....that should be funny. Does JJ man up, or look at his shoes. I would say there is zero chance JJ will be starting by the time we play France. Time to go back to blindside semaphore vs windmill tackling. I will be delighted to see one go....but the pain of having Fury back at 13, with his carthorse acceleration!
W here did you read that Dave?
Well chances are that if JJ and Fourie play at some point on tour, you will be telling us how crap JJ is and how much better Fourie played? For if Fourie does not outplay JJ, which he wont, there will be no justification for retaining Fourie over JJ.
Bottom line is that while I rated Fourie, he does not possess the attacking tools JJ has.......Fourie is strong, always had that ability to slip tackles, that's his strength........he does not have the speed and feet of JJ........JJ will trump Fourie without doubt
Lets rather have a race between the two - when JJ is passing the 100 meters mark - Fourie will with difficulty reach the 60 meters mark. Too slow for my liking. And after two years in the "soft" Japan environment - is he still the strong ball carrier he used to be?
The same JJ who was rated our second worst back against NZ and the worst back against Oz???????? Check out this humorous assess ment of the ephemeral JJ
Zane Kirchner – 7/10
A near perfect performance by man now worthy of the name Side-Step Bob… Great positional play by Zane and his confidence is clearly on the up as his Garyowen tally takes a toll in favour of a more controversial direct attack. Best be practicing those catches as the Highveld skies will be raining with them soon.
Willie Le Roux – 7/10
Scored what seemed to be an impossible try, finishing off some visionary Du Preez insight. Got more space than he has become used to of late but somehow I still wish he did more with it. Aerial displays improved as well.
JJ Engelbrecht – 6/10
He didn’t do much wrong nor did he convince me he actually deserves the jersey. I did, however see him tackle, which in itself is a privilege.
Jean de Villiers – 7/10
First he was crucified by the stadium for taking the line-out option in the first 5 minutes of the game. The pitch forks came out yet again when he inexplicably went for the penalty whilst leading comfortably against 14 men. I cannot fault his play nor can I justifiably state that he was a bad captain. He’s just the type of guy that you can’t dislike. I’ll even give him a kidney… No questions asked, other than, you know, a signature and maybe some box tickets… and biltong, definitely biltong.
Bryan Habana – 6/10
As desperate for work as an Enron accountant. His energy in general play is unparalleled and it’s his passion for the game is ever growing. Didn’t get much opportunity though.
Morne Steyn – 7 / 10
I’m starting to wonder how much of Morne’s form over the years was as a direct result of Fourie Du Preez brilliance.
Fourie Du Preez – 9.5/10
I don’t care what he’s paid in Japan or what union will match or even double that, I just want Fourie back. His vision is… I don’t actually have words. We never really appreciated the way he lifts an entire side. I am convinced that the rise and fall of Francois Hougaard was as a direct result of Fourie. When he left, so did Fransie’s form. I only hope that Jano is watching carefully, because Ruan is still clearing a ruck formed two weeks ago and old Fransie is using his time off to improve his persona as a professional celebrity, car tuning, borderline mullet wearing, USN drinking tattoo connoisseur desperately trying to become South Africa’s Quade Cooper but with more gay swagger
Moz, we don't need ratings to tell us what JJ did or didn't do......we know he set the standard in that last test against NZ........he silenced you for never will you be in a position to question whether he is able to beat his man on the outside again.....something I doubt Fourie has ever done for instance.
Shezz that is exactly how it should have been
Mozart
How many times do I have to tell you - the ratings of journalists are at best their own personal preferences. It basically is always flawed and can easily be analysed and proved to be rubbish. A very poor foundation to base arguments on.
Have you not seen how Du Preez faded out in the Ellis Park Test? Two test in a row and he lost steam in the second one. Vissionary play is ideal - but it has to be accompanied by stamina and I have my doubts about the Japan Club players' stamina - Du Preez and Fourie included.
That being said - Hougaard has never been one of my favourites either- Saffex is a lone warrior on his behalf.
Shezza
Mozart will overlook your statement on Mone Steyn - as quoted by you - but please do not repeat it - he will get a seizure of some kind. Remember - Engelbrecht with his one missed tackle is the only player blamed for the AB loss. Morne did the sublime contribution - he missed four tackles - three resulting in AB tries, but that is nothing because Morne is such a good goalkicker - he only missed 33,3% of his kicks on a windless day but for the breath of the capacity crowd.
