CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
09 Aug 2015, 15:17#2
Balls - there was no line-out losses and the fact si De jager was planned calls - while Matfield does not to call line outs to come to him anymore - because he is not competitive anymore.
How come De jager called one line out late in the fame to go to Du Toit if he did not call line-outs to go to Etzebeth. Was it not because Lavanini is so strongly competitive in line-outs and they want to cut him out?
This is about as ridiculous a statement as what normally comes from the opener of this thread and made in an attempt to discredit De Jager - what a farce.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
09 Aug 2015, 15:28#3
You sound peaved today perv.....running after every one of my postings. Bad Saturday night at the bioscope? Never mind I'm sure you have pictures.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
09 Aug 2015, 15:37#4
I just responded to BS you put on the site on the rugby side - not the stupid brainless one who wrote it.
ABABasquefan
Pro2,549 posts
09 Aug 2015, 15:55#8
very interesting stufff,........ no doubt,......... so Lady Etzebeth is playing crap and the culprit is another player,........ so logical!!!!!!
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
09 Aug 2015, 17:12#9
No the culprit is a reduced role...either based on the player making the calls, or the game plan.
DEDezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
09 Aug 2015, 19:52#10
Mozart is taking a closer look at the game and deconstructing the plan on the day. A wasted endeavour as always, even when you give the simple sheep diagrams to graze on.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
09 Aug 2015, 20:36#11
It stuns me that our commentary team, whole journalistic gaggle, and so many posters can't see what's happened here.
DEDezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
09 Aug 2015, 20:52#12
Would it make more sense if I told you a Saffer made these?
DEDezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
09 Aug 2015, 21:44#14
Right now I am very dissallusioned with South Africa. With the direction it's headed, it would be better that it'd never been.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
10 Aug 2015, 03:19#15
Well let's provide some help then.....in aggregate Lomp who was leading the pack called himself in lineouts and phase play 16 times....he called Etzebeth 2 times. What's the bloody mystery that we saw Lomp a whole lot more than Etzebeth.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Aug 2015, 03:38#16
As kak praat 'n siekte was - was julle heeltyd in die hospitaal.
ABABasquefan
Pro2,549 posts
10 Aug 2015, 10:36#17
@mozart,
"Lomp who was leading the pack called himself in lineouts and phase play 16 times....he called Etzebeth 2 times."
WTF are you talking about???????
as there's a player, and only one, who calls for every lineout (and de Jager was that player last sat) there's no such a figure in the phase play or open play,....... there's not one only player who calls for every play,....... can you imagine the scrummies waiting for the call in every play?
Calls in open play happen just in very concrete situations (e.g. near the tryline when a gap is very clear) and usually is the scrummie who organizes the forward pack and the attack itself . Are you saying that De Jager was saying to Pienaar what to do in every play of the game?
You are talking crap
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Aug 2015, 14:16#20
Dave
I suppose the following BS is what you referred to:-
"Lomp was also the player who stood off the rucks to take the ball supported by others including Etzebeth. Etzebeth made one run....Lomp made 9 for an ordinary 23 metres."
Mozart is always specializing in BS. He said a measly 23 meters with 9 carries. That is an average meter gain of 2,56 meters per carry. In his last four tests Matfield made 12 carries for a measly 22 meters. Now is that average of 1,83 meters per carry measly or not? Mozart will not admit he writes BS - so what else is new?
By the way his latest campaign id for the power forward Alberts whose average ball carries in all Super 15 games gained an average 1,6 meters per carry and that was as a loosie.
We have a serious case here of spreading BS by the barrell. What clowns Mozart and his side-kick DF is?
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
10 Aug 2015, 14:30#21
Blikkies I'm not saying Lood took on himself to make the calls. He was assigned that role and with it effective leadership of the Bok pack. But was he told to call Etzebeth once in the lineouts? I doubt it. Etzebeth is a terrific lineout forward, I cant recall him losing his ball once, although I'm sure he has. Point is its pretty extreme for the 4 lock to be called once.
