Plisson, one of the culprits for the loss to Krasny Yar. Herr Lügnerin hilariously blamed Morné. He wasn't playing.
I did not see the match - but there is a reason why Plisson kept the useless Morne Steyn out of the starting lineup of Stade Francais for years. He is something that Morne never was - a flyhalf and not only one which was piss poor in everything bar kicking at goal.
Do you want Morne back in the Springbok squad - brainless?
If Plisson could be half the player Morné was for the Bulls and Boks, he might have a career that will be remember when he retires. A quite limited player.
It's funny, the plastics only started to grasp the need for an intelligent and technically sound passing 10 after the last World Cup. It only took 20 years for the penny to drop. The plastics always expressed a desire to emulate New Zealand, and insisted upon dead-end cul-de-sac runners. They never understand the game they want or the teams they supposedly want to copy. If they had the capacity for it, they'd have appreciated Morné at least a little for his ability to unleash his teammates. Now, the bitter one's choose revisionism, because they want to justify their I'll founded emotions. As Lügnerin says it, bias, prejudice, hate. Being a quality Bok is too often a thankless task. Juan, Du Preez, Frans, Monty, Os, Habana, Schalk, Pollard, Smit and Spies et al have first hand experience.
Then there are the plastic flavours of the day, Kriel, JJ, Lambie, Jantjies, Watson, Damian, Reinach. Just some of the players rewarded and praised for some of the most hideous performances I have seen in a Bok Jersey. It's patently clear that Bok rugby, it's fans, they are gross dishonest.
This is one of the more striking contrasts between New Zealanders and South Africans. They also don't enjoy tearing their players apart. Barrett would have been hounded out of the team for a flavour of the days selection. The media would have elevated a Barabus and pushed hard until the coach relents. Its sickening.
AO
Who are you writing about when mentioning the following:-
"It's funny, the plastics only started to grasp the need for an intelligent and technically sound passing 10"
It can never be Morne and it did not even refer to Pollard - since he rarely played in 2016 and 2017. Morne's abilities were never remotely close to be an intelligent no 10 and he never was not a good passing 10 either,
AO
I read the above drivel about plastic fans and came to the conclusion that your arrogance knows no bounds. There is a case to be made out for honesty in dealing with the issue.
In the main the fans can see when players bugger up and when that is annunciated it a clear understanding that players became sub-standard.
The dishonest supporters are those who refused to see where the players go sour and never showed any objectivity in the relative regard. They base their whole campaign on reputation and prejudice as a basis for selection - whether the players involved perform or not.
In the process the dishonest supporters -
* paint grossly over-inflated and false pictures of players like Morne Steyn and when anybody differs from them - they persist with a false indication of the playing abilities of players; and
* are creating a false image of what happened in games - depending on whether the players are favoured or opposed by them and some of them do not hesitate to lie when they think it would help their cause.
I would rather be an honest plastic fan than being the dishonest fans who continue to write drivel on site.
Being a quality Bok is too often a thankless task. Juan, Du Preez, Frans, Monty, Os, Habana, Schalk, Pollard, Smit and Spies et al have first hand experience.
Organhuffer how do you call that pap Spies a quality Bok! Frans as well - his run of form was ever so brief.Lardy John who kept out Bissie for all those years just because he was captain. Bissie was indeed a quality Bok.
i wont call you di shonest but only incorrect!
Spies guaranteed front foot ball and ranked highly for several years for linebreaks and defenders beaten. He could take up to three defenders out of the next phase whilst getting over the gain line. A great lineout jumper as well. Post 2007 he became a very reliable defender and good counter rucker. The kinds of things the journos never point out, so the plastics never know it exists because they cannot see it themselves.
Spies had huge support before he had a health problem. Coming back to the Springbok fold he was a joke compared to wehat he used to be. Now wonder the going words were -
"He is built like Tarzan and play rugby like Jane"/
Again a total misrepresentation of the abilities of a player who could not produce what he should.
Mozart
The problem is to start with the helpless Morne is to totally eliminate backline play. Try and be factual for a change - the only real liar on site are you.
Spies was a plastic fans dream in 2006. Lots of open running, poor tackling, bloated stats of little substance. In the Ireland test he blew our coverage for 3 tries. All of them easy run ins from innocuous situations.
This was the time I backed Kankowski, who was legitimately the better player. They reversed after 2007 though. Spies became a much better performer. His best rugby was from 2009 to 2012.
EDIT: Morné totally eliminates backline play, yet is the flyhalf of the best attacking Bok side since 2007 and the South African super rugby side ever. His 2010 season one of the very best ever by any team, though 2009's linebreaks to try ratio takes some beating.
Where can we say the same for Lambie, Goosen, Plisson or any of the other pretenders you care to mention, like Swiel!
Like Plisson did for four years until Morne's protector and braai buddy became the coach. Another three months and we will see whether Morne are still the star ting flyhalf.
The bottom line is that Morné plays better.
The hubris. By the text, the guy was handed down a point deficit for a home game.
Home game. It showed the starting team did not do their job in the first hand.
The guy is not reported as failing to keep a lead, he failed to reverse the course of a game.
The article is poorly written and another sign of the favourable bias to SA players.
What is known, the team was losing when this guy came in, the team lost the game. That is all.
