Juan De Jongh at Center

Sunce some board members think De Jongh is a good player - I checked hys progile on SA rugby and find the following useful info there:-

 Please note that TWO OF THE TRIES SCORED WAS AGAINST THE MIGHTY NAMIBIA.

Does the above tell anybody anything about his tryscoring abilities????????

Just some more info - In all the 4 years playing on senior level for the Stormers and WP - he scored 22 tries

In the past 15 months on that level - Jordaan scored 15 tries for the Sharks.   Put that as a statistical comparison over a four year period period and the result would be as follows:-

De Jongh     =      22 Tries

Jordaan        =     15 x 48 divided by 15 =    48 tries

Any comments on the issue will obviously be appreciated

His other try was against Wales when he went through a gap big enough for USS Enterprise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEw04Fdztic

Actually he stepped a player into a gap big enough for the Enterprise. And his try against the Bools is probably the best centre try I have seen.

Mike I think you definitely proved 48 divided by 15 and then multiplied by 15....is 48. Could this be a "quark" sighting?

Mozart

3 Tries in twelve test matches - 2 of which against Nambia is not really anything substantial and does not really show that he is up to anything as an attacking center - is it?   The other issue is that he scored 22 tries over four seasons - that is an average of 5,5 tries per year - with the actual number this year only being 3.  Lets try another method to illustratethe issue -  lets use another method as to the number of tries scored on average per year:-

De Jongh      -     5.5

Jordaan        -     12     

The issue here is that the two players played basically against similar opposition ie- on Super 15 level and CC level.    In fact one of the best Jordaan tries was scored against the Stormers in the Super 15 game at Newlands.   He left De Jongh standing and outpaced Aplon in the process  over a distance of 60 meters.   One of he best individual tries this year in fact.

I think the above proves that Jordaan is twice as effective as De Jongh when it comes to attacking rugby.   Stats don't show something else.  Aside from the number of tries he himself scored - how many times did Jordaan make effective line breaks and off-loaded for teammates and especially Pietersen and Ludick to score tries?  That is something you can never accuse De Jongh of - it just never happens.

Mozart - you always talk about statistics - why do you accept it only when it fits your ideas.     

The try stats are fine insofar as they go Mike. But the only problem with your argument is,  head to head in an important game, the CC final, de Jongh outplayed Jordaan. I like both players, and certainly would have played Jordaan ahead of Taute at 13. But I don't need to make my Jordaan case by saying de Jongh is horrible, he is in fact a very elusive runner in space and a superb low tackler.

Mozart

Thanks for the clip.   It showed all the tries scored by De Jongh in test matches, the  two tries scored on Super Series level over the past two years and he solitary try in CC this year.    It also showed him in gym.   According to official stats as listed above - his weight is 84 kgs - acording to he latest Wikipedia data it is 87 kgs.  So he did manage to up his weight by 3 kgs during the past two years.   That still means he is way to light to be an effective attacking center.  

Now lets get back to reality.   I said that from an attacking perspective  De Jongh is inadequate as an attacking player and that is a fact you cannot dispute.    Elusive in space is one thing - makig line breaks and putting other players in space is also a requirement for centers.   That is done frequently by Jordaan - never this year by De Jongh.   Individual tries - Jordaan at least  three this year - De Jongh none at all. 

By the way Mozart - you constantly fall back to the CC final try.   In the try highlights package they showed at the Awards ceremoney they did show that try - but also the two tries scored by Jordaan against the Reds and the Bulls.   Both tries are actually important here for different reasosns.   Jordaan started the series of plays (in a way he created the try) that directly led to the first try - after the ball went to Pietersen and Daniel - he received the ball back and ran past two defenders of the Reds in the process.   The second try against the Stormers in fact followed a run of 65 meters by Jordaan - the first defender was De Jongh - who was left standing and the second Aplon - who was too slow to haul him in.