According to Mozart Engelbrecht is the only person to blame for the Ellis Park loss - so how dare we as ordinary mortals even think to suggest otherwise.
I expect some really serious flops from some players in Meyer's squad - so let wait and see what happens.
Sorry - duplication
Shezza, forget defensive lines and how it should be in a perfect world. Just know that Barrett ran straight into JJ. Straight into him. Not even a step or anything. He actually closed his eyes, hugged the ball and braced for the hit that just never came.
We all know how its supposed to go on defence but if it went how it was supposed to all the time, we would see rugby games end 6-6 with no tries ever. Fact remains, JJ was best placed to make the tackle, got himself in brilliant position and fluffed it. Not his first by the way! Had we had Fourie that day, we might have had us a trophy because he wouldn't have run away from his support and turned the ball over on the siren! He also would have snuffed out Barrett's attack. Fat Dave goes on about this defining game JJ had but he was again poor! He showed nothing apart from rounding Savea who has never been fast off the mark!
Boklogic
Let me explain something about the Barrett try first. De Villiers went out of line - and Barrett side-stepped him (first blunder). Next defender Morne Steyn - did not even attempt a proper tackle - just slap Barrett on his back - apparently wihing him well on his way to score a try (second blunder). Third defender - Engelbrecht made a hash of the tackle (third blunder). Blame for the try all three, but with Engelbrecht gtting at least 60%.
The Messam try. The Springboks got possession in their 22 - with the siren about to go off. Morne Steyn - being totally clueless - instead of making a relieving kick decided to pass the ball to Engellbrecht - who ended up being tackled and the ball stolen. Total bugger up - Morne Steyn - secondary bugger up De Villiers - who also could have kicked the ball out. Smallest share of the blame Engelbrecht - who ended up with the hot potato which he should never in the first place have received. and messed it up. The result of playing a robotic player at flyhalf - told by the coach to pass balls more often and kick less - problem is he could not distinguish when to pass and when to kick.
Have to defend Engelbrecht in the second case. The blame rest 90% on Morne Steyn in that case. Incidentallly Naas nearly had a fit about it too and he said exactly the same as to what I say.
I am not saying that Engelbrecht is the answer at 13, neither am I saying the carthorse Fourie is - so we will have to see how things develop in future.
What I am saying the real source of the Ellis Park bugger up - Morne Steyn - should be dealt with immediately. He was involved in both the above too incidents - but missed 3 other tackles as well - two of which led to AB tries. Mozart adores Steyn and dislike Engelbrecht intensely - so what he comes up should be taken with a bag of salt - a pinch is not enough.
Jean rushed out of line because he saw an opportunity to intercept or to make a spot tackle. Not sure which one it was but he has experience enough to know when to go for it as the Kiwi's learned in Hamilton in 2009!
Kiwi's worked a different move and Jean was never in a position to tackle. He had enough inside and outside him to allow him to go for the big play. After all, on such things are games like this won and lost. Had he intercepted and run 80 metres to score, he would have been a master. Now he is a villian?
Fact remains, I dont care who had the first bite at Barrett, the fact that JJ was in/got in to the best position to make the tackle is all that counts here. Forget Morne and forget Jean..We are talking about a simple 1 on 1, thin flyhalf vs a bigger centre with the flyhalf ready to concede and the bigger guy completely fucks it up! No other word for it. My issue is not that it cost us the match. It is that it is not the first time from JJ. This man goes high every time. It is a massive, massive negative in his game. He missed the Argies centre too. A good low tackle on both occasions and we would not be debating soft tries.
Saffex will repeat his kak about JJ missing 1 out of 14 against the AB's but its the technique that worries me. He will miss many more tackles with this going in high shit!
Boklogic
I agree with you about Engelbrecht's tackle technique problem and has been clear about that one in previous postings. Like I wrote about other players - there are a number of the Ellis Park team who are on thin ice - Engelbrecht a definite amongst them. I think Engelbrecht's problem is not only his defence but also his one-dimensional approach - relying on speed only with no real creativity in evidence. I still prefer him at wing in any event.
