Cherished fan beliefs defrocked in the CC final

1 Gelant should be starting for the Boks.....handling errors, one leading to a try and failures under the high ball....yes there was one snipe before a Bools try and a few mazy runs, but nothing exceptional. . 2 The Lions centre pairing is the best we have....today without Jantjies they looked slow and toothless, although Vorster did beat the hapless EB Viljoen once. Jones looked easily the best centre on the park. . 3 Bosch should be on the Bok bench...horribly exposed by Odendaal for a Bools try, he was pretty much a kicking option. He made a decent regulation skip pass for one try. . 4 Schreuder or van Zyl should be the Bok material. Van Zyl’s charged kick was outrageously poor and Schreuder wasted a lot of ball, at best adequate. .. 5 The Du Preez twins are future greats. These slow small locks are useful in the tight/loose but hopelessly cumbersome in general play....and their hands remain sad, gifting the second half kick off try. . 6 Nkosi should be touring.....he didn’t do much wrong but never looked particulrly incisive, van Wyk certainly looks the better near term option. . 7 Maakniks is back....no he isn’t, missed penalty touch kicks, missed goal kicks and no gravitas . 8 The new loosies at WP, the Lions and Bools are a step up....nope, the best loosies on display today were Nizaam Carr and Keegan Daniels. . 9. The Bools are rising because of Mitchell....actually the Sharks playing a tight traditional game put them away easily. What they have gained in handling is lost by poor application and the alarming fall in their general forward play. . 10 The Lions have a new model that works regardless of the players.....without Mostert, Whiteley, Kriel and Jantjies they were a rabble.....especially the backline without Jantjies, food for thought. .

The heading should read ‘CC semi finals’....apologies for any confusion.

Nothing new here,   Th e one-incdent jargon goes on and on.   Some comments are seriously funny.   

 
Ok ... so Gelant is out ... and who would you have us see at 15? Willie Le Roux?

Ok ... so Janse van Rensburg and Vorster are not up to the task ... who would you then have at centre ... Jones and De Jongh?

Ok ... Schreuder and van Zyl aren't options at 9 ... who then? Ruan Pienaar?

Ok ... The Du Preez twins are no good ... not test material ... who then ... Carr and Daniels?

Ok ... Nkosi is not up to the task ... trhe thought of him wearing the green and gold is absurd ... who then ... Van Wyk? LOL!!!

Ok ... Marnitz isn't the 10 we're looking for. Who then ... Frans Steyn?? Waaaaaahahahahahaaaaaa!!!

Mitchell it seems is also not the answer at the Bulls. I wonder if Heyneke is available?

So Jantjies is the glue that keeps the Lions together as a unit, right? Without him we're lost.

So much negativity ... anything positive perhaps?

 CC
Ther problem is that Mozart for the first time saw some of the players he listed, but he saw some negatives and then went on to make his career-defining decisions because they made a single mistake or even two.    Those incidents we will read about  for the next five years,
Two of the players Schreuder and Van Zyl scored tries - but that is not mentioned at all That makes it very, very funny.  
I was mot overly impressed by Van Rensburg and Vorster - but that does not mean they are to be condemned outright.   I think the service they got did not allow for any type of ball-in-hand play and the WP loosies caused problems for them.   Watch out for that youngster Van Dyk - playing at 7 for WP,  
The case is clear - our respected member's knowledge of rugby is limited..   Criticizing Mitchell is based on absolute BS.   The Bulls for the first time in years are showing positives and it must be acknowledged that Mitchell in fact only reallys s tarted coaching the CC team halfway through the season and what he achieved brought them through to the semi.  
Himmell - I have asked repeatedly what SA traditional Rugby meant and have never had even a half-decent response - it really is the idea that it is the function of the half-backs to kick balls away and then hope the recipients make mistakes,      
You must also remember that Mozart has his own norms - the older the better is one of those.   We should get Matfield and Schalk Burger, as well as a dozen other oldies back and everything will be fine.   I think for instance that two mistakes by youngsters caused the Sharks win - not entirely  positive play by the Sharks?  
Remember - in the case of Mozart scoring of tries is not of any value.   No wionder he is so disorientated when it comes to rugby evaluations.  
Incidentally I like Van Wyk as a wing - he has been abused by Coetzee while playing for WP -  he got very few starting games with them - the dummy preferred midgets such as Leyds to him.  

