15.Francois Steyn
14.Willie Le Roux
13.Jaque Fourie/Juan de Jongh
12.Jean De Villiers
11.Bryan Habana
10.Morne Steyn
09.Fourie Du Preez
You have backline that can play a smart tactical kicking game and big and strong on defence. Tough as nails.
Fuck me what a crap backline with a bunch of old farts in it......that lot would struggle to get past Scotland.
Bugger, I guess you had your eyes closed when you watched JJ with ball in hand in that last test against NZ or are you just another who knows stuff all.
Judging by your pathetic choice of a backline, I'm guessing the latter
Bloody funny. Morne Steyn is a defensive sieve and Juan de Jongh is worse. Jacque Fourie is as slow as a slow carthorse and Francois Steyn is unfit and slower than Fourie.
A "smart tactical backline" with the robotic Morne Steyn being tactical (?) - what a joke!!!
That backline will self-destruct, because of three very poor links - the Steyns and De Jongh
Oh what rubbish there is no way in hell de Jongh is tougher in contact, the guy is a complete liability in contact and why he will never make a test centre.
The notion that JJ does not front up is rubbish, ask Conrad Smith.......JJ has knocked him out in S15 rugby and run straight through him in a test match.
de Jongh has NEVER run through JJ, he half stepped him but JJ soon hauled him in with ease.
Comparing JJ to de Jongh is laughable and the fact that de Jongh, a player of colour, has not made the touring squad, speaks volumes for what Meyer thinks of him.
Its sad to say this, but the only reason de Jongh has ever played a test match, has nothing to do with rugby merit
Dave, seriously man Conrad ran into his hip with his head....Little Bo Peep could knock a player out if contact was made in the right way. De Jongh is better than JJ...JJ only hauled in de Jongh because Ndungane slowed him down. B ut all this is moot....neither will be playing by the time we play France. Fury will be the man. I honestly tried to warn you about this....I know how massively invested in JJ you are. But now it's too late. I'm afraid you are going to be disappointed.
Mozart
Problem is interesting. You mention all the negatives you see in Engebrecht and no positives at all - and there are some - whilst you add all the positives (also the invented ones) of De Jongh and none of the real negatives in the case of the latter. That is not objective assessment of players.
I also think that there are real negatives in the case of Engelbrecht and have listed them with an indication that he is not as secure of his selection for the Springbok team as Saffe x implies.
However, there is clarity as to why De Jongh is definitely not the answer and whether Fourie in fact is the answer is also questionable. He could bedevil backline attacking play because he is not the fastest of players around - speed is really a requirement at 13. We will have to wait and see how things develop in future.
Mozart
Don't talk rubbish as per normal. I have been always critical of the defensive play of Engelbrecht (as far as I can remember I raised it even before you did when I dealt with the Bulls-WP CC game last year) and has aside from that -
* listed that I think he is one-dimensional as a result of lack of ball sense; and
* he has a tendency to disappear in games.
Where I did defend him was in the case of biased and unwarranted attacks blaming him solely for the shortcomings of both himself and the exoneration of the real culprits - which you tried to keep silent about. For instance in the Ellis Park test - where you started praising Morne and Alberts to high heaven and they were in fact the real culprits contributing more to the test loss than Engelbrechht. I have also said in the past that if I had only a choice between him and the worst defending center in SA - De Jongh - who also brings zero to attacking rugby and does not vanish in games, but goes the whole hog through AWOL, my choice would always be Engebrecht.
The above is a clear reflection - and not a biased one - on my thinking about the Engelbrecht issue. I can only go further by repeating what I have said to the effect that Super 15 next year may give us a clearer picture of who would be the best 13 in SA from a selection perspective.
Unlike you I have been dead honest about the issue and not run around looking for a replacement for Engelbrecht and coming up with the poor De Jongh as a solution. You have been very critical of Fourie in the past, because of the Engelbrecht issue, he is manna from heaven.
