Bwhahaaaahaaaa......so how did Eben standing at 2 steal 3 balls off Lood at 4?
Kindly talk us through this one
Captain30,741 posts
08 Mar 2016, 17:37
#41
08 Mar 2016, 17:37#41
Etzebeth dominates the Cheetahs....especially Lomp.
Started by Mozart72 REPLIES902 VIEWS· 06 Mar 2016, 00:34
Captain49,914 posts
08 Mar 2016, 17:49
#42
08 Mar 2016, 17:49#42
So who stole those three balls from Lomp....the ghost of Jan Pickard?
Coach57,555 posts
08 Mar 2016, 17:50
#43
08 Mar 2016, 17:50#43
Mozart is in denial - the same he is when he cannot explain what happened to make his statements so laughable. De Jager was at 2,4 and 5 - all at the same time in line-outs. That makes the statement as laughable as it really is.
Captain26,388 posts
08 Mar 2016, 19:50
#44
08 Mar 2016, 19:50#44
Mike, watch the match. The Cheetahs l.o. was in panic. Eben forced them to throw at the back and still put pressure on the throws. Lood and his team mates totally folded and the Stormers could take their lineouts at will. Haven't seen such a collapse in quite sometime, if ever.
Coach57,555 posts
08 Mar 2016, 20:29
#45
08 Mar 2016, 20:29#45
The question is where was De Jager in the line-outs? He was not j umping against Etzebeth - but against Du Toit where the contest was fairly even. Du Toit took 2 line-outs from Cheetahs throw-ins.
The problem of the Cheetahs was that Wegner failed in the front part of the line-outs so they called the line out throws to be to the back of the line outs,
Nobody contests that Etzebeth had been in total control if the front of the line-outs, but Mozart contents that De Jager was the player from whom the balls were taken by Etzebeth - which was not the case. The failed jumper was in fact Wegner - not De Jager.
The problem of the Cheetahs was that Wegner failed in the front part of the line-outs so they called the line out throws to be to the back of the line outs,
Nobody contests that Etzebeth had been in total control if the front of the line-outs, but Mozart contents that De Jager was the player from whom the balls were taken by Etzebeth - which was not the case. The failed jumper was in fact Wegner - not De Jager.
Pro1,870 posts
08 Mar 2016, 20:48
#46
08 Mar 2016, 20:48#46
"The question is where was De Jager in the line-outs? He was not humping against Etzebeth - but against Du Toit where the contest was fairly even"
funny
funny
Captain30,741 posts
08 Mar 2016, 21:11
#47
08 Mar 2016, 21:11#47
Thank you Matey case closed.
Captain49,914 posts
08 Mar 2016, 22:37
#48
08 Mar 2016, 22:37#48
Hahaha you thick plonker Dave...read Matey's post again. You are right Draad....the Cheeters lose 7 lineouts, the majority of those called on Lomp....Etzebeth destroyed the big lump.
Coach57,555 posts
08 Mar 2016, 22:49
#49
08 Mar 2016, 22:49#49
Mozart a typing error by me will not explain how De Jager stood at 2,4 and 5 in the line-outs simultaneously. That is that he jumped against both Etzebeth and Du Toit - all at the same time.
You really are ridiculous this time - so explain to us how it happened.
You really are ridiculous this time - so explain to us how it happened.
Captain30,741 posts
08 Mar 2016, 23:25
#50
08 Mar 2016, 23:25#50
Moz matey calls it as it is.....it was PSDT against Lood not Eben against Lood.
You have to be pretty thick to conclude a 4 competes with a 5 in the line outs.
It would help to work out the difference between a 4 and a 5 in the line outs....just a slight bit of the obvious there.
But if this helps it was Eben against Wegner at 2 in the line outs
You have to be pretty thick to conclude a 4 competes with a 5 in the line outs.
It would help to work out the difference between a 4 and a 5 in the line outs....just a slight bit of the obvious there.
