Bok changes put more pressure on Eddie

There is a lot more on the line than just another expected shoddy performance from England.

We will see how Jantjies responds to Rassie's leadership. He knows that he's competing for the 10 jersey.  It seem he's at least guaranteed a spot on the bench for the coming RC.

We will also see whether Gelant can compete with your hyped up Le Roux. Is Le Roux truly the saviour of the Boks or can the snail paced Gelant challenge him for the starting jersey?

No De Allende ... that is already a step in the right direction. Will Esterhuizen rise to the occasion and confirm to us all that De Allende is best left at home? We will see. I'm holding thumbs.

I am not sure how many more times Kriel must show his incompetence before they fire him. He has the perfect make up of a quota.

And then ... we have your geriatric, Schalk Brits sitting in the bench. He could never cement a place in the Bok squad as a youngster, as there were too many better players ahead of him. Perhaps he'll be a little more fortunate with the new rules favouring sub standard players.

I am pleased to see Papier given a shot. He's a far better prospect imo than the ordinary Van Zyl.

I will be cheering for Jantjies big time. Hope he has a cracker.

Hansen is also changing things up by introducing different players for the third test. Coaches are clearly thinking of the RWC.

" No De Allende ... that is already a step in the right direction"

How dare you!!!

Why Kriel?? Ffs can Esterhuizen and Am play one game together?

I like Papier on the bench over Van Zyl.

It is clear that Erasmus is using t his test to widen his options in the tests to come and the players will have to start delivering if they want to remain in the squad otherwise they will join Louw sooner than hey think.      

However, now we see the BS streaming out of some above.   Lets look at that and see what is really problematic.   Jantjies in all the tests he played in was BS - he may have learnt something from Erasmus, but the first thing his opponents will do is to run at him - his defense is atrocious.   If he still make the passes to players he made this year he will neutralize the whole backline.

Am is out because he is not a test backline players ass - he is a defender who goes AWOL when opposing teams backlines attack.    Not a test level player - had two chances and was a sieve in both.   I keep my fingers crossed for Esterhuizen - he made two line breaks against the Welsh - both ending up in nothing - but is a good option at 12.   Pity he has to play outside Jantjies though.

I will watch Gelant - but have my doubts about him at full back.  He is way to pace-deficient for the full back position I am afraid.

All of Mostert, Snyman and Brits are in their last test for the SA team.   When Marx comes back he will take over he hooking position and Snyman and Mostert are nothing more than stand-in-locks  for Etzebeth and De Jager.

Papier is an interesting option as bench scrummy.  

Gelant is a major downgrade from Willie Leroux, but we do need to find a backup for Willie Leroux. Not sure it is Gelant, but he is a decent player and proved himself in this years SuperXV.  My guess is that Gelant might be better as an outside centre than fullback.

Jessica Kriel looked pretty good when he got onto the pitch last week. His pass at full speed was impressive, and it is a long time that a Bok centre has made a pinpoint pass at full speed. Let's see if the defensive problems still exist without AM. It is not clear at this stage what is causing the poor defence, but AM has cut into the inside a few times that have contributed to the problem.

Esterhuizen is long overdue, and hopefully, he will use this opportunity to cement his starting place.  He has a bone-crunching tackling ability that should knock the stuffing out of wee Farrell. 

Elton Scissorhands needs to have a big game. Hopefully, he understands the game plan of Rassie, and not a disjointed liability like he was for Alister Coetzee.

Fat Malherbe needs to prove that he belongs on the international stage, he was hopeless last week. The tank should have started to bring extra mobility to the pack. Malherbe is cleared not conditioned at this stage to play test rugby. Even the overplayed Louw would be a better option. 

Steroid Boy Rappele should not be playing full stop. A quota that cant even makes the bench at the Sharks. He was a good player long ago- before or perhaps during taking steroids.

Schalk Brits is another has been that should not be on the test stage. He was always a poor scrummager, and not good enough to make the test arena in his prime. I can understand the logic of having some older Springbok greats in the team to pass the baton to the next generation- for example, Bismaark, Frans Steyn etc- but a has been  that was a never been is pointless.

