SASaffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SASaffolk Captain30,741 posts
05 Aug 2014, 18:35#2
Rubbish, he was dominated in contact.....the guy is a physical liability these days
GTGonzo the Great
Club Pro560 posts
GTGonzo the GreatClub Pro560 posts
05 Aug 2014, 18:37#3
well the stats dont lie, bismarck was the worst of the two by far, so are you going to deny the facts and be all emotional over your hatred for victor or admit the truth and learn something? its your call big boy (i dont m ean that in a erogatory way )
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
05 Aug 2014, 22:17#4
Bonzo
How can you compare performances of a lock and a hooker and expect to come up with a logical answer? There is no comparison between player sin those two positions - they require a vastly different skill set.
Looking at the stats his line out performance was good - and taking into the stats only his tackle count seems acceptable. However, it is the quality of the tackles that was not up to standard - he does not have the avility to maje strong tackles and all his tackles were average to weak.
Matfield is - as Saffex says - is dominated in contact - there can be no doubt about that. It comes out in all facets of tight play.
GTGonzo the Great
Club Pro560 posts
GTGonzo the GreatClub Pro560 posts
06 Aug 2014, 17:30#5
do they? i thought modern rugby requires uniformity in skill sets? bissie is supposed to be the best hooker in the world but has kak defence stats, kak, carry stats and kak load of turnovers and penalties against him. all that is to show that you bitch about matfield but bismarck clearly was doing stuff all. yet one gets more praise than the other, thats just plain bull man. but thats just the kind of hypocritical attitide ive come to expect from you like your vitriol against morne in spite him being always better than lambie and goose juice.
SASaffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SASaffolk Captain30,741 posts
06 Aug 2014, 19:10#7
Matfield was a liability in contact - he has no grunt
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
06 Aug 2014, 20:21#8
No doubt a hot topic in U13 coaches group. B ut not something real rugby guys take seriously
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
06 Aug 2014, 22:31#10
Mozart
I said Matfield stats seems to be acceptable for one reason and one reason only. Matfield's tackles range from average to weak and although the count is high the e quality is not so. You mentioned De Jager's stats as well. Even though his tackle count is lower - he had much less playing time than Matfield on the one hand (about half the game time Matfield had) - and on the other hand the quality of his tackles range from average to strong. You would find with Matfield there is no turnover in possession and players move forward in a tackle - but the strong tackles of De Jager - forcing players back have had turnovers in possession and penalties as a result.
So please get real - you invented a term "process tackling" - Matfield's tackles are in the main weak process tackles.
DBDbDraad
Captain26,388 posts
DBDbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
06 Aug 2014, 22:43#11
Mike, Meyer is the Bok coach and does not tackle, although I'm sure he can do a better job than some of the players. He also do not carry and I'm sure he hasn't conceded any turnoves. :-)
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
06 Aug 2014, 22:49#12
Thanks = I corrected my mistake - obviously was referring to Matfield.
