de Allende MOM

Fact....we had exactly 192 points superiority over our pool opponents in both 2007  and 2019, but in 2019 our pool opponents were 3 full ranking points worse,

Now on to the Finals. According to the Nov rankings in both cases, our final opponents in 2007 averaged at a ranking of 5. Our opponents in 2019 ranked an average of....you guessed it...5. 

So our opposition was ranked the same, but in 2007 over the finals we had 50 point advantage over our opponents. In 2019 we only had a 46 point advantage over similar opposition.

Conclusions.  The 2007 team results dominated the 2019 results....because of superior opposition, slightly higher Final differentials and clearly because they never lost. 

Lots of hot air about opposition, points differentials and Jake....but the numbers clearly say 2007 was the better WC win.

Mozart

What are you rambling about ?

In  the  finals the difference in the winning margin was  an indication of the domination in games - namely 9 points in 2007  -  all  penalty conversions -  as against 20 points in 2019.   

By the way how did you get to 50 for the 2007 team  and 46 fir the 2019 team?    Please explain - but imagined BS will not help you.     

I added the numbers for each match in the knockout phase :

2007

vs Fiji 37 to 20

Vs Argentina 37 to 13 

vs England 15 to 6

Total differential 50.

2019

vs Japan 26 to 3

vs Wales 19 to 16

vs England 32 to 12

Total differential 46

Try using your toes as well as your fingers Tokkie but wash your hands afterwards.

Mozart

As per normal your ideas is totally cock-eyed and skewed,    You cherry-pick so-called stats and then  decide  how to use it,    It has nothing to do with actual performances  during games,    

In any event I was dealing with performances in the final where the situation was exactly what I described.     The performances in 2007 was a mess and the fat is the scoring of tries  and preventing thereof by the opposition is the key to playing of the game of rugby which you have denied for years -  was an example of the poor play in 2007 compared to the 2019 WC .

In the play-off stages as mentioned the situation was as follows:=

2007 WC   -     7    -    3    =   4

2019  WC         6   -    1    =    5       

The Fiji team in the quarterfinals in  the 2007  was a much weaker team than the Japanese team  in 2019 and the same can be said  about the Argentine team of 2007 and the Welsh team in 2019.    The  English team of  2007 was a train wrecked by elderly players  - the  2019  team was vastly superior as was evidenced by their beating of the AB's .  That is what really counted in the final analysis.           

You anti Jake types have been spewing this nonsense for years. The simple facts are our pool opponents in 2007 were 3 rating points above our 2019 opponents....an average of 12 vs 15. 15!!  How poor was our pool in 2019 yet the points differential was the same as 2007.

And in the knockouts we had the same opponent ranking of 5 in both cases....but we had a bigger points differential in 2007.

For a year we have been fed this rubbish, but the numbers blow away the subjective bs. It doesn’t matter what you think about Fiji for example (they were in fact a far more dangerous opponent than Japan) .....the numbers are clear. We had a better WC win in 2007, the numbers confirm it.

Mozart

You are trying to prove the impossible.    The fact is that even if you try and use all kind of theoretical calculations  you really achieved nothing since you totally ignore the key element of the game of rugby namely the scoring of tries and the prevention of opponents to score tries.,    

This has been the cased with you for years  -  you never give credit to players scoring tries an praised Morne as a flyhalf based solely on his ability to kick at goal and without any real ability as a flyhalf.     That is what you called traditional SA Rugby  and claimed that dead backlines are there to defend only.  

Aside from that you never regarded ball protection and recovery as unimportant and only rate it of one of your favourite players managed  to make a turnover.     That s why in the case of  The try scored by De Allende counted in your book, while a turnover by Louw is what  saved the game for the Springboks be cause near to ten minutes later the welsh were penalized.    

