Boks' centre crisis

Mozart

Nice - but utterly unclear explanation on his tackle technique - it the success rate is unsatisfactory - why keep on repeating it? The answer is simple - he is not physically strong enough to compete. And his record in the last two tests he played in was defensively not up to standard as well. So why is he better for the Springboks than for the Stormers?

Now one more thing - De Jongh scored his thrd try in two years in the CC final and now suddenly it is such a memorable and unique occurrence - sure it is unique for him to score a try it is so rare. Look three tries in two years does not make a player a devastating runner.   I am not an one-incident junkie - of it is a constant I accept that as fact - but in the case of De Jongh it never happened again.  

I did indicate that I played at hooker when you asked me before - and my counter-argument was that you seem to think that that should restrict comments on players in other positions. That's why I did not take part in that poll. .

Remember guys this is not SENIOR RUGBY.

Many players being mentioned lately are way past their best like Jannie, Jean and Victor.

Bring on the young guns. 

Wrong Moz, coaches do that all the time. The same happened with du Preez.

Fourie was only available on the EOYT, so he wanted to have a look at him, he is not available for the RC this year, so it was a case of having a look.

Meyer would not have offered JJ a Bok contract if he dropped him.......there is no way in hell a coach could drop a player like JJ after his last performance against the AB's

As for Taute being dropped, what nonsense. Meyer went on record saying that de Jongh and Taute would get game time at 13, then Taute got injured.

I see Coetzee has said that he will be using Taute at 15 and in the midfield this S15......good on him  

Ettinene Botha, Wynand Olivier, Murray, Whitehead, Taute, JJ, Serfontein.....zero for seven.... you keep throwing darts.

Jeez Moz, Ettienne Botha......no chance in hell, was never a fan......just another little guy.

Olivier was a great back-up to Jean, I never had him as anything else

Have never had Whitehead as a Bok

Murray had injuries stand in his way

Serfontein. Taute and JJ are current Boks, so not sure what your point is here.

Serfontein will be better than  Jean and JJ is the best 13 prospect we have had since readmission  

Actually there are a lot of similarities between Wynand, Ettiene and Serfontein. All serial inside steppers....all vulnerable to pace as Giteau demonstrated with Olivier.

 Saffex

Let me quote a statement you made above about a contribution by Sun Tzu"-

'You get some players right, like Frans Steyn, but you are hopelessly wrong when it comes to JJ and de Jongh."

Our friend Sun Tzu NEVER gets players right - for instance Morne Steyn is the best flyhalf  we have had for many years - so why credit him with " get some players right, like Frans Steyn,"   HE IS SERIOUSLY WRONG ABOUT FRANCOIS STEYN AS WELL.    

Saffex

My problem is that you are "married" to an idea - not reality.   Francois Steyn built up a reputation as a good player- so you see good play in him where there was very little real evidence of it since his return from France.   He was good because he was in the team - that seems to sum it up.    In actual fact all those good qualities he showed in the past was not there in practice during games he actually played in.  

Because Steyn crashballed regularly and ineffectively in the tests you wrote a long piece about center defence and the fact that 12's have very little space and consequently crashballing was virtually their only option    That was the justification for the fact that he made no space for other players and the infrequency of his passing of balls.   You also  wrote up the step he has - but in the tests he played in the step was missing and him beating defenders and effective ball off-loading in tackle situations were curiously absent.  There was virtually no or extremely scant evidence of execution in tests he played in and on Super 15 equally so.   

So lets give credit for him having the abilities - but accept that there is no evidence in fact and statistically that adequate application of the abilities was in evidence.   That is where you find excuses and I say show us that he apply the abilities and we will be happy.   The emphasis must always be on actual performance - not abilities not used during games.

Secondly - like you I am also a great Serfontein admirer from the time he was a junior.   He has all the abilities one would expect - but has had very little opportunities in tests to show that he can execute same.   However to state bluntly that he must replace the in-form De Villiers is not realistic and could be a gamble - taking into account his Super 15 form.   Let him grow into the position while he has the chance and can learn a lot from De Villiers.   His time will come - it is not really necessary to force the issue.  

Where I do agree with you is about Engelbrecht.  I - like virtually everyone else - feels that he should improve his defence - but that can be corrected with technique improvement and experience.    Experience should also lead to improved option taking - so I am delighted by the Springbok contract entered into with SARU.   However, like every other player  he should earn and retain his position through constant high-level performances.                  

 boklogic

Although in essence I agree with you about the issues mentioned above - there is one essential element that to my mind remains the key and that is constant high  level/acceptable performance by players.

What bothered me on Saturday more than anything else is the deficient performances of the established players - not the performances of the youngsters.   I watched the game twice and felt that players like Jannie Du Plessis, Alberts (who despite the hype loafed through the game and had one ball carry of any significance and had a negative tackle count) and Jordaan (knocked the ball in once  but was good in defence) did not perform up to expectations .