I have never disputed the issue of defence insofar as De Jongh is concerned - he is a good defender in open play - but that is I am sure not the only requirement for selection as a Springbok - or is it? 

Based on peformances this year - there is no way other than the fact that De Jongh has been a Springbok in the past, that could have caused him to be selected as member of the squad.   Definitely not on merit - since his performances this year was really not acceptable at all - unless you find three tries in 20 matches  acceptable.

I gave the different stats for Jordaan - not to suggest that he should rather have been selected ahead of De Jongh - I gave it as an example of really how inadequite De Jongh is as an attacking center compared to another rookie center just starting his career.    

I still maintiain that De Jongh is one of the reasons why the Stormers scored comparatively  few tries in the Super Series this year -  he was a real factor in their  "dead" backline performance - and there will be no difference in that insofar as the forthcoming tests are concerned.  That is what worries me - you cannot constantly play 10 man rugby and hope to win.  

Moz likes his stats to prove points - de Jongh's stats show what an ordinary player he is and people want him as our Bok 13, what a joke.

If that is the best centre try Moz has seen, he has obviously watched very little rugby. It was a good hand-off and thats about where it ends.

de Jongh is no test centre, never will be - he is far too small

Dave as usual you leap to the wrong conclusion....I was referring to de Jongh's try against the Bools. The link is clearly posted above. I repeat, I have never seen a finer centre try.

Mozart

You keep on responding to two tries only - the one against the Bulls and the one against the Sharks - scored over a 2 year period.   Those are good tries - but I think you over-esimate it a bit by saying the one against the Bulls was the best try you have ever seen by a center.   Even if it was - does that mean that on average he can be rated high - despite the fact that he scores such a minimal number of tries over a period of one year?.

Surely - a player is to be rated on average performances - not two good tries scored - without any idea about the rest of the time that he produces NOTHING of substance.

Mozart - if we have had a real backline coach - that knows what is expected from backline players - De Jongh would never have even been considered for selection as a test center.   He has defencive abilities - but the rest of the functions of a center is just not in evidence at all.   Two good tries over a period of two years will  not cancel the deficiencies in respect of functions as mentioned at all - because of the fact that it is such rare occurences.     

You always says Spies is absent from the game 95% of the time - the evidence provided De Jongh is competing with him in the absentee stakes.

Moz you mean the one against the Tahs where he steps a lock and a flanker - yeah good one, try again

I'm suggesting that all Bok selections should be made by Shotgun Slappex, at least we're guaranteed a

Dave are the Bools, aka the Bulls, the Tahs? Look at the video, you will see a superb try by de Jongh against the Bools, aka the Bulls. Clear enough?

Mike perhaps two tries define de Jongh. But two tries also defined Fury, you will see his highlight video on the same page as de Jongh. Fury scored against the Lions in the corner by running over a concussed O Gara....a player who can't tackle even when his brain isn't scrambled.

And then the try against the Poms where Fransie kicked ahead from his goal line. Fury bumped into the Pom wing, who fell down....leaving Fury with a clear run to the try line. Slow as he was Armitage caught him and tackled him , but didn't hold on....allowing Fury to flop over the line. A try which was more notable for it's distance covered than any dynamic running. The rest of Fury's test tries were uncontested runs and flop overs.

So apart from greats like Jean and Habana, whose highlight videos are festooned with brilliant tries......most players have a few career highlights. De Jongh at 24 already has a few.

Mozart

I really am amazed by your argument that because De Jongh scored two top tries in four years - he qualifies for Springbok selection.   Riaan Viljoen - playing for the Cheetahs in Super 15 scored one of the best individual  tries I have ever seen - does that qualify him foSpringbok selection?   Same with Taute - yet you always said he is not good enough to be in the Springbok team.  Another try which the New Zealnd commentators rated as one of the best tries this year was scored by Joe Pietersen in the Highlanders game - does that make him a Springbok?