But if this helps it was Eben against Wegner at 2 in the line outs
Captain49,914 posts
08 Mar 2016, 23:30
#51
08 Mar 2016, 23:30#51
Well it's simple Tokkie, Lomp moved to various positions at various lineouts. I'm not going through them all just to educate you morons....but I'll go through one. Minute 29.44 the Cheeters throw. The Cheeters 4 lock pulls back, as does Kebble. SoEtzebeth is effectively at 3 and Lompman at 4.
The ref complains about the long Cheeters conferences, obviously so Lomp could tell his mates of his latest hair brained plan. But the Cheeters throw in and Etzebeth reading Lomp like a book soars up just ahead of him and taps it back to the Stormers. It happened three times.
If you don't believe me check it out I have given you the time stamp....case closed.
The ref complains about the long Cheeters conferences, obviously so Lomp could tell his mates of his latest hair brained plan. But the Cheeters throw in and Etzebeth reading Lomp like a book soars up just ahead of him and taps it back to the Stormers. It happened three times.
If you don't believe me check it out I have given you the time stamp....case closed.
Coach57,555 posts
08 Mar 2016, 23:34
#52
08 Mar 2016, 23:34#52
This is not the first time that Mozart tries to discredit a player he does not like and using questionable and false info to do it. He has been caught out using that strategy before and that does not do credit to his own image on this site.
Captain30,741 posts
08 Mar 2016, 23:40
#53
08 Mar 2016, 23:40#53
So Moz if Eben moves and ends up at 3 while Lood is at 4...would you not conclude that the hooker threw in poorly given he did not loop the ball above Eben s reach?
But you are wrong. Most of the line outs have Eben at 2 and Lood at 4. The fact that given the above leaves you saying Eben stole ball off Lood is laughable....it's embarrassing.
It's like saying a 12 lined up opposite his opposite number is to blame for his 13 missing his opposite number.
But you are wrong. Most of the line outs have Eben at 2 and Lood at 4. The fact that given the above leaves you saying Eben stole ball off Lood is laughable....it's embarrassing.
It's like saying a 12 lined up opposite his opposite number is to blame for his 13 missing his opposite number.
Captain49,914 posts
08 Mar 2016, 23:41
#54
08 Mar 2016, 23:41#54
Diversion.....let's stick with the lineout at minute 29.44. You say it didn't happen, perhaps someone else would like to describe it....or perhaps you would care to give us your own description Tokkie.
Captain49,914 posts
08 Mar 2016, 23:47
#55
08 Mar 2016, 23:47#55
Two players jumped for the ball...Lomp and Etzebeth. Etzebeth got up first. Lomp was tight up against his back when they jumped.....a classical lineout steal.
Captain30,741 posts
08 Mar 2016, 23:50
#56
08 Mar 2016, 23:50#56
Where did I say it did not happen? There was movement in the line outs but MOST of them had Eben at 2 and Lood at 4 which is a fact.
Given this fact...the 2 does not compete against a 4 - Fact
Given this fact...the 2 does not compete against a 4 - Fact
Captain49,914 posts
08 Mar 2016, 23:59
#57
08 Mar 2016, 23:59#57
They were both jumping at the front of the lineout ...it happened 3 times. Lomp obviously wanted to show up Etzebeth, but got his head handed to him. There was no room to loop the ball over Ezebeth...Lomp had to get up first as the throwing jumper usually does...Eben read him like a book, got up first and plucked away the ball.
Captain30,741 posts
09 Mar 2016, 00:06
#58
09 Mar 2016, 00:06#58
No that did not happen I have watched the game again. At no point did Eben take a ball off Lood. The only thing Eben did was slap balls down thanks to poor throws by the hooker. Most of those slaps were balls destined for Wegner
Coach57,555 posts
09 Mar 2016, 00:07
#59
09 Mar 2016, 00:07#59
Lets get it straight - it happened occasionally that players move around in line -outs but as a rule not does not happen. Mozart is again stating the exception as the rule. He also does not accept that in some cases the throw-in is not accurate allowing for a steal. He used that argument - let me think - o yes - in the case where Matfield was outjumped by Whitelock in the 2014 test - but that argument was proven to be false as well.
