Morne Steyn's tackling stats.

I read over and over again what a poor tackler Morne Steyn is.....how according to Rugby 107 Jantjies and Goosen are way better. Well, here are the facts.....Morne's tackling stats since the start of the RWC11:

Wales 11/1

Fiji 11/0

Namibia 4/0

Samoa 15/2

Australia 6/0

England 7/0

England 4/1

England 7/1

Argentina 6/0

Argentina 5/2

Australia 9/0

New Zealand 6/0

That makes a cumulative record of 97/7, or a success percentage of 93%.....stellar for a backline player guarding 10 channel in huge tests, including the RWC. But there's more, he averaged 8 succesful tackles a match. A high tackle count for a flyhalf. And those who know something about rugby will have recognized that while Morne might be deep on his own ball....he pushes up very flat on opposition ball.....properly aligning the whole defence.

So, while I have my reservations about other aspects of his play, the ill informed comments about his defence are unfair. This young man has had nothing but abuse this year, and never made an aberrant remark. I fear his kicking nerve might be shot, which removes the main reason for keeping him.

But do I think we would have had a better chance of winning that last test with a pro like Morne in place versus the two youngsters? You betcha. Hell we were even with NZ in Dunedin when Steyn was subbed off. We lost the rest of the match by 13 points to 3.

Going forward we will need one of Goosen, Jantjies or preferably Lambie to claim the position. But it wont be an easy road.

Back to the top.....these stats deserve to be seen. Just to keep the record straight.

 Mozart. Stats ,when taken out of context, doesn't tell the full story. If you avoid tackles it doesn't count as missed tackles.Also if a player runs into you and makes 10 meters as they do with steyn, it still doesn't count as a missed tackle. This is Steyns problem. So before you put stats up, make sure you understand them.

Hope this helps you

Mozart

I said stats are wondeful things - they do not take into account what actually happen in given circumsyances on the field of play.   However, they did show one thing and that is that Morne became a relatively good defender and shook off completely his initial problems in the relevant regard.

However, the stats in this case is meaningless - nobody ever really criticize Morne Steyn on the score of his defence - at least I did not ever say anything negative about him in that regard.   Where I wa really critical about him it relates to -

*   His tendency tto kick away possession to the benefit of opposing teams - do me the favour and look up the possession percentages of the games where he was playing as flyhalf - it normally range somewhere between 35 and 45% - the latter figure against the weaker teams;

*   His inability to play a role in attacking backline play - that being the main problem he has though.

*   More recently his poor goalkicking form - in the last test he plaued in (Dunedin) - it was 20%.

The above are - I believe - the  main reasons for dismissal from the team.

By the way I think we both miss out on an incident last week duting the test.   All Black NZ wrote as follows about it:-

"I thought Goosen showed incredible courage to get up and attempt to tackle Whitelock as he was only back there in the first place cos he was down receiving treatment for his injury during the build up to that try."

The above explains to me why the ball was passed with disastrous consequences to Taute and not Goosen.  I admit I did not notice that and you made a remark about his feeble effort in the relevant regard. - so I assume you also missed it.    

The All Blacks attacked the number 10 chanel for more when Steyn wasn't there.  Even though I don't think Steyn is the answer to the future of South African rugby either as an All Black fan I'm always happier when he's not playing.  Especially when you throw a player there with limited test experience. Steyn has been influential in beating the All Blacks and the Crusaders before with his deadly boot and Drop kicking ability.  Compliments the up front style of the Spring Boks.  I can't believe the flak he gets.  Unfortunately we do the same to our players in New Zealand when we lose.  I also can't believe how a young Taute is just written of after 1 bad game, can he never improve? You guys are hard on your players. There would be a lot of great players in history who had bad starts to their International careers.  At the end of the day the selectors are far more knowlegable and have far more access to all sorts of information about players, game plans etc... than we do.  All we do is watch it on TV and we know it all.  Debate is always good about players though but compared to the selectors we know F.. All.  I like healthy debate about players but not the way we run them down after all they have reached a higher level than we ever will.  Our two countries are masters at slagging our players when we lose.  When sometimes maybe the opposition were just a bit better on the day!

All Black NZ

Wise words from a real rugby lover - we should all bear that in mind in criticizing players.   It is easy to criticize - especially sitting in front of a computer.   I believe every decent coach - despite comments to the contrary I think that Meyer is one -  review performances frame by frame - and base their decisions ultimately on that.

