KAKalaedFreddie
Club Pro495 posts
KAKalaedFreddieClub Pro495 posts
16 Aug 2015, 00:02#2
But, Glen Jackson made a massive difference in officiating.
sharkbok
Captain23,282 posts
sharkbokCaptain23,282 posts
16 Aug 2015, 00:13#3
Yes the Boks seem more comfortable with a suffocating game pressuring the opposition in to mistakes.
The forwards in particular are more confident going forward than laterally from ruck to ruck.
They also defend better when all 15 people are behind the ball instead of committing too many players to the breakdown.
Lambie looks like he has sewn up the starting position as Pollard tactical kicking game is non existent.His cross kicks were not of much use- but he had a decent game. Pollard wants to run everything at the moment playing more like an inside centre than a classic flyhalf.
I don't think the Boks really played well as a unit- but it was something that the team was able to understand and build on.
It was a pity Leroux was not on the field- as his skills would have converted more of the opportunities.
Delande- He is a marked man now, and he over did the crash ball.
Matfield- organised the lineouts where we got our best possession, and had a decent all round game.
Pienaar- Solid, but not great. Made a few fumbles, and was sometimes pedestrian at clearing. His passes were mostly good finding Lambie or another runner.
Alberts - was solid
Kircher- Understands the game plan and was also getting involved as 2nd reciever. He player well- but weNeed Willie Leroux back- as he c ould have converted more of the opportunities.
Habana- looking good and still got some pace. His step is not as good as it was- but he is still top quality.
Mvovo- has a pretty good game, scoring probably the try of the match. When he gets into space he is dangerous.
Serfontein was like a lost fart in too much of rush.
The scrum was much better. Unclear if the problem is Bismaark or Koch.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
16 Aug 2015, 00:29#4
If you go back to the 2007 WC we beat Argentina and the Poms through our backs. We should be playing to our relative competitive advantage.
Against teams like Ireland, the Bargies and the Poms we should be able to win the backline battle. So we can tilt towards more adventurous play.
Against NZ, Oz, the Pacific Island teams and maybe even Wales we are at a disadvantage in terms of pure running. These sides have to be killed off up front.
So unlike NZ who plays pretty much the same strategy against every team....we seem to do best when we vary things a bit, but stay broadly within a controlled game plan. We are as dangerous as any team with turnover ball....the point is we need turnover ball, not stale phase play.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
16 Aug 2015, 05:01#5
The attack on Lambie by Dr Goebbels was expected. Lambie had a very good game - but Dr Goebbels tried to attack him by his Following starting statement:-
"I was afraid this was going to happen...Pat catches the Bargies on the rebound, and is handed a much simpler kicking role. So now we probably have him for the WC. There was some competent play but another dead kick when we had a 8 to 7 maul in the offing. And those cross kicks weren't good..a better first half."
If Steyn was playing and he had a similar performance - we would have none of the above rubbish - but a whole page of praise-songs about how good he was. But then Morne does not attack the gain line and Lambie did it 4 times and was quite effective in what he was doing.
The next story of Dr Goebbels was a repeat of his lies about De Jager. Lets look at the situation in line-outs story. In the previous game against Argentina - De Jager made 11 line-out calls and of those 5 went to himself and 1 to Etzebeth. In the game yesterday Matfield made 11 calls and five of those went to him,self and three to Etzebeth. The difference was that the Springboks tried the same method leading to the De Jager try twice and failed both times. The ball was not passed by Burger to Matfield - they obviously realized that Matfield cannot carry balls in traffic - but to Alberts and the latter could not get over the gain line at all. The 16 calls supposedly made by De Jager was exposed as a lie previously - but Dr Goebbels kept up with the same lie again.
Another Dr Goebbels comment was exposed as nonsense as well was his remark about De Jagers ball carries. He attacked De Jager for making 23 meters when eh carried the ball nine times making for an average meter gain of 2,56 meters. Yesterday Matfield carried the ball 6 times for a gain of 12 meters - average gain 2 meters per carry - but not a word about the so-called inadequacy of Matfield's carries.
