15. Willie 14. JP 13. Sadie 12. de Allende 11. Aplon 10. Goosen 9. Reinach 1. Beast 2. Bismark 3. Jannie 4. Lood 5. Lewies 6. Coetzee 7. Alberts 8. v/d Walt
Captain30,741 posts
17 Mar 2014, 14:18
#1
17 Mar 2014, 14:18#1
Bokbarometer after week 5
Started by Saffolk 36 REPLIES400 VIEWS· 17 Mar 2014, 14:18
Coach57,555 posts
17 Mar 2014, 14:21
#2
17 Mar 2014, 14:21#2
Saffex
Cannot fault you this tine around.
Cannot fault you this tine around.
Captain49,914 posts
17 Mar 2014, 15:13
#3
17 Mar 2014, 15:13#3
De Allende gave away the last two tries to the Chiefs....one on his miserable chip, the other on a tackle and turnover up the left touchline. The Stormers were within a try with 10 minutes to go when he lost the game.
Goosen gave away the first try, tackled by Barrett when he should have kicked...and Barrett dominated him, with the same amount of ball. Note the defenders beaten 4 vs 1, the clean breaks 2 vs 0, the offloads 3 vs 0 and the turnovers 1 vs 3 :
FHBarrett2/02317/42/15672431 2/12/010/0
FHGoosen0/01210/40/13490103 11/30/000/0
Captain30,741 posts
17 Mar 2014, 15:52
#4
17 Mar 2014, 15:52#4
de Allende was once again very good with ball in hand and the chip kick was a player trying something different, sometimes they work sometimes they don't.......he was our best 12 by some stretch.
Goosen had a good game, it was a close call between him and Lambie......Boshoff cant tackle, 2 tackles made and 3 missed is shocking
Coach57,555 posts
17 Mar 2014, 16:00
#5
17 Mar 2014, 16:00#5
Mozart
This has nothing to do with Barrett's performance - it is about the performances of the SA players.
You attack De Allende - because of the fact that he tried a chip kick that could have turned the game around if it was successful. Any innovative play look stupid if it does not succeed 0 if it does it is turned into a brilliant act. It did not work out as it was - but at least he tried something different from the ordinary. I will check that missed tackle that lead to the Chiiefs last try again. You blame playerrs for missed tackles like it is unbelievable and exonerate others - so I will have a look at that one again.
However, the one you praise continually is Steyn. Steyn who spilled a ball leading to the Genia try, who stood looking sheepishly at Harris and made no move to try and tackle him before he scored a try and gave away two penalties before the posts are forgiven and promoted by you. Get real please - at least De Allende had for the rest had a much better game than Steyn had.
Lets get at the stats again - since you quoted the stats on Goosen:-
de Allende0/101/5/13220203 12/30/000/0
Steyn0/061/3/3600027/10/020/0
Steyn missed only one tackle - but allows Harris to run past him to score a try without even attempting a tackle. Steyn was rated as below par by virtually everyone bar you.
This has nothing to do with Barrett's performance - it is about the performances of the SA players.
You attack De Allende - because of the fact that he tried a chip kick that could have turned the game around if it was successful. Any innovative play look stupid if it does not succeed 0 if it does it is turned into a brilliant act. It did not work out as it was - but at least he tried something different from the ordinary. I will check that missed tackle that lead to the Chiiefs last try again. You blame playerrs for missed tackles like it is unbelievable and exonerate others - so I will have a look at that one again.
However, the one you praise continually is Steyn. Steyn who spilled a ball leading to the Genia try, who stood looking sheepishly at Harris and made no move to try and tackle him before he scored a try and gave away two penalties before the posts are forgiven and promoted by you. Get real please - at least De Allende had for the rest had a much better game than Steyn had.
Lets get at the stats again - since you quoted the stats on Goosen:-
de Allende0/101/5/13220203 12/30/000/0
Steyn0/061/3/3600027/10/020/0
Steyn missed only one tackle - but allows Harris to run past him to score a try without even attempting a tackle. Steyn was rated as below par by virtually everyone bar you.