The substitution was not a game changer. The article implied that the same penalty would have given if the SA failing player had stayed on the field. Nobody knows that. With him on the field, the penalty might not have been or the team could have conceded a penalty instead of winning one.
Tale after tale after tale, the SA rugby trademark.
Better to stick to what is known.
The SA player failed to put his team in the lead and his substitute was handed a hot situation, having to reverse the course of the game, a task he did not manage.
The SA mindset, they messed up and others are blamed when they failed to clean the mess.
The bottom line is that Morné plays better.
No. The bottom line is that this player is likely to be another evidence of SA cronyism.
The guy did not create a lead when on the field for a home game. One wonders what kind of rugby this guy brings to the field.
Whooosh!!!
Stupid should hurt!
The guy did not create a lead for a home game? How about the 18-3 win over the All Blacks in 2011, against the team who would be crowned World Champions a couple of months later. It's hilarious how wrong the plastics are. Each step is planted in a hole. These weary journeymen of Eggville deserve our deepest sympathies, so I implore the more astute minds among us to be gentle with the snowflakes.
So the self-proclaimed world rugby experts are right when proclaiming Morne Steyn as the most wonderful flyhallf teams can dream off.
Fact is he was dropped by Myer once in 2012 and twice in 2014 because he was piss poor in performance in tests, Meyer was in tears when he had to drop Morne - but realize he was a performance handicap whom even he could not keep without him losing his job. He did not repeat the same teary statement after the Perth disaster and never selected him to start for the Springboks again - but offered him a free holiday in the 2015 WC squad.
His present selection of Steyn ahead of Plisson shows that he is still the totally ignorant coach as to backline play he always was. The man is a total incompetent when it comes to selections of backline players and loosies.
Yes, he was dropped. How did that work out? A record defeat on home soil and a lacklustre attack on the EOYT where Lambie kicked ball away aimless and was stifling ball hog.
Then 2013. Morné sparks the best Bok attack since 2007 until present day.
You can't help but drown yourself in egg. Poor Omlettmann. Le weep.
Listen - it does not help at all - you fail to realize Morne was dropped once in 2012 and twice in 2014 for one reason and one reason only - he was piss-poor.
Any amount of dreaming would not help - there was no indication that the 2013 RC team showed much in respect of performance by their backline. Forget about the joke teams they played in June 2013 - imagine rating the tries scored against Italy, Scotland and Italy as a norm for real statistical purposes.
So lets look at the first five games in the Rugby Championship as to tries scored as against the first five similar games this year:-
2013 2018
for backs for backs
Argentina 4 4 0 6
Argentina 0 1 1 2
Australia 1 3 1 1
Australia 1 2 0 2
AB's 0 0 1 4
So the AO highly praised 2013 backline scored 10 tries as against the 15 tries scored by the present backline playing the same teams this year, If the fiasco against the home test against Argentina is left out since it as never repeated subsequently - the result is as follows:-
2013
Forwards - 2 tries
Backline - 6 tries
2018
Forwards - 4 tries
Backline - 9 tries
The 2013 team was praised to high heaven by Mozart and AO as an outstanding team and one of their wins against Argentina was a real surprise by a huge margin. That win was never repeated subsequently in any subsequent series. However, the praise-singing continues to this day - hence the stupid remark made by AO in his latest rant.
Looking at the actual figures above it is clear AO is becoming the same egg mountain Mozart already is.
Oh dear Lügnerin, ya dang gun 'n goofed up 'gain.
2013 Backline Tries
The guy did not create a lead for a home game? How about the 18-3 win over the All Blacks in 2011
What's next... The lead he created when he played junior rugby or something.
SA people on this board have not yet realized it takes a few clicks to debunk their tales. This is the internet.
This game was supposed to be a big game, derby and both teams sitting at the top of the table.
It is reported as a poor game, which can be believed when you look at the results of the week.
Only one away team did not score more tries than the away team involved in this game and no other home teams did not score more tries than the home team involved in this game.
The SA player can not even be given the credit for the only try his team scored as it is more poor defending and a flash of brilliance from the fullback that led to the try.
The guy had 65 minutes to carry his team into a solid lead and he did not even manage to set up a try.
Instead of admitting the poor performance, the blame is laid on a guy who missed a kick five minutes after being brought on when handed down a score deficit.
The substitute might not be good but the starter is horrible. His club has the largest budget, maybe the squad was at full strength and yet, for a home game, in a very important context, the starter did not make to set up one try. The try was the result of an individual effort. Milking penalties, that is all.
This is not a good performance. This guy led his team in the worst game of the week, he failed to give the team an attacking platform. His performance was terrible.
Already stated, but this story will end the SA way: SA people involved in the club will take as much wealth they can, give nothing in return and leave.
The head coach did not win his first derby. He forced the team in a SA rugby style that is out dated and inefficient. He will laugh his way to the bank when the locals are left with tears.
AO
So playing Italy, Samoa and Scotland is as competitive as to England? Are you nuts or what?
I looked at the 5 RC tests played thus far and that does not include the upcoming test against the AB's
Listen doffies - if comparisons are to be made compare apples with apples and base it on what happened in the RC - where the figures are clear and known.
We can look again at the situation later on. In the meantime you are talking your normal shit and if I were you I would not continue with it.
