Fox, Moz and Ceradyne:

Are you saying De Allende is not the answer at 12 for the Boks,  and if so,  who would you pick? 

Draad my backline at this point is:
WillieAllendeKrielJean....sub FransHabanaPollard...sub MorneDu Preez..sub Pienaar.
If Jean is not fully recovered and I have little expectation he will be, Allende and Frans are the next best alternatives. Frans has far more vision, experience and a huge boot. The Sharks have done better when he plays. Allende is the superior athlete. I'd probably pick Frans, the axis of inexperience at 10, 12 and 13 won't hold up under pressure. We have already seen that picture.

The experiment with Damian is as I had predicted. So yes, I am saying he is not the answer. 

Geez you two clowns are as clueless as they come....your backlines are as crap as they come.......I can see why you are such Meyer fans
What losers you are when it comes to selection
I feel for you guys?
Fox are you Afrikaans?

 I give up.  Fransie have absolutely NOTHING at either 10 or 12 in the last 8 years to justify his sellection there.  A strong case at 15,  but as backup only.  Really? 

Draad one has to give up with such conservatism......what rugby do these two blokes watch.....its not the same games the majority of us watch.
Imagine being stupid enough to exclude de Allende after the S15 and two tests he has played this year.......its beyond comprehension......especially when you consider how average Jean was at 12 last year.
As for Frans.....its been a while since he set the world alight. I reckon de Allende has done more in one game than Frans has done in a whole season.

Frans outshone Damian this season where it counted, playing as a 12. He had done many things better than Damian in ALL of the seasons he has played. At 10, he will seal off the seam completely. To those who understand the game that is a very tantalizing prospect! And with a free running Pollard operating as a second 10 on his outside... it's certainly something to consider. Frans has outplayed most if not all of the fan favourites at 10, especially Lambie! Put at 12, Frans gives us power and solidity and better creativity and space creation. He is a proactive general. But a Morne-Pollard combo is certainly another consideration. One I feel we should have reached out for in the beginning. As much I have bemoaned the bluntness of Jean, at least he can bring hard nosed defence and directness. My only concern is his fitness. We don't need a player at 12 who needs space created for him. We need a player who creates that space. Damian does not create, he hasn't created all year. Both the Stormers and Boks have been trying to set hi m loose in space and using everyone but him to set up first phase. 

Fox you should write kids novels

 And you should scribble your next rugby coaching manual "A hippo for all seasons".

Its elephants you ignorant twit
But seriously given the amount of make believe crap you come up with on the rugby front......you have a gift at speaking shit.....kids novels have nothing to do with reality......you would be a master of the art.
Give it a go

 Frans is too slow for a test 10.  Kicking included.  He never showed more than promise at 10.  Even in his prime he had his game against WP in the rain.  That's it.  Talk about pipe dreams... 

 Make believe would be your long list of players who have done nothing. You sound like De Villiers with his list of over a hundred test quality players that nobody has ever heard of.

 and you think Morne should be our Bok 10......bwhaahaaaa......fucking idiot

His stats at 10 have been much better than the fan favourites. I was never a fan of him at 10 or 15 but he is a usable piece is the point. No other option at 10 can play so close to the gainline without getting killed. He demands so much attention as an attacker that he needs up to three players marking him. Put that kind of presence at 10 with a long pass and offload ability. Are you telling me you cannot see possibilities? There's something very wrong here if you can't. 

You seem to ignore the fact that Frans does not have the software for 10 and his hand to foot is far too slow.......just two obvious points as to why Frans is not a 10's backside

Well, he is better than your man Lambie who is well known for being charged down! So you contradict yourself Saffy. But t hen, I merely expressed an interest in the dynamic I listed with Frans and Pollard. It's not my favoured or only option.

