Thread by @rugby_ap

🧵A thread on the Springbok flyhalf debate! Manie and Handre.

Exploring the tactics behind who might start vs France. And why!

Firstly - I think I should start by saying there’s almost no chance that the Boks don’t have both Manie and Handre in the 23. Whether they go 5/3; or 6/2 (they won’t go 7/1) - both flyhalves will feature (with Willemse at 15).

Let’s start by thinking on a macro level what Libbok offers:

It’s fair to say we’re a more complete team with ML on the park. He gives direction (and pace) to our play, is a better distributor and has a better attacking kicking game.

All big ticks. ✅

But there’s the downsides/risks of starting Manie…

🐘 in the room is his place kicking. It can fire, or it can flop.

Despite an improved performance vs Tonga - Libbok still averages under 60% in the tournament (the worst of any recognised flyhalf). Fair to say - erratic.

The stats aren’t amazing over his wider international and club career either. He’s just not an 85%+ kicker. Sorry folks.

Some will say, “that’s fine - so have Pollard on the bench and bring him on if Manie’s boot is awry”.

Imo there are 2 issues with this:

Firstly - the match against France will be decided by a single score (bookies have France by 2!)

The number of missed kicks it would take for the coaches to hook Manie (took 3 vs Ireland to hand the tee to Faf) would be too many anyway. Particularly given how deadly France are.

Secondly - I believe the Boks are better suited to defending a lead than they are to chasing the game.

If you miss the opportunities to build a lead early, you then rely on Pollard to chase the game for you - and that doesn’t play to his strengths at all.

There’s also the defensive risk of starting Manie. The stats bear out that he isn’t a brilliant defender off of set piece.

Ireland scored their try after Aki ran straight over the top of him and made a 65m break. Danty will similarly be licking his lips.

The Bok coaches have shown a reluctance to move Manie elsewhere into the backline on defence (as France do with Jalibert, for example) because it risks disrupting their finery tuned defensive system.

Upshot is that the 10 channel remains an area of some defensive risk.

To his credit, Manie has shown (Aki tackle vs Tonga eg) that he can mix it with the heavies - but it still only takes one break in a match this tight.

(Which is not to say that HP hasn’t had his own defensive issues of set piece btw. But on the whole he is a more robust option)

Then there’s the question of match fitness.

Pollard got through 50 minutes against Tonga but would he be able to hack 70 against France if Manie went down early? Not so sure he has the necessary match fitness for that - another reason the coaches might be tempted to start him.

So. Let’s pause. At this stage it appears that the argument for starting Pollard is pretty convincing.

But let’s muddy the waters a bit shall we?…

Let’s consider the other side of the equation, and specifically revisit this point I made earlier:

The Boks want to defend leads (no matter how slim) rather than chase scores!

If Manie’s boot *is* working (e.g. NZ and Tonga) then, together with his all-round game, he is more likely to put us in a winning position than Pollard is.

Simply put - with Manie at 10 (assuming his boot works!) we are score more points in the first 65 than with HP there.

This has the added benefit of playing to Pollard’s strength as a game manager.

Who better to bring on with 15 to go and a lead to defend, than the massively experienced HP and his astute defensive kicking game? It’s almost a case of reverting to 2019 style and playing the %s!

A second point to consider is that ‘if you play Handre, you have to play Willie’. The argument here being that if the coaches do pick Handre to start, they’ll also need to select Le Roux as a sort of attack guru - a crutch to support an element of Handre’s game that is lacking.

To start Le Roux and Pollard together and still keep Libbok in the 23 will torpedoe any chance of the Boks going 6/2. Something I think they will be extremely reluctant to do.

However…

If you have Pollard on the bench (rather than starting) and you utilise him as a ‘closer’, as a guy to game manage and defend a lead for 15/20 minutes, you may not need Le Roux’s attacking insight at all!

Suddenly 6/2 is back on the menu!

I think most fundamentally though - this comes down to one thing.

Trust.

Effectively the arguments I set out above hinge on a ‘best case vs worst case’ scenario. Best case it suits us for Manie to start; worst case it suits us for Pollard to start.

It is my firm belief that no coach can plan for a game with a ‘worst case scenario’ approach dictating their selections.

Of course you plan contingencies - but *expecting* your flyhalf to miss kicks or get injured is not a guiding philosophy. It can’t be.

I look at this coaching collective and see a team that trusts their players intimately.

Jacques and Rassie will back Manie to the ends of the Earth. And will plan accordingly.

And so for me - and I suspect for the Springbok coaches - the decision will be a straightforward one.

You start Manie Libbok.

With all the risks and all the benefits that entails. You back your guy.

ENDS

Thanks to @AnalystGus @Brendennel @OptaJonny, for some of the clips and stats used above. 👏 If anyone else wants photo credits just shout me.