Mozart's Matfield disease

I was highly amused about Moizart's views that -
*    Matfield is to start and play for the full 80 minutes on Saturday;*    Etzebeth should play for 60 minutes; and
*    De Jager must play for 20 minutes - replacing Etzebeth

The joke further has two other elements, namely that -
*    Matfield will not ignore Etzebeth in line calling - like De Jager does; and*    Matfield and Etzebeth is the ideal combination - since Etzebeth does the hard grind and Matfield is a "tactician".
Line-out Calls
Lets look at the above two scenarios Mozart stated so eloquently.   In the first instance Matfield played for 134 minutes and made the following calls:-
Total calls   =   22Matfield      =   16De Jager     =    5Du Toit       =    1Etzebeth    =     0
So why did Matfield make the 6 calls to De Jager and Du Toit?  It has all to do with the widely reported fact that Meyer instructed the Springboks to use driving mauls against the Japanese and was furious when Matfield in the first half disregarded that instruction. .  Matfield does not want to get involved in the forming and co-ordination of driving mauls and avoided them like a plague - so in the Japan game he moved to the front of the line-out and called the line-outs to go to De Jager (5) and Du Toit (1), who was to form the diving mauls Meyer instructed them to use.  
What is really weird that Mat\field made the wild statement about Etzebeth being ignored by De Jager and properly used by Matfield.   Really farcical.        
Matfield's Performances
According to Mozart Matfield is a "tactician".   Does that mean that he only be that without regard to actual performance?
Lets face facts - it is clear thus far that Matfield avoids driving mauls like a plague - so his value in that component of the game is zero-minus.   But what about the rest? He makes tackles while he is in the backline and the quality of the tackles are average - he never makes strong tackles and the opposing team has no problems in recovering of the balls after tackles.   Matfield has the ability to get and pass balls in the backline - but he is totally incapable to carry balls in traffic and he goes straight down in traffic - often enough resulting in penalties and turnovers by the opposition.  His role in mauls is minimal as well since he is just not strong enough physically to remove obstructing players in mauls.
So lets look at De Jager's performances in tests this year.   He is stronger in line-outs and resulting driving mauls than Matfield is.  He more or less always is the catcher  and engineer of such mauls and he does the co-ordination of the mauls as well.  He has a massive work rate and make more or less double or even more tackles than Matfield does.  The difference lies in the quality of the tackles - where Matfield's tackles is average - De Jager's tackles is strong driving ball carries back in tackles and causing ball recovery problems for the opposition.  De Jager's frequent ball carries in traffic constantly result in more than one defender to help in tackles, thus putting the opposing team on the back foot easing ball recovery by the Springboks.   Mozart makes a lot of noise about De Jager's limited abilities to be active in open field play - yet De Jager since June 2014 scored 4 tries in the 16 games he played at lock.  Not much - but a heck of a lot better than Matfield's 7 tri es in 125 matches he played for the Springboks.  2 of De Jager's tries came from open field play.  
Etzebeth said he is inspired by the performances of De Jager - if De Jager makes a good tackle Etzebeth strive to make an equally good or better tackle in competition with De Jager.  He did not mention Matfield's performances  once in the article that remark is taken from.  It seems to explain why Etzebeth was lethargic in the Japan test where Matfield was setting the exmple of lethargy.   The impact on Etzebeth by the De Jager challenge is massive and definitely to the benefit of the team        .         
In essence we have a top class performing lock Mozart wants to replace with a "tactician" with really questionable quality in performances.    If Meyer makes the mistake of replacing De Jager or Etzebeth with Matfield - the team is going to be weakened and the test most likely lost.   

Du Preez boring
What a crock of sh!t

 DA
I agree with Dave about Matfield - he really is not good enough as a lock anymore.  However, I do not agree with him about Du Preez - he was good in the tests he played in - but a bit under the weather against the USA.  He looked tired to me.  However, he is a good scrummie and I hope he lasts through the WC.  
I noticed that in the 2013 and 2014 tests played by Du Preez he was good in a test followed by a very average performance in the succeeding test played the next week.  In Japan the clubs play fortnightly and the lesser number of games played allowed for a longer recovery period after each game - a luxury not available to Du Preez in this tournament.
So ;lets hope it works out.        

J apanese rugby is more demanding of cardio fitness levels. Ball in play time is significantly greater than super rugby and the speed is greater. 
The rest is baseless and laughable.

 DF
Do you never understand what is written here or does that have to do with your defective mindset.  Not laughable because it is factual - laughable because you are clueless about the issue of the need for a performing Tight 5 and the role a lock must play in that environment.  
 

 This driving maul was started by a mythical jumper.....we know Matfield took every lineout including two on opposition ball. Nobody else took one.

