Objetive Player Performance Assessment - Springboks 2018

Forum » Rugby » Objetive Player Performance Assessment - Springboks 2018

Nov 25, 2018, 10:44

Full backs

Le Roux       -       6,5/10

Le Roux was brilliant at times – but in the latter part of the year showed some problems insofar as especially his passing game is concerened.    The only other player used at full back for limited times  were  Willemse – who played more at flyhalf  an wil be assessed in that position.


Nkosi           -       5,5/10

Kolbe             -      5,5/10

Dyantyi       -        5/10

Mapimpi     -        5/10

All four has pace – but there defense is seriously questionable.   Kolbe is physically too small to really compete and there  is a lot of work to be done insofar as development of the other three are concerned.


Kriel                  -     6/10

Am                    -     4/10

De Allende       -    4/10

Esterhuizen     =     3,5/10

Kriel was sometimes a defense problem – but did score tries and cannot be faulted from that perspective.  Am was a defense liability and together with the wings he was a defense disaster.  De Allende started off with a good tackle count and brought nothing into the game in the EOYT.   Esterhuizen made two good carries  in one test – but lost ball possession at the end of each.   For the rest his carries were poor and his defense was seriously deficient.


Pollard            -        6,5/10

Willemse         -       5,5/10

Jantjies            -       4,5/10

Pollard was far from perfect.  He was at times brilliant and at times poor.  The latter was illustrated by the kicking at goal – sometimes brilliant and sometimes disastrous.   His passing game at times was seriously questionable and the moment he was moved to 12 his defense went out of the window,   Willemse  was  still very green and made some mistakes in the process,   However, he is still the player that with further experience could become the best flyhalf in years.   Jantjies was a farce when he started in tests and was slightly better when coming from the bench, but still seriously questionable.

Papier              -     6/10

De Klerk          -      5,5/10

Van Zyl            -      5/10

Papier had much less game time  than the other two – but he  showed some good qualities when he did.   De Klerk can be brilliant – but shows serious disciplinary problems as well.   Van Zyl has a serious box-kicking problem – but not much worse than that of De Klerk.


Du Toit                    7,5/10

Vermeulen     -       5,5/10

Kolisi               -        4/10

Louw               -       3,5/10

Du Toit was by far the hardest working  forward  in the side and did some really good things throughout the year – whether playing at flank or lock.   Vermeulen started of brilliantly in two tests and then dropped down to 4,5/10 in the EOYT tests.   Louw was atrocious in two tests and in one test showed  a bit better in defense.   He is supposed to be a turnover specialist – but 3 in all test played is useless.    Kolisi was poor as a loosie in all tests played.


Etzebeth                  5/10

Mostert                    4/10

Snyman                    3/10

Etsebeth  was brilliant in the first test after retuning from injury in June – but then went into hibernation, showed some good line-out performances, but outside of that showed very near to zero.   Mostert was good in line-out jumping and made tackles and carries outside of that.   He was useless as a potential pivot in forming of mauls and is physically too weak to be really competitive in ball carries and tackles.   Snyman  did near to nothing in most tests  and was a serious discipline liability as well.  


Kitshoff                  6,5/10

Du Toit                     6/10

Beast                      5,5/10

Malherbe                  6/10

Koch                        6./10

Louw                       4/10

Beast showed serious signs of ageing in tests he played in and was eventually replaced by Kitshoff as starting prop.   Louw was seriously defective and showed signs of not being matchfit – his work rate outside of scrumming was near to non-existent.  


Marx                         6/10

Mbonambi               6/10

Marx lost the plot when it came to line-out throw-ins in two of the tests  and for a while lost his competence in making turnovers.    On the whole his performance improved  in the last two tests   Mbonambi was acceptable in all tests played..

Nov 25, 2018, 10:57

So where are serious issues to be addressed:-

*   Development of the wings is a serious concern - bring in Duhan van der Merwe  to start with.

*    Find a center partner for Kriel - and there are very limited options in that regard.

