Patrick Lambie

One of the best rugby brains we have. Class act and never doubted him. 

Ex Keo

Sharks flyhalf Patrick Lambie produced the Currie Cup performance of the weekend – the one that reminded me what the fuss was about post the 2010 Currie Cup final.

The wait for these types of performances needs to be seven days and not three years.

Lambie won the Sharks the Currie Cup in 2010 and in Durban last weekend he won the Sharks a semi-final showdown with the Cheetahs.

Lambie’s composure is one of his strengths. He doesn’t seem to be flustered and as with all special players he has time on the ball – and time in his decision-making.

But the time on the ball hasn’t in the last two seasons been matched with the explosiveness on the ball.

There are mitigating factors. Lambie has been played at No 10, No 12 and No 15 for the Sharks. He was played at fullback in the 2011 World Cup, where he was sound without ever being stunning.(Typical sharks brainless handling of a player!!)

He is no Gio Aplon, Willie le Roux, Israel Folau, Leigh Halfpenny or Israel Dagg as an international No 15.

Lambie, at 15, would do a holding job for the Springboks. It is at No 10 where you’d see his influence, as we did in Durban against the Cheetahs.(Agree this is his best position)

He must be played at flyhalf in next season’s Super Rugby competition and that is where he will play. I spoke in the week with Sharks Director of Rugby and Super Rugby head coach in 2014 Jake White and he confirmed that Lambie, in his view, was a 10.(Spot on Jake)

Springbok coach Heyneke Meyer rates Morne Steyn as his best flyhalf option and he has earmarked Johan Goosen as the man for the future. Goosen is 21, but Lambie, at 23, is as much the future as he is the present.

It does, however, require Lambie to produce with consistency the type of performance that ignited a drab semi-final in Durban and crushed the Cheetahs.

Lambie, used sparingly as a squad member of the Springboks in the last three months, has hardly played. His confidence has suffered and the two missed penalties in the final five minutes against Western Province in the last round of the league stages were costly and the act of a man down on confidence.

But the solo try against the Cheetahs, a few minutes before halftime, screamed class and authority. Lambie read the situation, backed his explosiveness off the mark and took on two defensively indecisive forwards. His reaction on scoring showed the intensity and determination that hasn’t always characterised his game.

He was pumped and it was a game turner. In the second half he produced another of those Dan Carter-like flyhalf moments, when he backed his explosiveness off the mark, weighted a left footed chip kick, gathered it and with two defenders on him he offloaded in the tackle.

This was Lambie as we saw him in 2010. This is Lambie as we need to be seeing him most Saturdays.

He simply has to continue to back his ability and produce the wow moments in a game. He is an X-factor player when he backs his natural instincts.

He didn’t have the confidence to do this a year ago when he started for the Boks in three successive Tests up North. Again, he may have been trying too hard to appease the Bok coach’s instructions and he tried to play like Morne Steyn when his skill is playing like Pat Lambie.

I thought Lambie was okay in those Tests when his talent should have had me using prose like exceptional.

He was no Dan Carter or Jonny Wilkinson or Stephen Larkham … He did not make an impact like we have seen from so many of New Zealand’s young flyhalves in the last 12 months.

Lambie played with the gratefulness of one happy to simply be there, when his talent demands he plays with the authority of one whose skill means he should always be there.

Goosen, currently, is the anointed one to succeed Steyn, but Lambie, if he turns the exception of Saturday’s glorious display into the norm in next season’s Super Rugby, will force a rethink.

For now, he has to deliver a similar threat to Western Province in Saturday’s Currie Cup final.

Whether the Sharks win or lose, Lambie’s performance has to have been one of authority and impression.

He has to produce the extraordinary on Saturday in Cape Town because the reality is that in the last two seasons there has been too much of the ordinary.

Because he has been messed about horrendously. Goosen needs some time to grow up.

 clean that backline would be awesome to watch (if they click).

