Springboks: Oom Rugby unpicks the evolving attack under Rassie Erasmus as Wales game ‘pulled away curtain’ on ‘fresh’ style

The Springboks are evolving their attack under Rassie Erasmus.

Making his debut on Planet Rugby, journalist Daniel Gallan has spoken to Oom Rugby, who unpicks the Springboks’ new-look attack under head coach Rassie Erasmus.

In a conversation style piece the pair take a deep dive into the attack South Africa looked to employ against Wales at Twickenham and what lies ahead in July.

The Springboks are currently preparing for a two-Test series with Ireland before they host Portugal in a one-off game. Here’s Oom’s take on their game-plan.

Daniel: I’d like to talk about the Springbok attack and how it has evolved under Rassie’s tenure, but I suppose that goes hand in hand with how defence has evolved in rugby. What effect has modern defence had on attack?

Oom Rugby: Great question and a good place to start. Look, we’re living in the era of defence. It is now much more aggressive and organised than in the past. I saw a stat something like after two phases your chance of losing possession goes up by 12% on each next phase. So if you have the ball, you’re in danger. Another stat: 75% of the time the team that kicks more will win the match. That is the reality of Test rugby. So teams will rather give the ball back and hand you the risk, or if they keep the ball they will play with a lot of structure to try protect it. The Boks’ answer was to play more direct, more forward-based, play percentages, don’t hang onto the ball too long, and kick to disrupt. They used their phases like a hammer and if a crack appeared they would strike, with Willie (Le Roux) as the main driver of that. We can call this a “play to stress” approach. It was percentage rugby but at the same time also creative if we think of all the wonderful tries the Boks scored when they did pull the trigger. Think of Makazole Mapimpi’s score down the short side against England in the 2019 Rugby World Cup final. In my opinion it is the most efficient way to play Test rugby. And hard to argue when it delivered two World Cups!

Daniel: So in that light, what is now the most noticeable variable in how the Springbok attack has changed since the Rassie era started?

Oom Rugby: The game against Wales was special and I will explain why. Look, Rassie had to rebuild the Boks and the way to do that is to first sort the fundamentals. International coaches don’t have much time with players so you focus on the basics: set-piece, defence, kicking game, breakdown, maul, kick-offs. Attack is much harder and you layer it over time. So the early model Boks kept things simple, as I have explained. But where do you go from there? Teams start to figure you out, and on top of that I think Rassie always had a vision that the Boks would evolve their attack. Plus the 50-22 rule has opened up more opportunities. So then the only logical place to go is to keep the ball more and use our backline more. But how do you do that? You can go the Ireland route and play in a very structured way, but that is not something that really exist in South African franchises or in our DNA. Or you can just try to keep it loose and “have a go”, but then I guarantee you will lose every match. So on Saturday we saw the Springboks pull away the curtain on what they want to do. In essence: they want to dilute the intensity of modern defence by making it spread its attention and resources. This is not anything new, but it is new to the Boks and certainly they have a fresh view on how they want to do it.

Daniel: Take us through it. What in particular did you notice during the Wales game? It felt as if they were trying to shift the point of contact a lot more.

Oom Rugby: Yes, in a way that is what was happening, but that was just a symptom of this bigger philosophical decision they have taken: to stress defence not just by physicality, but also by presenting it with multiple questions. It is like the game at the arcade where you try to hit the moles with a hammer. The Boks went about this in macro and micro ways. First, look at the picture below. In a broader sense they want different mini-teams or individual threats at different parts of the field simultaneously. Look at Edwill van der Merwe’s try for example, he was one of four viable options across the field at the same moment: a group ready to strike down the left touchline, then Edwill on the left of the ruck, Pieter-Steph du Toit threatening the ruck down the right, and a wrap play ready to go wider on the other touchline. The defence has to respect all these threats so it is harder for them to dictate.

Then secondly we saw it in plays that themselves contained a range of threats, with multiple players in motion around the distributor.

Then finally as you see below, within mini-groups the Boks are introducing multiple threats too. For example players in the pod were shifting the point of contact between themselves. This is what you were seeing, and while it is nothing new in rugby it is new to the Boks and they have a different spin on it.

I must also add this mostly is not rigid. Yes, the Boks will run patterns and plays, but this type of attack is more like a ‘lego box’ where the players are creating shapes and threats according to a common set of principles. The All Blacks have always been so good at this. I can hear people say “I coach my under 14s to do that”. Sure. But as I have explained, Test defence will gobble you up if a cleaner is one second late. And a system that is unpredictable to the defence is also unpredictable to itself. So to play like this at Test level need a high level of skill and game awareness, and it needs to be thought out very carefully to mitigate risk.

Daniel: It also felt that our players were more spread out on attack, not as narrow as in the past. More options for the 9 or 10 to hit.

Oom Rugby: Exactly. So let’s go into more detail. First, let’s talk pods. We have all seen a three-man pod with one guy in the middle to carry and two guys in a triangle behind him to latch and clean. The advantage of this is that it promotes ball security because the cleaners are right behind the carrier. But the downside is there is less deception because the defenders know exactly who the carrier is.

But what we saw from the Boks on Saturday was much flatter pods. So now these three guys are not always standing in a triangle, they’re standing in a line. This means that the defence don’t know which one is going to get the ball and be the carrier, so it is harder for them to commit so intensely to a single point of contact.

