Cut Peirre Spies some slack?

Cut Pierre Spies some slack. He deserves to be starting at No 8 for the Boks.(Hahahahahahaha)

Duane Vermeleun is injured. He would have started at No 8 had he been fit. He was the incumbent in last year’s Novembe internationals.

Spies was injured during the November internationals and now, in Vermuelen’s absence, he is the best available. He was as good as the Boks were against Italy, which was pretty decent.

His defensive contribution was massive. He was consistently strong in the tackle and industrious. He put in the hard yards, especially in those first 20 minutes after halftime when the Boks had six percent field position and Italy had more than 80 percent sustained possession (THIS THE BABBLERS ROOITWIT AND CLEAN CUT TAKE NO NOTE OF!!!!!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA).

The Boks had to tackle and tackle – and Spies was at the forefront of that effort.

Spies gets the same treatment that Bob Skinstad got when he played for the Boks. No matter what Skinstad did those up north would tell you what he couldn’t do. Even when Skinstad was at his explosive best the counter argument was that he didn’t scrum, that he didn’t hit rucks and that his tackle count was too low.

Now those in the south will tell you that Spies doesn’t hit rucks, that he doesn’t scrum and that his tackle count could be higher.

Spies is not liked by a certain sector of the rugby public, just like Skinstad was not liked.

Give the bloke a break. He has played well this season. He has led the Bulls to the top of the South African conference and he has been influential in many games. He is the form No 8 in South Africa.

He isn’t superman and he isn’t Sonny Bill Williams. No one is, and I think the expectation of Spies is unrealistic. He remains a fine rugby player, but he never is going to hit the rucks like Arno Botha or a closed side flanker who brings mongrel to a pack.

Spies offers other qualities and he shown these qualities consistently in more than 100 Super Rugby games and 51 Tests (PLEASE KEO WHY MISS THE OPPORTUNITY TO TELL US EXACTLY WHAT THOSE QUALITIES ARE?). Go ask the opposition what they think of Spies (man the abs will tell us like they told us re matfield that he is a great!!)? There is a healthy respect for his talents, as there was for Skinstad in his prime.

Similarly Morne Steyn.

He is playing the best rugby of his career (A whole different kettle of fish he is number 1 at the moment and who really disputes that?)and he is definitely more than just a kicker. Go and analyse his games. Ask why the Bulls have scored more tries than any South African team in Super Rugby. He is playing flatter on attack, which isn’t his natural game, but he is being effective.

He is under appreciated in this country (I guess so who will forget ou snapster and maaaikie getting it hoplessly wrong re Morne. Not only that they then jumped to the conclusion Meyer's coaching record was piss poor and bog ordinary. Hahahahahahahhahaha). Pat Lambie was adequate in the November internationals, without being outstanding. He was no better on attack than Steyn had been, but because there is this willingness for Lambie to succeed so much of his laboured play is overlooked.

Lambie is a fine rugby player but he hasn’t been overly impressive at flyhalf for the Sharks and he wasn’t dynamic for the Boks. He has been better when played at fullback.

Springbok coach Heyneke Meyer initially rated him only as a fullback. He then softened prior to last year’s November internationals, especially when Steyn was suffering from fatigue and was in desperate need of a break.

There is room for Steyn and Lambie in a very good Bok squad and there is also room for Spies and Vermeulen in the best Bok squad.(Sorry keo not in my book - re Spies)

There should be a greater appreciation for what Spies and Steyn can do instead of constant attacks on what they are perceived not to be doing.

You don’t score 31 points in a Test against the All Blacks if you haven’t got a certain quality and you don’t play 100-plus Super Rugby games for the Bulls and 51 Tests for the Boks if you haven’t got something special. (Rubbish matfield loafed about for 100 matches in a Bok jersey completely bamboozling his dotting devotees. Walking about with his arms out at right angles fooled the many.But the day of reckoning arrived when the wannabe backline players was found to be mere 106 kgs hahahahahahaha)

I have been critical of both players at stages of their career when their form has wavered and I have promoted the virtues of players offering more (in my view) to the national set up. I was very much in favour of Johan Goosen’s selection ahead of Steyn and Vermeulen’s national call-up.

But Steyn and Spies have both responded to the challenge in 2013. Both have been excellent for the Bulls and both were influential against Italy and will be for the Boks as the international season unfolds.

A failure to recognise this would be nothing more than bias and ignorance.