 This is class BS.   Let me explain something here and that is that we have two rank lunatics here.   
Lets take this story about Fransie first.   Here we have a player with the poorest pac e of any center in any of the South African franchises and -
*   the center with the poorest defensive record of all 12's in any of the SA franchises; and
*   the worst attacking record in the same category.
The above is factual as well as statistically proven, but the following is utter BS:-
" Frans outshone Damian this season where it counted, playing as a 12. He had done many things better than Damian in ALL of the seasons he has played. At 10, he will seal off the seam completely." 
Now the question is how did Frans outshone De Allende?  The only match they played against each other De Allende just brushed Fransie aside like he was nothing - Fransie twice landing on his backside on the grass behind him.  De Allende in one match made more line breaks than Fransie did all season.   He beat as many defenders in 1 match than Fransie did in all the matches he played in.  It was the same last year - so what makes him better from an attacking perspective?
When I queried the fact that Fransie has the worst defensive record of any SA 12 in Super 15 two years running - up came the answer from, Mozart:-
" You simply don't understand modern defence Tokkie....as long as your line is not broken there is no issue. Both Steyns are masters at holding their space off a forcing line. Position is as important making the tackle."
My response was simple and Mozart could not counter it:-

"Missing a tackle remains missing a tackle.  The Steyns are indeed masters at holding their line and then missing their tackle despite holding their line.  Sure position is as important as making the tackle - provided they do make the tackle - but they missed the succeeding tackles which are too often normal with the Steyns.  

Is that why you ignore the missed tackle fiasco's of those two players?"
In essence the question remains - how can anybody ever have a logical discussion on rugby with people with a total disregard for performance and a mystical belief in a player who was poor in performance since his return from France in 2012.  They talk about presence and then cannot understand that the presence means nothing without showing that it has an effect in the game on the field of play.
This was the kind of BS that led to scandalous lies about De Allende's performance by Disaster and support of those lies by Mozart.   They are delusional and all the positives assigned to Fransie by them are imaginary - not shown in reality.    
Anybody who have seen their above comments must wonder how two people with such a degree of prejudice can ever become so besotted with players that they are totally illogical and weird? What can we expected from a backline with their selections?  Nothing - and the rest of the world will laugh at us for being crazy if their backline proposals are accepted.
My comment is clear - this really is BS by truck loads by these to crazies. 

     

    

How many times has one been through this kind of rubbish. Luke Watson is the answer. Brent Russel is the answer. Wynand Olivier is the answer. JJ Engelbrecht is the answer. Stepfontein  is the answer. Goosen is the answer. Lambie is the answer.
And if you didn't believe that you were stupid, a traitor and a rugby ignoramus.

Did anybody apologize for getting it totally wrong. Nope, it was all the coach's fault.
Well here we are  again. We have a new centre pairing with some exciting attacking attributes...but they are pretty much neophytes on defence....uncertain and prone to panic. But this simply doesn't compute and so anybody who notices this has to disloyal or stupid. Critical tries by Kuridrani and Coles are dismissed as not their fault.

Well here's whats going to happen. They will fix their defensive frailties or they will fail as a pairing.

 BS.

At last...brevity. Your best post ever Tokkie.

 Another void in thinking ability.  Let me remind you - Mozart - that this thread  is about your center selections - not about past selection of players that most of us did not support in any event.  

Michael, allow me to blunt: you are a fool who knows absolutely nothing about the game. 
You don't even understand the most basic components of attack or defence. This completely absent foundation is compounded further by a defiant refusal to go beyond cutting and pasting of numbers. I have gone to far greater lengths to back up my words and in every instance you are left clutching at straws and on the run. Your last defence is to throw insults like a petulant three year old girl who couldn't get the tootsy pop she demanded. As I said before, it's all rather flaccid. Being called a village idiot by someone so laughable doesn't have quite the same effect as if it were from someone I had even the smallest measure of esteem. 

 BS

I guess Tokkie is finally speechless. This whole debate is exactly like the JJ farce, the Goosen farce.....hell  the Quade Cooper farce. We were told in all those cases their defence wasn't really poor, we were just being unfair. Well it turns  out defence matters.
Actually if prior WCs are anything to go by defence matters more than anything else. So until Allende lifts his defensive performance he remains vulnerable. So far this test year he has missed 25 per cent of his tackles....if that continues he won't survive. But ominously, it's just a continuation of very poor tackling in the S15.

