5 Super 15 sides required

Now if I was the Bok coach, I would want to use the S15 as an extensive trial. I would also have made sure I did not lose potential Bok prospects like Quinn Roux, CJ Stander, Josh Strauss, Ettiene Oosthuizen and Carl Wegner to overseas clubs and get a player like F.Louw back.

I would also look to move surplus players between unions - ideal world but hey ho. Here goes:

STORMERS:

15. Ludik 14. v/d Heever 13. Taute 12. de Allende 11. Habana 10. Jantjies 9. Groom 1. Kitshoff 2. Fourie (c) 3. Malherbe 4. Etzebeth 5. Bekker 6. Kolisi 7. Elstadt 8. Vermeulen

SHARKS:

15. Lambie 14. JP 13. Jordaan 12. Frans 11. Mvovo 10. Swiel 9. Reinach 1. Beast 2. Bismark 3. Jannie 4. JA Marais 5. Steph du Toit 6. Daniel (c) 7. Alberts 8. Coetzee

BULLS:

15. U.Beyers 14. Mapoe 13. JJ Engelbrecht 12. F.Venter 11. Basson 10. Pollard 9. Hougaard 1. Mellet 2. Chiliboy 3. Marcel v/d Merwe 4. Willemse 5. Peet Marais 6. D.Potgieter (c) 7. CJ Stander 8. Arno Botha

CHEETAHS:

15. W.le Roux 14. Rhule 13. P.Howard 12. J.Serfontein 11. Mjekevu 10. Goosen 9. v/Zyl 1. Nkanyane 2. Strauss (c) 3. Coenie 4. Q.Roux 5. Ruan Botha 6. Brussouw 7. F.Louw 8. v/d Walt

KINGS:

15. J.Visser 14. Sithole 13. Sadie 12. T.Whitehead 11. JP du Plessis 10. Catrakilis 9. Schrauder 1. Rossouw de Klerk 2. C.Visagie 3. Frik Kirsten 4. Bresler 5. Bulbring 6. Kriel 7. Rhodes 8. J.Strauss (c)

Its just a laugh chaps dont get hot under the collar

Saffex

Vey funny and quite ingenious - but I think it will not work out    However, if it does happen - some of the selections you suggest above - will seriously reduce the competetiveness of the teams.

Mind you the idea of letting Serfontein play at 12 for Cheetahs would be brilliant - he will then escape from the claws of the Bulls - who are clueless about usage of centers and he is in the graveyard situation at present.  

 Poor Sadie has not even started a game for the Cheetas and has now been moved to the Kings. His 4th union in 3 seasons!

Wrong Mike, none of those selection would reduce the competitiveness of the sides - there are no weak links

Saffex

I agree with you on many points and in some cases the backlines would be really something special.   However, insofar as backlin play is concerned I would really not go along with some "selections"   To strengthen the Bulls backline I would have rather tried Howard at 13 and not Engelbrecht and moved the latter to wing    i rate Ebesrsohn at 13 for the Cheetahs - they are strong enough in that position.

Insofar as the Stormers are concerned - they really have Joe Pietersen around - so Ludick would do much better for the Bulls or the Kings.

Jantjies will weaken the Stormers backline and I would keep Swiel there - send Jantjies to the Kings there and move Catrakilis to the Sharks. 

Nope JJ is one of our best 13's by some distance. Ebersohn is another little pretender like de Jongh - far too small for 13 - forget him.

Pietersen is another little guy getting on now so am not bothered with him.

Jantjies is a Bok and walks the Stormers side with his eyes closed.

Saffex

Just think - Jantjies sess the defenders coming - close his eyes and drop the ball in front of him - like happened in the famous tackle by Aplon.   It would have been better if he closed his eyes and then not see the defenders coming - he may just have done better than he did.

Catrakilis must not come to the Sharks, he is ok but I would prefer Swiel as he fits into the Sharks game plan.

Catrakilis would fit the Bulls game plan.

Rather have Swiel as the understudy to Lambie and get rid of Butch James who really is a pensioner at this stage. 

Ha ha there goes saff again. His way and everyone else is not even close.

