FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Pat Lambie at flyhalf

Pat Lambie at flyhalf

Started by sharkbok52 REPLIES854 VIEWS· 15 Mar 2014, 23:01
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
sharkbok
sharkbok
Captain23,297 posts
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,297 posts
15 Mar 2014, 23:01
#1
15 Mar 2014, 23:01#1

Lambie is very average at flyhalf. 

He could play any position in the backline better than flyhalf. 


He just has no effect on the game. He does not play badly, he is just barely noticeable. He does not stamp his authority at 10, neither in a kicking game, a running game taking on the advantage line, or even a distribution game in getting his line running.
Frans Steyn's performance last week at 10 was much better than anything that Bambie has dished up this season.
I think Frans should go to 10, and then shift Bambie to 15, or even inside centre. Although  I would prefer an inside centre in the 100+kg mark like Esterhuizen. Bambie has much more effect at 15, and can also come in at 1st reciever on multi-phase possesion to vary play up- like when Michalak was at 10.


MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
15 Mar 2014, 23:14
#2
15 Mar 2014, 23:14#2
A small, slow chappie. It's not clear to me why people think he is going to ignite our backplay. To do that he has to be a ball magnet and somebody who makes space and releases the  backs  outside him. This week no 12 got less ball than Fransie....he got the ball 7 times, the low for any inside centre in the S15. 
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
16 Mar 2014, 00:00
#3
16 Mar 2014, 00:00#3
Steyn got the ball 6 times - he passed the ball three times - a record for him - knocked the ball on once - kick once at the touchline after a penalty and did not find touch and hung onto the ball once - giving away two penalties .   
Lambie passed the ball 9 times - he could not help it that Steyn was nowhere when he was supposed to receive the ball from the flyhalf - or better still Lambie knew he should not pass tp Steyn - but to somebody else - since Steyn was bound to bugger up badly whenever he got the ball.
Steyn at flyhalf was a disaster - his goal kicking was good - his passing game totally inadequate and often enough wild - so what is his credentials to be a flyhalf?         
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
16 Mar 2014, 04:29
#4
16 Mar 2014, 04:29#4
 Actually I forgot to add, even though Fransie got the ball a miserable 7 times....Lambie only passed 8 times, the lowest number of any of the S15 fly halves. So um, speculation that Lambie was passing to somebody else is amusing.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
16 Mar 2014, 09:36
#5
16 Mar 2014, 09:36#5
 Mozart
Check your stats again.   Lambie passed the ball 9 times - 6 times to Steyn and 3 times to somebody else.   The seventh ball Steyn got when he caught a kicked ball in defense in the Sharks 22.  Even then Steyn failed to find touch with the relieving kick. 
You blame Lambie for kicking - but in the second half the Reds were camping in the Sharks half 80% of the time and he or Reinach had to kick balls to try and relieve the pressure whenever they got the ball.   Not the fault of either of the two.
Lambie knew better than to pass the ball to Steyn.   Of the 6 balls he received he knocked on/spilled 1 ball and caused penalties while getting caught in possession and hanging on to 2 balls.    He did pass 3 balls - one to Marais and two to Sithole.
Incidentally - there was a second ball possession loss and that was when Steyn was given the ball to kick for touch after a penalty was awarded.  He botched that one as well - failing to find touch.
Steyn thus buggered up with every ball he received and did not pass - so how in all honesty can Lambie take a chance and pass more balls to him?
To Steyn's credit - his defense this time was better than it was in his previous three games.   However, he still stood around looking sheepish when he did not even try to tackle Harris before the latter scored his try.
I would say that since Steyn's good effort in the first game in Super 15 this year  - he has regressed in every game since then and hopefully yesterday's game will be the lowest he would go.   Any further deterioration would be a disaster for the Sharks.      

SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
17 Mar 2014, 14:57
#6
17 Mar 2014, 14:57#6

There are some really ignorant observers on this site - Pat had a good game at flyhalf

 

This from the Sharks supporters site, which is about spot on

 

10) Pat Lambie. For the second match in a row, he returned a perfect place kicking record while putting in superb work on defence. It wasn’t flashy from Pat, but about the only error I can recall in 80 minutes was one penalty that didn’t find touch. 8/10 

MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
17 Mar 2014, 15:04
#7
17 Mar 2014, 15:04#7

The "only error" sums it up. He will give us decent defence and decent kicking. I rate Pat Lambie he is a gutsy player. But he will never be a positive in the running game....as the season wears on he will run less and less.....like last year. He is simply the next in a string of kickers at flyhalf. 

