Developing depth: Boks vs All Blacks

You blood talent, not any random player. Hendricks is the best wing prospect to come onto the scene since Habana. He must be retained. We are certainly no weaker than New Zealand in any position right now. The problem is that right across the board across test nations the new generation of players are inferior to the previous one. All teams are busy blending in the newer generation whilst trying to de-power the team as little as possible. All of New Zealand's options at half back have constraints, aside from Carter they don't have a complete 10. They are still waiting for the next Justin Marshall at 9. They still don't have a 12 in the class as Nonu. At 13 Smith is a fading force and the alternatives don't live up to the standard he sets even today. Savea is a quality wing, and about the best thing to come on the scene right now. At 15 Dagg is still by far the best player they have, if he doesn't shine then they have problems. His work as a second 10, his massive raking boot and aerial dominance are unmatched by any other player in the SH. Their starting locks are a problem, they have front row issues, Read looks to be slipping into ordinary status. You see, they are not streaks ahead in any department. We have our issues and so do they.

Then there's Australia; a weak pack, poor halfbacks, a slow back three. A fullback who cannot control territory. They are relying solely on Kuridrani, who is by quite some distance the best 13 in the world. Basically, their centre pairing is holding together patchwork players.

What South Africa's problem is, is this; they cannot select their best players. We keep returning to the same proven failures time and again. Pienaar, Lambie, Goosen, JP have not added anything to the team. I'm not a fan of Jean, but at least his experience and leadership has lifted the team. Strauss must be started, Flip must be brought into the mix, Du Preez (who you conveniently neglected to mention) was missed terribly this campaign, de Jongh is more complete 13 than Serfontein who only offers tackles. Brussow has never been dominated by McCaw at any level of the game, but he can hardly ever get into the team. Where is Frans? Imagine if New Zealand had only fielded Carter and McCaw every few years. Would they have been as dominant? 

Our niggling concerns are that we don't seem capable of producing scrumming props; Beast and Steenkamp have been our only test quality looseheads in the scrum and general play. We can't produce good centres. Meyer has tried different players at 13 and Fourie still has the best record of all of them. You cannot accuse him of not blooding players. To be honest he has given to many youngster a chance. Hougaard needed to be retained from 2012, but stuffing him around for Pienaar - who has been anything but reliable with a wonky boot. Dropping Pollard for Lambie may have cost us the World Cup. If you want him to replace Morné, he needs to start every game and be backed implicitly.

 Good post Card, I actually agree with most of what you said. I do however not believe Pollard and Hougaart were dropped. Hougaart struggled with confidence even in training and Reinach got his chance No need to damage Hougie even more. Reinach made a good few errors IMO, but all in all quite a good display. Same for Lambie. Both him and Pollard tend to be a bit up and down in their performances.

