Nice topic on Meyer's Legacy as a coach and how it affected his successors

When Plum raised the issue of selection of De Klerk  I raised  the issue of Meyer’s ignoring the Lions players in selection of the WC squad  -  AO came up with an unbelievable response  similar to what was mentioned by Mozart  when the topic was raised in the past.

My comments  on the issue of team selection

In the thread on team selection for the 2915 WC I wrote s follows:-

“The brilliant Meyer could find no place for any Lions player in the Springbok WC squad in 2015 and all the players listed above were denigrated by the rabid four - Mozart, Ceradunce, AO (whatever his user name was then - I think it was Gonzo the Ape) and Pakie.   

Now suddenly they have softened there approach and the attack is on Du Toit - one of their pet hates - so they support Mostert all out, “ 

AO response

Gonzo the Ape? I can honestly say I have never heard of such a name anywhere else on earth! Certainly isn't style! 

Who were the Lions, in 2015, who deserved a test spot for the World Cup? Here's the entire Lions squad of 2015, do point out these hidden gems.

1. Marnitz Boshoff  (Pollard, Lambie, Morné) 
2. Andries Coetzee
3. Robin Coetzee
4. Ruan Combrinck  (Willie, Kirchner, Lambie)
5. Ross Cronje
6. Faf de Klerk  (Du Preez, Pienaar, Page) 
7. Steph de Witt
8. Ruan Dreyer
9. Corne Fourie
10. Stokkies Hanekom
11. Elton Jantjies  (Pollard, Lambie, Morné) 
12. Jaco Kriel
13. Robert Kruger
14. Ruaan Lerm
15. MB Lusaseni
16. Malcolm Marx  (Bismarck, Strauss, Brits) 
17. Lionel Mapoe
18. Sampie Mastriet
19. Derick Minnie
20. Howard Mnisi
21. Franco Mostert
22. Martin Muller
23. Julian Redelinghuys
24. Mark Richards
25. Courtnall Skosan
26. Warwick Tecklenburg
27. Armand van der Merwe
28. Schalk van der Merwe
29. Jaco van der Walt
30. Jacques van Rooyen
31. Anthony Volmink
32. Harold Vorster
33. Warren Whiteley  (Duane, Schalk, Louw) “

My response

I really had to laugh about the above posting and the list of players he gave and those Meyer selection that kept the Lions players out of the squad.   If I ever saw BS selections those were it.

Who should never have been in the WC squad:-

Kirchner, Morne Steyn, Pienaar. Paige, Brits, Jannie du Plessis. Matfield and Alberts

So there were ample spots where the better Lions players could have been selected. 

Gonzo the Ape was a clarification of one of your previous user names you posted under.  Your postings were so clueless an Ape would have been an improvement.     

Plums response

Aug

Mike was punting Marx since day dot. 

Long before anyone else as I recall. 

Similar to the way he's talking about Augustus now. Or rather, has been for the last year or so.

Most of us saw Redlinghuys' absolute dominance in the SR scrum as Bok worthy. Guy was drawing penalties seemingly at will. Terrible shame what happened to him. 

I'm not defending Mike's position or attacking Meyer either. 

I do however remember thinking at the time that there were a couple of Lions that should have made the Boks squad.

Right now, it's the Sharks players that are being ignored and there are a good few that I'd like to see in the squad. 

Meyer didn't plan for anything past the WC. The upside of that was that Coetzee had a blank slate. 

A good coach would have relished the challenge. Coetzee folded and ended up presiding over one of the darkest eras in Bok history. 

Plum – just a reminder – Mozart defended Coetzee’s appointment initially and stated he was a merit appointment and he should be given a chance to see how he deals with the selection and coaching issues.   That was in direct  opposition to what the board feeling was.

NONE OF THE RABID FOUR RESPONDED TO THAT POSTING OF MINE AND DESPERATELY TRIED TO GET AWAY FROM THE TOPIC.