 

That kick into touch in goal was a pretty big mistake as well.

CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
17 Mar 2014, 16:10
#8
17 Mar 2014, 16:10#8
 Mozart
You are promoting Steyn as a flyhalf. 
Lets look at the following quote:-
 "But he will never be a positive in the running game....as the season wears on he will run less and less.....like last year. He is simply the next in a string of kickers at flyhalf."
Question is will Steyn promote the running game?       
Steyn was given a similar kick to the one Lambie made a mess of - and the result was the same.   Lambie is condemned - dead silence in respect of the Steyn mess.
 Prejudice raising its ugly head again?
ST
Sun-Tzu
Club Pro713 posts
ST
Sun-TzuClub Pro713 posts
17 Mar 2014, 16:47
#9
17 Mar 2014, 16:47#9
Lambie is passive, he is slow, he is weak, he cannot make decisions, he cannot handle pressure or respond to it with any kind of conviction. He has never been the kind of player he was stated to be, ever. He is just an average player that cannot excel in any position. He is plainly average at centre, fullback or flyhalf. At fullback he can do the least damage but is equally invisible. This shouldn't even be a debate, he has been on the scene since 2010, this is his fourth year and we are still talking about potential. He couldn't outplay a has-been Butch or Michallak, and coudn't outplay a specialist 12 now. In 2011 Bosman and JLP both showed more promise when given gametime. He is more solid than Goosen by a long way, but still nothing to write home about in contact situations. He will disappear from the Sharks sooner rather than later; the writing is already on the wall.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
17 Mar 2014, 17:54
#10
17 Mar 2014, 17:54#10
 Dim Sun
"Morne is passive, he is slow, he is weak, he cannot make decisions, he cannot handle pressure or respond to it with any kind of conviction."   That is much nearer a description of Morne Stteyn than of Lambier - so a I change the wording to be appropriate and reflect the truth.
And Morne has already disappeared from the Bulls and cannot make the starting line up of Stade Francais when Plisson is available.   
So please stick to facts - not your biased rubbish you continue to spout.   
AJ
Arthur John
Pro1,748 posts
AJ
Arthur JohnPro1,748 posts
17 Mar 2014, 18:38
#11
17 Mar 2014, 18:38#11
 As a Sharks and Bok supporter I will admit that neither Lambie or F Steyn appear to be the answer to either the national or Sharks fly-half woes.
Sure Lambie has had a few good games in that position and Steyn did remarkable well at fly-half two weeks ago. But, neither of these players have got that spark and the eye for attack that this position requires.
Cooper from the Reds has it all. That is what SA needs desperately to stamp their authority on a game and feed the backs/ forwards who are performing well.
Sure Boshoff has had an excellent season thus far and I hope he can maintain that standard and reap just rewards.
But the rest of the guys playing fly-half in SA today are all very average from what rugby I have seen in S15 this season.
For some reason we kick possession away needlessly and when we kick for position we fail to get touch. Most times when we do get touch we do not follow up and the opposition take a quick throw in and we loose ground.
Puzzling to me how we have still not latched onto the basics like the NZ and Aust. teams.
ST
Sun-Tzu
Club Pro713 posts
ST
Sun-TzuClub Pro713 posts
18 Mar 2014, 12:15
#12
18 Mar 2014, 12:15#12
There is still this persistence in refusing to understand how attacking backplay happens. You play off your 9 or you play off your 10. You need runners running purposeful lines around your 10, your 10 is the trigger, the runners are the bullets. Your 10 cannot spark attack, he can simply decide when to attack and pick the strike runner based on how the defence is reacting to the attacker's lines; that means the centres, blindside wing, the fullback. This and this alone is the very heart of South Africa's attacking woes. Modern defences are PERFECT at suppressing and capturing the INDIVIDUAL. Solution: You need attacking units working in unison to CREATE space through DECEPTION to insert the attacker. This continued idiocy in searching for a 10 who will compensate for these failings is the height of all idiocy, it doesn't and cannot work. It's a contradiction to how how New Zealand play and how attacking rugby really works. When Peter Dom Villiers and Muir talked this garbage up Eddie Jones stated it must exist on the moon because nobody on Earth plays like that, not successfully anyway. So in short, no flyhalf is the solution, because flyhalf is not the problem in the first place!!

