OMOwen Meany
Rookie57 posts
22 Apr 2015, 18:38#2
Hy het vir twee jaar oor gegaan om geld te verdien. Hy kom terug Bulle toe en sal nog n groot rol in ons rugby toekoms speel. Die Bulle bestuur hom reg.
JEJeromeV
Club Pro492 posts
22 Apr 2015, 19:22#3
Willemse has potential but i don't really think he has the qualities that is needed at the higher level of the game. He's too slow and lacks the ability link with players around him. Bakkies Botha had the same deficiencies, these weaknesses stops the team from playing the real brand of rugby.
The stand out SA lock that comes to mind is Grant Hattingh. In my view he is the most versatile SA lock, his abilities is much like what you would see of Andries Bekker. Hattingh can offload, break the line with speed and has a good fend. Initially i was impressed with him when he was at WP though now he has developed to an even better player at the bulls and I like what I'm seeing from him this year.
Here's a vid link of what Hattingh has done at Blue Bulls
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trgz6Yaqd1M (Copy and Paste)
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
22 Apr 2015, 20:08#4
I think that the problem si that Willemse has the bulk - but very little else. He is anytime as dumb as Willem Alberts is. The contribution he makes in mauls and scrums are substantial, but for the rest he is very, very average. Hs contribution he makes in ball carries - even i.n traffic - borders on the non-existent and his line out jumping is inadequate.
He gives away two many penalties and is a card candidate as well.
Willemse is a typical heavy player without anything to recommend him at all for higher honours. Duds on this site - the type who writes odes on this site iro Alberts when in fact there was some really problems in his performance - will obviously also write odes about Willemse. The only thing counting with them are size and weight in the case of some players only, while in respect of others the opposite is true.
The idiocy is amazing - Matfield at 105 kg is adequate in weight as a lock. Etzebeth is a no 4 lock - but he must make way and move to 5 to accommodate a rather questionable Williams at 4. The dolts swear by Matfield - despite his non-contribution in the Tight 5. To augment that non-contribution we must play Alberts at 7. There is no logic to it - just rank idiocy.
I would not touch Willemse with a bargepole at this stage - he is just not good enough in line outs and makes a very limited contribution to the game. Matfield is a joke in bad taste.
The lock combination at this stage based on performances are the following:-
4 Etzebeth - backup Du Plessis5 Du Toit - backup 10 real locks before you get to Matfield at 11.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
22 Apr 2015, 20:17#5
Mike you are pathetic. A small man ...my sympathies to all who deal with you
JEJeromeV
Club Pro492 posts
22 Apr 2015, 20:42#6
What is great about Steph du Toit? He hasn't proved that he can establish himself at 5 for the boks. He's average at best, Overrated. This year is an important year for us, we need to be more rational and pick the best players who are on form not players who are going to be a flop.
Grant Hattingh is the ideal option at 5 with Etzebeth at 4.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
22 Apr 2015, 20:49#7
Mozart
You are pathetic - a man with a small mind without knowledge of rugby. I pity anyone having to put up with you in a discussion on rugby issues.
What is clear in your reasoning is that you either want Matfield at 5 and if that cannot be - you want to move Etzebeth to 5 - so as to block the possible selection of Du Toit in that position. Pathetic idiocy and so transparent - anybody on this site see clearly through your idiocy in this case.
Is that why despite specialist opinion - you insist that Du Toit (who according to you has thin shoulders and wrists) shall not play rugby for the rest of this year. What a pathetic idiot - who wish players you do not like to be out of the way with injuries.
22 Apr 2015, 21:15#8
Mike - Let du Toit prove his fitness before he is considered. Plenty of other options until then. Its not as if he is a game changer, or a burgeoning talent. Consistency is key to forming any good team, and you can't get that with players that are injured often.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
23 Apr 2015, 09:26#10
Mozart
As to dishonesty you beat me hands-down. You rate players on one or two games in a season - never on their performances throughout the season. That makes your assessments of player performances a mockery.
You ignore anything that may be to the detriment of the players you support and invent negatives of a player you do not support. Misrepresentations is your stock in trade.
I do not think that there was anything to make Willemse an automatic selection as a Lock - and you base your arguments totally on two games. The current 4 is Etzebeth and there never was an indication that Willemse is better in that position than Etzebeth is at present. To just move players around to fit your ideas is absolute tripe and BS in capital letters.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
23 Apr 2015, 09:30#11
oimatey
I grant you that Du Toit has had too many injuries over the last two years - but insofar as performances as a no 5 lock this year is concerned - he was head and shoulders above any other no 5 lock in SA. If he is fit and remain so in the RC - he would be my first choice number 5 lock. Unlike Mozart I hope he gets back to playing and that he is not injured again - because he really is a top class player.
AGAgPleezDeddy
Club Pro900 posts
AGAgPleezDeddyClub Pro900 posts
24 Apr 2015, 15:38#14
Willemse, Etzebeth, Vermuelen, Burger, Coetzee, Jannie, Bismarck and Beast would be an absolute monster of a pack
DBDbDraad
Captain26,388 posts
DBDbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
24 Apr 2015, 15:47#15
I'm afraid Jannie is very close to done. We need some new blood to be given proper chances at 3, but Jannie is still to valuable not to go to the RWC. I think he will be rested more often by giving the young guns long stretches from the bench until one is fit to fill his boots.
SASaffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SASaffolk Captain30,741 posts
24 Apr 2015, 16:08#16
No APD, Jannie is a spent force.....we have better young tightheads in Coenie, Nyakane, Marcel v/d Merwe, Malherbe and Koch.....I'd play PSDT or Jacques du Plessis at 7 ahead of Schalk as well
AGAgPleezDeddy
Club Pro900 posts
AGAgPleezDeddyClub Pro900 posts
24 Apr 2015, 16:47#17
I agree, I was just using Jannie as a space filler as I'm not quite sure who deserves that tight head spot at the minute. There's some players making big waves though.
I think Jacques Du Plessis, PSDT should definitely be in the squad due to their versatility and quality but I think Schalk is showing a new leece of life and his linking up is something that will add a new dimension to our loosies.
SASaffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SASaffolk Captain30,741 posts
24 Apr 2015, 17:02#18
At test level we need power and size at 7.......the linking role needs to come from our 6 and 8.
DBDbDraad
Captain26,388 posts
DBDbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
24 Apr 2015, 17:36#19
Dave, Schalk has plenty of size and power AND if you play a bruiser like Duane at 8, you can afford a more agile 7. Vermeulen does not have the same skill set for linking play as Schulk. He can bash it up and offload, but Scalla has better vision and his passing is more acurate. He is pulling off some cheaky stunts I don't like too muc h, but it's nice to watch when it comes off.
