NZ Rugby World magazine’s 2018 World XV

So who are the selection if this Magazine:-

15 Elliot Daly (England), 14 Ben Smith (New Zealand), 13 Huw Jones (Scotland), 12 Owen Farrell (England), 11 Rieko Ioane (New Zealand), 10 Beauden Barrett (New Zealand), 9 Faf de Klerk (South Africa), 8 Kieran Read (New Zealand), 7 Ardie Savea (New Zealand), 6 Pieter Steph du Toit (South Africa), 5 James Ryan (Ireland), 4 Brodie Retallick (New Zealand), 3 Tadgh Furlong (Ireland), 2 Malcolm Marx (South Africa), 1 Karl Tu’inukuafe (New Zealand)

So what have we here.   Our supreme rugby thinker appointed by himself -

*    said that only Marx from the Springboks should be in such a team;

*    stated that Du Toit should be used on the bench - since he cannot pla y longer than 20 minutes in a match - a useless player that cannot make claim to any position - he is no lock and no loosie; and

*    clearly think that De Klerk is not up to standard. 

Mozart sis particularly against Du Toit as a player and normally start at least one thread a week to attack Du Toit as a player.    So how can anyone differ taking into account his deep sense of prejudice in this case and his consequential statement will obviously state that Du Toit is a hyped player and useless at best.   

Subjectivety is the keyword here ...THere are many of these type of World XV's being touted... not hard to make arguments for or against selections..

The Telegraph's recently posted one as well following the November Internationals

The Telegraph's World XV.

15. Israel Folau (Australia)
14. Joe Cokanasiga (England)
13. Semi Radradra (Fiji)
12. Owen Farrell (England)
11. Jacob Stockdale (Ireland)
10. Jonathan Sexton (Ireland)
9. Kieran Marmion (Ireland)
8. Mark Wilson (England)
7. Justin Tipuric (Wales)
6. Michael Leitch (Japan)
5. Maro Itoje (England)
4. James Ryan (Ireland)
3. Tadhg Furlong (Ireland)
2. Guilhem Guirado (France
1. Steven Kitshoff (South Africa)

I think in many ways the rugby scribes have their own preferences and  some selections are really subjective.

To be quite frank some players are picked based on reputation.  For instance - having watched Read in all games he played this year - I would not rate him as the top 8 this year,

However, the Telegraph is a typical Engllish paper and the SH players are as rare as hen's teeth,  One player from Australia, one from Fiji and one from SA and none from New Zealand    Typicl what to expect from that one .   . 

... notsoclevermike,  the snub of NZ players is intentional.... all the more reason to take these types of lists with a pinch of salt ...

but you could also justify the authors snub arguing the ABs have not been that good this year losing to SA and Ireland...not to mention some narrow wins...

...and yr probably right Read has'nt been that good this year and some will even say Vermeulen has been better....but it's Read that has been getting multi million dollar offers to play in Europe whereas if i'm not mistaken Vermulean for some reason has not...

Mozart

Sorry - but how many games Murray in fact played in November and the 6-Natiosn and Jubne est have been forgotten.

No I did not search for anything - it was a top rugby item in News 24.

Dimness - do you still stick with your claim about Du Toit not being able to play more than 20 minutes in a game?  

Dimness 

What you wrote about players is so deceitful that it is unbelievable.  Hell we got "process tackles" and now "process runs".

You must be kidding me - can you mange to pile the BS you write any further.   Hell how idiotic can you get. 

So now his line-out work is the worst of any of the candidates.   How many line-outs has Mostert take on opposition throw-in.   Happening to be zero and that equally idiotic remark does not take that into account.   At least witless you can carry on lying about how wonderful Mostert is in co-ordinating driving mauls - that you had to lie about the one in the French test nd get caught out.

Endless prattle by a witless idiot continues.   And that about the best forward in the SA team this year - recognized as such by everybody bar the most idiotic poster ever and his moronic sidekick,   What a joke - witless!!!!!!!!  LMAO        

Some of these ratings vary so much, it is just the same as one of us making them.

No way Ardie Savea could make a world XV, as he is not really a small fetcher. He is more like a Kolisi style of player. 

Kieren Read is a spent force. Retallack has been injured for most of the season - but he is selected even though he was poor on the EOYT. I dont think Karl Tuadsdfsdfsdfsdfsdfsdf is worthy of being the best loosehead. 

