I Found Your New Home Clever Mike

ummm it was said in jest......thought the smiley was a clear indication....no??? 

Obviously no.....suit yourself, I really couldn't be bothered if that's the way you want to play.

De Allende wiping the floor with Nonu?

Here is Damien's touches in the 25 July 2015 RC game:

04:06 catch and pass
09:40 pass from base of ruck
17:58 short run into traffic
18:22 pick and go from ruck gaining a few meters
18:58 phase play, DA bumps off AB #6 and makes another 7 or 8 meters, sending A Smith flying too - clean break #1
20:58 catches kickoff, swamped immediately
22:37 catch and pass
35:32 catch and pass
38:39 phase play, beats 2 (1 forward, possibly Read, and A Smith) for a strong 15+m carry - clean break #2
42:38 Pienaar feeds DA from ruck, who runs a few meters back into traffic
44:01 receives pass from Willie on deep counter, runs a few meters before tackled
52:04 gathers a wayward pass from Pienaar and makes a few meters, tackled by AB #6
57:26 catch and pass to Hendricks
65:51 catch and pass to Kriel
65:53 regathers lost pass from Kriel and carries into traffic

Damien had two strong carries / breaks
- at 18:58 
- at 38:39

Those two carries constitute about half his running meters for the entire game. The rest of his game consisted mostly of simple but accurate passing and a few short carries into traffic.

Did Damien have a good game? Yes.
Did he wipe the floor with Nonu? No, not if that refers to one on one domination.

Damien and Nonu had only one direct encounter the whole game at 44:01 from broken play on the counter, where Damien jinxed this way and that, avoiding the Nonu tackle only to drift sideways into the next defender. What he probably should have done was run straight, draw Nonu, and pass as there was space to attack on the outside and the Boks had a penalty advantage.

The only players he wiped the floor with so to speak were Aaron Smith (twice) and Liam Messam.

The only center who directly breaks through his opposite numbers with any effect is Kriel when he goes between Nonu and Smith to score after brilliant work by Pollard taking it flat to the line.

Nonu was solid but unspectacular for his 47 minutes and he missed a few tackles. He did set up the Ben Smith try just before the half by drawing Burger across before sending Sopoaga through the resulting inside gap, who fed Smith for the try.

Why was Nonu replaced?

There is nothing to indicate it had anything to do with Damien. Nonu was pulled immediately after Kriel ran through him and Smith to score. My theories would be:

1. Because Kriel breached his channel to score, and because he'd missed a few tackles already, including being physically dominated by Brussow at around 18:55.
2. A simple impact substitution. The coaching staff felt Fekitoa's explosiveness was called for in the home straight. Fek ended up making a crucial 50m break through a ruck that got the All Blacks away from their own 22 at around 67:35. The Boks never saw the NZ 22 again.

As for no ball given to the loosies - Burger made plenty of primary carries and passes, as his possession stats and meters run indicate.

Pollard beat more defenders than any other player on the park and was pivotal in the Bok attack.

Do with this what you will.

Thanks for quoting my grammatical error Denny

Lurker, so are you an expat Saffa living in the UK?

Thanks for quoting my grammatical error Denny

My pleasure....although I must admit I can't find the error

* you're

Nee, Xavi......... 'you're both nice guys is ok' ..... Folk Downunder I've noticed have a penchant to misuse the ... you're & your, eg. 'your gonna get it'  or  'your a nice guy'

PS. be nice if ALL the combatants gave this ping-pong verbal fracas a week-long ceasefire ..... nothing more , but perhaps time enough to gauge what its like without this GroundhogDay-like squabble.

As per normal - one story by Pakie.   Which 4 tackles did Nonu miss BSter?  

Blobbok, I am married to the managing editor of a magazine. I can't spell for shit and my grammar is hopeless. My life is one correction after another! Just kidding, she pretty much leaves me to my own devices when it comes to anything I write, but I'm pretty sure she must be dying inside!! LOL 

Bloubok

Maybe I am oversensitive - as to Lurker, but the insults are there in his postings an I did not start them.   Lurker is not aa new poster - he had a long history posting under various names and is not n angel when it comes to personal attacks on members who disagree with him.    

