Moz on the Plumtree change

-

And it's the right decision. If the chemistry wasn't right with Plumtree, they would have eventuallly have arrived at the same place....but with a lot more collateral damage. And Plumtree's handling of his own troops was very questionable.....Frans and Steph are not fans. The case for Plumtree was the run up to the S15 final last year, but as we saw with Mallett.....a good patch guarantees nothing in the future.

-

The Sharks have a fresh start, not a bad place to be, and Plum has his money. 'Nuff said.

Sometimes it is important to remember that circumstances impact on issues like happened with he Sharks and make an objective assessment - and not write rubbish on this site.   Plumtree was the top coach last year in SA - this year he had a very poor year.   There were reasons for the poor team performance - real ones and not invented ones.

That being said poor team performances are routinely reasons for replacement of coaches - and Plumtree's replacement was justified on that basis.   I had no complaint about his replacement - but had serious reservations about the way Smit handled it.

So what are you really referring to about hyenas howling?   The objective assessors of the situation on the site by any chance - and don't tell me you are objective   

Mozart

What a useless sheister we have here = always ready to carry on with wrongs of others - but never with what is wrong with his own contributions - normally a load of deluded rubbish in any event.

Come now - lets get some of the threads in which you criticize Du Toit and praised Kruger up again.   Let us get the praise singing of De Jongh going again.   Let us think how you attacked Lambie and raised Morne to the saviour of Springbok Rugby again. 

If you ever write something positive about younger players on this site - it would e a miracle.  Now suddenly Steyn was the reason for the Sharks win yesterday - but knowing you - your hatred of Engelbreht is so strong that you hope Steyn would replace him.   That being said you remarked that De Villiers did not play well yesterday - because he was playing at 13 and not 12 - heaven knows why  you said that.  It could only be linked to Engelbrecht issue again.

-

clevermike Status: Rugby Legend Posts: 6371 JJ Engelbrecht as a player September 12, 2012, 10:27:46 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I cannot help writing this thread - as Engelbrecht has been punted as the future 13 great hope. I have always had some reservations about him in defence - since he really plays and defends like a wing.

However, after watching him play at both center and wing this year on CC level I was in fact shocked by what I saw in the recent games. Lets take for an example the WP - Bulls game. In a break-out from their own 22 Du Plessis carried the ball and the defeneder was Engelbrecht. He completely missed the tackle and was lieing on the grass afterwards. That happened whilst he was on the wing.

When he was moved to center - the situation was much worse. Both Brache and Du Plessis scored tries with Engelbrecht missing tackles completely. The Brache try he could be forgiven for - the Du Plessis one inexcusable.

There were problems in other games as well - especially against the Sharks and the Lions. This guy has speed - but lacks the insight to play at center. His future is as a wing - bad news otherwise - very bad news.

Dead head

That was written after Engelbrecht - and as a matter of fact the Bulls team as a whole - had a bad day against WP in the CC last year.   However, Engelbrecht - despite your constant harpings to the contrary - had better games subsequently   What about the fact that Engelbrecht afterwards did perform much better as part of the attacking backline scenario of the Springboks.   There is still doubt about certain aspects of his defence - but those were not as bad as the defence for instance of Morne Steyn at Ellis Park    You said nothing about the latter's flop in defence and his missed kicks at goal till I raised the issue and even then you tried to soft-soaped that one.

Now we have had another question - why not open up in full what you wrote about Du Toit and Lambie over the past six months?   I raised doubts about Engelbrecht and still have some reservations about his defence - but you lied and carried on about Du Toit and Lambie beyond recognition of proven facts and statistics.  When challenged on the stats of Lambie and Steyn - you promptly chickened out.   When challenged on the Du Toit issue you chickened out and three months later came back with the same bullshit as spouted by you earlier - something to do with hyper activity.   When challenged on Kruger's abilities the same happened.   A spirited defence of Kruger - followed by another spirited defence on his ability to take over part of the loosie activities because of Alberts proven defect in mobility.

It goes on and on.  Non-thinking posts containing mindless and vicious attacks on any younger player that threatens Mozart's favourite players week after week.  Sometimes when proven wrong comprehensively - he returns later on with the same arguments he raised previously and more hidden defence of the under-performing player than he did in the past. 

Do you really not ever get tired about defending under-performing incumbents and start writing facts rather than fiction?