EOYT Expectations

In the game he criticized De Allnde who made 14 tackles and missed 2 and kept quiet about DE Jongh making 7 tackles and missing 3.

De Jongh is 12/3 in that game, not 7/3.

Sorry I am wrong - it was 12 made 3 missed.   It was the poor Morne Steyn who made 7 and missed 5 (normal style).

ESPN stats are being updated and I used the updated stats in a posting before Mozart came with his thread in which he left out De Jongh - he w as dealing with players who missed two or more tackles in that game - but left out De Jongh.   When I pointed out that he was wrong and tried to mislead members - he suddenly claimed that the De Jongh stats were updated.   Being a gentleman I did not take the matter further, but did mention the updating story is  questionable - in view of my earlier posting in which the real stats were mentioned.   

ESPN stats are usually final about 24 hours after the game.

Rooinek

The problem is that I like all coaches - I only look at results and what happens on the field of play and the results achieved.   

Thus far Erasmus performance can be compared to what Meyer achieved in 2012 and the differences were  hugely in favour of Erasmus.   The players under Rassie is playing positive rugby and they scored more tries in the matches and especially against the AB's they did better than Meyer did.

Mozart and AO started numerous threads to praise Meyer to high heaven and use lies and misrepresentations to try and discredit Erasmus.  The anti-campaign started even before Erasmus assumed duty with the Springboks.  This thread was just another one trying to discredit Erasmus.

As to the rest - I agree with you that the Springboks played with fire in their belly.   I also believe they play according to a positive 15 man game plan - which Meyer never allowed.  

It is early days  yet - but I think that the players as they get used to a proper game plan will flourish and improve with experience.   By the way the dead-heads on site claim that Meyer had a vey advanced game plan, but I have never seen it being played/implemented  in any match and if there was one it had to do a 2004 plan of the Bulls.           

@ Rooi

Cool. Yeah, they do look like they're playing for something. Rassie looks like he's put a bit of belief back into them. Never a bad thing I guess.

And the Sharks? Man I'm so disappointed with them.

What do you reckon is happening there?

Lügnerin, why do you do these things to yourself? Not only do you make a mess, but once you finally put said mess behind you, you return to the same situation and recreate the tragic disaster all over again. 

Firstly, I didn't post before Rassie was hired. Quite how I was able to achieve such a thing win tout posting remains to be seen. 

Secondly, I have provided a balanced perspective perspective of how the Boks have been playing. I give credit where credit is due. It was you who repeatedly chose to drag Meyer back into conversation. I was content to compare this year with last year. Simple as that. You over reach to pin as much as possible onto Meyer. Why? You are a biased, prejudiced and hateful liar. I merely exposed your tribe for what it was. Very embarrassing for you.

Clearly not embarrassing enough, as you sink to an old low. A debunked myth that Meyer implemented a 2004 gameplan post ELVs. Why did you choose 2004? You wanted to go as far back as possible to find a date that might convince others that Meyer's game was outdated. Very far from it. Meyer's Boks didn't play like any Bulls team. The 2004 Bulls team played a very different kind of rugby. For a start they didn't have a rush defence, and the way their organised their players around the field was very different. 

What Meyer did was very similar to the Boks of this year and under Coetzee. You fail to pick up any of these things because you don't understand what they are, which repeatedly brings great shame and humiliation upon yourself. One of the key differences is the amount of kicking the Boks do now, kicking away any slow ball in their half. They also have deeper lying layers of attack, which Rassie has slowly begun to change. Meyer's Boks were flatter and quicker developing.

So, tell us again, how do you feel about Rassie breaking the golden rules of tactical kicking all year? How did you feel about those tries which were run back? Oh, I forgot. They were strategic aimless kicks. Those tries conceded were strategic concessions. Silly me, I almost thought Rassie's gameplan contradicted your golden rules. 

Listen dimness - yu must compare apples to apples even though you are too stupid to realize that.

*   2012 was Meyer's first year as coach of the Springboks and so was 2018 in the case of Erasmus;

*    the opposition teams in 2012 were exactly the same as they were thus far in 2018;

*    2017 was the second year of Coetzee as coach and the June tests were contested against a totally different team.

Since there were sound grounds for comparing the Springboks performances in the years 2012 and 2018 - it would only be a sick mind who tries the same in comparison to 2017 and 2018.

Clearly this is way over your head and cut your contention was as to the wonderful coach Meyer was and the brilliant game plan (if ever there was in fact one) to pieces.

The opposition teams are the same, but the personnel are not. Deans was coaching the Wallabies. Argentina had a different coach. Graham Henry was working with them. So, no, it's not identical. 

Furthermore, the circumstances of those seasons were entirely different. How can you compare it? Meyer had to start from virtually nothing. Rassie had a deep pool of players to select from. 