So lets forget about the Dr Goebbels BS stories and get to a real evaluation.
Kirchner - carried the ball a considerable distance when collecting kicks of the Argentinians - but the carries did not entail linking up with the backline in attacking moves and normally ended up in a tackle ball situation - where he lost possession a number of times through a penalty ones and through a turnover of possession once, while on at least two other occasions the Springboks was penalized when they tried to protect balls after Kirchner was tackled. Not really a success story.
Habana showed much more enterprise than he showed during previous games this year and was effective in what he was doing. A food performance by him
Mvovo did better than the other players tried on the wing in tests this year and had a good game.
Kriel and De Allende had solid games - neither showed much in attacking play, but their defense was solid and they did not fail in defense.
Lambie had a good game and dictated play excellently. His kicking at goal was outstanding and it included a very good drop kick as well.
Pienaar was at best solid - nothing much to write home about.
Burger had a good game in general but he still gave away 2 penalties when eh tried to recover tackle ball.
Alberts was solid - but Du Toit looked much more fangerous in ball carries when he came on - leading to the following comments on his performance as reflected on ESPN - "Pieter-Steph du Toit has made a big impact as a flanker since replacing Willem Alberts".
Brussow had a much better game than he had thus far this far this year in tests. His defense was food and he showed much more enterprise in ball protection and recovery.
Matfield was solid - but did not show any abilities in ball carries in traffic and he did some better line-out jumping than he normally did in his last 4 tests.
Etzebeth was back to his normal strong game and not lethargic as he was in the Durban test. Some strong ball carries in traffic was in evidence. He was excellent in taking line-outs on opposition throw-ins taking 2 such line-outs.
The scrums was a vast improvement on what it was the previous week - but the player that gave the Springboks trouble last week (Ayersa) did not play this week.
Strauss had a good game - but the same cannot be said of Brits. he was poor in scrumming and did give away a short arm penalty and afterwards a penalty because of early engagement - a factor which is the responsibility of the hooker in scrumming.
Overall the lethargy of the previous test in Durban was not in evidence and the players performed better than in the previous test. Matfield and Alberts were at best average in performance and did not have any major impact in the game as a whole.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
16 Aug 2015, 05:36#7
Matfield 5 lineouts on his own throw and one on opposition throw....Etzebeth not excluded as he was with Lomp making the calls, 3 on his own throw 2 on opposition throw. The scrums more solid than before....the pack playing with cohesion under Matfield's leadership. More crow for the Pervster.
BObobbok...
Captain10,129 posts
BObobbok...Captain10,129 posts
16 Aug 2015, 05:52#8
Good to see the bricksh!thouse giant Alberts back in the mix .
Who t.f. decides to create a colour clash with the Bokke playing in white ? Madness .
50000 attendance, impressive, ole ........ shame on Durban's 27000 last week .
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
16 Aug 2015, 05:58#10
Alberts was a big part of what was missing in the Boks counter shove .....and counter rucking has always been our first line of defence against turnovers. We missed Alberts, everybody else will play better with his return. And we missed Matfield's nous and brilliant aerial takes. One second half kickoff he took today was particularly good.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
16 Aug 2015, 09:57#11
Du Toit spent far less time on the field than Alberts - and I believe what ESPN said - the the ramblings of Dr Goebbels and his lies.
Alberts made 2 runs gaining 75% of his meters and the other 5 never got over the gainline. That is a fact as well. Take for instance the try scored by De Jager the previous week. The Springboks tried it twice, but instead of off-loading the abll to DE Jager, it went to Alberts. He never got over the gain line and the method was not tried again.
This kind of BS is common in the case of Dr Goebbels. soi I will stay with what ESPN a\said about Du Toit:-
"Pieter-Steph du Toit has made a big impact as a flanker since replacing Willem Alberts."
