That he is no good in Tight 5 play as a result of being physically-deficient.
Coach57,555 posts
20 May 2015, 20:17
#1
20 May 2015, 20:17#1
Are the Victor Matfield groupies ready to admit
Started by clevermike11 REPLIES209 VIEWS· 20 May 2015, 20:17
sharkbok
Captain23,285 posts
Captain23,285 posts
20 May 2015, 20:25
#2
20 May 2015, 20:25#2
Matfield is a hybrid lock. He does some of the lock play and some of the loosie play. Just like Alberts is a hybrid loosie and lock.
If it was the World Cup final tomorrow and the Boks were leading with 5 minutes to go I would rather have Matfield than Lood Foot.
It was only last year that Lood Foot getting bundled into touch by a flyhalf on the All Black line on the overseas tour.
The Bulls problem is that they have the useless Werner and Greyling who dont contribute to anything.
If it was the World Cup final tomorrow and the Boks were leading with 5 minutes to go I would rather have Matfield than Lood Foot.
It was only last year that Lood Foot getting bundled into touch by a flyhalf on the All Black line on the overseas tour.
The Bulls problem is that they have the useless Werner and Greyling who dont contribute to anything.
Captain49,914 posts
20 May 2015, 20:42
#3
20 May 2015, 20:42#3
As things stand Matfield, Etzebeth and Flip Flop are our best bets. Lomp is slow witted. Stephanie is papier-mache glued together with sticky tape, Lewies was tossed around like a twig by Skelton and for some inexplicable reason the awesomely powerful Paul Willemse is the forgotten man.
Club Pro471 posts
20 May 2015, 22:03
#4
20 May 2015, 22:03#4
Based on?
His lack of muscle definition?
His lack of muscle definition?
Pro1,526 posts
20 May 2015, 22:10
#5
20 May 2015, 22:10#5
The rolling maul has been one of the Boks' main weapons and it is much easier to form a rolling maul from a lineout than say from a scrum. It is therefore critical important to have someone who can secure your own lineout and even disrupt the opposition's lineouts. Victor is the man for that job.
Yes, he is not worth that much as a typical lock, but if a team has a strong enough front row, they can afford to have less power from the locks in the scrum.
There is at the moment a problem with our setup amongst the locks. We are well aware of Matfields' shortcomings, but Etsebeth is also at the moment not in top form.
Flip Flop is not bad, but he is worth at least 6 points to the opposition and a walking yellow card. I agree, Lood is too slow.
Captain49,914 posts
20 May 2015, 22:16
#6
20 May 2015, 22:16#6
Agree on Flip Flop Blikkies. When he detached from that rolling maul against the Blues he needed to rotate back. Instead he went on uselessly bumping into an opposition player...with no effect on the success of the maul, but killing the try by being penalized.
He is powerful and athletic, but sadly a penalty machine.
He is powerful and athletic, but sadly a penalty machine.
Coach57,555 posts
21 May 2015, 01:22
#7
21 May 2015, 01:22#7
Mozart
The madness to have a 105 kgs 38 year-old lock who lasts about 30 minutes - like last week - in games has not hit home yet.
The idea to weaken the Tight 5 by playing a player not good enough to play a role in the engine room will never work out.
The madness to have a 105 kgs 38 year-old lock who lasts about 30 minutes - like last week - in games has not hit home yet.
The idea to weaken the Tight 5 by playing a player not good enough to play a role in the engine room will never work out.
Pro3,977 posts
21 May 2015, 09:00
#8
21 May 2015, 09:00#8
What is all the talk of Flip being amongst the top 3? He is a liability! End of story! He is strong, but is a cart horse and certainly not a great athlete! But it is his discipline that is the issue! You say he will cost you 6 points a game as if that will make no difference? I n a tight test 6 points is a loss. Flip is a liability, and the further away he is from the Bok team the better. Just as Moz has pointed out above, it is just silly penalties that he gives away, not the Bakkies type, where physically pushing your luck sometimes results in a penalty.
Coach57,555 posts
21 May 2015, 09:23
#9
21 May 2015, 09:23#9
Bluebok
I am not only worried by the penalties he gives away - but also by his card collection abilities (both yellow and red cards). That is even more serious than him giving away 6 points in converted penalties.
I am not only worried by the penalties he gives away - but also by his card collection abilities (both yellow and red cards). That is even more serious than him giving away 6 points in converted penalties.
Pro3,977 posts
21 May 2015, 09:34
#10
21 May 2015, 09:34#10
Exactly Mike! I get that you need a big bruiser as a no.4, but Flip is not the answer. Etzebeth is the kind of player you want at four, even though he is not enjoying great form at the moment. And I know that nobody has said Flip should replace Etzebeth, but in my opinion, he should not even be part of the equation.
Captain30,741 posts
21 May 2015, 10:16
#11
21 May 2015, 10:16#11
Matfield is the sole reason the Boks lost 4 of their major tests last season......the guy is a physical liability and because of that the Boks are not able to dominate physically as a whole.
Etzebeth, Willemse, PSDT, Lood, Ruan Botha, Jean Kleyn, Flip, Jacques du Plessis, Lewies, Carl Wegner and Mostert are all far better locks than old man Matfield these days........that's 11 better options.
Pro4,146 posts
21 May 2015, 12:27
#12
21 May 2015, 12:27#12
Victor would have been good at AFL
— END OF THREAD —