We can only assume matters and take a lot of liberty in that regard - often even misreading specific plays - and then start commenting on a board like this one.   However, that perhaps is the only reason why we are members after all.  

In both NZ and SA we are very hard on our players.

As for Morne Steyn, I dont think Jantjies and Goosen are miles ahead of him in defence, just that they are not as bad, but not as solid as Lambie.

Morne needs time away from the game. He knows that he has to work on certain aspects of his game and he should be given time to do so.

All Black in NZ, I agree with you regarding the opposition being better on the day,but sadly for us, the ALL BLACKS have been better all year. We were outsmarted and outclassed by a better team on Saturday, thats it.

*   His tendency tto kick away possession to the benefit of opposing teams - do me the favour and look up the possession percentages of the games where he was playing as flyhalf - it normally range somewhere between 35 and 45% - the latter figure against the weaker teams;

Bullshit Bertie and his made up stats.... The actual stats from the Springbok management and coaching team indicates that in the case of his kicks it led to a more than 80% advantage for the Springboks in terms of territory by the time they regain possession... Which shows that you are speaking complete bullshit!

Let's just look at some other stats...

Dunedin: Pienaar kicks 11 times, Morne 6 times

NZ made 28 kicks from hand, SA 27

Perth: Pienaar 13 times, Morne 9 times

Australia made 40 kicks from hand, SA 34

Your opinion on this is about as accurate as your prediction of a 20+ points win for the Boks in Soweto... You get people that know something about rugby and then you get people that predict a 20+ points win for the Boks...

Apollo

Nice reply - but after the territorial gain - who was in possession of the ball - the Springboks or the opposing teams?   I agree with you about Pienaar kicking away possession as well - the question is not who did it - but the kicking syndrome as a whole.   That probably stemmed from a misconception by some that kicking is the answer to attacking play.- it i not and we lost that test in Perth because of clueless play - nothing else.   In any event Morne kicked less than Pienaar did - but how many times in that selfsame game did he pass the ball to his inside center and how effective were those passes.  

Why don't you respond to the other statements as to the obvious deecline at kicking amd his  inability to assist in attacking rugby by the backline as well - or is that too near to the truth?   Tose are probably the main two reasons why he was dropped from the team.

Mikey, Mikey. Carefully read what the Greek God has said. He said:

".....a more than 80% advantage for the Springboks in terms of territory by the time they regain possession..."

Then also there is the constant noise about SA kicking every ball away. Ever so often the facts about of the number of kicks are posted and then they are conveniently ignored. We are said to be kicking away the ball at every opportunity, yet we kick less than both Australia and NZ.

Morne has been horribly out of form and it cost us. He even admitted it. He is going through a slump and he has been really bad in all aspects of his game. Not a fan, but  he will improve his game.Morne kicked away good attacking ball against NZ in NZ. Lets leave it at that. 

According to Stats, Jaque Potgieter made the most tackles in Argentina.Does this mean that Potgieter is a must for the boks?

According to stats, teams with big backline players tend to win worldcups? does this mean we need to put Waylon Murray in  our team?

Please take stats into context.

Bongani2

We kicked less than the AB's, but their kicks were excecuted with precision. Its not kicking that has been the problem, its that we kicked with players open on the outside.

Our kicks were just handing possesion over, not just Morne, but also Pienaar.

If you say so 107, if you say so.

Ever since the Honiball days South Africa have been obsessed in having big strong Flyhalfs that can knock opposition back. We had butch who did the job but has also been a penalty machine, then there was Braam the Cart horse van staaten, not forgetting Whites obsession to find big 10 such as Bosman and Frans Steyn.

Big flyhalfs that make massive tackles are a thing of the past. Top teams are investing far more on 10's that can play tactically and that can get their backline going. I have never seen Carter ever put anybdy on their backside, that is because its actually the job of the loosies to protect that channel.

What you do need is a 10 with a good tackle technique that can make the right tackles to stop momentum. For me Clevermike is right that there is no point having a 10 that catches a piggy back ride everytime a player attacks his channel. For me Lambie is better than all the other Flyhalfs, he takes the player low and stop momentum. Which is the right technique, Goosen gets knocke out far to often, Steyn catches a piggy back ride and Jantjies tackle gets broken far to often. I think he has been improving in the aspect a bit this season. 