And to think then we would have still back up players like:

Hougaard

Reinach

Van Zyl

Goosen

Catrakilis

Pollard

Serfontein

JJ

Mvovo

Rhule

De Allende

Colbe

 In saying that I would love to see maybe the following squad for EOYT

15) Aplon , Le Roux

14) JP (if avail) / Gerhard Vd Heever

13) JJ , Serfontein, De Jongh

12) Jean , De Allende

11) Habana , Basson

10) Lambie , Catrakilis, Goosen

9) Kockott , Fourie (if avail) , Vermaak

8) Vermeulen , Deysel

7) Louw, Alberts

6) Deon Fourie, Lappies

5) Pieter Steph , Lood

4) Etzebeth , Flip, Bakkies

3) Jannie , Coenie

2) Bismarck, Strauss

1) Beast , Nyakane, JC Janse

Not sure how big the squad will be and whether the overseas based players will be available. We must remember these are still test matches thus we have to win each one.

Yeah...at last they are seeing it...young Patrick as cool as a cucumber...what a difference to Morne...this guy has got big things ahead of him. Got nerves of steel despite his genteel looks...a future captain too,mark my words.

Mozart

There is a difference between Steyn and Lambie - which is very clear and I do not agree that Steyn should have been in the RC at all.   Lets deal with Steyn in particular in the first instance:-

Morne Steyn

Throughout his playing career - Morne had to develop some assets after a failed Under 21 performance in Argentina - where he missed every kick and goal and was useless as a backline pivot.   Because he was on the way to nowhere - he developed -

*   the expertise to kick at goal; and

*   his general kicking game

Goalkicking

He was successful with kicking at goal and his success rate was always in the range of 80% - with his most successful endeavours at Loftus Versveld.   He came into the Springbok team because he was successful in the Lions test and in general he maintained the success rate at kicking at goal until 2012'

There always was a problem with that component of the game - in key pressure games he inexplicably miss kicks - even sitters he would otherwise convert with ease.   This came to a crisis point in 2012 - when his success rate in kicks dropped to 56% in the tests in June - hovered there for a while and then dropped to 20% in the Dunedin test.   Having no alternative, as Morne had goal kicking as his only real asset, Meyer reluctantly dropped him from the team for the rest of the year.

Things seems to go better in Super 15 - where he was back at his normal 80% success rate - but he showed in the Brumbies semi-final that his kicking under pressure was  far from accurate with a success rate of 50% - and the Ellis Park test where the rate was 66%.

In essence - Morne is a very reliable kicker at goal when not under pressure.  When the pressure is high, he often enough fails in this Department of his game.

Other Kicking Game 

Morne's other asset was his long relieving kicks and his strategic kicks.  This was of great help to him for the Bulls when Mattfield and Botha were their locks and Spies was around.   They often enough stole possession of opposition throw-ins and did very well as the plan then was for Fourie du Preez to utilize the Bulls loosies and other forwards to pass the ball to when the ball was won.   The departure of their reliable locks caused problems and the kicking resulted basically in handing over possession to the opposition.

His kicking game required time for him to plan and execute his kicks and he consequently always stood very deep in the pocket.   This was fine - but it had a negative of major proportions an that is that since he never attacks the gain line himself -

*   the opposition wings and flyhalf could fall back and cover his kicks - opening the way up for counter-attacks or return kicks; and

*   in cases where he did pass the ball the opposition defenders - either their own 12 and the loosies was virtually on top of the recipient and backline play deteriorated into a farce and was ineffectual.

Morne under pressure missed relieving line kicks and even miss penalty line kicks.  This happened for example in both the away tests in the CR this year as well.   However, in for instance the Bulls-Brumbies semi this year - his one relieving kick was so bad - it in fact allowed the Brumbies to score the winning try.

In reality this component of his game became a mere method of handing over ball possession to the opposition with relatively little benefit to the Springboks.

