Possession is nine points of the law

Statistics do not always lie and John Smit and his resurgent Springboks would do well to heed the message contained in the numbers.

It’s common cause the Boks failed to beat the All Blacks because they had too little possession of the ball and retention stats paint an alarming picture of to what extent Smit and his men were playing against the tide.

In fact, to say that the All Blacks’ control of the ball was awesome would be an understatement.

The men in black closed out the game by taking the ball through successive phases of 12 and 15 re-cycles and on four other occasions during the Christchurch test they produced periods of seven re-cycles.

Against this the Springboks reached three re-cycles (their highest number) just three times in the test and a glance through the stats I have kept of their five tests this year reveals an even more disturbing scenario – in 400-plus minutes of rugby the Boks have not reached seven re-cycles on a single occasion!

Kitch Christie used to admonish teams he coached that “while you’ve got the ball your opponents can’t play.” The logic in this is so simple that it seems foolish to state it, but it is a fundamental missing not only from the Springboks’ game but all the Currie Cup teams as well.

The aim should be to “engage the enemy and exhaust their resources on defence,” - to quote from Izak van Heerden’s “Target Try-line” that was published in 1965 – and the way to do that is clearly to hold the ball through successive phases, setting question after question, extracting tackle after tackle, until the space, as it did for Doug Howlett, finally appears.

Most South African teams are still too opponent-centric – too concentrated on taking gaps, taking on an opponent, beating him with a kick, rather than being more keenly aware of their own support players and keeping the ball secure.

South African players, from the Springboks down, either too readily expose the ball to a turnover or are too quick to give it up with a kick of some description. Too often one sees players calling for the ball in precarious positions or moving to poorly supported areas rather than staying in the triangles or diamonds of support that will enable teammates to take the ball on by means of a short pass or help to seal it off in contact situations.

It is a question of being strong-willed and patient. This is the essence of the Brumbies’ play that is so admired around the world and it is now present in teams such as the Wallabies, the All Blacks and the England side who won the World Cup.

They focus (intensely) on keeping the ball and when they do kick they do so to relieve pressure (something the Springboks did not do very well), to put opponents under pressure or with the possibility of regaining the ball. A key essential is that the ball-carrier has the responsibility of keeping the ball secure rather than the onus falling on support players.

Jake White has worked wonders in restoring the spirit of the Springboks. His attention to detail and the greater fitness that is clearly evident have arrested what was a distressing slump and I know, from watching the occasional practice, that he is acutely aware of improving the team’s ability to hold onto the ball.

White has introduced drills with heavy medicine balls to improve the players’ ability at the “long place” on the ground, they work hard on upper-body, ripping strength while an attention to handling skills is always present but that crucial “mind-set” change is taking a long time to settle in.

The good news is that it will improve. Under Nick Mallett the Boks were able to produce ball retention counts as much as three times higher than is currently the case so it shows that it can be done… yet again illustrating just how damaging to Springbok rugby have been past administrative bungles and brainless appointments.