Not so Clever Mike

Watch the following video and tell us all whether you fo not feel a bit ashamed about the drivel you write on site:-

Slow and strong - but what else? not any cases showing his defense either,  Wonder why?     

Jeez, there are some sensational offloads in that video.

He's my choice at 12 ........ Dee-ah-lin-day aint no gamebreaker.

Mozart

I came across a similar package on Francois Steyn/  It started in 2005 when he played at hooker for Grey College and then for the Sharks and ultimately the Springboks,   Despite him playing for the Sharks up till 2015 it came to a dead stop in 2012.   All  the long drop kicks and penalties were covered and also the tries scored,   But never a word about his defense.

Nothing - since 2012 - why should that be?  

There's not a whole lot wrong with Esterhuizen's defense. He was superb in that respect against Australia last year - his dominant tackle in the first seconds hitting Australia back for example contributed to Dyantyi's intercept try 10 seconds later, and he kept pressuring the Aussie line with well timed rushes throughout the game.

He is vulnerable to the things a big unit is vulnerable to - two of his misses in the wet against England for example happened while chasing kicks and getting stepped by the receiver May (07:00 & 9:33) , a difficult situation for anyone but especially for a big guy who can't change direction and accelerate quickly. In his channel he is rock solid.

What about his low tackle count dimness?   

What about it? I have explained all of that to you before, if you didn't get it then you're not going to get it now.

So by the way ou Mike, if you're going to insist on calling me some cute little name every time you address me, I'm going to insist on not responding to you. We're not in primary school anymore.

Pakie

You explained zero to anybody about why Esterhuizen in fact in four tests in 2018 made 22 tackles and missed 5 - while the despicable De Allende in four tests made 42 tackles and missed 5.   That is why I referred to his very low tackle counts and the few tackles Esterhuizen actually attempted .

All you came up with is that Esterhuizen made strong tackles and De Allende - with his weak upper body strength made weak tackles,   Total BS of course - as is so often in evidence. 

The real situation is that Esterhuizen is too pace-deficient to get to ball carriers to attempt to make tackles.   

Wonderful how Erasmus saw that and kept him out of crucial tests in 2018 and how you lot explain away his stupidity in the last few minutes of the English test in November last year.  You may or may not respond to this - I am waiting for the jokes coming forth. .         .    

You explained zero to anybody about why Esterhuizen in fact in four tests in 2018 made 22 tackles and missed 5 - while the despicable De Allende in four tests made 42 tackles and missed 5.  

I dealt with this on 28 February.

Feb 28, 2019, 20:29

Why don't you take the entire season's stats for both players, Mike?

De Allende 79 tackle attempts at 84% success and 8.7 tackle attempts per game.

Esterhuizen 46 tackle attempts at 80% success with 7.6 tackle attempts per game.

Then take into account that Esterhuizen only played the last 20 minutes in the final England test. If you discard that and only take the tests both players started:

Esterhuizen 42 tackle attempts at 83% success with 8.4 attempts per game.

Barely anything in it, with or without the adjustment. But nice attempt to cherry pick the stats that favor your man while ignoring the rest.

All you came up with is that Esterhuizen made strong tackles and De Allende - with his weak upper body strength made weak tackles,

I have never said anything about De Allende's upper body strength. You are again confusing me with someone else again. CC and Auge are two of the guys who have made that claim, not me.

The real situation is that Esterhuizen is too pace-deficient to get to ball carriers to attempt to make tackles.

That's a claim you're going have to prove with real examples of where his pace prevented him from making a tackle. You're going to need as much luck with that one as you needed when I asked you to provide just a few examples of all those hospital passes you claimed Morne threw. Still waiting.

The proof of the pudding is in the tasting.

Honestly ... if that's all it t5akes to have you guys sing his praises then we should include a lot more 2nd rate players into the Bok mix.

No wonder you all rate Kolii as a suprstar.

Estie has played how many tests ... ? ... and in those tests, how many trys has he scored?

Let's compare that to a slightly above average test center ... Jean De Villiers?

See the difference?

There is no comparison between the two. 

In short ... Estie is not test match material ... so to answer your ignorant question Xavi ... Mike has no reason to be embarrassed.

Your attempt to gain a little favour with the rest of Moffies toadies is obvious. There is however an easier way to obtain toadieship and seeing as you already have your lips puckered the rest should be easy enough to work out.

Suck a fat one CC. It was a tongue in cheek response to Mikes thread.

I literally copy and pasted what he wrote but that's probably flown straight over your little head.

Try not to be a knobjockey  will ya.

CC was just looking for an excuse to put his fantasy about puckered male lips into print again, Xavi.

Pakie

What season are you talking about,  I took the tests Esterhuizen started in - there were 22 tackles made and 5 missed,    Where did you get the 42 tackles made and 5 missed in four tests De Allende started in.   An attempted bamboozle or what?

You refer to a season - not sure what season you are talking about.   You cannot comare De Allende in all tests started and include the bench tests into the system - it makes no statistical sense at all.   Apples must be compared with apples - take 4 tests Esterhuizen started in and take 4 tests De Allende started in.   Don't grab figures out of the air and I stated clearly that -

*    in the four tests Esterhuizen started he made 22 tackles and missed 5; and

*    in four tests De Allende started he made 42 tackles and missed 5,

Where you got the 42 tackle attempts of Esterhuizen from in his starting tests  in 2018 only you can explain - ESPN cannot do so apparently.     

