Fourie Du Preez - Past flop - future flop

I am going to give some commentators on this Board a hissyifit - writing about the latest additiona to the screams of the way past 'sell-by" date for selection.    My most clear remembrance of Fourie Du Preez was a 2005 test at Twickenham.   I spent a fortune to go and watch the game - but came away in shame.

Hard stuff going on amongst the forwards.   At last the Bok forwards won a ball from a loose mall - but where on earth is Fourie Du Preez to receive the ball?   Nowhere near and the POMS pick up the ball and score the winning try.   Ever since that day I have watched Fourie Du Preez - he must have a protector in high places - because for every good game - normally against weak opposition - he had two bad games.

Now watch the hissyfit - and reference to the 2007 WC Campaign.   But this is 2012 and not 2007 and Fourie Du Preex has the cheek to announce his candidature for Bok selection.   Please spare us that one - the useless one realized his career in SA is over - so he goes to play CLUB RUGBY in Japan.   That says it all.   Why should this escape sitation qualifies him for Springbok selection?????

His ANNOUNCEMENT reminds me of a funny situation.   A friend of mine worked for the US Embassy in Pretoria for more than 30 years.   A chap a famous discus thrower  - walked in and asked for a visa application form and started to fill it in.   He turned around and asked my friend - what do they mean by this question - is your spoes (his pronouncement of  the word "spouse")  going with and being a great athlete - he could not understand why my friend collapsed with a laughing fit.   Same with the Du Preez announcement - is his spoes going to play or him - since he should not have been anywhere near the team for at least the apst three years? 

There are 20 scrummies in SA ten times better than this has been - so i hope that Meyer does not go wrong and select his past mistakes into the Springbok team.

South Africa never played a test against England in 2005, nor was he part of the 2006 EOYT. He did however play in the 2004 EOYT. Unfortunately our pack was pulverized brutally. To be honest, our players were not very well conditioned in when Jake took over and the EOYT was just a step too far for the team; particularly a Grand Slam tour. Your assessment of Du Preez is flawed though. Had you noted his influence in the TNs of 2004? Or 2005? He was still a very good player in our WC campaign.

To state things like "there are 20 better 9s" is ridiculous. Who? Where? McLeod? De Bruyn? The only 9 that is better than Du Preez on form alone is Hougaard. That is taking a global stance. I believe conditioning played a part in Du Preez's dip. Peter let the Boks go down badly, and he overplayed his best players. Du Preez played throughout 2009 with a badly injured shoulder and in 2010 was again injured. You can talk all you want about his supposed flaws, he is still the greatest 9 SA has ever produced, easily the best 9 the game has ever seen and only three other players could even consider bettering him. Du Preez taking time to improve his conditioning and find a change of scenery will have benefitted him. He spoke of the dreariness of the SH game and sought a change. He isn't the only one! Several top All Blacks over the years have spoken of the SH games as boring and tedius.

Now onto Du Preez being a past mistake. He is a player that can dictate games. He has done so in many tests where te Boks were up against it. In 2009 who was it who sparked our four try bonus point victory? Du Preez. As it stands I would still go with Hougaard, but he lacks the all round quality of Du Oreez. Where Hougaard offers you elusiveness and pace, Du Preez offers you calculated genius. Having him in the squad will be very important. He is one of the greatest Boks of all time and in a year where we have lost several all time greats his presence alone is worth selection.
 

Fourie at times was a match winner all by himself, yes he had a dip in form, but as was pointed out, I think that had a lot to do with his shoulder injury and his long layoff. As for Fourie himself, he openly said regarding his possible inclusion in the Srpingbok setup for the three England tests, that Hougard should be the no.9. So his has basically admitted that he doesn't think he is the best, If you think that someone with the tactical brain that Fourie obviously has, can't offer anything, then you are not very smart. He could still teach Hougard a lot tactically,  and this is the perfect time, starting to build a team for the next world cup, to have the input of one of the finest tactical players in the sport.  

Fourie has played some good rugby. As long as he is included on merit nobody can complain. Let him come back so we can see what sort of form he is in.

Bluebok - I could be wroing about the year - I grant you that one.   However, about the performance at the game I am 100% correct.  May I just add to clarify the year issue.   I was in a box at the Aussie Tri-Nations game and got a bit too much joy juice and did two silly things.   I phoned my nephew in England to get us two tickets for the Murrayfield and Twickenham tests - and booked a trip to Australia to watch the Perth game against the Aussies.   We won the game at Murrayfield - but lost in both Perth and Twickenham.  

We were not playing well at Murrayfield and the game was touch and go.  However, we were saved by a decision taken at half time to replace Du Preez and afterwards the back line started firing and we won very easily.   Barely a week later and Du Preez cost us the game at Twickenham.

The absence of Du Preez often happen - the balls came out and he was absent.   When he was available he had developed the Joost method.   Start waving to players - delay the game and give the opponents a chance to organise their defences.   Most times he would pass back to the forwards - when he passed the ball to the flyhalf - the service was too slow for the backline to really function and the flyhaldf had to kick and hope for the best.   If he tried to break he would lose the ball 50% of the time.   No wonder the opposing temas loved him - he lost more games than he won through good performances.

I would never call Du Preez a matchwinner or a gamebreakerr.   He was a sterotyped player with very little ball sense.  Who is a  better selection - the list is long - but lets start with Hougaard, Pienaar, Duvenhage, De Kock (who replaced him at Murrauyfield) and maybe get to Du Preez at number six or seven.   Not my favourite player that one - maybe because he was so utterly predictable. 

It was one aspect of his game i didn't like - the slowness that at times he got the backline away. His tactical kicking and positional play was good and he used to make the occassional very telling break .

Scrumhalves he has to compete with are Hougaard of course but also Vermaak and pienaar if these overseas reports are correct. Sarel has gone off the boil as has McClowd. That Cheethas newby Van Zyl looks promising and Duvenage is sound. 

Clevermike, i'd like to take credit for der Aristokrat's attention to detail, but it was he that pointed out the error regarding the year of the game against England. As for Du Preez being a match winner, on his day he was/is just that. In 2007 at the world cup when we beat England 36-0, the specific game was won by Fourie Du Preez's brilliant play. He was sublime!! He really was good when he was on form. In 2009 he was shortlisted for IRB player of the year for good reason, and got pipped, still can't fathom why, by McCaw. You don't get nominated, and expected to win, player of the year unless you are a pretty decent player. I am not saying he should start for the Boks now, but from an experience and mentor point of view, he still has plenty to offer.

Mike I completely disagree with your take on du Preez, he has been one of the best 9's to ever play the game. Is past his best now, but given we lack depth at 9 right now, I'd be happy to see him lend his experience from the Bok bench