WHY NOT DICUSS THIS ISSUE FURT HER – SINCE IT HAS A DIRECT BERAING ON THE LEGACY MEYER LEFT FOR HIS SUCCESSORS.

This is your big stand? How desperate can one be? 

You still can't tell me who should have been in the team. The fact of the matter was that the Lions didn't have a core worthy of Bok selection. Kirchner was 9ne of the best players on the field against Japan. I suppose 81 metres in 9 runs for 3 defenders beaten, 1 clean break and 2 offloads was of little consequence?

Had Morné been playing against New Zealand we'd have been in a final. I assure you, we'd have gotten out of our half. What did Lambie bring in his place? He was comprehensively outplayed by Ono, he stuttered in his showing against the USA, and was ineffective when he replaced Pollard against New Zealand. It was hilarious, he was watching Pollard hit the line hard, and thought he could do the same thing when he came on. He was smashed and turned over in his first run.

Matfield outplayed Lood. This is a very easy selection to make. Furthermore, who should have been in his place were he omitted? I asked you to name the Lions players who should have been selected for the World Cup, you are trying to obfuscate the question which you posted right here.

I'm not a Pienaar fan, but he was clearly the next in line after Du Preez. In fact, I'd point you to his RC performances which exhibited a very quick and clean service from the base of the ruck. His passing was much better than what we've seen from Faf this year - not that he was the better player. Who would have been his spot from the Lions? Faf was not test quality in 2015. If Meyer played him, the journos would have attacked the selection in the wake of a World Cup exit, particularly if he started in the game against Japan.

Jannie was our only scrumming tighthead. He outplayed Malherbe in the World Cup. I think Malherbe has had a great season this year, being a very consistently good Bok, but he was nowhere near this level in 2014 or 2015. He was bullied by Scotland which botched a very good backline move for a try off a centre field scrum. A scrum which was dominant when Jannie was playing.

I agree, Alberts wasn't playing well, he was quiet for the Sharks too. He clearly wasn't the same after his injury. Meyer hoped he would come alive again and produce the kind of showing that made the Boks the #2 team in the world. It sadly didn't happen, but Meyer didn't play him much and certainly didn't play him as a front line Bok in any big games that year.

Paige barely featured. I'm not a fan of Paige, but he did play well when called upon. His service and basic scrumhalf skills were solid. I can't criticise anything he did, so I can't called this a bad selection; He did watch he was supposed to when he played. 

Brits was a dud selection, but then Rassie is making exactly the same mistake. In fact, Rassie told Brits to keep himself free until after the World Cup next year. I don't like this selection, but Rassie is doing the very same thing, but for an even less effective version if the man.

Overall, this was rather embarrassing Lügnerin. Just eat your egg and be quiet. Save your ego another bruising. 

I have to laugh - fact is that all the rubbish you wrote are debatable.    Morne was so poor in 2014 that he cost us a test against Australia.   He played for bout 25 minutes from the bench in all matches played in the WC.   Why did Meyer take him along - he had proven already that he was piss-poor.   

When t\did Matfield  outplayed De Jager - not in a single test De Jager played in.   Fom 204 onwards was a serious liability nd that was proven in test after test,   Also in the WC where in the semi Matfield was atrocious.

Now stupid - I gave a list of players that should never have been in the WC squad and it was a real list bearing in mind PERFORMANCE.   Alberts played in one game from the bench and failed as per normal.   Jannie went in reverse gear in 2014 against Argentina and his scrumming by 2015 was a joke.   He never contributed anything outside of scrumming.

The embarrassment should be all over you - the weird way you distort player performances  must be the worst the rugby world has ever seen - so I have no reason to feel embarrassed - but I fear you have.       

Morné didn't cost us the Perth test, the two weak defenders cost us the Perth test. Australia advanced the ball 62 metres and scored a try because of two very poor tackles. I don't see why this should be much of an issue for you though, as Damian blew the Aussie test the following year by directly gifting two tries, including the match winner. He was beaten twice for two more, but Folau fumbled the ball and Lambie, of all people, had to bring down Toomua as he cut inside for a run to the line.

