Bok Number 8: Whiteley

I have a sneaking suspicion that wee Whitley may be found out for being too small at international level. I hope not- his workrate is phenomenal. He may be short of the required physicality of test rugby.
Their must be a space in the backrow for Schalk Burger. Vermuelen and Schalk - both when fit- are musts for a starting position against the best teams. A specialist fetcher may be less important as both Schalk and Vermuelen are effective at the ruck. 
Whiteley adds pace so he could be effective at 8 with these 2.

 SB
Whiteley at 6'4" and 106 kgs is not as small as you make him out to be with the term "wee" added.   At least he is a stronger player than the useless Matfield - supposedly a lock at 105 kgs.
I think that Whiteley as a specialist 8 would be a better option in this case.   I would say that the loosies in the first game against the International team should be 8 Whiteley, 7 Louw and 6 Coetzee - with Burger on the bench.   
However, I am afraid that Meyer may play the clueless,slow  and clumsy Alberts as a loosie to compensate for Matfield at lock - so as to off-set Matfield's deficiencies as a Tight 5 player.  Am afraid that would be counter-productive.      

Schalk is not very effective at the breakdown. He is your big ball-carrying, tackling type of loose forward. 

 The list of useless players never changes - they are useless and remain useless - so what happens when the same names came up for selection purposes.   Must be all remain quiet?
Desert Disaster, you seriously need to change note. From now you should change your name to Dreary_Aeolian. 

Your anti-campaign against players are repeated in virtually every post - mostly without any substance and I am still trying to find a discussion on backline play where your repeated attacks on Lambie, De Allende and Reinach is not repeated over and over again.  If there was ever a repetative clown on this site - you take the cake.  

There are many of them, but I am still trying to find a post where you talk rugby.

 The issue is not the kicking, but the quality thereof. SA can afford one small loosy. Whitely is small compared to the others.Schalk, Vermeulen and Louw should start, with Marcell, Whitely and Alberts figting it out for the bench.

Draad, to you quality of kick may be an issue, to Michael it is a direct turnover and ineffective. Those were his words. He actually recounted every kick Morné made in 2012 and 2013 and said they all led to points for the opposition. He can go to extremes much of the time, like stating Morné directly conceded four tries in the 2013 Ellis Park test. He even lost a test that was level when he was subbed... That's how bad he IS! 

 Whitely is a fine provincial player and seemingly a terrific captain. He has less to offer at test level than Marcel Coetzee for example...who is also unable to carry energy into a successful test style of play.
Let's not delude ourselves test number 8s are  physical monsters these days.

 Desert Disaster
You are talking tripe.  I have always said that kicking is part of the game as a variation - provided kicks are strategic and accurate.   That is where Morne and Francois Steyn falls pathetically flat.   Morne has no idea when to kick or pass and his kicking game has been called BS on the air by commentators on occasion.   Same with Fransie who managed a record number of ball handovers in Super 125 last year - mostly with poor directed kicks.  
I never wrote Morne did concede four tries at Ellis Park in 2013 - he missed two tackles that led to tries - he missed tackles routinely in all tests.  The third try resulted from lunatic play by Morne - instead of kicking the ball he passed it.  That time Naas Botha nearly had a seizure during the half time discussion - he was livid about what Morne did because it beats all limits of idiocy even on the part of Morne.   
In that test Morne was told to pass the ball and not kick - so he passed every ball that came his way - irrespective of the situation in the match.  Robotic to perfection. 
There are adequate reasons why even his club regarded Morne as a bench player and only used him when Plisson is not available to start.   It is rank idiocy that a club bench player qualifies for selection as Springbok flyhalf.          

 Moz stop speaking utter horse shit....Coetzee has been damn good at Test level....easily one of our best forwards last year. 
Far better than the likes of average Louw.
Whiteley is not big enough for a Test 8...with Vermeulen out it should have been Arno Botha or CJ Stander at 8

 Mozart's idea of a test player is weird.  A player who gets through a lot of work is not important - the low output players are.    A player like Alberts (a notorious loafer) is acceptable - while an active player is being complemented by being similar to Marcell Coetzee.
Weird fellow this one!!!!!!!!!   