 Pakie 
A very good summary and then follows the garbled version of letsallbemorons.
I am very unhappy with our present situation.   Le Roux burst on the seen and only came in because of an oinjury to the lousy and useless Kirchner.   That was purely by accident - not intended by Meyer at all.   I am not really worried about the full back situation.  
Then we have the wing situation.  It seems to me that Habana is on the slide - he is not the same player he used to be.   Then we have the slack Pietersen - who has lost pace at an alarming rate and we have Hendricks - who looks good when he gets the ball in space - but is weak under high balls and his defense is not up to standard.   Obviously Letdallbemorons rate that guy - but he was the Cheetahs bench player and they know why he was their bench player.   Speed - but no defensive capabilities.   So in the end we have a serious problem.
The most problematic position we are faced with is in the center scenario.  We can use Serfoontein, De Villiers and De Allende at 12 - so we are well covered there.  It is at 13 where there is a serious problem.   Fourie was tried in that position and showed some defensive skills and zero in attacking skills.  Another player who have lost whatever pace he used to have.   Then there is a lot of reasonable players who as never given a chance to play test rugby.  The only one who was gvien that opportunity was De Jongh - who went AWOL in the Scotland and English tests at the end of 2012.  He is useless in defense - and looks a good finisher when put into space by others (cannot intitiate anything by himself)- probably the reason why he is rated by letsallbemorons.   Not an option at all.
Ultimately I think Meyer is right - he is trying out Sefontein at 13 - but his siginficant request to the Stormers is to play De Allende at 13 in the upcoming Super 15 season and allow him to get used to that position.   However, on the whole we are thin insofar as 13's are concrned - and that remains a problem.
The other central problem is the scrummie position.  Letsalbemorons carries on about how Fourie du Preez has been missed - but when he came back in the 2013 RC series - he looked good in the local test against Argentina - when every player looked good.  He then played in the home  RC tests and was largely invisible. Much the same can be said about him in the EOYT and June tests.   At this stage Du Preez is a reputation player without any indication that he is not like all older players in the twilight of his playing career.   I share your concerns about both Hougaard and Pienaar.
I rate Reinach and thinks he is the key player for the future.   We need to look at all the scrummies and their performances in Super 15.  Two in particular stood out in the form of De Klerk and Groom - and there is much talk about a youngster called Luiters.  
Meyer was to miy mind far too conservative in his selections - he flooded the EOYT with players that should not have been on tour at all.  Here I think he should have forgotten about players like Bakkies Botha, Morne Steyn and Gurthro Steenkamp and instead have gone for players like Schalk van der Merwe, Michael Rhodes and Boshoff.   Meyer's present approach limits the development of some promising players - but it must also be borne in mind that there are some injured players whom Meyer would possibly have selected and who could come into the picture in future - eg a no 13 center like Stokkies Hanekom.            

My point Lestat, is that we don't have test hardened backup in key positions. We have a decent first 15, but a few key injuries can cripple us and force us to either play rookies with little to no test experience in untested combinations, or fall back on has-beens like Jaque Fourie. If this happens in the RWC playoffs we can be in trouble.

We had a chance against Italy to put guys like Senatla, De Allende and Kriel on the park and get them some exposure in the test arena, see if they're flashes in the pan or can make an impact against a credible, if not top tier, test side. Instead we're going to learn nothing and gain nothing. We're going to see that our already established players that can beat the All Blacks on a good day can also thump Italy. That's common knowledge by now.

 Pakie, we are fine except for backup for: 3, 5, 11, 13 and 14. IMO 11 is also not too much of a problem as most back-line players with a bit of speed can fill in there. IMO 14 must have a decent left boot as well, which makes that gap a bit harder to fill. So it's actually a pity Senatla and De Allende missed out. We are fine with loosies, so no need for Meyer to force the issue there. 3 and 13 are the two main pieces missing from the puzzle, as I am sure Eben will be able to stop that gap if something should happen to Matfield.

". . . we are fine except for backup for: 3, 5, 11, 13 and 14."

Really?

Who is the backup for Willie le Roux . . . who himself should not be a certainty until he learns to take the simple option once in a while and stops kicking hard-earned possession away? Johan Goosen who's yet to play a test in the #15 jersey? Pat Lambie who prefers flyhalf and is one of only two flyhalves we have?

Who is the backup for Eben Etzebeth . . . who himself should not be a certainty until he proves he can last beyond the 50th minute and who needs to rediscover his form from 2 years ago? Lood de Jager who can't seem to bring his provincial form to test rugby? Bakkies the has-been?

Who is the backup for scrumhalf? Heck, who is our starting scrumhalf?

Who is the backup to Jean de Villiers?

 OK maybe not that fine but here goes: I think Lambie is great backup for Willie. Etzebeth...well there is always Flip...a bit brain dead sometimes but still good and should he remain injured, I'm sure we have enough young locks to fill the gap. I agree that it was a bit of a lost opportunity to pick Bakkies this year. Same with Guthro. You blood youngsters from the bench and ideally only have outoppies on the bench if they cover for a rookie in the starting 15. I believe FdP will be first in line for the 9 jersey, followed by...Pienaar...I would prefer that it be Reinach.Jan Serfontein is Jean's backup of course.

