Jan-Hendrik Wessels & Marnus van der Merwe

Boan Venter has been pretty quiet in his limited time on the pitch. His scrumming has seemed ok, but I barely saw him on the pitch. Given, he has not had much opportunity, but in that time his contribution has not been very noticeable.

I have been impressed with what I have seen of Jan-Hendrik Wessels. So far, he is looking like he may be able to take up the mantle as a regular match-day player.. He has mostly been played as a reserve hooker, but he is covering loose-head prop over the weekend. I have not seen enough of him to assess his lineout throws, like across a whole test match.

Marnus van der Merwe also appears to have potential. I wonder who is the better lineout thrower between the two of them. It is clear Rassie wants backup in this position as Bongi is finished, and Marx appears to have lost his mojo, along with his throwing arm.

We don't want to overplay Ox Nyxe before the next World Cup. Also, Ox has been most destructive off the bench, so having a loose-head prop that is good enough to start - like Kitshoff would also be useful.

The end of the tour (Northern Hemisphere tour) should leave the oldest players at home to give the new players a chance to start test matches. Maybe leave Ox at home along with Eztebeth, Marx, Kolisi, Bongi, Kolbe, Mosterd, Kriel, Delande, Pollard, Reinach, Willie Leroux, etc, etc. (Some must just be retired and put out to pasture).

Wessels is very good

I prefer Andre Hugo Venter and Grobelaar to Marnus vd Merwe

Gerhard Steenkamp is a good back up loosehead to Ox but has been out injured all season

We present a new programme for placing constraints on radial inhomogeneity in a dark-energy dominated universe. We introduce a new measure to quantify violations of the Copernican principle. Any violation of this principle would interfere with our interpretation of any dark-energy evolution. In particular, we find that current observations place reasonably tight constraints on possible late-time violations of the Copernican principle: the allowed area in the parameter space of amplitude and scale of a spherical inhomogeneity around the observer has to be reduced by a factor of three so as to confirm the Copernican principle. Then, by marginalizing over possible radial inhomogeneity we provide the first constraints on the cosmological constant which are free of the homogeneity prior prevalent in cosmology.

The spherical inhomogeneity of Weasels’ scrumming as demonstrated by the dark energy evolution of bog ordinary Clarkson during the URC final, proves that Dr Lucky hasn’t understood the Copernican principal defining his lack of primacy in the Universe.

YAWN

All we need is Weasel and the Tank scrumming together, Every Weasel scrum in the URC final was in reverse…every Tank scrum on Saturday wheeled clockwise because Tank could do nothing while Ox destroyed Newell . Now the great new Dr Lucky plan ensures we have at least one of these Duds on the field throughout the match….brilliant,

So clearly your mate Jake is an idiot for selecting him at 1 for the Bulls for most of the season?

Because he can’t scrum - genius by Jake

Fuck me your take on Thomas over the weekend is a lie - how insulting

The Bok scrum dominated thanks to Thomas and Ox

You seriously know fuck all about rugby

Jake is a brilliant coach, but he got that one wrong….er….he has a blind spot for Weasel. Schplottttt!

You are fucking clueless - the Bulls scrum dominated all season and your take on the final is a blatant lie but probably more down to your utter ignorance

What I love about Thomas is that he has proved all you clueless clowns wrong

He has pushed Wilco to the bench - that’s not bad going

But according to you he can’t scrum - are you really this thick?

I don’t have a ‘take’, I simply watched what happened when Wilco came on for the Tank….we went straight through them rather than wheeling round the neutral Tank.

And thanks for accepting the truth:

It’s time to move on - so let’s be bold and select this side for the next test

15 Fassi 14 Kolbe 13 Moodie 12 Willemse 11 Hooker 10 Sacha 9 vd Bergh 1 Ox 2 Marx 3 Wilco 4 Eben (c) 5 RG 6 Kwagga 7 PSDT 8 Wiese

Hahaha, hoist by your own petard.

As for the URC final, these raters rarely tell the truth directly…so I look at Clarkson’s ratings and I find:

3. Thomas Clarkson – 8

Won a tough penalty in his first scrum against Bulls loose-head Jan-Hendrik Wessels, which will have boosted his confidence no end. He refused to buckle after that and what proceeded was maybe arguably his best game ever in a blue jersey, not least picking up and driving back Marcell Coetzee five metres.

vs the rating for Weasel.

1. Jan-Hendrik Wessels – 5

Carried with his usual vigour and wasn’t bullied physically, but struggled to assert dominance at the set-piece, with Tom Clarkson more than matching him in the scrum

Fuck you really are stupid this is why I’m drawn to throwing abuse your way as so many of you are literally rugby stupid

Get this into your little rugby brain - I prefer Wilco to Thomas but I’m a big fan of Thomas who has proved you clowns wrong

While I would not select Thomas ahead of Wilco, the coaching team is doing just that - Human the scrum coach has made that call. I’m guessing he might know a little more about the scrum than you or I.

