Moz's extra strong, live Pom match notes

Stupid as per normal.   When he cannot admit that he and Mozart buggered up - he puts a mule on site - showing he has mental deficiency. LMAO

You've been debunked. Only an angry mule would fail to comprehend the clip posted, then attack the debunker . You were too eager to be disagreeable, because you never learn from past failures, and ended up with egg. Ende.

Plum sorry - to describe a kick one has to see what happened subsequently - an aimless kick is never recovered by the side kicking the ball.   It is total delusion  to claim that kick was an aimless kick.

An aimless kick is normally made when it cannot result on pressure on the opposing catcher or where the kick represent a plain ball handover to the opposition.   The other thing is that an aimless k9ick is what Morne became famous for - kick for tth sake of kicking - in other words it is a kick without any objective whatsoever.    

Sorry - and the ball was NEVER recovered by May  and the Springboks recovered possession deep in the English 22. 

It must be totally delusional what Mozart wrote in this case and that is a fact.  

Plum sorry - to describe a kick one has to see what happened subsequently - an aimless kick is never recovered by the side kicking the ball.   It is total delusion  to claim that kick was an aimless kick.

An aimless kick is normally made when it cannot result on pressure on the opposing catcher or where the kick represent a plain ball handover to the opposition.   The other thing is that an aimless k9ick is what Morne became famous for - kick for tth sake of kicking - in other words it is a kick without any objective whatsoever.    

Sorry - and the ball was NEVER recovered by May  and the Springboks recovered possession deep in the English 22. 

It must be totally delusional what Mozart wrote in this case and that is a fact.  

I'm not surprised Mike has trouble evaluating this situation. He also said the tries we conceded in the RC from aimless kicks were tactical concessions. Very loose definition for aimless, when it furthers his agenda. 

Ok Mike

Let's expand on that point.

A batsman plays a stiff bottom hand defensive shot that gently drifts back directly into the bowlers hand for the easiest of return catches.

The bowler fluffs the easiest catch of his life and drops it.

Do you think the batsman tries to replicate that shot, telling himself that the otucome was desireable, in that it dented the bowler's confidence, and as such there was nothing wrong with the shot? Do you think the coach sits in the dresing room telling the rest of the batters "Watch and learn boys!"

It's an unforced error. The very name of the situation tells you everyhting you need to know.

How open is Nkosi?   This is the type of supposition that theoretically is better.   I have seen hundreds of such kicking which is basically turning into an advantage for the ball kicking team.   There were so many defenders that prevented Nkosi from scoring.   

No Mozart - you turn suddenly from a kick supporter - who preached that kicking is the answer - to query a real pressure kick.   A pas may ion theory have worked - but it was about 40 meters from  the tryline and the chances were that the movement would have ended up much less effectively than the case was in fact.    

Mozart - if Fat Fransie was playing and he made that kick - we would still read about praising him a year from now.    

I've seen much worse kicks by the Boks than that one this year alone.

If you want to see a good grubber from 12, watch the Welsh test. André did it and created pressure. We got the ball back. 

A nd we lost the test!!!!!!!!!!!  Look at what Andre did in two tests against the English - unsuccessful plodder.

André's body of work is better. He was better in the 3rd English test and overall less of a hindrance in the last test. I've already cited several problems with Damian. Being bamboozled and beaten inside, allowing England to advance deep into our 22. Allowed England runner to run across of the face of him and past the edge of the defence. Willemse was the only thing preventing a try. He was run over head on. He also conceded a decisive penalty after the ref warned  him he was offside. Failed to pick up any runners. His game, exactly as I have already stated. To the detail. I don't need to turn this into a player x vs player y debate. Damian fails all on his own. Damian the player and Damian the mythical creature are two entirely different things. Where have we seen this movie before? 

I like "Damian The Mythical Creature" more than "Damian The Tractor"

Lets take this discussion a bit further and look at alternative inside centers - so we can see what alternatives he has to be more effective at inside center.

Mozart - you are always wise after the act - so tell us who you support for selection at 12.

BB

Fact is that one of my main problem with Esterhuizen is his defense - he has huge problems in that regard.   If his defense is analyzed it is clear that he ahs too high a missed tackle ratio and too low a tackle count to be a good enough defender at 12.   Even on Saturday he made two tackles and missed 2.

De Allende had games especially in 2015 where he showed serious deficiency in defense - but this year his defense was very sound.  His 2015 reputation should not be used at present.  One can analyze his defense this year and it is twice as effective as  Esterhuizen factually was. 

I think a careful analysis will reveal that I think De Allende play according to a crashball game plan favoured by Erasmus - and he is very effective in it.   But is that the real game required by the Springboks at present?   I frankly do not favour such an approach.