 DBDraad 
Good summing up.   I would say that we have ample no 4 locks - you mentioned Flippie - but there is also Lood, Willemse and a few others.  Our problem is at 5 - where we have to get rid of the passneger.   Matter of fact I would move Etzeth to 5 and use Du Toit as the back up.   Our locks only has one serious problem and that is Matfield - he should not eb in the set-up at all.   
Insofar as the scrummie is concrned I think you are wrong.  Pienaar is pedantic and slow and Du preez was totally unconvincing in the tests he played in since 2013.   I would not rate neither as top cnadidates - since they are playing on reputation only.  Both are in their twilight years and both are injury-prone.  So that remains a problem.
Lamnie, Polard and Goosen are perfectly capable to back up Le Roux - and then we also have Kriel in the abckground. 
The only real prooblems we have is at 9 and 13 - for different reasons.   In the case of the potential starters at 9 - we have two injury-prone elderly players playing on reputation and one really green one in Reinach.   In the case of 13 - we have not even got a regular starter to name - since I  believe that the De Villiers-Serfontein line-up is a missmatch of two inside centers playing the same style of inside center play.  None of these two are really outide centers.    In the background is the slow and useless on attack way past his best Jacque  Fourie and nobody else of consequence.  I believe that by the time of the WC the ouside center issue woul d be less pressing and think that there are two names to be watched in Super 15 - namely De Allende and Hanekom.  

Well ou Maaik, note that I'm limiting my backup players to the guys who are in Meyer's current squad because if they're not in the squad now (and not currently injured) then they're clearly not in Meyer's plans and can't be considered backup.

I still don't like this idea of naming flyhalves as backup for the already dodgy and rather off-form fullback. Also, Draad, if Serfontein is the backup #12 then you have an even bigger problem at #13 which you already listed as a problem area. Don't misunderstand me, I prefer Jan Serfontein at #12 but not if he hasn't played there for ages.    

 Mike, there is a huge problem at 3. Malherbe and  Marcel vd Merwe are more injured than they are playing and none of them has been tested properly and 3 is the most important player in the team according to many pundits. I tend to agree.

  Draad - there really is no problem at 3 - matter of fact i am perfectly happy with Dreyer and Redelinghuys as well.  They have been very good in Super 15 and was part of the ebst scrumming team in that competition this year.   Tha is the elast of our worries I bleieve. 
We have an over-supply in loosies and more than enough looseheads as well.   The main problems I believe are -
*   the replacement of the geriatrics at lock;*   the scrummie situation;*   the no 13 soituation; and*   the seriously problematic situation on the wing.  

Our problems are 3, 6, 9, 11, 12, 13 and 14. But the most pressing is finding a replacement for Jannie, who in his status as our only test proven tighthead is something of a national treasure. 

More depth you say Saffex, you say that every year, yet your list of strapping young children ready to take on the world gets dashed time and again. We've had a fair few newcomers over the years and none have been better or equal to Jannie. So what Mozart says is perfectly correct; he is a treasure. Lambie can do a quick job at 15, Serfontein is doing a quick job at 13. Yet who can do even the most basic of things at tighthead? The last player to do it was Smit in 2009. I'm, again, not a fan of Jannie. I don't think he has ever been a great prop, but you replace with someone better or equal to, not worse.

Mozart
There are better tightheads than Jannie and two of them pushed Jannie back meters when he and Beast scrummed against Schalk van der Merwe and Redelinghuys.  Not as bad as in the Argentina test - but still bad.  Both of them are better than Jannie by some distance  - in scrumming and in general play.
Meyer made some serious mistakes in his time - that is only one of those.   There is no problem at  6 - only imaginary - we have Louw, Coezee and Kriel in that possition - three of the ebst loosies imaginable.
I agree with you about 9 - there is a serious problem there.
The problem at 11 is very real and the one at 14 as well.   Habana is not the player he was  last year and Hendricks is not a stable selection.   I am afraid they will have to look wider than they are doing at present. There are a number of good wings around - and perhaps Senatla will be one of those.   
The problem at 12 is not serious at all - De Villiers is on the slide - but Serfontein is good enough.
14 - I agree wholeheatedly about that one.
The issue that you left out is no 5 lock.   Whether you like it or not the gruntless specimen we have in that position is costing us dearly in Tight 5 play and his line out prowess - as discussed elsewhere seems to be a mirage - not as real as people want us to believe.  Even there we have adequate back-up from stronger players that would help us in the rolling maul scenario.   As long as we have Matfield - we will have trouble in scrums, mauls and ball carries by our forwards.  Dead loss that one.