That is not double talk - nor the insular and lack of objective thinking ability displayed by you.
Bugger
Easy. Let me explain in practice why I criticize Morne Steyn and give practical examples, which I have given endlessly on this site before:-
Morne Steyn
Morne Steyn is robotic in all aspects of play - but that is not his biggest problem. His worst problem is defence. Throughout the RC he was statistically problematic as to defence. In all tests played he missed 19% of all attempted tackles - at best 9 to 11% higher than the missed tackle ratio should be.
However in the Ellis Park test that missed tackle percentage went up to 40% - he made 6 tackles and missed 4. What made the situation worse is that the AB's scored 3 tries after Steyn missed attempted tackles on various AB players. Much is being said about the defective tackling technique of Engelbrecht and nothing about the same defective technique of Morne Steyn.
Surely part of the problem with Morne Steyn is to know when to make relieving kicks and when not - part of defence strategy. An excellent example where he had a brain seizure is when the half time siren in the Ellis Park test was about to go off when he got the ball in his own 22 and instead of making an effective relieving kick he passed the ball out - ultimately resulting in a try by the AB's as a result of a ball turn-over. Meyer told him to pass the ball more and kick less - but instead of for a change using his own sense - he lost perspective. I am not the only one who said this - Naas Botha said it was stupid.
It can clearly be said that Morne was involved in disastrous play leading up to 4 of the AB's 5 tries. The AB's knows Morne Steyn like a book and they know his weaknesses like an open book - run at him and his defence will cave in - like happened at Ellis Park.
Willem Alberts
Alberts main problem is his lack of mobility. That reduces his capacity to defend - and he cannot be relied upon to make any tackles outside of the pocket area. However, even in the pocket area, he missed tackles and mainly so in crucial cases. That was pertinently showed by two cases in the Samoan test in June - when he missed two tackles on Samoan players before they scored tries.
In the Ellis Park test he missed badly a crucial tackle on Read and that missed tackle resulted in a try by Ben Smith after Read past the ball to the latter player - who ran through Morne Steyn as if he was not there. The original miss was the main problem in the scoring of the said try and was entirely due to Alberts' lack of mobility.
In the same test Aaron Smith was tackled and Alberts was the nearest person to him to try and turn over the ball from him - which is what a normal loosie would have done. Instead Alberts fell over his own feet and the turnover chance was gone. In an analysis of the reasons for poor ball recovery by our loosies, Tomas Lavanini - an Argentinian test player who is a member of this site - wrote that the reason for the deficiency is that they are to clumsy - and that is what was the case here on the part of Alberts. To make matters even worse was that Alberts after getting to his feet, did not take up a position to defend against a pushover try, but fell on the SA player involved in the resulting maul - another sign of clumsiness and the result was a push over try by Messam.
Alberts in essence is a rather dim-witted and clumsy tight 5 player masquerading as a loosie.
Mozart is a hysterical supporter of Alberts and in the CC final went over the Board praising him as to how well he played. When carefully analysing that game - it was found that Alberts missed four tackles in that game, made 3 e ffective tackles, assisted other players to make 4 tackles and made an in-effective tackle in one case. That from a defence perspective is for a loosie not up to standard.
When analysing Albert's tackle stats in all games on all levels over the past year, it is clear that he has a very low tackle ratio for a loosie and he normally makes about half the number of tackles compared to the number of tackles made by the opposing blindside flanker.
CAN YOU NOW SEE THE REASONS FOR MY SCEPTICISM OF THE ABILITIES OF THE RELEVANT TWO PLAYERS?
Bugger
Nice to look at games with blinkers on and not seeing what is really going on. I gave exact examples of what is wrong with both Morne Steyn and Alberts - and if you do not believe what I said - go and watch the games again. You are the type that build sandcastles and then ascribe wonderful talent to players - talents and abilities that do not exist. Another game where deficiencies of Morne was pertinent was in the Bulls - Brumbies semi this year. His strategic kicks and relieving kicks in that game was a serious joke, he missed 50% of his kicks at goal and - and like in the Ellis Park test - he basically cost his side victory in that game.
