After seeing Flip van der Merwe excel against the Samoans in the number 5 jersey, Tank Lanning, in his e.NCA.com column, asks if modern day coaches have perhaps not over complicated the line out?
Heyneke Meyer, like many modern day coaches it seems, places a lot of emphasis on the number 5 lock, as he not only calls the lineouts, but also organises the defence and competition, if any, on the oppositions’ throw.
Being a massive fan of the playbook, and to quote the man, “Structuring the unstructured”, Meyer has many pages of the Bok playbook dedicated to a seriously complex set of lineout calls. Hence the nervous twitches when Victor Matfield retired (and the plea from Meyer for him to return to the fray), and when Andries Bekker’s back made like scooby-doo under a ten ton truck.
But with Flip van der Merwe, traditionally a tighter number 4 lock, having done a great job for the Boks on Saturday (I am yet to read a match report that does not prais his effort), and Eben Etzebeth having excelled for the Stormers at 5 against the Reds a few weeks back, are we not seeing proof of an over complication of the lineouts, and an over reliance on a so called “lineout wizard” at 5?
And this with no disrespect to either Van der Merwe or Etzebeth … With the latter calling the shots, the Stormers won all eight of their line-outs and managed three steals on the Reds’ throw, and this with Gerbrandt Grobler, in his first Super Rugby start, as his lineout partner against the Wallaby captain James Horwill-led Reds line-out.
Stormers forwards coach Matt Proudfoot suggested at a bright future in the No.5 jersey for the big so called “Enforcer”, saying that “Eben is a player who will astound us in the future”.
And yet on Saturday, with the two of them starting a match together for the first time, it was Van der Merwe, who was handed the number 5 jersey …
The bottom line is that Meyer saw the need to improve the breakdown after the Scotland game, and chose as his one method, to include two locks who play to the ball. Thus, together with Willem Alberts and Francois Louw, the cleaning out of the breakdown was markedly improved, enabling the Boks to actually play a little rugby. And my oath, did they play!
And with no obvious detrimental effect to the lineout …
I presume I am being seriously old fashioned when suggesting that the lineout be kept as simple as possible. Not many things make me more angry than seeing a side I coach try all kinds of pre lineout throw switches and tricks, only for the ball to go directly to the opposition number 2 jumper who calmly stood and watched the hooker.
Me, I like the scrumhalf, knowing where the backline need the ball, to call where in the lineout he wants the ball to go, and then for the individual jumper to decide how he plans to take said ball, conveying that message to the hooker via a call.
And on the opposition ball, I am a fan of competing for every ball, doing this via three jumpers who each have a dedicated supporter. Sure you need a plan to defend the rolling maul when you do not make a steal, but that can still be done while competing for the ball.
Victor Matfield is perhaps the greatest lineout jumper of all time. As a player he was freakishly good, and unique. So when a player like that, who loved nothing more than to study lineout techniques, comes along, you use him accordingly. But in the interim, keep it simple, stupid.