*    pay further attention to development of Willemse as a flyhalf

*    Reconsider the loosie situation totally and get rid of the players  like Louw and even Vermeulen;

*     Forget about Snyman and Mostert as test level locks and accept that De Jager and Schickerling are better options.

Nov 25, 2018, 11:22

Fo the rest his carries were poor and his defense was seriously deficient.

While you keep repeating this fairy tale about Esterhuizen, you cannot claim objectivity.

Nov 25, 2018, 11:44

What fairy tale - Pakie.   What did I say that was not true.  Esterhuizen made two good carries and both ended up in possession handovers - one a penalty and the other in a turnover.   His tackle rate was low and his missed tackles a bad indication of what he is.   

Why is it that Erasmus used him rarely later in the latter part of the RC and only once in the EOYT  on the bench as well.

That is factual and not dreams.   It is not written as a result of prejudice either - it is based on facts.   I do not try and manufacture things - I leave that entirely to Mozart and AO.         

Nov 25, 2018, 11:53

“Why is it that Erasmus used him rarely later in the latter part of the SR and only once in the EOYT on the bench as well.

That is factual and not dreams...”

Hahaha. Factual? Really?

Nov 25, 2018, 11:56


If you do not understand what is being discussed you better not write your normal garbage - shit brain.  

Nov 25, 2018, 12:18

His tackle success for the season is 82%. Allende's before the Welsh test was 84%. There's no significant problem with his defense and no grounds for labeling it "seriously deficient".

Rassie's decisions are his own.

Nov 25, 2018, 12:20

Mike...please. Do you really call the below an objective assessment?

Esterhuizen gets a 3.5 and DDA a 4?

One has 4 years of test experience...the other got his first cap this year and commenced playing with people inside and outside him that he's never played with before.

Kriel                  -     6/10(right...So Kriel was one of our best this year)

Am                    -     4/10(Despite being new, and performing on par with Kriel, he score 2 less points)

De Allende       -    4/10(should be 2/10)

Esterhuizen     =     3,5/10(you must be kidding)

Do you consider the below to be a fair assessment the locks?

Snyman, again, gets his first test cap and Mostert is our most reliableble forward...yet Eben scores more than both of them. Despite having not done more than either in any game aside from the first English should test. 

Mike without wanting to insult you, it's becoming very clear why so many posters take issue with your opinions/ratings.

You seem to optimise everything that has been wrong with South Africa rugby thinking for a very long time. 

It can be boiled down to "He looks the part. He has a reputation. He must be our guy."

In the end it's easy to refer to vague and abstract performance criteria and use that to confuse an argument. 

For example. Tell me exactly how you arrive at the conclusion that Eben should score more than either Mostert or Snyman. 

It's obvious that against Scotland the contributions from Snyman stood out and had a large impact on us winning the game. Mostert's very high tackle count, fast clearing of rucks and open field support play outshine Eben at both test and SR levels. 

But Eben and Lood both look the part. Both giants and word is they're good locks. So let's do the good old SA'can thing and rate their myth.

And then finally, you rate Papier above Faf...By half a point? Faf, the player of the year candidate and vital to our wins over England and the ABs, as well as others. Faf who played Aaron Smith into the ground twice this year. Aaron Smith. Shall I say it one more time. Aaron ducking Smith!

Oh, wait, now I remember. You were one of the bandwagon members that claimed Faf's passing was not good enough and he wasn't test material. Yes, according to you Faf was SR standard and no more.

Have your opinion. But DO NOT try and pass it off as objective. 

Nov 25, 2018, 12:27

Esterhuizen made two good carries and both ended up in possession handovers

Another nonsense. For example, his 15m carry at minute 33:35 against Argentina away, beating 3 defenders, ended in a quick recycle for the Boks.

Nov 25, 2018, 12:33

“Posted by: clevermike (33135 posts) Nov 25, 2018, 11:56


If you do not understand what is being discussed you better not write your normal garbage - shit brain. “

So you insist that your remark about Rassie using Esterhuizen in SR was factually correct? Shit brain.

Nov 25, 2018, 13:21


I am sure you did not make a study of what I wrote about the performances in tests this year and saw the reason why I fgave the points.