No if you opened your eyes and stop your BS there are no comparison between the 2007 Springboks that  was not done better by the 2019 team.    These include  even -

*     scrumming - which was most of the tome  stagnant  in 2007 or even going backwards;

*      breakdown ball protection where the English made at least three turnovers in the final turnover where it happened  being totally controlled by the  English;

*      where in the hole series in 2019 gave away only one line-out  on own throw-in  and winning opposition line-outs were not clean but clapping balls back putting Du Preez under pressure - the latter  happened at least three times in the final 

*       the ball skills in the Springboks backline were sub-standard with players knocking on balls; and 

*       missed tackles was more prominent on 2007 than it was in 2019/

The only reason for the  Springbok win was because of indiscipline by  English players and penalty conversions  resulted from that problem and if that would not have happened the chances of the Springboks to win the  final would have been drastically reduced,    The reason for that was the poor game plan White decided on - which plan fitted the English like a glove and represented a  game plan that is totally unrealistic in rugby and kill the initiative to score tries,    By the way the only time Springbok effort to score a try in the 2007 final was killed a few meters out that Springbok ball protection and recovery failed and the English got a scrum turnover.     That should tell you something of what really happened in the 2007 final.   

The 2007 final was rather a mess compared to the near to perfect performance of the 2019 Springboks  in the 2019 final.          .           

All subjective ranting. In the 2007 pools the Boks clinically destroyed England by 36 points to zero with 4 tries.....vs the 2 in the 2019 final. England learned from that rugby lesson and were tougher opponents in the final.

But that’s all hardly relevant.....the 2007 Boks had superior opponent/differential credentials in both the pools and the finals and they never lost, choke on that if you must.

Here's the final proof that 2019 is inferior: they have to diminish other campaigns to create the impression of level of greatness that just isn't there. So be it, they have a rude awakening ahead if them. One would have thought they'd have learned to see it coming after all these years. It's going to be messy... and hilarious! 

There were three tries scored in the England Round Robin game - not four - two by Pietersrn and one by Smith,    All three tries were converted by Montgomery/ and the other 15 points came from penalties - one by Steyn and four by Montgomery.    The Springboks were all over the English in that match = which I went to see at Stade de France.  The English team was very very poor and the Springboks played a way that was totally unusual and attributed to what Jones normally expected  from teams he coached,   

That is why I was very disappointed in what they produced in the final.   They played a game that fitted the English  and it was essentially back to the 10 man game  with numerous mistakes the order of the day, 

As to losing against the number 1 team in the world is no dishonor.   The Springboks lost  33-6 in the Tri-Nations test on 2007 and  they were lucky they never came up against the AB's in the 2007 WC.  The result would have been another 33-6 disaster,        

The whole Rassie myth was based on a terrible performance by England in the final and some rock solid play by the likes of Pollard, Etzebeth and Vermeulen. But against  Wales we were scarcely better....that game was a toss up.

Kindergarten Imbecile

Above I quoted examples where the Springboks came short and each of these examples occurred at least three times in the final.    The 2019 English team would have beaten the 2007  Springbok team by at least 20 points if performances are compared,

Compared to the 2019 final the 2007 final was a shambles,    

Hi guys 

It has been a while.  Hope all you and your families are keeping safe.  Wow you are still arguing over world cup wins.  Before Rassie abandoned us in Munster, we had no fear of SA.  For the quality of players you had you were abysmal. Disorganized,  a team of individuals with no game plan and getting worse.   The first time I remember you were not mentioned in any northern hemisphere media as a possible winners of the world cup.  There was a reason they fired Coetzee.

In 18 months, Rassie got you organised and playing together.   He kept is pretty simple and focused on improving the basics.  He may not have picked the best players (according by Mozart) but the best 15 players don't make the best team.  

Ronan O'Gara was talking about the biggest lesson he learned when coaching the Crusaders in NZ.  They kept it simple, focusing on the basics and trusting the players.  Don't know if you saw the match today but they just spanked Leinster to reach the final of the Heineken cup.  I think they had 2 internationals on their team. Leinster had 20.  Similar message.....

Comparing two world cup winning teams using basic stats is like trying to convince a 5 year old that vegetables taste like sweets.  Lies, damn lies and statistics.   Have you considered the weather,  resting players coming back from injuries,  what they had for breakfast.   

The journey SA rugby took in the 18 months leading to the world cup should be celebrated and Rassie's contribution should be acknowledged.  You won the world cup.  We would have a  statue of Rassie 40ft tall in our main street in Dublin if he did it for Ireland (we like statues).