However, in the game under review there is one incident where Etzebeth moved back and slap the ball back to his side before it reached De Jager. For the rest his steals were from Wegner.
However, we will never get a false statement retracted by Mozart - he refused to do so when caught out in the past.
However, in the game under review there is one incident where Etzebeth moved back and slap the ball back to his side before it reached De Jager. For the rest his steals were from Wegner.
However, we will never get a false statement retracted by Mozart - he refused to do so when caught out in the past.
Captain49,914 posts
09 Mar 2016, 00:36
#60
09 Mar 2016, 00:36#60
Wrong again....if the number 4 lock is not in the lineout, the number 5 lock is the first jumper...opposing the the opposite number 4. That was the case here, but Eben just got up ahead of him. It was Lomp against Eben...Eben won.
Captain49,914 posts
09 Mar 2016, 01:00
#61
09 Mar 2016, 01:00#61
And let me drop a bit more ordinance. Minute 36.57.....de Jäger takes charge. He is going to show Eben a thing or two. He dispatches his 4 lock to the 5 lock position to support his jump....jostles a bit with Etzebeth before the throw. Eben beats him to it and regathers the ball but is pushed into touch.
Now Quasimodo is really mad...another Cheeters lineout at minute 37.5. The number 5 lock lifts Lomp....but Etzebeth is quicker into the air and directs it neatly to the Stormers scrummie.
What a humiliation 3 lineouts off Lomp in 7 minutes....total domination by Eben. No wonder Lomp tried to remove Stephanie's head. I noticed Stephanie never reacted to Lomp's proffered handshake...du Toit recognized the cheap shot.
This one is over chaps....I was totally correct in my first time observations. The mystery is easily solved, Lomp took up the 4 lock position to try and best Eben. A nasty bugger. Game, set and match
Now Quasimodo is really mad...another Cheeters lineout at minute 37.5. The number 5 lock lifts Lomp....but Etzebeth is quicker into the air and directs it neatly to the Stormers scrummie.
What a humiliation 3 lineouts off Lomp in 7 minutes....total domination by Eben. No wonder Lomp tried to remove Stephanie's head. I noticed Stephanie never reacted to Lomp's proffered handshake...du Toit recognized the cheap shot.
This one is over chaps....I was totally correct in my first time observations. The mystery is easily solved, Lomp took up the 4 lock position to try and best Eben. A nasty bugger. Game, set and match
Captain49,914 posts
09 Mar 2016, 01:00
#62
09 Mar 2016, 01:00#62
And let me drop a bit more ordinance. Minute 36.57.....de Jäger takes charge. He is going to show Eben a thing or two. He dispatches his 4 lock to the 5 lock position to support his jump....jostles a bit with Etzebeth before the throw. Eben beats him to it and regathers the ball but is pushed into touch.
Now Quasimodo is really mad...another Cheeters lineout at minute 37.5. The number 5 lock lifts Lomp....but Etzebeth is quicker into the air and directs it neatly to the Stormers scrummie.
What a humiliation 3 lineouts off Lomp in 7 minutes....total domination by Eben. No wonder Lomp tried to remove Stephanie's head. I noticed Stephanie never reacted to Lomp's proffered handshake...du Toit recognized the cheap shot.
This one is over chaps....I was totally correct in my first time observations. The mystery is easily solved, Lomp took up the 4 lock position to try and best Eben. A nasty bugger. Game, set and match
Now Quasimodo is really mad...another Cheeters lineout at minute 37.5. The number 5 lock lifts Lomp....but Etzebeth is quicker into the air and directs it neatly to the Stormers scrummie.