Lets look at your comments and see where we differ:-

Esterhuizen and De Allende 

Your comments is somewhat misleading as to De Allende.  He played in a number of tests with Pollard and Kriel in 2015 - but in the semi and final in the WC the backline usage was near to zero.  In 2016 and 2017 Pollard was never the inside partner and Kriel on his outside only once.

So playing with Pollard and Kriel was not the factual four ears tory you wrote.  


Was a defensive nightmare especially when defending together with the wings,   The coming in of Kriel imnproved the ouside defense of the backline.


Got a lower rating because of deficiencies in defense and fact is other than two line breaks ending up in  ball losses - what did he do additionally in attacking play?  ZERO.   His tackle count was persistently poor and missed tackles were far too high.

Snyman and Mostert

Snyman always was a penalty viability and he did very little constructively in the tests he played in.  Even in the Scottish test he was moved further back in the line-outs because eh was a liability jumping at front.

Mostert was a plus in line-out jumping - but he was physically to weak to set up and co-ordinate driving mauls.    He would have gained  6/10 for line-out work and 1/10 for setting up driving mauls.

His ball carries in traffic was ineffective - eg yesterday he carried the ball 9 times and gained ZERO in meters gained.   He had a majority of matches where he had a good tackle count - a few where it was deficient.   However, he does not tackle players backwards either.  

In the end it was the inability to set up driving mauls on test level which is for  lock at 5 a very important function and Mostert failed totally in that respect.   


Always had a disciplinary problem  and that was why Erasmus sent him packing in the last two tests.   If you have not noticed that in the tests this year then you must be kidding.  

I never wrote anything else negative about Faf.

Plum - sorry to differ from you - but I prefer to remain factual and look comprehensively at players.   


Nov 25, 2018, 13:24


Shitbrain - a typing error using SR instead of RC - is the norm for discussion.  Hell in the stupidity stakes you win by a mile.

Nov 25, 2018, 13:28


Just to clarify.

Are you saying that Faf was dropped from the squad?

IE Rassie dropped him?

Nov 25, 2018, 13:43


That was one where the result as to Esterhuizen was somewhat positive - in the main two it was totally negative.

Where did you get the 84% success rate from.   Was it in tests or in Super Rugby as well?  

Look - I checked his tackle stats and in one test he started in he made 9 tackles and missed one.  In the other three combined he made 13 tackles - which is very low for an inside center.

In the tests he started his tackle success rate in tackles was 81%,

As to the Faf issue - I think Rassie got hopping mad with him about the number of penalties he conceded and send him back to his club.  Why else would he have done that

Nov 25, 2018, 14:16

Steph is a 7.5? He had one good game on tour and a couple of no shows in the RC. You still have a blindspot. I pointed out a defensive weakness, one which revealed itself against Wales time and time again, but you rate him the best Bok? Ridiculous.

Damian and André's stats may be similar, but the quality of tackling is very, very different. Damian let many defenders past him and around the defensive line. A free breach behind the line. When has André done this? André hits the line harder, but also has a better boot an a better pass. Damian is a 4, André is a 7. Easily.

Mostert has been one of the best Boks. He outplayed Steph on tour and in several RC games. More consistent of the two.

So much for objectivity. You should have labelled this thread the "I stamp my feet in defiance performance barometer". :D

Nov 25, 2018, 14:25

No one can be totally objective. We all use filters to interpret reality, as without a filtering method it would be information overload. 

The problem happens when relevant information is filtered out, and reality is then misinterpreted creating self-delusion. Self-deception can also happen when wanting to believe a certain reality over another one.

Nov 25, 2018, 14:38

Nkosi           -       7/10 - excellent at chasing the high ball.  Very good try scoring ratio. Needs more experience in the defensive system

Kolbe             -     6,5/10 - good on attack, not used enough. Possible option at fullback

Dyantyi       -        7/10 - The best-attacking player for the Boks in 2018, but defence is a concern.

Mapimpi     -       6/10 - has been injury prone, but is a lethal finisher.


