de Allende 109kg

Michael that was embarrassing! I applaud everything Damian does well. Check my review of the Samoa test you twiddle-poop.
Reference one thing of what I asked. You have nearly twenty games worth of material. Now go for it. 

 Everything Damian does well - you manage to downgrade and not applaud.  It can always be read as favourable or not so because if it is supposed to eb facourable you should have dealt with the impact as well - which you don't.    The whole Aussie test was riddled with that - and you have the audacity to deny it.
Anyway - since what you write about De Allende is way of the mark - it is boring and not worth a response.   You and Mozart can conduct your normal damning exercise on De Allende on your own in future.  It is not worth reading the constantly-repeated dribble over and over again.     

Really? I assess every detail. It's very simple. If you can accept reality. 

  All that is said - but so slanted it is hardly ever a true reflection what actually happened,    I have no reason to answer repetitive nonsense you specialize in.   Not bashful - just sick and tired of dealing with the junk you write on De Allende.         

DA is the best centre in the game right now  

Enough twaddle Michael, just give me one reference. You always duck and dive, the run away. 
Care to join in the fun Saffex. Care to tell me something specific? You are a coach afterall, your analytics must be astounding. Why desist? Enlighten us underlings. 

 You did not give me a single example over a period of your years about hat Fransie achieved and now you ask me to give you a single example.  There are so many _ I suggest you go to ESPN stats and just look at the line breaks - the tackles beaten and the distance in territory gained and then tell me De Allende has a weak upper body - like your normal twaddle goes.    

M ichael, I know what's on ESPN stats and I know what happened in game. If there are so many examples it boggles the mind then that makes it all the more easy. All you have to do is tell me the game and what occured. Then we can all see it. But I'll give you a hint... it's not going to be found on a number sheet. It has to have been observed in game, because you have to actually tell me what happened! It's hard, isn't it? 
But I'll make it easy for you. All you have to say is "I cannot find an instance to reference" or "I don't specifically know when and where they may have happened" and we can forget the whole thing for good... well, assuming you can leave it be.

 Allende has a weak pper body. You cant be serious!!

 Allende has a weak pper body. You cant be serious!!

Well Kuridrani  has run straight through him twice with disastrous consequences...once in the Stormers vs Brumbies....once in Oz vs the Boks. There was zero evidence of upper body strength there. He does seem to be good at low gear tractoring though,

I can cite many instances where he has been run over this year, the worst being Kuridrani smashing him for a match winning try.
Like I say Beeno, you need to cite references. The fan girls have yet to support their claims. 

 Duplicate - one lie by Mozart and ten repeats by DF.

 I'm trying to give you a way out of the hole you dug for yourself. Take it Michael.

Unfortunately you are in the hole - or like an ostrich you have your head in a whole and believing the rest of the world cannot see you.  

I have my head in a "whole", a whole what? A "whole hole"? Damn, I was hoping at most half your standard hole. 

 Easy answer
Put your comments on the Aussie test and also my comments on your version on this site - you are welcome to start a new thread ion the issue - so anyone can see the real situation for themselves.
 

I love the "Allende haters"  angle. Let me be clear I don't hate Allende. He seems like a nice young fellow. For example the way he went over to commiserate with Jean on his way off Cardiff Arms Park....was class.
But I fail to see why his strengths and weaknesses are not fair game. In fact given the media and his fans only want to see the strengths, it's good that somebody should be a bit more objective.

All this aside, I remain very dubious about his ability to define our defence tactically...and very dubious he or Kriel can be relied on to make their tackles at the death in a QF or semi.
I hope I'm wrong...but the signs so far aren't good.

I don't have your comments, I told you I cannot recall the thread title. 
@Moz: Hate has never been a factor. My points have always been well established and the groupies have never been able to form a retort. It says alot about who the emotionally driven members really are. 

 You cannot recall the thread because you do not want to recall it - it was embarrassing to see what you wrote initially and then tried to ignore the response   since it was such a bloody load of rubbish.

I'll get that thread sometime. Not that it is of any significance considering I've already posted the video for everyone to see. 

 Mozart
I would accept it if people discuss both the positives and the negatives attached to players - but insofar as some players are concerned according to you and DF there are no positives and only negatives.  Even if a player plays great rugby - like for instance De Jager - he even gets criticized even if he did very well.  You at one stage wrote a whole load of BS on him and the line out calling on this site and then had to run for cover - you do not use his name and call him Lomp.
The same things apply to De Allende and a dozen other players.  No positives only negatives.   Your latest comments on his performance was absolute crap eg the tractoring story.   I wrote after the Aussie test that De Allende must improve his defense - he did very well in attack - but not well enough in defense.   That was objective - in your case not a word positive - only defense.   If you think that you are "objective" you must be kidding yourself - nobody else.     
When I for instance discuss Matfield I give him credit for line out play, but I also mention his negative - namely his deficiency in Tight 5 play.    You praise some players endlessly - but never a negative about their performances.
When Serfontein was called up to the Bok squad you and DF went bananas because Steyn was not called up.   In the last three years Steyn deserve some credit for his goal kicking, but you deny the fact that his performances - both on defense and attack was very poor.  His attacking play has gone out of the window and defensively he was worse than De Allende on Super 15 level - yet he is the one that should be called up. 
That is the fact - you totally  ignore the deficiencies of some players and over-emphasize theirs.   That remains the essence of non-objectivity on your part.           

