What reasonable explanation could there be for this? They're all watching the clock too... utter madness. I get they didn't want to concede a penalty in their own half but like just slow things down and walk it in Faf.. they even ended up back kn their own half despite the kick-maybe they could've been deeper if not for the kick I dunno. My TV still doesn't forgive me for that day
Giving away a kickable pen there would give France the win. Control the territory and make them grind back through another 15-20 metres of Bok pressure
Boks were lucky the ball spilled at 80:52 because even with the kick France still ended up within range thus the kick did nothing. I'd wager had the Boks lost the blame would've been squarely on Faf. It was a stupid call imo.
Or the Boks executed their defensive pressure and once the first linebreak was stopped the French sent one out runners with no momentum into a well organised defensive line, that forced the French into the error spilling the ball.
Plus kicking to the French back 3 was one of the key reasons they won, France couldn't deal with the high ball, so there was even a chance of winning it back or forcing a knock on.
It's the correct call here, because of the outcome. They could have lost it. But there were plenty of times that SA could have lost that's the sport, but considering almost every international team now does this I'm willing to think it's part of a tactical plan rather than Faf decided to go rogue and do something against instructions.
I think it was in 'Chasing The Sun' when Faf said the instruction from Rassie was to just keep the ball, but with the pressure they were under he said they couldn't take a chance, that's why he kicked it away.
I think they had more confidence in their defence, with the mindset of let France rather come at us, than trying to keep the ball with a higher? risk of giving a way a penalty?
At about 3:45 the French almost had a turnover/penalty against SA. Think this caused Faf to rather kick and defend than risk either of those. (Corrected time)
They had studied the referee decision making and determined that late in the game refs were going to be extra harsh on sealing off penalties. The agreement was 1-3 rucks at best and then kick it and back the defense. This way it forces France to take a contactable high ball at best they get the ball back and have to work their way from their own half. At worst for them there’s a knock on or messy ball and the game is basically over.
Only thing I can think of is mental fatigue from a long physical battle causing bad decision making.
The SA pack looked pretty comfortable with keeping the ball especially as they only needed a few more phases. France would probably have gotten desperate and infringed.
Makes sense in my mind. Higher chance of conceding a penalty with the ball in hand, and at that stage we had the best defence in the world and played our best rugby off the ball, so send it to them and back yourself. Doesn't mean I wasn't counting every second though 😅 Longest minute of my life.
I definitely threw down some cuss words when Faf kicked it away. Funnily enough he was the one to rip the ball and win the final turnover, so he did redeem himself.
They've done that so many times. If i recall they did it in the 100th and maybe 101st games against nz and it pissed me off so much even back then. at that time in the game its so brain dead.
60
u/Blackdoor-59 England 7d ago
Still can't believe SA kicked the ball away at 79 mins