JJ one of our best centres by some distance. Yeah Saff and pigs fly..What has he done to prove he is the best centre besides get dropped (very hastily might I add) by the Boks and go on to produce some poor games for the Bulls in that position. He is a wing at best and not a solid option at 13 at this stage in his career.

Jantjies walks the stormers side with his eyes closed..Come now Saff..Not even you believe this surely?? Grant is twice the player he is and I would be grooming Van Aswegen or someone else. Jantjies is a proven flop. Stormers are so effective because every game they know their systems and they trust them. They are not a flash team like the Sharks but they have awesome systems and they rarely fail. They have so much trust in one another to execute the game plan. Jantjies blows hot and cold and stormers can not afford that type of player in their set up. He is too weak on defence which means JDV cant trust him so must back him up and de Jongh must then back JDV up..It wont work. Just watch. They will lose nothing on attack really as they were never really special with ball in hand but defensively, they are losing too much with Jantjies around. He is a club player.,.That is it. Boks were skipping him..

boklogic

I am delighted to see that I am not alone in my assessment of the performances of Jantjies.  I always thought that I was the "false" note on the Board and maybe hypercritical of him - with my only support on the issue being Mozart. 

You must know something about Saffex - he has a large number of favourite players that can do no wrong - it is rare that he would ever change his mind about any of them.   Take for instance Ebgelbrecht - he reuses to see how bad he was on CC level after he was dropped from the Springbok squad.   If he was indeed bad - that players around him let him down.  

Saffex refuses to see any performance problems in his players - they are all perfect.  It is not only Jantjies, but also Hougaard, Francois Steyn, Taute - the list can go on and on.

His other real viewpoint is relating to -

*  older players - they must all go - irespective of how well they perform;

*  height and weight of players count for eveything - if they do not have skills, Saffex invents it that they do have;

*  the latter requirment does not apply if it relates to one of his favourite players;

 *  the players he dislikes or wants out - can never do anything right - even if they are Man-of-the Match their performances have been poor in the eyes of Saffe and

*  he loves to manipulate positional play of his favourite players so as to ensure that they all make the Springbok team proposed by him - irrespective of excellent performances of players in their preferred original positions and less effective performances in the positions he wants them to play in. 

Because of his above extremely controversial viewponts - it is a pleasue to have Saffex as a member - what he writes can and do lead to a lot of debate on the site - nut it can also be negative, since when cornered he becomes abusive and make nasty personal remarks.   Since we do know where it comes from I do not take his personal remrks seriously.   Saffex is in person actually a very nic guy - so no complaints on my part.`

I  have often enough tried to convince him that meritororious performances are the only basis on which selections are to be made - but my mpression is that he never really accepted that fact.

 Yeah Mike I can believe Saff is a nice guy. I will never judge a mans character from how little he knows about rugby. Not everyone can be a good coach. Saff will get more or less the results Straueli did. He accuses me of being too "conservative" because I believe in playing specialists in their positions. The man clearly coaches no higher than u10 level where the biggest and least scared guys make the team. He fails to realise that this is international rugby and not a "bring your mates" and play thing...

He believes there is place in the Bok setup for guys like Engelbrecht, Jantjies and other waste of time players. Keep the man away from any Bok coaches incase he has an effect on them ;-)

Boklogic, one certainty is that I know more about rugby than you ever will. One thing I do know is my rugby.

You are obviously not bright enough to deduce the fact that conservative has got us nowhere for years now and listening to your narrow minded takes on selections, its clear you follow in the Meyer mould so dont preach to me about not knowing my rugby or throwing the useless Straueli into the equation.

So in your conservative, insightful view JJ was justifiably dropped by wise Meyer after spending all of 15 min on the field as a wing and receiving no ball - yeah I can see you know your stuff.

For the record JJ made his impression at 13 during the S15 with some impressive breaks and is certainly a better 13 prospect than useless de Jongh or washed up Jean.

Get this into your stupid head......the art of selection is getting your best 15 on the field, be it at U10 level with 30 players to choose from or at Bok level with 100's to choose from - get it?