 DF
In the Stormers Game you have reviewed according to your way Steyn according to you was better than De Allende.  Fact is he was not - De Allende was playing the fool woith Steyn.  It was one of the weeks when De Allende was selected as the best 12 of all inside centers in the Super 15 series and published on this site as well.  How you could even dream that Steyn was better than De Allende you are kidding yourself nobody else.  No lies on my part - if you claim all the people who claim that I lied then so must all other observers lying.
Then as to Steyn costing us a win in a game - sure he did in Mendoza in 2012 - when instead of a relieving kick from deep in the Springboks 22 - he kicked a ball that rolled along the grass - putting the whole team off-side (not the first time he did just that in 2012)  and  the Argentinians kicked up penalty points in that instance and the test ws drawn.  You have never picked up a fault on either of the Steyns - not even iro Morne's Perth disaster.  
I have been very critical of some of the younger players - Lambie included - and there are ample evidence that I criticized all players who under-perform.  I have never once gone overboard like you do.  Take an example of you and Mozart.  You blamed in a list De Jager, Malherbe for the loss - whenever it suits you.  The fact that a player like Pienaar buggered up badly and caused the penalty that ultimately put the team under pressure are never mentioned.   No it must be De Jager - or Malherbe - or De Allende (whomsoever you fancy at a specific time)  that cost us that match, but never a word about the Pienaar incident - never about the atrocious scrumming of Van der Merwe - just the players.   You are the one who write pages and pages of imagined and very rarely real deficiencies in players.
Lambie made mistakes in his career - but there was also incidents of sheer brilliance, which I did review objectively.  When that happened you found an excuse not to give him any credit whatsoever.  You went overboard about Du Toit in the Japanese test - but never noticed the hard work he did in the two pushover tries against the Japs - that while Matfield made zero contribution to the two tries.  In reality when it was pointed out to you that  the Springboks struggled up front because of under-performance  by the Tight 5 - you ignored the fact completely.   Even Meyer was  incensed by what De Villiers and Matfield did on the field of play in that they directed the playing style contrary to what Meyer instructed them to do - not a word of criticism on them - not a word from either you or Mozart.  Yet without any sense of objectivity you went for Lambie and Du Toit iro of that disaster, while the real culprits went scot-free.  
I am never a person who assess players with a blinkered approach to start off.   We beat the Samoans easily because Matfield and Jannie was benched - after that he successor players made impacts which caused the Samoans not to make any impression whatsoever.   
I leave one-sided comments to you and Mozart.
      

 
Sooooo ... that means that if Mozart and Fox had their way they'd return the talentless Fat Fransie to 12 and rid the Goats of the highly talented De Allende.

Do I have that about right?

Wow!!!!!

It really is a sad state of affairs when two posters are able to drag the standard of a board down to this level. Bordering mor-onic.

An elderly man who's brain seems to be decomposing at a rapid rate, who doesn't know most times where he is or even who he is ... and an inbred imbecile who just so happens to be solid bone from the neck up.

These are the fools that posts thousands of posts every month.

Makes me think of a Robert Mugabe. Clueless ... but determined to have his say ... insisting his way is the way forward.

Fcuk me!!!

 The whole ante DeA thing was rather a Fransie promotion exercise....from the start.

 Draad
You summed up the whole issue in one sentence.  

 Card with rugby acumen and eyes.like mine you dont need stats and reference points. Damian is very good and very strong. End of story. We sre fielding our best backline in a while against the Scots.

 Beeno: if de Allende can eliminate the "hamstering" he could turn out to be a fine player
JW eternally optimistic

Actually, it wasn't. It was the anti-Frans sect who brought up Frans each and every time Damian was discussed. 

Card, your previous assessment of DdA was fair. Frans is good, but not flawless, but he did not really make it easy for him to be selected with his contractual dispute etc. I'm not glad he isn't there, but not too disappointed he ain't either. And from thise available DdA is the best choice.

