Eat Crow (3)

Desert Fox
Your last post was clear as daylight - but to remind you I copied your post - expecting you to run for cover buy changing it.  Here is what you wrote originally:-
 "Well getting run over twice against the reds, getting flat out done against the sharks and the Cheetahs dump amongst many other things say otherwise! He is very susceptible head on and has shown vulnerability laterally. He defends like a worse Sonny Bill, quite ironic given that Damian always reminded me more of a league player. He has his strengths, and I say we should play to those strengths, but he does have shortcomings, the same kind that saw him get dropped from the Boks last year! It would be utterly foolish to dismiss that, but stranger things have happened: namely Lambie... For six years!! Saffers are sadly very slooooow to catch onto to the obvious."

 
So De Allende got run over in a game that never took place and you want us to believe your constant BS.   You will be constantly reminded of this one - it shows exactly how accurate your match descriptions are.  I may be too old - but you are too stupid - so I prefer the first - not the second.  
In any event the player who buggered up in the Stormers-Sharks game was Fransie and in the Cheetahs game De Jongh.  So go and get new glasses fr om the other stupid on the site - Ceradunce. 

 So this crow will it be roasted ,broiled or sauteed in garlic butter and smothered in onions ? 

https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCcHNPuEG5BvZdJKfUkjLpAA

 I copied the above e-mail address and tried to open it - there is no such e-amil address in existence.  Try again.
Another Reds game - this one? 

 clevermike

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 17587 RE: Eat Crow (3)
July 05, 2015, 13:32:10

 Ceradunce

I apologize - but then you are too stupid to interpret anything happening on a rugby field - hence you adoration for Morne and Ouma Victoria.


Ag ou Klokkie Hangtiete. Gaan pis en gaan rus.

 Ceradunce
Even an apology is too much for this crackpot to take.   He must have been caught in the wrong thread to turn as mad as he is now.   What he was doing here is a mystery - because his contribution was zero on the discussion topic - but then that is normal with him under all threads.

 It's not an email address, it's a web address. Just type the following on youtube:
Super XV 2015 - Damian De Allende (Stormers v Rebels)

 RE: Eat Crow (3) 
July 04, 2015, 18:53:04

 What about my question - why no answer?   I watched that video repeatedly and what you describe is absolute tripe.

Then it turns out you didn't watch it. 

•  0 Likes

 I did watch it originally and whatever came out of you was an outright lie about what  actually happened.    You had it totally wrong in the first instance and kept on piling further lies to cover every time you got caught out.   
What about my question - why no answer.  I want to send your brilliant (?) suggestion to the various SA franchises so please come up with that one.  If you say that is a strategy to follow it would be revolutionary in rugby terms.     

 Desert Disaster
Thanks for thew referral to U-Tube.   One of the first video clips coming up was a tribute to Damian de Allende and I watched that one as well as the one suggested.
What those clips showed was the massive upper body strength of De Allende - his strong line breaks when it took two or three players to bring him down.   The clip you referred to showed that as well.   It showed two cases where in traffic he missed tackles - but also a large number of tackles he did make - some of them exceptionally strong tackles.   
As per normal De Allende was huge in that game.   By a mile the best Stormers backline player.   
I am just wondering about the Sharks game against the Stormers where De Allende cut Steyn down to size when he shrugged Steyn's tackle attempts off like he was a feeble kid.   In that game De Allende masw 2 line breaks beating 6 defenders - while missing no tackles.   Poor Fransie made no line breaks beating noi tackles and he missed two tackles on De Allende.   So who of the two was "getting flat out done"? 
I would not even go to the Cheetahs game match report - where De Jongh was defenseless and De Allende had to cover for his poor defense.
Be it as it may - your interpretation of matches is so weird and crooked that I am not suprised about your interpretation included a description of what happened in a match that never took place.  


       

 If my interpretation of THAT incident, which is the only one I am discussing is so "weird" and "never took place". I repeat my prior invitation....give us your description of where Cat was, where Kuridani was, what  moves de Allende made to cover Toomua, how many  "inside steps" Kuridrani made....and why exactly having made full contact de Allende missed the tackle.
The floor is yours.

Michael, neither Frans nor Damian got the better of each other on defence, but Frans was the stronger of the two. If you want to speak of embarrassing, why not speak of the tackle where Damian spun round Frans in the tackle all the way to his feet as though he was poll dancing. 