Other aspects of play

Morne had one problem in his personal repertoire and that is he always had to stand too deep in the pocket and never got balls on the run whilst launching attacks on the opposition.   It did not allow for any form of  attacking backline play and since he never attacks the gain line himself - the rest of the backline was incapable of attacking play themselves with the defenders on top of them by the time they received the balls.   This always was a negative in the Springbok play over the period up to this year.

This year after the June tests - Meyer even went public and stated that he instructed Morne to stand closer to the gain line and pass the ball more effectively to backline players.   It seemed to work quite well in tests - other than the Mendoza test where Morne was back to his normal and stood to deep in the pocket.   However, the instructions also had some negatives - Morne is a robotic player and not a thinking one and he did not know when to pass the ball and when to kick - so he mixed up the two requirements and got lost in the process - eg when any thinking flyhalf would launch a relieving kick on the point of halftime - he passed  the ball and it ended up in a try for the All Blacks.

Morne always was not the soundest defender around - he normally missed around 18 to 20% of all attempted tackles - which is about 10% higher than what should be acceptable from a flyhalf.   However, even here pressure caused problems.   In the recent Ellis Park test his missed tackle ration went up to 35% and he virtually lost the game as a result for the Springboks.

In essence Morne is and remains a robotic player - who caves in when he is under pressure and is at best a very average performer.   In some cases he deteriorated badly and that caused test losses - eg the Dunedin and Ellis Park tests as already mentioned.

Patrick Lambie

Lambie is a thinking player with an instinctive grasp of what is required under given circumstances and in all respects different from Steyn.   He does not have the negatives of standing to deep in the pocket and often enough becomes part of the attacking game plan of the Sharks prior to this year.

In 2013 the Sharks had a multitude of problems with an exceptionally high injury problem - both amongst the backs and the forwards.   Either way - the quality of balls received from the forwards were often enough not of good enough.   At the start of the Super 15 this year - the Sharks had the completely out-of-form Francois Steyn at 12 and backline play throughout Super 15 was in jeopardy.   Lambie unfairly got the blame of many for the team problem - despite the fact that he himself did well in enough in most aspects of flyhalf play.

However, this year - as previously - Lambie was less effective in kicking at goalthan Morne Steyn.   His normal success rate is 75% compared to Morne Steyn's  with an  average 80% success rate.

Even though he is ordinarily less successful than Steyn in kicking at goal, he does not carry the negative baggage of Morne in other aspects of the game and he does not easily become pressurized like the case is with Morne.

SUMMARY

Morne Steyn is an average player with robotic tendencies and some negatives  easily countered by opposition teams.  Lambie is a different kettle of fish altogether and with decent ball possession is far less predictable than Steyn and more of an attacking flyhalf than Steyn would ever be. 

That is why I would see Lambie as a better flyhalf proposition than Steyn and hope that Meyer will replace Steyn asap.

Oimatey you are speaking shit, we had no chance of winning the RC with Morne at 10 and the results confirm that.

Morne was culled last year and should never have been brought back.

Meyer has made a number of mistakes, recalling Morne was his biggest - Morne's pathetic defence in the final match ultimately cost us the RC.

But the issue is not Morne's defence, its his general ability as a player. He offers nothing other than a boot, that is simply not good enough for a test pivot

Not that again - Mozart - it is twaddle that starts in a prejudiced mind. 

The player to cost us the RC were Morne Steyn (3 tries) and Alberts (2 tries), brought about by poor defence  and a wicked decision by Steyn and poor defence  and clumsiness on the part of Alberts.

Those two players are where the wheels really came off.  There can be no doubt at all by the deficiencies shown by Morne and Alberts in that test - it makes Engelbrecht looks like an angel of virtue.    

 Mozart

On the basis set out above Morne on his own cost us the following points:-

4 Tries (3 tackle misses and and one stupid play)   -    28 AB points

2 missed kicks at goal                                         -     4  points

Total   -  32 points

gain    -    7 points

Negative for Steyn 25 points

The Steyn bugger-ups were indeed costlier than the negatives you ascribe to Engelbrecht - really warped reasoning as to the above - but Morne missed 1 tackle that resulted in a try and Morne missed  3 - each of which was followed by a try.