Pollard            -        8/10

Willemse         -       5,5/10 - A solid utility player and he may also be a good option on the wing as he has pace. 

Jantjies            -       6/10 - very good, other than under the high ball. His worst mistakes were when he was under the high ball. One terrible test against England, otherwise he brings another dimension on the attack when Pollard shifts to 10. 


Papier              -     6.5/10 - He looks like the backup scrummy for the world cup

De Klerk          -      7.5/10 - some excellent games, but was poor against France.

Van Zyl            -      3.5/10 - Ok in the match aganst Wales, pathetic in all others


Du Toit                    7,5/10

Vermeulen     -       6/10 - had 2 excellent tests vs England, but was piss poor on the EOYT

Kolisi               -        6/10 - started the season well- but no impact at the breakdown.

Louw               -       6.5/10- started the season as a basket case, but improved as season went on. Unfortunate to not get more game time on the EOYT


Etzebeth                  5/10   - One excellent test, otherwise did SFO. Does not know how to place the ball.

Mostert                    6/10  - Started well, but faded as the season went on. 

Snyman                   7/10  -  Excellent in some games, but did not get enough game time


Kitshoff                  6,5/10- started well, faded as the season progressed

Du Toit                    7/10 - Excellent at loosehead

Beast                      6.5/10 - Started very well, but got injured.

Malherbe                  6/10 -  Started well, but like others poor EOYT

Koch                        5./10- a temporary placeholder, or stop gap .

Louw                       4/10 - seems to have an eating problem as not fit enough.


Marx                         6/10- Lineout throws remain a problem, especially to steph dutoit

Mbonambi               6.5/10- A good showing. A little clumsy around the base of the ruck, but a good player. 

Nov 25, 2018, 14:38


Based on what - a wild daydream of yours that Esterhuizen is a strong tackler,    That was NEVER proven to be the case, what was proven that 22 tackles made in four tests at 5,4 tackles per test is too low an average per test to be considered as acceptable for an inside center,   

Can you read what I said about Mostert?   I pointed out his strongest point as line-out jumper and his weakest being his total inability to on test level initiate and co-ordinate driving mauls.

I also looked at Mozart ravings in his constant attacks on Du Toit - supported by your BS.  In the test yesterday  you attack Du Toit for poor ball carries (12 carries making 19 meters) - but praised Mostert for his carries (9 carries making ZERO meters).   Wonderful objectivity by the fools on site.       


Nov 25, 2018, 14:45

“Posted by: clevermike (33141 posts) Nov 25, 2018, 13:24


Shitbrain - a typing error using SR instead of RC - is the norm for discussion. ”

It takes ages for you to discover your typo at last and I’m the shitbrain?

Nov 25, 2018, 14:59


Did Rassie "drop" Faf?

Nov 25, 2018, 15:11


I would never know neither would anyone else - but the mere fact that he sent him off to his club indicates to me that Erasmus was not happy with some ill discipline shown by Faf,

Nov 25, 2018, 15:24

Ok Mike

Did Rassie send Faf to his club or did Faf's club recall him?

 Simple question. Your previous statement, including r he one above suggest that you know the answer.

Cumon, out with it.

Nov 25, 2018, 15:26


One of my greatest pleasures on site is to expose all the BS you specialize in on site.   Take for instance your comparisons between Du Toit and Mostert.

So I looked at the tackling stats of Mostert and Du Toit in ALL THE TESTS they started in.  So here goes:-


Tackles made           =    116

Tackles missed         =      20

Missed tackle ratio    =    14,70

Du Toit 

Tackles made           =     143

Tackles missed         =      24

Missed tackle ratio    =    14,30

So where did you get all the bugger ups Du Toit made and all the glorification of Mostert from?   After all Du Toit made 27 more tackles than Mostert made and even though Du Toit made slightly more missed tackles it is a fact that Du Toit is a much stronger tackler than Mostert and he would attempt tackles that Mostert would not even dream of trying.

Happy wriggling in getting out of this  - call up Mozart - your brother in BS spreading - to help out. :D:D:D:D

Nov 25, 2018, 15:29


I do not know for sure - but I made a deduction from what happened in the Faf case and I think it is a very logical one.