 Frans was the stronger when De Allende shrugged him off and he landed on his backside on the grass on two occasions - that was embarrassing.   Then we have your lie about De Allende "getting flat out done".   It was Fransie who match after match was the poorest tackler of the two  - who was "flat out done". 
Your assessment of players is amazing.   De Allende - who in 9 rounds of 16 of Super 15 this year was selected as the best no 12 in the competition - is rubbish,  Fransie who never even got close to be selected in any matches he played in was in your book the best.   Fransie has upper body strength - yet De Allende toyed with him and really has amazing upper body strength.   De Allende who broke 73 tackles in the whole of Super 15 was weak - Steyn who broke 9 tackles in the competition was a strong attacker.   The way you rate players is a joke which people fail to understand because it is so weird.      
The rest of the crap - all because I caught you out as a liar - was expected.  I would rather have been ashamed of myself if I were you.       

Mozart
There ever was only one thing true in that whole description of yours and that is that De Allende missed the tackle.   The rest of your description of what happened in fact was an outright lie.  and a total misrepresentation of what actually happened.
You were completely quiet about the fact that -
*  De Jongh - the direct opponent did squat to try and stop Kuridrani - putting De Allende at a disadvantage having to run at speed from the inside to make a tackle attempt;
*   that although De Allende missed the tackle it so unsettled Kuridrani that he fumbled the ball and five meters further lost possession with the result that a scrum had to be formed.
Once you get to describe incidents on a rugby field correctly and in true context one would be able to make sense of it and accept your point of view.  Until that happens nobody in his right mind would accept as true the garbage you write on this site.  It has happened time after time on this site and always aim at two things - to protect the image of players you like and discredit the players you do not like.
Now go and eat crow.     

It so unsettled him that he dropped the ball? Wehe...is that was passes for manly tackling these days. Nothing on Cat, nothing on Toomua, nothing on the tackle....just a bs excuse and another dig at de Jongh. 

Right, just watched the clip over and over again! It was Damien's tackle to make, and he missed it. Not sure why there is a debate about it. It doesn't mean De Allende is a failure as a defender, because all players miss tackles, but on this occasion, he missed what was meant to be his man. 

 Mozart
You were talking crap about the line up of the defenders and the fact that i n the first instance De Allende had to go for the player he was lined up to defend against and only when Toomua passed the ball did he have to go and cover the non-attempt of De Jongh to defend against his direct opponent and did De Allende had to run at speed to defend against Kuridrani.  
Did Kuridrani drop the ball after the tackle attempt of De Allende?  Yes or no?  
Sure it is not another dig at the useless De Jongh - it was a statement of fact that he did squat in this case when his direct opponent beat him on his inside and he made no attempt at all to cover that.   That is normal with De Jongh in any event - in critical times he goes AWOL in matches and that was what happened here.
No excuse for De Allende - he missed the tackle and that was poor on his part.  But the description you gave of the incident was so distorted that I had to defend him against the distortion and place on record what really happened in that case.   On your part this was just another dig at De Allende.          

 Haai jirre, nothing, NOTHING has changed since my last visit about six months ago.  Some of you may join ISIS with all that pent up anger.  Nei man daai's nie mooi nie. Salaam!

 Freddie
It really ios refreshing to have you back - nothing ever change on this site - it is just a normal battleground with the past tense admirers and the present tense admirers.
Have fun.  

 OK - Who ever played in the backline?  Did you ALWAYS get your man?  Can we as the supporting fans really make a call like (both sides of this argument) this and be one hundred and ten percent sure and true in our hearts that there was no bias involved?  No we cannot!  We're fans, we're passionate about a game we love, nê? Well with that passion and pride comes a little one-eyedness (Lekker eenoog kyk). Does the centre(s) in question make a habit of missing a tackle?  Do they sometimes on instruction from their coach try and do the charge-up defence, hoping it will force the other side out of their rhythm?  If you played the game and missed a tackle or two (or like me - more than that) then you'd understand.  If you never played the game and think you know - I have a newsflash for you - "wake the fak-up" Not one single player is perfect and all will miss a tackle or two now and again - but look at the total contribution of the player in the 80 minutes and do not get sidetracked by a single incident.Salaam!  

