With the Lions playing the Janguares, we have the potential for a good attacking game. If anyone is interested, I am willing to splice the footage of Jantjies for further review. Maybe an opportunity for Plum to make a stronger case for him to start at 10 for the Boks.
Plum is an enthusiastic supporter of Jantjies - I have serious reservations about that and with good reason.
Jantjies did nit have a single successful test since his first one in 2012. He is a highly rated provincial level player even though he had his ups and downs at that level too. The Stormers took him on loan from the Lions in 2013 and he was so bad they released him from the loan agreement early.
I do not think Jantjies can take pressure nd he also is a lousy defender, Attacking in the channel in the recent Super Rugby game between the Stormers and the Lions De Allende ran over him at least 4 times. If De Allende does that - what would happen if he has to face strong ball carries on test level.
No - he is not the back-up for Pollard as a test flyhalf - I would rather see Du Preez in that role.
I am not an advocate for demoting Pollard, but the question is interesting and not without merit: Is the combination of 10.Jantjies, 12.Pollard better than any combination of Pollard and our inside centres? That's the question I ask. Which gives the team more options? I personally believe André eliminates the need to play Jantjies at 10. From what I have seen, Frans is another case.
I am not in favour of du Preez playing for the Boks. The game is too fast, not just in terms of movement, but how teams adjust. He is too slow of mind. I don't think he has the skills either. Interestingly, the Sharks put the ball in de Preez's hands (7.1%) considerably less than the Bulls do Pollard (9.0%) and the Lions do Jantjies (13.3%). From this, we can see that Jantjies has the better, proven aptitude for having play run through him. He is a capable backup to Pollard. Certainly not perfect, but better than Robert.
Oops - into the normal BS again. That means a reference to -"put the balls in hands" - please Silly Billy it is what the player does with the ball in hand. Secondly he then proceeds to his normal BS about Andre and Fat Fransie - the most ineffective and clueless centers the Sharks had for years, Lets not forget that Plumtree said Fransie is not a center at all and the more I see of Esterhuizen the more he looks like a Fat Fransie clone. Perhaps a bit less in defense and a bit more effective in ball carries - a bit less lard. .
The fool wants to move Pollard out of position - where he was not very effective in the games it happened to accommodate Jantjies, There are limits to rugby illiteracy - but Silly Billy has even crossed those limits.
It was bound to happen, Mike.
Doos tends to favour the useless, so why not Jantjies?
He'll start telling us of all his attributes next. Attributes he doesn't have.
How deceptively strong he is. .. his blinding pace ... he'll mention his incredible acceleration from a dead start ... his wall like defense and his ability to play under pressure ... he'll even mention his irritating flip passes in a positive light.
It'll be the usual fabricated nonsense we see from him all the time.
NO ... Jantjies is most definitely not a capable backup to Pollard or to any other test 10. He's barely suited to SR.
I'm not sure what he wants to do with Estie once Pollard moves to 12 .. play him at 13 ... or maybe on the wing? ... but one thing is for sure, he wants to rejig the entire backline to fit this idiot in ... and that's without having the first clue of his own match 23.
Go ahead, Doos. Make your little clip. It'll be on par with your feeble attempt to sell Esterhuizer to us as the Bok 12.
Can't wait to see how you polish this turd up to shine like a super star.
CC
I wait with anticipation to see how turd-like Silly Billy's real thinking is. Expect another outburst of cloud 9 fairy tales.
Auge: "I am not an advocate for demoting Pollard..."
Auge: "Maybe an opportunity for Plum to make a stronger case for him to start at 10 for the Boks."
Mike: "The fool wants to move Pollard out of position - where he was not very effective in the games it happened to accommodate Jantjies, There are limits to rugby illiteracy."
2CC: "It was bound to happen, Mike. Doos tends to favour the useless, so why not Jantjies ?"
Silly Billy
Idiocy supreme as expected
Organhuffer you have just owned ou maaaikie and wee cc. Hilarious
Love meme or whatever you call it!
Beeno
At times - if not all the time - you are totally nuts. And Pakie share that di stinction with you.
Aag Mike, don't be so seriaas.
These foul ups are becoming too common. The ghastly trio need to up their game!
I'm already apparently in favour of Morné as the best 10 of all time. That from an argument in 2016 between 2CC, Mike and Pakie!
"Apparently" underlined and in bold to avoid further confusion. If any further trouble is encountered please leave a message and I will retype in capitals. Thankyou for your cooperation.
