Hansen Differs from Meyer

The following from News24:-

"Springbok coach Heyneke Meyer has said that the respective loose trios will decide Saturday’s Rugby Championship clash at Ellis Park, but his All Black counterpart Steve Hansen begs to differ, reports thesupersport.com website.

According to Hansen, it will be the tight forwards who will decide this game, with much obviously hinging for him on how his replacements for two key injured members of the pack go against the Boks.

He has called in former wrestler Joe Moody to replace the injured Wyatt Crockett at loosehead prop, and even more tellingly, is going to have to go without the regular No 4 lock and unsung hero of the All Black success, Brodie Retallick.   However, Hansen appears confident that areas of concern that arose out of the previous clash between these sides in Wellington three weeks ago have been sorted out in the interim.

"I can’t agree that it will be the loose-forwards who decide this match, as for me it will come down to the tight forwards," said Hansen.  "If you get tight forward dominance, then you create the platform for your loose-forwards to play off. 

"If you don’t, then no matter how good your loose-forwards are you may struggle in the absence of momentum."

What Hansen says does make sense. 

As it turns out, the All Black starting front-row for this game is the same one that finished the Wellington match, and which was involved in a dramatic turn-around scrum that nearly won the Springboks the game, with Keven Mealamu now the starting hooker whereas Dane Coles played last time.

"There is no doubt we are going to need our scrum to be much better than we were in Wellington," agreed the All Black coach. "But we have been working on it and we think we have it sorted out. 

"We were good against the Pumas, who in turn dominated the Springbok scrum, so that gives us confidence. 

"The scrum depends a lot on concentration and focus. 

"In our last game we ended up scrumming at the level of the Bok scrum, which likes to scrum high, but we have worked on a change that should suit us this time."

Of course Retallick is a particularly big loss, as he is way more than just a good lineout forward, with Bok veteran Victor Matfield describing him as “the chief All Black ball carrier and also a player with great distribution skills”. 

Hansen though reminded the media that Jeremy Thrush, who packs down in Retallick’s place, was part of the team that won in Wellington.  "Jeremy played in that game as a replacement for Sam Whitelock. Sam is back now, so that partially offsets the loss of Brodie."

The All Blacks will though miss Retallick’s hard-nosed, aggressive approach and while the lock is not quite as important to the Kiwis as the doubtful Duane Vermeulen is to the Boks, they are nonetheless starting the game without a crucial player.  Hansen meanwhile is looking forward to seeing Moody, who doesn't appear that known an entity even to the travelling New Zealand media, make his first start at Ellis Park.

"Joe has been working really hard and I feel he has a lot of potential. 

"He is a former champion wrestler so he knows a lot about body position," said Hansen.

Moody did raise the attention of the South African media when he came up to be interviewed. 

Asked what he thought of Jannie du Plessis, the Bok tighthead, after coming up against him a few times at Super Rugby level, Moody stopped just short of calling Du Plessis a cheat.   "Jannie is different to other props in that he scrums in and attacks the hooker, whereas the props I am used to facing in New Zealand all scrum straight by comparison," said Moody.

Of course, most tightheads do look to exert pressure on the hooker, so whether that really makes Du Plessis unique is open to interpretation, and Moody wasn't saying it in a way that appeared to suggest he was trying to be controversial.    Still, there are bound to be headlines around the country on Friday that will raise the temperature just a little."

Conclusion

What is evident is that Hansen is a clever guy - always steps ahead of Meyer.  Why do I say that?   Because  Hansen has taken heed of what happened in the past and Meyer has not.

Hansen realized that in the Ellis Park test last year life was very difficult for the All Blacks because of Tight 5 dominance by the Springboks.   So while Hansen is strengthening his Tight 5 by all means possible - Meyer is weakening The Springbok Tight 5.   Matter of fact is that -

*      the selection of  Matfield - a player with virtually no contribution to Tight 5 play - has weakened the Tight 5 to a level where they are at best a Tight 4 combination; and 

*      the fact that the inward-scrummng Jannie du Plessis  is not theplayer he was a year ago and is by all accounts weaker in scrumming this year.

Meyer is building his scheme around the loose-forwards.   With Vermeulen, Louw and Coetzee in the team there was a chance that the Springbok loose trio would at least match the AB's - but Louw is out and Vermeulen is uncertain as to his contribution.   One advantage i that the bumbling Alberts is not there to destroy potential loose forward parity.   Meyer selected Mohoje - but he is not upp to international standard at 7 and he will be swamped by the AB's.

So it is a fact  -

*   that as a result of Matfield and Du Plessis the Springbok Tight 5 willl loose the battle up front: and

*   that the Springbok loosies will be over-shadowed by the AB loosies - especially i f Vermeulen is not playing.

Incidentally with all the praise singing - members of this site lost it completely that when a line out was set up  witha  view to a driving maul in the closing minutes of the Wellingto test - MATFIELD under pressure fumbled the ball and the chance went abegging.   How many fumbles will occur tomorrow?    

*   that as a result of Matfield and Du Plessis the Springbok Tight 5 willl loose the battle up front: and

*   that the Springbok loosies will beover-shdowed by the AB loosies - especially of Vermeulen is not playing.

