Cardinelli's Power Rankings for the WC

I'd put Wales and Australia ahead of the Boks. Cardi placing the Boks ahead of England is the usual Saffer chest beating before a fall. 

That said, so much usually changes once the competition kicks-off. Priority number one before then is to be fit and ready, armed with a full strength squad. 

Well we can at least say that we go to RWC as the only undefeated  team this year.

True. I think the Boks are contenders in a tightly packed group of more favourable contenders. We are unbeaten, and had the plastics not gone over-board in their estimation of the RC, I'd have spoken more optimistically. It's so typical of Saffers to beat their chest with hollow victories and then shriek in despair at the very first sight of trouble. There appears no middle ground. No rationality. Lügnerin has campaigned hard for the coach who has defied every "golden rule" of the game, installing a game plan he would otherwise be scathing day in and day out. It's been an odd build-up to the World Cup. 

Liza Page

I specifically did not comment on this thread - until you came up with your standard BS.   I have no problem with  Erasmus's game plan - it worked and the results proved that it does,

I have always said there was NO game plan in evidence under Meyer,   I repeatedly used Meyer's own words to support why I said there was effectively no real game plan.   What you described as Meyer's game plan you will find zero evidence of it in any test the Springboks played in.   

Let me explicit.   Meyer did say that the SA backline players lack the ball skills to play a ball in hand game.   He also said that he select players on the basis of what he claims "I know what the players are capable of'

End result shuffling the ball around amongst the forwards with virtually nothing positive about repetitive and predictable garbage.                

Oh but you do. Aimless kicking, poor use of the ball, predictable, being out-coached, poor selections. We can break this down to the finest nuance of detail and we find Rassie contradicts you. The only thing that binds you to this man is your bitter hatred of Meyer. Nothing more, nothing less.

I don't believe that quote, and as it happens, Meyer's Boks out-produced Rassie Boks ball-in-hand. As it happens, he got much more out of Willie throughout 2015. Everything you speak is wrong. If you want shuffle ball, look no further than the current team. It's use of the ball is well behind all other tier one nations, even several tier 2 teams. Blunt bashing, slow static passes behind predictable screens that get caught well behind the gainline ( many metres in fact), quick shuffles to a wing who has to kick or cut back into traffic where we exert too many resources to secure possession for another slow phase the opposite direction. This is hilarious. I applaud your devotion. Without it, I may not have had the sustained interest to watch the World Cup. 

Read CC's post on you - never learn - always a total idiot.  Yes they were shuffling the ball around ineffectively and lost all three RC games as well as the Japan game in the WC for exactly that reason.

Sure in the first five games in 2015 the Meyer duds lost four of the games and was lucky to win the fifth one when playing the Argentina "B" team in the only WC warm-up game.   End of story, 

Meyer did make the statements about the back line players inability to play a ball in hand game and about the famous one about the player selection norm he used.  The first remark was made in 2013 and the latter remark was when critical questions were asked about the squad selection for the 2015 WC.   

You are doing what you always do - you see what you want to see and do not see what discredit your BS on site.

Now go and see what CC wrote about you - LMAO,     

Strzok 

Weird how you and Liza Page suddenly after years of debate when reference was constantly made about Meyer's idiocy you claimed the quotes were not real. 

If you want to find them you can - but let me remind you to one classical statement of yours - 90%  pf the functions of a flyhalf relates to kicking of the ball  when defending the BS displays of your dear Morne.   Look for that one and you will find the Meyer idiotic quote as to backline play as well.   

The other one was at the press conference after the 2015 WC squad was announced - that you could also found if you try.

See how the site duds run away from facts when exposed for being rugby illiterates,               

You claimed I lied - prove it simpleton.

I did not make up anything - Meyer did make those statements and if you want to say he did not proof it.  Those two issues was mentioned a number of times on  this  site and his words quoted.  Youi did not dispute it then and actually supported him  in that  idiocy,   No rugby brain plus no rugby brain is still no rugby brain,  

"Those two issues was mentioned a number of times on  this  site and his words quoted.  Youi did not dispute it then and actually supported him  in that  idiocy,  "

Jirre maar jy is dof. Where in the world do you prove a negative. You said the issues were mentioned. Moz said BS. How do you expect him to prove that something, that he doesn't believe exist, does indeed exist?

No mate. The burden of proof in this case, I'm afraid, is on you. 

