Mozart
The arguments are really not about age as you try to make it out as - the argument is about
performance. You take issues such as the Tait tackle 7 years ago and one on Fekitoa
on Saturday and made a wild claim that without those tackles we could have likely lost the crucial games. Those are based on singe incidents durng games - not on overall performances.
If you talk about those two incidents only -
maybe you have a point. But those two incidents came at a heavy price. If Matfield was physically more dominant - what would the effect have been in the rest of the game? That you leave out completely.
Take another example - for years you have been advocating selection of players like Morne Steyn and lately also Francois Steyn, based on one element of their performance - namely their kicking at goal. You were prepared to sacrifice the functioning of the whole backline to get an advantage in goal kicking. That Morne could win us matche with kicking at goal - has been your whole argument, The counter that he was in fact damaging the team performance by neuralizing the performance of the backline as a whole was according to you never a consideration at all. With Pollard in - you could see an immediate improvement in backline play and that was clear when you look at the backline performances now compared with what happened with Morne at flyhalf.
Now back to Matfeld - what impacted more on the games as a whole - the incidents mentioned or the lack of physicality displayed by Matfield in those games? The fact that single incidents can influence game outcomes could potentially be true - but the counter is that it is not necessarily so. Lets take the WC situation. The fact that the Tate incident would have given the English 4 extra points still would leve them short by 5 points in that game. We allowed the English forwards to determine the game pattern during substantial parts of that final and our backline showed vey little spark - so we had to win by kicking at goal - which we ultimately did. If we had a stronger physical player at 5 - would that not overall have been more in our favour in the game as a whole? The same applies to the recent games against Australia and New Zealand. There can be no argument in those cases. Matfield made some really major flwaws in the NZ games - which helped the NZ side wining the Wellington game and helped them in getting in the lead in the Ellis Park game- but that is conveninetly forgotten because he made a tackle on Fekitoa.
Anyway - this whole discussion is in a way theoretical as it centers on age and on single incidents in games - not n overall contribution throughout those and for that matter other games. Your following statement is questionable as well though:-
"But those who think through their age sensitive lenses can't even see what he is doing to win the match. Vermeulen aside we had no more effective forward against Oz and nZ." That is again a rubbish assessment that cannot be substantiated. I looked at the stats on ESPN for Matfield and a player you always made disparaging remarks about, namely Coetzee:
Matfield
0/1
0
0/18/21
24
0
0
0
2
56/9
23/2
4
0/0
Coetzee
1/0
0
0/3/38
57
0
5
2
4
55/4
0/0
2
0/0
Now lets look objectively at the above - which have two divergent issues, namely the fact that --
* the figures reflect in the case of Matfield the line-out takes by him, without indicating line outs he lost on own throw (4); and
* did not indicate the number of breakdown balls recoverd by Coetzee or wherre the oppositin was penalized forholding on because of Coetzee.
Leaving those aside lets - as well as the tryscoring issues which were more the result of team efforts than individual efforts - and look at other c rucial elements of the games:-
Ball CarriesMatfield - carries - 21 - meters gained - 24 - average gain - 1,1 meters
Coetzee - carries - 38 - meters gained - 57 - average gain - 1,5 meters
Beating defenders and off-loads
- Matfield - zero -
Coetzee - 5 + 2
Coetzee substantially more effective
Ball Losses
Matfield - 2
Coetzee - 4
Matfield more effectiveTackling
Matfield - Tackles made - 56 Tackles missed - 9
Missed tackle ratio - 13,84
Coetzee - Tackles made - 55 Tackles missed - 4 Missed tackle ratio - 6,78
The above stats do not provide info on the qualiy of tackles made. Coetzee was a much stronger tackler than Matfield - who even Mark Andrews said makes rather ineffective tackles.
Coetzee more effective
Penalties Given Away
Matfield - 4
Coetzee - 2
Coetzee more effective
The above thoroughly negates your statement as quoted. Really Mozart - you look at some elements and lose site of the whole picture. Matfield overall performance was not that of the champion you give himself out to be. `
