No conclusive game on this Tour so far

We have set piece dominance and can pin teams deep in their half for very long periods. We don't have the attacking nous to really make teams pay for this. If New Zealand had that platform, they'd be cutting teams to ribbons. Our attack is too predictable, slow developing, linear and our distribution chain lacks a finisher. We aren't making space for our wings. We're a kicking team, and that appears to be our biggest weapon. If not our only weapon at times. This shouldn't be the case.

Our forwards can beat anyone up. We could field several combinations that could bully any team in the world. Our backline, and its implementation, is very far from satisfactory.

I don't think a win will change the complexion of the season. At least in my eyes. Though I think ending on a high note will do wonders for moral, particular given how poor the past two tours up north were. There is a lot to learn here. It really does depend on Rassie. He seems very set in his ways and will bludgeon his will through irrespective of the consequences. If he doesn't learn, if he isn't willing to adapt, he will go the same way as Peter. Another coach who was too stubborn to learn. 

Both Mozart and AO have serious problems with  -

*  Erasmus as a coach and even before he was appointed the two of them - assisted by Ceradyne - started a falsified campaign against him; and

*   they have a mania campaign against certain players and for that reason they always support any other players despite serious deficiencies on the part of players thy found support for.

When asked questions about what they really want and who would solve the problems their answers showed nothing of consequence - logic means nothing to them.   They create myths - for instance the story that Mostert was so good in co-ordinating the final maul that let to the try last Saturday against the French - hiding the fact that he tried to and ended up being pushed up into the air and the maul success had to be to credited to  Du Toit (one of their pet hate players) and Vermeulen who took the maul forward. 

They are known for having their own versions of what happened in games and do not mind falsifying circumstances to fit their campaigns.   It soon becomes clear that the game they watch  is not the one reflecting what really happened and when it is pointed out to them that they created false descriptions - they go bananas and came up with BS like Matfield being the best performer in matches during 2014 and 2015 where he failed badly.  That Steyn who regularly missed tackles on players made non-existent line breaks in the Stormers - Sharks game in 2014.

Their concoctions of myths are actually endless - so Du Toit -  recognized worldwide  as a top player - according to them is useless and a real low work rate player like Louw is the best loosie in the squad at present.  

One can only pity them - when pointing out the truth about issues - they abused stats by comparing the non-comparable and then claim that they know better than anybody else what is happening in games.   Everything going against what they preach is hype, yet they themselves hype up some failed players.

This thread is a typical example of what they come up with.   They refuse to recognize that Erasmus inherited BS from Meyer and Coetzee and had to start building up a playable and usable squad from scratch.   The players that he used is then credited to have been identified as players by Meyer and bar a few players like Etzebeth and Le Roux rarely used in tests by Meyer until the 2015 WC when the wheels came of badly as a result of BS squad selection.   Beside that they go on and identified players used firm time to time by Coetzee - who did not know anything constructive about selections and often enough ignored players inherited from Meyer and never used them in combinations.   So Erasmus inherited a squad from his two predecessors and did squat on his own.   

Bad news the two of them when it comes to reality and any comparisons between what Erasmus achieved in his first year as coach compared to what his two predecessors achieved in their first year as coaches is to be discredited.   And wonderful stories about backline play is created when in fact what AO claimed is so far removed from what Meyer himself said and did that it is funny in the extreme.      

There's a lot of truth in the header. The Boks just can't get to the next level, it's almost like a 6 cylinder running on 5....but why?

Style of play and speed of play is no different to the Irish or AB's but unlike them, we seem to hit a flat spot. Are the Boks perhaps carrying one too many a plodder ? The one thing that stood out about Ireland is that to a man they distinguished themselves, individually there are no weaknesses.

Rassie is delusional if he believes he can turn plodders into RWC champions. 

I have logged all the details. I know exactly where the ball is going, where it ends. I've logged all the plays and every attacking sequence. What have you got? Poorly interpreted numbers from ESPN for a game you clearly never watched? Or just another lie? I spotted four lies in your post and I hadn't even finished reading it. Meyer did more in his first year with less. Not that I need to compare Rassie to anyone, I was merely evaluating what he has done in and of itself. 

I find it hilarious. He was supposed to be Mike's anti-Meyer. Instead, he is everything Mike claims to loath. He has strained desperately to deflect attention from the real issues. When he is moaning about Meyer, you know he is really feeling the heat, and is unable to defend Rassie. The past week was a disaster for the poor forked tongue. Many battlegrounds left in ruin. Where to next? Blame Jake? Desperate times for wee Mike. 

You logging is as distrusted as your description of game plans are.  So lets have a laugh when you post things on site.   Most Laughable BS price would be given to you as per normal.   

Laugh now. It always ends with you mashing your keyboard in a tantrum. I'm still waiting for you to post your first verifiable piece of evidence. Your last attempt, the comparison between 2016, 2012 and 2018,  was a spectacular failure. Funny though. 

The Dups brothers and some better centres would have seen us win more convincingly Moz.

In the English game, JL or Dan would have made that crucial break and put somebody into space with an offload. Similar to Snyman this past weekend. That's my feeling anyway.

But even with the forwards as they were, somebody else at 12 would have actually produced a proper opportunity for the 13 or a winger on at least one occasion.

It's inevitble that both JL and Dan will be in the squad. If it were up to me i'd get them in there sooner rather than later.

I'd have Esterhuizen at 12 while still using Pollard as his replacement and i'd have brought Zeilinga and Ward into the squad also. Combrink would have been my utility back and Willemse would only have been brought in after the 2019 WC, once his proved his worth at SR level.

Wise words Plum. Send that to Rassie.