FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Bredan Venter on team selection

Bredan Venter on team selection

Started by sharkbok26 REPLIES287 VIEWS· 16 Jun 2014, 15:05
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,295 posts
16 Jun 2014, 15:05
#1
16 Jun 2014, 15:05#1
Why conservatism is Meyer’s strong suitby Brendan Venter 11/06/2014, 10:35

Since the advent of the professional era, I believe there’s no significant difference among top teams in the oval game in terms of defensive structures, attacking organisation, set-piece plans and exit strategies.

What then, you ask, was the defining quality which saw the Springboks, for argument’s sake, overcome a star-studded World XV side so convincingly at Newlands this past Saturday?

Primarily, I believe it came down to the Boks’ experience – the average age of the current side is 29.

With experience comes composure under pressure which, in turn, allows said players to make the finest on-field decisions.

Big matches are more often than not won by the best decision-makers.

If I recall my playing career, I would categorically state that I produced my best rugby between the ages of 26 and 32. Simply put, that’s when my physical ability matched my decision-making ability.

While critics may suggest Bakkies Botha is past his sell-by-date or Schalk Burger is on the wrong side of 30, in terms of modern conditioning, as long as the body lasts, the brain only improves with age.

Therefore, senior players are worth their weight in gold and have to be managed scientifically.

Some may argue that affording said players less game time is the simple and most effective solution. However, while rotation is important in the modern game, I believe tailoring a particular player’s training regime is the ultimate key to career longevity.

Senior statesmen such as Burger and Botha, for instance, would be best served conditioning in the controlled setting of the gym rather than performing hard practice drills out on the training field.

With the 2015 Rugby World Cup just 17 test matches away, I believe Heyneke Meyer’s sternest task will be in getting his core group of experienced senior players to England in peak physical condition.

Meyer has been labelled “too conservative” for his selection choices and squad composition, however, in my mind that remains his greatest strength. What makes him such a top coach is that he doesn’t get rattled and grab a new player each and every time his team experiences a hiccup.

Those that are begging for new blood are ultimately not responsible for the results and are inclined to knee-jerk reactions i.e. Lose a match and change the side or win and retain the status quo.

Young players such as Eben Etzebeth, Pieter-Steph du Toit and Jan Serfontein, for instance, definitely add verve and value to a side. However, if Meyer were to select a glut of young guns without striking the right blend, I believe the Boks would have zero chance of winning the 2015 Rugby World Cup.

Purely from a statistical point, World Cups are won, time and again, owing to a spine of experienced players running through the side. The 1999, 2003, 2007 and 2011 tournaments bear testament to that.


SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
16 Jun 2014, 15:12
#2
16 Jun 2014, 15:12#2

The same Venter who assisted Sarries in losing both the Heineken Cup and Premiership final this year. 

 

As for him producing his best rugby - hell that is a stretch, he was bloody useless as a player

sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,295 posts
16 Jun 2014, 15:12
#3
16 Jun 2014, 15:12#3
One thing for certain is that blooding youngsters into a winning team is a low risk start to Bok level without massive pressure. 
A player like Lood took his chance and must now be a contender for the starting position. 
I think Matfield is going to be number 5 lock until the World Cup, and Ezetbeth is going to be number 4 lock. 
Their is going to be strong competition for the backup lock with PSDT coming back as well.
PSDT played well last season and got man of the match in the CC final. However his form this year before injury was not as good as Lood's form at the Cheeetas.
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,295 posts
16 Jun 2014, 15:15
#4
16 Jun 2014, 15:15#4
Sarries were never going to beat a Star Studded Toulon outfit that contain the highest paid players in the world. Toulon could probably beat any SuperXV team, and most likely rank as the top club/regional team in world rugby.
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
16 Jun 2014, 15:21
#5
16 Jun 2014, 15:21#5
What crap, that Toulon side is made up of a bunch of washed up hasbeens  
BO
BokBFClub Pro421 posts
16 Jun 2014, 15:35
#6
16 Jun 2014, 15:35#6
 

 

Quite right... but I did have a peek at their trophy cabinet to see what a bunch of washed up hasbeens could do. Seems it is not empty?

sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,295 posts
16 Jun 2014, 15:39
#7
16 Jun 2014, 15:39#7
my thoughts exactly. They won their international and national competition this year. 
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
16 Jun 2014, 16:13
#8
16 Jun 2014, 16:13#8

Ooh wow, a whole lot of French and NH trophies!!!