Mike you prove you don't have to be right to be a g reat poster. Hahahahahahahahaha
Silly Billy
You were the one whop compared Morne favourably when Mozart posted the stats of Carter and Morne and affectively claimed that Morne was a better flyhalf than Carter. You also carried on for years claiming that Kirchner was a better player than Folau.
You continued with Folau in that vein up to early last year - giving away your new user name at the time. Now suddenly you claimed that you ideas were confined to 2013 and does not apply anymore, .
The same kind of idiocy rose its head in the case of Carter and Morne and a host of other players.
.
Beeno
You are a better person than to join the idiots on site - but I cannot avoid that - so face the criticism you deserve if becoming an idiot yourself.
You were the one whop compared Morne favourably not part of the discussion when Mozart Pakie posted the
stats of Carter and Morne and affectively never claimed that Morne was a
better flyhalf than Carter.
Fixed. You're welcome.
I have always rated Carter the best 10 of all time. I have always rated Butch the best South African 10. The only player I have ever regarded on the level of Carter was Larkham, at the beginning of his career. I should say it was the other way around. So no, you are entirely wrong as you mix fantasy with reality. Again.
As per Folau? Show me one quote where I rated Kirchner the best fullback in the world. Show me one quote where I rated Kirchner better than Folau past 2013. I did point out several weaknesses in Folau's game and referenced more than two dozen incidents to prove them. One such incident left you red faced, again, and you went off in a huff. Misquoting in numerous threads. Why? Because your "golden rules" of kicking were debunked. I used one of the best attacking players in world rugby to do it!
Now here is the real gem: You fell for the Goosen hype, Lambie hype, 2014-2015 Steph hype, Lood hype, Damian hype, Kriel hype, Swiel hype (there was no hype, just you waving a solitary flag). I could extend that list. It's embarrassing. To add insult to injury, you were one of those very ignorant fans who fell for the "Schalk at flyhalf" nonsense. You also defended our wings having to kick to get behind the defence, as that was an advancement of the "doff tactics" of Meyer. You are the debate equivalent of Frankenstein's monster. A malformed clump of garbled and indiscernible hogwash .
The Very Clever Mike Approach to Making Friends:
Silly Billy
I do not think you understand what hype is - it is writing up in the media that a player is good, while his performance does not justify the lauding of the player. What is written on this syte has nothing to do with hype.
There are obviously some site members who are total rugby knowledge deficient and you are a prime example/ So let give a few examples -
* There was no hype of Goosen - fact is Morne Steyn was so pathetic in 2012 that there were media reports suggesting that as the best flyhalf in Super Rugby that year Goosen should replace the disastrously poor Morne at flyhalf. that year. That was also reflected on this site, No hype - just real facts.
* De Allende is regularly criticized in the media and on this site for deficient performance - but the question I always asked is come up with a better player to replace him, All we got in response - especially from you and some of the other Village Idiots -has been hogwash. There is zero hype involved here - but realistic approach towards solving a problem
* Same with De Jager - he would walk into any test team ibn the world - so hype is not an issue.
* Du Toit is one of the best performing players in international rugby and deserve the praise he gets. Only rugby illiterates will dispute that,
* Kriel has the same problem as De Allende - give a better player and do not come u with hogwash.
I happened to see a video clip about Swiel playing for Bishops on the internet. What I consequently said we should watch out how he develops in future, That was not hype - just drawing attention to a player.
Schalk in the WC tests was the first receiver of the ball from the scrumhalf more than 80% of all passes made went too forwards and not the flyhalf with Burger getting most of those , That is not nonsense - it is factual.
No - Silly Billy - I routinely stick to facts and not the cloud 9 fairy tales you spout on site, But then you have no idea about rugby and one can expect real hogwash from you/
"There was no hype of Goosen - fact is Morne Steyn was so pathetic in 2012 that there were media reports suggesting that as the best flyhalf in Super Rugby that year.."
I have logged every possession for the 2015 WC tests and the distribution chain for each test. You are talking porkies Mike. I see you are trying to subtly weasel your way out of this gaff. You said Schalk was occupying the fly half position, playing flyhalf. I posted a stats comparison between Schalk in the WC and steph at 7 last year, and Schalk came out on top.
The hype in 2015 was that Damian was the best 12 in world rugby. Right after he directly lost the Wallaby test that year, the media and its ardent guppies dubbed Damian and Kriel the best centre pair in world rugby! Yes, that's hype.
Schalk in the WC tests was the first receiver of the ball from the
scrumhalf more than 80% of all passes made, That is not nonsense - it
is factual.