His impact was bigger than the one of Alberts. He is much more difficult to tackle than Alberts and the tackle efforts on Du Toit constantly require more than 1 player to bring him down - in the case of Alberts in 90% of the cases one player is adequate.
What is going on here is that the commentators comment on Lambie is wrong and unacceptable according to Dr Goebbels - in the case of other players it is correct. How anyone can ever take anything as serious and correct comment about what Dr Goebbels writes, is a joke.
DEDezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
16 Aug 2015, 14:05#12
Lambie did nothing of note, one break. To be our starter? Ludicrous, but when the Boks crash out of the World Cup I'll be there laughing! Special mention to Brussow, excellent work rate, must have been the highest on the day from the looks of it. Kirchner was solid, but as I said before, he won't be the playmaker ala Willie. The centres were much better, the wings looked very good. How does one like Alberts and Victor? The pack was so much improved with their return the backs had to do relatively nothing.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
16 Aug 2015, 14:52#14
Dr Goebbels are you not ashamed of yourself fiddling with the ESPN stats - you stupid old fool?
Here are the real stats - BSter:-
Alberts0/000/0/81202017/11/000/0
du Toit0/000/0/51610003/00/000/0
3,2 meters average gain per carry is marginally better than 1,5 meter per carry?
Alberts made 7 tackles missing 1 playing for 64 minutes. Du Toit made 3 tackles in 17 minutes That means that Alberts average 9 minutes per tackle made and Du Toit less than 6 minutes playing time per tackle. Put it differently idiot - If Alberts stayed on for the full game his maximum tackle count would have been circa 9 tackles made. If Du Toit played for 80 minutes his tackle count could have been circa 14 to 15 tackles.
Go back to primary school and learn something in basic maths before you start talking crap on this site.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
16 Aug 2015, 15:33#15
ESPN revise their stats I presume after some kind of review. My numbers were totally accurate based on their initial data reproduced faithfully above. I never, ever fiddle with data.
Still I'm glad to see their numbers now reflect reality. Stephanie's clean break involved beating no tackles....he simply got the ball in space. Whereas Alberts hard yards involved beating two defenders.
Thanks for helping me make my point.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
16 Aug 2015, 16:14#16
Dr Goebbels
I fully realize they revise their stats - but I have never seen a revision where the final stats are near to 50% changed from a meter gain of 22 meters to one of 12 meters. Even the tackle stats are way too different from what they finally stated to be realistic.
Thanks - but no thanks. Your explanation about Alberts do not hold up - so try again. Just a reminder of what is clearly stated in ESPNscrum:-
"Pieter-Steph du Toit has made a big impact as a flanker since replacing Willem Alberts."
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
16 Aug 2015, 18:44#17
Oh you realize they change their stats? Why do I think you had no clue they changed their numbers. In falsely accusing me you have just exposed another instance of your ignorance.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
16 Aug 2015, 19:07#18
Dr Goebbels
I know they make minor changes to stats - but have never seen them making a major change like happened in the case of Alberts. It is not usual and to change 22 to 12 meters and tackles from 10 to 7. That makes me very suspicious of what happened here and I do not trust you to stick to the truth anyway.
DEDezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
16 Aug 2015, 19:48#20
Mozart doesn't lie about things like that. We may disagree on things, but lie about numbers that are accessible to the entire planet? Of course not. Besides, the numbers cannot tell you much, their defintion for successful tackles is too inconsistent and loose, and numbers regarding passes, kicks etc cannot provide the context to say when and where they occured, what the desired and actual outcomes were, what the opposition were doing in response to this. So the raw data you refer to as statistics are unreliable at best.
SASaffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SASaffolk Captain30,741 posts
16 Aug 2015, 20:11#21
Marcel yet again proved Moz knows fuck all about prop play or his ignorant calls on players. Marcel dominated his opposite number and that's a FACT. Moz don't ever feed us your bullshit that Marcel is not a test standard prop. Same can be said of Malherbe.
