Player ratings

This site can't be reached....

www.rugbypass.com

15. Willie le Roux – 8
Occupied a more traditional fullback position as compared to last week’s game in Marseille but was just as effective with ball in hand. Played the final pass for two of South Africa’s nine tries and was instrumental in inciting several backline moves that yielded points. Grows in importance with every performance.

14. Cheslin Kolbe – 7
Scored a breathtaking try straight from a South African restart where he le[t in the air, gathered the ball, and accelerated upon landing to dot down. That proved to be his last act though as he tweaked his hamstring in the process. Slotted three kicks at goal and was busy on the wing before being substituted for Manie Libbok on 47 minutes.

13. Damian de Allende – 5
Seems to be on a zealous crusade to prove that he can kick a rugby ball. He certainly can, just not in any way that positively impacts his team. On two occasions he hoofed the ball when either holding or passing would have been a better option. He made just 27 metres with ball in hand from five carries and made just six passes. One wonders if that’s the last we see of him in the 13 jersey.

12. Andre Esterhuizen – 6
Mostly used as a battering ram he punched holes in midfield and offered go-forward when on the charge. One off-load was the extent of his creative output but was solid enough in the job he was asked to perform.

11. Kurt-Lee Arendse – 9
Someone at World Rugby needs to explain how this hot-stepper wasn’t shortlisted for breakthrough player of the year. With two tries across 80 minutes, he now has six from six Tests. It often seemed as if he’d been cloned such was his constant involvement in the match. Showed great strength to finish the first try of the game and demonstrated his blistering speed in setting up the final South African score as he cut infield off the right touchline. Outstanding show and rightly named player of the match.

10. Damian Willemse – 8
Took control at first receiver but still dazzled with some swift footwork when cornered by the Italian defence. Responsible for finding space for the opening try as he dummied then stepped before a delayed pass to le Roux created the opportunity out wide. Moved to the wing when Libbok came on for Kolbe and scored a try to cap off a tidy match.

9. Faf de Klerk – 6

Gave away a cheap penalty and gifted Italy three points when the game was still in the balance after straying offside from a Kolbe clearing kick. In a way that summed up de Klerk’s game as he often lapsed in concentration or made the wrong choice. He began the game by sniping down the blindside when recycling and shovelling it along would have been the sensing option. Not a disaster, but hardly a vintage display. Off for Cobus Reinach on 68 minutes.

Ox Nche – 7
Another strong performance in the scrum and in close quarters. Made 11 carries and was successful in every tackle attempt. Off for Steven Kitshoff on 49 minutes.

2. Bongi Mbonambi – 6
Did well to burrow over from close range to score and improved his line-out throwing (though he did miss his target once). Loses points here for being reprimanded by the referee after incessant moaning. Given the recent behaviour of Rassie Erasmus, one would hope that senior players would be conscious of their image and relationship with the officials. Off for Malcom Marx on 49 minutes.

3. Frans Malherbe – 7
Heavily involved all over the park while still performing his primary job of anchoring the Springboks scrum. Seemed to clear out every second ruck and carried over 20 metres. One of the best in the business in his position. Off for Vincent Koch on 49 minutes

4. Salmaan Moerat – 6
Was a constant presence in the line-out and did well on maul defence duties, winning the ball back with Italy threatening the line. Also won two turnovers in the first half. Off for Eben Etzebeth on 43 minutes.

5. Marvin Orie – 6
Solid without being spectacular. The Springboks depth in the second row has been tested with Lood de Jager and RG Snyman, and both Moerat and Orie gave a good account of themselves. They’re clearly lower down in the pecking order, but they showed they’re able to step up when called upon. Off for Kwagga Smithon 50 minutes.

6. Siya Kolisi – 8
Grew as the game went on, the Springboks skipper was excellent across the park. Mostly found himself in the trams where he acted as a de facto centre at times, straightening the line and then picking the right pass at the right time, including a tray assist for Willemse. Energetic around the rucks his speed to the breakdown was impressive.