 Freddy
You are 100% correct about the one-incident issue.  Mozart and Desert Disaster dislikes De Allende intensely - since he is a threat in selections to their hero Frans Steyn - so they are nitpicking and never give Dr Allende credit for all-round performance.   This one missed tackle is according to them career-defining - hence the constant harping on it.    

No it's not career ending....but it is indicative of 82 per cent tackling. Miss that many tackles in a test and you will impact the result. De Allende badly missed a big man in space, he needs to improve his defence against opponents in space.  

 Mozart
Who are better in making backline tackles -  De Allende, Frans Steyn or Juan de Jongh bearing in mind statistical data too?
I do not justify missed tackles by any player - especially if he is in the habit of missing tackles - but one has to see the situation in context and that is where concentration on one missed tackle is undesirable.  

Yes, I hate him so much I say he should get a shot as our starting 13. I must be the most horrifically evil human to ever walk this Earth for saying that the tackles he flubbed are tackles he flubbed. Like I say, he has strengths but all this hero worship must be tempered with a level head; he has not been perfect, particularly at 12. If he is to be successful at test level we must be honest about these shortcomings and use him where his skill set can thrive best. Trying to infer that he is a Marshawn Lynch power back and turning a blind eye to his defensive problems is only going to lead to tears later. This thread already illustrates that.

 Honest about shortcomings - that is a joke.  The Best 12  this year in Super 15 is not good enough to play at 12.  He has shortcomings - all players have those - but when the shortcomings are invented or when they are totally inaccurate - what is honest in that.
Your interpretations has been proven wrong game after game and you continue with them.  You refer to the attack and defense deficient Steyn as perfect and refuse to admit his much more grave shortcomings - yet you say we must be honest with shortcomings.  
This is really funny.  

Tokkie what is really funny is that a liar like you continues to be taken seriously on here. I wish Pakie was on here to give us his still shots showing all the participants....but failing that I will go with an honest commentator like Bloobok who said it was de Allende's tackle to make.
Game over...Eat Crow 3 established. I'm sure Eat Crow 4 will follow.

 You have established zero about the whole thing.   According to your weird interpretation to the effect that De Allende was lined up to defend 13 was the biggest crap you could have come up with - since it was preceded by a line-out where players do not go out of line from a defense or attacking perspective.   
There was no doubt that De Allende  failed to make a tackle - but the biggest flop was that De Jongh - lined up to face Kuridrani - made no attempt to stop Kuridrani from passing him on his inside resulting in De Allende having  to try and run outwards to tackle Kuridrani from the side.   If De Jongh did his job - or at least attempted to do his job - the situation could have developed differently - but he did squat and put pressure on De Allende to try and cover his flop.
That was the long and the short of the matter.   You lied from the start about what in fact happened - so that will not change by all your subsequent  stories.           

Michael, I have uprooted your viral spread of lies with ruthless efficiency. Everything. Just because you decide to give yourself a pat on the back, you aren't any less debunked.

 Tokkie is using the Dave " deny and don't amplify" defence. For de Allende read JJ Englebrecht. The last time he tried this denying Robbie Fruean had monstered his special pick Jordaan....he ended with massive egg on his face when Reid won the S15 monstering Jordaan in the same way.

I sincerely hope we don't rue the De Allende defence at the WC.

 The last time you describe the issue of Jordaan you lied about the number of tackles missed by Jordaan on Fruean - you said he missed two tackles while even ESPN said that in the whole game he missed one tackle.   Now suddenly he comes into the picture again.
This time I never said that De Allende did not miss the tackle on Kuridrani - what I did say is you gave a totally false description of what happened in that case.   The fact is the same as in the Jordaan case - where I never denied that Jordaan missed one tackle on Fruean.
Mozart I do not deny things that happened - but I do not lie like you about the circumstances attached to incidents.  I am not going to sincerely hope about anything attached to De Allende - what I sincerely hope is that the player you punted for 12 - Francois Steyn - is not in the WC team.   What I do know is that if he is we will all rue his poor execution and decision-making as well as his defense and attack deficiencies in the WC - that is a definite.   
What I also know is that we will also definitely rue the presence of other of your favourites you punted in the WC - especially those who have already let is down in the 2011 WC and in a number of tests subsequently.                   