The downside is that it is harder for your cleaners, or they can be disrupted, so you can concede turnovers. But it is an added layer of stress on the defence. And these flat pods the Boks were using was probably what gave the impression that players was more ‘spread out’ as you say. Look, any team will use different types of pods at different times – they all have different uses – but I am not sure we have really seen the Boks use these flat shapes to this extent before. And then with forwards interplaying the ball and shifting the point of contact a lot more.

But I want to mention one more thing that I thought was interesting. A few times the Boks lined up in this a flat pod with two or three guys, but then there was also a extra man waiting nearby at depth. He is not part of the pod, he is technically his own man. But many times this guy joined the play, either to run off the shoulder or to act as a emergency cleaner. We can call this a three-and-a-half-man pod, with the three guys and their friend waiting nearby. It is both ball security insurance but also a added threat, and I find it a nice innovation.

Daniel: It felt a little bit frenetic at times, in a way that wasn’t necessarily always productive. I can’t imagine that playing like this is the goal. Just teething problems?

Oom Rugby: You raise a good point, and I think what we were seeing was just that the Boks had more licence against Wales. I mean no disrespect, but Wales is not where they want to be and their defence has some deep issues. Quite a few things that worked on Saturday will not work against better defences. For instance there is a good chance that Ireland will punish flatter Springbok pods by getting to the ball before our cleaners. So while the Boks have clearly added a new dimension to their game and wanted to take it for a test drive on Saturday, it is just one of the gears a team must have. They won’t play like this all the time, it will be situational and contextual. We will see more percentage play by the Boks when it is needed, and that is fine. Think of how the Bulls beat Leinster – with a smart kicking game, and you will see that the basic Test blueprint still holds true.

Daniel: The Springboks have some exciting new faces vying for the 10 jumper. How do they fit into the picture when we talk about this new attack? And what’s your opinion on Handre Pollard’s ability to run this kind of game?

Oom Rugby: First off, the fly-half is the coach on the field and there few better than Handre at this. And while we’re seeing a new type of Springbok attack, we must remember it is just one of the options in the bag and someone must still make the call of when to use it based on the match situation. Handre with his deep experience, calmness and rugby IQ is that man. However in a practical sense, if the Boks switch to this kind of attack in a game, we can ask if Handre is the best guy to operate inside these kinds of fluid shapes. It is a fair comment that one thing he was not always elite at was playing the ball late and having that little bit of finesse in close-quarter distribution. It is a small thing but it is also not a small thing. The success of this kind of attack comes down to incredibly tiny margins. We’re talking centimetres, milliseconds, deception, soft hands, misdirection, innovation, hitting exactly the right option at exactly the right time in a way that the defence could not get set for. It will be a case of seeing how often the Boks attack like this, how Handre slot into that, and then weighing up every pro and con from there. But the guy is now coming into his prime as a 10 so no question he must drive the car. And as much as we feel the new guys might be better suited to playing like this, it is just one aspect of running the show in Test match rugby.

Daniel: What role do our centres play in this? We’ve used hard-running, direct 12s in the past. Are they going to have more freedom?

Oom Rugby: The fascinating thing with the Boks now is that the wings are acting like centres and the centres are acting like flanks! Traditionally, Rassie’s wings mostly keep their width and don’t always get involved inside, but what we saw on Saturday was a lot more innovative. Our wings are operating in the middle of the park more than they did. And when wings are popping up by rucks, or inside a shape, or trailing behind a fly-half then the defence get a heart palpitation because these are the most dangerous players on the field. In terms of centres, it seems like on attack the Boks always want someone running a hard line option to further stress the defence, and they will use a centre or a flank to do so. I mean, if you going to threaten somebody then threaten them properly. As I have said, the main risk with the Boks’ new approach is conceding turnovers (and I think we will see a rise in this as the Boks try to play this new game), so the centres now have quite a big role to play to support and clean. They essentially must be like two openside flankers. But to your point, they must also now have the finesse to play out the back, change the point of contact, disguise their intentions and be creative. While Damian de Allende is one of the best and most dangerous 12s in the world, Andre Esterhuizen maybe offers a little bit more in this department. It is a nice problem to have!

Daniel: Finally, what is the role of the 15 in this? Both in a practical sense and if we consider that Willie le Roux might be stepping off the stage at some point.

Oom Rugby: In the past the Boks used the 15 as the key playmaker. This had to do with the more straight-forward game plan, but it also had to do with Willie and Handre and what they offered. I don’t think people realise just how critical Willie has been to the Boks – seeing the weakness developing, calling the play, and then pulling the trigger. Obviously this is easier to do from full-back because you see more, but it is not wise to rely so much just on one player, especially if he is not so easily replaced. But in the new attack system all the players are essentially collaborating together in spontaneous ways depending on where they find themselves, so the creative load is spread. And something fascinating is how that suddenly affects selection. Think about it, you now need players with high rugby IQ, a good sense of depth and timing, good skills, and the ability to coach themselves on the field. But an important question still remains: while the Boks are trying to create multiple simultaneous threats, who is deciding which option is going to be taken? That is not always a collaborative decision. You need someone to look at the picture and make the call, and in this system I think it will return to a more classical 9 and 10 situation. If there are multiple options, then your key decision makers must make the call from source. I think the 15 must still be a playmaker who can come in, but he must also be a threat, popping up in a shape to add more dimension.