I liked what I saw of Du Toit, Swiel and Andre Esterhuizen,  they together with Bismarck and Deysel  had good games  and the said youngsters showed a lot of promise and ball sense.  

 Mozart

There were very few younger players given adequate opportunity to play for the Springboks and only Etzebeth and Le Rouc really had any real runs in tests to establish their names.  The other player with a few games were Engelbrecht

For the rest in reality stuck to the older players - some of which were really there on reputation rather than performance.   Meyer had a tendency to run back to players he was acquainted with and in that process selected dinosaurs who never lived up to their reputations and let the team down badly.   There were serious question marks as to present performances by so-called senior players.   

None of the younger players was given adequate opportunity to perform - so your comment about talent spotting being futile is not realistic.   Who is to say the younger players would not make their mark if given realistic opportunities and outperform the rugby geriatrics  Neyer is addicted to?       

Mike you will find that CHICKENSHIT spends his whole time lying for at no point have I EVER said that I rate Jake and I have NEVER selected Jantjies as the Bok 10 ahead of Goosen or Lambie

My suggestion is that people refrain from interacting with this lying prick........one cant debate with a liar  

 Sun Tzu

I grant you that Engelbrecht had nine test outings and did not really include him in the rest of the discussion.

Of the players you regard as failures - you really must be kidding.   Nobody - but you - would rate players like Lambie, Goosen and Bekker as failures.   The list of successes include the ultimately poor Morne Steyn, who should not have been in the team in 2012 and 2013 and cost the Springboks dearly in tests he played in during those two years.   Some of the rest started off bright enough and went off as the years went by and is certainly not a consideration for selection anymore (Frans steyn,  Van Niekerk, Matfield, Butch, Juan Smith and Jaque Fourie).  Of those only Francois Steyn can make a comeback from the disastrous past two seasons - but that remains to be seen,

Forget about the past and get to the present.   There are selection scenarios to be dealt with now and the past greats - not good enough at present - is not a  consideration at all,   Neither is the very poor De Jongh even a remote candidate after his bugger-ups in the tests at the end of 2012.    

Sun Tzu

Wrong about me and definitely wrong about virtually all else.   He did cost us the RC by his atrocious game in both defence and in kicking in 2013.  If you don't believe me gp and watch the Eden Park and Ellis Park again.   Just look at two penalties where Morne failed to find touch in the Eden Park game - shortly whereafter the AB's scored tries and thus helping themselves to a bonus point.   And both the two draws in 2012 stemmed from POOR play by both Morne Steyn - so bad that the crowd boo-ed him in the PE test.   The loss in Brisbane was also largely due to poor play on his part.

As to Francois Steyn - you have debunked nothing.   Tour stat interpretation was superficial and as a result useless - you even credit him for cases where he lost possession of the ball as a positive.   He crashballed totally ineffectively with nearly half the balls he got - he kicked away aimlessly valuable possession  and his defence in especially the Brumbies game stank to high heaven, There were zero sign of positives in the first four games he played in before he was replaced.  He was seriously over-weight and unfit and in fact an embarrassment to boot.

By the way De Jongh did bugger nothing in the tests you mentioned - he consequently could not make any mistakes.   I watched the two games he played in a number of times - because I wanted to find out why and how he managed to go AWOL.   He was hiding around on the side of the field where the ball could and would never go.   In passing of the ball - where there was supposed to be an overlaps - De Jongh was missing and the ball went from De Villiers to Kirchner who did zero with the ball as well - no overlap - nothing.   He never touched the ball ONCE in the Twickenham test - and in the whole game made 3 tackles  - for the rest he might as well not have been on the field of play at all - the ESPN stats was an amazing string of zeroes.   That from a Springbok center is disastrously poor.   How can any sensible person justify that?   No wonder he is not even remotely a consideration anymore.      

Mozart

Some of the players you support had no start and no continuation (De Jongh) and some you support had run out of steam years ago after one or two good matches (Morne Steyn, Willem Alberts) and some may have been great in the past - but are at present poor beyond words.

So what is the point - a player had one game and he is condemned?   That is what I call real BS,   Take another code of sport - in his first ten tests Kallis's highest score was 15 runs.   If your latest comments are anything to go by  he should have been sent packing,   Is that the kind of thing you support now or is it just another of your unthinking postings? 

 Good centres have always been around and still are ...our trouble with this issue is that we diagnose this "weakness" in players. I blame the tactics and strategies. Really exceptional centres like Danie Gerber, Frank Bunce and Pieter Muller (to name a few) come from simply bold intuitive guys that have strength , initiutive and intelligence to instinctively find a gap in atack and can likewise counter attack because of the same intutitive skills.

Jean De Villiers is one of our best...although a veteran can still play a very useful game and a huge mentor to guys... Steyn has the ability to become a great inside centre...I'm interested to see how Jake White tutors him...he could astonish his critics.