It’s all true.....every word in my posting. The fact that it doesn’t solve any issues is not an accident....I’m discarding the myths. Those myths will die a natural death, but we will cling on to the myths for a while.....wasting precious time. Just as we clung on to JJ, Allende, Lambie, Reinach, Lomp, Arno Botha. The signs were clearly there for all these players but fans made a case for them, as did commentators and coaches.......all a literal waste of time. .. I post the facts....use them or discard them .....live in a fantasy world. I really don’t care.

Mozart
Why  don't you start thinking before you make sweeping statements,   In the first instance you attacked Mitchell when he was only taking over the coaching duties  of the Bulls halfway through the season when the Bulls were sailing around bottom of the log.  In five week he coached them into being competitive and into the semi's.   I do not know of any other coach - inclusive of those who got fired - eho vould do that in sych a short period of time.
Secondly - how many of the players you listed above have you never seen playing before the game yesterday?   How many matches have you actually seen in the CC this year?
Thirdly why did you not mention anything about the tries being scored in the Sharks-Bulls game or is try-scoring still of no value in rugby.
Finally what the hell is traditional SA Rugby?   And when did it become  traditional?          

First...the Bools team was poorly coached in all the set pieces and on the deck, for you fools good coaching is a few offloads. . Second...there are players I haven’t seen, but their ability to perform under pressure is what we need to assess. Yesterday was the first good test, if some of these flops make it to Super Rugby the standard will be higher yet. . Third....you mean the Schreuder try handed to him on a plate? I wasn’t reviewing the whole game, only stress testing the kind of myths you believe in. .. Fourth...if you don’t know our traditional game after watching so much rugby I can’t help you.

 Mozart
Are you nuts or something?   The story is that the Bulls do not have quality props and you cannot blame Mitchell for that - so the set piece story is nonsense.   Mitchell will bring in worthy players to help out on that element sooner rather than later..   Secondly coaching goes wider than set pieces and on the deck and surprise-  surpriase  it includes the whole scenario.  I ca n understand your feelings on the issue since you obviously feel that coaches like White, Meyer and Ludeke are  proper coaches despite the fact that they were totally clueless about backline usage.
So you have not seen some players yet you have determined they are useless  after you have seen them once only - so what else is new = we will indeed get that refrain of your story for the next five years repetitively.
Bugger it the man is trying to find fault with players just because I mentioned some players to be considered in future.   That confirms the situation - if somebody on site write favourably on a player you go on a fault-finding expedition,   Is that your only interest as a rugby supporter?  Have you nothing better to do?
The traditional game myth has been dealt with extensively in the past - there is no such thing at all.    That is why I asked what you regard as the so-called traditional game.    .           

This low emotional twaddle is a waste of time....cork it unless you have contradictory evidence, stats, incidents, qualified opininons.

 
We are looking toward building our national side ... which means that we have to put a few feelers out. It's called trial and error.

If I recall correctly you had much to say about Marx at one time, didn't you Mozart? He's no Bismark blah, blah, blah ... and will never be ... yet it seems you're singing a different tune these days. 

Remember when you said that Jantjies was useless ... only to do a 180 on that and declare him the answer ... but that was short lived as the inevitable 360 was already on it's way ... now I see you're a fan again ... till next week ... or the week there after.

I do not discard a player as easily as you do, Mozart ... I do not suddenly rate failed players like Nizaam Carr as Bok potentials all based on a single poor performance by one of the obvious stars in the country.

You jump from one to the next ... and then back again.

