Why Springboks chose not to select six/two bench versus England

If you have an overlap on a rush defense, they naturally cover out and out and leave a huge gap near the ruck.

It also helps if both teams play the same rules. ARs set the offside line 1m past where the last mans feet were😅

It could be achieved by outsourcing all your IP and players to New Zealand, Japan, and America, with a big Super competition between those countries raking it in with all of Australia's best talent to help them at a club level. When there is enough of a following and players coming through internally, and from other international countries (starting out like Australia/without a pro scene), for these high profile clubs to compete without a heavy australian base, then RA could use all the money they'd saved over the decades to turn things around at home and fund 4 super sides of their own that would be good enough to compete.

That sounds like a great model to reset the game in Aus. Take a couple of decades to invest in youth and community networks before trying to become professional again. I just suggest most aussies would be a bit more optimistic they can make it work without the two decades without any pro club rugby bit.

Let's keep Marcus Smith on the pitch if he's fit and playing well. I was really pleased with his goal kicking. It used to be his weakness. I feel sympathy for George Ford who hadn't kicked all match and then had a kick to win the game. You hear pundits and commentators commend kickers who have come off the bench and pulled that off. Its not easy. If Steve B continues to substitute players with no clear reason then he is going to get criticised.

On paper I thought England would beat NZ if they played to their potential and didn't show NZ too much respect. Okay, the off the ball tackles certainly stopped England scoring tries, but I would have liked to see more smashing over gainlines and less kicking for position. Yes, I also know it's the Springbok endorsed world cup double winning formula but the Kiwi defence isn't the Bok defence, is it. If you have the power to put Smith on the front foot then why muzzle him? I guess what I'm saying is back, yourself. Why give the momentum to a team like NZ? Why feed the beast? Don't give the ball to NZ. Well d'uh.

Our scrum is a long term weakness. If you are going to play Itoje then he needs an ogre next door and a decent front row. Where is our third world class lock? Where are are realible front row bench replacements? The England scrum has been flakey for a while now. It blows hot and cold. Our front five bench is not world class.

On the positive side I love our starting backrow right now. I'd like to see them stick together through to the next world cup.

Anyway, there is always another Saturday.

BB being injured has kind of made things complicated.

Rueban Love is the most like-for-like, covers 10 and 15….. but 10 in a test?

Plummer would be safer option for first five cover, also covers 12.

Then ALB covers 12-13.

I think the sensible choice would be Plummer and ALB, but I’d rather see Plummer and Rubes.

That might be a bit much for a test this size but if they lit it up it would be one hell of a story.

Leaves our midfield too light for cover though.

Front row could be interesting. Ofa in my opinion is too important to leave out at the moment and needs to be on the rimu.

Mighty Temaiti will be better off for last weekends experience, he offered more around the field than DeGroot has in his last few games.

In fact the English team were very early in their season and should've been comfortably beaten by an Allblacks team that had played multiple tests together.

Razor has himself recognised that to be the best they'll have to sort out the crisis levels of mistakes that have really increased since the first two tests against England.

Early tackles were a classic example of hyper enthusiasm to not give an inch, that passion that Razor has achieved is going to be formidable once the unforced errors are eliminated.

That's his secret, he's already rebuilt the passion and that's the most important aspect, its inevitable that he'll now eradicate the unforced errors. When that happens a fellow tier one nation is going to get thrashed. I don't think it will be until 2025 though.

The Allblacks will lose both tests against Ireland and France if they play high error rates rugby like they did against England.

To get the unforced errors under control he's going to be needing to handover the number eight role to Sititi and reset expectations of what loose forwards do. Establish a clear distinction with a large, swarthy lineout jumper at six that is a feared runner and dominant tackler and a turnover specialist at seven that is abrasive in contact. He'll then need to build depth behind the three starters and ruthlessly select for that group to be peaking in 2027 in hit Australian conditions on firm, dry grounds.

It's going to help him that Savea is shifting to the worst super rugby franchise where he's going to struggle behind a beaten pack every week.

The under performing loose forward trio is the key driver of the high error rates and unacceptable turn overs due to awol link work. Sititi is looking like he's superman compared to his openside and eight.

At this late stage in the season they shouldn't be operating with just the one outstanding loose forward out of four selected for the English test. That's an abject failure but I think Robertson's sacrificing link quality on purpose to build passion amongst the junior Allblacks as they see the reverential treatment the old warhorses are receiving for their long term hard graft.

It's unfortunately losing test matches and making what should be comfortable wins into nail biters but it's early in the world cup cycle so perhaps it's a sacrifice worth making.

However if this was F1 then Sam Cane would be Riccardo and Ardie would be heading into Perez territory so the loose forwards desperately need revitalisation through a rebuild over the next season to complement the formidable tight five.