But according to Queer, Matfield never calls any mauls on himself...so some higher power intervened. And I suppose 12 of the 13 other mauls took place after Matfield was subbed at minute 53.

Queer develops these cockamamie theories, excuse the pun.....but never bothers to check any facts. Matfield called several mauls on himself in the Samoa game, as he always does.
45

Samoa starting to look a little ragged and South Africa get a penalty in kickable range and opt to kick for the corner and a try-bid rather than the 3-points.

466 - 22

The Bok line out is followed by a rolling maul and a dart at the posts and then some loving passing out to the wing and Pietersen scores his 20th international TRY!

Not only this, but Lood is apparently the primary driving force in the maul that starts when he is the initial jumper. Imagine that, pushing yourself to glory. Lood has no weaknesses! 

Du Preez does that when its on. But do note, the reason he is so much better than Reinach and his wing brethren is because he makes the right decisions and executes. All these supposed running 9s lack skills for the position and just heap pressure on the team through mistakes. Worthless.

 Mozart
Is De Jager any worse in line outs than the weak Matfield - the answer is NO - is he a better ball carrier and a more effective tackler than Matfield.  Matfield played 134 minutes in the WC thus far and his tackle stats were as follows:-
 Matfield - time played  -=  134 minutes   =  18 tackles
De Jager                      =  160 minutes   =  42 tackles
Ratio per minute played:-
*   Matfield                  =   A tackle every 7,33 minutes*   De Jager                 =   A Tackle every 3,80 minutes
And you cannot tell and convince anybody in the world that the quality of Matfield's tackles is better than De Jager's
The same applies to ball carries in traffic and all other aspects relating to Tight 5 performances of locks.
if it comes to writing drivel - what about your drivel about De Jager ignoring  Etzebeth in his line-out calls and the BS about so-called other calls coupled to the myth that Matfield will not do that?  That really is BS by bucket-loads.
IF MATFIELD IS IN THE MATCH 23 ON SATURDAY - THE SPRINGBOKS MAY JSUT AS WELL MAKE THEIR RETURN FLIGHT ARRANGEMENTS  - THE MAN IS A SERIOUS  HANDICAP - AS WAS PROVEN IN THE JAPANESE TEST AND SO MANY OTHERS OVER THE LAST YEAR.

Saffex
 
Status: Hall Of Fame 
Posts: 13948RE: Mozart's Matfield disease
October 13, 2015, 15:20:21

Yep du Preez is boring.....all he does is pass and kick.....I expect my test 9 to snipe and challenge the defenders at times

 

When the opportunity presents itself he has sniped many times from around the scrum, you are not giving him a fair call on that, very biased indeed

The Boks used Lood to lead an arrowhead defence in the middle, since most of the punching is in the middle, he will naturally have runners coming right at Him! He is supported by other forwards as well. All this is just to show you Michael that you really haven't a clue what you are talking about. 

Eish..... Which one is it?
clevermike
 
Status: Hall Of Fame 
Posts: 19999RE: Rugby World Cup Power Rankings: Wallabies edge All Blacks from top spot; by LIAM NAPIER
October 13, 2015, 12:16:35

 I think the Wales game will be won or lost tomorrow when Meyer announces his team fir Saturday.   if Meyer refrains from picking some of his favourite passengers, the Springboks can book their flight home asap.

If the Springboks pick the right team - then it could be a relatively easy win for them - but they must avoid the trick Gatland played on Australia and not play the game Wales describe to them to play.   

"IF MATFIELD IS IN THE MATCH 23 ON SATURDAY - THE SPRINGBOKS MAY JSUT (sic) AS WELL MAKE THEIR RETURN FLIGHT ARRANGEMENTS "

Poor HM. Damned  if he does, damned if he doesn't. 

 DF
And where is Matfield when De Jager makes his tackles?  Moonlightu\ing in the backline? This is th biggest laod of drivel I gave ever comes across from somebody who claims he knows something about the game of rugby.   So who is going to make the tackles if De Jager is not there?    Ever herd of defensive lines?  Obviously not.  What you miss out on si the quality of tackles - where Matfield makes weak tackles DE Jager strong ones.  
Alberts who makes 8 tackles in a game at the outsider and is liable to miss 4 of them - Paris test 2013 is an example.   So let the other 4 guys take the tackles one player does and then the dimwit does not realize that it is stupid to sacrifice such a lot of players to do tackles and not save them for other work.    Your idea on this issue is ridiculous and could come from a 10 year old kid - because it is based on BS.
No DG - try again - the drivel in this case was way below par and reach the utmost level of stupidity displayed on this site.  
Alberts - what a joke - are you really serious?    - LMAO at rank stupidity this ti me around.