As for posting facts ... well ... we both know that to be a lie ... you twist facts as it pleases you and then twist them even further when you're tired of the argument.

You have no credibility here, Stipid ... all because you post silly little things about egg laying counter ruck theories that only work in your deluded mind.

I have a question for you ... are you drunk? You sound as though you've had one too many. Perhaps you should sleep it off before you make a bigger fool of yourself.

Oh and I think I'll rather discard these supposed "facts" of yours. They're as much use to me as you counter ruck theory was.

Mozart
This has nothing to do low emotional twaddle as you call it on my part - In fact it is emotional and prejudiced twaddle on your part.
You ask for stats - while you produce no stats and any supporting evidence to support your sweeping statements.  
Really too funny - the above nonsense ,   

You see CC you have it all wrong. No team ever evolved because of experiments....they get there by selecting the right players and building the team around them. That’s what Jake did, that’s what NZ does.....hell even Oz are building around stalwarts like Beale, Kuridrani, Foley, Genia, Hooper, Kepu. .. Being critical is the essence of finding the right players....assessing whether the talent is really there before wasting years or seasons on players like Stepfontein. .. And just to put the record straight I certainly wouldn’t choose Carr, but he was better than all the newbies in his game. And no I wouldn’t select Jantjies, all the things I said about him 4 years ago are true. All that I’m saying is the Lions have built the game around him and Vorster/Rohan are toothless without his pop passes. .. And no I always thought Marx was a potential test great....but his lineout throwing is very sub par. .. And no I’m not drunk, I really don’t drink that much. My last pop was about a week ago. . I’m perfectly willing to debate this in a civilized way, or you can throw out a few more insults, declare victory and make common cause with the Comrade....either way I’m not that bothered.

Here is an extract from Cardinelli, the only SA reporter that maintains objectivity...he makes the same points: ‘ ‘ Gone are the days when a good Currie Cup guaranteed one’s chances of national selection. The Currie Cup has become the Vodacom Cup in the sense that it provides youngsters and fringe players with an opportunity to vie for a place in a Super Rugby team. It’s in the Super Rugby tournament where players are judged and measured to determine their readiness for Test rugby. Indeed, it’s becoming harder and harder to take the Currie Cup seriously. The point has been made more than once over the past week regarding the flawed format. The Blue Bulls lost seven of their 12 league matches and the Golden Lions six, yet both progressed to the playoffs. Talk about rewarding mediocrity. Coetzee would do well to keep an eye on a few of the players competing across the knockout stage, though. Here we are talking about the non-contracted Boks, as well as the players who have already proved themselves in Super Rugby. Form must be a consideration for selection ahead of the tour to Europe. Injury robbed Lukhanyo Am of his chance to represent the Boks against France in June. The Sharks centre has since made a successful return to the field, and has gained some form and confidence. One would expect Am, as well as a few other Currie Cup players, to be on the flight to Europe in two weeks’ time. The Currie Cup does not boast the same intensity as the Super Rugby tournament. Yet something can be read into how the players perform in the playoffs. This past weekend, Bosch certainly showed that he can be counted on in pressure situations. The 20-year-old impressed in his first full season of Super Rugby. There were moments when his defence was exposed, and his coaches admitted that he would need to improve in this area if he hoped to own that No 10 jersey in future. Apart from that, Bosch boasted one of the strongest kicking games in the tournament. His ability to kick goals under pressure, and to sink long-range penalties and drop goals was rightly highlighted as an asset to the team. There were moments when Bosch was under pressure in the recent Currie Cup semi-final against the Bulls. The lowlight was Burger Odendaal running through Bosch to score a try.