 Its quite clear to all but the most obstinate that Allende is a brilliant young centre and that his combination with the brilliant Kriel has been spectacular. Anybody arguing this is not so doesnt understand center play.
Outplaying mother Nonu and conrad as a new test combo is good going. 
It is a fair question as what will happen if Jean returns fit and raring to go and how Fourie Du Preez is.
How much more EGG can the Allende knockers handle.  Thankfully Dr Mozzzz has wised up re Lood. I am not sure he was in favour of Kriel either to begin with?
The poor form of Moz and Card unfortunately continues egged on by JW of course

I suppose having a forum will all agreeing on most opinions would be as boring as watching grass grow, But the inclusion of Frans and Morne is comical at best. Those boys have had their moments but it's well and truly time to F*ck$ff now. Our new centre pairing have much to learn and experience but if its lack of vision, an absolute disaster at defence what you want Morne and Fat Fransie are your men. 

 Beeno
I am sorry - but the constant repeat of the same rubbish about De Allende - based largely on misrepresentation and often enough on outright lies is not acceptable to me and I believe most members.  The source of the problem is that both Mozart and Disaster has one overriding reason for it - they want Frans Steyn at 12.  That has nothing to do with Steyn's performance.  He was consistently poor in the last three Super 15 seasons.  So what is to be done to justify their reasoning - just malign De Allende endlessly.   
If the deficiencies of Steyn is pointed out - go into cloud 9 fairy tales about his abilities without any examples of where those abilities have occurred in matches he played in since his return from France.  His "presence"  is praised without ever proving that it counted for anything in matches played.  
The most laughable comments obviously came from Disaster about a so-called upper body strength deficiency he has seen in De Allende - while the exact opposite is proven in match-after match as being a false.  Repeating that continuously turns it into an outright lie. 
Their kind of hounding a player without virtually any substance to it is not in the interest of rugby discussion on this board and in future my comments on repetition of lies and misrepresentations by them will be one word - BS         

You have to balance a player's weaknesses with their strengths. Kriel has a lot to learn on defence, yes, but what other 13 option that we have would have scored the try he scored against Oz? His try against NZ was the first proper attacking line run by a Bok 13 in how long, not to mention that he actually finished as well. So, yeah, he let Coles ghost by him, but in turn he ghosted past the vastly experienced Nonu. What are you gonna do? Call Nonu an unworthy test center because he got beaten by his opponent? That would be silly. Of course these youngsters have weaknesses in their game, they're rookies in the test arena after all. They also undoubtedly have the potential to become something special.

 Ahmen!

Desert Fox

Status: Bok regular
Posts: 1144 RE: Fox, Moz and Ceradyne:
July 28, 2015, 05:18:53  Michael, allow me to blunt: you are a fool who knows absolutely nothing about the game. 

I have given up arguing with Ou Hangtiete. I post the odd response and sometimes engage for the entertainment value and that is it. He is so far removed from reality it is not even funny.

This is the kind of reasoning by the clown...... A year or two ago, he "saw" Beast crapping on Victor for his lack of support in the scrum. That was against the World XV, IIRC. Jannie was also crapping on Bakkies because of his support. Then we had this peculiar situation where he tried to convince us that Beast's scrumming improved when Bakkies was subbed, only for Moz to remind him that Bakkies was scrumming behind Jannie and Victor behind Beast. I thought that he might respond by saying that he made a mistake and got it wrong or something. I was in any case looking forward to see him get out of that one. No. Not Tokkie. IIRC, he came up with some ridiculous elaborate theory how he was, in fact correct and you could even see scrumming coach, Pieter de Villiers, crapping (from the side-line nogal) on Victor. That scrumming performance was all down to Victor and Bakkies being crap.

That is not the end of the story. When the Boks went to Argentina and got hammered up front, with Lood in the mix, it suddenly came down to the two props. They were suddenly the fly in the ointment.