That is why I drew the Mueller comparison. The entire legal fraternity was in agreement that Mueller, as a prosecutor, was never in a position to declare that he could not exonerate Trump because he couldn't. He had to either say that he had obstructed justice, and provided the prove or he should have confirmed that there was no proof and then declined to prosecute. In other words he should and could not have proved a negative. This is what you are expecting Moz to do, i.e. what Mueller wrongfully did, which was to try and prove a negative.

I think this is the article referred to. This sounds like a very defeatist Meyer right after the World Cup in 2015.

Ceradyne

Really simple  you and Mozart rake up postings of the past and then try and use it,   Mueller on the other hand refused to investigate what really happened and tried to find something that was non-existent legally,   

The Obama Administration got involved on illegality and what happened has been exposed - but Mueller came out with a report on a political issue to cover up that illegality.   To compare that with statements made by Meyer himself is totally illogical.

Easy to deny what Meyer himself said because he happened to be totally silly at the time and when he was quoted on site from the media quoting his actual words nobody claimed he did not say it -  years later Strzok suddenly claimed Meyer never said what he did say,   One can compare that lie with what the real Strzok came up with and for which he and a lot of other people is likely to serve time in jail for.

I'm not interested in any quote, I'm looking at the games themselves. You always dance around the issue, slinging mud. You've been beaten to a pulp every time you foolishly bring up 2015. You never seem to learn from past experience. 

Liza drooler

I have never been beaten into anything - neither have I succumbed to idiocy like you did.    

You have never understood the use of  stats in evaluation anything that is why you constantly preach idiocy on site,

Let me explain something and maybe you will understand.   There are two aspects attached to stats and that is easy to explain - but for morons like you, Strzok and Comey impossible to understand:-

*    The rugby stats you looked at is a combination of raw data - it does not men that the outcome of what happened is necessarily in line with the stats.

*    Any logical person would then look at what was the effect of the stats and for that one has to look at whether it led to points being scored - after all the objectives of the game of rugby is to score points and prevent the opposing team from scoring more points than your team  did.

Insofar as individual players are  concerned the raw stats must be used to determine trends in player performances.  If a player has one brilliant performance in 1 tests and failed o n the five other games in a series the real effect is that he failed as a player,

No gets back to stats in a team context,   One has to look at the results of the team activities,    If the team has been extremely active carrying the ball  and there is no result in scoring of points  the fact is that the team efforts have been a futile  exercise.

So where does the above bring us to.    Stats can show us why games are won or lost - but it is often enough not showing us why favourable stats does not necessarily lead to winning of games. 

For that we have to look at two other things as well, namely -

.           

Duplication

No  Strzok

Always BS always misleading.   Some of the starting players in that Japan test never played in another game in the WC series, while soe like Penaar played in total for 10 minutes,  Two were injured in the Samoa game (De Villiers -  seriously and Matfield probably a fake injury as he was never treated on the field of play and just walked off)

Be it as it may - Matfield never played again until he came rom the bench in the semi and f#cked up royally.

As to the game plan of Meyer reverting to additional SA rugby - whatever that was since there is no such thing ever in existence - Meyer just buggered up badly,   If there was a game plan involved it was based on the Bulls game plan of 2004 or thereabouts when Meyer was the Bulls coach - kick the skin off the balls and do not let the ball go past the 12 whose only function was to crashball.

Maybe you regarded that as traditional SA Rugby.   Meyer was lucky - he had about two or three youngsters that pulled the team in the WC from the mess he caused.    .    .                

Duplication

Comey

He said what I wrote years before the WC and that was just one of the follow-ups on what he said previously - in a way  confirmation of his attitude throughout  his period as Springbok coach.    

The other part of what he said about his selection strategy was at the press conference after the WC squad was selected and when he was challenged as to selection of players who did not play any rugby for up to 18 months before the start of the WC.   

Thanks anyway.   Just to add to Strzok's misrepresentation - before the 2013 Johannesburg test  Meyer said that he would like to see less kicking in the game and as a result Morne lost the plot completely.  When he had to kick he did not and when he did kick he made a mess of it,   Witness the Messam second try at the end  of the first half.   He was right - the kicking was always poor and aimless - especially on the part of Morne. 

