Learnt an interesting point re test selection

This is why Mostert so often gets the nod....he calls a great lineout and has a winning  lineout record against Dud and Lomp.

Dave 

The calling of line-outs is important, but the problem with Matfield was  I am afraid that in 2014 even when he called line-outs,   he fouled up line-outs on numerous occasions when he failed to take line-outs he called to come to himself.  I can call at least four such occasions where he failed badly and in two occasions he cost the Springboks the games and in the third one he nearly cost them he only game the Springboks against won under Meyer.  It was only saved by a long distance penalty converted by Lambie.

It remains that calling line-outs is not the only thing required from a lock and the contribution in line-outs and in general play.   When a player failed in both or even only in one - he should never been on the team,     

Dave....Lomp was great against Japan and innocuous against Wales. Against the Poms he exited early after trying to stop Vunipola. Fortunately we had Mostert.

No period at the WC was more crucial than our late first half goal line stand where Mostert was the most prolific tackler, includingtackles on Vunipola. And he was money in the lineouts.

Nobody wishes any player an injury, but getting Mostert rather than Lomp was  not a bad thing.

The only forward to miss a tackle against England? Not sure what you are talking about Dave. In 58 minutes on the park Mostert made the most tackles  and missed none.

Lineout steals by players at the WC:

Lineout steals – player

1 Guido Pagadizabal (Argentina) – 5

2 Izack Rodda (Australia) – 5  

3 Shannon Frizell (New Zealand) – 4

4 Franco Mostert (South Africa) – 3

5 James Ryan (Ireland) – 3

Tackle stats for AB game  Mostert was the worst tackler of all the forwards on the field -

*    Tackles made      -    10

*     Tackles missed   -     4

His one missed tackle let to the Barrett try -  oh no the miss was due to Du Toit bcause he was 5 meters away and should have tackled the ball carrier.

He was exceptionally weak in ball carries -

*     Balls carried       -     8

*     Meters made      -      1               

Weak in line-outs as well - so much so that he as dropped from starting in all - bar agaionst the weakest round robin games.  

So now to the final :-

Mostert  - played  58  minutes - made 15 tackles  =  On average a tackle every 3,86 minutes

De Jager - played  22  minutes - made 6 tackles  =  On average a tackle every 3,67 minutes

A minute difference in the tackle situation between Mostert and De Jager.   In ball carries Mostert was useless -  5 carries - zero meters gained.

Mostert was totally inept in line-outs as well.   Mozart prefer to give the line out count as to steals against weaker teams - but hide away the losses in other games.   This type of stats are totally useless without the full stats being given and evaluated.  Fact is that in at least two tests Mostert was poor in one that he was not used at all as line-out jumper in he next test,.   In other tests he moved around on line-outs - sometimes being in front and sometimes in the position where the number 7 normally jumps - that is in positions where  the ball was not going to.  

Anyway Mostert was the weakest forwards player in the one match the Springboks lost - as he was in the AB game in the Super Rugby season.   Despite that - our respected member rated him ahead of Du Toit as player of the year.   That is the type of BS we get on site regularly.     

I don't know what you oaks are squabbling about. The fact remains, we won the World Cup against a very good England team that destroyed the All Blacks the weak before. 

If you watch Squidge youtube channel you will notice that in his analysis he points out to SA pressure that they put on the players. So Mostert might have missed a few tackles against the AB but he was extremely valuable because of his fitness and incredible mobility. 

I think he made up for it in the finals and probably knew he had a poor game. It is not every day that a ball carrier will dominate the collisions, especially in big matches like the World Cup

More BS has been written about frot matfiled than any other player. 

For example Chippo notes what a great jumper pap Victor was. No Chippo he was lifted by his props. Yes he has good catching ability. 

Dr Mozzzz was amazed how how quickly airlight matfiled got up into the air. Well that was only because pap victorvwas so light he was easily tossed into the air.

Ou Saffex says matfiled was a great all round lock but lacked physicality after his return. No snapster wee matfiled was always the most feeble "lock" ever to play for the Boks or any test team.

As the great Bakkies said Victor didn't always play in the backline. 

No more BS about this apology for a lock. Boy did wee matfiled con some oaks here big time! 

As for Mostert he has great heart and was a big improvement on matfiled but the world coach of the year saw he too lacked the size and physicality needed to dominate top sides. 

Hopefully we will NEVER EVER see a pap lock like conman wee matfiled ruining our tight five.