It's actually very logical to compare last season to this season. In fact, it makes far more sense to compare two consecutive years than 2018 to 2012. Seasons divided by six years. Six years!

So, the question is clear, what kinds of improvements did we see from Coetzee's team of 2017? 

The personal attack only reinforces for us all how little character you have. 

I've never been a huge fan of Rassie, not since those days when he had all the lights going and was trying to control everything the players did on the field, but he's doing something right and I like the attitude of the players under him.

rooitwit had you listened to Beeno from the start about Rassie you would not have got off on the wrong track. H ow often hasn't this been the case!

No dimness

Meyer inherited a far better  pool of players with more experience and test caps than Erasmus got.   You gave list of retirees, but never gave  a list of players he inheritedand to name some of those the following are mentioned:-

Kirchner, Habana, Pietersen, De Villiers, Olivier, Framns Steyn, Morne Steyn, Lambie, Pienaar, Spies, Louw, Alberts, Jannie du Plessis, Bismarck du Plessis, Beast,   

Combined the above could be a near to full starting line-up and later in the series he also got Steenkamp and Van der Merwe back.  He had a serious attack of past tense selection by promising Matfield the captaincy and when Matfield would not bite he promised the same to Fourie du Preez.   Both changed their minds and came on board in 2013.

On the other hand the only really experienced players inherited by Erasmus other than Etzebeth, Beast, Willie and Louw all had very little test experience having less than 30 caps each.   Erasmus also had a string of newbies he had to start off with,   Of the above Beast and Louw was in serious decline and getting near to or being passed their sell-by dates and both played some matches off the bench.       

Meyer made an utter fool of himself by filing the developing gaps with Bulls players and declared that he prefers to select player he knew ahead of other players,   he at the end of 2012 declared he was wrong doing what he did,   Imn the end Meyer with his age  mania caused serious damage to the Springbok squad to be inherited by Coetzee and ultimately Erasmus.   Although he started sekecting new players he gave them very little game time.

So your argument is BS in capital letters about Meyer having to start virtually from, scratch.  If somebody had to start virtually from scratch it was Erasmus.   All your other excuse is a poor attempt at a covering up effort for the fact that with all the experienced players available Meyer could not equal most of the achievements  of the Erasmus team.

Accept it that you are clueless and try and use deception to get past the poor and clueless performances by the Meyer team and the absence of a constructive game plan.    To get away from the real facts you are now harping on a comparison between Coetzee and Erasmus  and trying to make out that Coetzee was a batter coach than Erasmus is.    

What a bloody non-plussed  fool you are!!!!!!    

Meyer lost Du Preez, Fourie, Smit, Victor, Bakkies, Juan, Butch, Rossouw, Schalk. 

What depth did we have? Very little, almost nothing in many instances. Meyer had to rebuild the spine of the team with less than test quality players. Rassie had strong options right off the bat.

Were Rassie to have lost Faf, Pollard, Marx, Eben, Snyman, Mostert, Steph, Duane right from the start then it would have been comparable. Even then, our depth has improved as more youngsters are finding their feet. Such wasn't the case in 2012. Not even in 2016.

Meyer's first team had a younger average age than that of Rassie. Many players that had accumulated tests were never front line players anyway. Olivier and Kirchner being examples. 

No Lügnerin, you are making a fool of yourself. Again. You talk of comparing apples with apples etc, but then lose all perception of either season and make a mess. Why? You hate Meyer and will do anything to attack him. If you can't find something, make it up. If noone is talking about him, throw him into the conversation  anyway. Even if it's unrelated to the thread title. You need professional help. That or a few minutes outside the basement you lock yourself in like a parallel I'd Gargamel. 

Listen dimness - I quoted all the players had available.   Some of the losses you mentioned by 2011 was useless anyway.   It was easy to replace the lot with experienced players and I mentioned the retained players.

You were already caught out lying iro average age of players - so stop using that as an excuse.   

No I do not hate Meyer - hatred I ;leave to you and your coterie of fools.   I looked at the achievements of coaches and the legacy left by them and in the end Meyer was a 2/10 coach.  That must have been the rating  SARU gave him too since they would not renew his contract.   

He failed because he -

*   did not build up experience in his squads and ended up with players with minimal experience having to become starting players in the WC;

*    he did not select players based on performance - he selected on the basis of what he knew they are capable of (from his own mouth) - forgetting when they were capable of; and

*    he had no game plan incorporating backline players into the set-up (he said SA backline players do not have the skills).

Bad coach - just about 2% better than Coetzee.

Listen dimness - I quoted all the players had available.   Some of the losses you mentioned by 2011 was useless anyway.   It was easy to replace the lot with experienced players and I mentioned the retained players.