This has stuff all to do with selecting ones mates its about getting the best 15 on the field and for the Boks that includes Taute, Lambie and Goosen.............only a complete idiot would want to leave Lambie on the bench in the name of depth or keeping competition for places alive - talk about stupidity and shooting oneself in the foot.

I detract, you are not conservative, you are stupid!!

  Saffex

 I agree 100% with you when you wrote the following:-

"the art of selection is getting your best 15 on the field, be it at U10 level with 30 players to choose from or at Bok level with 100's to choose from."

The challenge obviously is how do you determine who is your best 15 - without taking into account the positions in which players performs best - after all the selection should be based on meritoroious performance - nothing else.

This is where I have a problem with your subsequent assumptions.   Lets deal with the issues of Lambie and Taute for instance and see where it gets us form a meritorious performance perspective:-

Lambie

Lambie can no doubt play at full back and flyhalf - the question is how effective is he in those two positions.   Lets take for instance the positions he played in in 2012:-

Lambie played as follows in 2012:-

Super 15       -   Flyhalf       -     4 games

                      -   Full back   -     7 games

CC Level       -   Flyhalf       -     5 games

Springboks    -   Flyhalf      -      3 games

He was on the bench for the Springboks for all the tests and played short spells at full back in a few games.   He also started in the PE test af full back, but was injured early and replaced by Aplon.

The immediate question is - how did Lambie perform in the 7 games at full back and how did he perform in the 12 games he played at flyhalf.   Lambie played well as a full back and on the whole his performances can be assessed as above average.    In the games he played at flyhalf on Super 15 level he performed exceptionally well - in the CC games he was brilliant and in the tests aft flyhalf he was good.   There is no doubt that Lambie himself is a better player at flyhalf than he is at full back.

The question consequently arises - is he the best available full back in SA.   He is no doubt a serious compeittor for that position - but may not end up as the top competitor for selection as full back.   The problem here is that he would have no further exposure at full back in Super 15 and when the next Springbok team will be selected in June 2013,  he would have had virtually no full back game time for a year.   The only way he could then come into the picture would be for him to be selected on the basis of potential and that is most likely not even a consideration.

Taute

In 2011 Taute  played at fukll back for the Lions throughout the year - both on CC and Super 15 level.   In 2012 he played 5 games at full back and 3 full games at center.   He then played 3 full games at center for the Springboks.   Taute by all accounts was the best performing Lions player at full back - real top class.   At center he showed very little in both the Super 15 games and in the tests and with a bit of leeway he can be described as an average center - nothing more.

He also performed as an average center in the tests he played in.   There is no way in the world that he can be described realistically as the best-performing no 13 in SA in 2012.   Matter of fqact oin Super 15 level Jordaan was way above him as a center.

Now there is another problem - he is going to play exclusively as a full back for the Stormers in 2013 - so he will have no further exposure as a center in Super 15 this year.   Here we have a player that has shown zilch as a center in the 6 full games he played in that position during the past 2 years - whilst his performances at full back was consistently exceptional.

On what basis will his selectability change and he become acceptable as a number 13 center - that remains th question to be answered.   There is no way that he will not play  at full back for the Super 15 series and then be selected as a no 13 - since hter is no way that he can remotely be evaluated as a center performer without guessing wildly about it.    

The issue of performance should always be measured against other compeitors for selection in specific positions - not on vague ideas about potential.

Let me keep this short and sweet for the umpteenth time. First of all I am not stupid enough to base my selections on ideas of potential and more importantly I am not stupid enough to leave a quality player on the bench in the name of short sightedness.

So here goes, hopefully for the last time. My selections of Goosen, Lambie and Taute are not based on potential, but on merit given they are into their 2nd or 3rd seasons of top flight rugby. I have long seen enough of them to formulate an opinion on their abilities. They are all class acts - class is permanent, form is temporary. Therefore all 3 would remain in my equation, if one happened to be struggling with form, he would find himself out of the match 22. But playing at their best, all three would make my starting 15.

So now that we know I am selecting these three on merit and not based on some fanciful notion of potential, we can move onto the more obvious conclusions regarding these three. First of all Goosen only plays flyhalf and happens to be our best 10 in my opinion and therefore makes my side as the 10 - get it?

