Bekker back in the mix?

Six former Springboks on whether Japan-based Andries Bekker should be recalled to the Bok squad and which locks should go to the World Cup.

KRYNAUW OTTO (former Bok lock)

'Bekker will be an excellent addition to the Bok squad. He plays in Japan, so his body will be well rested and he's vastly experienced. He can also aid Victor Matfield in mentoring Eben Etzebeth and Pieter-Steph du Toit, although Etzebeth has played more Tests than him. Bekker is a good lineout source, but also a strong ball-carrier, which will be handy in northern hemisphere conditions. Fitness permitting, Du Toit and Bekker should travel to England as backup for Matfield and Etzebeth.'

ROB LOUW (former Bok flank)

'Bekker should most certainly be recalled if he's available. With all the injuries our locks have suffered recently, his inclusion will only boost the Boks and I'm glad Heyneke Meyer sees it that way too. Another guy whose name I'd throw into the hat is Juandré Kruger. He has been in good form for Racing Métro and I'm surprised he hasn't been mentioned in the national set-up. I'd select Pieter-Steph du Toit, Eben Etzebeth, Victor Matfield and Bekker for the Rugby Championship and World Cup and if there is an injury to one of them before or during those tournaments, Willem Alberts can cover in the second row depending on the availability of Flip van der Merwe.'

KOBUS WIESE (former Bok lock)

‘We definitely need Andries Bekker’s experience and playing ability going into the World Cup. Meyer should be looking at the in-form locks, so Eben Etzebeth, Bekker and Pieter-Steph du Toit if he’s fit. Lood de Jager and Franco Mostert are playing out of their skins at the moment and are outside candidates.'

GARRY PAGEL (former Bok prop)

'If Bekker is on form, then yes, he’s a valuable asset to a Springbok side. I would have him at the World Cup, as well as Eben Etzebeth and Pieter-Steph du Toit if he manages to get fit in time. I would pick Flip van der Merwe too for his strength on the ground as well as the tackle, and his ability to grind down the opposition.'

MARK ANDREWS (former Bok lock)

'Bekker must definitely be selected if he’s playing half-decent rugby, because we’re short on fit, quality locks. Apart from Eben Etzebeth and Pieter-Steph du Toit, a half-fit Bekker is as good as anyone else who is fully fit. The only other lock I’d take is Flip van der Merwe, due mostly to the Bulls style of rugby Meyer will probably play. You need someone to dominate the contact and breakdown, as well as play a style of rugby that will work in northern hemisphere conditions, and Flip does that well for the Bulls.'

COBUS VISAGIE (former Bok prop)

'I'd take Bekker because the Springboks rely so much on their lineout specialists and Victor Matfield will surely not be able to play every minute of every game. Bekker is an excellent jumper and he manages the lineouts and driving mauls well. Obviously Eben Etzebeth is the No 1 lock, so he picks himself. I'd have Bekker, Victor Matfield and Juandré Kruger, all of whom have experience of calling the lineouts in Test rugby, as my other options.'

Bullshit Bekker is NOT better than some of the young locks we have on board these days.

PSDT is twice the player Bekker is and I rate Bekker highly.......I'd much rather have Bekker in the side than old man Matfield.......no contest.......but we don't need Bekker or Matfield........not when we have Etzebeth, Willemse, Lood, PSDT, Jacques du Plessis, Ruan Botha and Lewies 

The Bok locking pair should be Willemse at 4 with Etzebeth at 5...........pure grunt from Willemse, with the skill and grunt of Etzebeth.......what a pair they would make.

Physicality would be the buzz word.

Add PSDT and Jacques du Plessis to the mix......one at 7 the other on the bench.....mouth watering stuff 

Actually Mike the correct form is a single "w". Once again you have produced something which is alien in nature, a figment of your imagination....try to maintain a continuous "w". Unless you are a whooping crane, it's impossible.

Don't bother to thank me. Here is the bird for easy reference:

It was all positive Moz until you mentioned useless Matfield in the mix

If PSDT can stay injury free he will prove better than Matfield ever was, that is how good he is......pure bloody class  

Moz please don't lie......we went over this.....your hero achieved all of 6m in the game, never beat a single defender, conceded a line out ball, while PSDT gained 26m or something and lost no line out ball

So stop speaking utter shit.......PSDT was far better than Matfield on the day it was not even close.

You are lying and that is a fact.......the stats are there to be accessed.....so why not bring them up, for failing which I will and in the process I will expose you for your lies.

The stats were stacked in PSDT favour, three fold in fact.......so do us a favour and stop lying

Case bloody closed.......what a one sided affair.....PSDT made Matfield look like the useless player he is these days

Moz lets see you explain your way out of this one.......good luck!!!!  

Bwhaaahaaaaaa what a fucking joke, so you conclude that PSDT was weaker because of the odd missed tackle..........brilliant.......so the wonderful Vic ruled the line-outs did, with ONE win and ONE steal......geez you are a joke.

If PSDT had to move around the line-outs, it made no impression on him as he won ALL of his ball.

Matfield was as useless as he has been all season. Gaining 6m in a whole game and not getting past a single defender, sums the lightweight up......he makes no impression these days, cant impose himself physically as a lock should do......the fallacy that he reigns supreme is quickly quashed by his all of two takes all game.

But lets get to the stats that count, the ones that make a real impression.

PSDT gained 28m in the game nearly 5 times more productive than useless Matfield.....and with those gains, the real lock beat 2 defenders in the process, probably run straight over them with his physicality.

Given those stats, not a SINGLE selector would select Matfield over PSDT unless you were rugby ignorant.

As I said, you just lied about what really happened......the only schooling that took place was by the young PSDT over has been Matfield, who continues to prove what a liability he is.

His stats in that game are a disgrace......stats of a man who makes no impression, one that is long past it   

Dont you get it you dumb grunt, the second stat has nothing to do with him winning his own ball....it has to do with him winning or in his case him not winning opposition ball. The ball the Matfield won on opposition ball, which you posted, is the one Stephanie lost.

Every rugby writer chose Matfield over Stephanie in that game....in fact Matfield was in both the Planet Rugby and Rugby 365 TOWs.

Your sheer stupidity and incredible ignorant arrogance is really amusing. Invariably wrong but never uncertain. You are a tonic Dave, but don't worry about it, we are not laughing with you, we are laughing at you....hahahaha.

Lomp is dead after he lost the AB away game running over the touch line....you can't coach stupid.