FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Matfield loses his overseas bus pass

Matfield loses his overseas bus pass

Started by sharkbok29 REPLIES365 VIEWS· 19 Aug 2014, 14:10
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,294 posts
19 Aug 2014, 14:10
#1
19 Aug 2014, 14:10#1
Matfield stays in SAby Brenden Nel 19 August 2014, 11:39

The Springboks’ hopes of a better performance in their Castle Lager Rugby Championship return match against Argentina were dealt a blow with the news that lineout kingpin Victor Matfield has not made the trip to Buenos Aires along with the rest of the side.

Matfield was spotted at Loftus Versfeld Tuesday doing rehabilitation on the cartilage tear that caused him to miss this past weekend’s game and it seems he may only be ready to play if his knee heals when the Boks make their trip to Perth to face the Wallabies in a fortnight’s time.

This means the Boks are likely to go into the Salta game this weekend with the same three locks they went into the Loftus game with, giving them another chance to impress.

Matfield was missed in the 13-6 win over Los Pumas in the driving rain, with Argentina disrupting the Boks normally solid lineouts, especially at the front.

It was hoped that he would return to the side this week, and coach Heyneke Meyer even intimated there would be a few changes among the forwards for the Salta game.

But it seems in the marathon 22 hour travelling session the Boks had to do, Matfield’s condition was omitted by the Bok management and no mention was made of the fact he would not travel along with the side.

Lood de Jager looks set to get another run at five this weekend in Salta, with Eben Etzebeth likely to return to the starting line-up and Bakkies Botha on the bench. The Boks should have a lot more lineout options as they are set to return to their more traditional lineup with a blindside flank slotting in, and not two opensiders as was the case at Loftus.

This means that Juan Smith, if he overcomes a hamstring strain, may well be in line for a starting spot, while Teboho Mohoje is the other option.

Both players will give the Boks a solid ball carrier and another option at the back of the lineout.

Warren Whiteley may well find himself on the bench to cover eight for the Boks and will give them another option in the second half.

The Boks will hold their first training session on Tuesday.

sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,294 posts
19 Aug 2014, 14:11
#2
19 Aug 2014, 14:11#2
not clear if he will be available in O Z/ NZ
GT
Gonzo the GreatClub Pro560 posts
19 Aug 2014, 14:13
#3
19 Aug 2014, 14:13#3
 juan will bring some serious grit and work. ebenezer stooge better do some more work for once.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
19 Aug 2014, 14:31
#4
19 Aug 2014, 14:31#4
 Good news - the longer Matfield stays out - the better.  This guy is not the one to help at all in the Tight  5 situation against any SH team.   At 106 kgs he is - like Beeno says - far too pap for that competition.    Based on what Bakkies produced in the tests he played in - he is over the hill as well and not up to standard anymore.    Time for the geriatrics to retire.    The starting line up against Argentina insofar as the locks are concerned should be De Jager and Etsebeth  - will help in the scrums as well.   We need all the muscle we can get - not the pap muscles of the elderly.  
There is more work done by Etzebeth and De Jager in thirty minutes in a game than the two pap Geriatrics produce in three full matches.
     
GT
Gonzo the GreatClub Pro560 posts
19 Aug 2014, 14:35
#5
19 Aug 2014, 14:35#5
 yet he is one of our best defenders with one of the best workrates. so drop him for ebenezer stooge who regukarly does stuff all other than try to act like a hardman starting fights? man you are really drawn to losers Mika.
CL
CleanCutPro9,905 posts
19 Aug 2014, 14:50
#6
19 Aug 2014, 14:50#6
 
Best defender?

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahaaa!!!

Matfield?

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahaaaa!!

He's a light weight ... he's slow and cumbersome ... he's old ... he offers the tight 5 nothing ... cant scrum ... goes to ground at the slightest touch ...

He's there because of his life long friendship with Meyer. Just another quota ... so to speak.

Best defender se gat!!!
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
19 Aug 2014, 15:08
#7
19 Aug 2014, 15:08#7
 CC
He does make a reasonable number of tackles in games - but the quality of the tackles is poor and cause no real problems for any opposing team.   
Bonza 
Afraid not - you idea odf quality of performance and actual contribution is so warped you reaqlly must stop showing your deep-rooted ignorance on this site.