“  Posted by: clevermike (37678 posts)

Liza drooler

I have never been beaten into anything - neither have I succumbed to idiocy like you did.     “

I cannot believe that you have gone and done it again:

Is Stade Francais trying to get rid of Morne Steyn

The media is absolutely clueless. The fans even worse. They don't know what they want and their memories do a hard reset after each cycle, hence they never learn. Meyer was the balanced modern approach, Coetzee was the all guns blazing approach and Rassie is the skop 'n pop wizard.

It was unfortunate that Meyer struggled to find a solid ball carrier to replicate Alberts. His injury, along with Jean, that was a devastating blow to our World Cup. Frans ruling himself out due to the sudden death of his brother was another. I can't recall the circumstances surrounding Flip, but if he wasn't injured etc, this would have been an avoidable final nail. Rassie has options galore.

This is the funniest Lizatjie as ever written,  Alberts the solid ball carrier with an average territory gain of 2,2 meters per carry - who was clumsy and fairly easily tackled.  Fransie was a toptalflop in 2014 and 2015 and any a lunatic will consider him a fitting squad member.   He still is and a mistake selection by Erasmus,  And penalty king Flippie the clueless.

This is about as clueless any rugby supporter can become.   Thank heavens the clueless Meyer is gone,   He did select 8 players in the WC squad and that is why they lost the Japan test,  The useless prevailed and gifted the Japanese a win.   He had managed to reduce Pollard to a kicking dummy and for the rest one can only laugh at idiotic selection.

Erasmus is a rugby genius and he can see things that Lizatjioe does not even know exists,   What I cannot understand is how a person can make such a monumental fool of himself on what he writes on site,      "The media is absolutely clueless. The fans even worse." 

What the hell does he think he is superior to all other rugby lovers - they are fools and he knows what is correct.  I think it is common knowledge that some lunatics  believe they are sane and everybody else are lunatics.   Is  Lizatjie suffering from the same malady?   I think not - he is too stupid for that.  LMAO       

Alberts required a concentrated effort to neutralise him. We don't have carrier like that right now. In 2014 to 2015 there were many who tried to replicate that power, all failed. Most prominent of these was Coetzee. Blown away by Los Pumas each and every time he faced them. No, that gainline dominance is the heart and soul of Bok rugby. With it, we were a mighty force to be reckoned with. 2013 remains the best and most powerful Bok side of the decade with by far the best loose trio of that span of time: Thor, Alberts, Louw. Flip augmented that power to an obscene level. All three heavy hitters at the breakdown making it almost impossible for teams to control their ball. Steph is a poor man's blindsider. Treacle carries, the Damian of the backrow. Certainly not worthy to occupy Albert's shadow. Your desperate bleatings inform me that you know it. A triggered individual is convicted of the truth. 

The problem is Lizatjie - where did you get that story from about the best loosie combination in a decade,  All  three slow with Alberts taking the cake in that one.  All three made a weirdly low number of tackles and  Alberts had the distinction of missing tackles constantly.  None of them ever had the pace to get to breakdown points slightly out wide and Alberts to this day does not know the meaning of the phrase "ball protection and recovery".

Du Toit is ten times the loosie Alberts ever was  - a slow prop pretending to be a loosie.   When I read things like the above I cannot believe  how anyone could have that little rugby knowledge to write tripe like this.  LMAO

Lizatjie you are a laugh a minute - keep it up. 

If metres gained was reported separately for open play vs rucks (no space) - it could measure the battle of collisions and forwards playing a tight game. 

Alberts lacked basic skill and finesse, but he was a brute that dominated collisions. His role was to play tight, which worked well with locks like Matfield, Juandre Kruger, who both played looser at the ruck.

Alberts bust tackles and carried a few of the opposition on his back. He was like a heavyweight boxer that made the opposition battered and bruised. His robust play eventually caught up with him, and did not have the all-round game to compensate for this loss, and was a spent force by the 2014 EOYT. 

In the 2012 and 2013 Tests against England, Alberts was good. It is true, he is a bit like Vonipula in his contribution to the arm wrestle at breaking the 1st line of defence at the ruck. 

If neither team is getting around the first line of defence, then the only option is to go over it. 

Strzok

Did Vunipola - Billy or was it Vinnie - not play in the June 2018 tests against the Springboks and was totally ineffective at best?    

Strzok

Did Vunipola - Billy or was it Vinnie - not play in the June 2018 tests against the Springboks and was totally ineffective at best?    

Bot on the one I usually use -   stats.espnscrum.com/scrum/rugby/records/team/match_results.html?id=2018;type=year

Have fun Strzok