Another example of our friend Tokkie's way of reasoning. In his campaign against Bakkies, he tried to convince me that Bakkies was now so crap that he was subbed, in a game against Exeter Chiefs by Ali Williams and that he was now (at that stage) Toulon's second choice behind Ali Williams. I then pointed out that he had it all wrong and that Bakkies and Ali started the game as lock partners, like so many games before that one and like so many games after that, and that Bakkies was in fact replaced  by Suta, IIRC. The main issue, though, was that Bakkies was replaced because one of his team mates tramped him in the face and he was badly cut. I posted a picture that Bakkies posted on Twitter, showing the cuts and stitches to his face. Ou Tokkie's comeback.............. Bakkies was terribly crap in that game in any case. It then came out the he never even watched the game. And that from someone who says that he never comments on games he hasn't seen.

To get back to Draad's question in the OP.

Draad, I don't think that you would find a post where I said that De Allende is not the answer for the Boks at 12. I did not pay very close attention during the game and have not yet revisited it but I am also concerned about our defence in the midfield. I remember that I wanted to have a look at De Allende in particular but I got distracted  a number of times during the game. I did see a number occasions where I thought to myself that he was totally out of position and there was the odd occasion where he looked a bit hesitant to defend or to move away or something. I don't know what exactly it was but his body language, at times, looked like he was unsure what to do or where to be. On attack, of course, it is a total different story. He seems to eb quick to decide what to do and where to go. I got more or less the same feeling about Kriel on defence but less so than De Allende.

One thing that I have to say, and I have said it before, I jumped on Saffex' back when he punted Kriel for outside centre but in hindsight, he got that one correct. I was of the opinion, when the initial squad was announced, that it should have been between Kriel and Willie to start at fullback, and the other one as the starter's sub on the bench. It now seems that Lambie looks to be - correctly - the cover for Willie and Pollard. Then, lurking somewhere in the background, there is of course Morne Steyn. But I would rather not go there because that would cause another brand new explosion of seismic proportions.

 
Haaaahahahahaaaaa ... Pollard's now an inside center.

A test inside center!!!!

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaa!!!!!!

 Ceradunce
A discussion on the backline and now back to Matfield with a strange series of talks about scrumming.   
So lets get back to De Allende.  The following is the type of thing that really is meaningless and is then repeated as fact on this site:-
" I did see a number occasions where I thought to myself that he was totally out of position and there was the odd occasion where he looked a bit hesitant to defend or to move away or something. I don't know what exactly it was but his body language, at times, looked like he was unsure what to do or where to be."
That kind of reasoning is meaningless since it is not substantiated at all by factual info.  Anyone can have a "feeling" and then goes on to write crap about it.  This is exactly why the rubbish touted on this site is contradictory to what anyone said about De Allende's performance on Saturday.  The "feeling"  did not prevent various assessors from giving him 8/10 for performance.
Your "feelings" are equal to the unsubstantiated tripe touted by Mozart and Disaster on this site and unless you can prove it - you are up to your normal claptrap.   
If you want to discuss the feebl est lock in international rugby open a thread and we can discuss his issue separately.       

 
A TEST CENTER NOGAL ....!!!!

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!

Fox,I thought Damien could have done more on Lima when he broke the line and Ben Smith scored, but hey that's Rug by. NZ could have done more when Willie and Jessie scored. 

 
What next ... Pienaar and Morne our starting halfbacks ... ????

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaa!!!

With Gurthro at loosehead and Bakkies our starting 4 lock ... ????

Pfffffffffffffffhahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!

 clevermike

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 18152 RE: Fox, Moz and Ceradyne:
July 28, 2015, 10:53:46

 Ceradunce

A discussion on the backline and now back to Matfield with a strange series of talks about scrumming.  

Whoooosh.......



"That kind of reasoning is meaningless since it is not substantiated at all by factual info."
Something like a little string of ESPN stats for instance...............?

What Cleancut fails to realise is that 12 is like a second 10. Guess where Carter first came onto the scene? Why was that? And suppose why Lambie was tried at 12. Nonu was told he'd never make it at 12 until he improved his handling and kicking skills. The list goes on. 

 BS

 New Zealand pioneered the concept of the second 12 you silly little dear.
http://intheloose.com/training/positions/12-inside-centre/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Carter

There is more on Butch, Lambie, Potgieter etc playing 12 but those should be well known by now to every Bok fan.