Captain49,914 posts
17 Mar 2014, 16:08
#6
17 Mar 2014, 16:08#6
Dave, wHat you are saying is a nice effort that loses you the game is OK. That's not a winning philosophy. That in fact is the Cheetahs approach....everybody loves them as they keep losing.
But still we see Cheetahs picked all the time in these fantasy teams. Lood has done stuff all really. Willie a genius, but he needs some discipline. Goosen, thankfully getting through a few games, but it's Willie who is cracking the defences....Goosen understandably is feeling his way. Lappies, as one of his former fans put it...now just a fat man. But why is he so much bulkier and slower? Because he was in all likelyhood told to get stronger, as he wasn't cutting it in the big games last year. There is a reason for everything.
This endless cycle of exaggeration and subsequent disappointment goes on. But Etzebeth is real, and Flip has come into his own....those are our best two locks. And Matfield or Bekker are still superb talents, I wouldn't count them out.
But still we see Cheetahs picked all the time in these fantasy teams. Lood has done stuff all really. Willie a genius, but he needs some discipline. Goosen, thankfully getting through a few games, but it's Willie who is cracking the defences....Goosen understandably is feeling his way. Lappies, as one of his former fans put it...now just a fat man. But why is he so much bulkier and slower? Because he was in all likelyhood told to get stronger, as he wasn't cutting it in the big games last year. There is a reason for everything.
This endless cycle of exaggeration and subsequent disappointment goes on. But Etzebeth is real, and Flip has come into his own....those are our best two locks. And Matfield or Bekker are still superb talents, I wouldn't count them out.
Coach57,555 posts
17 Mar 2014, 16:32
#7
17 Mar 2014, 16:32#7
Mozart
Talking tripe again. You know bugger all about the fantasy games. I gave the fantasy standing of players and the players you condemn are fairly high in the ratings.
* Goosen is rated the no 2 flyhalf* Lood is the number no 6 lock* Labuschagne is the number 7 loosie* Willie is the number 6 back row palyer
You do not get those ratings while doing "stuff all" as you put it.
Just for your info - Labuschagne was leading the pack - but did not play for anything near the full game because he is carrying a niggle and has been subbed early in the last two games. He still did double the work Alberts did in his last two games = so even when he is injured he is twice the loosie Alberts will ever be. Labuschagne picked up 3 kgs in weight from what he was last year - and that fat story is tripe.
"This endless cycle of exaggeration and subsequent disappointment goes on" In your case just adjjust the quoye a bIt:-
"This endless talking bullshit and subsequent disappointment goes on:.
Talking tripe again. You know bugger all about the fantasy games. I gave the fantasy standing of players and the players you condemn are fairly high in the ratings.
* Goosen is rated the no 2 flyhalf* Lood is the number no 6 lock* Labuschagne is the number 7 loosie* Willie is the number 6 back row palyer
You do not get those ratings while doing "stuff all" as you put it.
Just for your info - Labuschagne was leading the pack - but did not play for anything near the full game because he is carrying a niggle and has been subbed early in the last two games. He still did double the work Alberts did in his last two games = so even when he is injured he is twice the loosie Alberts will ever be. Labuschagne picked up 3 kgs in weight from what he was last year - and that fat story is tripe.
"This endless cycle of exaggeration and subsequent disappointment goes on" In your case just adjjust the quoye a bIt:-
"This endless talking bullshit and subsequent disappointment goes on:.
Club Pro713 posts
17 Mar 2014, 16:51
#8
17 Mar 2014, 16:51#8
Goosen has never dominated one contact situation in his career to date. Worst defender I have ever seen. Totally dominated again. DA was at fault as Mozart says, it's very simple if one is honest... if only.
Coach57,555 posts
17 Mar 2014, 17:33
#9
17 Mar 2014, 17:33#9
Dim Sun
You and Mozart share a couple of things and those are your hatred of Gooesn and de Allende - so anything the two of you said must really be taken with a bad of salt - a pinch is definitely not sufficient. And what Mozart said is his normal bullshit about De Allende. I will check that last tackle which Mozart claim was his fault - I smelled a rat, Mozart has in the past manufactured missed tackles by blaming innocent players - so I will check this one out to see whether he was talking the truth.