De Allende is total rubbish.  The match video was a totally fake.  Please do not bring him back to play against the Lions.   He could use the rest.  Also, Snyman should also stay in Ireland he is not fit.

Thanks

Hi guys 

It has been a while.  Hope all you and your families are keeping safe.  Wow you are still arguing over world cup wins.  Before Rassie abandoned us in Munster, we had no fear of SA.  For the quality of players you had you were abysmal. Disorganized,  a team of individuals with no game plan and getting worse.   The first time I remember you were not mentioned in any northern hemisphere media as a possible winners of the world cup.  There was a reason they fired Coetzee.

In 18 months, Rassie got you organised and playing together.   He kept is pretty simple and focused on improving the basics.  He may not have picked the best players (according by Mozart) but the best 15 players don't make the best team.  

Ronan O'Gara was talking about the biggest lesson he learned when coaching the Crusaders in NZ.  They kept it simple, focusing on the basics and trusting the players.  Don't know if you saw the match today but they just spanked Leinster to reach the final of the Heineken cup.  I think they had 2 internationals on their team. Leinster had 20.  Similar message.....

Comparing two world cup winning teams using basic stats is like trying to convince a 5 year old that vegetables taste like sweets.  Lies, damn lies and statistics.   Have you considered the weather,  resting players coming back from injuries,  what they had for breakfast.   

The journey SA rugby took in the 18 months leading to the world cup should be celebrated and Rassie's contribution should be acknowledged.  You won the world cup.  We would have a  statue of Rassie 40ft tall in our main street in Dublin if he did it for Ireland (we like statues).

De Allende is total rubbish.  The match video was a totally fake.  Please do not bring him back to play against the Lions.   He could use the rest.  Also, Snyman should also stay in Ireland he is not fit.

Thanks

So you think observations and opinions are less biased than numbers. Sure you could get very elaborate, but points differentials and average ranking of opponents are hard to dismiss. They are basics.

As for your 40ft statue.....there is an Afrikaans phrase ‘niks  gewoonds’ meaning you are not accustomed to something. I can see how you might build a statue to dominate the Dublin skyline if you ever won the WC, but it seems pretty unlikely for a while.

Anyway welcome back.

What the hell are you talking about Mozart?    Against Wales two try-scoring opportunities were destroyed by Le Roux  and I mean real opportunities not the rubbish you dreamed up earlier.   

So England convincingly  beat the AB's  in the semi and in the  final  put in  a terrible performance  by the same team   and only three players beat them in the game.    That is what you in effect  wrote?    

What about the fact that in the final in 2007  White in the final outwitted himself  by using a game plan that fits the English team - that Jones outwitted Meyer in the Japan disaster in 2015 and that Jones was outwitted by Erasmus in the final om 2019/    

But them you supported Coetzee as Springbok coach and hate Erasmus because he proved that you know zero about rugby,    .       

What the hell are you talking about Mozart?    Against Wales two try-scoring opportunities were destroyed by Le Roux  and I mean real opportunities not the rubbish you dreamed up earlier.   

So England convincingly  beat the AB's  in the semi and in the  final  put in  a terrible performance  by the same team   and only three players beat them in the game.    That is what you in effect  wrote?    

What about the fact that in the final in 2007  White in the final outwitted himself  by using a game plan that fits the English team - that Jones outwitted Meyer in the Japan disaster in 2015 and that Jones was outwitted by Erasmus in the final om 2019/    

Bit them you supported Coetzee as Springbok coach and hate Erasmus because he rpoved that you know zero about rugby,    .       

Boiorad1

Nice to see you are back on site;    I enjoyed your contribution.        

There is no evidence of Rassie contributing. A Nienaber statue would be more appropriate. Coetzee most certainly had a gameplan, it was the plan fans had been calling for the entirety of the previous 4 years! 

Yes it’s funny that Erasmus went exactly back to the rugby that we always played......while fools like Mike were calling for the ‘expansive game’ and then pretended they were in the boat all the time.

Nothing wrong with what Rassie did, except to beat the ABs we need more strings to our bow.....Rassie walked away from any offloading and structured attack, relying on counter attack from turnover ball.

It worked once against a complacent NZ team returning from Argentina...but was exposed in the crucial WC opener. Against other opponents including England we were able to make physical dominance and the Nienaber defence count.