There are different dimensions to tackling, and a "happy medium" has to be found. You can tackle "high" and piggy back ride but then have an opportunity to prevent or hamper an off-load. On the other side you can go low and take out the runner's feet from under him, stopping him in his tracks, but then his hands are free to off-load at will. There is no wrong or right way to tackle. It is more an issue of the right type of tackle at the right time.

As an example, a ball carrier that has broken the line, and has become isolated from his support, can be tackled low and stopped in his tracks, and it is even better and more effective if the tackler has some of his own team in support.

If the ball carrier has lots of support around him, which often happens when the flyhalf needs to defend, it is better (IMO) to try and perform the tackle in such a way that you prevent the off-load, even if it means that the ball carrier gains a metre or two.

Ou rkicking i sobviously not over done in trms o fquantity but qualit yis a question as is the chase.

A far as moene is concerned the  facts are clear:

Normal a ver ygood if not outstanding goal kicker. He has t recover tha tform to b ein contention.

His defence is solid enough.

He can playattacking rugby as has been seen on a number of occassions when playing for the bulle.

The number of time she kicks has somethig to do with tactics.

Although he can play a running game he is not as good a runner himself with the ball as Goosen neither can he kick the ball as far.  The indications are that Goosen is a more talented player.

With a much better Bok pack emmerging and with better go forward ball one can expect a less conservative approach once this side settles down and things gets going.  A backline consisting in the future of say Hougaard, Goosen, Frans, Jordaan, Habana, JP and Taute has huge strike power. We need a good backline coach to put it together - that is the only concern.

A backline of the future? Well that's good because our backline of last week with Jantjies, Goosen and Taute accomplished nothing. But, hold it, Jean was there. Ah yes, there you have your problem. Morne is gone so it must be the other oldster .

As long as we keep annointing these young guys without asking them to make a case first, we are right back in Destroyli world.....the place Jake saved us from.

If White was coaching the Boks .....Fury (I don't rate him personally), F du Preez and Bakkies would be back for next year....probably along with Juan and Schalk. And then a few of them would quietly disappear as young players, used off the bench, showed they were ready for test rugby. That's how a professional would do it.

Mozart

I that is how a professional would do it - by picking the players you have mentioned ourely on the basis that they played for the Springboks in the past -  - we are indeed doomed beyond any redemption.   Virtually all the players you mentioned are way past their sell-by date and there would definitely be NO IMPROVEMENT in the team at all.   If the lack of performance by De Jongh in Super 15 this year does not show you anything - than nothing will,   He was crap to put it mildly.  In any event he had an opportunity to score a try against the Aussies or contributed to scoring - but he fluffed it.   He is one player that years back showed something - but to select a formless De Jongh would add no value at all.

Bakkies at lock - you seems to think that a 34-year old is of future value - you must really be kidding.   In any event Fourie is only due back in 2014.

The only one that may yet show something is Du Preez.   He was never a player that I would play myself - but he could still make the grade by a push.   The other player that could help is Kankowski.    But I should think that nobody should be played purely on reputation or because they previously was in the Springbok team - that would be utterly unprofessional - they will have to show at Super 15 level next year that they can still make the grade.

Mikey. That is the type of response when the first intention, when you start reading someone's remark, is to see if you can find gaps where you can punch holes in his argument. That is when you miss this part:

"If White was coaching the Boks .....Fury (I don't rate him personally), F du Preez and Bakkies would be back for next year....probably along with Juan and Schalk. And then a few of them would quietly disappear as young players, used off the bench, showed they were ready for test rugby. That's how a professional would do it."

Bongani

You are a gentleman and a scholar.   I stand corrected and maybe should not have been as bad is it would appear to be.

However, I stay with the last sentence in my comment above .

I'm sorry but didn't white start Dupreez,Cronje,devilliers  as youngsters

He did yes, but under different circumstances. They Bokke just cam off a disastrous campaign by Rudolf Straeulli (probably worse than PDV). In addition, Jake White knew exactly what he had in them. He coached them the previous year when he won the U/21 RWCwith them.

Actually no 07....Jean was introduced by Destroyli against France, as a starter,  in November 2002. With predictable results he went off with a badly damaged knee in his first tackle. He never made it back to the Bok team until 2004. He wasn't ready and should have played off the bench to start.

You provide almost a perfect example of what I'm saying.