Well Keo somethings you get right but some wrong. Spies is living on borrowed time

 Spies as allready had enough slack, unless it is just more rope to hang himself with (figuratively not literally).

Bottom line his contribution is not consistent enough. He makes zero contribution on the ground at rucks, his tacking stats are poor and if he does not carry then his contribution is not good enough,

 He started the seaon well, but then reverted to his minimal contribution

Simple point here is he may be average at best in the tackle count, has very few ball carries and his lineout contribution meets the minimum requirements.

The biggest issue is his work from the base of a 'mostly' dominant scrum is rubbish and the scrummies get no protection from him. Just have a look at the complete article Filitau for the Lions and Wales as a comparison. Spies makes no carries from the base of the scrum and should be. With his size he should also be running hard at the opposition and offloading aka SBW.

Just dump him it is never going to work and he has had more than enough chance.

Common bean dip!!

Must agree with rugganut.

Spies avoids the collision as best he can. His body may look like Superman’s but his heart is that of the Cowardly Lion in the Wizard of Oz.

At provincial level one may be able to get away with it from time to time but not at international level. He’s been exposed for the last few seasons as mediocre at best and should have been dumped ages ago.

One needs every swinging dick to front up.

He’s a passenger … not worthy of a Bok jersey.

What size are you talking about. Spies is only 108 kg. So to speak  of his size is unreasonable. A big loosie would be Alberts at 118 kg or Vermelen at 116 kg,Elsatadt 118 kg (Although he debulked a bit this season) etc. Spies is just average at best.

How this reminds me of the big victor matfield comments that were bandied about and used to brainwash ou snapster and co. 106 kg big for a lock. Hahahahahahahahahaha

No the entire problem was Pierre should never have moved from wing. Having moved to number 8 he should have played a Kieran Read type of roving number 8 game. This was not possible for many years as the bulle and Boks only had 4 tight forwards as wee matfield was busy specialising in the backline. So Pierre got drawn into a tighter role which does not suit him.

However the times have changed and there now exists a possibility - barring injuries an departures - of building a dominant tight five along with a big 6 like Louw 114 kg and a bruiser at 7 if needs be. This means Pierre could play that roving role amonst the backs - his only hope of making any impact  -  save debulking and moving ot the wing - but its late in the day for that perhaps?

How fateful these decisions are. Pierre may have been a world class wing. Now we have young Kolbe at 15 - not where he is going to make an impact at senior level. Keegan Daniel is another tradgedy- hugely talented with great heart and skills but simply outgunned.

Meyer has a great ability to spot talent. Guidance needs to be given to young players as to where they can play at senior level.

Man one feels really bad about the waste.

I have a question … do you ever check your post for legibility?

I find it at times tiresome trying to work out what the hell your trying to say.

Cutting part of a word off and for some reason adding it to the next.

I take it you went to school … right? You know … that place where they tried to teach you the basics … how to read and write.

Sorry … but I still haven’t picked up the art of reading moron!!

"Cutting part of a word off and for some reason adding it to the next."

CC, I can see you are getting there. The above identifies the very essence of moron-speak.

I fyouc anu nderstandt hi sthe nyo uar ereadingm orona ndB aboon-oum ightu nderstandy ou.

Can you two little dears please  try and make a rugby related comment. CC is decending into being no more than a little echo for rooitwit. Or is it the other way round. Bwahahahha

For example rooitwit and CC could you comment on this;

"in those first 20 minutes after halftime when the Boks had six percent field position and Italy had more than 80 percent sustained possession".

6 percent possession!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Those more learned in rugby were trying to tell you things were not as rosy as you made out. That Italy had in fact presented a challenge. I suspect the stats for the seond twenty of the first half were not great either certainly the last 10 minutes of the first half wer good for Italy.

Now asking you two hatters for any reasonable rugby comment is of course asking a lot but hey give it a shot oaks! 

Haaa ahah ahaaa aaa!!!

Se eIca neve nlau gh inmo ron. Arey ouimp res sed?? Betyo ucan 'tdot hat?

Da m nro oi nek!!

You rgo od!!! Ver ygo od!!.

Tha t’sim pre ssi ve!!!! Di dn’t kno wyou wer eso flue ntatm oron.

Reckon I can get into this. Makes me think of my childhood when me and a few of my mates would write messages in code.

Do you think olbe ano mayst illha veth ebrai nof anin fant??

