Every rugby writer, every blogger is convinced our starting team was too old. They played badly, they simply couldn't take the pace. The old Springboks imploded.
Average starting age for the Boks on Saturday... 29.33
Average starting age for the All Blacks on Sunday....29.4
Just another fact our writers were too stupid or too lazy to uncover. Group think appears to be a communicable disease in South A frica.
"Difference is that of the original side selected we only had 4 players under the age of 30 one of whom was 29.....the AB on the other hand had 8 players starting that were under the age of 30."
Are you simple Fattie.....what did I say? I said the starting team didn't I. The AB starting team last weekend was marginally older than ours....put that on your pork chop and eat it!
Victor Matfield: 6
For little it’s worth, lock combination was probably Boks’ best by position. Matfield was right in the trenches for the duration, including trying to lead by example in dramatic closing minutes when SA were heavily under cosh: good stuff for man of 38.
Jean de Villiers: 4
Looked, frankly, like the under-pressure veteran he is; had an effect on his normally vibrant leadership. Couldn’t get into space, plus some rare blemishes in defensive positioning.
From Rugby24. Matfield the second best Bok behind Lomp. I agree with the comments on Jean....mostly the leadership comments. But this is a guy in his first game after breaking his jaw, after destroying his knee.....he was at least as good as Jesse Kriel.
The cowardly vitriol directed at these great players tells me a lot about South African rugby fans. It's frankly disgusting.
Ah Moffie, stumped again......too fucking stupid to work out that the AB's had 8 players under the age of 30 in the their starting line up versus the 4 the Boks had in the original side selected.
Spot the difference you fucking idiot
Owned once again..........game set and match for the umpteenth time
You are such easy pickings old man.......do yourself a favour and retire and take Kirchner, Mvovo, Habana, Jean, Morne, du Preez, Pienaar, Beast, Jannie, Brits, Matfield, Louw, Alberts and Schalk with you. Put Meyer out to pastures.....he does not even deserve a pension.
All a bunch of passengers.....much like yourself
How's Meyer shaping up for you......what about big Vic ahead of Lood.....or Jean ahead of Kriel.......bwhaahaaaaaa
Average age is the best independent variable to measure the effect of age on team performance Fat Man. You are arguing for 30 being a magic number...above 30 you cant play. So why not use 25 as a magic number....below 25 you cant play, the Boks had 4 players below 25, NZ only 2. So the best team in the World has very few young players.
That should do it....game, set and match.
Ah so Moffie who told you that average age is the best independent variable......what a load of horse shit.
By your pathetic argument.....I could have 10 twenty year olds in my side and five 38 year olds, where your best independent variable would be anything but accurate......for neither are the 20 year olds on average 26 and nor are the 38 year olds for that matter.
What counts is actual age and yes in general, 30 plus would be considered old in a sport like rugby.
I'll say it one more time, the AB starting line up had 8 players who were under that age of 30, so the best side in the WC has a perfect balance of old and young......unlike the Boks with only 4 under the age of 30......spot the difference old fart......8 vs 4......get it thick prick?
Of course you can construct a skewed distribution with all the players at the tails Fat Man. The only problem with that theory duffus, is it doesn't match reality. Almost all the teams have normal or near normal age distribution.. Here are the facts:
Age<25 ....NZ 8....Boks 9
25<Age< 30....NZ 12...Boks 8
Age>30....NZ 11...Boks 14.
So the Boks are a bit more represented below 25 and have more players over 30. But if you then peal the onion one more layer, you find NZ's over 30 players average 32.63 vs the Boks 32.14. Which no doubt accounts for the average age of Nz's starters being higher than the Boks.
Game, set and match again. Bu.llsh. it never baffles brains.
Age<25 ....NZ 8....Boks 9
25<Age< 30....NZ 12...Boks 8
Age>30....NZ 11...Boks 14.