Haaaaaaaaaaahahahahaha!!

DumbAss Dave still going on about De Allende??

No surprise. I remember how he fawned over Elton “Panic Attack” Jantjies for years … till I showed him the error of his ways.

Mozart

Erasmus just did not follow the 10 man dead backline rugby you always advocated and called "traditional Springbok rugby"  -   an was the norm with most of the failed coaches we had since 1992.

What he did do is to turn to real traditional rugby played before the 1980's and by a few provinces afterwards - but rarely by the Springboks where both forwards and backline players are involved in attacking rugby and a 15 man game is played.    

The dead backline rugby was a loser  and the way Erasmus planned and coach the players to play was totally different from what happened in the past.      

The dead backline is a figment of your imagination. Erasmus completely eschewed the offload....we offloaded at 20% the rate of other teams. In other words he was coaching rugby from the nineties...his era.

It is definitely not - when Morne killed the backline  by standing too deep in the pocket  and either made aimless kicks  or  since he never attacked the gain line and  hospital passes to thee inside center  you defended him saying that it was traditional   Springbok Rugby,

You never regarded scoring of tries important  and never really credit backline players for scoring other than Habana - who rarely scored tries through a backline attack and routinely scored through individual effort.

There was no 15 man rugby at all and the Springboks in Meyer's own words did no have the ball skills to  play such rugby.    When White in desperation brought Eddie Jones on board - the latter told them things about attacking play that no other SA coach has told them. 

In 2015 the situation was so bad  that the flyhalfs only got  circa 20%  of the balls passed by the scrummie - the rest went to forwards who carries died on the spot.     The ball was  passed  to the flyhalf to make relieving kicks - so tata backline attack possibilities,   What was even worse  was the fact that ball protection and recovery was never regarded by SA coaches regarded as not important for years.

And all of that had your  full support and many times it was clear that you regarded try scoring as not important,     A combined attack  backs and forwards as was seen in the two tries  in the 2019 final was an extreme rarity and virtually never successful.  

I never discussed off-loads - but since you raised it  I have to refer to comments  mase by Vermeulen  after the welsh test in 2015 when he said him and Du Preez on  their own  practice the move  themselves and they were worried about it since Meyer forbid off-loads  in games/   Off-loads had to be effective and there were no sign ever that Erasmus forbid off-liads in games,  When they did happen they were effective. 

You really for years has been confused about rugby and what you praised were BS and what you decry as unacceptable were the opposite.      

Well Dave let me help. We played a pool ranked at 15 on average. And even so we didn’t score the most tries. NZ scored 3 more tries in one less game (their  Italian game was cancelled, which if played would undoubtedly have made them top scorers as well).

And please direct us to the clean break/metres gained stats....I can’t find them for teams. I did for individuals:

1. Josh Adams (Wales) – 18
2. Beauden Barrett (New Zealand) – 12
3. Jordie Barrett (New Zealand) – 12
4. Marika Koroibete (Australia) – 12
5. Sevu Reece (New Zealand ) – 12

Mozarrt

Your brains topped thinking when  it comes to the issue,    What had all tour demerit stories got to do with the final outcome of the series at all?   If you do not realize that your attacks on some players and the coach are just idiotic - you would never realize it,.    

Just remember the last penalty converted by Pollard and tell us that White or Meyer or Coetzee were  the ones who invented that strategy.    So who was involved with the whioke atatcL-

*     Pollard kicked in the ball after Farrell missed a penalty kick at goal/

*      DuToit get the ball back to Etzebeth who carried the ball about 10 meters

*     Etzebeth  passed the ball  to   De Allende who carried the ball over  the halfway line  and ensure quick recovery  and the ball  which was passed  to Willie who kicked the ball away from the  English defense which was in disarray and the full back  kicked the ball out about six meters outside the English 22.

*       A quick throw-in  and the ball is passed to De Allende  who carried  the ball strongly to the 22 drawing in the English looses and most forwards into a breakdown situation situation  while all the Springboks forwards formed up behind Vermeulen and the backline players  take over the role to protect and recover the ball,

*       Vermeulen  got the ball from De Klerk and the  roving mal is formed,   Cole is one of three English players who tried to stop  the maul and he is forced to to illegally stopped the maul  and  a penalty is awarded. - if he did not a try was ineitable.  

