Édition du Nord

Select Edition

Nord Nord
Sud Sud
Mondial Mondial
Nouvelle Zélande Nouvelle Zélande
France France

France v Afrique du Sud : lorsque les éléphants se battent, c'est l'herbe qui souffre

Marseille provided a cacophony of sound and a kaleidoscope of colour as France beat South Africa (Photo by Jean Catuffe/Getty Images)

Un vieux proverbe africain dit que lorsque les éléphants se battent, c’est l’herbe qui souffre. Dimanche, lors du dernier quart de finale, la pelouse du Stade de France accueillera deux gros packs d’avants qui se jetteront l’un sur l’autre pour avoir la chance de disputer une demi-finale.

ADVERTISEMENT

Alors que l’on s’attend à ce que l’Afrique du Sud aborde le match avec un désir de jeu au pied, d’engagement physique et de domination sur les phases statiques, et que l’on pense que la France jouera avec toute la liberté qu’elle souhaite, les statiques dont on dispose semblent contredire cette perspective.

Rencontre
Coupe du Monde de Rugby
France
28 - 29
Temps complet
South Africa
Toutes les stats et les données

Bilan contrasté sur les phases statiques

Car de toutes les équipes du top 8, la France est celle qui domine le plus les collisions par rapport à ses courses avec ballon (48%), tandis que l’Afrique du Sud se classe au septième rang (38%) de ces huit équipes en la matière. Les Springboks ont également perdu le plus grand nombre de mêlées par match de ce groupe pour le deuxième plus mauvais taux de réussite (81%), et ne se classent qu’au cinquième rang pour la réussite en touche (89%). La France, quant à elle, a le troisième meilleur taux de réussite en mêlée (94%) et le deuxième meilleur taux de réussite en touche (91%).

Les Bleus sont également habitués à la dépossession, puisqu’ils bottent le ballon plus de 30 fois par match en moyenne, ce qui, par conséquent, les place au cinquième rang pour les courses avec ballon (119,0 par match). L’Afrique du Sud, quant à elle, a choisi de ne pas dégager le ballon, ne le faisant que 20,3 fois par match en phase de poules.

Ca se jouera à l’avant

Cependant, la France a été meilleure que l’Afrique du Sud chaque fois qu’elle avait le ballon. Les Français gardent le ballon en vie mieux que quiconque, avec en moyenne le plus grand nombre d’offloads (11,8) et le deuxième plus grand nombre de franchissements (10,5), alors que les Springboks ont concédé le plus grand nombre de récupérations (17,0) et ont obtenu les pires résultats positifs de toutes les équipes (60 %), ce qui signifie que quatre possessions sur dix se sont soldées par une faute.

Si l’on ajoute que la France est l’équipe la plus sobre en matière de pénalités (8,0) et que l’Afrique du Sud ne passe en moyenne que 1,5 point par match depuis l’extérieur des 22 mètres, les champions en titre savent qu’ils auront fort à faire pour battre leurs hôtes à Paris. En commençant, comme toujours, à l’avant.

« Ils ont un très gros pack, mais nous serons à la hauteur », a affirmé l’avant des Springboks, Jasper Wiese. « Je ne pense pas qu’il y aura un manque d’intensité ou que quiconque se retiendra.

« Ce sera certainement énorme, les collisions seront plus importantes et il y aura certainement quelques bobos. »

ADVERTISEMENT

Elimination

New Zealand
South Africa
11 - 12
Final
Argentina
New Zealand
6 - 44
SF1
England
South Africa
15 - 16
SF2
Wales
Argentina
17 - 29
QF1
Ireland
New Zealand
24 - 28
QF2
England
Fiji
30 - 24
QF3
France
South Africa
28 - 29
QF4
ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Commentaires

0 Comments
Soyez le premier à commenter...

Inscrivez-vous gratuitement et dites-nous ce que vous en pensez vraiment !

Inscription gratuite
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 5 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian? Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian?
Search