3 Dead Head moves by Allende which cost possible tries in the first 6 minutes!

Firstly Willie has the ball opposite Ford and slides outside him forcing the gap. Allende is outside him, marked by Farrell. As Willie looks to break free Farrell turns inside to help. That's the moment a smart, fast centre would have gone outside Farrell and been in position for an offload.

Allende inexplicably tries to run through the gap Farrell has closed and finds himself blocked behind Farrell. So he slows down and trots behind the move. Willie looks to offload to his right where Allende should  be....nada....Kolbe who was on the touchline tries to get in position but he's  too far away for an offload. Chance lost.

Secondly the Boks get the ball well inside the Pom 22....it goes to Allende with a pod of 3 forwards opposite him.....then a gap in the Pom defence to Underhill further away. A natural centre would have run outside  Itoje on the open  side of the pod....forcing Underhill to come in and exploited the resultant overlap. 

Or as an Alternative, he could  have shaped to offload in Itoje's tackle to Malherbe who was positioned in the gap. Instead Allende crash balls into the three forwards and the Pom defence reforms, opportunity gone. A centre like Goodhue would have turned both of these situations into try scoring chances.

The third dead head move was allowing May, pinned against the touchline, to step inside him. Make that tackle with the aid of the touchline and we either have a 2 on 1 at the breakdown on their line....or a lineout throw 5 metres out. But instead of making a good low tackle we see the familiar upper body paw and May waltzes away.

Three excellent chances in the first six minutes...all blown by slow thinking and sloppy execution. Why do the rugby talking heads and writers fail to see these obvious things? Hard to say....and there will be more instances. Instead of seeing these things as they do in American Football they blather on about power, power which beat 1 defender in 12 runs....and vote this one dimensional centre into the WC team.

American Football is results driven, and has a deep and rich culture for x's and o's. Rugby is a long, long, long way from that. They also pass knowledge down. Jake White lamented this years ago, he called for a central hub for coaching where technical insights could be shared and a coaching culture at the highest level established. He remarked that we don't really know who our best coaches are outside of a handful of names. He was right. Imagine the impact his ideas would have had on South African rugby? Instead of following trends, trying to keep up, we'd be innovators, ahead of the curve. Intelligent people are not welcome in South African it seems. Here we are, with twaddled peddled passively. Many times foreigners don't know better but just tell us what we like to hear, praising names they know we love. It was funny in 2015 though. Cheika praised Damian mightily, yet went after him to great effect, essentially winning the game entirely through that concentrated effort. Even after that, it wouldn't be for another two years that Damian's ability was questioned. Analytics is the most valuable skill a person can possess, but it leads to a lot of frustration. 

Back to the World Cup, there are many instances of our players playing like this, especially the big names. They can look good at times, such as the routine passing of Damian, but these are scripted sequences. Lambie used to do the same thing, take the ball to the line and pass to a predetermined target, but outside of that he couldn't think. Neither can Damian. Damian panics when in space, yet his best work is in space, which he craves. It's easier to just run into someone. Esterhuizen is a very smooth operator in space, with some of the best distribution of all our players. Esterhuizen and RG are the best offloaders in South African rugby. Neither one can break into Rassie's team. Both are significantly more imposing specimens than their preferred lumbering buffoons. Damian is not a natural 12, and it shows. Esterhuizen has a good feel for space and pressure, he reads the game well and makes proactive decisions. On defence we see this, as he catches attackers well behind the gainline, forcing the opposition to rush their entire gameplan. 

Its a sad sight that more deserving people are not being rewarded for their good work. If there is something I loath more than anything else, it's mediocrity and the adoration of it. South Africa loves mediocrity like no other. You uncovered three more details which will remain untouched by the media and the fans. Even some of our coaches miss these things. We wonder then why we never succeed as a nation. 

Duplicate

Wonderful analysis of further  BS TO BE EXPECTED AS THE NORMAL BS BY THE TWO BEST PREJUDICED BS IN THE WORLD ONLY THEY COULD DISCOVER.   WILL YOU NEVER STOP WITH THAT IF IDIOT STORIES.   Anyway they would always have discovered this type of rubbish. 

Did not even bother to read the whole IF theory.   I have learned one thing about those two analysts is that they are experts in BS spreading.  Never expect the truth from them,.  

Heaven help us - lucky Esterhuizen donkey was not in the squad - it would have been goodbye to the WC an d Erasmus knew it and avoided him like a plague in squad selection.   