Papier is a step forward from the useless Ivan the terrible. 

Notshe was ok last week, but he needs to get better. 

SB

Your version is somewhat skewed - Malherbe was much better in the second test than Louw was in the Wales and fir st English tests.   

That was followed by two scrum penalties against the Poms - one five meters from the tryline on Pom throw-ins.   The dud saw only what he wanted to see - really stupid that one.   And the scrums were stronger than in the first test where they were either stagnant or going back slowly - in the second test that situation was reversed.  Wake up fool - you missed too much.  

Well ... it's rather simple actually ... I'm surprised you haven't grasped what I'm suggesting. 

Jantjies is a talented rugby player. There is no argument there. His only down fall is his self belief. If one fixes that, I believe we'll see him playing to his full potential. A confident, inspired Jantjies is a dangerous player.

Will Rassie be the inspiration he needs? Will Rassie be the one to bring the best out of him?

So yes ... you are right ... I haven't given up on Jantjies yet.

And both of those scrum penalties were against Kyle Sinkler Oom Mike who you will recall was scrumming against The Beast.

Malherbe also missed a pretty regulation tackle on Billy Vunipola in the build up to Mike Browns try. Not only him b ut his was the first missed tackle.

Am was never going to look the part outside De Allende.

He should have been retained with Esterhuizen.

It's not logical to break up a settled pair.

One has to argue with idiots on this site.   In the last two tests  De Allende made 17 tackles and missed 1 - so was he a sieve idiot?

Find a sound reason - even the experts said Am was the defensive problem - but obviously you think otherwise.   Glad to see we have real idiots on site to laugh at.

And to crown it all - Esterhuizen is not all that good at defense - he missed plenty of tackles in Super Rugby - we will see what he does on Saturday .

Xavi 

why lie about the scrums.   The first one where the AB;s were penalized was when the whole scrum went backwards - not only on the open side.   The second one was against Vullipola - not the one you indicated..

However, go back a bit and see how bad the scrumming of Louw was in his last two tests and be fair - Mozart found out I identify lies easily - and you will find the same.

Xavi 

why lie about the scrums.   The first one where the AB;s were penalized was when the whole scrum went backwards - not only on the open side.   The second one was against Vullipola - not the one you indicated..

However, go back a bit and see how bad the scrumming of Louw was in his last two tests and be fair - Mozart found out I identify lies easily - and you will find the same.

Tsek Mike. If you open your ears you can hear Poite points at Sinkler and says 3 collapsing.

hey wee cc are you stunned and amazed or amazed and stunned after second test victory by Boks Hahahahhahahaha

We will also see whether Gelant can compete with your hyped up Le Roux. Is Le Roux truly the saviour of the Boks or can the snail paced Gelant challenge him for the starting jersey? 

Bwahahahahahaah breath taking ignorance!!!!!!!!

No De Allende ... that is already a step in the right direction. Will Esterhuizen rise to the occasion and confirm to us all that De Allende is best left at home? You clearly don't know!!! Hahahahahaha

I am not sure how many more times Kriel must show his incompetence before they fire him. He has the perfect make up of a quota. Hahahahahahahaha hilarious one from wee cc!!!!!!

Well its good to see wee cc back as he is an hilarious poster!!!!

Ffs. not-so-CleanCut ......Jantjies has 25 test caps, if he hasn't found his mojo by now , he never will. I wish him well, but to me he's a wannabe who'll never be. Good provincial is all.

Blobbok - I share your opinion about Jantjies - he played in 25 tests and failed badly in all those.   He cannot make the step up to test level at all/    

After looking at the team - and taking into account Jantjies at flyhalf and Kriel at center - I have changed my Superbru selections from a win by the Springboks to a loss by 6 points by them.

The lie is by Xavi again - the referee pointed at the no 1 of England in the case of the last penalty - not on the other side.   Stop distorting the situation - fool.   Mozart did the same when Van der Merwe was penalized constantly when Meyer was stupid enough to pick him at 1 - and the liar blamed Malherbe for the resultant penalties.   Try and be honest for a change - you are in reality not as bad a habitual liar as Mozart is.