Moving onto Lambie, we know he plays both 10 and 15 and in my opinion is damn good at both. I could either be short sighted and stupid and ignore the fact that he is a good fullback and select him as my bench 10, or I could embrace the obvious and select him as my 15. Lets see do I want to waste Lambie on the bench or have him involved in the game from the start? You still with me?

Last but not least, we have Taute who plays both 15 and 13 and in my opinion is damn good at both. So you work out where I would select him?

I dont give a flying toss what the stats say about these players in different positions, for stats ignore context and I have seen enough of these players in their different positions to formulate the opinions I have of them as players.

So despite what you or anyone else says, I am not stupid enough to leave Lambie on the bench and my Bok side would contain Goosen at 10, Taute at 13 and Lambie at 15 - no questions asked, its one of the easiest selections I would have to make

Safeex

You have a warped idea of "damn good".   Lambie is a damn good flyhalf and a slightly above averge full back - with fairly limited full back play in 2012 and zero in 2013.  So how can you proclaim now that he would after 7 games at full back in a year proclaim that he is the best player in that position.

Taute is a brilliant full back and in the 6 full games over a two year period has produced nothing at all to make him even average as a center - damn good, my ass.   He will get no center play for the next six months and you will still consider him as the best 13 after he played 6 full games in that position over a periodd of 30 months..

You have despite evidence to the contrary already made up your mind that they are the best in the 15 and 13 positions - on the basis of class is permanent,.   The real class they showed was NOT in 15 and 13 - so that is really a joke.   I call it flight of imagination supported by no evidence at all - other than that you say that they are "damn good".   Whether that statement is true and valid - is a basis for debate.  

Mike I tell you what, I dont care what you think of Lambie as a fullback or Taute as a 13 for you are speaking kak. Lambie has played most of his test rugby as a 15 for a reason, much like Taute has only played test rugby at 13 - but of course you know better than this - I give up.

I'll stick with my assessment of these players and would certainly not resort to being stupid enough to leave a player like Lambie on the bench - I'll leave that clever call to you.

Saffex

Come now - I never said Lambie failed at full back - I said he was a better flyhalf than full back.  He himself declared he wants to play at flyhalf in future - not at full back - unless he is forced into it.

Taute was not successful at center in any of the six games he played there over the past year - very average at best.   Meyer realized that and picked himas a full back for the EOYT  and Taute himself wants to play at full back in future if it depends on his preference - nobody will be stupid enough to play him at center - where he produced nothing of note.  

Forcing players to play in positions where they themselves feel they do not produce the best goods possible is wrong and nobody wll convince me otherwise. 

Mike dont become a Moffie and start lying about players. Meyer did not select Taute as a fullback on the EOYT, he always had Kirchner there as his fullback.

Also dont lie that his games at 13 were poor, that is just you trying to justify him being a fullback. Taute was good at 13 against Oz and Ireland, the best 13 the Boks had in 2012. The problem with you is that you dont have a clue what constitues a good performance at 13 for a test player for you are still stuck in a Danie Gerber time warp expecting 13's to dance their way through teams like the old days. Name a single test 13 who did just that in 2012 - get with the times man.

And for the fucking last time, Taute asked to be considered at 15 for the Stormers as he saw that as the only opportunity to make the starting 15 - its like trying to get through to a 3 year old here - read and take these FACTS in, dont just make the bullshit up.

At the highest level ie TEST matches - Lambie has played most his tests as a FULLBACK, Taute has only played his tests as a CENTRE - there is a reason for this, the coaches rate them in these positions - its like talking to a bloody rock

Saffex

Why don't you accept some facts as well -

*   Taute was included in the EOYT as a full back - Meyer himself said that;

*   Taute had six full games as center over a period of two years - he was moved to center only as a result of injutires to La Grange and Hollenbach - the first game he played there was in April 2012;   He was then selected as center and played  3 full hames in that positiom for the Springboks  in other words h played less than 10% of his games during the last two years as a center;

*   Taute himself said he prefers to play at full back, but would play at center if asked to do so - center being his obvious second choice;

*  Taute never said he would play a 15 for the reasons given by you - period - and if he as Springbok 13 cannot make the Stormers squad 13 then he was really not up to standard when he played for the Springboks.  