Nov 25, 2018, 16:01


Nov 25, 2018, 16:01


There are some thing that bothers me about players.   One of those is Kolbe and defense - although he tried to strike above his size and weight - his defense is a problem.

Jantjies was not only poor in one test - he was poor in all tests he started.   Moving Pollard to 12 was not the success it is advertised to be - he was poor in defense and had no punch in that position - while there were also communication problems with Jantjies, 

Maybe Faf tries too hard and lose it when it comes to discipline.  I may be wrong - but that is I believe the reason why Erasmus released him to go back to his club.

I missed out the games where Snyman was excellent in.   For me he was a very average lock and  in some cases poor.    In fact I do not think he will be called up again to future Springbok squads.   I think that the same will happen to Mostert purely because of his inability to get rolling mauls going. 

One cannot give Louw anymore game time - one needs loosies that can tackle and Louws count in three games he came from the bench was  THREE.   Fact is the low tackle count of Vermeulen is also a  major negative for the Springboks.   Yestedray he made only 5 tackles and missed 2 - the Scottish test it was 5 missing 0 -  In the French test it was 7 missing 2.   So in all the EOYT tests he played in he made 17 tackles missing 4 for a missed tackle ratio of 19,04 - for me a lot too high to be acceptable.

Another problem I have seen on the field of play is the lack of leadership on the field.   Kolisi asked everybody - and that includes the water-bottle carrier - what should be done and then takes the wrong decision anyway.   The team needs a real captain that can enforce his will when needed and provide leadership - and there is indeed none.  

Nov 25, 2018, 16:35

I do not know for sure - but I made a deduction from what happened in the Faf case and I think it is a very logical one.

Faf was not available for the Scotland test as part of the deal between Rassie and Sale. He was available for Wales, but Rassie chose to give his backup scrummies a run instead because of how little time is left before the World Cup.

“Faf is a contender for the World Cup but we only have five Test matches before the tournament. We have relied on Faf a lot to get back the winning feeling, but we feel our other two scrum-halves are ready to step up. We are playing in the dry under a closed roof in Cardiff and it makes sense to give them another chance because Faf is more used to northern hemisphere conditions.”

Nov 25, 2018, 16:45

@CM, Rassie said before the tour that Faf would play for his local pub club team. It is unclear why because, he could have told them to FO, except for the England test.

The English released all of their test players, but SA had to play without some key players.

Releasing Faff after the Scotish test made sense because  Papier had a good game. Now the Boks have a backup scrumhalf, while before this Faff had to play all 80 minutes.

Nov 25, 2018, 16:53


Listen  what DEAL are you talking about?   The tests were in the test window period where Erasmus has no need to make a DEAL with the club.  Do you know for a fact that a deal was made - since there was no deal necessity.   Wild guess again?  

How many penalties did De Klerk gave away in his last two tests - for your info it was 4 - three of which was in the Scottish test.   In his last 6 tests the total was 11 penalties - nearly 2 on average per game.   So there are real discipline problems in his case.      

Nov 25, 2018, 17:39

I think Shark's ratings are fair.

Nov 25, 2018, 17:53

Coming from a moron like you - it is not a compliment.:D:D:D

Nov 25, 2018, 18:07

Shark I differ from you on a couple of points but it's pretty clear that your ratings are done objectively. 

Anyway, I'd rather have made a new thread for your ratings as they are actually worth discussion.

Nov 25, 2018, 18:15

Good point why sully the discussion with the lies of the Board buffoon..

Nov 25, 2018, 18:45

Probably a gentleman's agreement. Remember, Faf was allowed to play the entire RC by Sale. A number of newspapers talk about a deal/compromise and Rassie striving to maintain good relations with NH clubs.

Embrose Papier will make his first Test start when the Springboks take on Scotland at Murrayfield this weekend after coach Rassie Erasmus awarded the youngster the No 9 jersey.

Faf de Klerk’s unavailability due to club commitments allows the 21-year-old Papier to win his sixth cap.