As for the one penalty against Marcel....what a load of shit that was. Apparently he slipped his bind....having rewound that scrum - no bind was slipped....but that's beside the point....Marcel made mince meat of the Argie 1.
Good to see Lambie also rub ignorant Moz s nose in it. Lambie had a good game....as calm and composed as they come.
Alberts was average....made little impression . PSDT was far far better when he came on...he actually bust tackles and made an impression with ball in hand.
Etzebeth was back to his best. We missed Lood, Matfield is a useless passenger.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
16 Aug 2015, 20:37#22
DF
I do not trust Dr Goebbels to speak the truth about anything as he lied to often in the past - he would consistently do it if he thinks a player he supports need it. Take for example the 16 calls he claimed for De Jager having been made only a week ago - there was never ever anything like that - yet he insisted on it and kept repeating it despite the fact that he was repeatedly told to get the true situation into account.
There is not a single coach in top rugby that do not study stats as an indication or performance. They do so over a series of games - since it gives a reliable indication of tendencies in player performances. Even Meyer has on occasion referred to the stats of certain players. Tendencies in players indicate where there is a need for further specialist coaching and improvements required in players. Continuous tendencies also influence selections and a player can find him on the trash heap f he constantly under-performs.
The situation is that specialists studies videos and stats as part and parcel of review programmes of matches. That brings both what you call context and stats into the determination of their coaching programmes. - so stats is and will always be one of the important facilities in performance evaluation.
I never disregarded on what happens on the field of play - neither do I slant the situation to support my comments on players I like or dislike. I also agree with you stats in one match does not necessarily project the full tendency in player performances - but the same tendency is noticeable in a whole series - that tendency is accepted as one of the norms for player evaluation.
The normal tendency on this site is to say all stats must be disregarded - as they do not show context - but you would find those claims only when the stats do not support the wild claims some makes on this site or player performance evaluation. If for instance there is a wild claim made by somebody about the abilities of a player in attacking rugby - and it virtually is statistically indicated to the contrary in a series - then it is clear that a fairy tale is being spread in the hope that some gullible person will swallow the bait.
The day when you start evaluating players without prejudice - that day a reasonable person can start taking note of your evaluations. Until that happens reasonable people can only shrug them off for what they are - silly attempts to discredit players you do not like.
AJArthur John
Pro1,748 posts
AJArthur JohnPro1,748 posts
16 Aug 2015, 20:41#23
Saffex, Agree with your comments. But I honestly cannot see the Springboks taking on the All Blacks and even making a game of it never mind winning. To late for Meyer to change now but I am sure that he has all the old times lined up for the WC. Matfield, Burger, Zane K, M Steyn, du Preez, Habana, Alberts, Pienaar, Jannie, Peterson plus Moz will all be at the WC unfortunately as players except for the latter who will be here continuing to drag the forum down to his level with stupid commentary about their excellent plays and muscle.
Cheers.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
16 Aug 2015, 21:23#24
Dave
Unfortunately we are facing the silly season here - as AJ said earlier - and Mey er will select the duds he mentioned. In the meantime we also have the fools here on site supporting the silly season fare Meyer is going to feed us with in the WC.
After watching the game a second time I agree with you about Alberts and Matfield - nothing to write home about. The other player with a poor performance record yesterday was Pienaar - he really was p!ss poor.