Mozart has been insulting for years with all members differing from him and has been getting in my case a personal insult history that is unparalleled in any forum of this kind.  The man drove away too many posters from the site using personal insults as a means.

If you watch what happened as to the Folau case - it is typical way of Lurker who wrote the same tripe abut Folau under previous user names and now suddenly he did not say that Folau is a poor player - he did in fact imply as such by saying Folau can only kick balls poorly and is caught in possession after taking a high ball only and he is too slow to counter-attack.   

I am just going to comment on future postings of Mozart, Lurker and Pakie using two abbreviations - "BS" .         

As per normal - one story by Pakie.

Refute my report point by point based on the footage, then we can talk. I am not debating with the voices in your head anymore.

Which 4 tackles did Nonu miss BSter?

Pollard - 6:47
Brussow - 18:55
De Allende - 44:01
Kriel  - 45:31

Thanks ouMaaik, & I hope that you're aware that the nickname is a term of endearment, & not meant in a derogatory sense. Hopefully your, sadly, not so friendly adversaries harbour similar sentiments & there might yet be peace in our time, or at least for a week! Hallelujah.

Mike, this is why stats only tell a quarter of the story.

The stats show Nonu missed 4 tackles, and you immediately assume they had to have been on Damian. In fact, Damian did not once attack Nonu's channel from set play or phase play. Their only direct encounter was, as I mentioned above, in a loose play counter attack situation at minute 44.

The moment you get to phase play, there are no more lining up of direct opponents in the defensive line and the centers often come up against loosies - as Damian did at least twice with the two clean breaks he made.

The two guys who took most of the ball to the line from set and phase play were Pollard and Burger - Nonu's first missed tackle was on Pollard directly attacking his channel .

Clever Mike said that Damian encountered "Bobu" 8 times. That Damian beat him easily all game. But I'm the liar. 

I actually didn't say that Folau was slow. I didn't think of his speed actually, but now that you mention it the faster players did cause him problems. Habana and Savea both beat him for a try each. I still don't think he is slow though. But thanks for once again fabricating something to justify your bigotry. I suppose calling him "a great player" is seen as an insult these days. Thanks for informing me. Why don't you change your name to The Most High so I don't forget to offend your higher ways again. 

Do you really believe the Pakie BS - he was caught out previously lying about the same player.

Lets face facts the 3 BSters are in full out in full cry.   Mozart was caught out lying and he muist get support from the other two BSter.  They squirm like snakes and no wonder one has to listen to them and everyone else is wrong.   LMAO  

BS as to the Folau lie.

Careful you don't poke someone's eye out Mikenocchio. 

BS

LOL Mike

You do have a way of hanging on to a point no matter how broken or stale.

At some point we are going to have to let the Meyer thing go. 

It might annoy some a lot more than others but for me its about pros and cons with you Mike.

I know you'll always be up for sharing team info and views on SR, Worthless Cup, U21 and schools teams so for me that far outweighs any negatives. 

For the most part, we are generally all in agreement on which players are the best or better than others. 

There are only a small handful of names mentioned when we talk about the tight five, loosies, nine, ten, wingers and FB for the Boks. 

Presently the debate seems to be mainly about the 12/13 pairing. Then some way behind there is some dispute about the loosies and then far behind that four and five.

Despite the claims of liar, ignoramus, clueless etc etc that fly around on here, it's still a wonderful resource for discussion and info.

Something this site would benefit from greatly is one of you retired guys would start downloading matches and then using some basic telestration software to analyse events. 

EG The board is given 48 hours to vote on three topics from the game where we'd like some clarity. 

Fly half's out of hand kicking, a players tackles, a players runs, scrums, passes etc etc

We vote and which ever area gets the most votes is then edited, telestrated and put up for discussion.