 

 

If a side made up of Armitage x2, Drew Mitchell, Habana, Basteraud, Giteau, Wilkinson, Burden, Haymans, Bakkies, Ali Williams, Danie Rossouw, Lobbe, Juan Smith and Joe v/Niekerk represents current stars then you lot are even more stupid than I originally thought  

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
16 Jun 2014, 16:34
#9
16 Jun 2014, 16:34#9
 None of those players, including the now retired Johnny Wilkinson and Danie Rossouw , would let any national side down right now. If you do  not believe that than you are even more stupid than I originally thought. 
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
16 Jun 2014, 18:26
#10
16 Jun 2014, 18:26#10
Brendan is exactly right....a core of experienced players is the common factor in all RWC wins. 
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
16 Jun 2014, 23:13
#11
16 Jun 2014, 23:13#11
 He is that stupid.
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,295 posts
16 Jun 2014, 23:16
#12
16 Jun 2014, 23:16#12
 Is it even possible to more stupid than totally stupid?
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
17 Jun 2014, 00:36
#13
17 Jun 2014, 00:36#13
 What was evident is that Lood De Jager is at present a much better lock than Botha and that Etzebeth is a better lock than Matfield.  We need neither of the two for the 2015 WC.  We have more than enough stronger locks than Botha and Matfield in Etzebeth, Du Toit, De Jager and Van der Merwe - with Willemse also being available.  
Those are factual - time for the has beens to be out.     


CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
17 Jun 2014, 00:41
#14
17 Jun 2014, 00:41#14
Etzebeth is "at present" not even in a state to tie Matfield's boot laces. let alone compete for a place in the Bok team. Rather wait until he is able to play again, and see what state he is in.
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,295 posts
17 Jun 2014, 01:28
#15
17 Jun 2014, 01:28#15
I think the way Meyer sees it, barring injuries he has lots of options at number4 lock. 
He even has some number 4 locks who are also confident playing number5 lock.Ezebeth and Lood can both play at 5, but Meyers sees them primarily as 4's
However Matfield is his best specialist number5 lock. A number 5 lock's primary responsibilities are lineouts, kick offs and scrums.
Call lineouts, take the most lineouts, put pressure on opposition lineouts.Matfield is still best in world rugby at lineouts. Compare the lineouts this year to the disaster of last year, and their is a big difference.
Kick offs, Matfield is again the best. He is just a very athletic lock that can jump very high. 
Matfield is solid in the scrums. Surely their must be better scrumaggers, but he is solid. 
I think it is Bakkies that should be dropped when Ezebeth returns, with Lood on the bench. PSTD could also potentially be on the bench to cover number 7, and number 5 lock. 
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
17 Jun 2014, 01:38
#16
17 Jun 2014, 01:38#16
Matfield looked like the best 5 lock in the world to me on Saturday. Clearly his lack of involvement in the Worlds lineouts....which produced howls from Clever..was deliberate. He ruled the lineout on Saturday...which produced nothing from Clever.
As for Lood he was an aggressive tackler on Saturday. Nice. But by the time he arrived Alberts and Steenkamp had knocked the stuffing out of the Welsh. I still prefer Etzebeth  and Bakkies..but it's nice to have additional options.  
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
17 Jun 2014, 06:16
#17
17 Jun 2014, 06:16#17
 Mozart
You are as stupid as only you can be.   Botha made zero tackles when he was on the field of play, Steenkamp made none either - and in 70 minutes Alberts made 8.  So how the hell did Steenkamp anmn Alberts knocked"the stuffing out of the Welsh"?  
Matfield called all line outs to himself and was good enough in the line outs - but that is one facet of play - for the rest he was average - still providing no force in teh tight 5 situation.
Your poor effort to nullify De Jager is laughable.  Botha has been below par in the Scotttish test, just about average in teh French test and invisible on Saturday.  The locks should be from the following forceful players - we do not need a lightweight flank and an invisible as locks:-
Etzebeth, Du Toit, De Jager and Van der Merwe - the geriatrics we do not need.     
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
17 Jun 2014, 11:40
#18
17 Jun 2014, 11:40#18
Good one Vlagtwat.......Rossouw was past it years ago.......he would be yet another liability in the Bok side.......its not about letting a test side down, its about making a difference and adding the edge.......old Danie could only dream of that - wake up you idiot  
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
17 Jun 2014, 11:58
#19
17 Jun 2014, 11:58#19
Moz kindly talk us through why you prefer Bakkies over Lood......when it was obvious to all that Lood was 100 times better than Bakkies......hell it was not even close  
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
17 Jun 2014, 12:11
#20
17 Jun 2014, 12:11#20
 Sharkbok
The scrum was still not what it should have been on Jannie du Plessis' side - so there are still signs that Matfield does not provide adequate support in scrumming.   I grant you that Matfield took all the balls in line outs thrown in by the Springboks - but it was over to De Jager to take a ball frown in by the Welsh.    Most of the younger locks would have done as well as Matfield did - if not better - in line outs.  At least they are much stronger physically than Matfield is. 
If you are prepared to have a lock around to catch a few kick ins by the opposition - then fine - play Matfiekd - but I think that is a dubious way to look at it.   
Last year Meyer stuck to Kruger in most matches and Kruger is not a good comparison.  Everyone of De Jager, Etzebeth, Van der Merwe and Du Toit is better than Kruger - so the fact that Matfield was an improvement on Kruger is putting the bar very, very low.
I think the Tight 5 as a unit needs to be strengthened in games in the RC and that will not happen with Matfield in the team.              
XT
XtramickClub Pro103 posts
17 Jun 2014, 12:18
#21
17 Jun 2014, 12:18#21
By now you have lost the moral high ground on this argument regarding Matfield Mike. By no means can we say that Lood or Flip would have been as solid in the lineouts and from kickoffs as Matfield was on Saturday. Lood still has a lot to learn about 5 lock play. Our securing of possession from kickoffs is miles better this year. You are purposely blind to Matfield's robust contribution in the tight-loose 
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
17 Jun 2014, 12:41
#22
17 Jun 2014, 12:41#22
 Windpomp says - Etzebeth is "at present" not even in a state to tie Matfield's boot laces. let alone compete for a place in the Bok team. Rather wait until he is able to play again, and see what state he is in. windpomp is hoping someone will tell me he is saying matfiled is better than Etzebeth and he would gleefully point out the word state used twice. Small things amuse small minds! More drivel from ou windpomp. The point ou windpomp is Etzebeth is a great lock. Matfiled is no tight forward at all. Being good in the lineout as all good internatioanl locks are doesnt make him a lock!!! Mike is absolutley right we have great locks for the Wc and they do not include the show pony. Again I ask would you play a 106 kg stringbean and expect your scrum and tight forard play not to suffer. Bwahahhahahahaha the hatters contimnue to be fooled by the show pony. However well we scrum against the Welsh we would do even better witha real lock in palce of matfiled.Kruger was also proved to be no test lock. BUT he and Hargreaves ano ther journeyman lock outplayed the Bok duo largely thanks to the ineffectul wee matfiled- Bakkies was man of the match after all.
The basic trouble here is oaks do not have a vision of what a prober Bok pack should look like. They have no idea about what being a tight forward is about. It's a sick joke that anybody would think matfield is A BOK LOCK. HE IS HARDLY CLUB LEVEL STANDARD. YOU ONLY DETRACT FROM YOUR TIGHT FIVE BY PLAYING HIM.Would Loodt have been given a chance but for injuries? One get too conservative. Where are the young scrummies - Reinach and Faf.I hear Goosen is okay so the glass jaw goosen oaks are embarrassed by that one as well. However the guy who looks to be the real annointed is the ex WP player  Pollard. Ou Allistair did you do everything you could to keep him. How I lamented his departure.
Loodt and Jan proved the introduction of young players in a careful planned way is NOT as great a risk as thought  - given the quality of what is being intoduced - future Bok greats. Also that trashing exceptional young players is unwise to say the least.


CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
17 Jun 2014, 14:44
#23
17 Jun 2014, 14:44#23
 

Saffex

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 8102 RE: Bredan Venter on team selection
June 17, 2014, 09:40:22 Good one Vlagtwat.......Rossouw was past it years ago.......he would be yet another liability in the Bok side.......its not about letting a test side down, its about making a difference and adding the edge.......old Danie could only dream of that - wake up you idiot 



Gaan slaap soutpiel, jy weet fokol.

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
17 Jun 2014, 14:51
#24
17 Jun 2014, 14:51#24
 

clevermike

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 11184 RE: Bredan Venter on team selection
June 17, 2014, 10:11:53  Sharkbok
The scrum was still not what it should have been on Jannie du Plessis' side - so there are still signs that Matfield does not provide adequate support in scrumming.   I grant you that Matfield took all the balls in line outs thrown in by the Springboks - but it was over to De Jager to take a ball frown in by the Welsh.    Most of the younger locks would have done as well as Matfield did - if not better - in line outs.  At least they are much stronger physically than Matfield is. 

Last week the Beast was better when Bakkies (who was scrumming behind Jannie) left the field. This week the scrum is still not what it should be because Matfield, who was scrumming behind Steenkamp, does  not provide enough support. You poor simple sod.



SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
17 Jun 2014, 15:20
#25
17 Jun 2014, 15:20#25
Vlagshit, let me guess, you reckon you know what you are talking about......the only thing you are good for is drawing in the wagons at night and lying  
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
17 Jun 2014, 15:27
#26
17 Jun 2014, 15:27#26
 Gaan slaap Soutpiel. Jy weet nog steeds fokol.
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
17 Jun 2014, 15:28
#27
17 Jun 2014, 15:28#27
Exposed liar  
— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news