When reading about Matfield - there are always a number of accolades being written about him. Those include -
* he is the best line-out speciaist in World Rugby
* he is good at reciving kick-in balls.
Lately a third quality was added - the high number of tackles made by him,
Lets analyse the above a bit and see where we get.
Line-out specilist
There can be no doubt that Matfield was in the past exceptional in line-out takes. he frequently also robbed ball when throw in by opposition hookers. The qustion is - is he still the same?
Looking at his performances since his retrun to test rugby - he started off lie a house on fire and in early tests even managd to take a few opposition throw-ins. However, the stealing of opposition throw ins has gone compeltely and his number of line out takes has dwindled down to a very low figure of 4 takes in each of the last two matches.
In earlier days he would tcatch the ball in the air - nowadays he is as likely to slap the ball back to the scrummy 9 (at times inaccurately) as he is in catching the ball in the air. He also has a tedency to funble balls in line--outs or even lose balls thrown in by his own side - especially late in games.
Is he still the line-out specialist he was in the past? Unfortunately there is no indication left of any such wondrous line out play and at present he is an aver age and sometimes weak line out player.
Kick in Specialist
The kick ins to Matfield has been an extreme rarity and in one case where it did happen - he funbled the ball and the Springboks were lucky - the ball went backwards from him. He also tried to make a catch from a high ball kicked by the English and made a complete hash of it.
Is he still a kick-in receiving top player? There is virtually no sign of that since his return to the Springbok team and indications are that he is not better than any other locs in SA.
He is a top tackler
Here there are two issues, namely -
* to what is the high tackle count attributed; and
* the qualiy of tackles made.
The real truth is that most of the tackles stemmed from the fact that he is moonlighting in the backline or behind mauls - rarely enterring mauls. The number of players crrying the balls to the area where Matfield is loitering is high - so he would have a high tackle count.
On th other hand there are real indications that his tackle quality varies from average to poor - and that players when tackled by him goes forward in the tackle and ball recovery by the opposing team is easy.
The question is - would it not be better to have him playibng in Tight 5 contaxt and having loosies contesting balls in mauls - doing the work in defense that Matfield is doing now - or having a case that the loosies assist the abcks and having a good contestor up front? The nswer really is that a lock should do the work of a lock and not that of other players - while the forwards struggle to get the upper hand in such situation.especailly when the players up fromt struggle.
Physicality
Matfield never was a physicl player - he always tended to try and let the publcik forget about that lack of physicaity bymoonlighting int the backline. The enegative is seriously problematic - sine he weakensas a lock in the Tight 5 context has a detrimental effect on the performance of the Tight 5.
SUMMARRY
We now have a situation where the Tight 5 is weakened by him and where he does not live up to his reputation anymore. The sooner Matfield realizes that and quit in the interest of Springbok rugby - the ebtter.