MOMonsterBok
Club Pro442 posts
MOMonsterBokClub Pro442 posts
17 Aug 2015, 04:16#25
My assessment of the Starting 15Zane - Too many turn-overs against him, stay at home.Mvovo - Took his opportunity, looks our best prospect at 14Kriel - Solid performance, nothing special, few opportunities. Best 13Damien - Much the same as Kriel.Brian - Best enthusiasm we've see. Our best 11Lambie - Very good game, not that successful in the cross kicks - Our best 10Pienaar - A solid game at best - he'll have to do because Meyer has'nt tried anyone else. Burger - Solid, but please recover Duane I beg you.Alberts - Solid showing for a first hitout from fatso. But NOT the super hero others think.Brussow - Best test so far.Skinny Victor - Solid alround game. Weak in carrying the ball, but will go to RWC.Eben - Hard as nails.Marcel - Jump aboard, you're coming.Adriaan - Exactly what he needed, a bit of game time. Thank you.Trevor - Well done, you're also coming.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
17 Aug 2015, 04:55#26
Monsterbok
The weak components in the squad would be the inevitable Meyer selections of De Villiers, Pienaar, Alberts and Matfield. None of them with their injury and deficient performance records will be in any WC squad of any of the top 10 rated international teams. That is the main reason why I think Meyer has fouled up badly in his squad development over the past few years and we are in a mess now. Instead of developing a reasonable squad of experienced players - he buggered around with has-beens or never-has-beens in a continuous stream of hopeless selections without any regard to the requirements of the upcoming WC.
I think that Meyer is a reasonable coach of forwards - with a serious defective knowledge of backline coaching - but his selection of players he was acquainted with in the past was a recipe for disaster. Our performance record over the last year showed the futility of his selection shenanigans.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
17 Aug 2015, 05:42#28
Funny stuff from the doom and gloom brigade. This was supposed to be a terrible Bok team according to them. Now rather than admitting their own errors.....Kirchner, Mvovo, Pienaar, Matfield, Alberts and Schalk....they exaggerate the contributions of Marcel scrumming against a nothing Bargie prop, Stephanie who made one run through open field when the Bargies were beaten...he bust no tackles, not one.
As for Lambie he kicked well....he kicked a lot...it was a typical kicking game plan. With the Bok pack led by Alberts and Etzebeth dominating up front andPienaar providing slick service, he was untroubled. But one only has to think back to Wales to recall Lambie under pressure.
Pollard was asked to play an expansive game in tests we were under a lot of pressure.....Lambie a simple kicking game in a game we dominated....which goes whoosh over the heads of the doom and gloomers
MOMonsterBok
Club Pro442 posts
MOMonsterBokClub Pro442 posts
17 Aug 2015, 06:18#30
Moz,I'm not against Fat Alberts, and I wish he could return to his old self, dominating the collisions and carrying the ball with power. I saw only a little of this on Saturday, which I think is reasonable to expect after his long absence, BUT to place him on a pedestal as you have is nothing shot of far fetched.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
17 Aug 2015, 08:53#31
Monsterbok
You must realize you are dealing with delusion here. Alberts dominated NOTHING on Saturday - his ball carries was in fact poor - but Mozart will make out it was the contrary and that Alberts have had a massive game.
It is much like the way he blamed De Jager for the lethargic performance of Etzebeth the previous week. Etzebeth for some reason or another was lethargic - so the dimwit had to find a reason and he blamed De Jager for it by inventing a lie that had no basis for it.
I thought that Pienaar was poor yesterday - but he would make out that Pienaar was the reason for Lambie's good performance and his first sentence on the game was an attempt to try and demonize Lambie. Even the heading of the thread was aimed at Lambie - nobody else.
You must always remember that Mozart has ulterior aims at whatsoever he writes on this site. His primary aim is to criticize the players he does not like and that list is endless - the only players he really supports are in fact those who played in the 2007 WC and some additions from the 2011 WC. Nobody since - bar perhaps Etzebeth - is supported by him. So criticize players and suggest further dud performers - since he cannot find any justification for those duds to be supported.
The same goes for DF - I just learnt one thing and that is that when it comes to their viewpoints on players it is better to just laugh and ignore their stupidity.
TTThe_Truth
Club Pro471 posts
TTThe_TruthClub Pro471 posts
17 Aug 2015, 09:39#32
How to identify bullsh.it all around...
Lood is God! Marcell Coetzee is a powerhouse!
leads to: Pathetic scrums, predictable lineouts. Panic. and a LOSS!