15 Elliot Daly (England), 14 Ben Smith (New Zealand), 13 Huw Jones (Scotland), 12 Owen Farrell (England), 11 Rieko Ioane (New Zealand), 10 Beauden Barrett (New Zealand), 9 Faf de Klerk (South Africa), 8 Kieran Read (New Zealand), 7 Ardie Savea (New Zealand), 6 Pieter Steph du Toit (South Africa), 5 James Ryan (Ireland), 4 Brodie Retallick (New Zealand), 3 Tadgh Furlong (Ireland), 2 Malcolm Marx (South Africa), 1 Karl Tu’inukuafe (New Zealand)

Mozart

Just a simple question - how did Du Toit fail against England?   

SB

I have a problem with a number of the selections you quoted above -

*    Read was not up to the standard he used to be in the past;

*    Retallick had a string of injuries this year and he was poor in the Irish test and better in the other EOYT and the question is - did he do enough to justify selection.

*    Ardie Savea is not an openside flank - he plays like a blindsider and is deficient when it comes to breakdown ball recovery.  

Although it may be journalistic fun to come up with selections - it is often based on  reputation and not on actual performances.  

Take for instance the Lock combinations who played against England:-

South Africa vs England

4   Etzebeth/Snyman      5      -        Itoje        2        

5   Du Toit                    6/1     -       Kruis       3/1

New Zealand  vs  England

4    Retallick                 4/3     -       Itoje                  6

5    Whitelock                  1             Kruis/Sewels     1

Retallick jumped in the front of the line-out and took Itoje to the cleaners in line-out jumping.   Etxebeth and Snyman had the same opportunity - but they did not take a single ball on England throw-in.   Why did that happen - since Itoje is not exactly a top- line-out jumper anyway?  No wonder Retallick deservedly so took him to the cleaners.

Then we have the Du Toit case - he took 7 line-out balls - one of which was on England trow-ins.

Mozart compared Retallick nd Du Toit - but on what basis?   They do not jump in line-outs in the same position - so is that aspect comparable?   

Retallick carried the ball 13 times making a 22 meter gain at a average gain of 1,69 meter per carry

Du Toit carried the ball 12 times making 19 meters at an average meter gain of 1,58 meter per carry.

Retallick made 9 tackles missing 1 -  Du Toit made 13 tackles missing 1.

Based on an evaluation of the above stats there was no real reason for lauding Retallick and attacking Du Toit the way Mozart did. 

Shit - but you are a miserable BSter.   Marx himself said it was his mistake in not finding the jumpers and he practiced for many hours to correct it.

Because Marx failed to find jumpers - both Du Toit and Vermeulen - is now blamed on Du Toit.   What you do not realize that in the cases the ball was thrown deeper because of intended driving mauls.   One throw to Etzebeth proved that driving mauls are not successful if the ball is not thrown deeper  and all the three throw-ins had to go deeper - but then you are too stupid to even realize why driving mauls went absent from Springbok rugby when Mostert played at 5.

For that reason you lied when you described what happened in the driving maul in the French test that lead to the Springbok winning try by crediting Mostert with the driving maul when the maul started to go forward because of Du Toit.    .   

Mostert never in all tests took a throw-in by an opposing team and he never had the ability to start driving mauls - so that makes him better than  Du Toit.   Ouch - what a complete idiot. .    

Duplication

Duplication

Thanks for finding ONE line-out take on opposition throw-in.   Did Du Toit not take 5 in tests he played in.   So in your book Mostert is better than Du Toit since he took one line-out on opposition throw-in and Du Toit only 5.

By the way did Mostert not lost own throw-ins at all?   

Thanks for finding ONE line-out take on opposition throw-in.   Did Du Toit not take 5 in tests he played in.   So in your book Mostert is better than Du Toit since he took one line-out on opposition throw-in and Du Toit only 5.

By the way did Mostert not lost own throw-ins at all?   

The tests will be updated - there are still tests not updated that does not reflect the line-out takes on opposition throw.   However, maybe I was wrong to accept AO figure in the case of line-out takes on opposition throw-ins,   Thanks anyway.  

Mozart

You have a very selective memory.  Watch the Wa les test and see how Mostert did lose a line-out ball to Wales on Springbok throw-in.    I doubt not that AO and your other supporters willc laim it did not happen - but unfortunately it did.         

No Mozart- the foul;-up was by Mostert himself - it was clearly shown on TV - so stop trying to get away from fact.