This was about SA players in various positions. Mozart started off by trying to bring in Barrett - ie not dealing with the issue at all.
The alternative for De Allende was Francois Steyn - who went even further back in performance than his previous two games indicated. He was poor in his previous two games he was abysmally poor on Saturday - so is he the preferred player ahead of De Allende?
You and Mozart share a couple of things and those are your hatred of Gooesn and de Allende - so anything the two of you said must really be taken with a bad of salt - a pinch is definitely not sufficient. And what Mozart said is his normal bullshit about De Allende. I will check that last tackle which Mozart claim was his fault - I smelled a rat, Mozart has in the past manufactured missed tackles by blaming innocent players - so I will check this one out to see whether he was talking the truth.
This was about SA players in various positions. Mozart started off by trying to bring in Barrett - ie not dealing with the issue at all.
The alternative for De Allende was Francois Steyn - who went even further back in performance than his previous two games indicated. He was poor in his previous two games he was abysmally poor on Saturday - so is he the preferred player ahead of De Allende?
Captain49,914 posts
17 Mar 2014, 17:36
#10
17 Mar 2014, 17:36#10
If you "smelled a rat" OOM it's time for your weekly shower.
Club Pro713 posts
17 Mar 2014, 17:36
#11
17 Mar 2014, 17:36#11
I don't hate any player, I hate the bulldust surrounding them. DA might be an option in future, maybe, but he has had far worse moments than Frans. Being biased is rating Frans 3 or less week in and week out.
Captain49,914 posts
17 Mar 2014, 17:43
#12
17 Mar 2014, 17:43#12
Precisely. Take Barrett, he has already accomplished so much more than Goosen, but he still has to prove himself. Anybody can see de A has power and good speed. It's his decision making that's about at schoolboy level that would make him a liability in tests. These groupies think that what's obvious to everybody is some kind of great insight.
Only those players who can take on and outplay NZ test opposition will make a positive differenc e. That does not include JJ, Serfontein, Mvovo, de Allende, Lambie, Goosen, Lood, Kitshoff, Malherbe, Lappies or Steph. Some of these guys I hope will get there, but it takes time. Being young and enthusiastic is not enough, you need a set of skills you can deploy beyond pure effort.
Coach57,555 posts
17 Mar 2014, 17:47
#13
17 Mar 2014, 17:47#13
Sun Tzu
Ok I rate Steyn as 3 points out of ten for a way below par performance - but I am not alone in it - Fixsport gave him ZERO points for that performance. At least Foxsport gave De Allende 14 points for his performance - who put him way ahead of Steyn in any event.
I am not prejudiced against Steyn - I just look and recognise rubbish when i am objective. De Allende has had "far worst moments than Frans" - nobody could have been worse than Steyn - he buggered up every time he got the ball - so in his case the worst moment lasted throughout the game.
Ok I rate Steyn as 3 points out of ten for a way below par performance - but I am not alone in it - Fixsport gave him ZERO points for that performance. At least Foxsport gave De Allende 14 points for his performance - who put him way ahead of Steyn in any event.
I am not prejudiced against Steyn - I just look and recognise rubbish when i am objective. De Allende has had "far worst moments than Frans" - nobody could have been worse than Steyn - he buggered up every time he got the ball - so in his case the worst moment lasted throughout the game.
Pro1,870 posts
17 Mar 2014, 20:39
#14
17 Mar 2014, 20:39#14
Mike,
On a points per game basis :
* Goosen is rated the no 7 flyhalf (Lambie #2)
* Lood is the number 16 lock (Flip #4 )
* Labuschagne is the number 19 loosie (Whiteley #3, vdWalt #5, Coetzee #7)
* Willie is the number 21 outside back player (Mvovo #10, Marais #20)
Flip is the highest scoring SA lock. If you break down his points to a points per minute played basis it is 0.281 . Next highest SA lock? Matfield at 0.275
On a points per game basis :
* Goosen is rated the no 7 flyhalf (Lambie #2)
* Lood is the number 16 lock (Flip #4 )
* Labuschagne is the number 19 loosie (Whiteley #3, vdWalt #5, Coetzee #7)
* Willie is the number 21 outside back player (Mvovo #10, Marais #20)
Flip is the highest scoring SA lock. If you break down his points to a points per minute played basis it is 0.281 . Next highest SA lock? Matfield at 0.275
Captain49,914 posts
17 Mar 2014, 20:55
#15
17 Mar 2014, 20:55#15
Matey how are these points per game developed....I would guess it's no more than a set of stats similar to the ones everybody is cautious about.