You were already caught out lying iro average age of players - so stop using that as an excuse.   

No I do not hate Meyer - hatred I ;leave to you and your coterie of fools.   I looked at the achievements of coaches and the legacy left by them and in the end Meyer was a 2/10 coach.  That must have been the rating  SARU gave him too since they would not renew his contract.   

He failed because he -

*   did not build up experience in his squads and ended up with players with minimal experience having to become starting players in the WC;

*    he did not select players based on performance - he selected on the basis of what he knew they are capable of (from his own mouth) - forgetting when they were capable of; and

*    he had no game plan incorporating backline players into the set-up (he said SA backline players do not have the skills).

Bad coach - just about 2% better than Coetzee.

1. Props: Beast, Jannie. Who else? Coenie? 
2. Hookers: Bismarck and Strauss. 
3. Lock: Kruger, Bekker and Eben. Eben was a rookie. 
4. Flank: Louw, Coetzee, Alberts. Who else? Coetzee wasn't any good on debut anyway.
5. 8 Man: Spies, Duane. Duane wasn't great yet. We had to wait until 2013 for him to truly step up to test rugby. 
6. Scrumhalf: Pienaar, Hougaard. Who else? We had problems with both. 
7. Flyhalf: Morné. Nobody else until 2014.
8. Wings: Habana and JP. Who else? Mvovo? Chavangha? Please spare me. We had to wait until 2014 for Hendricks. 
9. Centres: Jean, Frans and de Jongh. Meyer didn't try Juan until the EOYT. We haven't had a fully fledged 13 until Am. Of course, that's unless we refer to Fourie in late 2013. Still, he wasn't available in 2012. Olivier was not test quality.
10. Fullbacks: Kirchner. I'd include Lambie in his best position, but many wouldn't agree. Either way, we didn't have great depth here at all. Aplon c was another.

Let's compare this to what Rassie had at hand. 

1. Props: Kitshoff, Beast, Malherbe, Louw. There are others who could fill in if we were in a bind.
   
2. Hookers: Marx, Bongi. 
3. Locks: Eben, Snyman, Steph, Mostert
4. Flanks: Kolisi, Louw, Steph, Jean-Luc
5. 8 Man: Whiteley, Duane, Notshe
6. Scrumhalf: Faf, Van Zyl, Papier
7. Flyhalf: Pollard, Jantjies, Willemse 
8. Wings: Dyantyi, Mapimpi, Nkosi, Kolbe
9. Centres: Serfontein, André, Am, Kriel, Frans, Rohan. 
10. Fullbacks: Willie, Gelant, Bosch

Rassie has a very versatile pool of players who can play multiple positions. Meyer had a big drop off between established players and next in line with nowhere near as many utility players. You lose this debate easily. 

What a fool the Village Idiot made of himself AGAIN.    He lists players  brought into the squad by Erasmus as adequate back-ups - which Meyer never had,   There were as many suitable back-ups for Meyer in 2012 - but he would not recognize them and in some cases never used them.  

Take for instance the joke he made about Vermeulen - he was even better in 2012 than in 2013, but Meyer failed to recognize that type of selection.   He was totally stuck on his own norms as set out in the  quotes I mentioned from his numerous public statements.   

Meyer tried out Etzebeth and Coetzee as rookies = both did better than the retiring player the replaced.   The above list had a long list of newbies -  most of which were tried out and failed when given opportunities.   They were in the main no better than the players Meyer had available and never used.   

Meyer had two problems as  coach -

*    he could not identify promising players at all - he mainly only started new players when he was forced into it and then made panic selections when players was not available and to his amazement found hen to be better than the predecessors;

*    he had to use a game plan his experienced players could play - they could never be taught something new - so he ended up with no game plan he could implement even if he wished too.   

Be careful - in the back-up list you quoted there are players who failed when used and others that was not top standard and was used by Coetzee and discarded.   Bosch and Geland are two examples.   All the wings mentioned  were new ones whom  Erasmus identified, developed and selected.    The centers were in the main failures when Coetzee tried them out.   That included Frans Steyn and Rohan - whom Erasmus would never use.  Then there are Serfontein never used because of injury and Am who was extremely questionable.   Erasmus used in his latest games De Allende and Kriel - with Esterhuizen being just about average to poor in four of his five starts.

