Scotland dominate the stats

The forh comi.n gf match scedule remains a problem with only 2 Wales tets ere we an expect fiurther exoeeriments - one next week and he oher in November. I think the following playes past t e test on Satirday:-

Hoprn. Porthen, Louw amd De Villiers.

The problm remains te flyhalf and center positions.

On the other hand the positive news was that Sacha wqould be ready to play - but will pribably not be iused against Wales and await the upcoming Rugby Championship tests

Those are big numbers. Pollard not surprising as he has been a suspect defender his whole career. PSDT missed a lot last week too even if people don't want to hear or accept it. I'm surprised at how Scotland dominates the stats though, didn't seem so bad live. I'll watch the game again with attention, watching with company like I did is always distracting.

‘It's a microscope on everything that was wrong, with very little focus on anything that wasn't all bad’

Not exactly true, it was a focus on some of the things that went wrong. I never mentioned our 88% scrum wins vs 100% for Scotland. Or our 90% lineout wins.. vs 92% for Scotland. Or the fact that Scotland passed the ball 235 times to our 85….is that evidence of Brown ball? Or that we had to make 65% more tackles than the Scots.

I provide this information you probably won’t find elsewhere, because I always think real fans like to understand what’s happening. But maybe I’m wrong….perhaps nobody cares. In which case just ignore any aberrant fact.

@Mozart on balance there was more positives than negatives for me, but I get what you're saying, I'm just a bit more positive about where we are...we have pure flaws, and it's a good thing we find out about all of them...we find a way to win despite them...Rassie is good ad figuring out how to play the cards his dealt... he'll make a killing playing poker or blackjack.

Woosh!

shameonyou

...but, but he made all his kicks...

Pollard made his kicks at goal - but he failed in all othe aspects of flyha;f pl;ay in destroyed backline play bym the S Springbok play.

Pollard in 2014 scopred 2 tries aagainst the AB.s. Since then he played in 86 tests amd inm total scpred 6 tries. He alwats was a top clas goa kicker. After 2019 went too play fo Montpellier. He was a very expsnsive imnvestment and part;y due to injururies he pl;ayed only 38 matchees for that Unions. He was average and Montpellier off-loaded him to Leicester fopr whom he played until 2025 - amd in Ju,ly 2025 he joined the Bulls. To be quite fair he is not th e payer he used to be in 2018=19. Pollard has another problem - he has injury problems that caused longish period he could not play any rigby due to injuries,

Fact is he is not the asset for he Springboks he used to be,, I think his future liesin coaching and not in test rugby,

.

Nothing wrong with the stats... it's good to look at it ..and on first glance Scotland dominated... except where it counted most...did you honestly feel the game was in balance any time10min into the second half onwards ?..I didn't even when the scores were level..there was context to it...my gripe isn't with the stats, it's the doom and gloom interpretation every time, with very little credit given ..ever...

Fassi used to have express pace. He no longer does - probably because of his injuries. I think that's why he constantly kicks possession away.

Quite sad actually because the 2023/2024 Fassi could hit an angle from a distance out and put half the opposition defensive line under pressure. That doesn't seem possible any longer. There is an old YT clip of him running Moodie down almost like he was toying with him. Today he and Moodie look about even in terms of pace.

So, what's left now? What is left doesn't remind me the Fassi from two years back.

Plum

The pr/obem I hae with Stats is that the stats Mozart use is not really an indicator of performamce value of players during matches, When sn like n t he case of Pollard is that he has a performance record abo/ut poo/o/r defence that goes back years, - so even with ESPN stats that s t e ,unfotnate po/sition. Even from a ty-scoring perspective Pollard scored 2 tries in his first test - he scored 2 tries - but the total number of tries scored since the2014 match are 8 - so/ from th at perspective h e is u,nde-perforing. Ano/th er example is for instance the tackling of players. In the ase of Du Toit he frequently made attampts to make open fied tackles - a very difficult thing of forwards to do - while Mostert rarely tried to make openn field tackles with a very high missed tackle ratio in su,ch cases, Even more problEM is who get credit for tackles when two playes jointly make tackles.