Lood was physically dominated by Argentina just as he was in 2014. His poor mobility and lack of speed or endurance being exposed for a try. He blew two attacking sequences against Wales in the World Cup with very poor hands. He was beaten by New Zealand for a try scoring attack. Victor made nonsuch errors. In fact, Victor is a positive contributor in all such scenarios. He was good all 2015.

Why bring up Alberts again? I just said he wasn't at his best in 2015. However, it's easy to say he shouldn't have been in the squad in hindsight, when having to get ball carriers together for a World Cup you think differently. Meyer gave him a chance to deliver. Steph certainly was of no use against Japan.

Jannie was our best scrumming tighthead in 2014 and 2015. In fact, nobody else delivered. He had his issues, he certainly wasn't good on defence, but there were no other options that worked. Malherbe was poor in 2014 and 2015.

Another total misrepresentation.   Even Meyer after the Perth test basically wrote Morne off as a dead loss - yet AO believes he was not to blame for the loss of that test.   How ignorant can a supposed rugby supporter become.   Just think for a little bit - if Morne did not miss the penalty line kick - there would not have been an  Aussie counter-attack and Habana would come back on field after his yellow card.     I cannot believe you are so ignorant  that you do not understand the sequence of events.  

As to your description of De Jager - it is actual lot of prejudiced BS with virtually nothing of truth in your description.   Are you not ashamed to come up with such BS.   De Jager was the Player of the Year for 2015 - if he was as you have falsely alleged he is - he would not gain that distinction in  WC year .     

Mozart

Keep to the topic and state why Meyer's legacy was beneficial for his successors.  AO is fighting like a lunatic against anything negative said about Meyer - where are you in that fight.    

And how much game time did he give them before the WC?   How many players he played constantly leaving a total void to be filled by his successors and a pool of players often enough with less than 15 tests played.   

No game plan and a totally absence of a reasonable plan for squad removal. 

No real game plan development of players - what did they learn from Meyer as a coach?        

He played Coetzee, Duane, Pollard, Eben, Kriel, JJ, Damian, Lood, Hendricks, Serfontein, Willie et al extensively. He did more than enough. It's not a coach's job to run youngsters into the ground just so his successor can have youngsters with lots of caps. No successful team does that, in any sport.

Lügnerin is straining desperately to pin everything he can on Meyer. He'll ignore two years of Coetzee. Even went as far as to say 2012 and 2018 were under the same conditions. He is entirely incapable of reasonable thought. 

AO

Again check your statements against facts.   When he was forced to use De Allende and Kriel in the WC as a center -combination they had a total of three tests as a combination. 

At the start of the 2015 WC - Pollard had 10 matches of test experience, Kriel had 3, De Allende had 6 (of which one was from the bench, De Jager  had 10 (of which 5 was from the bench).  That is just four players you claimed gained extensive test experience under Meyer,   Get real please.    

JJ had played in three matches in 2013 and was not in the WC squad, neither was Hendriks and Serfontein.   

The only younger players he selected fairly consistently were Etzebeth, Coetzee, and Le Roux.   For the rest younger players was lucky to get selected to start - most of their experience was in the form of bench selections with very limited playing time.

Coetzee inherited a list of players with limited experience from Meyer - but he was also a fool - maybe just a slightly bigger one than Meyer - and got nothing right.   What he inherited from Meyer can best b e described as a dogs breakfast.

Can I make a final plea to you - before writing BS on site - please check your facts,

He used Damian as a replacement for Jean yes, but Damian had been in the Boks as squad as early as 2014. Kriel would have nine tests under his belt before the World Cup game against New Zealand. 

He used Duane, Pollard, Kriel, JJ, Hendricks, Damian, Nyakane, Coenie, Lood, Kolisi and a host of others extensively. So no, your list of debutants he used with regularity is completely incorrect. 

