting the post.
Instead of three points they end up with five, but the narrative in the final wash is that we can add back De Klerk’s missed three to the end total plus Libbok’s conversion. Madness.
If you want to add the potential for three back, please subtract five first, and then cancel out the potential for two more from Libbok’s miss as conversions don’t occur without tries.
So already the narrative that the Springboks left 11 points on the field doesn’t hold any weight. They end up in a worse position if De Klerk makes the first penalty.
South Africa’s next penalty attempt at goal came with Ireland up 10-8 after Sexton reclaimed the lead with a regulation kick at goal.
A knock-on by De Allende led to an Irish scrum 40 metres out from their line on the angle. Again another fierce shove by South Africa at the scrum wins a penalty against the feed.
This was the most make-able kick of them all but unfortunately Libbok missed it, shaving the left upright.
Consider the decision-making of taking the shot in this situation.
Would you kick to the corner down by two points with 17 minutes remaining, or take a chance from 40 metres out and 15 metres in to take the lead by 11-10?
It is very reasonable to assume they would want to take the lead and a penalty would do that.
After Libbok’s missed penalty, Ireland clear the ball away downfield from a 22 restart. Kwagga Smith returns the restart near halfway and Ireland are penalised on the very next phase for being offside, leading to De Klerk’s second long-range attempt.
This comes directly from the sequence of play after Libbok’s penalty miss, less than 30 seconds apart. They don’t get the second chance to kick for goal if the first one is made.
If De Klerk made his first long-range attempt, cancelling out the Kolbe try, and Libbok made his penalty, the score would hypothetically be 10-9 in Ireland’s favour.
South Africa don’t kick for goal for the remainder of the game and would still lose but by 13-9.
However, this is an impossible assumption as the sequence of match events has already diverged from our realised sequence of what happened.
Questions were asked why the Springboks changed tact and starting kicking for the corner to go for the maul at the end of the game.
There is only one questionable roll of dice when the score is 10-8 after Pieter-Steph du Toit is tackled near the sideline and the ball is forced out.
Ireland are judged to have ripped it out of Du Toit’s hands and South Africa are awarded the throw.
The Springboks attempt a rolling maul and win a penalty, but turn down a third penalty shot out wide in favour of another maul since they are already in the corner.
This was the first tactical change with faith in the maul greater than their place kickers. There was 10 minutes remaining.
Flanker-turned-hooker Deon Fourie’s throw is not straight and the miscue hands Ireland a scrum. The Springboks give away a short-arm penalty and Ireland escape out of the situation.
Ireland then got ahead by five points, time was running out with three minutes remaining and the Springboks were then forced to chase seven points if they wanted to win.
There is nothing suspect about the way South Africa tried to manage the game and the decisions they made. It was by-the-book of how they would be expected to handle those situations in any other Test.
They tried to kick goals when they arose and when that didn’t work they tried to maul and failed. It is as simple as that.
There is no scenario in which the Springboks making their goals automatically leads to a reversal of the result.
Trying to twist the outcome match with revisionist possibilities is fraught with folly and in this case doesn’t add up to 11 extra points for the Springboks.
All we can say is Ireland won 13-8 and South Africa missed their chances to win, end of.
Irish won fair and square, boks threw all they had in but ireland was too good. Am sure they kissed that Blarney stone before the game. Ireland goes in hot favourites against NZ in the quaters. May the best team win!
Pure suppososition again! The best team on the day won. Simple!
Ireland going to knock out those powder puff All Blacks in the quarter final it’s coming
The point of the questions is based on the comparison with the Twickenham game against the abs where they didn't take the shots, built pressure and got abs in the bin and then scored tries. And the fact they hardly bothered to maul until the end and if you take all your shots you can't lineout maul on the line.
Geez you write some rubbish these days ben
The bokke have proven their pedigree on this stage. Ireland have progressed but never proven themselves when it counts. I (american) reflect on this fixture as very far from showing either side's superiority this year. Ireland kicked well and SA kicked poorly in a match decided by mere foot points. looking forward to the next.
Ben, you were somewhat partial in your writing. Your eagerness to defend the match from "woulda coulda" narratives ignored the clear superiority of the South Africans on the touchline and in the scrum.
Looking forward to seeing how this matchup plays out and if you will own your misunderstanding of these nuances next month.
"All we can say is Ireland won 13-8 and South Africa missed their chances to win, end of" - pretty much what every Saffer is saying.
Honestly, Ben, you need help.
Nigel you beaut
Not meant for you David but Nigel who I think is related to Ben Smith
nigel uses AI to "write" as our smithy boy
If you look at the photo of Ben Smith he must have been a beautiful baby. And like the poem suggests his parents most likely kept him from children who were rough. Understandably! The issue is, he has stayed a very pretty little baby boy and therein lies the rub.
It's so funny cause when I see these articles on my phone news feed before I even open them I can tell it's Ben Smith writing them. The hate and envy in his titles give it away.
What was most interesting from an outside perspective of that great game, was the tackle ball area - Ireland won this area hands down. The Irish fitness negated the SA reserve bench. Also, when the Bok chose to run the ball wide in the last 20 mins, they were shut down. The Northern Hemisphere team do not do a lot. Like the French and English, the Irish do enough to win. In saying that, the Boks have more potential to win.