Coach57,555 posts
17 Mar 2014, 21:21
#16
17 Mar 2014, 21:21#16
oimatey
I do not want into theory here - I just gave the points earned - and I do not want to go into theoretical calculation of points based on minutes plated etc. Ultimately the number of points will be equal for most players based on a number of games played and all players will at some stage or another have an injury game off. As the competi tion progress the situation will become clearer in any event.
I will give the situation each week and that would clear up progress throughout the competition and equalize outcomes.
I do not want into theory here - I just gave the points earned - and I do not want to go into theoretical calculation of points based on minutes plated etc. Ultimately the number of points will be equal for most players based on a number of games played and all players will at some stage or another have an injury game off. As the competi tion progress the situation will become clearer in any event.
I will give the situation each week and that would clear up progress throughout the competition and equalize outcomes.
Coach57,555 posts
17 Mar 2014, 21:21
#17
17 Mar 2014, 21:21#17
oimatey
I do not want into theory here - I just gave the points earned - and I do not want to go into theoretical calculation of points based on minutes plated etc. Ultimately the number of points will be equal for most players based on a number of games played and all players will at some stage or another have an injury game off. As the competi tion progress the situation will become clearer in any event.
I will give the situation each week and that would clear up progress throughout the competition and equalize outcomes.
I do not want into theory here - I just gave the points earned - and I do not want to go into theoretical calculation of points based on minutes plated etc. Ultimately the number of points will be equal for most players based on a number of games played and all players will at some stage or another have an injury game off. As the competi tion progress the situation will become clearer in any event.
I will give the situation each week and that would clear up progress throughout the competition and equalize outcomes.
Coach57,555 posts
17 Mar 2014, 21:23
#18
17 Mar 2014, 21:23#18
Mozart
We all know your attitude about stats. I f it supports your argument it is reliable - if not it is unreliable.
We all know your attitude about stats. I f it supports your argument it is reliable - if not it is unreliable.
Pro1,870 posts
17 Mar 2014, 21:51
#19
17 Mar 2014, 21:51#19
Moz - you can access how points are awarded here . Click on the scoring tab
They are based solely on stats so there are elements of a players contribution that are not measured but those elements would be entirely too subjective to fairly factor in (game awareness, strategy etc etc)
What is helpful is that some stats are awarded more points than others so as a measure of overall contribution it can be very informative.
They are based solely on stats so there are elements of a players contribution that are not measured but those elements would be entirely too subjective to fairly factor in (game awareness, strategy etc etc)
What is helpful is that some stats are awarded more points than others so as a measure of overall contribution it can be very informative.
Captain49,914 posts
17 Mar 2014, 22:02
#20
17 Mar 2014, 22:02#20
Thanks Matey....you can only manipulate the data you collect. So the results are bound to be somewhat one dimensional. Remember when Watson, a process player, led all the stats. The model never picked up that that Burger was smashing players and Watson was just feeding off his productivity.
I cant see why these stats couldn't be modified...reflecting for example opposition, score, total distance of a penalty etc. but that would require a bit more data collection. Down the road one could rate a tackle, based on the runners record in beating tackles, where it is made on the field, the space the runner had etc.
Sound far fetched? That's what we do when we watch a game, the stats are just a useful way of confirming basic impressions.
I cant see why these stats couldn't be modified...reflecting for example opposition, score, total distance of a penalty etc. but that would require a bit more data collection. Down the road one could rate a tackle, based on the runners record in beating tackles, where it is made on the field, the space the runner had etc.
Sound far fetched? That's what we do when we watch a game, the stats are just a useful way of confirming basic impressions.