@ArthurJohn : Cooper has beehn a liability to Australian rugby since day 1. Did you not see him flail around like a toddler thrown into stormy waters? He bombed again when put under close scrutiny. But then Wales is the real test *rolls eyes*
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Mar 2014, 14:12
#13
18 Mar 2014, 14:12#13
 Sun Tzu
I like the following of what you said above:-
"Your 10 cannot spark attack, he can simply decide when to attack and pick the strike runner based on how the defence is reacting to the attacker's lines."
I believe that the above requires from a 10 to read the game and instinctively decide on what option to take.   Without that ability in a ten we can go nowhere in any attacking play.   Problem is that the 10's we have had since Honiball did not have that ability.   Morne Steyn even have to be told in advance by the coach  where to take up his position and what to do under given circumstances. 
You cannot have robots at 10 - you need players who have rugby acumen.   That is where players like Goosen and Lambie are miles ahead of the robots - eg Morne Steyn and Francois Steyn.   In 2012 those two robotic players were in positions 10 and 12 and that was enough to destroy anything done by anybody outside of those two players.   Tries were only scored when those two were cut out altogether from attacking moves.
In conclusion - you are not looking for a magic 10 - you are looking for a 10 with the ability -
*   to read games and to vary plays according to those readings;*   to also vary playing styles - including to attack the gain line himself; and*   to defend well enough to stem opposition attacks through the channel.
Morne and Francois Steyn fail in all three above - so we have to look elsewhere.     
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
18 Mar 2014, 14:33
#14
18 Mar 2014, 14:33#14

Disagree 100%, Pat has always shown he is a classy attacking player - up there with the best of the 10's out there.

 

 

If there is an opportunity to attack, Pat will take it, as will Goosen. I have far more confidence in these two taking the attacking opportunities on offer, than a player like Morne, who is not only ill equipped to execute on attack, he is also conservatively minded. Look no further than his Youtube tribute.......hell we see 3 or 4 breaks in a 10 year tribute........for the rest its kick, kick, kick.

 

 

Lambie and Goosen have hardly ripped defences to shreds thus far this S15, but they do posses the ingredients to attack......more so than any other 10's in SA  

MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
18 Mar 2014, 15:45
#15
18 Mar 2014, 15:45#15
 Small, slow and conservative....no way Lambie is an attacking option at 10.... the channel most filled with big bodies.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Mar 2014, 18:00
#16
18 Mar 2014, 18:00#16
 A hell of a lot faster than thoughtless Morne - whom you idolize - and only slightly smaller.   Hell - but the defense of Morne is putrid as well - much worse than Lambie.
And your second choice is Steyn - whose defence thus far was severely questionable.
Deceptive and non-factual thinking in evidence again.  
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
18 Mar 2014, 22:57
#17
18 Mar 2014, 22:57#17
He is far quicker than Morne, has rugby skill and is all of 3kg lighter than Morne......he is about standard when it comes to the size of international 10's.

Lambie = conservative is a joke.......I bet Jake thinks that of Pat!!!!!!
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
18 Mar 2014, 23:39
#18
18 Mar 2014, 23:39#18
He is 5' 10" ...small.
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
19 Mar 2014, 00:39
#19
19 Mar 2014, 00:39#19
What does height have to do with playing 10?  
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
19 Mar 2014, 01:57
#20
19 Mar 2014, 01:57#20
 Jonathan Sexton 6' 1"Quade Cooper 6' 1.5"Jules Plisson 6'Beauden Barrett 6' 2"Johan Goosen 6' 1"Owen Farrell 6'2"
Seems the new generation have moved on from height challenged chaps like Carter. Lambie is the exception

I'm guessing the 6 ft rule for fly halves is more reliable than your 90 kg rule for centres....I'm just taking a page out of your book.
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
19 Mar 2014, 14:58
#21
19 Mar 2014, 14:58#21

Height has nothing to do with playing 10

 

 

Carter is the best 10 to have ever played the game  

MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
19 Mar 2014, 15:15
#22
19 Mar 2014, 15:15#22

Was one of the best ....Dave. Old man Carter has done nothing of note since before the RWC. He was good but the game has moved on.....I'm sure you of all people recognize this theme.