You refer to Habana and De Villiers scoring many brilliant tries - Habana (47 test tries) De Villiers (20 test tries).  Not like De Jongh who in three years scored 3 international tries - two against Namibia of all teams.   If he could not score those tries against Namibia - he should not be in the Vodacom trophy team.

In any event there were two really brilliant tries scored this year in Super 15 and the one of De Jongh cannot be compared to those.   That was the try scored by Pietersen in the Highlanders game and the one scored by Jordaan in the Reds game.   Pietersen's try stemmed from a move started by him ten meters inside the Stormers 22 - he ran through most of the Highlander defenders - kicked the ball over the heads of the last two defenders - gathered the ball and scored.   He beat at least 7 defenders in the process.   The move that let to the try scored by Jordaan was a classic.   The ball reached him aftter a backline move.  He ran around three defenders - beat them with speed and made an inside pass to JP - Pietersen who  got tackled and off-loaded the ball to Daniel - who passed the ball again to Jordaan.  The latter got the ball on the halfway line - beat two further defenders and scored under the goalposts.   

Both were long distance tries that was caused by players with exceptional ball skills - not getting a ball just outside the opponents 22 - having to evade one tackle and scored.   Frankly Mozart - the latter type of try is a dimne a dozen and is scored by many players not even near the Springbok team.

The real issue is that De Jongh has an exceptionally poor try scoring record - there is no way that one or two tries made a difference to the career of a player.   De Jongh is 24 - and already has a few - the problem is way to few.

LET ME PUT IT BLUNTLY - AND IS PROVED BY STATISTICS (WHICH YOU CHOOSE TO IGNORE) - DE JONGH IS A MEDIOCRE PLAYER.  If you arre prepared to accept mediocrity you are welcone to it.   I am not prepared to accept it and will use facts to criticize such a selection based on overall performances . 

The amount of tries for De Jongh doesn't give full info to the situation as he was behind Jean De Villiers and Jacques Fourie as a centre and was on the bench for how many of those 4 years? Same for his Bok appearances where most of his appearances were off the bench ?

De Jongh isn't as bad as he is made out to be by some.

WPXV

Welcome to the site

Sorry - I disagree with you about the issue of De Jongh.   He played in 18 games this year in Super 15 and CC and the sum total of tries scored by him werre 3.   That is just not good enough and he in no small measure contributed to the comparative lack of bonus point tries scored by the Stormers.

He is a good center - but really not up to standard insofar as international rugby is concerned.  

 With Lambie at flyhalf I think our centres are going to get a chance to prove their form. I for one believe that Dejong is better than many give him credit for. Time will tell. I just hope more than anything it is not MORNE STEYN or even Jantijies to a degree starting, that will be a bigger problem to backline play than the centers

Sharkie

I don't understand your second sentence - surely you mean Steyn and Jantjies and NOT Lambie and Jantjies? 

Oh boy Moz you will find that there is no clip of the Bulls, it would help to read. Its the Tahs - i'll refrain from milking this one!!

You're right Dave it's the Tahs in the S15 Semi final......even more impressive, another great try in a key game. He beats a player in open field who looks like a forward. Then he steps Beale completely, steps the number 11 wing and when hit low by Barnes 6 metres out, rides his tackle to score . As fine a centre try as I have seen....and in a crucial match.

Mozart

You must have been totally overawed by that try - but I have seen better.    The first two defenders he beat was not opposing centers - both were forwards,   I have often seen forwards been outrun by backline players - so that is not really so impressive.  What made it a very good try was the sidestep in open play to avoid Beale.   I give cedit to him for scoring it - but to say it is the best center try you have seen must really be pushing it.

Om the whole the the atats indicate that he is really not an attacking  center.  Two tries of quality in two years and a very poor record for the rest of the year - is just not acceptable.   Other negatives like knocking on balls - losing balls in tackle situations and giving away concertable penalties happens far too often in his case.   He has

a good defensive record - but on attack he is not a player that can effect linebreaks.   He is as Dave said - probably far too light in weight to be really an effective attacker.