Pro1,870 posts
17 Mar 2014, 22:06
#21
17 Mar 2014, 22:06#21
Mike - my calculations were not theoretical. They are factual and based on the
same source that you quoted but are more accurate because they have the proper context and account for
the fact that the Lions and Cheetahs players have played one extra
whole game. And as you can see from the difference in the rankings at
this stage of the season that one extra game makes a big difference.
It would be unfair to measure Matfield on a points per game basis because he played less than half of the first two games of the season. Thus the effort to calculate the minutes he played versus the points he earned. Turns out he is the second best lock in South Africa based on the data you were referencing - this after taking two years off and statistical contribution was supposed to be his weak point as the old man who can't get around the park.
He still has more to prove though in my book (consistency, for one) and measuring someone by their fantasy point contribution should only be one aspect that is taken into consideration before determining their possible inclusion with the Boks.
It would be unfair to measure Matfield on a points per game basis because he played less than half of the first two games of the season. Thus the effort to calculate the minutes he played versus the points he earned. Turns out he is the second best lock in South Africa based on the data you were referencing - this after taking two years off and statistical contribution was supposed to be his weak point as the old man who can't get around the park.
He still has more to prove though in my book (consistency, for one) and measuring someone by their fantasy point contribution should only be one aspect that is taken into consideration before determining their possible inclusion with the Boks.
Coach57,555 posts
17 Mar 2014, 23:02
#22
17 Mar 2014, 23:02#22
oi- matey
Not wanting to argue with you because I think that unfortunately for Lambie at the end of the season he would have 15 games.
However, you make one mistake in your calculations. Labuschagne was subbed in the last two games at the same time that Matfield came on. You for instance work out minutes played for Matfield - but failed to do the same for Labuscgane. The subbing system makes comparisons impossible - some players played the full games (the forwards rarely do) so any mathematical calculations will be extremely complicated if actual playing time is to be the basis for calculation.
I would rather shy away from those type of calculation because the variations are immense and work towards getting the actual ratings at the end of the season - reviewing them on a week by week basis.
Not wanting to argue with you because I think that unfortunately for Lambie at the end of the season he would have 15 games.
However, you make one mistake in your calculations. Labuschagne was subbed in the last two games at the same time that Matfield came on. You for instance work out minutes played for Matfield - but failed to do the same for Labuscgane. The subbing system makes comparisons impossible - some players played the full games (the forwards rarely do) so any mathematical calculations will be extremely complicated if actual playing time is to be the basis for calculation.
I would rather shy away from those type of calculation because the variations are immense and work towards getting the actual ratings at the end of the season - reviewing them on a week by week basis.
Pro1,870 posts
18 Mar 2014, 00:00
#23
18 Mar 2014, 00:00#23
I wasn't comparing Matfield and Labuschagne but could have easily used the same method if necessary as that would have been the most accurate way to compare.
If you are going to use Foxsport "ratings" as evidence to back up your views of a players performance you have to make sure that there is proper context. Just displaying total points and then comparing that to another player without allowing for the games a player had bye's or may have missed due to injury isn't objective. At the very least use the points per game drop- down from the menu in Foxsport.
If you are going to use Foxsport "ratings" as evidence to back up your views of a players performance you have to make sure that there is proper context. Just displaying total points and then comparing that to another player without allowing for the games a player had bye's or may have missed due to injury isn't objective. At the very least use the points per game drop- down from the menu in Foxsport.
Pro6,277 posts
18 Mar 2014, 06:00
#24
18 Mar 2014, 06:00#24
the stats provided by oimatey on matfield are a good example of how stats regardless of the source is only one half of the bigger picture, visual analysis of on feild performance is IMO the other half.
matfield maybe the second best lock in SA at the moment statistically (according to foxsport), but when only taking into account the impact through our eyes there are better locks in SA at the moment like flip, lood, uys, franco van der mewe to name but a few.
am glad that matfield is pulling his weight for the bulls though, time away fromt he game has been a blessing in disguise for some of the older players, just look at schalk.
if schalk keeps playing the way he has been, hes going to be the No6 for the Boks in 2014 easy, and i wouldnt disagree with that selection.
matfield maybe the second best lock in SA at the moment statistically (according to foxsport), but when only taking into account the impact through our eyes there are better locks in SA at the moment like flip, lood, uys, franco van der mewe to name but a few.
am glad that matfield is pulling his weight for the bulls though, time away fromt he game has been a blessing in disguise for some of the older players, just look at schalk.
if schalk keeps playing the way he has been, hes going to be the No6 for the Boks in 2014 easy, and i wouldnt disagree with that selection.