As a pivot Morne was always average to poor and even Meyer instructed him to improve that component of his game - and that resulted in him losing it totally, Really - anyone stating what you did in your above contribution, must be in a serious state of delusion. I agree with Saffex here - Morne always was a poor fyhalf - with only one asset in his make-up his kicking at goal and even that flops at times - in the Ellis Park test he missed 33% of all attempted kicks - at least a substantial improvement of the 80% misses last year in Dunedin.
I also pointed out that the assessment is supporting stats of players as shown in all games throughout the past year - so dream on about the players concerned and also about De Jongh - another hopeless case insofar as defence is concerned and useless in attack as well. You and Mozart can have him - but I hope never to see him in the Springbok jersey again. Also preferably not in the Stormers jersey as well - a 25% missed tackle ratio is a disaster for any team.
Shezza
About a year ago there was a discussion of the term ball sense - ie the ability to read games and to determine instinctively what line of action to adopt in given circumstances during matches. The other side of it is to have a "feeling" as to where the ball will go and be there to cause maximum damage defensively and in attack when the ball in effect arrives at the point you felt it would go.
This ability shows the difference between a good player and a great player. Serious deficiencies in this often enough leads to a player being average in performance. At that time reference was made to two players - namely Morne Steyn and Francois Steyn.
in the case of Morne Steyn the outcome was that over the years - from the time he was playing for the Under 21 team of South Africa - Morne always was one-dimensional and showed little as to what is expected from a pivot and had a game easily read and countered by the opposition. There was at a time a member who said that Morne is the total package from a ball sense perspective and that he is exactly as bugger described him. Predictability is the exact antithesis of ball sense and that is what Morne is.
Realising that predictability of Morne is a serious problem Meyer before the Ellis Park test instructed him to stand flatter in the pocket and pass the ball more so as to ignite the backline. I think even the AB's was surprised by this change and the backline became a real problem for them from a defensive perspective. Bugger saw nothing of that and said that the attacking style had no positive affect and was like playing sevens rugby. He went on to blame Meyer for giving Steyn a wrong game plan to play according to and Jean not changing it on the field of play. Be that as it may be - the problem is that during the game there were cases where Morne read the game completely wrongly - as happened in the circumstances that lead to Messam's second try. Finally anybody ascribing "ball sense" as being an attribute of Morne must eoher know nothing about rugby - or nothing about the functions of the backline pivot.
In the case of Francois Steyn the problem was that he also became one-dimensional through the years. At the time of discussion Francois was not in good physical shape after his return from France and the result was a tendency to crashball and rare passing of the ball - in the latter case to players often enough in a worse position than he himself was in. Although you probably will disagree - both Steyns were part of the problem of a total lack of backline attacking play in tests last year. The only difference was noticeable in the Aussie test in Pretoria where neither of the two were on the field of play. Incidentally the issue is also a defect in the play of Engelbrecht whose over-reliance on speed and vey little else shows a remarkable degree of predictability.
There was a marked improvement in backline attacking play this year - but the key ingredient in this was the inclusion of Willie le Roux in the mix. He is really totally unpredictable and even though some of his stratagems do not produce results, the number of successes is surprisingly high. Bugger said prev iously that Le Roux is a problem in the backline and not producing results.
The discussion of issues with a person like bugger leads to nothing - since his ideas are so unreal and unbelievable.
Mozart
Just one thing - you accused me of the following:-
"Oom the only difference between you and me is I am being honest whereas you are talking out of both sides of your mouth."
I responded on that one and no response from you - a personal attack of a dubious nature because you were found out a gain.
Now lets get to Morne Steyn. I cannot believe what you have written here. If that is Morne Steyn - then my name is Napoleon Bonaparte or something impossible like that. Since when has Morne Steyn displayed all the wonderful talents described by you? Most people must have missed out completely on that one - and should have said what a miracle flyhalf we have here - better than anything ever in the world.