Rassie is just so much smarter than the deluded matfiled nutjobs here. Hahahaha what a laugh these cases are. 

"If you watch Squidge youtube channel you will notice that in his analysis he points out to SA pressure that they put on the players. So Mostert might have missed a few tackles against the AB but he was extremely valuable because of his fitness and incredible mobility. "

that is an excellent point.

We harp on about a missed tackle... but when the guy has a work rate higher than anyone else in his position, it is bound to happen.

Id rather have someone put in 20 tackles and miss 2, than a guy that makes 10 and misses 0.

Anyone disagree?

@beeno1...

"Boy did wee matfiled con some oaks here big time! "

as much as Trump has brainwashed you?

Its all subjective at the end of the day beeno .

David that is the most logical thing you have ever said.

Your rugby knowledge is on the up.

matfield is widely renowned as one of the best locks of all time.

Just ask my Kiwi, Eng and Irish mates.

Oh what a crock of shit.

Dumb Fuck Dave at his best.

Calling a line out is easy. It's not what made Mostert or Matfield special. Reading the oppositions put in and stealing their ball is where it counts in the end. It's called a turn over, Dumb Fuck. Taking possession away from your opponent. 

Anyone can call a lineout. Even a prop. It's what the hooker does with the ball and how the recipient responds.

There's more to a lock than shouting a few random numbers out ... Dumb Fuck!!

As ignorant as ever.

For one ... his work in the tight loose is by far more important.

@david... "chip chip"

do you have a stutter?

what the fuck?

I was agreeing with you?

I thought we were over your insecurities and that we could chat about the game of rugby and cricket now.

...you got me going again, you delusional potato.

You know dave, in some countries, you would never have been allowed to see your son until he turned 6!

Flash doooka Trump was an outstanding business man not some weirdo from Kenya community activist. 

Trump has done brilliantly as President as his achievements PROVE. You have to be a serious nutjob to think otherwise. Many people now saying he is the greatest President in American history. 

Saffex you thick plank matfiled was never 115kg you dope. What utter BS. 

He was between 105 and 108 kg. 

When he retired he dropped to 102 kg. Uou don't just drop from 225 to 102kg 

He was the weakest "lock ever. A useless backline wannabee.

Get it into your thick skull matfiled could NEVER  be considered a physical player. 

Of course our opposition loved wee matfiled. America's opposition hate Trump. Wonder why hahahaha. 

Look at the formidable pack Rassie chose. They chewed up everyone. Kolisi may not even have been the best 6 either. 

No the dullard's here have to admit wee pap matfiled destroyed out tight 5 for at least a decade. 

Only a half baked Mampara who doesn't understand lock play would think otherwise. 

Flash in the pan dioka please do some research about Trump before making your unfortunate remarks. I hear he has added about 19 trillion dollars to the stock market for example.

Wi se up flash

Donald Trump graduated from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania in 1968, with a Bachelor of Science degree in economics and anthropology. Mensa doesn’t accept SAT scores from after 1994. However, Mr. Trump was a student at Wharton when it was possible to derive an accurate IQ core from known SAT scores. Given the usual requirements for admission to a top school like Wharton, I estimate that Mr. Trump has a 156 IQ at the minimum.

“The standard description of this level of intelligence is ‘Genius - Exceptional intellectual ability and capable of looking beyond known facts.’ However, the percentile rating is more revealing than the raw score. A 156 IQ is at the 99.9905490555 percentile. That means that Donald Trump is smarter than 99.99 percent of the people on planet Earth. Not only does Trump qualify for membership in Mensa, but he could join the Triple Nine Society [people scoring at or above the 99.9th percentile on selected intelligence tests].”

..........

Now I can't personally verify this....but the logic is sound. Before you go to graduate Business School in the USA you write an SAT exam. This is a quantitative and verbal test.....not an IQ test....but also abstract and unseen. It measures problem solving not knowledge.

So this psychologist is an expert at translating an SAT score into an IQ score. He has Trump's SAT results and estimates the Donald is at 156 minimum. Genius level.

Even if he is off by a little bit, there is no doubt, Trump is a very smart man....but there are plenty of smart men who aren't wise. The only way to judge thatis results, and so far the Donald has acheived remarkable tangible successes.

Put it another way, he has Peeper by about 50 IQ points.

You aren’t the target audience Dave.....look at his rallies sometime, as a curiosity.....completely sympathetic communication for that audience.