Lukhanyo Am Injury Update

Cape Town - Springbok centre Lukhanyo Am is in a race against time to be fit for the team’s end-of-year tour to Europe after recently fracturing his forearm.

The 24-year-old, who boasts six Tests, sustained the injury in South Africa’s 36-34 win over New Zealand in Wellington on September 15.

Am's province, the Sharks, told SA Rugbymag that the midfielder should return to training in six weeks’ time.

This means he should board the plane with the national team for their year-end tour.

The Springboks' first year-end Test is just over five weeks away - against England at Twickenham on November 3.

South Africa also take on France in Paris (November 10), Scotland in Edinburgh (November 17) and Wales in Cardiff (November 24).

by Sport24.co.za

Yes, we need as much playing time for Am. We must not repeat the mistakes of 2014.

Sur e Meyer emptied out the hospital wards when he selected his 2015 WC squad.   Agree with you on not repeating Meyer's selection craziness again.   Still does not see Am as the answer to 13 though - very dubious.

He selected Coetzee, Lambie, Reinach, Damian, Goosen, Mohoje and Serfontein. All these players would make no make in 2015. This at the expense of the halfback duo that won back to back tests against Australia and New Zealand. We wasted a tour on substandard to average players. 

Listen - Meyer also selected the 17 over 30 year old players in the WV squad and of those not a single one succeeded.   Burger failed as stand-in flyhalf and half of  the others did not even get a starting line-up selection.   Who was that half back duo you are referring to?  

The West Virginia squad? 

Schalk was a success. To say he was playing flyhalf makes you look rather silly Lüge. 

Herr Ein Auge, I'm a Scalla fan myself and I think he had a fine RWC 2015, but the Meyer game plan sucked big time, most of the time. The ball never made it to 12. Hell, Pollard saw verry little ball too. Go check the stats for some of the matches. The backline went to defend, they got no ball to play with. Was terrible to watch, but quite effective. 

Herr Draht, why put the ball in the hands of a player that can't use it? In the RC, Meyer gave Damian plenty of chances. In the WC against Scotland and Samoa, Damian got alot of possession. He was ineffective. Meyer's game planning surpasses that of Rassie and Coetzee. His ability to make adjustments for personnel is vastly superior. Schalk can distribute, he can also read play. Ergo he is the better option.

Also, be careful not to fall into the same pitfalls as Lügnerin. He is part of the dinosaur rugby plastic fans who are behind the times and have no idea how forwards are used in the modern game. It's quite funny. 

If you watch a Meyer era game. Watch each set of phases and see what opportunities we're available. Now note how each player responded to those opportunities. Like the burst down the touchline against Australia in 2015. A good scrum play. Damian failed to pick up Pienaar or JP as support. Opportunity lost. There are dozens upon dozens of scenarios like these. When it's a gameplan issue, players will not have these opportunities. You'd think after the past two years f ans would realise that the players they most lauded were among the very least.  We are only just beginning to see an upswing in talent. 

Burger a success in the WV series in 2015?   I always from his junior years was a great admirer of Burger - but in the WC in 2015 he was anything bar average or worse in matches,   Making him first receiver from the scrummie was not the type of game Burger shined in. 

You specialize in BS,   De Allende did not get plenty of ball in the RC.   When he got balls from the stand-in flyhalf it was in the main hospital passess.   Despite that De Allende was still the center with most defenders beaten in that tournament.   He was also the backline player with the most turnovers in possession made.

Meyer may have a fairy tale game plan composed by you.   His game plan - if indeed there was in fact one - was atrociously poor.  There was a sort of a game plan based on the Bulls game plan of 2004- but that was what caused the Japan disaster.   

If there indeed a coach with a missing game plan it was Meyer,   Anybody claiming that there was anything beyond the no 10 is in fact totally mixed up.  You try to lower Erasmus to the Meyer level and that is real nonsense.   It happened  that England toured SA in June 2012 and in June 2018 - so lets look at the try scoring record between the first year of Meyer and the first year under Erasmus:-

                                           Meyer             Erasmus     

England                                   5                       8     

Argentina                                 4                       6

Australia                                   1                       2

New Zealand                             1                       5

So in similar matches thus far there is already a marker how poor a coach Meyer really was compared to Erasmus,

Please  be careful comparing Meyer with Erasmus - the former will always end up as a loser in such comparisons.     

Watch Meyer's 2014 game against New Zealand, much better. Meyer implemented a game closer to what New Zealand do. He would vary the gameplan according to personnel and opposition. This makes it all the more damning for these players the plastics love. Like the 2012 All Black test at home. Goosen failed to pick up Taute for an inside ball in the All Black 22, he had a clean gap inside Nonu for a try. He missed Kirchner as well. He missed Taute two more times. He did throw Taute a hospital pass though which was punished. These are the many instances which reveal a personnel flaw, not a gameplan flaw.

To suggest Meyer was a 10 man rugby coach is the absolute pinnacle of idiocy. How then did we always lose the territory battle? Absolutely ridiculous. The rot started when Meyer strayed from the players who were successful. It began in 2014. Lood popped up, so too Damian, Reinach, Coetzee again, Goosen again, Serfontein.

Serfontein was run over twice against Wales. Conceded a crucial try. Damian was exposed against Argentina. It was so bad, the public all agreed he should be dropped. Lood was burned on defence against Argentina. Lambie and Reinach had a terrible EOYT, being comprehensively outplayed by their counterparts. Goosen was a tragedy. Coetzee failed to be the ball carrier he was heralded to be. As good as Cornal was on attack, his poor defence cost us an away win in New Zealand. This was just 2014. 

In 2015, Damian conceded the Aussie tries with absolutely horrendous defence. In all, Austria should have had 4. Kriel and Damian would shamble their way through the rest of the year. Lood blew two try scoring opportunities against Wales, was beaten on defence against New Zealand. Where were Lambie and Pienaar against Japan? Or Steph? 

You criticise Meyer's gameplan. I can point to each and every failed player and cite nearly every instance where they themselves let the a Boks down. They were put in positions or succeed, but they failed. You can't even correctly identify how the Boks were playing. You should have been studying the games, not ESPN stat sheets. That said, you should have picked at least some of this up through those stats. If only you were an honest man. 

AO

Sorry - just look at the tries scored to see where the problems under Meyer really were.   They were with the backline inability to score a reasonable number of tries,   The backline usage under Meyer was a joke - remember his own remark that SA players do  not have the skills to play a ball in hand game.   

The inability to score a reasonable number of tries in tests, as well as Meyer's own remarks indicates that all your dreams about  game plans were never even considered by Meyer and was consequently never used.

You pick a test as an example of a game plan - namely the Johannesburg test in 2014.   In that test there were three tries scored by SA - two by Pollard when he attacked the gain line (something Morne Steyn cannot be accused of doing) and one by Hougaard,  For the rest the passing game was somewhat problematic and not really according to a systematic game plan.  

I do not even try to write up dreams on how the game happened - I look at what actually happened and when that has been conformed by a second viewing would then confirm some issues at looking at the ESPN stats.   I never used the stats of one match - I looked at a series of matches to confirm individual performance tendencies.   That in fact is the only method in using of stats that is really acceptable.  

Insofar as honesty is concerned - I never let prejudice take over from honest assessment.   That I leave entirely to the Mozart gang - of which you are a great supporter.