I have tried to make a proper analysis of the actual performances of Matfield - based on statistical data as well as his actual performances in games:-
Stats per test
Wales
Matfield
0/0
0
0/3/6
12
0
0
0
0
11/2
8/0
0
0/0
Wales
Matfield
0/0
0
0/2/4
8
0
0
0
1
10/0
10/1
1
0/0
Scotland
Matfield
0/0
0
0/3/2
2
0
0
1
1
9/0
6/0
1
0/0
Australia
Matfield
0/0
0
0/2/2
1
0
0
0
1
13/4
5/0
1
0/0
New Zealand
Matfield
0/0
0
0/1/2
1
0
0
0
0
17/3
7/2
2
0/0
Australia
Matfield
0/1
0
0/7/13
18
0
0
0
0
16/2
6/0
0
0/0
New Zealand
Matfield
0/0
0
0/4/4
4
0
0
0
1
10/0
5/0
1
0/0
Ireland
Matfield
0/0
0
0/1/7
1
0
0
1
0
8/0
9/0
0
0/0
England
Matfield
0/0
0
0/4/1
3
0
0
0
1
12/2
4/0
1
1/0
Italy
Matfield
0/0
0
0/5/6
9
0
0
1
1
10/0
4/0
1
0/0
ANA LYSIS
So what can we learn from the above?
Ball carries
Matfied's ball carries in traffic borders on the non-exstemt - where he does try to carry balls he goes down quickly. In two games were he did show ome meters in ball carries was where he got the ball while in the backline. Totallyineffective in carries expected from a lock - ie carries in traffic.
Tendency to Lose Possession
In six of the ten tests played he lost ball possession once. Those possession losses is in the main linked to when he carries balls in traffic.
Tackle Stats
In the ten games played - he made 116 tackles and missed 13. The latter represents a missed tackle ratio of 10, 7% - whiuich n the face of it is good.
Line Out Takes
Matfield's real reputation is largely based on his line out abilities. In his case he has -
* taken 64 lie out on own throw - ie an avergae of 6,4 line outs sper match;
* taken 3 line outs on oppoition through at an averageof0,3 line outs per mactch played.;
Penalties
In the 10 games played he gave away 8 penalties
FURTHER ANA LYSIS
Ball Carries
The fattc that his bal carries in trafficis totally ineffective is a negative - a lock should be able to do that as part nd parcel of his job. The problem is that Matfield is easily tackled and goes down straight - not going forward. That allows for the oppostion to take away balls easily - a major part of his ball possession losses - or force penalties in cases where he has hung on in tackle situations.
In essense this is a serious negative insofar as his performance as a lock is concrned.
Tackling
For a lock Matfield ia involved in a very high number of tackles and there are two questions to be asked, namely -
* what is the reason for the high number of tackles; and
* what tackle quality is involved.
In the main the reason for the tackling count is in the fact that Matfield rarely become part of mauls at tackle breakdowns - he stands around behind, adjacent to or even in the backline - where you would rather expect the loosies to be present - not a lock. He thus leaves the maul work to the loosies - which in a way is counter-productive.
The second issue relates to the quality of tackles. Matfield does not make strong tackles - tackled players goes forward in tackles and the opposition normally recovers balls with ease. That implies that his tackles are numerous - but in essense not really effective.
Line Outs
Matfield started off in line outs like a houseon fire - in his firs two tests - but the third and succeeding tests showed a decline in line out takes.
Matter of fact the last two tests were below par. It seems as if Matfield runs out of steam in line out play if he ahs to play a number of games in succession and even during games. Towards the end of games he has been seen to lose line out balls on our throw-in and even fumbled balls in the line outs instead of making secure catches.
The question remains - is he still as good a line out player as he used to eb - and the answer seems to be no - he is nothing special in the relevant regard.
Grunt?
Matfield never in hsi career was noted as a player that should any rut in forward play. He was never prominent in mauls and really a passengerin driving mauls - forcing the selectors to play players with more grunt in the loosie positions.
At present he has deficiencies in mauls - he rarely enter mauls at breakdown situations - he lacks physicality in ball carries and driving mauls - there are serious question amrks about his effectiveness in scrumming.
In essense indications are that he has deficient grunt to make him a valuable Tight 5 player and that his presence in fact weakens the Tight 5 considerably.
SUMMARY
The question remains - is it worthwhile to ahve Matfield as a lock in teh Springbok side - and the answer is that it is debatable. Indications are that he is playing on reputation - more than on what eh actually prouces.