Shocking Ben Smith! Talks trash
Ben's Myth
I’ll skip the snide/smug language used to discuss anything Springboks related (seriously mate, were you bullied by a South African forward pack at some point?) and just point out that this type of moment by moment mathematical calculation of how many points the kicks actually cost SA is missing a crucial aspect, which is the way Rugby works psychologically. If the Springboks punished Ireland for transgressions at the breakdown or whatever, then suddenly they’re chasing a 9-0 lead. Not to mention that players play differently when they know an opposing 10 can punish them reliably from 50-60 meters out Like the Boks of 2009. That builds pressure, pressure builds mistakes, mistakes builds more pressure, stop me when you get bored here…
Look, I am South African, so let me be the first here to say: Ireland won the game fair and square. SA had 6 years under Rassie and Nienaber to develop reliable kickers within their group and they failed to do so.
What South Africans are ALSO saying is that by perhaps bringing in a kicking coach or two, and maybe correcting a few things at the breakdown, the Springboks should be able to make a great contribution to the spectacle come the knock-out phase.
Gosh Ben, so flattering, why would you mention Aki coming in from the side and collapsing that last maul on the Irish try line? The default penalty there is a penalty try? Why would you mention that when Lowe ripped that ball wasn't he on the ground? Isn't playing the ball on the ground in a ruck a penalty? Why would you mention all of Ireland's if and buts? Myopic much? Oh why would Boks fear ABs 4 weeks after handing them a record defeat?
When I see Ben Smith has written another article about the Springboks I don't even bother reading it and skip straight to the the comments section, which is where the entertainment lies...
Jaapies cannot even take constructive criticism and comment which is exactly what this is. He explains how the bomb squad did help SA win that scrum & penalty. The other point is the foolishness of taking off Kolisi and Etzebeth. The replacement props were so unfit they can only manage to dominate in one scrum when the opposition are already 50 minutes in. The Irish evened up the next scrum. Next time around the call will be a big effort in the first scrum after the bomb squad come on. Ireland defence was so good SA could only score one try, taking them by surprise. Keep going with that bomb squad safas. It will see you go out soon.
This is actually a proper and very pertinent opinion rather than the garbage he usually writes about the Springboks.
First sensible article Smith has written about the Boks this year, proving you don't always have to write BS to drive engagement and comments...
There are no theories, assumptions or dark plots,the Boks lost the battle but are going to win the war fait accompli 😉
Pas encore. 😋
Ben from your point of view have the Boks actually ever played a decent game ?or are they the great pretenders!or simply a case of sour grapes 🍇
Cheese and rice . Ireland won . Moving on .
Ireland won only this match. Nothing more. I would actually say nothing. Lots of rugby ahead. Careful now.
Don't you mean 'mice'? At least, that's how yr Oirish looked in the line outs. Or were you catching 40 winks?
Comedy gold as per
Oh dear, can't wait for the barrage of dumb, rugby dunce saffas after this. No doubt most will attack Ben Smith in the usual, boring ad hominem onslaught that has become so boring and predictable. Take a step back boys and girls, grab a grown up that knows something about rugby and digest the article. It's spot on, well thought out and on the money.
You really shouldn't be accusing anyone of being boring and predictable, captain Obvious.
Grown up. Doubt it very much. Thought you were Irish for a moment
😂 😂 🤣 🙂 😆 🤣 😆
Can I be your friend 🙂 I think you need a hug 🙂
Say "ad hominem" for the camera Diggy! 👋
Nigel, you 'sound' like yr namesake Farage. I'm not a Saffa, nor an Englander, little or otherwise. However, Smith goes into more minutiae which lasts longer than the time the ball was in play (27, I think?).
Some basic stats; the teams scores a try apiece, suggesting 'D' dominated. Therefore, both may now need to gen up on 'A'.
Worryingly for Ireland, they lost 5 line outs (on the bounce?). SA also controlled majority possession, territory, rucks etc, especially in the 2nd 1/2.
'End of' indeed seems like an ill advised, novice used car salesman's attempt to sell headlines in 1 of the lying professions such as, funnily enough, politics, estate agency etc. Is BS (interesting moniker, or what?!) perchance, related to Boris?
Anyway, with a kicker at just 50 % SA would have won, or drawn the game.
Surely, that's more like an actual 'end of', innit?
Whom is most likely to be concerned about an indicative, but not pivotal result? Which team has been there, dunnit? Whose beads of sweat are more likely to be glistening going into the 1/4ers?
Well, I dunno do I, but we'll all find out soon enough won't we?
via Rugby Onslaught:
"Outside the Stade de France, a sea of green and gold-clad Springboks fans fumed with frustration after witnessing their beloved team’s loss to Ireland in Pool B of the Rugby World Cup. The air was thick with disappointment – nearly as thick as the average Bok supporter – as fans gathered for interviews with RugbyPass, their emotions laid bare for the world to see"
They really are the dumbest fans, in any sport, in the world.
South Africans hate Ben Smith because he has a good understanding of rugby and is honest about what he thinks.
As usual, this is a good article.
The article is a load croc, because as soon as you change 1 decision the entire game changes from that point on and the is no would've , could've, should've. All the saffas are saying is Ireland won 13-8 and we missed a few kicks. Ireland were better than us on the day and the score board reflects that.
Ben Smith, the fullback was brilliant. Not this fellow. There is something amiss here.
From his articles it seems like the feeling is mutual his opinion is always biased so rather predictable
Why? leaving aside BS's endless detail, what concrete fundamental evidence is there to support his 'End of' comment? Did you (or BS) look at any match stats?
Also, yr 'hate' comment is generalised, opinionated & judgmental. Surely not a form of prejudice is it?
Unless you've conducted the swiftest Mori type poll in SA history, all 59.39 m of them, since I last blinked, perhaps you could also look up the word 'objectivity'.
😂😂😂 did you just say Ben has good knowledge of rugby outside the all blacks and springboks ? He doesn’t write about anything else
Well at least you have a good grasp of comedy. Flawless delivery there Finny boy.