Actually, it is complete and utter bullshit.
WORLD CUP 2015:
All Burger possessions/Scrumhalf passes
Vs Japan - 37/79
Vs Samoa - 30/80
Vs Scotland - 22/91
Vs USA - 18/61
Vs Wales - 41/103
Vs NZ - 13/50
161/484 = 33% (not "more than 80%"), and of course that is assuming that every single possession that Burger received came from the scrumhalf, which it very likely didn't.
For someone who can't stop touting himself as a "true rugby lover", Mike certainly has no qualms about lying about the game. These numbers took me less than 10 minutes to verify. A lie, of course, is much less trouble - especially when you assume no one's going to call you out on it.
Correct Pakie, but that is still way too much and most of the other passes went to forwards too. We had a very predictable (and frustrating to watch) game plan for the 2015 RWC. Even Snô rre's team played with more variation .
Good work Pakie. It used to be surprising to me, but he does it almost every time I converse with him. I wasn't exaggerating when I said he gets caught in at least one lie every day.
Herr Draht, Snor had arguably the best Bok XV in history. A golden generation in its prime. Meyer started from scratch and had the likes of Damian and Kriel. What can you do with that? To compound the problem, Willie was horribly out of form. Meyers game planning was light years ahead of Pieter, Coetzee and Rassie.
Sure Draad, that's an opinion that can be debated.
The numbers though are verifiable (not exactly in this case as some minutes of substitution needs to be calculated as well as the fact that we don't know exactly how many of Burger's possessions came from the scrumhalf, but to within 5% either way I'd say, which is close enough to show a claim of 80% as that of a fool and a liar).
Meyer had too much structure and his players were forced to comply precisely. There were no place for thinking players or flair. That's why Rassie is sitting with a few dumb players ATM
Of all the coaches of the past twenty years, I'd say Meyer left the most leeway for decision making. We currently have the most rigid pattern based team, which is saying something after Coetzee. I've never seen our wings kicking so much ball to get behind the defence. That or cut back in and take contact from multiple defenders. Watch some of the Meyer tests. Not as bad as you think. Look at the structures and plays in the 2015 RC. He opened the game up for the fan favourites. That certain individuals couldn't thrive is entirely their own fault.
Cheers Aug
Strangely nobody here gives me neatly enough shut for backing Jantjies like I Do.
In reality, my support for him has its foundation in his record with the Lions.
As soon as I feel that somebody else has been consistently better than I'll support him, no matter which player that is or the team he plays for.
Most of Jantjies detractors have one thing to say about him...he cracks under pressure.
His creativity, out of hand kicking, game management and record are never spoken about.
Mike still has not answered my question about which ten in SA is able to win games for his side when they're on the back foot.
Jantjies was very good today - but when he was very good in 3 incident in the match he was very bad in the case of two incidents as well. I still think he is not a test class player.
Pakie
Look at the number of passes made by the scrummie and the total number of balls handled by the flyhalf bearing in mind that a number of handling by the flyhalf stemmed from kicks the flyhalf covered. That gives you an idea what was going on. Your figures are too little to paint the whole picture and therefore lead to twisted conclusions. as is normally the case with you.
No - you have no idea what really happened and less about what I really wrote, Listening to and supporting Silly Billy is making you as silly as he is.
No Mozart it was part of a total load of BS and you should know better, It does not happen that the scrumhalf passed the ball routinely to a forward instead of the flyhalf. Where it does happen is basically when the intention is to pass the ball to forwards to move away from the sideline and make a relieving kick when on defense and when the forwards are being used to try and batter the opposition to score a try,
You can go and check the stats yourself and you will find that at most 25% of Du Preez's passes went to the flyhalf - the rest did not and Burger was the main but not the only recipient of such passes. In the Japan disaster it happened regularly and Burger knocked on 4 balls in the same strategy,
You are at liberty to compare the number of passes made by Du Preez with the number of ball handling of the flyhalfs beari ng in mind that the flyhalfs also cover opposition kicks and that is included in their ball handling stats,
The obvious indication was that in the WC Meyer fell back on a strategy used successfully for the Bulls in 2004 with Du Preez at scrummie - the latter tried to repeat it in the 2015 WC with no success and neutralizing totally any backline play by the Springboks in crucial games.
.
Silly Billy your logging si normal ad routine BS on your part. Read clearly what I wrote to Mozart about and then you would find that you are too ignorant to interpret what really happens in games,.
02:28am
