The Stormers put up a brave display today - but there were three tries donated to the Highlanders by possession turn=-over kicks by Duvenhage.
The routine kicking and possession handovers resulting therefrom is part of the Meyer, Coetzee and Ludeke "game plan" so strongly supported by Mozart. As long as that kind of BS prevails we can forget about winning games.
Nothing wrong with a kick chase gameplan. As long as your accurate. Stormers were not end of.
Luke
I have no problem with kicking in a game - but then kicking must be strategic and accurate and not the BS so often kicked by SA players, The Stormers was the exact opposite today and especially Duvenhage should be get rid of asap.
Well Mike...at the end of the day...it all boils down to how Saffas coach.
You take Rebels...suddenly they are the best franchise in Oz...where were they a few years back.
You take a player like Willie Le Roux...suddenly he is playing brilliantly under the Wasps coaching.
You take the Lions rugby a huge turn around when you consider that 4 years ago they couldn't even qualify for Super series...you take the Bulls now under Mitchell.
We can go on and on but until you are blue in the face.
Mozart and some others here too, thinks that if you get the most talented players and select them then by some magic it will all come together...I can tell you it won't...you need a building coach and hard work and practise after practise until the side eventually gels and clicks together.
The Stormers coaching isnot up to standard...and then confidence gets lower and lower when losses occur and all sorts of false excuses are used.....blah, blah, blah.
Seb
I agree with you 100%, Dud coaches has a problem and it trarts with seriously defective game plans, The players realize that it is rubbish and is half-hearted in execution and that is where teams cannot win.
It is of particular impoertance when we play 10 man rugby so favoured by virtually all coaches since Du Plessis in the late 1990's and exemplified by coaches like White, Meyer, Coetzee and Ludeke who are totally ignorant as to playing rugby where the backline has toplay a role in both attacking and defensive play.
The problem in the main centers around our half-backs in the main. Du Preez is revered by many - but virtually the whole way he played was to kick balls - badly at times
- and passing balls back to the forwards. The flyhalfs we had was at best third rate with the Steyns virtually the bottom of the pile.
The first step to get over the present scenario is to ensure that the coaches are competent ion getting the best out of players and the second is to ensure that the best performing players are identified and their talents be developed further.
Anything else is just blah, blah,blah BS.
Du Plessis who lost to the Lions (a scratch side) vs White who developed a side won a 3N and a world cup.
Your ignorance knows know limits.
On the sports field winning is the only marker of success.
White got Jones in to help him with backline play coaching and then he got to the Sharks and got fired because without Eddie Jones he could not deal with backline play - this being one of his deficiencies. He got fired by Montpellier for much the same reasons.
Jake was a good ten man coach - anything beyond that was mot in his comprehension of the game of rugby.
Winning without playing comprehensive rugby is just not possible anymore and although I rate Jake higher than the rubbish who succeeded him I am not blind to his deficiencies insofar as the present format of the game is concerned.
Stats mean sweet fanny adams if NOT DONE EFFECTIVELY...it is not even a debate...back to the same old meaningless garbage...some are so blind they will not see.
It's a waste of time debating this nonsense..the problem with SA rugby is the lack of coaching skills with maybe one or 2 exceptions...NZ rugby is healthy in virtually every dept...we may have the players but we just cannot put it together...I'm just wondering how long it's going to take until we can see this and put it together.
Mozart
Have you never realized the worst form of rugby is to hand over ball possession to opponents. For that not to happen kicking must be accurate and catch opposing recipients under extreme pressure. by either effective following on or catching recipients out of position. It must always be strategic kicking and effective as a weapon.
Now lets look at the kicks this morning and 90% of all the kicks made by Duvenage fell into the BS category and the results were attacking frpm the back and the scoring of tries. According to you the kicker is not at fault the defenders are. In the case of players like Duvenahage and the Steyns kicking has always been the first choice option the first choice option and hen theydo not know how to kick balls accurately.
If any player wants to kick he must be sure that the kick is effective and not an easy ball possession turnover situation. This is where 90% of the SA kickers are totally in effective and 90% of the AB team players are.
Your stats is under the circumstances meaningless BS and since you do not understand that all kicks must be represent a strategic mechanism to gain an advantage omne cannot debate the issue with you.
Sure BS stupidity like yours in respect of rugby cannot be cured, since you have no idea about the game of rugby.
Duplicate
Duplicate
BokBF, how long has Carel been coach when he played the Lions. What was the losing margins? Who did we olay in his last match and what was the score?
You kick when the moment presents itself as the best option. Whether that is on attack or defence. Quite simple really.
Faf must be one of the worst box kickers. But he got a lot of success at the Lions with it because he knew when AND how to kick.
Dunno how longs it's been since I saw any other SA 9 in SR kick anything but a lofted box kick. Kicking directly into space from the safety behind the ruck is very valuable.
Duvenage kick ed away possession a number of times in an aimless fashion.
If anybody doesn't realize poor coaching here is a big problem they are living n cuckoo land.
Db..Great result against Oz after loosing 5 of the previous 7 games those two wins being against Tonga and a dead rubber against the lions. They went into that Oz game backs to
the wall after the embarrassment of a 50+ defeat to the all blacks.
For me h e rivals AC as the worst ever Springbok coach.
The 10 man game is now outdated and to easy to counter. But Jake had the vision 11 years ago to structure a winning game plan. Which other RWC winning coaches have put there cocks on the block predicting a win seasons ahead of the tournament?
Du Plessis was the Springbok coach for I believe four months in 1997. In that time there was one test match against Tonga - the Springboks played the British and Irish Lions and in the 3 Nations and the results were as follows;-
Tonga - 74-10
Lions - 25-16
Lions - 18-15
Lions - 35-16
All Blacks - 32-35
All Blacks - 35-55
Australia - 20-33
Australia - 61-22
So lets look at the above results:-
* The game in Durban against the British and Irish Lions was one of the most frustrating games I ever attended. The Springboks scored three tries and Honiball's goal kicking that day was atrocious - he missed all three try conversions and two penalties. The Lions scored no tries and won by converting five penalties and a dropped goalIncidentally the one other test the Springboks played against Tonga was in the 2007 WC where the Springboks had a close win against that team by 5 points, The Springboks won by a miracle that day - I was also at that match. As to playing against the AB"s the Springboks lost by a bigger margin of 30 points in 2007 (30 points) than they did in 2 tests in 1997 (23 points).
In the White years the Springboks failed to even come remotely near the scoring of tries as was the case in the tests where Du Plessis was the coach. There was no real vision for the Springboks put together by White and definitely not at all discernable in his subsequent career as a coach. The vision should have been reflected in the 2014 Super Rugby season with the Sharks and there was zero discernable - after that season he got fired by the Sharks for obvious reasons.
The difference between Du Plessis and subsequent coaches was that he had a vision about how the Springboks had to play to win matches by scoring of tries - which worked well for a while in the case of Mallett and then deteriorated over the years by successive coaches to a level finally achieved by Meyer and Coetzee. White's saviour in 2007 was Eddie Jones where the players said they learnt things from Jones which nobody ever told them before and that included from White. White always was a limited coach with no real vision about backline play and that is still the case at present.
Sorry BB - this issue was not related to White as a coach - it was related to the dead brain rugby played by the Stormers yesterday and the aimless kicking BS.
