Performance of the loosies ysterday

Mozart as per normal missed half of what was happening on the loosie front yesterday - so I am quoting the stats from ESPN on four loosies for info here:

There was little to chose statistically between Botha and Labuschagne - both were up to standard.  

The other issue raised by Mozart - is the situation as to De Allende.  

Just shows how really little some members of this site see during matches when they prefer not to see something.

Look a little closer Oom and you will  see Labuschagne made no clean breaks, took no lineouts, missed two tackles and turned the ball over 3 times. Botha by contrast made one clean break, took 3 lineouts....one on opposition ball, missed no tackles and never turned the ball over once. Your analysis is focused on the obvious running stat which is totally comparable on a per run basis.....while missing everything else.

The simple fact is the Cheetahs had the bigger pack, their scrum provided a great base for the loosies......but apart from Brussouw their loosies were a non factor. Labuscgagne will be no more successful in the step up to test rugby than your prior favourite....Coetzee.

Now to the centres. de Allende had a horrible game. Why doesn't that show up in the stats? Well actually it does, the Stormers scored only one try in spite of being comfortably in charge of the game. They made 116  passes to the 58 of the Kings....beat 14 defenders to the Kings 8......made 40 more metres.....had to make 28 fewer tackles. But still only scored one try. Why? Well in large part because on three of four occasions with overlaps beckoning de Allende barged inside. He showed zero appreciation of the potential outside him. And if you think I'm dreaming listen to Skinstad's commentary.

Mozart

Selctive interpretation of stats again.  When will you ever learn.  Labuschagne made three crucial turnovers in possession - two of them when the Bulls were on attack - the other that started a Cheetah attack.   You just make wild statements.

Take your favourite loosie Alberts.  In the ten tests he played in last year he did squat - experience of 2010-2011 - must now be the determining factor for the future.   Both Labuschafne and Coetzee is at this stage better than Alberts - who has done very little since 2011.   He seems to be good in carry balls for 2 or 4 meters agauinst weaker internatinal teams - for the rest his tackle count is low with enough missed tackles as well - whilst his contribbution in line-outs are zilch as well.   At 29 years of age - he will not make the 2015 WC - since his performances aare already on a downward slope - so lets build for the future..   

And as for De Allende - did you watch the game yesterday and noticed the weather conditions it was played in?   Obviously also missed the comments where it was said that they were worried that the slippery ball may be missed and the results could be a try by the opposition.   Do you know what the instruction was to De Allende - with diue regard to the weather conditions?    A passing game to outside players are normally limited in such conditions - so what made it different yesterday?   You obviously missed the plot completely again.  

 Stay focused on your own point....Labuschagne vs Botha. In every stat which you yourself raised, not me, Botha is superior. The failure of the Cheetahs loosies to fire is the story of this loss. A big factor in their wins, the loosies were no shows yesterday, offsetting front row dominance

 As for de Allende he botched a bunch of try scoring situations. No coach ever tells you to do that. ...no matter what the weather. Get with it Dom Oom.

Mozart

Losing contat with reality again.  U said that in the immediate future with Vermeulen out - I favour Botha for 8 and Labuschagne for 7.   I am a great admirer of Botha in any event and for me it is a toss up if the cjoice is between one of the two.  I would place either of them in the strating line-up and the other on the bench.   However, they each have strong points - whih you cjoose to completely ignore in the case of Labuschagne.  

 You must be living in dreamland when you think that players do not get clear instructions as to the game plan with duiue regard to conditions like yesterday.   What if he did pass the ball and it was knocjed on and the opposition scored.   You would not blame him - but the coach would.   Don't make yourignorance too obvious -- you miss the plot continuously.  Have you ever been right before?

Clevermike I don't see what you are trying to proof between the two Stormers centers. If you look at stats to see how each performs then you are totally lost. De Villiers and De Allende tktally have different jobs in the team. Do you know De VIlliers role in the Stormers team? 

Spooony

I know th ifference  - but what I am trying to say is that the weather conditions did not allow for a free flowing game and that the performance of both were influenced by the need to ensure that a slippery ball does not benefit the opposition  - as could easily happen.  Both passed the ball a very few times -  De Allende twice and De Villiers three times - indicating a reluctance to do just that - in other words to hang on to posession as much as possible.   .  

 de Allende had a great game the week before, but he botched it against the Kings by cutting in too often. A good coach would take him aside and tell him to never do that again

Precisely Dave....Maaik is struggling understanding that.

No Oom you just aren't being intellectually honest. If a player you like has a mare, the credible poster accepts that. He doesn't make laughable excuses.

Mozart

That really is a new one on me - the pot calling the kettle black.   Have you ever admitted that De Jongh did not only had a mare at Twickenham but de facto went AWOL and never contributed an iota to the game that day?  Never that I can remember.

So seriously adverse  weather conditions does not have an impact on the way rugby is being played - and is in fact a joke to state otherwise amd ,ale laughable comments?   That is a new one on me too.  

I always call it like it is.

Mozart

I cannot recollect that you said anything about De Jongh's game at Twickenham.  Was fis performance acceptable?

Well de Jongh got the ball once in that game, and passed. Jean made  12 metres, having received the ball 5 times and run three times. I guess one would say the Bok centres got very little ball. De Jongh didn't do anything wrong, but failed to improvise and find ways to contribute. He becomes too passive on occasions, this was one of them.  There you go.......fair, balanced and unafraid.

Mozart

Really mixed up info in this case.   Here are the stats for De Jongh and De Villiers:-

How did De Jongh - playing at 12 managed to pass the ball to De Villiers - playing inside of him?   I can recollect that there was one scrum from which the ball went to De Jongh and he passed it to Kirchner.   The second movement De Vuilliers passed to Kirchner because De Jongh went  missing.

De Jongh did not do anything wrong - because he did virtually NOTHING.   Nobody can do anything wrong if he does nothing - and the plain and simple question was his performance acceptable to you - YES or NO?