In the comments of various members on the issue of Du Preez, mention was made that he is the most creative scrummie in SA. I have always thought exactly otherwise. Du Preez has four standard plays at scrumhalf, namely -
* Pass the ball back to the forwards;
* Try to break through himmself;
* Kicks
* Pass to the flyhalf
Everyone would say that the four options are the only actions available to a scrummie - but that is not the point - the point is how successful and varied these are. The success rate is in fact not good at all. His passing back to the forwards is normally after him waving at the forwards to form up - so that he can pass to them - the other side is that the opposition forms up to defend against a pre-advertised move. Very slow pass follows waving of the arms for a considerable period. Success rate - near to zero since the ineitable result is another maul situation and the danger of a turnover or penalty.
Tries to break through himself - success rate about 10% - but often resulting in a ball turn over - either through penalties or loss in a maul situation.
Kicks - 30% success rate. Most times the ball is handed over to the opposition - most times allowing the opposition to turn defence into attack.
Pass to flyhalfs - extremely slow service forcing the fklyhalf - especially Steyn - to stand back a long distance and then having to kick - since any back line move would stop before gaining any ground.
Over years - Du Preez displayed one other problem that has been disastrous, namely his absence when the balls are turned over in a maul situation. He would often be far back to receive a kick and to shine in subsequent play and not being available to receive a ball after turnover and pass it. Result on a number of occassions during crucial matches he caused a loss of the ball and consequential tries.
I never rated Du Preez as a creative player - he definitely is not. He has been good when the forwards dominated against weaker teams - he was too slow a link player against stronger opposition. His performances peaked in 2007 and then started going backwards. By 2011 he was NOT the best scrummie in SA - but he remained as De Villiers tried to do the impossible - that never happened before. He tried to use basially the same players in 2007 and 2011 to win the WC. He did not develop further as his career got longer - he in fact went backwards becoming slower and slower in service to the back line in particular. Point is that together with Morne Steyn and Du Preez the result was that the main purpose for the back line was decorative and for defence purposes only - back line attacking play under these cricumstances was virtually non-existent.
The problem with Du Preez basically was also his predictability. he was certain always to do the four actions mentioned on an utterly predictable basis - and the opposition was able to do the necessary adjustment in their defences - beause there was no ways that he would change tactics suddenly. He would kick or pass back to the forwards 90% of the time and 10% pass back to the flyhalf to kick.
I think that at this stage Du Preez is a player well past his sell-buy date and he - together with other rugby geriatrics like Rico Gear and other players in their mid-thirtties are playing in the less demanding Japanese environment - beause injuries to older players in international competitions become more pronounced than earlier in their career. That does not bode well for further inernational selection.
In summarising - DU PREEZ IS PROBVABLY ONE OF THE LESS CREATIVE PLAYERS - WHO PLAYED FOR THE SPRINGBOKS AS A SCRUMMIE DURING THE PERIIOD SINCE THE 1950's.