CL
CleanCutPro9,905 posts
19 Aug 2014, 15:47
#8
19 Aug 2014, 15:47#8
 
Yes I know, Mike ... the Bozo claimed him to be one of our best defenders yet I can't ever remember seeing him hit an opponent backwards.

It's always a matter of just grabbing the opposition and going to ground ... no go forward ... no turnover ball gained ... just a matter of holding onto the opposition for dear life and hoping support comes.

How many times have we've seen Matfield blown up for not releasing his tackle?

That to me doesn't qualify as one of our best defenders.

Etsebeth not only slams the opponent backwards but takes him and his mates an additional 5m ... getting go forward and putting our pack on the front foot. 

There's a very big difference between him and the lightweight Matfield.

Bozo doesn't have a clue other than what the Bulls produce.

He's narrow minded and I bet you his hair is brilled creamed and he sports a friggin plastic comb in his sock.




 
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
19 Aug 2014, 16:05
#9
19 Aug 2014, 16:05#9
 Now wouldn't that be a nice "stat" to see. How many times has Matffield been penalised for not releasing? Go get it for us. Good luck.

PS. Remember to put it into perspective of tackles made/missed, etc.
GT
Gonzo the GreatClub Pro560 posts
19 Aug 2014, 16:11
#10
19 Aug 2014, 16:11#10
 i already posted defensive stats and matfield was only slightly edged by lood for amount of tackles but missed the least. you see ceradyne i am so stupid because i use real infi and because uncleanCunt and clevarMika say so. They are the self professed gods so they must be right.
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
19 Aug 2014, 16:38
#11
19 Aug 2014, 16:38#11

The Bargies o wned Lomp, this is bad news.

GT
Gonzo the GreatClub Pro560 posts
19 Aug 2014, 16:44
#12
19 Aug 2014, 16:44#12
 all four starting locks were very close in terms of stats idont think there was that much in it and the scorr mostly reflects that. rrmember argentina have the number 2 spot for pack power. they are never going to be easy beats for a test they are fired up for.
CL
CleanCutPro9,905 posts
19 Aug 2014, 16:52
#13
19 Aug 2014, 16:52#13
 
Yes, we all saw Loodt struggle at 5. No need to repeat it or have you forgotten that you already mention it in an earlier post?

He should never have been there in the first place.

Perhaps Meyer will wake up and play him at 4 this weekend ... with our "best lock" at 5.


 
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
19 Aug 2014, 16:58
#14
19 Aug 2014, 16:58#14

Lomp didn't struggle because he was at five Lump....he struggled because the Argies are big aggressive buggers. Etzebeth became combatative....Lomp crawled into his shell. Bok locks don't get intimidated.

 

And it's Lood you fool....not "Loodt".

PA
PakieCaptain17,321 posts
19 Aug 2014, 17:09
#15
19 Aug 2014, 17:09#15
Lood went pretty quiet after hurting himself with that big tackle he made right on first kick-off. Jury's out on whether he has a test lock temperament.
CL
CleanCutPro9,905 posts
19 Aug 2014, 17:18
#16
19 Aug 2014, 17:18#16
 
Horseshit Faggot ... Loodt is not suited to the 5 lock role ... it's as simple as that. With the useless Bakkies at his side he had no one to guide him. He's still a kid and was expected to play a role he's not familiar with. Simple bad choice by the coach.  

Etsebeth never became combatative ... he was blindsided by three Argentinians and taken to ground.  I wouldn't exactly call them "tough buggers" - 3 on 1.

Then again, with you I guess trying to pass a stubborn wind would be regarded as tough.

How's the missus?


SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
19 Aug 2014, 17:24
#17
19 Aug 2014, 17:24#17
 Best news I have read in ages. Matfield is a liability at least we will have a real lock on board in lood. Let's hope matfield does not recover at all and hands in his towel. The further matfield is away from the on field action the better.
He is useless these days
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
19 Aug 2014, 17:35
#18
19 Aug 2014, 17:35#18
How are the unsightly growths? 
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
19 Aug 2014, 17:47
#19
19 Aug 2014, 17:47#19

re matfield and the topic at hand, I think he is holding out for the senior discount an his bus pass.

SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
19 Aug 2014, 17:54
#20
19 Aug 2014, 17:54#20
 Yeah just win it's the only place he belongs it's certainly not in a test match.....Fuck me he is 37 for god sake and we have young locks to burn. Our 8th choice lock would be a better option than matfield and I am not kidding
GT
Gonzo the GreatClub Pro560 posts
19 Aug 2014, 17:59
#21
19 Aug 2014, 17:59#21
correction: young locks to crash and burn.
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
19 Aug 2014, 18:03
#22
19 Aug 2014, 18:03#22
 Bozo are you as ignorantly stupid as our coach 
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
19 Aug 2014, 18:24
#23
19 Aug 2014, 18:24#23
Some really good news at last. Given wee victor spends his time in the backline its possible he puts in a few powderpuf tackles. 
It will be interesting to see Juan in action as he will be up against a good pack.
Hope Meyer gets his half back selection correct and Whitely gets a decent run.

GT
Gonzo the GreatClub Pro560 posts
19 Aug 2014, 18:27
#24
19 Aug 2014, 18:27#24
 bekker, mostert, kruger, eben all wiltef. only liod has shown the goods. PSDT will also fail. so only matfield, bakkies and flip habe really given us an edge. your bogus trash is not convincing.
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
19 Aug 2014, 18:41
#25
19 Aug 2014, 18:41#25
 Bozo you are the fucking idiot who informed us that Barry was better than Jean. That fucking sums you up as a rugby man - you are fucking clueless and for that reason you are not qualified to pass comment on matters rugby.
But my guess is that you are an arrogant twat and will continue to bless us with your ignorant garbage. Just don't expect us to take any of your crap seriously. You have no credibility not ever after that Barry call.
But you have served to confirm your blind stupidity above. Etzebeth won't make it you say......Fuck you are a plank
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
19 Aug 2014, 18:47
#26
19 Aug 2014, 18:47#26
 Bozo you are the fucking idiot who informed us that Barry was better than Jean. That fucking sums you up as a rugby man - you are fucking clueless and for that reason you are not qualified to pass comment on matters rugby.
But my guess is that you are an arrogant twat and will continue to bless us with your ignorant garbage. Just don't expect us to take any of your crap seriously. You have no credibility not ever after that Barry call.
But you have served to confirm your blind stupidity above. Etzebeth won't make it you say......Fuck you are a plank
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
19 Aug 2014, 19:36
#27
19 Aug 2014, 19:36#27
 Mo(zart)ron
Lets look at the struggle of De Jager against Argentina:
de Jager0/000/1/3100006/16/010/0
You li3d about De Jager's performance on Saturday and that is what we all expewct from you - lies and deception.   You praized Bakkies Botha who produced zero of sunstance during the whole game.   You were caught out that you lied that De Jager lost a ball in any SA line out throw ins.   So since you lie all the time we cannot believe you BS in any event.     
Now lets look at the stats for Matfield and   De Jager in the Scottish game where they played together:-
 Matfield0/000/3/2200119/06/010/0 De Jager2/1100/1/856100017/15/100/0
Even againstw weak oppsotion Matfield produced nothing of substance .  His ball carries was pathetic to the point of non-existent - His tackle count was way eblow that of De Jager - his line outs on par as well - but De Jager took one from opposition throw in - something Matfield never managed to do.   
Lets face it when De Jager tackles somebody he goes backwards - when Matfield does he hands on for dear life.
Who would you like in your team if you compare those two locks.   Only a moron will pcik Matfield - he is pap and ineffective.  
It was great news that Matfield is not playing on Saturday - he will just reduce our Tight 5 further.     



MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
19 Aug 2014, 20:29
#28
19 Aug 2014, 20:29#28
Lomp is a myth. Willemse was the better bet...actually Lomp looked a bit scared out there against the Bargies. A flat track bully.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
19 Aug 2014, 21:09
#29
19 Aug 2014, 21:09#29
 Mo(zart)ron
The standard set of crap from the moron - we get the same crap from you  all the time - because he makes up his mind in advance which players he supports and which he does not and then lies and carry on in hystrical fashion to try and get people to believe him.
Lets get back to reality - your idol Matfield is a flat track period - he is too weak to even try and dominate anybody.       



GT
Gonzo the GreatClub Pro560 posts
19 Aug 2014, 21:13
#30
19 Aug 2014, 21:13#30
 im not qualified? maybe i should coach an under 9 team too so i can also be qualified just like you. who knows i might beat your team in tge Beanie-Baby Cup Final. hey meyer hasnt won it yet so thats why hes a stupid fucking moron hey. hahahahaha! 
Heres a thing barry was more of s centre than jj, taute or murray. you know jack anout centre play you bloated old wind bag. 
— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news