Matfield is a useless passenger! Alberts is average!
leads to: Much improved scrums. Authority in the lineouts and the option for a few drives. Calmness and a WIN!
Apparently I also prefer the useless passenger and the average Alberts... As long as we win!
Apparently PSDT was also better when he came on.... HAHAHA!!! Despite the fact that the game was already sewn up at that stage, half the Argentinian team were fatigued, his wonderful impact, that is beyond human understanding, led to ZERO points being scored... Great improvement indeed!
Interesting, but the planning was that Alberts was going to play for 30 minutes only. But he did so well, that he was kept on for much longer...
Seems we need much more useless passengers and average players... At least they contribute t o the TEAM and WINNING!
17 Aug 2015, 09:50#33
Well I guess we're world beaters now that we defeated the 8th ranked team's experimental 3rd stringers by a mere 14 points.
We got our revenge.
Hallafrigginallujah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Meyer must be so proud!!!!
It took us 5 test matches to chalk up a win.
Impressive.
I saw a non-effective Alberts gasping for breath by the time he ran onto the field ... and then he disappeared ... was nowhere to be seen ... not the juggernaut certain elder confused folk claim him to be ... but rather a timid, lost, out of shape, king size prop pretending to be a blindside flanker.
Me thinks he should consider retirement.
Lappies would have been much more effective.
I saw the usual garbage from Pienaar who's only play seems to be that of passing and kicking. No attempted line breaks. Nothing special on attack nor on defense ... as usual ... someone that the opposition needn't be concerned about. Predictable, easy to read, nothing special about Meyer's front line scrummie.
Faff would have been much more effective there.
I saw Matfield attempt to run over Sanchez ... only to be embarrassed by being tackled backward and landing with a mighty thud on his back.
This elderly, out of place chump can't get us any go forward. He goes to ground at every tackle only to find himself rucked over and lying on the wrong side.
Oh well ... I guess Meyer has the right to select him ... he is after all our WC Captain.
Personally, PSDT, Willemse and every other lock in the country would have been much more effective there.
I saw Marcell stand his man against a powerful scrum only to be replaced by the useless Malherbe ... why Meyer even needed to sub Marcell is beyond me.
So pleased Jannie wasn't in the mix. We would have had to endure many scrum penalties if he were.
I saw my starting loosehead prop play a wonderful match ... in the tight and in the tight loose. What a difference he made.
Why is Beast still in the mix??
I saw a wonderful display by Pat Lambie. He's deceptively strong on his feet and lead the troops like a true professional.
Apart from those who would not see ... those who prefer the mediocre Fat Fransie and Morne ... only their standard criticism can be expected ... how else wouLd they try to save face?
As I've said on several occasions, Pat has no better in the country ... is streets ahead of everyone else. He should have been selected as our premier 10 right from the start.
He displayed a lot of leadership qualities ... encouraging the boys, pumping them up with positive words ... unlike the sullen Mattie.
I would go so far as to suggest that he's our future Bok Captain.
17 Aug 2015, 10:22#34
"Well I guess we're world beaters now that we defeated the 8th ranked team's experimental 3rd stringers by a mere 14 points."........"As I've said on several occasions, Pat has no better in the country ... is streets ahead of everyone else. He should have been selected as our premier 10 right from the start.
He displayed a lot of leadership qualities ... encouraging the boys, pumping them up with positive words ... unlike the sullen Mattie.
I would go so far as to suggest that he's our future Bok Captain."
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
17 Aug 2015, 10:41#35
CC
You are wrong - you should not write anything that would go straight over the head of the deluded on the site.
Factual things like an inability to carry balls in traffic does not count at all. The line-outs were faultless this week - but was it any different the previous week? Last week Etzebeth took one opposition line-out on their throw - this week he took two. Last week there was no lost line-outs the Argentinians took from us - this week Matfield managed to lose one throw-in - no word of that.