Willemse was a player identified by Erasmus as a newbie.   Jantjies was used by Meyer in 2012 and failed = he was used by Erasmus in 2018 and failed again.  In the case of Pollard - the longer he played under Meyer the worst the effect of Meyer's coaching was on his performances and in the end he lost out and was replaced by Steyn (who was a complete flop in 2014) and by Lambie.   The latter was also negatively affected by Meyer's coaching of backline players and in the end Pollard became the stand-by flyhalf in the WC in 2015 - the real first receiver of balls from the scrummie was Burger - with both Pollard and Lambie mainly used as kickers and not for any other propose.   It was unfortunately also the lot of Le Roux as well.  Under Meyer he started of brilliantly and then slowly  deteriorated becoming a worse full back - so bad that he was never selected by Coetzee.   It was Erasmus who brought him back and started using properly his many assets.   

Amongst the forwards there were also some dubious players mentioned,   Louw at prop did not do well in the latter part of the SR series and was not up to standard in most games he played in.   Beast is going sliding down and Kitshoff was never used by Meyer.

Marx the same and also Mbonambi.

Amongst the locks Snyman was a questionable performer when he came on as replacement lock in the tests where he was the back-up.   De Jager would have been first choice partner for Etzebeth had he not been injured and Mostert is not a great contributor to Tight 5 play.   Du Toit - detested by Mozart, supported by you and Pakie - are mentioned twice.   Du Preez was tried out from the bench twice and failed and Louw should never have been selected in the first instance.

No your thinking for the talent available to Erasmus are laughable.   The potential player list was even better available to Meyer -  but he would not pick them if they hit him in the face.                    

The situation is that Erasmus was a better selector of new talent than Meyer ever was and the players perform better than they did under Meyer.

No, Duane wasn't better in 2012 than he was in 2013. Meyer did in fact play Duane in 2012. He started 7 tests.

Jantjies was about a 6/10, but better than Goosen or Lambie. Pollard didn't get worse at all. He played well under Meyer.

Lambie hasn't been a good player under Plumtree, Jake, Peter, Meyer, Gold, Mallett or Coetzee. He hasn't played good rugby under any coach. Conclusion, he simply isn't the player the media made him out to be before he even played one test. A reputation they peddled for years.

Pollard was used primarily as a runner, not a kicker. You are lying yet again. You should do a little research and see often Lambie kicked and passed. You are making a fool of yourself again. Does Pakie need to set you straight again? 

Willie suffered no ill effects of Meyer's coaching, he was simply out form. It happens. He had a few bad months compared to two and a half very good years and you place the blame on Meyer's coaching. You are easily the most dishonest person I have ever encountered.

Who were these better players in 2012? Was Kruger better than Mostert and Snyman? No. Rassie has a much deeper pool of players available to him. In Meyer's first year there was a sharp drop off from core players and everyone else.

Just give up Lügnerin. Your feeble attempts to slander Meyer have backfired at every turn. 

Lets get back to reality,    Mozart went off the rails calling Billy Vunipola Vinnie Vunipola and swore  before the June tests that he would destroy Malherbe - which he never did.   Now it is back to the same story - and nothing has in fact changed.   How sickening is that repetitive story.

You can point out facts to AO - but it never hits home.    He did not realize that Meyer dropped Pollard a number of times from the team and replaced him with  Morne Steyn and later on Lambie.   He did no realize why L3 Roux's performance deteriorated under Meyer.   What really happened had hit him in the face repeatedly - but facts don't count and his repetitive BS does.

No use giving him another lecture on playing of 15 man rugby - it goes straight ober his head,    

Meyer didn't drop Pollard for Morné. He did drop him for Lambie. How did that work? I have referred to that numerous times as one of the lowest points of Meyer's career, and you went along with it.

You say it's a fact that Meyer is to blame for Willie being out of form at the World Cup? Produce these facts. I want to see them. 

Ok  - lets explain the Birdbrain the following:-

In 2014 there were 2 tests against Wales in which Morne was the flyhalf - in the second test he was as expected atrociously poor.  That was followed by a test against Scotland and two against Argentina in which Pollard was the flyhalf.   In the test against Scotland he was brilliant - but despite the fact that Pollard  was good enough - Meyer dropped Pollard from the starting line-up against Australia in Perth Morne Steyn took his place.   As expected Morne was a disaster in that test and Meyer never picked him as starting flyhalf again - even though for some stupid reason or another he retained him in the WC squad.

So your statement is as per normal BS plus again.  

As to the performance of Le Roux it is always a requirement for any player like Le Roux to need supporting runners.   Initially the support of Pietersen and Habana - as well as other backs was essential and forthcoming.   After the 2013 tests the performances of backline players started to decline and there was no real coaching to help Le Roux continuing playing like he did for the Cheetahs who at least had a game plan  for backline players - something Meyer never had.   It ended up that Le Roux could not function while Meyer was the coach and that the absence of proper player support and the absence of a proper game plan for backline players turned out to be the real re asons for the deterioration in his performances.    

I know the above is totally over your head - but please make an effort to understand what really happened.