 I have never rated Morne Steyn as a tackler. I have watched games when he falls off players, or gets a piggybag ride until one of his team mates does the proper tackle, or does a Naas Both impression of running near the player and then waiting for some one else to do the tackle first, and then falls on both the tackler and tackled player. No amount of stats will change my mind that he is a poor tackler. If he makes 8 tackles in one game it is not by himself. I have watched many games to know that Morne is not a good tackler. Although I would agree with the premise that a flyhalf, or scrum half is not on the field to tackle unless their is no one else. As soon as a tackle is made, if the scrum half is lying on the ground their is no one to pass, if a flyhalf is on the floor their is no general to pass to. The flyhalf is the key decision maker on the field, although Ruan Pienaar at 9 has taken much of this responsibilty as of late. 

Mozart

I stand what I say previously - nobody should be selected purely based on the fact that they were Springboks in the past - or on reputation.   They should prove that they are still capable of being the best in their positions.  The one player mentioned by you - I assume you referrred to De Jongh -  played in Super 15 this year and was a complete failure - so what would make him suitable for Springbok selection?   De Jongh's attacking skills was non-exitent and his defensive skills very average.

You talk about Juan - if it is Smith you are referring to - he apparently has no interest in resuming playing and has played no rugby at all this year.   

The others played club rugby overseas and nobody really know whether they have made any contribution or not.

Burger has not played any rugby for a year - is he still up to it - nobody knows.

I say they must play Super 15 and if they come through they can be considered on merit.   By the way I doubt very much if any of them will make the grade.   They are from a bygone era - and it is useless to live in the past.  

Mike where all you guys get it wrong is you view each selection as an individual lottery. Each position is independently chosen and the so called best player selected. Jake's view, which I totally buy, is you have a Springbok team. Individuals are members of that team, and stay members of that team , as long as they execute the team's plan.

When that becomes questionable you "introduce" the new player.....off the bench at first. If he proves....AT TEST LEVEL.....to execute the TEAM'S plans better than the incumbent, by an observable margin, you select him as a starter.

Not one of our youngsters....Mvovo, Taute, Goosen, Jantjies, Etzebeth or Coetzee passed that test. If they were better, it was temporary, and only in some aspects. The closest is Etzebeth, but he is still no Bakkies.

It's about a team that develops skills, coordination, trust, esprit de corps and confidence. It's not about selecting individuals.

 Mozart, I know Jean got injured in his first test, so when Jake got hold of him, he barely had any test experience. 

I agree with you regarding the introduction of young players into the test arena.It should be done the smart way. The problem is we don't have the experienced players available to ease our youngsters into the test arena(off the bench).

If we introduce a young centre, then we need experienced wingers and a centre next to him. The same goes when playing a new fullback, you need two experienced wingers next to him.

Remember Jakes disaster against Ireland in 2006 where he had a back 3 making their debut as well as Habana at centre. This is not the way it should be done.

I know you don't rate the guy, but we need Fourie to teach the youngsters how to organise the defence, Jean actually hasn't stepped up regarding this. Our defencive organisation has been horrible.

Mozart

I do agree substantially with your analysis and suggestions about phasing players in - as well as the team environment - but I also believe you cannot use out of form players in team selection - despite them having been good players in the past.    They must not be played on reputation or merely the fact that they were Springboks in the past.    If they are out of form and cannot perform well - then they place the team as a whole at a serious disadvantage.

Jake White was a very good coach - I never doubted that at all - but White also dropped non-worthy Springboks from the team and initiated moves to upgrade the performerance of players that was out of favour like Montgomery - who always had the real talent to play better.

However. I believe White would never have picked a player whose performance was suspect and not known at that given moment of time.   I must re-itterate - there is no way that players like De Jongh can be wished back into form - when he failed in Super 15 for a season as a whole.    Meyer in fact is also inclined to favour experienced players - proof being De Jongh and his persistance with Morne Steyn - who from a performance perspective had the worst year in his rugby playing career.  

Fourie played overseas - but what did he produce there.  We do nort know at all.   He may have been good enough - but at 33 he is probably on the way out.   In any event his contract in Japan is up to 2014 and he cannot play for any other team before that date.    The same - but not the contract issue as a whole - applies also to Bakkies Botha.    In any event our forwards were not bad in the tests played this year - it was in the main the backline players that failed badly.

If you refer to Juan Smith - he has in practice - without any fanfare-  retired from rugby and at his age is unlikely to return at all.   Burger we do not know at all whether he would be able to play  on the basis he played in the past after his latest injury.   I hope he does  and would have no problem if he is selected to the team - but we need to know whether he can produce the goods and that can only happen in the 2013 Super series.