"Wonderful analysis"

Yes, it was. He got up off his backside and brought some useful info to the board. What have you done in all your 38700 posts? Post lineups? Fantasy rugby? What have you brought? Moz has made some very specific claims with references. If you don't like them, refute them. It's that simple. If you cannot, then you can in no way determine that he is wrong/stupid/lying. You never get out of first gear in these exchanges. 

I do not need to respond to anything you write on site - you are doing well enough in discrediting yourself.    I do not have to prove Mozart wrong on any BS he dreams up other than to mention that is routine rubbish you and him regard as rugby input and is in fact totally unrelated to what actually happened during games.     

"I do not need to respond to anything you write on site"

Yet you do anyway! You can't help your poor little self. Still, no rugby input. Thirty-eight thousand posts ad not a solitary occurrence of such a thing. Feeble is putting it mildly. You can't offer anything, yet feel compelled to speak authoritatively determining what is right and wrong. 

"You are doing well enough in discrediting yourself."

Nothing to date. Hard luck.

" I do not have to prove Mozart wrong on any BS he dreams up"

That's not how it works sweety. I don't know how coddled your upbringing was, but I am beginning to think you were literally wrapped in bubble-wrap. If you are going to state it's a fact that someone is wrong, you are going to have to show how and why. If you are going to tell someone they are stupid/worthless/a cunt/fucker/need to be murdered etc... those things can very easily result in your big mouth being busted apart. You talk very big behind a keyboard Lügnerin. In the real world, you'd be accountable for those words. I see you are all too comfortable attacking people from a point of safety. Just because it's the internet, it doesn't change the magnitude of what you say, revealing a very poor character and lack of maturity. 

You won't even attempt a retort, you are so arrogant that you say you can determine who should and shouldn't post, what is right and wrong and talk to people any way you please, expecting no repercussions. You are a mess. Consider yourself fortunate anyone entertains you at all. 

De Allende was easily one of the top 3 best player in the Goats side.

Let's give credit where credit is due.

The Goats can be thankful that Esterhuizen didn't go along to Japan.

De Allende was a cul-de-sac basher. His game was exactly the same. Esterhuizen is our best 12. Now that Frans is gone, our only test quality 12. His distribution with a variety of passes is the best of all our backs, with offloading only rivalled by RG. His defence actually significantly bolsters the Boks, completely forcing the opposition to pass far earlier and much further away from the gainline. His counter-rucking is better than Damian's. His kicking is better. He reads play better, senses pressure better. Damian can't determine what is in front of him, panics and runs back into the teeth of the defence. He also has a tendency to crab out wide and cluster defenders together. No. Damian was not top 3. Our top Boks were Faf, Pollard, Eben, Beast, Thor. Notable mentions include Mapimpi, Am, Bongi, Malherbe. 

 And the problem is Esterhuizen is much more so. Dead head - that is why Erasmus would not touch him with a bargepole.  Idiots know better - LMAO

I expected that you and Mozart would go gaga after the Springboks won the WC - but really it was not gaga - it was sure madness.   The twits that thotoughly deserve the eg g mountain they are under.  

Totally idiotic pair. 

Damian was Rassie's preferred option because he had no intention of playing the ball through the backs. As it was Damian very seldom circulated the ball. He was a basher. His defence did little to bolster the Boks, as we saw in the first six minutes of the final, and again in the second half when Frans had to down the runner Damian flubbed for a guaranteed try. Damian is a D- centre. Incapable of performing outside of heavily scripted sequences, though at an average level. You think differently? Show me.

Let me put it bluntly - if Willemse was available Steyn would never have been in the squad.   Even Erasmus said that  as Willemse was not fully matchfit due to injury he was NOT initially selected.  Who would have made way for him of his return from injury was earlier.  Only two candidates for dropping - Steyn or Jantjies.       

Steyn did not make even the remotest effort to tackle Watson - he got bumbed out of the way, but in the process Watson lost his balance and fell down.  Since he was not held Watson could have gotten up and scored the try - but that did not happen because Du Toit prevented him from getting up and going forward.   In the effort to move further forward Watson knocked on the ball.

That is what happened.  I can still remember the baffled look on Fransie's face after the bumping incident.   If it was not for the quick action by Du Toit a try would have been scored.  I think the blush was on Fransie's face.  

Christ

You just dont stop moz.

You're becoming worse that clevermike.

We won the RWC.

No player is the perfect player.

I bet any of the players you like, also either missed a tackle or two OR duffed a chance or two.

Cant you try .... Stop. Think. before you type crap like mike?