I'd seriously love to do that but as it stands, unless some others will share the load there is no way i'll have time to do it alone. 

Could be a really nice feature for the site and maybe even have its own section. Would certainly clear up a lot of speculation and help possibly increase traffic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwa3hz9T0rc

Here's an example of the type of software. This one seems very user friendly.

Would certainly clear up a lot of speculation

If you think visual evidence would clear up speculation where Mike is involved, you haven't been paying attention.

I made short gif videos at one time. Would like to actually do video analysis. But the fact is you can demonstrate most things really well with simple screenshots and visual indicators, and most people get the gist from them. Except those who refuse to.

Pakie your work is very well done. You investigate then various elements of the game and give us an opportunity for real rugby debate. Don't let Clever Mike put you off because that's the kind of stuff I really enjoy reading and talking about! 

Thanks Lurker.

Indeed Pakie

Shall we trial it during the RC? See how it goes without any telestration. We do a vote and see what areas we'd like to have another look at and discuss and the one with the most votes gets edited and uploaded? 

Of course some might not let evidence change their mind but but if that is sufficient reason o give up then one would never get anywhere.

TLDR: Are you volunteering? Be cause by god i'll you to it

I can give it a shot. As long as you promise to have some vrot tomatoes ready to chuck at Mike every time he accuses me of doctoring the evidence

Some still insist that he merely makes honest errors, Moz. The mind boggles.

Nice one Pakie.

Bluebok, I don't mind arguments. I mind when visual evidence is deliberately ignored in favor of empty bluster. When those producing visual evidence are called liars without any of their evidence ever being refuted by a verifiable counter claim. That's when it becomes a muddled and distasteful mess. 

I have no problem with your take on the Damian/Nonu situation, for example. There doesn't have to be a winner, or a consensus. I disagree with you, but so what. We're free to disagree. As long as we respect the facts.

Facts or Manufactured Fiction?

Majority rules always leads to tyranny.

Between Mozart, Pakie and I there is a lot of rugby input. I'd say the bulk of it on this forum. Clever Mike and his defenders have brought noting to the table. How can you change a person's mind by force of will alone when they have all the information at hand and are the ones doing ANY investigation! And then insult them, lie about them, attempt to get others in on the act. 

BS  LMAO

Here's yours. 

1.Numbers with no context 

2.New Zealand used a standard defence

3.South Africa attacked from all angles

4.South Africa gave the loosies no ball, so it wasn't a defensive game

That's it. 

Well, since Mike insists on acting like a child on this thread now, let me show people exactly why these arguments go on forever.

Let's take the Fleck/Kayser example.

Mike claims Fleck was showboating behind the tryline when he got tackled and lost the ball. So, two claims have to be weighed: 1) he was showboating, 2) position, namely behind the tryline.

I post a video of the incident, showing Fleck was 1) not showboating, he simply took his foot off the gas too soon and 2) he did not at any stage carry the ball behind the tryline.

This should be the end of it. Mike should now say "sorry, I was wrong" and we go on to better things.

----

Here is what he does next though: he ignores the original claim being refuted, and now pounces on the position of the tackle.

Okay, so now the reason for the tackle taking place 4m out needs to be pointed out to him. We can clearly see the 5m line, Fleck got hit on his first step into the 5m area. Fair estimate.

Next, he now questions how the players got to the tryline if the tackle happened 4m out. An immensely stupid question. Answer: for the same reason your speeding car hits the wall even though you pressed the brake 20m earlier.

With that explained, he now puts up a straw man fallacy asking us why momentum applies in this case and not others - an argument nobody put on the table.

And so it goes. None of the subsequent nonsense had anything to do with the original claim - showboating behind the tryline, which was easily and quickly disproved, as everyone else who saw the video agreed.

We don't need votes to end arguments. We just need one person to get his act together. Then none of this endless merry-go-round stuff would be necessary.

BS

Moz, I also enjoy analysis far more than things like speculation about players or making up teams. That has its place, of course, but figuring out the intricacies of a play and why it went down like it did is more fun .