Du Preez was always the most predictable scrummie ever, but who went missing at crucial stages of matches - the main reason why I never liked him as a player.   However, my likes and dislikes is not important here.   He himself said when Meyer approached him earlier that he cannot perform up to the required standard and ruled himself out.   What  is the position going to be in future?   We do not know at all.   The only yardstick to my mind is what happens in the Super series next year.   I hope he shapes up - we really have no relaible scrummies at present.

Personally I think there were too many players that in fact overstayed there welcome in the Springbok team.   There was with rare exceptions no real renewal in players for years after the White era.   Since the older players went out of contention virtually simultaneously - they left a huge vacuum with very limited expereienced players actually available      That really resulted in a major problem for Meyer who to my mind was forced into playing more rookies than ever before.  

I know you have written off virtually all the younger players as not up to standard - but was that really in all faurness the case?    What other options did Meyer had in any event?   

 Clevermike, you make a good point. That's what I've been saying, we need experience, but we don't have experienced players on form.

2004 end of year tour. We had a good trinations. Marius Joubert and Dewet Barry were very good in the trinations, but during that tour they lost their form from game one. An inexperienced player would have been better.

 Some "experts" here, claim that after one bad defencive showing, missing two tackles, then a player can't tackle even though that same player was very good the week before..???

Did anyone see our Captain and experienced player JDV(I rate him) get embarrassed by Brian Odriscoll when he played for Munster. Jean missed tackles that whole game on BOD, one led directly to a try. Am I to believe that Jean can't tackle or was it just a bad day at the office. It happens

Every youngster selected by Heyneke, did show some promise at international level. None of them had me writing their names down in a world 15, but we can't discard any of them. 

White and Heyneke didn't inherit experienced teams. The difference is that White surrounded himself with good assistant coaches, not his bulls friends.

White also had a game plan and a good defencive structure. He started youngsters,but he didn't rush them back from injury.

Please.... JdV had one bad defensive game in over a hundred first class matches....and that's the same as Taute leaking tries in his second test?  If you look at Taute's S15 performances at centre....you see he misses 2 or more tackles in a several  games, and never makes a lot of tackles. Besides which he added nothing to our offence either game.....a grand total of 27 metres in 12 carries.

I personally doubt he is going to be anything beyond a warm body.

And I think Mvovo and Greyling can be discounted now. Coetzee already looks like a kid who just doesn't have enough firepower for NZ, and Jantjies was almost irrelevant out there in the second half.

If we don't have better players, perhaps we will have to play these guys, but every one will be a competitive loser against his NZ opponent.

Etzebeth and Goosen are the only newbies in with a shot of becoming world class.

Mozart

I think in essence you did not really respond to my comments and I assume you in fact agree what I said.   As to the situation relating to expereienced players in the Springbk team this year there has been failures.   If you look at platers making their debutes as Springboks before 2011 - I would say the following basically failed this year:

Kirchner, Hougaard, Morne Steyn and De Jongh (note all are backline players)

Of the new players selected the first time this year I think the following did not really let the team down:-

Etzebeth, Vermeulen, Goosen and Coetzee

I know you do not rate aspects of Coetzee's game - but he is a deadly defender and his ball carrying capacity will improve with age and experience.

The new players that really was not successful was the following:-

Greyling, Werner Kruger,  Jeandre Kruger, Potgieter, Jantjies, Mvovo, Engelbrecht and Taute

That really is a long list of failures - some were really bad, others sub-par.   Some did not play a full game - they  came from the bench.   However, most are not Springbok material at all - some were downright useless and some were only in because of injuries to established players.   Despite your misgivings I think that Taute can develop further  (he is still very young) - but most likely as a full back.

I think Meyer made some really bad mistakes with player selection - he preferred Bulls players - whenever there was a fill-in needed.   Please note that of the failures 5 were Bulls players.   Media hype and interference by the powers to be could have had an inpact insofar as Mvovo and Jantjies are concerned.   In any event  - when new players by force have to be selected as happened this year - there will be successes and failures.

I have one serious problem with the present coaching set-up though.   Meyer;s choice of assistant coaches was atrocious.    That applies in the main to backline,  defence and attack coaching.   That could in fact account for the number of failures - but then I believe some of the above failures are in fact too bad to benefit from any coaching at all.   Meyer should change his assistant coaches pronto.