*       In the meantime the backline is formed up and  the ball is  passed to  De Allende, Pollard and  Kolbe and the attack continued, 

Did you see any of the above - where De Allende was involved three times in an attack that produced points for the Springboks?    Either you did not because you did not want to see it or you were too stupid to understand what happened,   Your choice/

This is the type of thing that caused  comments by Pollard that De Allende is the best inside center he ever played together with as a flyhalf and he did play a few games with De Villiers as inside center.   Are you saying he lied to the Publix?

                .

"added the numbers for each match in the knockout phase:

2007

vs Fiji 37 to 20

Vs Argentina 37 to 13 

vs England 15 to 6

Total differential 50.

2019

vs Japan 26 to 3

vs Wales 19 to 16

vs England 32 to 12

Total differential 46

Try using your toes as well as your fingers Tokkie but wash your hands afterwards."

Perspective..the 2 matches swinging the stats are Argie in 2007...a team we've never ever lost to at that stage, and Wales in 2019...a team we haven't beaten in years leading up to that match....add Japan 2019 (beaten Scotty and Ireland) vs Fiji who beat a poor Wales that year....Fiji who we have never lost to in the history of the game either....why distract the achievement of either sides with comparisons anyway? 3 times World Champions is good enough for me...almost as if some of us are angry that we won in 2007...and some others about the 2019 win...kla met die witbrood onder die arm...we don't know how good we have it...all these years and England's got one, Aus 2 and we and NZ 3 each...and we bitch and moan about 2 of the 3 we won????

Tokkie you numbskull should we not expect a test player to make a pass, recover a loose ball or run through space. These are bog ordinary things any test player can pull off. It’s no accomplishment to be involved in a try if your contribution is rote, to be expected, nothing beyond the basics.

The same old tired arguments Draad....Argentina a team we never lost to....but a team that was ranked 3rd in the world at the end of the 2007 WC. We only struggle against teams that can hold up to us physically.....Japan was never going to do that, both Tonga and Fiji in 2007 were more dangerous.

The only way to compare the degree of difficulty is to look at the closest average ranking of the opposition. I did that.

I’m not saying any WC win is unworthy....by definition it can’t be. But the exaggeration of our 2019 win and scorn directed at our 2007 win is too much. It all comes from dislike of White, most of which stems from the fact that he stood up to the disgusting Watsons and their press.

These were very equivalent WC wins....but you need only look at the 2007 roster to realize it’s a special team.

People talk about Rassie’s turnaround. But in 2003 under Destroyli we were humiliated by NZ in the Quarters...not competitive anywhere, destroyed in the scrums. Nine months later Jake was beating NZ to win the Trinations.

In 2009 Jake’s team under an incompetent coach was still good enough to beat NZ 3 times without loss and win series against Oz and the Lions. How will Erasmus’ chicken run Boks do this year two years after the WC? 

Sure we do  regard  what you wrote  as ordinary rugby 9 unfortunately for near to 20  years disregarded by the coaches and the ball skills deteriorated to a mess in that time.   Jake was one of the people .who realized the magnitude of the problem  - but  even Eddie Jones could  get the deficiency  corrected  and in the final in 2007  the ball skills were poor.   

This whole discussion would never have started covering literally hundreds of postings  if you did not start an attack on Erasmus and  some of the key players in the 2019 team that you carried on with especially after the final,     In the end I started looking  critically at the three finals  of the 1995, 2007 and 2019 WV were compared/     The quality of rugby played in  2007 was not on par with the quality in the 1995 and 2019  WC's,   Unless otherwise indicate there was at least 3 examples of each deficiency I mentioned in the 2007 final.  

I still have White's signed book and never was critical of him before. and even after the 2007 WC.     The first time I mentioned anything critical about White was in 2014  when he was the coach of the Sharks when  the Sharks got through to the semi in Super Rugby series and got thrashed by  the Crusaders and he was effectively fired by the Sharks as coach,

Unlike you I looked at what happened according to media reports an also comments on the issue and put it on site,    There were obviously  two sides to the story, but White obviously allowed a situation to develop where the Sharks had to make a choice between losing 70%  pf their players or retaining him as coach.    