It certainly would explain a lot.

cc you complete twit and quarter wit. Explain why you think the Italians provided no opposition. Explain the 6 percent oak!    You are blabbering away like a moron!

Oh for goodness sake, Baboon-ou, are you really this clueless when it comes to rugby? The Springboks beat the Eyeties 44-10. That is a snotklap of note in anyone's terms and it completely vindicates what both CC and I said before the game when we were quite rightly laughing at suggestions that Italy would pose a "threat" to the Springboks . . . apparently because the ground was soft or some such ignorant nonsense!

Yesterday, a hapless Combined Quuensland/NSW Country XV got absolutely arse-raped by the British Lions but, half way through the second half they managed a sustained period of possession. Fat lot of good it did them because they still got pumped 64-0 but  that doesn't mean they "threatened" to win the game at any point, just as the Eyeties never threatened the Springboks . . . even if they did get a few minutes respite after half-time when they weren't conceding a point a minute.

I suppose if you never played rugby you wouldn't know to include the territory stats along with those possession stats you're claiming and you also wouldn't know that even in a one-sided game, there are periods in the game when the little guys hold their own or perhaps even score some points . . . but only a complete moron would think that a side on the wrong end of a 44-10 snotklap ever seriously threatened the other team.

Just stick to your tedious copy and paste jobs, Baboon-ou and stop attempting any original thoughts of your own on rugby matters (or anything else come to think of it) because you're just going to embarrass yourself.

Understand now? Do I need to translate that into moron-speak for you?

Rooitwit you jabbering hatter I anticipated them being a challenge. They were. Dont tell me limiting the Boks to 6% possesion doesnt suggest a side is presenting a challenge. As Moz said they were only 10 points behind after 63 minutes.

Man how daft can ou rooitwit get. One almost dispairs about ones mentoring programme re rooitwit! Years of effort and little to show for  it.  Its the clay I work with that is so poor!

As for me not playing rugby what complete rubbish. I initially got into our school first team as a fourth year - were some seventh years in the side - guys who plugged their A levels first time round.  But I must not boast about my achievements hey rooitwt!

Your fourth year of what, Baboon-ou? Your fourth year of Grade 2?

If you made the school 1st team then I can only assume it was a very, very small special needs school.

Spoes should have been moved to center ages ago by the Bulls. They let him ramble through out his carreer at no8. Bad from them

Like ou rooitwit I tend to rely on what I see rather than stats.  Unfortunately given how ou rooitwit gets it wrong so very often this tends to discredit the system!

Stats of course are interesting and their interpretations ever more so with stat gurus forever disputing each others stas and their interpretation. The very evident trend it to find stats tha tsupport ther arguments- or they think support their arguments - and ignore the rest. The practice is of course universal among stat gurus.

Now what is hugely interesting is NONE of the stat gurus have picked up on Spies's stats in the last test a as they would not support their opinions which universally appear to be that spiesies is not up to it - which he isnt. However this  highlights the selected useage of stats by the said stats gurus!!!

Read this ex Keo:

Pierre Spies’s match statistics support why he will again be at the forefront of the Bok forward effort against Scotland.

Bok coach Heyneke Meyer has only made two enforced changes to the Boks run on XV and there should be Test debuts for scrumhalf Piet van Zyl and flanker Siya Kolisi, who are among the substitutes.

On Tuesday I (Keo) wrote a piece applauding Spies’s effort in Super Rugby and against Italy.

Many challenged this view.

Here are some statistics from the match to support my argument. Make of them what you will but it leaves me in no doubt as to his contribution. (So ou Keo is in on the stats game!! I note he doesn't quote hi ssource)

Spies: Four ball carries (How many meters oak? Hahahahahahahaha), 16 cleans at the ruck (Leaning against the ruck wee matfiled style is hardly a clean out!!!!), 18 tackles made and none missed (the 2nd most tackles in the match) (Not one of them a really  offensive tackle though), one ball steal, one lineout steal and two lineout takes. He was also instrumental in the set up of the maul try and he was used as the main kick-off receiver.

A towering performance  by spies according to the "stats" so why are we complaining stat gurus?

Man  of the match stuff bvy Spies- why are we praising Arno and not Spies then? Why did Arno look much the better player as was the consensus. 

Thanks for the info Mike. I think Keo is trying to get some cred after some predictions backfired on him!

I would like to see how Piere goes against Samoa. In that game we will miss the likes of  Vermuelen.