I always believe that Super 15 has a way of highlighting problems in players. Engelbrecht had too high a missed tackle ratio of 16% in Super 15 and that showed up some deficiency of a serious nature in expected performances on test level. When the pressure is on - the failure is likely to happen - the Bosch and Barrett tries being evidence of that.
I can see him being replaced by Fourie as one immediately available option, but the latter also have some problems and he may also run out of steam as well. I think there may be more clarity on the 13 position coming out of he Super 15 next year and although he has a natural defect in defence - Engelbrecht may yet improve in that component of the game. However, there is no chance of an improvement in creativity and option taking.
Bugger
I differ from you - defence are normally not affected through attacking play - other when there is a turnover in a breakdown/tackle situation a ball knock-on or through an intercept. The other way where defence are under stress would be when a ball is kicked downfield and the receiving side counter-attacked.
If we analyse the AB tries in the Ellis Park test - only one stemmed from an attacking move by the Springboks and that one should never have happened - bar Morne Steyn's rank stupidity in his own 22.
The other tries all originated from mauls and fixed play - and was the result of miss tackles by Alberts, Morne Steyn and Engelbrecht. None of these poor defence cases had anything to do with the effects of attacking play. That is my problem with defence in the Ellis Park test.
You are also deluded on the issue of Jean de Villiers. Meyer instructed in his own published words for Morne to stand flatter in the pocket - pass the ball more - and kick less. Problem is the robotic Morne followed those instructions to the T and lost sight of when he should kick and when he should pass. De Villiers cannot take the blame for that one - he could not and would not countermand Meyer's instructions as made public before the game.
Bugger
Lets get the situation further cleared up. In Super 15 Engelbrecht missed 16% of all attempted tackles - De Jongh 25%. The latter's defence this year has gone to the dogs and it would have been like handing a signed blank cheque to the AB's to play him. He really is too much of a gamble at this stage and he has the opportunity to improve his defence performance next year in Super 15.
Both the player's defence deficiencies are too high - Engelbrechts by 6 to 8% - De Jong's by 15 to 17%. Both are unsatisfactory - but I am afraid that De Jongh's is much worse than Engelbrecht's.
Clean Cut
You are 100% correct in your analysis of Meyer's plan - but Meyer did not plan for poor defence from structured play and mauls. That is where the defence buckled - not from playing an attacking style of rugby. The defence problems stemmed from a limited number of players and not from the whole team. Secondly Meyer did not plan for a poor line-out performance - effectively only having Etzebeth as a reliable line out player.
I admire the players for their attacking psych and play - which was epitomised by four backline tries - but certainly not for the defensive lapses of the three main contributors to the AB tries - Steyn, Alberts and Engelbrecht. All those tries could have been avoided if the players concerned did their job properly. It is indeed a problem for the team and is likely to be repeated in future crunch matches - whether the Springboks play their traditional rugby or whether they play the style they employed at Ellis Park. That really is what worries me more than anything else.
That really is what worries me more than anything else.
Bogtwat could not get the issue on the Barrett miss right if it slapped him in the face, his take on the passage of play clearly indicates he knows fuck all about rugby but more to the point - he is lying about the fact that he still plays the game.
No-one who plays or coaches the game could conclude that JJ was the main culprit in missing Barrett.......that goes first to Jean, followed by Morne, who was without doubt the main offender.
It was bad enough that Jean rushed out and completely missed Barrett and in the process threw the defensive line into disarray.
But as John Mitchell correctly pointed out, it is then the inside defenders job to tackle the man with ball in hand.....ie Barrett.....anyone who plays or coaches the game, knows this very fact. The outside defender, being JJ would have trusted his inside defender to tackle his man, while he himself was covering out wide......the basics of rugby.
Morne made a pathetic attempt to tackle Barrett, no doubt thrown by Jean's rush and the fact that he is a crap defender (4 misses in that very game).
JJ was committed out wide, had to change tact when he realised Morne had missed his man, had to turn and go high from the side/back......never ever being in the correct position to align and make an effective tackle.
Its complete and utter bullshit that the miss was JJ's fault, he and Kirchner were the least to blame with that miss and that is a FACT
Bogtwat, your take on Jean rushing out and the defensive line confirms you are a liar with regards to playing the game......for no-one who plays the game can come up with that shit. You are a liar
Bugger
I said repeatedly that Engelbrecht's tackle technique is flawed. There I do not differ from you. My problem is that last year in Scotland and England De Jongh did squat in both tests - he went AWOL in the Twickenham test - producing nothing at all. I could not understand why he was absent from any attacking and defensive play - but he was absent as is indicated by the statistics for the games in question.