Which penalty are you talking about fucktard? The first one near their try line or the last one or the one where the "AB;s" went backwards?? 

You speak more shit than that doos Trad sometimes.

Aambei asem!

Sorry about the AB's it was the English - and liar it was the second scrum - which did not exactly showed the English going backwards - dim c u n t - but it showed Vullipola going down in the scrum and losing his bind.  The ref was on the Vullipola side of the scrum and did not point out the problem as alleged by you on the other side.  After wards the TV focussed on Vulipola as the one giving away the penalty.   Better not to lie - simpleton - ask Mozart about what happened when his constant lies are exposed.   

Oh boy ... it has nothing to do with that, Mozart.

Is it really that difficult to grasp? Do you really want me to explain my point again or are you just in an argumentative mood today?

Tell you what ... I think I'll leave it at that. Any 3 year old would understand what I posted above.  

With Cipriani the Poms are going for the aerial onslaught.I always had the 2009 Lions series in mind where they came back in the final game because of our team changes,now they are using it as an inspiration.

I can see Pollard coming on early to kick the ball back,not finding fault with Jantjies but he looks a bit overweight.

If I was England, Jantjies would be my focus. Get a big hit on him early, even if it's late and you cop a penalty for it. Get in his face. Watch him fall apart. We've seen it often enough.

Ffs Mike, so because stransky says it COULD of been Vunipola( VUNIPOLA) it changes the fact that it's Sinkler thats penalised?

Xavi

For f#ck sake - how did you and only you and the Mozart liar arrived at your conclusion.  TV did not - the ref did not indicate as such - so you claim to be correct against all other evidence.  This can only be a fabrication on your part.   Leave it to Mozart - don't disgrace yourself any further.   .   

Because Mako Vunipola was only penalised once and that was for the slap to Du Toit.

Also I watched the game on Sky sports with their commentary st the tim and Poite gets the call from his AR that Sinkler is at fault.

Yet he was on Vulipola's side of the scrum and the latter ended up on is stomach losing his grip.   There was not much change that the ref on the far side of the field can see what happened and give a message to the ref on the side near the scrum on his side.   The assumption was first that it was Stransky - now Sky.   The fact is that now suddenly you say Vulipola could have been penalized - but was not adds to your BS.   

Better forget about this  otherwise you will only disgrace yourself further.     

Lol Mike. Whatever bro. You're only fooling yourself.

Oh and its VUNIPOLA you thick idiot.

Whatever it is - dimwit.   Now there are things I dislike intensely on site and those are -

*   manufacturing of positives about players that in fact is not substantiated  by their performance - making them looking better than they really are and trying to find excuses for poor play by them;

*   falsification  of performance evaluation to discredit players who did nothing wrong as a result of prejudice against them;

Mozart is the leader in both respects and he do not mind getting caught out lying - too thick-skinned.   He has some support from prejudiced people with similar tendencies.   There is no way prejudice should influence performance evaluation.

I will never give a player a prejudiced  evaluation.  I can see what is wrong in given circumstances.   Take for instance De Klerk - he was good in the first test and in the first 20 minutes of the second test made at least 4 very serious mistakes.  I still rate him higher than an other scrummie.    

I like what I recently saw of Pollard - but since 2014 he developed a defense problem and miss too many tackles.   However, he is still miles better than Jantjies and Morne Steyn  in that regard.

All players have deficiencies but one must always look at both the positives and the negatives in players.   Only when the positives  are completely overshadowed by the negatives - must the player be  ousted.

It is no use that somebody invent and slant things to discredit players or give them undue credit as well - that is when I lose my cool.   That is why your comment is below reality and very slanted.   I may be an idiot - but you are much worse.   You are both a moron and a liar all rolled into one.    Try and get out of the Mozart circle and redeem yourself - it is still possible for you - Mozart is a habitual liar and it is impossible for him.