The one AB try you ascribe to JJ  stemmed from rank stupidity by Morne Steyn - and that is a fact, which gav e Naas Botha nearly a fit..   In both two tries Morne should at least be held partly responsible since he messed up badly in the first try and missed a tackle on Barrett as well.

Funny how you exonerate Steyn completely for his tackle on Barrett - but blame Lambie's try on a missed tackle by Labuschagne.   That really is weird and I am still laughing about that one.

YOUR HERO STEYN WAS PATHETIC IN THE ELLIS PARK TEST AND WAS LARGELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LOSS BY THE SPRINGBOKS.    FOR MESSING UP NOBODY COMES NEAR TO HIM

                                         -

Your "stupid play" was a good pass, one can hardly blame him for that. That reduces Morne to 18 points, even if you blame him for all those tries in which he had a marginal role. So JJ is still the man who lost the most points.....and the man who had the last tackle to protect the RC victory and missed it. But thanks for clarifying my point.

Balls - if the siren is about to go off and if you are in your 22 - no thinking player would pass the ball - he would kick it out - that is where the rot started.   You may not wish to accept it - but Naas Botha said it was idiotic and I trust his opinion on that.

That really is the problem - you try to exonerate Morne completely and try and lay all blame on Engelbrecht in the case of the Messam second try - which is really a huge farce.  

Reasonable people would assign blame equally to Engelbrecht and Morne for the two tries you blame Engelbrecht for and where Morne had a huge negative role as well  - so that reduces Morne to 18 points given away and Engelbrecht to 7 points given away.

That makes Morne even looking worse than in my calculation as outlined above.

Balls - if the siren is about to go off and if you are in your 22 - no thinking player would pass the ball - he would kick it out - that is where the rot started.   You may not wish to accept it - but Naas Botha said it was idiotic and I trust his opinion on that.

That really is the problem - you try to exonerate Morne completely and try and lay all blame on Engelbrecht in the case of the Messam second try - which is really a huge farce.  

Reasonable people would assign blame equally to Engelbrecht and Morne for the two tries you blame Engelbrecht for and where Morne had a huge negative role as well  - so that reduces Morne to 18 points given away and Engelbrecht to 7 points given away.

That makes Morne even looking worse than in my calculation as outlined above.

Mozart

It was indeed a weak effort as you said and so was the tackle on Bosch in the Puma test.   However, I am doubtful about Engelbrecht and said so before - Meyer will have to look at the Super 15 next year and see where to go.

However, that was not the issue here - the issue were the flyhalfs.   Nobody can deny that Morrne was poor in the Super 15 semi and in the Ellis Park Test.   I do not think anyone would say that Morne is a top test flyhalf - he is far from that.   At best he is on test level an average player that may even be questionable.  

I have no Morne antipathy - I am just unhappy about his performances and believe that there is justification for that unhappiness .   I believe he would be a serious deficiency in the WC and would like to see him replaced asap   

He was huge? Look Dave keep writing fiction if you like. But all the rugby writers gave JJ the second lowest rating of any Bok back for that game.

"13. JJ Engelbrecht – 6
Had a very good first 30 minutes but fell off the pace in the second half and slipped the tackle on Beauden Barrett when he scored the All Blacks' fourth try."....from Keo.

True Keo, but he also botched a try before the half and then was feebly dispossessed for a crucial AB try before the half.

Saffex

With all due respects - there can be no question about one aspect of Engelbrech's play which needs attention and that is his defence.   There are problems with his tackle technique and to argue against that is just plain prejudice in his favour.