*   Taute clearly said he can perform better at 15 than at 13 - go and read his statement again and you will see that was exactly what he said - no surprise - since he was brilliant at full back and very average at center.

You have really invented some reasons to justify Taute's average to poor perfpormances as a center.   Taking into account your determination of functions of a center - I came to a conclusion that centers themselves are just dummies in the backline who can produce nothing because of tight defence and their actual role is only defence - a bigger advocate of donkey-kicking rugby I have never seen - if your definition of the roles of center should apply.    Yet in other tests this year a number of centers did exactly do the opposite and they played for France, for England, for ireland, for Argentina  and above all for the All Blacks.   These centers made major line breaks, drew in defenders thus creating space for other players. off load balls effectively in tackle situations allowing back line moves to carry on with attacking play.   Neither Steyn, nor De Villiers, nor Taute did anything significant insofar as attacking backline play is concerned.   De Villiers came nearest in doing the above - at least he had a hand in some tries being scored.   Francois Steyn produced nothing and Taute less.

The fact that centers from other international teams and also Super `15 teams can do what I mentioned above is clearly evidemce that such plays remain  part of the modern game - not of the Danie Gerber era only.   You invented the reasons for non-performance by our centers and then lay the blame at the door of De Villiers only.   He was to my mind not good enough, but Steyn and Taute was much worse.  

Your argument about Taute playing his only tests at  13 means squat since he was not good enough in that position to justify his retention.   You don't want to accept it - but if Taute ever plays for the Springboks again  it will be at full back and not at center   

Yawn - I am bored Mike, I'd rather talk rugby with Bob Marley

Saff, I can assure you that you dont know nowhere near as much about the game as I do. I played premier rugby for Collegians in Durban after 3 years 1st xv at school. Came to NZL where I played premier division rugby at East Coast Bays on the North Shore. I am 25 now, 194cm tall (6'4") I think that is and weigh 101kg. I play at 15 usually but have recently been playing 13 more often.

You see, I still play the modern game. You are now as wide as you are tall I believe so you probably never really "played" the game or not at any respectable level that is.

Nowhere have I mentioned being conservative. Conservative is trying to load the team with all the guys you "hear" are the best. JJ Engelbrecht was dropped not just after 15 mins of being totally out of his depth and not making any impact, but he backed the decision up with a string of average to poor performances in the CC at 13. Wing at best. Not Bok level!!

Conservative would be to put Lambie at 15. Not for me. He is really good at 15 but he is not our best. What has he done differently to Kirchner or Aplon may I ask? He would not have made 15 for the Sharks the way Ludik was playing and that is a fact. He is a better prospect at 10 and he must not be coached out of it. Are you too "dull" to see what has happened to players like Pienaar, Hougaard and others who have not been able to specialise. 13 for me is a very different role to 15. I sometimes play wing too and that is different again. I find I play my best rugby at either of those positions when I get many consecutive games in the position. This is why I can comment on that. It is not nice to be shifted all the time and it makes you feel as though you have not performed well enough in any 1 position to make it your own and a no brainer that you need to fill that jersey whenever you fit! These guys mindset plays a huge part too.

How is JDV past it? You say Taute and JJ are "the manne" but JDV is past it when JDV has been better than both of them combined last year and will be this year too. Are you watching the same games as us? If you are, you know less of rugby than I give you credit for.

Engelbrecht is not good enough AT ALL at this stage in his career. Too inconsistent still. Taute may be good enough at 15 but time will tell.

I am not conservative. I believe in playing the best 15 you have in their positions at the time. Last year that would have meant Ludik at 15. Jordaan at 13. JDV at 12. Goosen at 10 with Lambie hot on his heels. Reinach at 9. Kanlowski at 8 (Japan changed that I believe).. Nothing conservative about that. I named 4 debutants in the backline there mixed with some good experience in Habana, JDV and JP. Youth and experience is vital moving forward. Taute and JJ are not as good as you think they are unfortunately. Lambie can cover 15 if the starting 15 is injured during play but he needs to specialise at 10. Thats the long and short of it. He plays better rugby when he is controlling things and takes the ball to the line beautifully.