Look through team after team on this site. Coetzee is hardly a fixture. Why, because at best he has been workmanlike. He was dominated on the deck on the YE tour....the plain fact is he is less than average at fetching.
So let's lose the crap...he hasn't been damn good at test level. If he had been damn good at test level he would have cemented his place.
There is too much  noodle headed logic on this site.

 What about the real issue - was Alberts "damn good"?  You missed the point again - I am not saying that Coetzee is all that good - as a matter of fact I prefer Kriel as no 6 - but Coetzee is a worker - not a low-output player like Alberts.   You would want Alberts at 8, where he can do his normal loafer appearance I assume?    

 Desert Disaster - the donkey/bird brain on this site
I want to quote some of your donkey-brain lies about what I wrote:-
"01.Your nonsense that a miss pass inhibits overlaps because it gets the ball out not quicker than shuffling along the line. 02.Crashballing is detrimental to attacking play, so we must no longer ever punch the ball up and just run laterally passing one man at a time to get around the outside of the defence.
03.All tactical kicking is a turnover and always gives a clear shot for attack. So we must run from deep because that way we always have the ball. Having the ball deep in your half is more valuable than playing in your opposition half."

Point 1
My comment on this issue came about as a result of repeated cut-out passes made by Francois Steyn.   During the said match the half-time discussion by Mallett and Botha dealt with the issue comprehensively.   They pointed out the position of the defenders and the fact that cut-out passes with obvious overlaps in place is idiotic - since the defenders only had to drift out to eliminate the initial advantage.   There is a case for occasional cut-out passes, but it should be based on reading of the game and continuous cut-out passes is idiotic and predictable. 
Point 2 
You do not understand the difference between crashballing and punching the line up - so you make another foolish statement.   Crashballing is not "punching the line up".  Crashballing is when a player repeat the same thing unsuccessfully over and over - namely running at the first defender every time a player get ball possession never passing the ball and getting tackled with ease by that defender.  Punching up the line is different completely.  The ball carrier aims at the small gap between two players and the object is to draw in more than one defender - thus creating some space for other players to operate in.  I have never said a player should not attack the gain line and even crashball - but that should be part of a variation in play, not the same repeat with every ball a player gets.
Point 3 
This is an outright lie.   I never condemned tactical kicking at all.   What I did condemn was constant ineffective and inaccurate kicking representing ball turnovers.   What you wrote is complete BS.   What i said there is a need for kicking in a game - but that should be a variation - not a rule.   I never said anything about the need for relieving kicks - neither that a strategic and accurate kick is wrong - what I did say is the BS kicking by the Steyns - mostly without any  objective and often wildly inaccurate - is wrong.   Any kick must be aimed at gaining an advantage - kicking a ball too far ahead for effective follow-up and putting no pressure on the recipient is BS and often enough is just there to put pressure on your own team.
What I do criticize is the unsuccessful and unthinking repeating of plays every time a ball gets to a player - in other words the player being utterly predictable.   That is the case unfortunately with two of your constant favourites - Morne and Fransie.  They are unable to read games and takes decisions since they have zero ball sense - the ultimate robots in games.            

Where was wee Whitey against the World XV. 
I only saw the highlights but he did not seem to be involved in any of those attacking moves. His most consequential play was the try scored by the World XV. (Craig Burden is a Curry Cup player).
Schalk was all over the place when he came on - even in the highlights. Schalk secured a good turn over and showed how effective he can be at the rucks.
Schalk is in the form of his life. He has more skills than ever before- but still has most of his physical game to offer. 
Ranking of the Springbok Backrow
Starters1. Schalk2. Vermuelen3. Strauss (Coetzee)/Louw (Either of t
Bench4. Louw/(Coetzee). (Need fetchers on the bench)5. Brussow         (Need fetchers on the bench)


6. Alberts 7. Whitey
8. Spies

 Whitely not big enough but Arno botha is. says Snapster:Ex Wiki

1. Arnoldus Francois Botha is a South African rugby union footballer. He can operate either as a flanker or number eight. Wikipedia
3. Born: October 26, 1991 (age 23), Modimolle
4. Height: 1.90 m
5. Weight: 102 kg
6. Career start: 2011
7. 
   