All aspects of Rassie's gameplan that I have assessed have been assessed accurately. Rassie is the very thing Meyer was ridiculed for being, that's the hypocrisy. I simply will not believe something that isn't true. He is an average coach. He is tactically limited, and leans heavily on his defence coach, who forms the backbone of our entire game. That's not an opinion, that's a reality. without physical dominance, we can't do very much, as evidenced in our loss to New Zealand where we were held at arms length, looking impotent. We need someone who can expand on that physicality if we want sustained success. We are not going to bully bash our way through 2020.  

I must remember the company I keep, the self-professed coach who knows better than several Bok coaches. You yourself have called Rassie an idiot. If there is a pompous know-it all, it's you Saffy. Yes, tell me again how stupid I am. It loses its luster the more it's used. Is there anyone here who hasn't been labelled an idiot by you? 

Something that I noticed about DDA during the WC.

When he gets quick ball and the opposition line is 10m-15m from him. He tends to change direction early instead of late.

It's the equivalent of playing the ball far out in front of your body. There are a limited number of situations where this is a benefit. 

He should be rushing towards the line an forcing the opposition to hold their position, deviating towards the gap in the last moment.

DDA does exactly the opposite and that's why he never gets a clean breaks.

It's immaturity of process. The gap is bigger when you are further away and it naturally decreases as you approach. Regardless, it's always easier to get through a small gap late than it is to get through a big gap early.

Delaying gratification is the way. 

Yes, the unders line so typical of the quality 12s. He doesn't have that weapon, something I've lamented before. He likes to look for the outside shoulder as well. His natural tendency is to want space. If you watch the England game against New Zealand again, watch their midfield lines. 

De Allende lands a contract with Munster - what a club of fools. they are.  They appointed Erasmus as Director of Rugby.  In Paris their Head Coach passed away because of a heart attack.   The Idiotic Munster ask Erasmus to handle both roles and after the 2017 Erasmus - the idiot coach according to AO - is awarded as the top coach in the Top 12 competition for the 2017-18 series. 

Obviously the whole of Ireland, Wales, Scotland and Italy are all rugby fools.  How can they agree to such an atrocious award according to AO.   

Now the bloody idiots signed a contract with according to AO the worst inside center.   AO is such a wise (????) guy - how the hell do they expect to make progress with De Allende around?     

The Stormers haven't been a good attacking side for around fifteen years. So, Rassie has no record of attacking rugby at any level of the game. what we do have is a body of work of the two at test level separate from one another, and the attack stats under Coetzee significantly dwarf that under Rassie. Coetzee's problem was turnover ball and breakdown defence. His approach left our weaker defenders more vulnerable. Vulnerabilities which still exist, but are better disguised. 

Idiot speaker

Rassie coached the Cheetahs for two years - 2004-2005.   The Cheetahs has always been a team spcializing in ball-in-hand-rugby and won the CC in 2004 and share the cup with the Bulls the enxt year,   Moved to WP/Stormers and while he was coach did very well in both cases ie from 2008 to 2010.   Was in the Super Rugby final in 2010 I believe.  He then left the coaching role and in 2012 became SARU Director.

'The Stormers haven't been a good attacking side for around fifteen years".   In the 15 years Erasmus was coaching the WP/Stiormers for less than 3 full years ,   

Happy Idiots Day to you.

During the years 2007 up until 2011 the Stormers scored half of what the leading teams produced. Their linebreak stats have persistently been cellar level from that time up until now. At their peak, their defence was their means of attack. You are too easy Saffy. A little homework makes all the difference. 

As for the test production on attack from either coach, I have posted that information numerous times. I know you've seen it as you commented in those threads. 

We believe every lie this bugger came up with,!!!!!!!!  

"In the 15 years Erasmus was coaching the WP/Stiormers for less than 3 full years,"

I'm aware of that Lügnerin. However, the playstyle would heavily suggest that he had a very large influence on the Coetzee years . Coetzee, away from Rassie, doesn't coach a team to play like that. The Stormers blueprint is the Bok model under Rasse. Same limitations and problems. We are basically the 2010 Stormers side.

Fuck me - this is beyond anything real.   I know you are a simpleton - but you are even too stupid for that.

A lie? What do you dispute? Shall I repost the numbers? Really, must you bring it on yourself yet again? 

The 15 years story is what is the starting lie. Start thinking from there.  

Mike, you really need to calm yourself. Your English breaks up when you have a tantrum. You've lost yourself. Poor comprehension.