 Ag foeitog - Mozart has missed the ship again with his now hero Cardinelli who is suddenly the been-all end-all of real rugby scribes - the only one to believe.  
We all know that the CC does not have the status it used to have before Super Rugby was introduced - but the fact is that it opens up the opportunities for younger laysers to come onto the scene.  
The next thing is to watch how the new players perform in Super Rugby and thens tart thinking about their future usage.  
Where some people misss the ship completely is that some of our members cannot accept that player identification through performance is  not worth studying -  for then performance is not a norm for future selection of Springboks.   They only believe in reputation and age as a norm,   LMAO     

RE: Predictions for Abs v OZ October 21, 2017, 05:31:02 AB's by 17+ ... Waaaaaaaahahahaha!

 Always wise after the fact - what a farce. LMAO

Remember Timo Swiel: RE: Timo Swiel- Fullback or Flyhalf January 11, 2013, 22:52:35 Sharkbok Ater watching that video - I called Swiel "the Ball Sense Wiz Kid" - he really is something special. I think he is equally good -whether at full back or at flyhalf. Even Saffex rates him as a better flyhalf than Pollard. We will see lots of him over the next decade. Let me add a prediction - within 5 years time this kid will play rugby for ENGLAND - because the politicos here will insist that place must be found for Earl Jantjies - the useless. .... Another great prediction gone wrong. Perhaps he is hunting with Goosen.

Oops are you sticking with your. Swiel plays 10 for England?

 Mozart 
Remember Graeme Smith and  dozens of over-the-hills others.   Remember the De Jongh' and others as well.   The list of his mistakes is endless - yet he blames others for looking at youngsters coming through and needing to be looked at in future,  
Problem is that I believe in performance as a norm - the age-maniac believes in reputation only as a basis for selection.
But  that really is not all.   When some members express an idea that future development of some younger players should be looked at - the result is normally to start studying games to try and identify deficiencies in such players by trolling through matches.   If obvious deficiencies are  not found - then the narrative is to invent such circumstances and falsify the situation in matches.
Question in response - are you still saying that at this stage Fat Fransie is still Springbok material at flyhalfor center?    
        

You believe in performance and you joined the ANC? Give me a break Comrade.

 What has the latter got to do with the rugby issues discussed?   Another personal attack on me, but that is normal with some of our local members,
 

9. The Bools are rising because of Mitchell....actually the Sharks playing a tight traditional game put them away easily. What they have gained in handling is lost by poor application and the alarming fall in their general forward play.

A bit hasty there... The Sharks did not really put them away easily, as the Bulls were actually in it 'till reasonably late in the game. Added to that two or even three of the Sharks tries were scored after mistakes by very young players in this position for the first time. The average age of the Bulls team is something like 23...

Then you have to consider the improvement over the period, as the Bulls in fact came close in some of their other matches. It is clear that there is also some structure returning to the Bulls play, which they definitely did not have under "Nullis".

They do however need some serious strengthening of the tight five, but the bunch of no-names actually managed to keep the Sharks quite busy for most of the game...

Maybe the Sharks should be ashamed that they conceded so many points with their "tight traditional game"?

 Another personal attack on me, but that is normal with some of our local members,
How's that song go.....
Oh its crying time again

 The truth
Unless you are sarcastic there is a lot of what you wrote about that is true.
A few years agothere was a lotof talk in the media about the poor props the Bulls are constantly fielding.   At the time the Bulls contracted three players of the Cheetahs - Strauss, Nyakane and Labuschagne - the latter to improve their loose forward dilemma.
We all know that Strauss and Nyakkane failed badly and that Labuschagne left because there were no future for him with the Bulls.    I am afraid that the bulls props are still deficient and they only have Pierre Schoeman who is actually meet requirements. Marutlelle was a vast improvement on Strauss     They need at least a back-up prop for Schoeman and two decent tighthead props.  
I think they should look around at the situation of the Cheetahs players and can also hunt around the minor unions toi see what theycan get.
Even though there are statements of narrow losses - the tendency did not arise after Mitchell halfway through the serious took over the coaching. himself.
I am sure that the Bulls next year in Super Rugby will perform much better than they did over the past two seasons and we will have tow ait and see what happens.