Is Pollard the answer?

 Well Tok really is a piece of work, caught with his pants down lying about his comments on Pollard, he goes on another of his clumsy attacks.....ending up with the always predictable attack on Matfield, the response of choice when he has his drooping tits in a wringer.

Arthur John

Status: Bok regular
Posts: 1235 RE: Is Pollard the answer?
December 03, 2016, 17:01:20

Granted Ceradyne the Bulls had an awesome season that year.

But credit must be given to the form players that season and not the ex fly-half substituting as an attack coach. 
OK, let's have a look at that so-called 2013 form players then:

Bjorn Basson

Ulrich Beyers

Arno Botha

JJ Engelbrecht

Louis Fouché

Dean Greyling

Grant Hattingh

Francois Hougaard

Zane Kirchner

Frik Kirsten

Juandré Kruger

Werner Kruger

Lionel Mapoe

Sampie Mastriet

Bongi Mbonambi

Morne Mellett

Akona Ndungane

Wynand Olivier

Rudy Paige

Handrè Pollard

Dewald Potgieter

Jacques Potgieter

Chiliboy Ralepelle

Jan Serfontein

William Small-Smith

Pierre Spies

Wilhelm Steenkamp

Deon Stegmann

Morné Steyn

Flip Van der Merwe

Francois Venter

Jano Vermaak

Callie Visagie

Jurgen Visser

Willie Wepener

Paul Willemse

Read more: http://www.superxv.com/bulls-super-rugby/bulls-2013-super-rugby-squad/#ixzz4RoiHXMNw

 Paul Willemse, Jurgen Visser, Jano Vermark, Flip v d Merwe, Morne Steyn, Wilheim Steenkamp, Jan Serfontein, J and D Potgieter, Pollard, Ndungane, Juandre Kruger, Hougaard, Hatting, Arno Botha, Deon Stegmann for example had a good 2013.
A few others also made good.
Any other RSA Super Rugby  or CC squad would have been more than excited to have had these guys in their squads.
Now tell me who of the players named would not have walked into a Stormers squad.
By the way the rule changes that u refer to in your earlier comment also applied to all the other teams as well not just the Bulls.
By the way do u know which SADF group uses the term "Vasbyt" since u spent a few years in the SADF.

No catch just asking.

Now we are onto the Bulls team of 2012 - the idiots parade again.   The Bulls team did well that year - but the wheels came off badly against the Brumbies in Pretoria.
As per normal in the semi the Bulls lost badly.  I can remember the main reason for the loss - an aimless kick by More Steyn sealed the loss.  So what else is new?
However, lets face facts - the Bulls that year was favoured by the system which allows the team to go through to the final stages - but never to the final.  The last two SA teams who reached the final in Super Rugby were the Sharks in 2012 and the Lions this year.   Both teams did not play the BS that caused massive losses for the SA teams in the semi-finals.
Why did that happen that SA teams fell flat in the semi-final stage of the competition or in the play-offs?   The only team that was competitive in the play-off phases over the last few years was the Cheetahs - who lost by one point against the Brumbies away and could have won the game if a late try was converted.   
The issue here is that idiots think that players who are good on Super Rugby level cannot perform on test level and that the malaise in SA Rugby - also on Super Rugby level is not attributable to poor coaching and poor performances by their favourite players.
Matfield - a good attacking coach - that is the pits in the arguments of the DUNCE.   Matfield was so poor as a coach that the Bulls could not get rid of him fast enough and was relieved that Northampton Saints got them out of the mess they landed in by having the dolt as attack coach.       



 


    

Stay with us Comrade, stay with us. We are on the 2013 Bulls team and not the 2013 Bulls team. Why? Because you have dragged us there with you argument about Victor Matfield's abilities as an attack coach, you farking clown. The Bulls did not get rid of him he started playing again. His role changed from coach to player, p@epol. Now go back to watering your vygies.

 Maybe I did not rate Matfield as attack coach since -
*   he was normally and constantly moonlighting in the backline where he frustrated the backline players with his negative contribution; and
*    he was not a lock contributing anything to Tight 5 play - other than being a Kiewiet being easily lifted in line-outs - making his fame as a line out jumper.
Since his contribution - especially since 2009 was seriously defective and he was neither a backline player - nor a real lock forward - so what could he have contributed to attacking play?  
So ask the Bulls why they got rid of Ludeke and Matfield at the same time?    Both were top class fools incapable to coach a class 1 school team.  .   

 Ag my f@k tog ou BSBertie. You just cannot help yourself when it comes to ducking and diving, can you? the Bulls did not get rid of Matfrield. Not as a player and not as an attacking coach. He was one of the coaches in 2013 and in 2014 they signed him as a player until the end of 2015, after which eh signed with Northampron Saints until the end of the 2015/6 season. You did not accidently get that wrong. You were blatantly BS'ing............ again.