Lood...

While I'm fan off Loods, it's been interesting see the comparisons with PS Du Toit. It seem that people are saying that they are the best two for that spot. Well, if we compare the way he was dominated yesterday to the way the Stormers played against him. You gotta say that maybe Mostert and Co are underrated.

 I rate Mostert - but he is not an international quality lock.  I put him on par with Whitelock and Retallick - but that is not the top class of locks around. 
At this stage I think the Du Toit - Etzebeth combination is awesome. The Brumbies was so afraid of throwing a line-out ball where those two players were involved and that ruined their game yesterday. 
I also took a look at the defensive stats of the Stormers locks.  They made more tackles than the  Stormers loosies did and Du Toit was the only effective ball carrier among the Stormers forwards.   
At this stage the Etzebeth - Du Toit combination is the two foremost candidates for Springbok selection.        

 I hear Lood is top priority on the Bools shopping list.

 Won't be surprised if that happens.  The Buls needs a no 5 lock desperately.

 Lomp was massively overrated at the WC. That much is becoming obvious now. Stephanie is benefitting from playing with the monster Etzebeth......the opposition is afraid to throw to the front of the lineout.

 If De Jager was overrated at the WC - how did he manage to be SA Player of the Year.  The vastly overrated lock was Matfield and that was an accepted fact by the majority of South Africans.  
Look the fact is that the opposition throws balls away from both Etzebeth and Du Toit - not only from Etzebeth - so what crap are you talking about AGAIN?  Etzebeth himself said it is a combination factor between him and Du Toit - are you saying he is lying? 
Incidentally nothing change when Etzebeth was replaced by Schickerling late in the game on Saturday.  if Etzebeth was the only factor - why did his replacement did not cause a review by the Brumbies?  

 Many more opposition balls were thrown towards Stephanie....the only ball stolen was stolen by Etzebeth, who went off in minute 77. If you want to to propose some theory at least get the basic facts right.

 Mozart
Question remains - was Etzebeth lying in his statement that the success by the locks is the result of the combination of Du Toit and himself?    
What facts?  The steal was in a very early line-out and the only appropriate facts here have nothing to do with Du Toit calling the line-outs - but the effort made by the Brumbies to avoid throwing in the balls to anywhere near where the two was present   
   

 Well, IMO, Eben is probably South Africa's best player. He and PSDT forms a great combo for the Stormers. The WP loosies are a bit light, but I prefer the combination that played yesterday. Scalla looked better at 8 than 7. It was a different story against the Sharks though, but the yellow was a game changer.

I agree Mike. But i think Lood should be in the Bok squad too. Was jsut funny too see how the no-name Mostert who nobody really ever talks about totally outshone Lood.

 So Clever you ask: "Incidentally nothing change when Etzebeth was replaced by Schickerling late in the game on Saturday.  if Etzebeth was the only factor - why did his replacement did not cause a review by the Brumbies"

Because he came on at minute 77 and there are no lineouts while Schickerling was on the field. You just lied again saying nothing changed.....there never was time for anything to change.

The lies just keep pouring out of your mouth. You ask why things are so screwed up in SA, why dishonesty is so prevalent....look no further than yourself. String after string you lie through your teeth and apparently are never bothered by being caught out......cynically,serially dishonest. A pure bulls.h itter

 And in your typical cowardly way, you now drop the string. Every now and then I see other members having what purports to be a serious rugby discussion with you, incredibly there are still some who think you have views that have to be considered. How many times have I proved you are lying....possibly more than a hundred by now. 

 Mozart
I did not drop the string - I also need to sleep sometime - so you have a field day in that case.  Look the line out foul-ups happened throughout the game and your rank idiocy never fails. 
The biggest liar on this site has persistently being you - whenever you write anything pertaining to certain players one has to search with a microscope to find anything that may be the truth - since prejudice requires from you to lie persistently.
I may make mistakes by my interpretation of issues and I freely admit when I have been wrong - you do not recognize any  mistakes being made by you and try to justify your mistakes by spouting laughable BS on this site.  
I thought we decided a few weeks ago to be more civil to each other - but that on your part was broken again - like happened in the past as well.   Any difference of opinion with you has an adverse affect on you resulting in personal jibes.   When will you ever learn to be a gentleman - I suppose never.            

'Balls  as usual' ....recognize that gentlemanly remark. Plus a bunch of over jibes I have had to warn you about. Either it's deliberate or you simply don't understand when you are being insulting. Still either way, you are at fault.
As for this string, its not complicated you implied the lineouts never changed after Etzebeth left....there were no lineouts after he left. That was.....wait for it....a lie. 