Rugby is not made up only of attacking play - defence is of equal importance.   Englbrecht's one really weak point is occasional lapses in defence - which can be ascribed to an unacceptable technique used by him.   I believe it can be corrected through coaching - but if indeed it remains the same - I do have question marks about him 

Here we have Sports 24 ratings for all the backs, take heart Dave, your man did just edge Kirchner:

Zane Kirchner 6
It was a little cruel for spectators to pointedly start chanting Pat Lambie’s name before the Sharks man replaced the starting fullback late on anyway. Kirchner made a key, kick-out-on-the-full error on the hour mark which led to a NZ try, but previously had played with welcome positive intent and constructive enough energy.

Willie le Roux 7
Here’s another player who seems sure to be a provider of necessary X-factor for the Boks at the next RWC jamboree: he was at the fulcrum of many attacks, either with ball in hand or wicked little kicks and with some luck and a wee bit more composure might have had a hat-trick of personal tries rather than just one.

JJ Engelbrecht 6.5
The outside centre, who had been an injury doubt right up to the Friday practice, was slippery and very involved in much Bok front-foot stuff during the first half. Receded as the All Blacks took charge, with a missed tackle or two and some sloppy execution.

Jean de Villiers 8
What a dynamo once again! Little blame can go his personal way in the taxing No 12 channel for any of the defensive frailty and inaccuracy that cost the Boks dearly here, and he was responsible for some exhilarating runs as well as powering over for his 58th-minute try. Not something everyone holds dear, but tops for diplomacy and sportsmanship in his leadership role as well.

Bryan Habana 8
The veteran wing was buzzing as only he can as an attacking factor until his evening was cruelly cut short in just the 22nd minute – with two high-tempo tries already to his name. Occasional defensive question marks, maybe, before his sad exit.

Morne Steyn 6.5
Not always appreciated enough for his passing game, which was strong in the lead-up to a few Bok tries; effective link man here. Memorable moment when he “bounced” big Brodie Retallick, too! Did leave a few points behind off the tee, and some doubts still swirl over his defending.

Fourie du Preez 7
One or two strange, ill-advised options from the seasoned No 9, but few could doubt that since his return the pace and range of his pass and broad vision has revitalised Bok backline play.   

Mozart

The above quotation on Morne Steyn is very vague about his defence and is quoted:-

"Not always appreciated enough for his passing game, which was strong in the lead-up to a few Bok tries; effective link man here. Memorable moment when he “bounced” big Brodie Retallick, too!  Did leave a few points behind off the tee, and some doubts still swirl over his defending".

Whilst stating on that in the case of Engelbrecht  "with a missed tackle or two" there is a direct indication that he did miss tackles - in fact statistically he missed 1 tackle - in the case of Morne there is only some doubts expressed.   Whereas Morne statistically in fact missed 4 tackles out of 11 tackle attempts - the "some doubts" in fact was a gross understatement of the actual situation.

I am not defending Engelbrecht - but is basically referring to the need to take journalistic assessments of players not with a pinch of salt - but a whole bag of the stuff.   Even commentators have a similar tendency during matches - their off the cuff statements are erratic and not accurate - so trust your eyes and not the comments of commentators.    

Cleancut

I am ambivalent about Engelbrecht and said initially that in Super 15 there have been defensive lapses on his part.  I also at times expressed doubts in CC matches - like the WP match at Newlands last year the opposing JP du Plessis outplayed him comprehensively and the fact that he vanished from sight in the recent Cheetahs game.

I also said at times - that he looks like a recycled wing and should be utilized as a wing.

However,  I did defend Engelkbrecht in cases where attacks on him was to my mind unfair and one-sided - like in the case of Mozart 's recent ones aimed at the protection of the image of his favourite - Morne Steyn. 

When I said that Meyer should re-assess the no 13 center position next year - Saffex went ballistic about the statement.   I do not share Saffex's view of the "awesome" abilities of Engelbrecht and thinks he can do better.   My problem remains insofar as Engekbrecht is concerned - he is not really a player with ball sense that can read games instinctively - he is one-dimensional and relies totally on his speed and to a lesser extent on physicality.  A clever thinking player he definitely is not.