This is all irrelevant anyway. How much experience does a player need to make it at test rugby? 56 tests of failure before maybe showing signs of life? If the players were good enough, they can deliver immediately. How many tests did JP, Habana, Butch, Morné, Jean, Fourie, Monty, Frans, Schalk, Juan, Victor, Bakkies, Fourie, Joubert, Joost, Du Preez, Os, Beast, Big Joe, Paulse, Honiball, Pollard, Eben, Flip, Dyantyi, Marx et al need before they showed an aptitude for test rugby?

Here's an even better question, how many long term projects succeeded?

Meyer averaged 11 debutants a season, until 2015. He built depth for his team and even when some of those players didn't start, they had spent significant time in the Boks setup. Rassie and Coetzee drew from many of those players. 

No Mozart

The whole story collapsed in the period November 2014 to September 2015 when the bottom fell out because of a variety of reasons and SA at one stage was 6th rated by WR,   It was that slump and 

*   his inability to get his selections right since it was based on reputation and not performance; and

*   the absence of an implementable game plan - with zero reference to backline play,

that led to the refusal of SARU to renew his contract.   

The situation also relates to his inability to identify players and then give them a reasonable chance to settle into the team - three players mentioned by Mozart is just not enough to ensure a good enough future player planning and development programme.    That was to my mind the worst part of his record as a coach.   His inability iro of backline play was a particular problem in the relevant regard. 

So he left the SA squad in total disarray and the collapse under Coetzee added to the problem.   Erasmus ended up with 8 players from the Meyer era to start with and of those 8 at least two were failures and the rest had limited test experience.   Just not acceptable.            

My overriding memory of the Meyer era is, wrongly or rightly, dominated by two themes.

1) We devolved and played both more conservatively less efficiently as his tenure went on. Purely my opinion.

2) We were at 2nd position in the world for some/much of his tenure and I remember saying that "All we hear about is WC prep. I'd rather beat the Abs today than win the WC next year. I'd rather experiment and lose to weaker teams from time to time but create a chance to beat the ABs rather than beat every one else but never beat the ABs."

@Mike

At the time, based on his CV, Coetzee could be seen to be a merit selection. 

I was hoping Akkers and Swys would get the job.  Everyone said they were too green. I don't think they were.

Aside from them...there was nobody else really. Unless we shopped abroad.

The Boks were far from conservative. Rewatch any test of 2014 and then 2015. The fact of the matter is that Meyer was a better tactician and game planner than Rassie. What we are seeing now is a more conservative game. A clunker game that is gradually becoming a little better. It's behind what Meyer had for the Boks. Rassie is fortunate to have an upswing in personnel after several years of next gen failures.

Even more interesting is the fact that so many of the features of the Meyer game, which were lambasted by the fans and journos who led them, are present in the Rassie lead team. This is quite revealing, as it very clearly highlights that the plastics can't interpret what they are seeing. 

Lügnerin claims using backs beneath, or outside forwards is backward and only Meyer did it, because he is "rugby doff". We see it in every team. Rassie has been using the same basic shapes. Lügnerin also claims Schalk played flyhalf, but missed how often forwards are at first receiver under Rassie. Why? There's something very wrong with that.

Meyer used more elaborate plays and schemes in 2015 than anything Rassie has done this year. It was also a flatter and wider game. Aside from 2012, Meyer was not by any means conservative. He opened the game up alot for players, and made changes to accommodate Goosen and Jantjies. Neither took the chance.

What are the most cutting edge plays and attacking shapes we've seen by Rassie? I'm busy logging them, and I've seen nothing I could say was more advanced. The most use he got out of Damian was inside runs to bunch up the seam defenders in Brisbane, which wasn't very effective. What other shapes? Little deep lying mini units of twos and threes. Playmaker backs behind/alongside/amongst a POD of 2 or 3 forwards. What kinds of set plays? Not many. Lots of very basic screen passes. Nothing particularly sophisticated. 

