How good was PSDT for the Stormers

 So where did you get your facts from? 
2014 - played 10 (in which Matfield started)  - he missed the Argentina tests - both won by the Springboks,  Won 6 - lost 4 (1 AB, 1 Aus, 1 England, 1 Wales)
Where did that tests miraculously came from?  They played another 9 tests in 2015 in which Ouma Victoria started in only 4 : 2 won - 2 lost (1 Aus, 1 Japan)
S in the 14 tests that Matfield started in - the Springboks lost 6.   Bad news that one.  Problem is that when he came from the bench he was even worse.  
Trying to get away again from the fact that De Jager was the SA Player of the Year last year and Ouma Victoria was crowned with the piss-pot throne as the worst player in the Springbok squad?   His crowing achievement was the loss against Japan that he was largely responsible for.  So bad that Biosmarck told him off in no incertain terms and was left out of the team for the next game.
Are you enjoying his pe rformances playing for the Saints - or rather his deficient performances - doffies?      

  

 Your favourite site ESPNSCRUM. Let me list them for you.

1. v Wales in Durban. 14 Jun 2014. Won.
   
2. v Wales in Nelspruit 21 Jun 2014. Won
   
3. v Scotland in PE 28 Jun 2014. Won
   
4. v Aust in Perth 6 Sep 2014. Lost
   
5. v NZ in Wellington 13 Sep 2014. Lost
   
6. v Aus v Cape Town 27 Sep 2014. Won
   
7. v NZ v in JHB 4 Oct 2014. Won
   
8. v Ire v Lansdowne Road 8 Nov 2014. Lost
   
9. v England Twickenham 15 Nov 2014. Won
   
10. v Italy Padova 22 Nov 2014. Won
    
11. v Wales Cardiff 29 Nov 2014. Lost
    
12. v Aus Brisbane 18 Jul 2015 Lost
    
13. v Argentina v Buenos Aires 15 Aug 2015. Won
    
14. v Japan Brighton 19 Sep 2015. Lost
    
15. v Samoa Birmingham 26 Sep 2015. Won
    
16. v NZ Twickenham 24 Oct 2015. Lost
    
17. v Arg London 30 Oct. Won
    

 I was and am a supporter of Pollard. Not because of his early RC games, but because to me he had the physique, skills and mental poise to be a successful international flyhalf. I still believe that.
But there is no doubt in my mind that he was a big factor in our loss against NZ. As series of weak clearing kicks and poorly directed tactical kicks gave NZ great field position. Say what you like about Morne, but in that game his educated boot would have taken a lot of pressure off the Bok defence.

If we had more balance in our rugby discourse Morne could have been there backing up Pollard, but it had to be Lambie...another fellow, like Goosen who is better off at 15, for different reasons.
 Goosen is simply too fragile to police 10 channel. Lambie by contrast is a good low tackler, which invites the offload. But still defensively robust. It's his decision making, or lack thereof that dooms him at 10. If things aren't going well he gets hesitant and confused. Morne has a model, he is a kicking flyhalf primarily but also a fine distributor. He isn't confused as to which option to take.
Fans think coaches make their decisions in a vacuum. Not true....the fan sentiment against Morne gave us Pollard and Lambie. It would have made so much more sense to have had Pollard and Morne, new star and mentor vs competitors.
We remain rugby's dumbest fans, pretty soon the drumbeat will start for new youngsters doing well in routine Super matches, while Oz, the Bargies and NZ cherish proven test players.

 Ceradunce
Narrow that down to the tests in which Ouma Victoria actually played.  He was not in the Scotland test last year as I can remember.   Where Ouma Victoria did not start - he caused havoc when he came on.
  
