Ja it sure looked like it today.......hahahaha!
I never doubted that the Springboks would win the WC and told everybody so from the start, I also said there are too many players that has had a massive reputation and not ever really tested, The Vunipolas were just two of those. They were flops against the Springboks last year in June and the same today.
Malherbe taught Mark Vunipola a scrumming lesson today and Billie was largely contained in all phases of the game.
The description of the players given before the game by Brits was 100% correct.
I think that Du Toit is likely to be the Rugby Player of the Year. That pass by him to Kolbe before the last try was masterclass in itself.
du Toit has averaged a little over 1 metre per carry. Still defensively vulnerable. He is a lock playing flank. This talk of him being POTY is utterly absurd. Thor eclipsed both Lood and Steph, but will never receive the same recognition.
Steph is not the best player in the world. We played as a unit greater than the sum of its parts to get this far; there were very few standouts for POTY. Faf, Thor and Mapimpi were the constants.
AO
You still are expressing the same BS after being wrong about Du Toit for years. De Allende was the most imposing backline player of the tournament in both attacking and defending and show physical strength that you always denied, Why not admit you were wrong in your assessments for the past 15 months at least.
Erasmus - who you and Mozart called Eraser - was the best Springbok coach we ever had since 1992 and it is time you admit it and apologize to both the coach and the players you constantly attacked viciously.
Damian was not the most imposing player in the tournament. He was comprehensively outplayed by numerous inside centres, most notably Kerevi and even Sonny Bill. Closer examination of his game reveals the same old issues, issues glossed over by blind patriotism. Damian is not the answer at 12. He wasn't even the most imposing backline player in the final!
Throughout the tournament, Steph has been an inefficient ball carrier with a paltry 1.8m per carry. He still exhibited the same defensive frailties. Not the best player in the competition.
Correction: I have never used the word Eraser on this forum. Not until the prior sentence. He is not the best coach we have ever had. He isn't even better than Snor. Tactically he is very limited, yet fortunate to possess the physicality to take out the English for one big game. He has been out-coached numerous times. He is inferior to Jake and Meyer. These are truths you are going to have to reconcile at some point in your life.
Snor is better than Rassie? Are you joking...
Snor had a better grasp of backline structures. The big problem in his grand vision was defined roles and breakdown pressure. Hence 2008 was a season marred by big ball carriers who were turned over. The attack structures of Rassie are stilted, outdated in some instances and too inflexible. Very simple, basic, easily discerned by the opposition. If we are comparing x's and o's, I do not regard Rassie very highly. His analytics also isn't particularly impressive. Did he make each individual better? No. Are we playing to our potential? No. How then can he be reasonably assumed to be "the best coach we have ever had"? Every attack stat is down from Meyer and Coetzee. Very inefficient in possession. Are these mere trivialities? Were they trivilities when we couldn't break down Japan, or Canada for long stretches? Then there is defence. We are a defence first team, and the accolades have fallen on the head of Nienaber, not Rassie. Who then shall receive the most credit for the change of emphasis from Coetzee? Rassie has long been joined at the hip to Nienaber. For over a decade in fact. Wherever Rassie goes, his defence guru lays the foundation and that becomes the focal point for the entire blueprint. Rassie is not the best coach we have ever had.
I think it is high time to forget about the idiocy of AO and just accept that he does not know anything about rugby as a game at all. He is just desperate to express worthless empty- headed idiocy on site, so we must really pity him rather than even comment on his idiocy. He is constantly in need of stupid pills as well.
It burns you deeply that you cannot assert with any authority any of these opinions. One game to wash away the mediocrity that persisted before it. That's the shortsightedness of Bok rugby. You can spew all the insults you want, it changes nothing. Straining and labouring in vain. Rassie, the average coach, whose entire game hinged on the work of another man, both at the Stormers and Boks, for over a decade, is not the man to take the Boks forward. His limitations are unsustainable. No ideas, no innovations. Besides, he is past tense now. So it's pointless talking any more of him.
Your idea of innovation simply only exists only in your mind. The fact that you elsewhere compared Erasmus to a coach like Ludeke that was effectively fired by the Bulls is insulting the intelligence of site members. The fact that you claim Erasmus is a worse coach than De Villiers was is unbelievable. You pretend you know something about rugby, but what you write on site shows the exact opposite. LMAO
I never compared Rassie to Ludeke. However, whilst we are on the subject, he is the most successful South African rugby coach in super rugby history. Rassie regressed the Stormers into a diabolical cacophony of mediocrity, mou lding the Boks into that very thing!
GG NR
And Ludeke got fired for incompetence - LMAO.
Did he? Provide the evidence for this.
Tell me something. How great was the rugby under Rassie at the Stormers? What's that? Beaten by Ludeke in a historic season of high-powered offence? No kidding!
If Rassie wants to continue with the forward dominance found this year...Akkerman is the man.
The Gloucester pack are formidable. And much of it is the same formulae Akker used for the Leeus when they had the most dominant pack in SR for three straight years.
...combined with the a brilliant conditioning coach.
Rassie might not want someone with a too strong opinion though.
And Aug, another thing that you are missing is the fact that how you choose to play is partly dictated by what you perceive the opposition weakness to be combined with what your strengths are.
Hindsight is always 20/20 but after winning the cup yesterday, you can't assume that he blundered his way there.
That conclusion rest s on bias and ignores evidence.