Scrumhalf Faf de Klerk will play for Sale Sharks this weekend as part of a deal between Springbok coach Rassie Erasmus and the club‚ which means much-needed game time for another halfback against Scotland.


But it seems as if Bok coach Erasmus is hoping to maintain good relations with overseas clubs – in this case Sale – in order to secure the release of players when required.,


Rassie: "When you lose a match you have to pick up momentum again and I think that's the balancing act we faced when we lost to England," Erasmus explained. "We like to make changes when we're winning and not when we're losing. That's why we got Faf (De Klerk) and more of the experienced guys back."

Following the logic above it's easy to see why Faf was not recalled after we beat France, especially given the game time needed for the backup scrummies, a position with no clear and tested backup and a World Cup just a few tests away. Believe whatever you wish though.

Nov 25, 2018, 18:47

Board Buffoon  - that description fits you and AO perfectly,   No it does not - Board Idiots are more descriptive of the two of you.   

Nov 25, 2018, 19:06

We lost the test when Papier was taken off and a shift to a kicking strategy was followed. Van Zyl played poorly and proved he isn't ready, I wonder what the reasoning was to take off Papier. By my judgement he was having a good game, I loved the audaciousness of his attempt at scoring from a scrum. He skinned North but he'd have been better off kicking the ball into the goal area and falling on it rather than trying to get it into hand thus giving the defender the opportunity to tackle him.

Nov 25, 2018, 19:11


Do you really believe it is necessary for Erasmus to make "deals" with the overseas clubs.  They know the story - in test window periods the players have to be released,   

There were numerous reports about deals being made with the club of De Klerk and Le Roux and none where anything but fake news.

I do believe that De Klerk needs to be in the test squad and probably start as scrummy.   But his disciplinary record is bad and that makes him a liability in games.   An average of virtually  two penalties  per test is just not good enough. 

Nov 25, 2018, 19:11


Nov 25, 2018, 19:12


Nov 25, 2018, 21:16

Do you really believe it is necessary for Erasmus to make "deals" with the overseas clubs.  They know the story - in test window periods the players have to be released,  

Right, so there were no games outside test window that Rassie may have traded time with Sale for?

Nov 25, 2018, 23:11

No there was not.  The only tests outside the test window were  the Wales test in June and the English test in November and none of the Sales players were playing in those test.

There was a break in the RC when there was no matches played and Le Roux went back to Sale to play in their match - but the next week he was back   Louw was also released to play for Bath,but on  day when the Springboks were in fact playing  and there was every hope that he would not return to the Springbok squad.   But he did and we were subjected to his constant poor performances again.   

No other players were released to his club during the window period and that made the release of Faf very strange,   

Feb 18, 2023, 17:16

Laugh of the day!

Feb 18, 2023, 19:33

This was the real situation in 2018.    What I wrote at the time was objective.   What I am writing now is still objective - but not the BS you are spreading all over the site.   That is based on prejudice and nothing else.

By the way BSter - Erasmus evaluated what was really happening - sometimes a bit on the late side.  For instance he never took Esterhuizen as part of the WC squad and even when Kriel had to be replaced due to injury he preferred Willemse as a replacement.   Mostert fuck up badly in two games and after the second failure against the AB's in the WC he dropped him to the bench.  

What you and other site idiots know about rugby have been discarded by Erasmus years ago as being total BS.   The Springboks was worse in 2018 because Erasmus use the tests to experiment with new players and get the Springboks he inherited played an advanced form of rugby - by 2019 he had the recipe 90% correct and by the WC 99% - with o0nly Moster being the weak link.            


Feb 18, 2023, 19:46

Erasmus' lousy tenure hinges on a Louw turnover, a Beast masterpiece after England lost Sinckler early, and two Frans tackles to save Damian's blushes. That's the fine line Erasputin has ridden. 

Feb 18, 2023, 21:36

The score against Wales was 16 all, the Wallies had the momentum when this happened:

73' Penalty South Africa! That is great work from Francois Louw who is not long on the field; the back-rower gets on the ball and survives the clean out.


Maaaaik never saw that

You need to Log in to reply.
Back to top