Kicking more ball away than under Meyer is very embarrassing for Lügnerin, who has Rassie breaking all of his golden rules for tactical kicks. Yet he asserts these were tactical concessions, tries included. Does this not read as bias? I've been quite balanced regarding Meyer, I don't defend his mistakes. I never defended them as he made them. What I won't do is endorse revisionism. I posted several games and challenged the anti-Meyer groupies to show me where the evidence for their bleatings can be found. They hide away, but bark from behind a corner.

Do be sure, I don't actually disapprove of Rassie's tactics. I actually said they got better throughout the RC. I also said he brought a more balanced game to the team, returning to old Bok strengths. He has let himself down with some poor selections, but did I not say that he has given the team an identity? Did I not laud the things he has done well?

I think it's very childish to demand absolute obedience to the Church of Plastic. These repeated distortions of past players or coaches is equally as childish. It's regressed the quality of discussion on this board, which has regrettably taken another nose dive the past few days. What do we talk about? Basically old games and a few posters correcting faulty information. That's the bulk of it.

I've made quite a lot of posts with the scope to allow others to post something more engaging. If they had the rugby IQ some of them claim to have, it would have been a fantastic opportunity to show it. Its unfortunate that they settle for less. It seems personal attacks and lies are the order of the day. 

Mozart

As per normal you lost the plot completely.   By the time the WC came along te situation under Meyer was dire.    Your list of players started off totally wrong.   Kitshoff was never selected by Meyer, but by Coetzee.

Of the remaining 8 only three had consistently selected by Meyer - Etzebeth, Le Roux and Kolisi.   The rest had all less than test tests by the time the WC came along and most of the appearances were from the bench.  

The WC caught Meyer in a bind.  He was forced to play the younger players in the starting line-up - either because of failure by the elder players or as a result of injuries.   Players with very limited teste experience was forced to start in the WC tests and since he had no real game plan in place - the result was in many respects questionable.   So of his WC squad players played less than one match in the whole WC and some played less than 30 minute in total.

If over his four year tenure there are only 8 players he identified still in the Springbok team three years later it shows that his squad building for the future was a sham.

Louw should never have played for the Springboks this year - he was average to poor in all games played.  But in any event he was not from the Meyer era anyway.   

The other problem with Meyer was that he never had a game plan that was implemented.   AO is writing story after story about a delusional game plan nobody ever saw in matches played.   Backline play was a shambles.   Under Meyer both Le Roux and Pollard started off brilliantly.    Habana helped Louw a lot early on and so did Pietersen.  However, by 2015 both those two players were so much down in performance that Le Roux found no assistance from the backs.  Both De Villiers and Fourie was of no help either.   There was no way that Le Roux could function with the rest of the backline not functioning and the game of both Le Roux and Pollard suffered as a result.   So much so that Pollard was not regularly used by Meyer and Le Roux was never used by Coetzee.  

All in all Meyer was -

*    a reasonably good coach of forwards;

*    a disaster when I came to backline coaching; and

*    clueless when it came to squad development and selection of players.

That combination caused SARU to refuse to renew his contract when he applied for renewal.

The only consolation was that Coetzee was even worse than Meyer, despite the warnings of 80% in a countrywide opinion pool that he should not be appointed as coach and your misguided opinion at the time that he should be given a chance to prove himself, despite his atrocious record as coach of the Stormers/WP.        

Mozart

As per normal you lost the plot completely.   By the time the WC came along te situation under Meyer was dire.    You list of players started off totally wrong.   Kitshoff was never selected by Meyer, but by \Coetzee.

Of the remaining 8 only three were consistently selected by Meyer - Etzebeth, Le Roux and Kolisi.   The rest had all less than 15 test tests by the time the WC came along and most of the appearances were from the \bench.  

The WC caught Meyer in a bind.  He was forced to play the younger players in the starting line-up - either because of failure by the elder players or as a result of injuries.   Players with very limited teste experience was forced to start in the WC tests and since he had no real game plan in place - the result was in many respects questionable.   So of his WC squad players played less than one match in the whole WC and some played less than 30 minute in total.