Coach57,555 posts
18 Mar 2014, 06:05
#25
18 Mar 2014, 06:05#25
oi-matey
I am not using it for any basis other than general information. Player ratings are somewhat different. The players are to be assessed with due regard to actual performance as well as the impact such performance have to the game.
Take for instance the following example. Francois Steyn spilled the ball in a tackle. The Reds got the ball as a result and the ball is carried up to the Sharks 22 - where a maul ensued. Genia picked up the ball and scored. This tiurnover had an impact on the scoreline - so the minus g oes in the first instance to Steyn.
I am not using it for any basis other than general information. Player ratings are somewhat different. The players are to be assessed with due regard to actual performance as well as the impact such performance have to the game.
Take for instance the following example. Francois Steyn spilled the ball in a tackle. The Reds got the ball as a result and the ball is carried up to the Sharks 22 - where a maul ensued. Genia picked up the ball and scored. This tiurnover had an impact on the scoreline - so the minus g oes in the first instance to Steyn.
Rookie75 posts
18 Mar 2014, 13:13
#26
18 Mar 2014, 13:13#26
So are we only taking the SA franchises into the mix for this barometer? I thought Ebherson for the Force had a massive game against the Highlanders on the weekend. Where does he fit in Mike?
Captain30,741 posts
18 Mar 2014, 14:45
#27
18 Mar 2014, 14:45#27
Moz last year the Cheetahs kept winning with the same players......this year they have started slowly.
Lood week after week proves that he can live at the highest level. I big unit who gets involved in every facet.......bloody hell he made 17 tackles in the last game.
Lood is good in the line-outs, where we see speedy ball straight to the 9, we always see him on the charge, he imposes himself physically......the lad is better than any SA lock playing at the moment.
He should be a Bok, is our best lock after Etzebeth and PSDT......no other locks come close and he proves it week after week.
Willie is Willie, no tapering needs to be done with him other than him improving on his defence.
Goosen is finding his way back slowly, but his pedigree is not in doubt.
Labascagane has not made the impression of last year but then many of the Cheetahs are a step back from last year given the team performance.
But this guy like Coetzee of the Sharks is a quality player and has the pedigree to play at the highest level. Coetzee always had it, he showed it from day one, but there were so many doubters but just look at him now.......same applies to Kolisi, Arno Botha, CJ Stander and Labs.....these players have what it takes
Captain49,914 posts
18 Mar 2014, 15:41
#28
18 Mar 2014, 15:41#28
Coetzee has asked a question Dave, he hasn't proven anything. That will be clearer if he plays a few tests, last time he fell at that hurdle. All I'm saying is he is playing well enough to be considered. Lappies never has.
sharkbok
Captain23,297 posts
Captain23,297 posts
18 Mar 2014, 18:03
#29
18 Mar 2014, 18:03#29
Ebherson was disposed off sometime ago. He had a hissy fit when he had to sit on the bench for Goosen, and then when he did get game time he missed a kick right in front of the posts to not convert the try scored. He then blamed the coach for making him rusty. His brother was a a bigger loss.
Captain30,741 posts
18 Mar 2014, 18:40
#30
18 Mar 2014, 18:40#30
Disagree, Coetzee never failed at test level, always been a better player than Louw......some faith and investment would have gone a long way.
Labs was regularly the best SA loosie last year and certainly has the credentials to be a test player
Captain49,914 posts
18 Mar 2014, 20:01
#31
18 Mar 2014, 20:01#31
Louw was a vast improvement on Coetzee. I have never, ever read any serious rugby fan suggesting the contrary. Coetzee got a lot of starts in 2012, seven in a row, but he made no progress. He was a routine tackler, nothing more. Louw helped us get back to parity at the breakdown.