or Bulle website

Bio

Physical: 1.90m & 105kg

DOB: 26 October 1991, Modimolle

 CJ has the cre4dentials but I have not seen him play since he ahs went overseas :

1. CJ StanderRugby Player
2. Christiaan Johan 'CJ' Stander is a South African rugby union footballer. He can play either as a Flanker or Number 8. Wikipedia
4. Born: April 5, 1990 (age 25), George
5. Height: 1.89 m
6. Weight: 114 kg
7. Career start: 2010
8. Education: University of Pretoria

 

1. Marcell CoetzeeRugby Player
2. Marcell Cornelius Coetzee is a South African rugby union player and currently plays for the Sharks in Super Rugby and for the Natal Sharks in the Currie Cup. He plays as a flanker. Wikipedia
4. Born: May 8, 1991 (age 24), Potchefstroom
5. Height: 1.91 m
6. Weight: 112 kg
7. Career start: 2011
8. Education: Port Natal High School

 Full nameSchalk Willem Petrus Burger Jr.NicknameSchallaBorn13 April 1983 (age 32)
Port Elizabeth, South AfricaHeight1.93 m (6 ft 4 in)Weight114 kg (17 st 13 lb)OccupationRugby playerSchool(s) attendedPaarl GimnasiumUniversityUniversity of StellenboschRelativesSchalk Burger (father)

 Full nameLouis-Francois Pickard LouwDate of birth15 June 1985 (age 30)Place of birthCape Town, South AfricaHeight1.90 m (6 ft 3 in)[1]Weight114 kg (251 lb; 17 st 13 lb) [2]SchoolBishopsNotable relative(s)Jan Pickard (grandfather)

My guess is that Meyer will pick Louw (6), Burger (8) and Coetzee (7). A formidable hard working trio. Whitely on the bench.Add in a Tight 5   of Kitshoff, Bissie, Malherbe, Eben and Willemse and you have a strong and mobile pack of warriors.ReservesBeast, Strauss, Koch, Du Toit  and Whitley and how can you not dominate sides with pap packs like the wee abs!!  
Youcan tweak the pack and speed it up by playing Stra uss and Du Toit. You could also have Kriel on the bench etc.
Meyer has all the players but will he ever get it right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 Beeno
There seems to be in rugby circles according to media reports a school of thought that Matfield and Jannie du Plessis should be past tense and not in the WC squad.   Jannie was downright poor again on Saturday and other than one instance when Matfield was moonlighting in the backline and picking up and passing a ball - he was not up to  standard either.  No show in line-outs and in Tight 5 play was a serious negative as well.
Can we play on test level without a Tight 5 of top quality?  I do not think so.   That means we we are heading to disaster with those 2 in the Tight 5.
I think the solution at lock is that Meyer has painted himself into a corner and we are stuck with a Tight 4 and a passenger and it will take some real rugby logic to get that problem sorted out.   
I think in the next two tests our scrumming on the lose had side is going to be a continuous problem and that can be traced down to insufficient support in scrums.   It was even in evidence on Saturday.
So where to now.   The solution is to start with Malherbe in the RC and play Koch from the bench.   The solution to the lock problem is to get back Du Toit asap or if that is not possible in the alternative use either Du Plessis or Willemse as locks.                 

So wee Whitey is not even on the bench against Australia. Lots of running- but no impact.
Just another small loosie who is good at SuperXV, but not able to step up to physicality of Springbok test rugby. 
The only small loosie is a fetcher, but Whitey brings nothing to the breakdown. 
Meyer said that he did not play badly- but then he is not even on the bench.

Great player but not big enough for a test 8  

SB
Excuse my ignorance - but who is this guy Strauss you rate so highly as a loosie?  The only loosie by that name that I can remember is the guy that went from the Lions to Edinburgh - but I believe he is intending to play for Scotland.
There are no loosies by the name of Strauss in any of the Super 15 sides - so you really have me baffled.   Help out please.

 

Clevermike- I meant Coetzee- not Strauss.

CJ Stander was named Munster player of the year....that should tell you what kind of current form he is in......another missed opportunity by ignorant Meyer