Fact

A fact (derived from the Latin factum, see below) is something that has really occurred or is actually the case. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability, that is, whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience. Standard reference works are often used to check facts. Scientific facts are verified by repeatable experiments.

Since it can be said that in this forum we are keeping ourselves busy, or is supposed to keep ourselves busy with the philosophy of rugby, we have to look at the term "fact in philosophy.

Fact in philosophy

In philosophy, the concept fact is considered in epistemology (a branch of philosophy that deals with the theory of knowledge which is concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge) -and ontology (which deals with with questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to exist, and how such entities can be grouped, related within a hierarchy, and subdivided according to similarities and differences.). Questions of objectivity and truth are closely associated with questions of fact. A "fact" can be defined as something which is the case, that is, a state of affairs.[12][13]

Facts may be understood as that which makes a true sentence true.[14] Facts may also be understood as those things to which a true sentence refers. The statement "Jupiter is the largest planet in the solar system" is about the fact Jupiter is the largest planet in the solar system.[15]

Compound facts

Any non-trivial true statement about reality is necessarily an abstraction composed of a complex of objects and properties or relations.[18] For example, the fact described by the true statement "Paris is the capital city of France" implies that there is such a place as Paris, there is such a place as France, there are such things as capital cities, as well as that France has a government, that the government of France has the power to define its capital city, and that the French government has chosen Paris to be the capital, that there is such a thing as a "place" or a "government", and so on. The verifiable accuracy of all of these assertions, if facts themselves, may coincide to create the fact that Paris is the capital of France.

Difficulties arise, however, in attempting to identify the constituent parts of negative, modal, disjunctive, or moral facts.[19]

How does the above fit in with ou Maaikie's remarks? For ou Maaikie's observations to be deemed as facts, they would have to pass the certain tests, similar to the above to, indeed, be deemed as facts.

Therefore one might argue that before ou Maaikie can declare it as fact "...that as a result of Matfield and Du Plessis the Springbok Tight 5 willl loose the battle up front: and...." he, for instance, has to be 100% sure that:

The Springboks will battle up front. This, of course, opens up a new predicament for our friend because in rugby there is always a battle up front. That is essentially what forward play boils down to. A battle between two packs of forwards. Each and every breakdown becomes a battle for the ball, be it a scrum, ruck, maul or a line-out. It is a battle. So, yes, they will indeed battle up front - as will the All Blacks. Therefore our friends theory (fact in his eyes) passes this test.

There is something as a tight 5 in rugby. That is also an established fact. The tight five in rugby is made up of the front row (two props and a hooker) and the second row (the two locks). Another pass for ou Maaikie.

Both Matfield and Du Plessis are part of the tight five. This could well have been a problem for our friend because he has not specified which Du Plessis he is talking about. We can only go on assumption that he is talking about Jannie du Plessis, in view of the fact that only him, Jannie,  has been mentioned in the entire article. Then again, his (ou Maaikie's) bacon is saved by the fact that the only other  Du Plessis in the team, Jannie's brother (Bismarck), is also a front rower and part of the tight five. So that is another pass for ou Maaikie.

The Springboks will loose the battle up front. Now this is where it becomes tricky. Is he trying to say that the battle up front will be very tight and that the Springboks will loosen up the battle? That would, of course, open up an entire new argument. Would it be good or bad for the Springboks if the battle is not as tight as was expected? I think that we can safely say that ou Maaikie actually meant that the Springboks will lose the battle up front. If that is the case, then our friend has failed this test because there is no way that we can know for sure that the Springboks will definitely lose the battle up front.

The supposed fail is due to Matfield and Du Plessis (Jannie). This one is also a very tricky one. How will we know that it would be due to these two if we are not even sure that the battle will be lost? Let's assume, for the purpose of this exercise, that they are going to lose then battle up front. How can we know, at this stage, that it will be because of the two players concerned? I smell a fail for this one as well. 

There are probably a number of other tests that can be brought in but since the theory can already be declared as "not a fact" but indeed just another theory, due to the two "fails", it would be a fruitless exercise.

Yes, I was a bit bored when I did the above but I am not bored enough to even start to tackle the theory about the loosies.

1. Sam WhitelockRugby Player
2. Samuel Lawrence Whitelock is a New Zealand rugby player. He plays as a lock for Crusaders in the Super Rugby competition and Canterbury in the Air New Zealand Cup. Wikipedia
4. Born: October 12, 1988 (age 25), Palmerston North, New Zealand
5. Height: 2.03 m
6. Weight: 114 kg
7. Education: Feilding High School
8. Siblings: Luke Whitelock, George Whitelock, Adam Whitelock, Amy Whitelock
9. Parents: Braeden Whitelock, Caroline Whitelock

1. Jeremy ThrushRugby Player
2. Jeremy Thrush is a rugby union lock who plays for the Hurricanes in Super Rugby and Wellington Lions in the ITM Cup. He has also represented the Junior All Blacks, New Zealand Under-19 and New Zealand Secondary Schools teams.Wikipedia
4. Born: April 19, 1985 (age 29), Auckland, New Zealand
5. Height: 1.98 m
6. Weight: 115 kg
7. Career start: 2006