Then there was the attacks on our forwards last week - when most of them were going through the motions. But Alberts went through the motions on Saturday - when he was according to Dr Goebbels a powerhouse. But the bad doctor had to attack Du Toit on extremely dubious grounds to justify Alberts deficient ball carries.
Flippie when he came on last week contributed zero to the game - this week the same - but he is the superhero to Dr Goebbels who must be in the Springbok squad ahead of De Jager.
One can go on and on by their BS - but it won't help. Thi forum is ample opportunity to discuss rugby - they discuss delusions.
By the way I cannot remember when last I saw a lock being tackled back into a heap and the Boks lost ball possession by a backline player like Sanchez did to Matfield on Saturday. Can you?
TTThe_Truth
Club Pro471 posts
TTThe_TruthClub Pro471 posts
17 Aug 2015, 10:50#36
Dear Idiot-mike
If Matfield and Alberts are so crap.... And someone like Lood is so fu.cking wonderful.... Then why in fu.cks name did we lose by such a fu.cking huge margin last week?
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
17 Aug 2015, 12:24#38
The Trooth Fai9ry
Ever since Matfield returned we lost more matches than we won when he was playing - anybody blind could see the reason. Our forwards were dominated by the opposition. Even in games we won Matfield fouled up badly and in three cases was an inch from losing the games by his personal poor play. The man is the most feeble lock in the competition and a huge liability in Tight 5 play. It is only the extreme ignorant that cannot see that for themselves and ignore the opinions of previous Springbok locks on the issue. Even Bakkies Botha humorously said Matfield was not always moonlighting in the backline - by implication he was sometimes amongst the forwards.
It is only the extreme ignorant who believes Matfield is a lock of substance anymore. He never had grunt and contributed to Tight 5 play - and it is even worse now. if there is one player that will knock our chances in the WC to smithereens - it is Matfield.
Now lets get to your profane earlier posting. De jager is not "god" as stated by you - he performed better than Matfield did in his last three tests compared to Matfield's last three tests - FACT.
Matfield is inadequate as a lock in the Tight 5 - and Alberts produced nothing on Saturday that eh is even average. He is way below what Du Toit achieved when he came on and that is a FACT as well.
Win against Argentina - huge achievement - in a game where the geriatrics did not distinguish themselves. We have yet to beat any team in the top six over the past twelve months - other than two wins last year against the AB's and England - a win where the only noticeable achievement of Matfield was to -
* f#ck up a line-out in the final 10 minutes of the game allowing the AB's to score a try and put them in the lead (Lambie had to convert a very long range penalty to lead to our win); and
* get yellow-carded in the game against England - for the rest of that game he wass p!ss-poor.
TTThe_Truth
Club Pro471 posts
TTThe_TruthClub Pro471 posts
17 Aug 2015, 12:44#39
"Ever since Matfield returned we lost more matches than we won when he was playing"
Try again:
13 matches - 8 won 5 lost (61%)
Which easily could have been 9 vs 4 (69%)
...as we lost leadership when he left the field against Australia...
Another blatant LIE!
Add to that there were 4 matches where he did not play in... 2 Against Argentina last year... which we won and two against Argentina and New Zealand this year, which we lost. So our win ratio is worse when he is NOT playing... We nearly had a loss against Argentina in Salta already last year, when he did not play... Where we were saved by Morne at the death...
So if you had your way, we would have been without Morne and Victor, which would then read:
3 losses from 4 without Victor.... (25%) instead of 2 from 4 (50% - which is already less than the actual figure of 61%, when Victor played )
Keep digging!
17 Aug 2015, 12:45#40
Mike ... I think you'll probably have more fun enduring root c a n a l surgery than trying to explain anything concerning rugby to the ignorant Toof Fairy.
I know you'll keep trying ... cause that's who you are ... somebody's gotta teach the poor dear.
I on the other hand don't have the patience.
I'd probably have an overwhelming urge to administer a few backhands after his first few blank, confused, los t looks.
Good Luck, anyway!!!
