Lambie/Morne the selection summary

We have seen how Morne makes more tackles per match than Lambie at the same success ratio. We have also seen when he runs, he outgains Lambie by 1.5 metres a carry and beats more defenders. So should we choose Morne? I think so on the basis of his ability to keep the cash register ticking along....he is a points machine.

Do I believe Morne is as good tackler as Lambie....frankly I don't, in spite of what the stats say. Lambie is a superb low tackler. But Steyn has an uncanny ability to read the play and be there to make the tackle. His higher tackle count per match may have something to do with that. I'd call that aspect a draw.

Lambie is a pretty ordinary runner, as is Morne. Much is made of Lambie's run in the semi where he slipped past Labuschagne. That's one incident....more down to poor defence. Over the S15 season he didn't do much, and his productivity dropped as teams sussed him out. His top four running games all came in the first 8 games of the season. I dont think there is much difference in the running stakes.

What is true is that Morne kicks a whole lot more ....37% of the time, to Lambie's 25% of the time. But this is team strategy. The numbers in green and gold will likely be much closer.

So the choice is between Morne, who is viewed as boring and Lambie who is endowed with mythical qualities, not substantiated by the numbers. In spite of that I believe Lambie  is a slightly better tackler and probably a better runner. But I think Morne is in the right position to tackle more often  and picks his running opportunities better.....a wash.

So it all comes back to judgement, handling, nerve and kicking skill. And in all those traditional flyhalf departments, Morne still holds the edge. He remains our best choice until Lambie makes a clearer case.

Mozart

I accept the summary as provided by you - but that summary diod not really reflect the way in which you previously described Lambie as having had a very poor record in Super 15 - against a good record by Steyn. 

There is some assumptions made though that could be misleading.   One example is the following:-

"But Steyn has an uncanny ability to read the play and be there to make the tackle."

Problem is that that is  an assumption which is not supported by facts.   Against all teams the situation is that they attack through the channel - because Morne is not really regarded a good defender and his higher tackle stats is stemming from attacks through the channel than his "uncanny ability to read the play".   He stood up rather well in that department of the game  though and deserve credit for that.  He has no uncanny ability to read any games. 

All in all the  only real superiority has over Lambie is his overall  goal kicking success rate - but that  is being questioned because of  his poor goal kicking in the key semi-final, where his  success rate was a low 50% -  a factor which contributed in a major way to  the loss of the game by the  Bulls.      

Wow, imagine having the choice of Morne, Lambie and Goosen as your pivot and actually selecting Morne

You would have to be a conservative coach who discourages attacking play and who is resigned to the fact that you will never seriously challenge the AB's and that a win record of around 65% will do.

Selecting a talentless 10 goes against every rugby grain I have in my body and Morne's test record confirms just how average he is

That's a very interesting take Bugger....entertaining in fact. I would put it slightly differently....fans like Dave and Mike remind me of kids who still believe in the tooth fairy. Out there playing in some U20 game is this mythical talent who only they have discovered and who is about to change Bok rugby.

They see rugby coaching as just a matter of selection. Tactics and team building bore them. Dave would rather have the quaalude hopping around and kicking diagonal kicks to nobody....than have a guy like Jean who delivers every moment of the game.

As for the type of player who SA fans love.....it's Spies not Burger....Fury not JdV....Goosen not Morne....Coenie not Jannie....Britz not Strauss.

To me there seems to be a penchant for the new, the flashy....a rejection of the solid contributor that really makes a difference to the team. There is also that provincial streak that has dogged our rugby ....probably since the Boer war.

Mozart

The village idiot are preaching and spreading his standard rubbish again.  Spies not Burger - there is not a single contributor that has had a good word to say about Spies this year - and Burger has had very limited game time and showed nothing during that time - so where from, village idiot?

Fury - not Jean de Villiers - when did that happen?

Brits not Strauss?  Inventing rubbish again?

And the tooth fairy believer are you - who try to find a diversion in the case of De Jongh (he misses so many tackles because his tackles are so strong) and Morne is such a wonderful pivot.   The latter buggered up so badly last year that Meyer had no option - but to replace him  - since  then  Goosen was not in contention at all.  

That kind of junk is why your arguments are so incredibly shallow.