But set motivations and responsibility aside. With Lomp getting the ball 16 times from structured calls and Etzebeth getting it twice, is it surprising he looked more involved.
I can't say I can recall when our forward play revolved as much around one player...and we paid the price in predictability and motivation.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Aug 2015, 14:49#22
When Mozart uses stats he is sure to land himself in BS. When he makes general statements he gets into even worse trouble. What about predictability - if Matfield rarely if ever calls balls to come to him in line-outs - he is not predictable? In most games his liner -out calls is to Etzebeth or other players because he does not want to compete in the air against stronger jumpers.
What about motivation? Is he crackers or what. How can good performance by a player be a negative for motivation of others. Petty thinking and lack of human relations is at work here - HR specialists will tell you this is an argument for the dustbin.
This is the standard crap to try and discredit De Jager - an attack of sh!t on the brain this one.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
10 Aug 2015, 15:01#23
I'm not attacking Lomp....I'm attacking marginalizing Eben, which I think did demotivate him. That was the least energetic display we have seen from him in a long time.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Aug 2015, 15:24#24
Mozart
You tried to use stats to discredit De Jager and it backfired - so what next. The ball carrier stats backfired badly so what about the other stats comparing Matfield with De Jager. I suggest the last three tests each player played:-
Matfield
Wales Test
Matfield0/000/5/510000210/03/110/0
Italian Test
Matfield0/000/5/69001110/04/010/0
English Test
Matfield0/000/4/13000112/24/011/0
Combination
Matfield0/000/14/1222001432/211/131/0
De Jager
Argentina test
de Jager1/050/2/92302007/15/000/0
All Black Test
de Jager0/000/0/111801018/25/010/0
Auatralia Test
De Jager0/000/0/75000118/04/000/0
Combination
De Jager1/050/0/2746000233/314/010/0
So What is Mozart real Story.
First of all he lies outright about the line out calls - in the last three tests combined De Jager took 14 line outs or more or less just about 4,75 calls to come to him per game. In the three games Etzebeth took 8 line-outs from balls called to him and 1 on opposition throws.
The second exposure is the ball carries - in three games De Jager carried the ball 27 times against 12 carries of Matfield to gain 22 meters. That average 9 carries per game for De Jager and 4 carries per game by Matfield - so Matfield's productivity was less than half of the carries of De Jager. Sign of low activity player. In his 12 carries Matfield lost ball possession 4 times - in his 27 carries De jager lost possession 2 times.
In the 3 games Matfield took 11 line-outs as against the 14 of De Jager. Again advantage to De Jager. Mayfield gave away 4 penalties and De Jager 1. Mayfield got a yellow card - De Jager got nothing of the kind.
So Matfield was low-activity and De Jager basically was twice as active.
Mozart if you start something - my suggestion to you is don't start because you will be exposed if you lie like you did in this thread.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Aug 2015, 15:32#25
Just other observation in the three fames De Jager did the line out calls - there were 34 line-outs called by the Springboks - of those 14 went to De Jager - the other 20 to other players.
This was complete disinformation of better a lie spread by Mozart in a desperate b id to discredit De Jager. Best advice - stay with the truth - before you get whipped again.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
10 Aug 2015, 16:21#26
We aren't talking about the three games Pervert, we are talking about about last Saturday.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Aug 2015, 17:11#27
Idiot
I gave all three games to see whether a pattern is developing. You are too dim to realize that the calls to Burger was intended as a drive around the back of the line-out, so all this slurs of yours are BS.
How do you like top explain how come De Jager performs so much better than Slapgat Ouma Victoria. There is another thing - Victoria is easily tackled going straight down in tackles and often enough losing ball possession or give away penalties. De Jager carries the ball strongly forwards in tackles and a few tacklers are needed to bring him down. He routinely tackles players backwards - not the process tackles Matfield makes.
Please try and explain the difference between an active player (De Jager) and a low activity player (Matfield) It would be fun to see how you wigg le yourself out of that one.