If over his four year tenure there are only 8 players he identified still in the Springbok team three years later it shows that his squad building for the future was a sham.

Louw should never have played for the Springboks this year - he was average to poor in all games played.  But in any event he was not from the Meyer era anyway.   

The other problem with Meyer was that he never had a game plan that was implemented.   AO is writing story after story about a delusional game plan nobody ever saw in matches played.   Backline play was a shambles.   Under Meyer both Le Roux and Pollard started off brilliantly.    Habana helped Louw a lot early on and so did Pietersen.  However, by 2015 both those two players were so much down in performance that Le Roux found no assistance from the backs.  Both De Villiers and Fourie was of no help either.   There was no way that Le Roux could function with the rest of the backline not functioning and the game of both Le Roux and Pollard suffered as a result.   So much so that Pollard was not regularly use by Meyer and Le Roux was never used by Coetzee.  

All in all Meyer was -

*    a reasonably good coach of forwards;

*    a disaster when I came to backline coaching; and

*    clueless when it came to squad development and selection of players.

That combination caused SARU to refuse to renew his contract when he applied for renewal.

The only consolation was that Coetzee was even worse than Meyer, despite the warnings of 80% in a countrywide opinion pool that he should not be appointed as coach and your misguided opinion at the time that he should be given a chance to prove himself, despite his atrocious record as coach of the Stormers/WP.        

Mozart

Sorry - but you have misread the whole situation.   But SARU did not and most other people did not.   What I wrote above is real and a careful analysis of the situation.   Meyer failed in most respects as a coach and his failure was due to the situation as outlined.   

I do not think you, AO, Ceradunce and Pakie would really understand what was written and would realize the deficiencies of Meyer as a coach.   

Mozart

Sorry - but you have misread the whole situation.   But SARU did not and most other people did not.   What I wrote above is real and a careful analysis of the situation.   Meyer failed in most respects as a coach and his failure was due to the situation as outlined.   

I do not think you, AO, Ceradunce and Pakie would really understand what was written and would realize the deficiencies of Meyer as a coach.   

Mozart

Sorry - but you have misread the whole situation.   But SARU did not and most other people did not.   What I wrote above is real and a careful analysis of the situation.   Meyer failed in most respects as a coach and his failure was due to the situation as outlined.   

I do not think you, AO, Ceradunce and Pakie would really understand what was written and would realize the deficiencies of Meyer as a coach.   

How can you explain deficiencies in Meyer's coaching if you cannot interpret what his players did on the field? Firstly you expect us to believe that Meyer had no gameplan at all, literally. Perhaps it was your poor rugby IQ on display? I'd say yes. Then you expect us to believe Meyer played Schalk at flyhalf. Literally. You berate him for excessive kicking, that when you support Rassie for aimless kicking. 

You stated Meyer always resorted to old players, I'd listed the average ages of his teams throughout each year of his tenure which proved they were not old teams, and I listed all the youngsters he brought into the team and which older players replaced them.

All of your claims have been routed for months now. Every single one. It gets better though. You denied the use of PODs, you said that was a make believe term. You denied how teams organise their forwards and how they interact with the backs. You also couldn't point out simple moves by Rassie and not even video evidence could sway you. It absolutely tragic. 

In the end you become red faced and frustrated as you strain to make sense of the world around you. I imagine the sleepless nights, concocting new lies to thwart the Ruckers mafia. I think you need to get out more. You've been entirely consumed by something far too big for you to comprehend. 

-Both of you wrote garbage and is in urgent need of your stupid pills,   Start off with a triple dosage and then after six months go to a double dosage if there is any sign of improvement and you two manage to move from moron to stupid.  If no such sign there is no hope that you will ever leave the moron environment. 

I started this thread to see the reaction of AO and Mozart.   They came with their pie-in-the-sky assumptions and tried to prove that pigs fly.   Their total disregard of facts and writing about a non-implemented gam plan reached new high levels of make-belief.