Far too long we having been experimenting and ruining players careers. Its time now to specialise these guys and let them becoming legends.

Oh so I am short and fat then, is this possibly to suite your vain attempt at imposing your supposed rugby prowess over me? What a joke, 3 years for the schools 1st team and the mighty East Coast Bays - a little google of that lot had me splitting my sides - wow what a level you have attained and you have the audacity to declare you have achieved more on the rugby field than I have, not knowing anything about me?

Well lets just say I did better than 1st team at school and we will leave it at that. I might not presently be playing the modern game but I have been coaching it for the past 7 years and by coaching I mean level 2, purely out of love of the game. So dont come insult me with your stringbean frame, playing centre for a bunch of nobodies.

So I load teams based on who I have 'heard' are the best - where did you drag that crap from? Pretty insulting to a man who gets a kick out of knowing who is who when it comes to SA players. So given this perceived rugby knowledge of yours please explain how JJ was exposed in those 15 min on the field at wing for the Boks.

You have just confirmed your conservatism by stating that Kirchner is better than Lambie at 15. Worse than that is that you are clearly out of touch with the requirements of the modern game calling for Aplon as an option over Lambie at 15. Do you not get that Aplon is way too small for a test 15. Hello!!

It does not get more conservative than praising the woeful year we have just had to endure with Jean first at 13 and then at 12. We needed to move on from Jean two seasons ago, retaining him smacks of conservatism. Taute, Jordaan and JJ are far better options at 13, Frans is a far better option at 12 as are other youngsters like Venter, Whitehead and Serfontein.

I am not asking to have players play different positions each week. Hougaard should never have been moved to wing, he is our best 9, Goosen our best 10, therefore Lambie should specialise at 15 and Taute at 13......its thats simple and how I would call it. None of this is experimentation....Hougaard is a 9, Lambie has played most his test rugby as a fullback and Taute has only played his tests at 13

My arse you know more about rugby than I do

Saffex i'm also 6'4" so therefore  I can assure you that you dont know anywhere near as much about the game as I do LMAO....

on top of that Boklogic in all his modesty keeps telling everyone he's part of South Africa's brain drain...ROTFLMAO...

East Coast Bays premiers what a freakin joke - lost all their games coz they're totally fken useless ....keep em coming boklogic yr a laugh a minute buddy ...

Yeah I reckon our local village side would give that lot a smack. Thanks for confirming my initial impressions of the mighty East Coast Bays - Boklogic must be proud!!

I am short and fat bud so yes you must know more than me at 6'4!!

Brycy, out the woodwork again! Why dont you come play Brycy. If they so useless, surely you would make the team?? No one said they were the greatest premier team around but fact remains, its still a premiership team. Poor level of coaching (compared to premier teams in SA) vs playing coaches favourites were major issues of the team and impacted results. Much like Saffex's take on coaching. Play the favourites. Forget the talent.. Are you playing the game Brycy or still just logging on to talk shit everytime your family gets their dole and pays for internet?

Never once referred to myself as part of SA's brain drain. In fact I never went to uni or college after Matric but I can assure you I do better for myself in my adopted country as you do in your country of birth! Hard work and smart brain. Not hard to better kiwi's like you on that front though.

Saffex, played higher than first team..Conveniently you would leave it at that because you have no proof yet again. Just like the height vs weight issue. How can you google me?? You dont know my name as far as boklogic. As for my string bean frame, I can post a pic if you would like in the bays uniform and you can make up your mind! Dont mistake my weight for string bean. I train 5 times a week to keep it to lean muscle so I dont become short and fat in my old age like you. Frans Steyn weighed a touch over a hundred when he first made the boks and is my height give or take a cm (I know this as I played for Collegians when he came to Durban) so is he a string bean? You are deluded man. I know why though..Its short man syndrome.

Brycy would just do anything to take a dig at me and go against what I say for two reasons. He is a prick and I have put him in his place a number of times. Just another blogger on here with no value to add.