However - you started the story and now have to accept  the result of your attacks on Erasmus and some players .   .                     

The story is getting weirder by the day,     Jake White's  team d id not play rugby minions -  while the team coached by Erasmus  did.     This followed a string of false statements on his thread alone,    Either you did not do your homework and checked what before writing  on site  or you deliberately lied as to what happened in the hope that you will get away with it, 

So who did the Springboks play other than 4 teams in the Tri-Nations in  the  lead-up to the 2007 RWC?    These  were in fact   6  games played - all the games were against minions kk tthe fgames were against minion  teams.    Of the ten games played in total the ten games played in the Tr-nations the Springboks lost 3 out of 4  played  - two against the AB's and 1 against  the Aussies,    The other six games  may look good for use as statistics - even the two England tams beatem  by massive margins,    That in the fact that the two teams  did not include any players that was ultimately in the English RWV squad and none of the players of the 2 tests were included in the RWC squad,.    Why is tests  like played in the run0op to the RWC not regarded as of any statistical value and the answer is simple - they may be useful for statistical abuse - when used out  of context.

The fats are NIT  plain  and the situation is that it leads to abuse of stats that is n a broader  concept totally worthless.    The only reliable stats is for real value and reflect positive proof of actual performances of the team is simple. - look at the tries scored fort and against the team  and that  is the whole basis for performance evaluation.                                  

Actually Tokkie you simply don’t understand.....you can’t compare White’s record and Erasmus’ record because  of the WC effect being doubled in Erasmus’ case. So you find something comparable...their WC years and their first years. Erasmus never had a non WC second or 3rd year....so that’s all we have.

We compare their records where they overlap.....a first year and a WC year during which both coaches had minnow games. Quite comparable.

And in that comparison Jake has a 77% win rate to Erasmus’ 68%.....case closed.

Rassie had half the time Jake had...and the politics were 10 times worse...he did the impossible. 

Jake won the Trinations 10 months after the Destroyli farce.....10 months  after he took over Rassie was 7 and 7.  Nobody turned things around faster than Jake. 

And the politics he faced was personal....a coup attempt by the Bools which inevitably spread to the team and destroyed morale. He had to fly back from Oz to defend his record. 

Rassie always had the support of the rugby community, it was just a negotiation with the government about how many black Boks had to be in the team. And that turned out to be doable, although Rassie gets credit for championing Am, Mapimpi and I guess Kolisi.

Being a part of that coaching team saved Eddie. Jake contributed massively to Eddie getting the boot from the Wallabies. He changed nothing and wasn't needed. 

Mozart

By the way who was the biggest farce in  coaching of the Springboks - Straueli or Coetzee?  

The fact is you supported Coetzee's appointment as  coach and never criticized him for his inadequacies as a coach when the the ranking of the team dropped to 7 in the world.   That achievement was never taking down to the number  ranking in the world  - in the case of Straueli it was no 6.    Lets go on and look at the  worst record between New Zealand and SA under Struaeli it was  67 points - under Coetzee it was 99 points,      

You speak about  winning the Tri-Nations in 2004  ten months after White was appointed - but never even  thought about the fact that the Springboks for the first time since 2009  beat the AB's in New Zealand  a mere  5 months  after the appointment of Erasmus,    The 2004 Tri-nations were weird - each team involved played 4 matches in 2004 and  each team won two and lost two  matches,    The end result was that decision as to winning the trophy depended on  bonus points achieved in the 4 matches played and there SA had 3 points, Australia had 2 and NewZealand had 1 point,   A bit lucky in the end   for the Springboks to win the trophy anyway.

When coming to ranking points in 2003 it was 9,02  in 2017 it was 9,75.     

Erasmus player inheritance from  Coetzee was much worse than  that of White's inheritance were from Straueli.    What  Erasmus got from Coetzee was  totally demoralized players            

So all in all Coetzee - the coach you admired so much and supported  all the time  was a worse coach than Straueli ever was,    Both Straueli and Coetzee were failures - but as big a failure Coetzee was  he beat Straueli by a neck in the Coaches Failure Race.

                                                                                                                                      .