Nope. He beat a forward, who looks like a lock or 8th man......then Beale.....then the 11 wing and finally he rode Barnes tackle for 6 metres to score. Whether you call other tries better is subjective....but it's beyond reasonable argument that it was a superb try.

Juan de Jongh got the MOM......as he did from Planet Rugby in the CC final. These tournament playoffs start to approach test matches for intensity. So to see de Jongh getting MOM awards in these matches rather squelches your and Dave's banging on about weight. Handsome is as handsome does.

Actually he first beats a lock, then a back and then a loosie - wow.

Now that would have been impressive had he beaten three backs in the fashion. Hell Moz, my guess is you could have stepped that lock!!

Its called perspective, nothing impressive about beating a 2m tall 120 kg lock with a step. Had that been a centre marking him, he would have been stopped in his tracks as he usually is

Mozart

Did De Jongh got the MOM in the Waratahs game?   Good luck to him if that was the case.   He definitely did not ge it in any other game he played in.

Why do you ignore the stats in this case - you always are a great believer in stats - and in fact focus on 2 tries De Jongh scored dince 2010?  

Let me state it clearly - I also thought  that  De Jongh was a top center until I studied his performances over the past 18 months.   I found that his attacking ability is minuscule and he normally is handled by the opposition with ease.   That is why he would always be harmless on attack.

So loosies now wear number 11 Dave?  Mike I'm with you on the stats, he should have scored more tries. But he is nowhere near Wynand Olivier who has one Bok try in 30 plus caps.  The lad isn't a dominating player....but is a quality centre. And he is better at this stage than Jordaan, Taute or any other youngster. I doubt he is the long term answer, but in the absence of any other player putting up his hand, de Jongh will serve us very well.

None of these small chaps from the Cape, Aplon, Paulse, de Jongh or Keyser ever let the Boks down. They are in a sense a unique resource available to South African rugby, we ignore them at our cost.

the small guys are beter than the big guys. the are creatif on the filed and make hols and make tries they dont have to score the tries they are the providers of the try. de jongs and aplos side step is awesome and thatg makes oppercionitys for the wings to go score and that is wat we need

If De Jong is a great centre then spies is a great 8th man. Both are very good open field runners. Both lack the knowledge of how to actually play their positions.

Some see Dejong scoring a good try and now he is amazing. Spies outpaced wings to score tries, is he now a great 8thman?

Dont get me wrong, I will have him at 13 for the boks if that means Taute plays 15 and we dont see Kirchner on the field. Dejong isnt bad, just nothing great.Lets give him a shot on this tour. We need depth dont we? Dejong is definitely not a liability like Wynand Olivier and Adi Jacobs.

As for some comments about Fourie...please he has been one of the best 13 in the world game for some time. Good strike runner, great defencive 13 and reads the game very well. All of the players he has played against rate him highly.He ,like any other player has had some bad games, but will go down in the books as a great.

yes fourie is great and it will be great for the boks if he can play when he comes back from japan. i will take fourie befor any ather center in the word not evan o'driscoll is beter then fourie at hies best.

You guys have obviously drunk the lemonade .....Fury was  more of a roving back than a centre. He scored lots of tries, but more against poor nations. His strike record in the TN was well below Marius Joubert. I can't recall once he beat a top test centre in  regular back play. He made a fettish about organizing the defence but was missing when other teams were running rampant. He almost lost the Fiji test by gifting two tries in a row. He was never quick enough off the mark to back up Jean's breaks.

In the last RWC he missed Faletau for a try, to almost lose the Welsh pool game. The Fury besotted press never made one comment about that missed tackle. Against Wales and Oz , our only meaningful opposition.....he combined for 24 metres in 12 runs. Jean made  77 metres in 12 runs against Oz! Fury managed 6 tackles in both games. 