DF
Nobody - but you and Mozart was constantly plugging the Steyn selection line and for that purpose you tried to discredit De Allende all the time - it was so ibvious everyone on this site noticed it.
You are just exactly what you said above - notice the one change I made:-
"It's the typical way underling Saffers handle these things with their lack of wit and cowardice. They could not defend Frans Steyn directly, so they attacked the nearest threat - in their mind - to him."
Nobody can actually tell you anything - because you have made up your mind about De Allende and refuse to look at anything else.  It really is weird the way you carry on about lack of upper body strength when in the game against the Chefs he beat SBW twice in running through him and in one case Van Wyk scored a try.  De Allende had for a center the highest number of line breaks in Super 15 this year - and he beat more defenders in the process than anyone else in the series.  That is definitely not a person lacking upper body strength.    If that does not convince you what he is as a player nothing ever will.  Fact is that he was selected 9 times of the 16 games he played in Super 15 s the best inside center in the competition.  So there must eb a huge number of sheeple in the world - because those ratings are not only done by South Africans - but also people from NZ and Australia.
 Your comments on De Allende has consistently been negative.  I could not find a single case where you actually had anything positive to say about De Allende - not one case.   You can bring up past comments of yours on the guy and I will apologise if I was wrong - but doubt it whether there was anything positive like that in any of your comments.
The sheeple are not those people who try and be objective and look at both the positives and negatives pertaining to players.  You will find I have also criticized De Allende in respect fo defensive lapses - but has never gone overboard and wrote he should improve his technique and reading of defense strategies.  I wrote that knowing that he si a young player from a terst perspective.  But I did not write he is incapable of defending the way you  carry on.  I give him credit for frequently putting his team on the front foot by breaking the line and beating defenders - you have no once even commented on that in anything you write.
If you are dead set in dealing with members with a level of disdain - you are not winning any points at all.  You may think and convince yourself that you are the rel authority and everyone else is wrong - then so be it.  
I like some of your comments on rugby - but some others are so outrageously opinionated that they become boring.   So lets leave this one at that.   This game a few hours deom now will show us who is right and who is wrong.      
       
  

Nobody can tell me anything because I have already made up mind and don't want to look at anything? Truly, it is with the utmost difficulty that I can comprehend that I am conversing with a person who is more than twice my age. Have I not requested evidence? Have I not provided a platform for the Damian fangirls to speak in their defence of their boo? 
Yet here you are claiming that the reason you sheeple are drawing blanks is because I willed it to be. Now I am guilty of enforced amnesia! What next? 

Draad you are losing the plot again. Remember what they told you about keeping bad company. This debate will not be settled until we see Allende and Kriel under pressure again. The kind of pressure Allende was under when Kuridrani ran through him to beat the Boks. The kind of pressure Kriel was under when he blew the Japanese test....as explained by Darcy.
They may not be under this pressure today, but they will eventually be tested again. Kriel when he came on against Samoa made a hell of a tackle on a big guy at pace. I'm hoping he has decided he isn't going to screw around again. Allende's problem is mental as well as physical. He doesn't naturally go low and he doesn't read the movement. That seems like a lot to deal with. I hope he can, but I'd say the odds are not good.
That's my view. The groupies are entitled to theirs, but I remember the same debates about JJ and Step. Centres reveal themselves early and rarely change.

 Moz, I agree with your view up to the point where you would replace DdA with Fransie. Great player that he is, he has shown nothing in the last 2 years to sugest that he would be a better pick at 12 ATM. IMO DdA is the best of the rest. Kriel is a great runner, but not proven at 13 yet, I agree with that, but from the options we have in the squad, he's the best choice, and it's Meyers fault that there is no other 13. I'm on record for saying all along that we should have at least 1 regular 13 in the squad. De Jongh was my choice. Although i don't see him as a long term solution, to me he seem to be the best 13 we have, experienced in the position. I'm all for giving Kriel and whoever else a try there, but in my mind, he should have been the backup there.

 Moz, I agree with your view up to the point where you would replace DdA with Fransie. Great player that he is, he has shown nothing in the last 2 years to sugest that he would be a better pick at 12 ATM. IMO DdA is the best of the rest. Kriel is a great runner, but not proven at 13 yet, I agree with that, but from the options we have in the squad, he's the best choice, and it's Meyers fault that there is no other 13. I'm on record for saying all along that we should have at least 1 regular 13 in the squad. De Jongh was my choice. Although i don't see him as a long term solution, to me he seem to be the best 13 we have, experienced in the position. I'm all for giving Kriel and whoever else a try there, but in my mind, he should have been the backup there.

To say that Frans has shown nothing in the past two years is a lie. 

  DF
Not a lie - the real truth.  He managed 2  line breaks beating 17 tackles means nothing over two seasons.   And his tackle stats was worse than De Allende's in both years.  I used to support Frans as well, but once I saw how bad he was in the tests in 2012 and in 2013 in Super Rugby - my support went out of the window.
He brought it onto himself - grossly overweight and paceless with a knee that could not support any sideways movement and he was a sitting duck in defense.  Everyone that looks at rugby knows why Steyn is not up to standard at all.  To claim that he still is what he used to be is crazy.      
When I asked you and Mozart repeatedly for practical examples over the last three years of any exemplary play by Steyn neither of you could come up with even one example in the three years - but both of you droned on about how good he was in 2007 - which means nothing at present.
Something serious went wrong with Steyn as a player and to look at him with rose-tinted glasses and imagine he is a good performing player is just not on.  You can rave about him as much as you like - but realists have given up on him.  At present he is bad news in any team for which he plays.