Saffex, stop calling people stupid, thinking you know everything on every player or more than the rest of us. You are the only one that believes that. Trust me no one is with you on your "ideas" for the bok squad. We can all see through you...If we kneel down that is ;-)

Bays are not the best performing team by any stretch of the imagination and their systems are screwed which is why I am not there this season. Way too much politics and favouritism for a menial team but at the end of the day, for everything they are, they play in the premier division with some good players. I linked up with them as I was told many South Africans live there and play for the club. I was new to the country and thought it would be nice to see how other guys like me had gone about life here and bonus was I would still be playing the game on a competitive level. My challenge to you and Brycy is to go and make the team..Hell even start playing socially again.

I am 26 now and am never going to get any further in rugby than this and nor do i portrait to be a rugby god like you Saff. I know my boundaries and limitations.

On a lighter note, surely London offers some midget rugby or another brand where oompaloompa's get to tackle each other. Google it Saff. You good rehash your glory days..

Brycy, use your internet to look on seek for jobs buddy!!

I never googled you, you fool, I googled your mighty club. You have to be stupid to say that I only select my favourites. One would usually conclude that favourites equate to the best and most talented players we have at our disposal - ie Lambie, Frans, JP, Hougaard, Goosen and co - most peoples favourites not only mine.

As for leaving my playing credentials to school, that had stuff all to do with proof but more to save you the embarrassement as I am not in the habit of splashing my personal details all over a rugby messageboard - my name is not Moffie.

As for proof of my height and weight well, Jal, Mike and Becs have met me in person and confirmed that I am neither short nor fat - what further proof do you seek wiseman???

You feeling a little stupid no doubt given Brycy has rattled your unimpressive cage - hence the pathetic short and fat angle you now employ - grow up man. As for rugby, I am more than comfortable in the knowledge that I know my stuff - those that know me will vouch for that. Becs has watched my club side play, so feel free to ask her take on their performance that day.

Short man syndrome at 6ft get a bloody grip

Well you see Saff, we dont know if you are 6ft. Mozart gives some damning evidence and you have admitted to it. He is taller than you by your own admission but he tells us he is not 6ft. Why would he lie about being shorter than he is? How does this then make you 6ft. Maybe in high heels in your spare time buddy.

Brycy is to me what most other bloggers are to you. We have offended each other to a point of no return. I actually dont hate the man or mean half the nasty things I say to him coz I dont know him but its just one of those things we do to each other. Childish really but we do it anyway. He will go against me if I say NZL is paradise because its not the statement he disagrees with, its his hate for me you see.

Whilst Bays is not the log leaders as I mentioned, they still have some harbour reps playing for them in the premier division. Much like the Blues sucked last year. Does that make them terrible individuals? No, they still a super rugby team, they still great players but they just dont fire like they should. It happens some seasons. Our senior 1st won their division and made semis in 2011 but the Prems did poorly.. It just happens that way when a lot of the best players cant make prems team due to politics. Thats why senior 1st was so strong..Coach cleanout was had and now Slade McFarland is at the helm. Maybe he can change the fortunes around with a fresh approach!

Oh so is that how it works and you wonder why I call you stupid. The fact that Moffie says he is taller than me is gospel now is it? Where on earth did you get that I said I was shorter than Moffie huh? I met the bloke once and am not in the habit of comparing heights, we spent most the evening seated for crying out loud.

What I did say was that if pushed I'd say we were similar heights and that if I was shorter it would be marginal and vice versa - get it? Given Moffie has confirmed he is 5'11 and I know I am 1.82m, you draw your own conclusion - if you are able.

So given the fact that 3 posters have confirmed that I am neither short nor fat and that I am around the 6ft mark given none of them were pathetic enough to carry a tape measure with them - you choose to ignore these very facts and draw the conclusion that I am shorter than Moffie based on Moffie's word. The fact that he has been exposed for lying does not register with you - why is that - stupidity?

Good for you and your club, but thats beside the point. My issue was that you started chest beating about your playing credentials telling me you were superior in the knowledge that you know stuff all about me. Do you not think that, that is a little naive?

 The reason I told you about my rugby credentials as u refer to it is because this is your statement to me:

"Boklogic, one certainty is that I know more about rugby than you ever will. One thing I do know is my rugby"

How can you summise that? I dont claim to know more than you but how is this all measured that you can come up with a statement like that? What you are implying is that you are right and I am wrong?