Except for Luke Watson, I have never seen a player so overrated by the Bok rugby press. He's gone now, but the memory of his wind milling to other defenders and hiding on the blind side still rankles.

a very interesting take on fourie Moz. There are some valid Points there, but I don't really agree with you regarding Fourie's pace.

No we just watched him play. Look as I can tell you dont rate him, thats your oppinion, nothing is going to change it. 

Against Wales Jean was the worst back, he was horrible on defence. Fourie was actually solid. He is fast enough to score from Jeans breaks as he did score from them in the past.

Jean and Fourie was a very good partnership. If we have to go back and look at Joubert.... really expected more from him, he was amazing for 3 seasons and horrible for the rest of his career.I really dont know how this happens.

Seeing as individual tries make you great, did you see Fourie's try against the crusaders a few years ago?

Ek I am clearly out of the mainstream on Fury. I actually thought a Campese like roving wing position suited him best. His top speed was never great, witness how Delasau totally gassed him in the Fiji RWCQF for a try. But his real problem was pace off the mark and for the first vital 15 metres. That's what made him so vulnerable defensively against quick backs....I once saw Kankowski run right round him!

As for try scoring....here are a few stats. Marius Joubert scored 6 TN tries in 10 games.....Fury 9 TN tries in 25 tests.

Fury scored fully half of his 32 tries against USA, Namibia, Samoa, Georgia, Scotland, Argentina and Fiji.......hardly fearsome opposition. He loaded up against USA, Uruguay and Namibia!

Prior to and including RWC 2007 was his heavy try scoring period. After the 2007 RWC he scored 10 tries in 31 tests....a good but much lower strike rate. Four of those ten tries came against fish and chips nations.

Fury, like Campese , had a nose for the tryline. But it came at the expense of regular back play. He was not a secure one on one defender....Toeiava, for one, had his number. He could put in a big hit though. He never created anything for the players around him, witness the shocking pass he threw behind Habana costing us a try against Oz at the RWC. He rarely if ever cut the line, unless he had forwards against him.....but he was very aggressive if he had a mismatch.

And he was and remains all about Jacque. I have no doubt he will try and come back for the next RWC year if his body is still hanging together. But by then he will be 32 , and hopefully we will have solved our 13 problem.

What interested me about hims was not neceserily his playing skills. He has this confidence bordering on arrogance. This is something that rubs off on his mates around him and negetively influences the opposition. To me that pshycological thing is what makes him a good player. People however will always differ on oppinions Sometimes a player is not necceserily defined by his playing ability but about how h influences those around him. John Smith is a perfect example as well. Most people never even pick up on that or realise what a psychological impact this has on a team and the oposition.

Yes 107 I did see that and have just watched it again . He beat two forwards, and then gassed the Saders inside centre, who dove too early. Following that he had clear space,  the offside wing had a shot, which he blew by going high. Probably his best try.....but given it started by beating two tight forwards.....it doesn't make my top 10 list.

Mozart

I think that Paulse was a great player with ball sense - that is why he was so successful.   The other players mentioned by you lack that quality and have really nothing to offer instead.   Paulse was small - but slippery.  The others mentioned are small - but lack that capacity.   That is why Paulse was able to score tries - the other players less so.

If you are small there is one major issue - you have to build up your body - so as to get stronger and speedier.   I want  to ask you one question?   Have you ever seen any of them trying to keep a caught player from going to ground and thus affect a turnover - the answer is never, they just don't have the muscle power.    Incidentally I have seen Jordaan doing that on a number of occasions - but he is 9 kilos heavier than De Jongh and 18 kilos heavier than Aplon.   Let me explain in the game against the Cheetahs he helped holding up the attacking Cheetahs player, robbed him of the ball ten meters from the tryline and- got it out to Pietersen - the result a try undr the post by McCleod.  In a similar case in the hame against the Bulls - he did the same thing and scored the subsequent try himself - none of the smaller players bar Paulse could ever do anything like that.