 

And height and weight are proportional, are you saying weight has no role at 10? Surely not. These other chaps are naturally big, Lambie is a tiny little 5' 10' bloke pumped up to maximum size. But unlike other small blokes like Aplon or de Jongh, he isn't fast or even strong for his size.

 

There is no way Lambie will change anything about the Bok running game.....he simply doesn't have the tools.

BE
Beeno1
Captain40,032 posts
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
19 Mar 2014, 15:54
#23
19 Mar 2014, 15:54#23
 Could you all read Suns very good post and understand the problem.Thanks
ST
Sun-Tzu
Club Pro713 posts
ST
Sun-TzuClub Pro713 posts
19 Mar 2014, 16:57
#24
19 Mar 2014, 16:57#24
 5'10 is not that short, it's average. I personally am 5'11 and a lot stronger than Lambie. Habana is 5'10 and even stronger than me! Januarie is 5'7 and stronger than both Lambie and Goosen. Most of his trouble is that he is too passive, the central nervous system - which controls muscle activation - is not doing anything because he is running on empty psychologically and emotionally. Lambie could produce greater output if he is was more aggressive. Goose on the other hand just doesn't have the body as an ectomorph.

Much appreciated Beeno, we need more awareness of those truths. It's what foreign coaches work on when they come here. Eddie Jones did it in 2007, in fact, the only player he worked on specifically was Burger; having him offload and link more.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
19 Mar 2014, 17:38
#25
19 Mar 2014, 17:38#25
 Sun Tzu
It is your assessment of players like Morne Steyn,  Lambie aand Goosen which is questionable - not what you wrote above.   
Let me go forward with your argument based on the following:-
"Most of his trouble is that he is too passive, the central nervous system - which controls muscle activation - is not doing anything because he is running on empty psychologically and emotionally."
You cannot make a statement like that based on what you see watching TV during rugby games,  That is at best a totally unscientific evaluation.   The same as the one on Goosen.
Apparently you do not have similar qualms about Morne Steyn.   He has been relegated to the bench by Stade Francais when Jules Plisson is available.   Is there a reason for that?   Is the reason not that "he is too passive?  Don't you think that Stade Francais has sound reasons for that?   It obviously is clear that they studied the performances of Steyn and came to an adverse conclusion about what he is capable of delivering.  Some comments on the latter will be appreciated.   
CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
19 Mar 2014, 17:52
#26
19 Mar 2014, 17:52#26

clevermike

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 9802 RE: Pat Lambie at flyhalf
March 17, 2014, 15:54:51  Dim Sun


And Morne has already disappeared from the Bulls and cannot make the starting line up of Stade Francais when Plisson is available.   


more.


clevermike

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 9804 RE: Pat Lambie at flyhalf
March 19, 2014, 15:38:05  Sun Tzu


Apparently you do not have similar qualms about Morne Steyn.   He has been relegated to the bench by Stade Francais when Jules Plisson is available.   Is there a reason for that?   Is the reason not that "he is too passive?  Don't you think that Stade Francais has sound reasons for that?   It obviously is clear that they studied the performances of Steyn and came to an adverse conclusion about what he is capable of delivering.  Some comments on the latter will be appreciated.   



Old lying Sopdoos at it again. These were the games that Stade Francaise played since Dec as well as the flyhalves in those games:

Top14:

20 Dec v Grenoble. Steyn start. Plisson bench
29 Des v Perpignon. Plisson start. Steyn bench.
4 Jan v Biarritz. Steyn start. Plisson bench
24 Jan v Castres. Steyn start. Plisson bench
8 Feb v Clermont. Steyn start. Plisson 6N
15 Feb v Brive. Steyn start. Plisson 6N
22 Feb v Oyonnax. Steyn start. Plisson 6N
28 Feb v Montpellier. Steyn start. Plisson bench


European Challenge Cup:
8 Dec v London Irish: Plisson.
14 Dec v London Irish: Plisson start. Steyn bench
9 Jan v I Cavalieri Prato. Both Steyn and Plisson rested
16 Jan v Lusitanos XV. Both Steyn and Plisson rested