So De Allende started only 4 tests in 2018? You conveniently leave out the Australia test for Esterhuizen? You can't even get these basics right but you want to engage me in debate. As I said, this is not primary school and I'm not entertaining children anymore.

ESPN cannot do so apparently.    

If you can count, they can. If you can't count, I can't help you.

I have nothing further to say on this, already dealt with a month ago. You're welcome to keep orbiting around the same planet tossing your ignorant little snot balls if you wish.

No Pakie

Stop pretending you are an idiot.    I took four starting tests of Esterhuizen -

*    the Wales test                      5 made  -  0 missed   

*    the  third English test          4 made  -  3 missed  

*    the Argentinian home test   9 made  -  1 missed

*    the Argentina away test       4 made  -  1 missed

That made it 22 tackles made and 5 missed.   Where did you get the 42  myth from?

As to de Allende I similarly took the info for his first four starting tests  in 2018,   Problem is you lied and now claim I am wrong on the issue.   Nice way to try and cover lies - bu t that will not be of help to you BSter,

Where did you get the 42 tackles made and 5 missed in four tests De Allende started in.

LOL! You said that, not me!

Here, look:

What season are you talking about,

Gee, let's think. In what season did Esterhuizen play test rugby? Could it be...2015? Oh no, he wasn't playing test rugby then. 2016? Nope. 2017? Nope. Oh, hey, it can only be 2018 then! Gee mister, that sure took a lot of brainworkings to figure out hey?

Where did you get the 42  myth from?

*    the Wales test                      5 made  -  0 missed   

*    the  third English test          4 made  -  3 missed  

*    the Argentinian home test   9 made  -  1 missed

*    the Argentina away test       4 made  -  1 missed

*    the Australia test                  13 made - 2 missed
(which you conveniently omit because it fucks up your little theory)

5+4+9+4+13 = 35 successful attempts

0+3+1+1+2 = 7 unsuccessful attempts

35+7 = 42 attempts

My numbers match exactly what I said, if you'd read.

Again, why do you only want to use 4 tests instead of the entire season? Why do you stop short of the test with Esterhuizen's best tackle stats?

Now kindly apologize for yet again calling me a liar when everything I've said is spot on and backed up by the official data. Or you know what, don't bother. I've had such a good laugh at you aggressively questioning your own numbers up there that it's made this whole episode worthwhile. I do pity you sometimes, you poor confused creature.

Bullshit in Buckets   as per normal.     I referred to 4 tests and indicated what four.  your way is what one calls absolute BS,

Even if you add the Aussie test - it still get you below the number of tackles made by De Allende in four tests.   Get the message - the tackle count is still way below that of De Allende and the missed tackles higher than those of De Allende 

In any event the calculation is to the missed tackle ratio is as follows :

Tackles missed  x 100 divided by the total number of attempts

That equals to a mtr of  16,67.

In the case of De Allende - a fifth test takes his count up to  53 tackles made missing 7

That equals to a mtr  of  11,67 

Incidentally "missed tackle ratio"   is a universally acceptable method of evaluating tackle efficiency of players.   The norm for backline players is basically as follows:-

*    13 to 15   -   acce ptable

*    10 to 12   -   good

*     9 and below - exceptional

So Esterhuizen is just above what is normally  regarded as acceptable - not a disaster - but not acceptable as well.   

The difference of 5 points on that mtr scale is massive.   Fact remains in 5 tests De Allende made 18 more tackles than Esterhuizen did - while missing the same number of tackles than Esterhuizen did.   That mans an average of 3,6 tackles per game more comparing De Allende with Esterhuizen.  Get the message .  

I accept you are not a liar and apologize for that - however I also believe you are a total rugby illiterate and for that I do NOT apologize. .

your way is what one calls absolute BS,

No, my way is fair. Work out an average across the whole season, not just the tests that support the story you want to tell. Otherwise you end up, for example, ignoring the tests where Damian had a low tackle count, like the 23/4 across his last 4 tests.

OK

You wanted a fifth test added and I did add it.   But from there you went totally off the rails.   The only norm used to determine tackle efficiency is in fact the MISSED TACKLE RATIO as calculated by me.   The rest is pure baloney.     

You are trying to use all kinds of manipulations to benefit Esterhuizen by hook or by crook - and I used your five test scenario and what I brought to the fore is totally correct.   You are now as per normal ducking and diving  to get out of the situation you created for yourself.

Where is Silly Billy  - has he ducked out because he was making such a fool of himself for the umpteenth time on this site?   You must be missing him - you were always in cahoots with him supporting all his crazy BS.   .        

OK

You wanted a fifth test added and I did add it.   But from there you went totally off the rails.   The only norm used to determine tackle efficiency is in fact the MISSED TACKLE RATIO as calculated by me.   The rest is pure baloney.     

You are trying to use all kinds of manipulations to benefit Esterhuizen by hook or by crook - and I used your five test scenario and what I brought to the fore is totally correct.   You are now as per normal ducking and diving  to get out of the situation you created for yourself.

Where is Silly Billy  - has he ducked out because he was making such a fool of himself for the umpteenth time on this site?   You must be missing him - you were always in cahoots with him supporting all his crazy BS.   .