Another example is scoring of tries by a backline player li.ke Po/llard compared to for instance Sacha. Pollard 86 tests played - 8 tries scored compared to S cha 20 tests played - 9 tries scored.

I do not really believes that stats based on ESPN is really reflecting the affectiveness of individual players in matches,

I see that Moyo i likely to stnart for the Sringboks o/n Satirday, He played in the 2024 and 2025 Undr 20 RWC - but he has never played a sngle match on URC level sinc h emc then. From what I have seen in he Under 20 level since 2024 - the 18 year old Jaqeen Ahmed is a bette flyhalf than Moyo was,

I believe a playme must at least perform on fanchise level before being selectedto play for the Sringboks. Neither of the two has played on franchise level - but Jaqeen Ahmed at least played for the Springbok A team agaist Zimbabwe this year, I think Erasmus realizes that Pollard is rapidly appro/aching his retirement for playing test rugby and is trying to find a second or even third flyhalf to use in future,.

       ,

@clevermike …the stats don’t come from ESPN, they stopped providing them 2 years ago

It speaks more towards Scotland not being accurate enough in their execution. As Hansen said - it's not about the ball you have, it's what you do with it (paraphrasing).

Kriel's try - direct result of Russell tossing a pass into touch - it came from that lineout. Sure, there was line pressure, but Russell's passivity was a problem all game long and it reached its zenith in that play.
Elrigh's try - direct result of Scotland delaying their maul possession on their own 22 and then knocking it - it came from that scrum.
Steyn - drops a perfect cross kick in a scoring position
Tui - breaks inside instead of feeding Steyn wide open outside
Russell - tosses a high pass to Steyn yet again in a scoring position - second bite at the same cherry, they fluff it again

As I said in my writeup, if Scotland wants to beat the big boys regularly, they need to execute better. You're a man up, you get a cohesive attack going, fracture the defense to get the man open wide and then you don't pass to him, coming away with nothing after 10 minutes against 14. You may beat England or the Argies that way. You're not going to beat France/Boks/All Blacks that way.

The answer is simple as o h Scots game on Saturday - we have a lo/ck pro/blem and Du Toit ended up as the key lock player and as a result we h adonly2 l.ine-out jumpers and not 3, On a number of times on Satiuday the line-ous on own throw went awry. Another problem is hat Pollard at flyh alf jeoaised backline attacks as well.

Unlike what it s normal for the Spring boks they faildo dominate Scotland in scumming - it only happrened after the starting props and hooker were replaced, To my mind t he problem si that te whole backline was disfuncional starbting wih Pollard and ending wth Fassie. I hink Willemse is a star all-rounde and specially at full back - but I would also like to see hiim play at 13 - wherehe has more space space availabe han at 12.

I wsa really disappointed by the performanes of Hooker and Van der Mewe on Satirday

I see that Sacha isa vailabe to play - but he is unlikely to play before the tests against the All Blacks starts.

So despite he deficiencies mentioned

@clevermike Hooker had nothing to do except tackle, which he did. Did Edwill even see the ball? I can't remember. We don't use our wings, that's nothing new. Kolbe and Arendse each got the ball about once against England. There's no one responsible for the backline being "disfuncional". The Boks simply didn't play that way. We sent it down the line once in the first half in one of those me pass to you and you pass to him lateral jobbies that ended against the touchline, and the next time we went out back was for Willemse's try where we had some space and width to exploit. The rest were contact carries and broken play.

Yeah, you're totally correct. From now on, when the Boks win, this will be my default response...

"Yeah, the Bokke are amazing! We are the best! What a great win! What a a great team! What a fabulous and wonderful coach! Boks 4 life! Boks 4 eva! Bokke Bokke Bokke!!!"

You said the score is the most important stat….hardly a revelation. Nor is there any doom and gloom. Just facts. This string was clearly marked as one which deals with match statistics. If you dislike any statistical comparisons and think they are irrelevant why did you, Hysteria and Chip-ou bother to open it. And what gives you the right to then complain that you don’t like it?