Mozart Jean had more than one bad defencive showing,  it happens, he is all class(not in his best form now).

As for Greyling I agree with you, I didnt take him into consideration as he was introduced to test rugby by  Pdivvy.

Then I ill say, Greyling,Daniels,Engelbrecht,Mvovo,Potgieter, werner Kruger were failures.

Morne was a complete failure this whole year. He is a talented kicker and this is what kept him in the team since 2009 and he won numerous games for us with his kicking.

I dont think he should be brought into the test side until he works on his all round game.

Goosen,Taute,Ebzebeth, Jantjies and Coetzee showed potential as well as shortcomings. They will all develope

As for Tautes offensive display against Aus, he did well considering the ball he got as he stepped his direct opponent numerous times, but he hasnt showed much on attack, well not according to his potential. I still believe he should be a fullback.

 Our backlines attacking structure doesnt allow our centres to attack. The only meters Jean made was against Aus when he had that big break against 14 men. Jean always makes meters, why do you think that he hasnt made much or not as much as he is capable of?

Mikey. You have some of the stuff about Fourie du Preez wrong as well. His age and his reasons for turning down Meyer's invitation to join the Bokke again.

Bongani

I know for a fact that Du Preez is 30 tears old,   Fourie is 33.   I only wrote about the reason for turning down Meyer's approach by Du Preez as he himself said on TV and was in the media.   Sorry about any misunderstanfings. 

 I think that if we had the likes of Du Preez, Fourie, Bakkies, Burger around the season might have been a bit better. At the moment the youngsters coming through have nobody to measure themselves against. So players such as Hougaard will always get into the squad easily as their isn't many other players above to push him. 

If we can create competition with in the squad and not be to fixcated on what senior players and what they have done in the past and allow the easing of this players into the team, our rugby will be much stronger. 

De Villiers completely destroyed that, how many of the youngsters did he bring through to replace the likes of botha and fourie. Where as New Zealand very rarely seem to be in the building phase, the only time that happend was in 2009 where they had a whole bunch of new players but bounce straight back the following year.

I just hope that we can do that next year and also sort out the number of games our top players play. 

Time to stop digging Mikey. Which Fouries are you talking about now? Fourie du Preez, who was born on  24 March 1982 and who is 30 years old, or Jaque Fourie who was born on 4 March 1983 and who is only 29 years old?

Du Preez never said that he cannot perform at the required standard. This was what he said:

"

"I had a few meetings with him and he said he wasn't 100 percent sure he's at his best," Meyer told the media after Saturday's squad announcement in Pretoria.

"He said he hasn't played for almost three months." www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,16024_7793374,00.html

www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/Springboks/Fourie-du-Preez-Im-not-at-my-best-20120603

Another quote from Mail & Guardian:

“I’m well aware that we have a wealth of talented scrumhalves, in particular Francois Hougaard, whose time has now come,” Du Preez said in a statement. “It’s time for the next generation to step up and I’m happy to help play a role if the coach calls on me.”

The 30-year-old Du Preez, who was one of numerous Springboks to retire or move overseas after last year’s World Cup in New Zealand, said he would help out the Boks “in a crisis” and was also happy to mentor younger players.

But he was committed to Suntory until his contract there ended in March 2013, he said.

mg.co.za/article/2012-05-08-pick-hougaard-du-preez-tells-bok-coach

Bongani

Thanks for correcting me.  I somehow always thought that Jacque Fourie is 33 years old.   I must have mixed up his age as to what age he would be in 2015 at the time of the next WC.    Sorry about that.

Your quotes on Fourie Du Preez is also 100% correct.   I will bear it in mind in future comments.    It is indeed surprising that Du Preez said the Hougaard is good enough to play as scrummie - yet it turned out not to be the case.   I personally think that Meyer realized that when analysing Hougaard's performance in the earlier tests thus year.

Do you think Meyer will  try and get Du  Preez back in 2013?  

Mike, Bear in mind that FDP said that before England test when probably 9/10 persons would have nominated Hougaard as his succesor.

I don't think HM will bring him back for 2013. He said, at the time that was considered FDP,   that he did not have enough time and that he was thinking short trem only. His first priority was winning the England series and that he was promarily after FDP for his leadership/the captaincy. FDP will not be back in the Green and Gold, IMO.