Sometimes I wonder Dave, I really do. Is that what you saw, or have you just boxed yourself into that position.
Captain40,032 posts
18 Mar 2014, 21:06
#32
18 Mar 2014, 21:06#32
Snapster stop talking nonsense. Louw has todate been a much better player than Coetzee. One only hopes jake can coach some variety into Marcells play. He is utterly predictable and his skills level appaling. He could be a good player but plays sucha limited game.
Matfield probably wieghing in at around 105 kg sis as pa as ever and completely hopless as atight forward. All he can do is catcha ball.
Kolisi has also proved zip and lacks the physicality to play at Bok level and possibly even at Super 15 level. His best bet is as an impact player for now.
We have 4 test class locks in Etzebth, Du Toit, Flip and Loods. Others like Willemse are nice prospects as well.
Matfield probably wieghing in at around 105 kg sis as pa as ever and completely hopless as atight forward. All he can do is catcha ball.
Kolisi has also proved zip and lacks the physicality to play at Bok level and possibly even at Super 15 level. His best bet is as an impact player for now.
We have 4 test class locks in Etzebth, Du Toit, Flip and Loods. Others like Willemse are nice prospects as well.
Coach57,555 posts
18 Mar 2014, 21:26
#33
18 Mar 2014, 21:26#33
I have no problem with Louw with Marcell Coetzee as a back up. Also no problem with Vermeulen with Arno Botha as back up and also no problem with Burger and Labuschagne as back up.
I have a problem with the by-accident tackler Alberts - too slow and ineffective to be a loosie - whose sole function is to make a few tackles by accident and make a few ineffective ball carries. Of no value in respect of the remainder of loosie functions. No ball protection and ball recovery at breakdowns - no passing game - no ball carry in open space and a tendency to give away penalties
I have a problem with the by-accident tackler Alberts - too slow and ineffective to be a loosie - whose sole function is to make a few tackles by accident and make a few ineffective ball carries. Of no value in respect of the remainder of loosie functions. No ball protection and ball recovery at breakdowns - no passing game - no ball carry in open space and a tendency to give away penalties
Captain49,914 posts
18 Mar 2014, 21:47
#34
18 Mar 2014, 21:47#34
HasBeen I must say it was embarrassing when we were mauling for a try and Jaws ripped the ball right out of Kolisi's hands. Can't say I have ever seen such feeble ball carrying in the maul.
Captain30,741 posts
18 Mar 2014, 22:54
#35
18 Mar 2014, 22:54#35
Fact is Louw has never amounted to much........a player that is certainly not an openside for a start. There are a handful of tests where he has added value but for the most he is a handy player, something we see in his performances for Bath week after week.
Brussouw has always been a far better player and these days Kolisi and Coetzee add far more value. I struggle to see what people see in Louw to be honest, we never see a steal, why would we, he is hardly quick enough and the first to a breakdown......is he a link player, no, not even close.........does he impose himself physically.......no never......what is Louw really? For he is too big for 6, too small for 7 and does not have the skills for an 8.
Louw is just another poor test selection......much like a few others we have on board. We continue to select players who are not the best in their positions.
Brussouw, Kolisi, Coetzee and Fourie are all better 6's than Louw
Brussouw has always been a far better player and these days Kolisi and Coetzee add far more value. I struggle to see what people see in Louw to be honest, we never see a steal, why would we, he is hardly quick enough and the first to a breakdown......is he a link player, no, not even close.........does he impose himself physically.......no never......what is Louw really? For he is too big for 6, too small for 7 and does not have the skills for an 8.
Louw is just another poor test selection......much like a few others we have on board. We continue to select players who are not the best in their positions.
Brussouw, Kolisi, Coetzee and Fourie are all better 6's than Louw
Captain49,914 posts
18 Mar 2014, 23:27
#36
18 Mar 2014, 23:27#36
So let it be written, so let it be done.....but oops next came the Red Sea.
Captain30,741 posts
19 Mar 2014, 00:37
#37
19 Mar 2014, 00:37#37
Yeah the sea we cant cross.......second place prevails
— END OF THREAD —