  

Mozart
It is with surprise that you wrote what you did about the loss in the semi of the WC.  How you could have said what you did, is really surprising.   Most of the balls got by the Springboks never reached Pollard - if you study the stats Du Preez handled the ball 70 times - he kicked the ball 13 times and carried the ball 7 times for a 15 meter gain.  
Du Preez passed the ball 50 times - but less than a third of those balls were passed to Pollard.   
Pollard handled the ball 20 times - of those he gathered the ball from kicks 6 times.  Du Preez passed the ball to Pollard 14 times during the whole game - mostly when Pollard received the ball in the Springboks 22 under pressure and forced to kick,  However of the 14 balls Du Preez passed to him he passed the ball 6 times.   So he made 8 kicks and taking into account the inside 22 meter relieving kicks - how many strategic kicks are you talking about here?
Sorry Mozart the player that buggered up test was Du Preez playing according to a game plan devised by Meyer.   Passing the ball to anyone bar the flyhalf is crazy and Du Preez was really the man who did more damage to the Springbok effort than anyone else.   He made more poor kicks than anyone else, he made more ineffective passes than anyone else - starving the backline from ball possession.  The fact is that must the worst case of stupid passing in the history of the WC.       

i dont understand the apprehension some peeps might have with PSDT. i knowhe hasnt come close to achieving his best rugby, but the glimpses of brilliance we have seen from PDST in a career that to date is filled with injuries, shows that he could be the best lock to ever play the game, even better than retallick.

i would also like to know rooys feelings on PSDT leaving his sharkies for the mild breeze known as the stormers, i sensed a disturbance in the force when PSDT signed with the stompies, and im wondering if rooy was responsible,

 Stephanie 'Could be the best lock to ever play the game' says Sushi....totally completely and utterly clueless. All this hype and the guy turned the ball over three times on Saturday and lost two of the lineout balls thrown to him.
It's cloud cuckoo land.

 "Ceradunce
Narrow that down to the tests in which Ouma Victoria actually played.  He was not in the Scotland test last year as I can remember.   Where Ouma Victoria did not start - he caused havoc when he came on."
Correct. He played in the 2014 Scotland test. What is your point? I listed each and every game that Matfield played in since 2012. He only came on as  a replacement in one of those 17 tests. The one against NZ in the semi-final of the RWC. 
        MatStartSubPtsTriesConvPensDropWonLostDraw%1716100000107058.82

 I think Suzuki-maki might be taking the proverbial .

 Tokkie you really get confused don'tcha. Pollard kicked the ball 12 times, not 8,  several of those were weak clearing kicks and ineffective tactical kicks...end of the first lesson. 

 Mozart
You missed the point entirely.  Four of Pollards kicks came from situations where he covered kicks of the opposition and had to kick the ball up-field because of him being outside his 22.  Those cannot be classified as strategic kicks,  The other 8 kicks were when the ball was passed to him by Du Preez - most of those being relieving kicks when in the 22.
Point is he did not get real opportunities to make strategic kicks as mentioned by you.     

 Any kick which isn't intended to go into touch is strategic....where do you place it to get the best advantage, to put the opponents under greater pressure. The simple fact is Pollard kicked 12 times and I can't think of one of those kicks that was close to optimal. He kicked very poorly from the field that day and put the Boks under more pressure....case closed.

Mozart
That is in my view really a weird statement - most return kicks are covered by the full back, the wings, the flyhalf and the scrummie.   That leaves very limited if any space for any strategic kick scenario as outlined by you.  .   
Strategic kicks are normally aimed at getting an advantage from an attacking perspective - the type of kicks you call strategic is nothing of the sort.
If Pollard was poor in kicking a very limited number of kicks in the game - how poor was Du Preez with his much higher number of kicks    You condemn Pollards limited number of kicks and not condemn Du Preez's higher number of kicks.   Why? 

Case closed.

Mozart
That is in my view really a weird statement - most return kicks are covered by the full back, the wings, the flyhalf and the scrummie.   That leaves very limited if any space for any strategic kick scenario as outlined by you.  .   
Strategic kicks are normally aimed at getting an advantage from an attacking perspective - the type of kicks you call strategic is nothing of the sort.
If Pollard was poor in kicking a very limited number of kicks in the game - how poor was Du Preez with his much higher number of kicks    You condemn Pollards limited number of kicks and not condemn Du Preez's higher number of kicks.   Why? 

Case closed.