 Mike, none of our 3's were ever properly tested in tests. I'm hopefull for the 2 from the Lions, but S15 ain't test rugby. Serf plays OK at 13 on attack, but Jean defends on 13 and it creates problems for us. I think De Alende and Serf are proper cover for 12. Let's hope a 13 puts up his hand next year.

The ABs are an older team than the Boks and have introduced far fewer newbies than us since the RWC. Mils/ Dagg is the model .....if a newbie challenges he has to conclusively prove he is better. A tie and slight wins go to the incumbent. That's why it's called a team.

 Different from the SA scenario,  In new Zealand playerrs have to prove that they are better than the present team players - here it depends entirely on whether you are a pal of Matfield in some cases.   Here performance plays second fiddle to that one and incumbents are retained till they disgrace themselves totally.   Merit selection is a rare commodity i SA Rugby.

 Moz, I agree that newbies should prove themselves from the bench, but that's not possible if the bench is full of players on the way out and players to keep the AA watchdogs happy. Our bench is a bit weak most of the time.

 9. Smith, Perenara

10. Cruden, Barrett, Slade, Carter

11/14. Piatau, Savea, Jane, SBW, Slade, Dagg, B. Smith

12. Crotty, Sonny-B, Carter

13. C Smith, Fekitoa, Crotty, SBW, Dagg

15. B Smith, Dagg, Slade, , Piatau, Barrett

I just wanted to demonstrate (players in bold) how many of these AB backs can play in other positions & therefore increase flexibility as coverage for several positions . This gives the ABs increased depth overall but also in terms of bench coverage in any given game (depending on who is selected in the team).

 We are in a stronger position because of Meyer's so-called conservative selections. I 2006 White played a second string team in the tri-nations and just about all those players failed miserably, because there was no stability provided by experienced senior players. In 2011, de Villiers did basically the same in the tri-nations and most of those players also struggled in those matches.

In the case of Meyer, most of the new players had starts surrounded by experienced players that gave the stability for them (or most of them) to be tested in more ideal conditions. A lot of them were retained and kept as back-up and as part of the squad. If necessary, (like with injuries), many of them will be able to slot into specific positions without any major disruption.

It is in fact stupid to test players a, b, c and d in a team where you add another 10 new faces, just because you can. It is much better to keep your basic team and just make changes to the specific positions where you want to test players... If you disrupt the whole team, players a, b, c and d might all fail, because the team failed.

 It is stupid to play Vermulen into the ground. Meyer has not developed hsi squad as well as he might have.
Is Meyer to close in terms of friendship with some players eg victor and bakkies and steen kamp. 

Truth, Jake played a second string team in 2007, not 2006 and it was on the two away games only, the last two games of the competition for us. He did it to rest the players and he was justified in his decision. And we didn't play poorly actually, we led Australia 17-0 at half time, it took one hell of a fightback to win that game and we held New Zealand to 13-6 until the last 7 minutes, Carter complaining that he couldn't execute full backline movements.

In 2006 Jake had to make many disruptive changes due to injuries, let me refresh your memory:

Injuries to Schalk Burger (broken neck), Bakkies Botha (calf surgery), Jean De Villiers (cracked rib), Bryan Habana (cracked rib), Butch James (groin and knee), André Pretorius (groin), Joe Van Niekerk (C5 & C6 vertebrae), Jacques Cronje (cracked rib), Danie Rossouw (hamstring), Juan Smith (left quadriceps), Eddie Andrews (back), BJ Botha (back surgery), CJ Van Der Linde (Leg), Gurthro Steenkamp (broken hand), Pedrie Wannenburg (wrist surgery), Marius Joubert (fractured hand) amongst other lesser injuries stretched the Bok's depth to its limit.