What a humiliation 3 lineouts off Lomp in 7 minutes....total domination by Eben. No wonder Lomp tried to remove Stephanie's head. I noticed Stephanie never reacted to Lomp's proffered handshake...du Toit recognized the cheap shot.
This one is over chaps....I was totally correct in my first time observations. The mystery is easily solved, Lomp took up the 4 lock position to try and best Eben. A nasty bugger. Game, set and match
Coach57,555 posts
09 Mar 2016, 04:18
#63
09 Mar 2016, 04:18#63
Mozart
I do not want to be rude - but the above is absolute BS, De Jager never moved forward to the 4 position where 4 normally jumps. He always jumped in the middle opposite Du Toit.
Don't try the stunt you have tried before - that is not a nice way to distort the truth.
I do not want to be rude - but the above is absolute BS, De Jager never moved forward to the 4 position where 4 normally jumps. He always jumped in the middle opposite Du Toit.
Don't try the stunt you have tried before - that is not a nice way to distort the truth.
Captain49,914 posts
09 Mar 2016, 05:35
#64
09 Mar 2016, 05:35#64
Gee I guess when the Cheeters 4 lock was standing directly behind Lomp they hadn't changed positions. Why don't you just stop lying Tokkie. Lomp did exactly what he did for the Boks.....a pattern of behavior I documented. He decided to call almost every lineout on himself. And this time he went further, he changed positions so he could challenge both Stephanie and Eben. He had some success against Stephanie, but Eben handed him his head.
This guy has to learn it's a team sport. Frankly he simply isn't skilled enough to call every lineout on himself.
But do stop the bs, it's tedious and lowers the level of debate.
This guy has to learn it's a team sport. Frankly he simply isn't skilled enough to call every lineout on himself.
But do stop the bs, it's tedious and lowers the level of debate.
Coach57,555 posts
09 Mar 2016, 06:03
#65
09 Mar 2016, 06:03#65
Mozart
With respect you are talking absolute BS in this case. I watched the match 3 times and De Jager did not change position the way you described. The question is why should he do that? I agree that it is tedious to discuss this issue with you - since you have lowered the level of debate to a ridiculous level by making a false statement and now tries to justify it.
With respect you are talking absolute BS in this case. I watched the match 3 times and De Jager did not change position the way you described. The question is why should he do that? I agree that it is tedious to discuss this issue with you - since you have lowered the level of debate to a ridiculous level by making a false statement and now tries to justify it.
Captain49,914 posts
09 Mar 2016, 06:54
#66
09 Mar 2016, 06:54#66
Why should he take the balls for 4 and 5? I'm guessing some kind of need to show that he is better than the two Stormers locks....fat lot of good it did him. In the meantime who cares how many times you watched the match....I have it on my computer....and I have reported it correctly.
Captain49,914 posts
09 Mar 2016, 07:27
#67
09 Mar 2016, 07:27#67
This string is truly a staggering case of denial. Both Dave and Tokkie claim to have watched the match multiple times....and swear that Lomp never shifted to the number 4 lock position. But look at the lineout at minute 37 and there is Lomp positioned in front of the Cheeters number 5 lock. It's not a mystery.
So why is it we can't get some posters to accept the truth? Some debates are a matter of opinion. This isn't, it's a simple verifiable fact...up or down. It has to be a desperate need to protect a prior position, to not concede on a prior argument.
But it makes posters who are inclined to this kind of dislocation with the truth totally unreliable. One can't believe a Tokkie/ Dave report on a match or even an incident in a match.
It's a remarkable quirk of human nature.
So why is it we can't get some posters to accept the truth? Some debates are a matter of opinion. This isn't, it's a simple verifiable fact...up or down. It has to be a desperate need to protect a prior position, to not concede on a prior argument.
But it makes posters who are inclined to this kind of dislocation with the truth totally unreliable. One can't believe a Tokkie/ Dave report on a match or even an incident in a match.
It's a remarkable quirk of human nature.