JJ and Taute are your picks and they proved a flop and average respectively. Hougaard at 9 is your pick and he proved a flop there.. We both have different takes on selections but you are calling me wrong!

That call was based on the crap rugby calls you make, they mirror the shit we have had to endure for the past few seasons with the Boks

Hougaard never failed at 9, Pienaar came on board and was piss poor on the EOYT

Taute was our best test 13 by some distance, so you take is complete bullshit. And to say JJ was a flop after 15min is not only naive its pathetic.

Your rugby knowledge is poor and yes you are wrong.

Saffex you really are hard to talk to with your forceful nature and idiotic views. Is it is that not only me, but everyone does not agree with you. No one else here at the moment wants JJ or Taute at centre, Hougaard at 9 and Jantjies in the squad or Lambie playing 15 when his best is 10. ONLY YOU. Are we all idiots??

NO SAFF, you are WRONG!!

JJ showed nothing in the time he was on and Boks were poorer with him hence the reason even Meyer got rid of him. Meyer's view was justified by a string of below par performances for the Bulls in CC at 13. He is useless and better he stays at union level. Taute was not good at 13. Look at him as a whole. Not what you want to believe. He showed little against Australia in a game where guys like Goosen, JDV and Habana were running a mock. Even Kirchener was scoring tries. He then went on to be below par against AB's and nothing special against Scotland so De Jongh was brought in.. There goes your JJ and Taute at 13 and rightfully so!!

Jantjies proved to be the worst player to line up for the Boks in years if not ever. His team mates were not happy to have him on there and it was noticeable! Hougaard was dropped from 9 after many chances to improve and rightfully so..

So Saffex, is everyone else wrong except you little man?

Nothing I have said is "much of the same" as we have been seeing as you say. How is a backline of

15 LUDIK

14 Pieterson

13 JORDAAN

12 De Villiers / Steyn

11 Habana

10 LAMBIE

9 REINACH

much of the same as what we have been seen I ask you with tears in my eyes? All capitals are either debutants or guys who had not played in that position for the Boks prior 2012! That is 4 new players if you need help counting. They just are not weak arsed players that you choose. Take your Jantjies, JJ, Taute and Hougaard and play them in your half baked club team but dot try force them onto us and tell us you know rugby. You know fuck all bru! We have witnessed these players underperform already. This shows me you know nothing of what it will take. Your team you named would be the first to lose to the Argies for sure!!

boklogic

You are a man to my heart - that is since I am a Sharks supporter.   Quite a backline you have there with six Sharks players (that is if Francois Steyn is to be 12 and not De Villiers).   However, I think very highly of Ludick - but at full back in Super 15 Taute was indeed a better performer.  In the latter regard Ludick played 69 games for the Sharks and scored 55 points.   In the same period Taute played the same number of games for the Lions and scored 109 points for the Golden Lions.  A very big difference by all accounts.

Francois Steyn showed much less playing at 12 than De Villiers did - matter of fact I think Steyn would be a dead loss in that position unless he sharpens up considerably.

Based on form only I would pick the above backline with De Villiers at 12 and Taute at 15.   

Like you, I would remain with JDV at 12.

I also agree that Taute is a better prospect at 15 and have said that is where he is good enough to play for the Boks right now but not at 13. Only reason I choose Ludik is because we need to play our inform players at the time they are in form and not because of what they have done in the past or what they "can" do.

Ludik in 2012 was better as Taute was injured a lot. Goosen will be a great Flyhalf but at the moment, he needs to mature a bit and get stronger and over all these injuries. I would hate to see such a talent have his career cut short because he was rushed into it. This way it gives Lambie time in the position and he will no doubt get better in each performance. 2 great flyhalfs fighting for 1 spot is always better than 1 great flyhalf available only half the time due to constant injuries.

Sharks were the best SA team in the Super 14 last year hence the reason for nearly 6 in the starting team. I have no issues where the personnel apply their trade as long as they are the best in the country. Jordaan can play for the Kings for all I care but as long as he cuts the line like he does and sets his team mates up in the green and gold I am gona love him!