De Jongh in years gone by built up a reputation of being a good defender with good technique - but he is physically a small guy - whose deficiencies have been found out. He missed a huge number of tackles this year in Super 15 - you would find that in virtually all the missed tackles he tried to use the right technique he used in the past - but it did not work - the ball carriers were too strong for him and ran over and past him like he was not even there. Size is a serious liability in his case and is going to keep handicapping him in future - both in defence and attack.
Bugger
Just one question - is De Villiers or Steyn the pivot of the backline? Steyn is - he cannot be told every time when he gets the ball now do this or do that by De Villiers. In any event you blame De Villiers for not changing the instructions given by Meyer to Morne. That really is crazy - and it is the first time I heard that a captain can change the game plan of the coach on the field of play.
The reasons for the missed tackles were clear and precise: not a general malady at all. I am dealing here with only the missed tackles that led to tries:-
* Morne throughout the serious had a problem with missed tackles - because like Engelbrecht, his technique is defective.
* Alberts is way too slow and has been too slow in two tries scored in the Samoan test and also too slow in the case of Read. This had everything to do with his physical ability - speed deficiency - that could not be corrected by his teammates and it has nothing to do with the defence you described as 7's defence.
* Engelbrecht's defence was problematic - not only in the Ellis Park test, but also in Super 15 and other tests - and the problem is a defective technique.
Just one more thing - you say the attacks were "stressed and by implication not successful - yet the Springboks scored 4 tries by backline players - how ineffective was that?????? They could even have scored more tries if Engelbrecht did not overrun a ball and knocked on and if Le Roux was not caught on the line twice.
I completely agree with Bugger of course. As I have told the OOM time and again....de Jongh tries to make a lot of deep tackles at pace, for example following kicks. You will never see JJ attempt those tackles, because he never tackles low. Compare the stats for easy phase tackling and de Jongh hardly ever misses.
The difference is plain to see....the de Jongh tackle is low, crisp and dispositive. The JJ tackle is a bunch or arm waving and jersey grabbing, with the best outcome that the tackled player is delayed long enough for another tackler to finish things off.
As for attacking play....de Jongh doesn't have JJs outright pace, but he makes more metres in contact and is much more elusive. so he is more effective about 90% of the time.
But this is probably a moot discussion....JJ can't survive Fury's presence.
Oh what complete crap.......de Jongh misses far more one on one tackles than JJ, because people effectively run through him at times. He makes technically good low tackles but often enough given his size people run through him.
No way in hell does wee de Jongh make more metres in contact, that is the joke of the year.......that is de Jongh's weakness, he cant impose himself physically on attack. Look no further than JJ running straight through Conrad Smith in the last test, that is how you beat the man physically.
de Jongh, like Adi Jacobs is a sad excuse for a 13......no one selects these guys other than Moz because Moz has no idea when it comes to 13's
de Jongh and JJ have the same elusiveness with ball in hand, both have good pace and step.....the big difference is that JJ has physicality to go with that and therein lies the difference.
JJ is the future when it comes to the Bok 13 spot, de Jongh should never have won a single cap. Fourie has no chance against JJ, he just wont be able to live with him anymore......not aged 32 as an outside centre who does not play it as clever as 32 year old Conrad Smith
Mozart
Thanks for a crap explanation about the reason for De Jongh's missed tackles - it must have taken a while for you to dream that one up. De Jongh's too many misses is plain and simple - he has ben found out by oppoising team and he is physically too small to defend properly - virtually all the tackles he missed is because of opposing players simply run over him, run past him and he just miss them or he lost his grip when he attempts a tackle.
Hard to except that your hero is in fact defective - hence the joke you provided in return. Really funny - that one.
You agree with bugger - so I assume you agree with him that De Villiers is a crap player and captain as well?
Dave apparently the 30 year old Fury has been whistling a song which nobody could place, until some old chap figured it out:
So long, it's been good to know yuh;
So long, it's been
good to know yuh;
So long, it's been good to know yuh.
It's a long time since I've been home
And you've got to be driftin' along.