 You implied that the Brumbies do not try and avoid both throwing-ins from going near to Du Toit - which was false as well.    They avoided both locks like the plague and to  state that they only tried to avoid Etzebeth is false. 
 I was not aware exactly when Etzebeth was replaced and thought it was around minute 73 after the Leyds try was awarded erroneously.  if I was wrong - then I apologize,   However, that is as far as it goes.  
Mozart, I may use some words that describe my real feeling - mostly following personal attacks by you.  Some of your postings are in fact garbled because of persistent prejudice and that results in usage of strong disapproval of my part.
Calling a person a liar because he differs from you on issues is not an acceptable norm.    I will try and moderate my language and not react to provocation on your part - but I am afraid that would not work out - since the personal attacks always start from your side.  
         

Yeah ok Israel and Palestine. Time for another temporary/meaningless cease fire? Both of you should stop ruining threads just to get one over on each other. Skype or something ok? Send us the edited highlights if anything new gets said. Honestly, get over it.

 Ruining threads...hmm. There are 4 posters who participated on this string. What great line of thought was not advanced?  Best I can tell you were unimpressed with Lomp on Saturday. I made the point he was overrated at the RWC, I also made the point that Etzebeth is lifting Stephanie's game.....legitimate rugby views.

Mike then lied about Etzebeth.....what exactly do you want to do about that. There is no view I express on this Board he doesn't seize on....usually with incorrect facts as in this string.
Go ahead, give me your best advice....what exactly does one do with a Board stalker? 

Lood - love the guy and I think he gives his absolute all every match he plays, especially for the Boks.
But for me he's a player that still has a lot to work on. 
From a technical aspect, he's not a great player. 
He tackles upright, runs upright and it all looks impressive as long as he is able to out-muscle whoever he is up against. His long frame puts him at a disadvantage with leverage and go forward can quickly become go backward when he's double-teamed and is too high to find the ground.
It is probably too much to expect someone at his age to have the fine arts of the lineout down, but he has to get better as the Bok #5. What happened to the Cheetahs lineout against the Stormers is alarming -  would never have happened to any lineout Matfield was in charge of - and Lood was at a loss as to how to salvage it. It is an aspect of play you would expect to get better the longer he plays.
Physicality is not a long term career solution. IMO players who built reputations on physicality without the technical aspect or flair for the creative have shorter effective careers. They are injury prone and there will always be a bigger and stronger youngster right around the corner to take their place as soon as they falter.
For his ow n good and longevity - he needs to become a more complete well rounded and technically astute player. He is an underrated passer of the ball and with his length should be looking to offload in contact all the time.

Plum you are speaking kak......at no point has Lood been dominated, not even close.
He has been good all Super series thus far, stood firm against the Stormers pair in the clash, good performance given how much better the Stormers side is to that of the Cheetahs
On the weekend, he had a solid game......did not stand out......but solid in a Cheetahs side that was never going to live with the Lions
Lood was simply outstanding in the WC.....he was not only the best lock in the whole of the WC by some considerable distance......he was in fact one of the best players in the WC as a whole
This guy is an awesome talent.....his pairing with Etzebeth in the WC was a revelation and as we have all said all along, PSDT is just as good at these 2......we are blessed with some real talent at lock.
Hell to think that the impressive Paul Willemse has never been used at the highest level thanks to useless Meyer
Mostert is a very good player, gives his all, puts his body on the line....is probably 5kg less than the locks in contention for the Boks and this probably stands in his way......but why not consider him at 7, where he ended the game for the Lions
A fantastic player, much like Hattingh is for the Bulls.....both just lack that physical grunt that would enable them to dominate the physical battles as Etzebeth, Lood, Willemse, Jacques du Plessis and PSDT do.

Just a pity nobody told Whitlock that that Lomp was the best lock in the WC. This guy was toast by the end of the Stormers game....even Schickerling was eating his bacon by the end of that match.

Ah would that be the Whitelock that gained a big fat ZERO metres in that game against the Boks
Whitelock was nothing in the WC, the next best lock after Lood was Eben followed by Thomas of the Argies
JD Schickerling did absolutely nothing in his game against the Cheetahs, was hardly on the park.....Lood was as good as Eben and PSDT in that game as evidenced by the stats
Lood was SA player of the year.......how the hell did he win that if he is that average
Catch a bloody wake up Moz, your prejudice is childish

 Agreed Schickerling wasn't on very long....but long enough to steal another of Lomp's balls, Etzebeth stole 3 of them.

 The player Whitelock took balls off in the lineouts in that test was De Jager(1) andMatfield (1),  The De Jager one was a slap backwards - the Matfield one a clear case of out-jumping catching the ball and one must always remember the Ellis Park test in 2014. when he did the same and the AB's scored a try as a result.   The loser of line-out balls in the test Mozart preach about was Burger - who was outjumped by Read 3 times - but obviously De Jager must be blamed for that as well.
Mozart  - stick to the truth please.   Even your faithful supporter Pakie could only find one case where Etzebeth in fact jumped against De Jager and where he took a ball off him.   The other two alleged cases was where Etzebeth was lined up against Wegner.