In your own words:

"So please stick to facts - not your biased rubbish you continue to spout. "





CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
19 Mar 2014, 18:01
#27
19 Mar 2014, 18:01#27


Saffex

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 7418 RE: Pat Lambie at flyhalf
March 18, 2014, 22:39:25 What does height have to do with playing 10? 
A lot, in this case, if you mention that Lambie is 3kg (which is actually 4kg) lighter than Morn,e Steyn but you fail tomention that he is also 2 inches shorter than Steyn.
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
19 Mar 2014, 18:08
#28
19 Mar 2014, 18:08#28
Indecision kills the flyhalf.....at S15 level  it's dogging Lambie and Goosen, except when the line kick is obvious. I doubt things will getter in higher paced test rugby.  Would Lambie or Goosen have had the confidence to break out of their cookie cutter games and thrown the Morne pass that led to Habana's try against the ABS. Unlikely.
DB
DbDraad
Captain26,388 posts
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
19 Mar 2014, 18:13
#29
19 Mar 2014, 18:13#29
 LMFAO!!! So Card (sorry I mean Sun Tzu), you say you are a lot stronger than Lambie, but almost as Strong as Habana?Did you lot armwresl ? 5'10 might be normal for normal people but is smallish for pro rugby players playing top flight international rugby. Excetional players being the exception.Don't take offence, I might not be strong enough to handle you. I do have about 3.5" on you though.
DB
DbDraad
Captain26,388 posts
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
19 Mar 2014, 18:16
#30
19 Mar 2014, 18:16#30
 PS, You joker you....ROTFPML... gold I tell you, keep the good stuff coming!
GE
generaltit
Pro3,164 posts
GE
generaltitPro3,164 posts
19 Mar 2014, 18:26
#31
19 Mar 2014, 18:26#31

 Slit-eyed and cross between Warlord and Confusius...dream on...what horse crap...


"I personally am 5'11 and a lot stronger than Lambie. Habana is 5'10 and even stronger than me! Januarie is 5'7 and stronger than both Lambie and Goosen."


Patrick is ten times the strength you'll ever be.


Stop hallucinating pal.


Don't like JW personally but he is a near genius coach...he knows rugby and is a very outstanding assessor of mens strength and ability to put a win formula together...the criticism of Patrick Lambie and other team members Willem Alberts, Frans Steyn and Jannie Du Plessis and the rest (from some critics here) is going to spread a lot of egg on faces after the Sharks make us proud...if not a clean sweep of the competition...the only reservation I have about the Sharks is this week-end...because I hope they get a fright against the Bulls to wake them up...always been the Sharks weakness...complacency...the best side in SA but with mind problems.


Jake knows this and is programming his side right...one step at a time...no for-gone conclusions, no celebrations or parties until the silverware is in Durban...a long road still and the glamour boys of the Sharks have been made aware of this.


Francois Steyn and past glamour boys know this, Alberts is going to become even greater...the Sharks ooze talent but the training, preparation is on track...I will put my head on this.


As much liking I have towards Mike as a decent guy he just pisses me off with his criticism on Alberts and FS.


Sadly we're lost Pieter Steph but Anton Bresler is one of the best unsung locks in this country...come on Sharkies...I got the vibe that you'll put everyone in their rightfull place...a huge respect to both the Sharks and Jake.



MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
19 Mar 2014, 18:34
#32
19 Mar 2014, 18:34#32
Don't get me wrong Chaballs, I also rate JW. He would be in his third RWC phase as Bok coach if I had the choice. And he would never play a flyhalf who wasn't very competent. Lambie will be very competent. The question before the house is whether he can spark Bok backline play....that's where I demur. He could be an effective Bok flyhal f in the Morne/Joel etc mode. He will never be a runner or an open game facilitator. Which is fine by me....I don't think we can beat the ABs playing wide open rugby.
GE
generaltit
Pro3,164 posts
GE
generaltitPro3,164 posts
19 Mar 2014, 19:35
#33
19 Mar 2014, 19:35#33

Thanks Mozzie...I respect you as a reasonable critic...nobody agrees with everybody...but I never allow my dislike or my adversion to a particular subject or person to blind my vision...I enjoy intelligence but also try to do  the best of my God given abilities to say uplifting (without flattery or programmed patriotnising of any individual).