Now back to the issue about small players.   Aside from muscle power they must have speed and great ball sense to be successful - in other words they have to read games better than bigger guys.  If you lack the latter quality - there is no way that a smaller player can be successful.   Problem is that unless they vary their game considerably - and not repeat the same things over and over - the opposition takes counter-measures that destroy their value to thteam completely.   Of the four players mentioned Paulse had massive ball sense, Aplon came second  in that capacity - De Jongh and Keyser nowhere near it.

The latter is th main reason why De Jongh is not on par with Paulse in the try-scoring stakes - he has very little varition in his game.   Let me explain by a simple example.   The try scored by De Jongh stemmed from a practiced move.   If successful and is tried more frequently -  it would be countered and the result could be a try by the opposition.   That is why similar plays by Jantjies virtually never work out - the opposition knows it will happen a number of times in a game and stop any real progress under such circumstances.

De Jongh in fact has very little variation in his game and is easily countered all the time.  That accouts for the very small number of tries scored by him.   He for instance never breaks the line - or draw in defenders so as to put other players into space.   Even though he does not score tries - he lso does not create space for other players to score tries.

On the whole I would say - we have to accept that Meyer will have no option - but to play De Jongh at 13  on Saturday.    However, I really think he is on the field to make up numbers from a defensive perspective and I do not expect from him anything as to attacking play.   I only hope he does not foul up to badly in the ball ahnd-over and penalty stakes.

I read you comments on Fourie as well.   I myself think is a player that could feed of other players good plays - but on his own he is not a gamebreaker.   Matter of fact I think De Jongh is a better defender than Fourie - but the latter is slightly better in attacking play  because of a variery of reasons..   Out of 100 De Jongh would get 45 points - Fourie 55.   None of the two are really a house on fire in that Department.  

Joubert was a good player, but Fourie has been far better and certainly one of our best centres ever. 32 tries in 69 tests speaks volumes. Joubert scored 9 tries in 30 tests - you do the maths.

Fourie scored 6 v Oz, 4 v NZ, 3 v Scotland, 2 v Wales, Samoa, Fiji and 1 v Ireland, Argies, France, England, Italy and the British Lions. Thats 25 of his 32 against better sides. So Moz your theory about poor opposition is crap.

Joubert scored 4 v NZ (3 in 1 test), 2 v Oz and 1 v Wales and Argies

If you had to choose between the two Fourie walks it and I bet every international coach would tell you the same

i agree with saf. joubert is nowhere. every one likes him because of the hat trick he got agains the all blacks but that was that he did not play good in france and now his back and cannt play jordaan out so he is nowhere

Actually no, smart rugby fans like him because of his two brilliant tries against Oz.....one in the corner flying over backwards and his 70 metres strike where he gassed Chris Latham after making his initial break. As for the hat-trick. Two of those tries were overlaps , but the one try won the TN.....when he broke clean through Tana Umaga to score. No easy task.

Marius was also a much better open field tackler.

The only way we can fairly judge Joubert and Fury is against similar opposition. Marius never had two RWCs against mostly poor teams to build his record.

Marius scored 6 tries in 10 TN tests for a strike rate of 60%....Fury got 9 in 25 tests for a strike rate of 36%. Hell give Marius only his try where he broke through Umaga, and disallow the other two.....and his strike rate is still 40%.

Tries against the USA, Namibia, Georgia, Fiji, Samoa, Scotland and Uruguay, for heaven sake, don't belong in the same record.

Fourie scored two tries in 7 tests in 2011, one against Fiji, one against Namibia.

No smart rugby fans would select the guy that scored 32 tries, 25 of which were against good opposition.

Joubert was good, but Fourie far better and 95% of fans, coaches and the likes would agree to that

@ 107. You say Fury was good defensively....Jean poor against Wales. Well Jean played for about 25 minutes, some with an injury, made one tackle, missed none. Fury missed Falitau for the only Wales score and made very few tackles. Excuse me if I continue to believe Fury was the bigger problem. I mean if you miss a player for a try, it does matter doesn't it?