His cover at the back - every flyhalf does it - part of his job. Nothing special and no really marvellous asset.
His pin point strategic kicking - most of his strategic kicks are nothing sort of tripe and handing over possession. Because of one kick he made in the Eden Park test - leading to the Lambie try - he did not kicked once a strategic kick that produced positive results. However, like you always say - one incident is career-defining - so now suddenly all his pin point strategic kicks are miracle kicks. But they are not - and most people would recognise that statement as a figment of your own imagination and basically a hollow play with words.
His clearing under pressure - when he missed even penalty line kicks or miss the line in other kicks. This happen far too regularly and also backfire often enough. Please just have a look at the Super 15 semi-final and then come back with that one as a positive.
His "his superb passing" - that statement after Meyer himself ordered Morne before the last test to stand flatter in the channel and pass the ball more often. Previous to that Morne stood too deep in the pocket - the defence ignored him, because he never attacked the gain line himself and when he passed the ball the recipient was under serious pressure by the opposition defenders. That was Morne's game and everyone saw it and recognized it as such. There was no test - before the Ellis Park test in which the Springbok backline was really an effective attacking backline involving Morne Steyn. It normally was that provided he did not touch the ball in the process. Why should Meyer have given him a public instruction before the Ellis Park test to play a different game - if his previous games were not defective? He did play a better passing game at Ellis Park - but also made errors in cases where h should have made relieving kicks and not passed the ball - the typical sign of a robotic player.
His goal kicking is his only strong point - but also where he fails in important matches. His normal accuracy is 80% of all attempted kicks - a vey high percentage and acceptable - matter of fact his only real asset - but in important games he often enough flopped in that regard as well. In the Super 15 semi - he missed 50% of all kicks at goal - in the Ellis Park test that miss ratio was 33% - an improvement on the kicking last year when his average missed kicks was 60% and the Dunedin test where his missed percentage was 80%.
Mozart - I have seen you manufacture so-called assets where they do not exist in players - like the De Jongh tackling story to explain away his high percentage of missed tackles - but the above piece of verbal diarrhea beats anything I have ever seen.
Saffex
This is the thread where Mozart has gone over the moon with Morne Steyn - some comments please.
I am reposting Saffex's comments on Morne Steyn - they are a classic - AGREEE WITH HIM IN EVERY RESPECT.
"In my books, Morne is the worst test flyhalf out there.......certainly worse than the Oz, NZ, English, Argies, Irish or Welsh incumbents. "
Mozart
There was a challenge made and I accepted the challenge, provided that "cover at the back" - as you called it - disrupt the meters gained issue and makes the gains look more impressive than it is in practice and that really is not a reflection of actual and real value. All other value items should rather be used and I listed them.
Now since the verbal diarrhea on the real assets of Morne is being dealt with back to the one you chickened out on - namely the statistical data issue in S uper15.
By the way - I cannot remember a single match where any game was lost because of poor play by Lambie in Super 15, but I can remember the atrocious performance by Morne in the Brumbies semi - where Morne contributed in a major way to the loss.
But lets get on with the challenge - and lets see how much better Steyn really was than Lambie and include the tackle stats and missed tackle stats in that issue as well.
Bugger, shows how thick you are.....so NZ went for JJ did they and wow.......the stats tell us that in the two tests against NZ, JJ made 12 tackles and only missed ONE.......you feeling pretty stupid now.
Why not entertain us with your next joke.
Funny how that in one test against NZ, Morne missed 4 tackles, 3 of which lead indirectly to tries
Shout if you need another paddle joker?
And while you are there, kindly point out when Goosen was exposed on the big stage you liar
Morne missed Barrett, as did Jean, JJ and Kirchner, hence his miss indirectly lead to a try.
Morne missed Nonu, who gained ground and set up the next phase that lead to Messam's try
The worst one was Morne being swatted