Coach57,555 posts
09 Mar 2016, 07:49
#68
09 Mar 2016, 07:49#68
The dis location of the truth is exactly as you have done in the past on numerous occasions and it is in your case not a remarkable quirk of human nature - it is in your case a remarkable result of unlimited prejudice.
Captain30,741 posts
09 Mar 2016, 09:56
#69
09 Mar 2016, 09:56#69
Hmmm someone is speaking shit here
Captain49,914 posts
10 Mar 2016, 04:09
#70
10 Mar 2016, 04:09#70
Actually all the lineouts that count are shown just before the half, with commentary. They clearly point out Etzebeth's dominance and the lineouts Lomp took from Stephanie.....exactly as I reported.
It takes a worried man to sing a worried song.
It takes a worried man to sing a worried song.
Coach57,555 posts
10 Mar 2016, 06:42
#71
10 Mar 2016, 06:42#71
Mozart
The fact that Etzebeth took line-outs on Cheetahs throw-in was never disputed - your clais about him taking them from De Jager is what is clearly an invention by you,
The fact that Etzebeth took line-outs on Cheetahs throw-in was never disputed - your clais about him taking them from De Jager is what is clearly an invention by you,
Captain49,914 posts
10 Mar 2016, 07:02
#72
10 Mar 2016, 07:02#72
Tokkie your take on the lineouts is about as wrong and as stubborn as your take on the ESPN stats....the number 4 lock was positioned outside glory seeking Lomp when Etzebeth embarrassed de Jäger.
Coach57,555 posts
10 Mar 2016, 08:18
#73
10 Mar 2016, 08:18#73
Balls. Look at the photo on News 24 and see where De Jager was. Then read the following article under the photo:-
"After two rounds of Super Rugby, Stormers lock Eben Etzebeth has stolen more lineouts and taken more total lineouts than any other player in the competition.
"After two rounds of Super Rugby, Stormers lock Eben Etzebeth has stolen more lineouts and taken more total lineouts than any other player in the competition.
The 24-year-old enforcer has formed a fearsome second row partnership with new recruit Pieter-Steph du Toit, and the pair have been a highly influential weapon for the Stormers already.
Etzebeth has won opposition lineout ball six times in the victories over the Bulls and Cheetahs, which is twice as much as the next best - a group including Du Toit.
He has taken 19 lineouts altogether, which is three more than anyone else, and he has also made 22 tackles to boot.
Etzebeth puts his early success in the lineouts this season down to the influence of Du Toit and new forwards coach Russell Winter who have implemented a new system, laughing off suggestions that he is the mastermind on his own.
“Our coach Russell Winter has worked hard with us on our contesting, but it is a team effort from all the forwards,” Etzebeth told the Stormers’ official website.
“Pieter-Steph takes control of the lineouts, and with him here and the new system we have it is working quite well - that is why I look like a new tactician.”
Etzebeth explained that an important part of their success so far has been choosing which balls to contest.
“We have our balls that we want to contest a bit more than others and we decide during the week where we want to target them and we take it from there, I am not going to give away too much,” he said.
Despite his early success, Etzebeth is determined to continue improving, starting on Saturday when the Stormers take on the Sharks at Newlands.
“I just want to improve in every game and every year so hopefully I can do that.
“We pride ourselves on our scrums and lineouts and mauls, we just want to improve this weekend again against the Sharks,” he added.
Saturday’s clash at Newlands is scheduled for 17:15."
The above article is a clear indication of how the system works now. It is really surprising that the line-outs now work so much better with Du Toit taking in the words of Etzebeth "control" of the line-outs, while only last year it became a weak point in the Springbok set-up. Shows what happened when a team has the wrong coach and players.
Etzebeth obviously does not agree with your constant attacks on Du Toit and Malherbe in the Stormers Tight 5 - so maybe you would learn something from him insofar as real rugby is concerned.
— END OF THREAD —