What pisses me off on this forum is the remarks that are so insulting, so stupid and so individually launched in personal attack...really immature and with really no knowledge of the person attacked verbally without even knowing the person in the flesh ( so's to speak). You get a vague idea from comments...either positive or negative from people who you do not know.


I think there are a lot of really good guys (and gals, especially Cloudy from the Land of the Long White Cloud) and dear old Bec's who lives in England...really even your arch enemy Mike really likes you...and I even tolerate Jalepeno...the guy who tries to bait me with trivial matters but attacks me when I posted a title in the opening match between England and France in the 6N. I remarked that that the absence of Tuilagi (due to injury) was no train smash...he aggressively challenged me that it was.


I replied that B urrell was a good substitute and indeed he was for he scored a try in that match and other matches later.


My question is...why do we argue against lost causes and try and demean each other when we are wrong...why not be real gentlemen and officers and admit mis-assessments and give acknowledge to your adversery. Is it stupid ego or pride that makes us such fools??


I surmise that is why Tomas Lavanini  left this forum...probably many others? 

SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
19 Mar 2014, 23:21
#34
19 Mar 2014, 23:21#34
There are two positions on the field where weight is of little significance.......9 and 10.
Sure you cant play a 10 that weighs 80kg but high 80's is about par. At 9, weight plays no part.

Height plays little part in the backs, especially at 9 & 10 ........Tuilangi a centre is 6ft and weighs over 110kg...........height has stuff all to do with him
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
20 Mar 2014, 00:04
#35
20 Mar 2014, 00:04#35
Height and weight are proportional Dave....you can't want weight without height. Your 90 kg flyhalf will typically be over 6 feet. Anyway I don't buy weight being so much more critical at 12 vs 10. The flyhalf gets more loosies rumbling through his channel.
sharkbok
sharkbok
Captain23,297 posts
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,297 posts
20 Mar 2014, 00:16
#36
20 Mar 2014, 00:16#36
In any rugby position, if 2 players are of equal skill the heavier player is going to be better. It is a contact sport so physicality in all rugby positions is beneficial.
Ask Jonah Lomu who was tackled in the 1995 world cup final by a scrumhalf which prevented a likely match winning try by the All Blacks. 
Having a Henry Honnibal at 10, or a Peter Grant is better than having a timid flyhalf that cant tackle. 
The garbage tackling of Morne Steyn against the All Blacks was one of the defining factors of the loss. 
Bottom line is flyhalfs and scrumhalfs should have high skills levels, but being physical is an extra bonus and certainly a factor in determing results.


MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
20 Mar 2014, 00:23
#37
20 Mar 2014, 00:23#37
Which is why I like the notion of testing Fransie at 10....remember how he smashed Shane Williams in a legitimate power tackle. He has the boot, clearly loves playing at 10  and as he showed in RWC07 where he made the clin ching kick....he has the nerve. None of the other guys like Lambie and Goosen have a prayer of outplaying Barrett except in a kicking duel. In a tight game Frans could dominate a Barrett.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
20 Mar 2014, 00:30
#38
20 Mar 2014, 00:30#38
 Dof Doos 
While the 6 Nations were being played and even before that the French squad included Plisson - so he was not available from the third week of January until last week.  Talking kak again - idiot.  
Can't you get it into your thick skull that Morne is NOT international material?
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
20 Mar 2014, 00:38
#39
20 Mar 2014, 00:38#39
Mozart
I take it that you think that the flyhalf should be a good defender.   That being the case - how do you account for Morne's poor defense in last year's RC and Frans Steyn worse record in Super 15 this year?   Yet you support their candidature for the flyhalf position while their defense is highly questionable?  
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
20 Mar 2014, 01:18
#40
20 Mar 2014, 01:18#40
So then Moz, how do you account for Tuilangi standing 6ft and weighing over 110kg?

The 10 should not have loosies running at him if his loosies are doing their job. Sure the 10 is going to have big lads running at him, thats why you dont select a defensive liability like Morne at 10......Goosen and Lambie are far better defenders than Morne

The 12 has to be 95kg plus for he is expected to impose himself physically on attack and defence.......this is not something expected of a 10


↓ LOAD MORE (page 2 of 2)

More from Rugby

More news