Twice.....that's how many times Fruean ran over wee Jordaan....once he made a clean break. The other time he wore Jordaan like a handbag for 10 metres, and then offloaded for a try. I believe you are insisting Jordaan made that tackle....technically perhaps....but it never prevented the try. 
The egg must flow.

 The lie continues about Jordaan missing tackles twice and the lies will flow from Mozart as long as he is on this site.  He was cornered properly in the case of the missed tackle lies about the De Allende - Kuridrani case and is now diverting to Jordaan - the same as the simpleton Desert Disaster always ends up with Lambie.
Jordaan has NOTHING to do with this topic - stick to the De Allende case and be honest enough to admit that your description of what actually happened was a fraud.  That is all you can do to save face in this case.   

Desert disaster
"Michael, I have uprooted your viral spread of lies with ruthless efficiency. Everything. Just because you decide to give yourself a pat on the back in doesn't make you any less debunked." 
This must be a joke - you have been the one that was exposed as a fraud and the above is too funny for words - you have debunked nothing even when in your own weird way you believe that you did.   Debunk means showing up factual deficiencies in arguments - not using  wild and factless assertions based on zero but own prejudice. 
It remains funny how you carry on regardless and all facts indicates you are wrong.   You even base you assertions on a match which never took place - that really beats everything.

Oh, I see, this match report must be wrong. Still here is what the reporter wrote:

"The first who comes to mind is Paul Jordaan, if only because the initially hapless outside centre was given bouts of glaring revolving-door treatment from Robbie Fruean, the freight train in midfield for the Crusaders -- some 10cm taller and a gaping 22kg heavier at 110kg if the printed tale of the tape is to be believed.

It was hard to avoid minor flashbacks to the days of Lomu v Catt as Fruean ran straight and hard at the former Baby Bok, either knocking him to the turf with contempt or simply brushing off his passing attempt at a tackle."

 Mozart 
That report refers to one tackle attempt - not two.  I said and admitted it happened - you lied about the second tackle miss.  But then what has this case to do with the De Allende tackle miss on Kuridrani.
I read elsewhere that you latest invention in that case was that De Jongh was covering the wing in that case - but you fail to indicate what the wing was covering. So lets confirm the following as alleged by you:-
*   Catrakilis was lined up to defend against Toomua at 12*   De Allende was lined up to defend against Kuridrani at 13*   De Jongh was lined up to defend against the wing.
So the Stormers wing was lined up to defend against nobody and Lealiifano was not defended against at all.   That alone tells us what idiocy you can get to in cases like this.  All to exonerate De Jongh for any responsibility to defend against his opponent and blaming De Allende for being smashed to the ground by his direct opponent.
Why give a totally false description of what actually happened in this case in the first instance?                   

 75 comments over a tackle ? Man you saffas love to stick it to each other sometimes doncha ?Keep up the good work chaps !Off topic but I have just seen an ad for an Aussie TV cooking show with the episode being Japanese themed ,and the music accompanying it is "Turning Japanese " by the vapours ."Turning Japanese " refers to the young dude in the video having his eyes becoming slitted whilst whacking off to a pin-up pic .But seeing as how this thread is about eating crow I guess it sorta fits .

  "bout s of glaring revolving-door treatment from Robbie Fruean"....refers to one tackle....ag ou Tokkie you are not even a good liar.

Mozart
 So ESPN stats lied in the Jordaan case as well!!!  My name is not Mozart known as a habitual liar in efforts to attack players he dislikes and protect players he likes.
Now back to my comments about your description as to what happened in the Kuridrani - De Allende case.  You were caught out neatly in that one and is now on the diversion tactics again.   Get back to this case and forget about diversion tactics - t hey will not work out.
My advice to you is stick to the truth in describing incidents and do not become the diversion expert like Desert disaster - who when cornered always run back to Lambie or in you case Jordaan.   That type of thing is really silly.     

 "Another thing - does in the game of rugby a flyhalf normally line up to cover an inside center in a game - the inside center have to line up to cover a no 13 etc?"

Uhm, you are talking about a normal everyday, run-of-the-mill inside-out shift defence.

I want your advice on the above question since I want to e-mail it to the various franchises as a sound suggestion for them to follow in defensive strategy.   

Uhm... too... They will be laughing at you for being so damn slow, because teams have been doing this for years... and years... and years...

I would suggest you start watching rugby a bit, maybe you'll learn something about the game...
;-)