There are findings in the data that may be relevant when we face stronger opposition. There are findings I haven’t noted that back that up. Scotland had more possession in the last 10 minutes for example. There are findings about players that are concerning….Dud Toit missed a third of his tackles against England for example. There are findings that are positive, PdV made 93% of his tackles last Saturday.

But we have had this tiresome whining about stats, which are followed by all coaches and many serous rugby fans, forever. If you don’t like them ignore them and play your role as you see fit.

It comes down to a very simple thing, they created a lot of opportunities, but they didn't convert them into points.

So no matter how good the stats say you are, if you can't turn those positive stats into points, you mean absolutely zero on a rugby field.

That's why the Boks won, because the few chances they had, they converted into points. And of course, our blitz defence did it at the right moments.

So, we blew them away? Not really, because they handed it to us. If they had actually used their positive stats and used their opportunities wisely, they would have beaten us, and handsomely.

" If they had actually used their positive stats and used their opportunities wisely, they would have beaten us, and handsomely"

@Mpower ... that's a BIG if, I don't believe in If anymore ...if's an illusion, if is for children.

Chippo
Chippo
PRO
3,408 posts
14 Jul 2026 at 06:04
#11
Lucky for us, games are not won on stats alone.
Such a stupid post - contrived and attention seeking.

……

So I take it you disagree with that view….or at least disagree apart from the ‘games are not won by stats alone’ which sounds a lot like things you have said.

@Mozart no, I think if we were able to direct the stats minute by minute in conjunction withe the score, substitutions and cards, it will be revealing...the raw data of the overall stats don't give the complete picture...did you at any stage think that Scotland was the better team and that the Boks were at risk of losing the match? The raw data is missing some context...and it's not only missed opportunities by Scotland...we missed a few opportunities too....we always do...

Chip took a swipe due to frustration...we all do at times...

We were only in full control for the first 20 minutes when we were 14 points up….for the remaining 60 minutes the score was 28 points to 28…..another statistic

@Mozart ...after they crawled back to level we went to 21 ahead ..they caught back to within 7, we accelerated again and went 14 ahead again...you can't be in control if you're chasing the game...context...they scored 2 tries after Rassie just unloaded the bench...not the normal Bomb Squad replacements...the shuffled backline disrupted our backline defence even more...go listen what ROG had to say...

Okay Draad you have a point. It was a pickup team in part and we won handily. I never really thought Scotland was going to win the game. There were enough veterans out there who have the habit of winning. Actually beating this team is difficult France had two great opportunities…in the WC and last year when they were a man up….and they fell apart. Only Ireland has had the belief to win.

My point is, as in all sports, the bar is continuously being raised. In blooding a lot of new players we are trying to anticipate the loss of the world’s best ever pack of forwards. What I can’t see is any evidence of adding to our game plan. I honestly don’t think our back play has progressed at all since 2019. We still rely on individual brilliance…..the Papier try vs the Scottish try off the Russell/Tui offloads.

Erasmus has clearly built the confidence of the team and straightened out the fundamentals our prior coaches allowed to lapse. But he has not grown the skill set. Maybe that won’t hurt us because there seems to be no team that is ready to challenge for the top spot. But the Boks, for all their recent successes, are still mostly forward centric.

@Mozart... fair enough...I don't agree 100%, but you are right that we still don't play a constant expansive game...I think we have added the personnel to do a bit more than just the old Hulk Smash...but we stay close to our core that brought us succes...we don't need to change too much because it's still working, but we've added some variations and innovation when needed...we are slightly less predictable than back then...and it shows in the world rankings and our winning record...

Um???
Excuse me?

I've never stolen a thing in my life. Though David's mum's heart may argue that!

lol

😁😁😈

Finally South African rugby journalists and commentators find there is gold in the numbers.

See what you’ve done Chip-ou, you made Hysteria your best friend. Soap and water works best

@Xavi defos good for organics, but will it work to remove nail polish and fake eyelashes too?