My point is that it takes something pretty special to displace Wilco and you are telling us Thomas can’t scrum

That is just plain fucking stupid

Yes the first scrum where you were too thick to know that one prop could pre engage before his partner - which sums you up really

Thomas is a totally neutral scrummager which is why our scrum wheeled all the time…pre engage is pure nonsense i

What a load of ignorant shit as always

Just assertions, no facts, no examples, no stats. Thomas is a less accomplished version of Kitshoff, a scrumming neutral. If Kitshoff was on at the death of the Pom game we wouldn’t have got the scrum penalty that saved our bacon.

Why have a neutral scrummager like the Tank when you can have a dominant scrummager like Wilco.

scrum minute 13.4….Ox goes forward Thomas rotates back and stands up,

scrum minute 15.40…..both front rows go down

scrum minute 20.49….Tank wins a penalty when de Groot collapses

Scrum 29..20 ….nothing to report

scrum 33.40 ….scrum literally turns 180 degrees as Ox powers through his man and Tank does nothing. Bok penalty

scrum 37.00….Tank gives NZ a penalty for early engagement

scrum 48.30….once again Tank goes backwards

scrum 59.00…..Ox wins penalty NZ tighthead down

scrum 61.20…. Wilco Louw on, he goes straight through Williams, try for Boks

‘scrum 72.30 …Boks get another penalty as NZ front row goes down….Reinach scores under penalty advantage.

That’s two tries to the Boks from scrums after Tank is replaced by a real tighthead. I can say with no reservations, the Tank never made one foot of forward progress in 8 scrums.

Moz, you wouldn't ask a penguin to write an email.

Why then do you expect stats, examples, or logic from Dawie?

Moz yet again You’re spot on about Wessels and Tank.

Wessels was never developed as a pure loosehead. He came through as a hooker, and while the Bulls have used him at prop, his scrummaging is nowhere near the level of the URC’s top specialists.

That URC final against Clarkson showed it clearly. Wessels was under pressure, because he doesn’t have the natural base, body shape or experience of a career prop.

Forcing him into that role at Test level is setting him up to fail…..

On Thomas du Toit, the All Blacks game highlighted the exact problem.

The scrum was wheeling around him, and he couldn’t apply dominance on De Groot the way Ox destroyed Newell.

The moment Wilco came on, the entire picture changed.

Suddenly the Bok scrum went forward, we earned pressure, and that led directly to Marx,s try.

That’s not coincidence. Wilco is a Far stronger, lower Centre of gravity and more potent scrummager than Thomas ever will be!!

So the question is fair: why does Rassie persist with experiments like Wessels at prop or Du Toit over Wilco at tighthead? At the top level, scrum dominance wins tests and right now, Ox, Marx and Wilco is our most destructive combination.

If Rassie is serious about the Boks traditional strength, the set piece, then picking players out of position or preferring a weaker scrummager over a dominant one makes no sense.

It’s not “genius”, it’s gambling with our greatest weapon!!

I would guess that Du Toit started over Wilco because NZs best loosehead Tamati Williams was on the bench as he's coming back from injury.

Thomas is a good player and deserves this run of games. I'd also want Quadzilla coming off the bench to win us scrum pens if the game was tight in the last 20 and if it wasn't for those disastrous first 10 minutes it may well have come down to a scrum = pen in front of the uprights to win it.

Horses for courses fellas. If we lift another WC in Aussie, nobodies gonna care about the 51 or 50 something test record.

If you start your Best possible Front Row, you have your best possible Basis to score points from.

Once you are chasing a deficit, it makes it more difficult to benefit from that solid Basis.

Scrum Dominance wins Test Matches. That Dominance is achieved by Ox, Marx and Wilco.

NZ weren't starting with their best front row, so I'd want my best tighthead to counter their best loosehead. Lomax and Williams are their best props and Samisoni is no slouch either.

I would have started Wilco and hoped there were lots of scrums in the first half at least.

Thomas Du Toit is better in the loose and breakdown, so there are advantages to starting him as well.

Except Xavi according to that logic we should have kept Ox Niche for the bomb squad. Wilco was on for 18 minutes and participated in 2 scrums close to the NZ line. That was lucky. He could have participated in 2 scrums in the midfield with no scoreboard benefit even if we got a penalty. Or no scrums at all if we wait too long.

Granted Moz,

I just think Du Toit would've struggled more against Williams but was good enough to counter De Groot.

Probably true Xavi….who would be the third Bok tighthead option. Is Malherbe retired or injured?

de Groot is better than Williams, Lomax is better than Newell