7. Franco Mostert – 6
Handy as a lineout option but failed to boss the tight channels in the way that a more hard-hitting loose forward might. Definitely improved when he shifted to the second row. Proved his versatility but also his limitations.

8. Jasper Wiese – 7
A few busting runs but was well marshalled by the Italian defence. Didn’t quite exert himself around the fringes but did charge through a half gap when he picked the right line, proving that he’s more than just a mindless blunt object. Also stole the ball on the ground on two occasions. Off for Evan Roos on 59 mins.

REPLACEMENTS:

16. Malcolm Marx – 8
On his day he’s the best hooker in the world and he wasn’t far from his best on this occasion. Scored South Africa’s fourth try in the second half from the back of a rolling maul but that was just one involvement across a half hour that had everything. Capped it off with an important steal five metres from his own line at the death, showing his value on either side of the ball. On for Mbonambi on 49 minutes.

17. Steven Kitshoff – 7
Showed immense strength to score from close range, shrugging off a tackle as if he’d been tapped in a pillow fight. Performed his job as expected. On for Nche on 49 minutes.

18. Vincent Koch – 6
Not much to praise or critique. A good hit out for an integral member of the Bomb Squad. On for Malherbe on 49 minutes.

19. Eben Etzebeth – 8
South Africa were in danger of letting slip a must-win game before Etzebeth came on. He immediately crunched Ange Capuozzo with a bone rattling tackle and then disrupted an Italian line-out, winning the ball back. His first carry of substance attracted the attention of multiple defenders which then opened space in other areas, resulting in a try for Arendse on the left. A big player having a big impact off the bench. Someone needs to make a case for why he wasn’t nominated for World Rugby’s player of the year.On for Moerat on 43 minutes.

20. Kwagga Smith – 8
Injected needed pace into the Boks back three as well as some slick runs and neat passes.. Demonstrated he has grunt to go with his guile by crashing over for a score under the posts. Such an asset off the bench. On for Orie on 50 minutes.

21. Evan Roos – 6
A tidy show. He made three carries without setting the house on fire. Still, that’s another cap for this exciting talent. On for Wiese on 59 mins.

22. Cobus Reinach – 7
Scored a try set up by his teammates, added a bit of sparkle with his pace. His work was made easier as the Springbok pack began to flex their muscles. On for de Klerk on 67 min

23. Manie LIbbok – 9/10
Sensational. The performance that Springboks fans were hoping for. Showed what a difference a genuine 10 makes to the game. First introduction was to straighten the attack after gathering the ball much shallower than either le Roux or Willemse had done, he then ignited a move that culminated in a South Africa try. Expertly bisected the poles with difficult kicks on the periphery as well. His ability to bring teammates into play by shooting the ball to them at the apex of their run was a joy to watch. Is he the missing ingredient? One game doesn’t mean a whole lot, but there is something to work with. Wouldn’t be surprising if he starts at fly-half against England next week. On for Kolbe on 48 mins

Some of the above ratings are total BS.     Take for instance the ratings of Esterhuizen and Mostert - the two worse defenders playing for the Springboks.   

Mostert was a nonentity when it came to line-out play and his open-field defense was non-existent.   His contribution to line-out play was non-existent as well.   So at best he was a  5 or worse.    

Esterhuizen always was a sub-standard defender and proved it again  on Saturday,   At least one of the Italian tries came from poor defense on his part.    Should be a 5 or below insofar as the real quality of play is concerned.   

Kicking story on the part of De Allende is another myth.   His defense was good and his involvement in at least one try was evident.   His real rating was as follows:-

 "Damian de Allende: 7

Made a couple of incisive carries and had a bit more space to work with at outside centre, compared to his usual No 12 battering-ram role."

Some of the above ratings are total BS.     Take for instance the ratings of Esterhuizen and Mostert - the two worse defenders playing for the Springboks.   

Mostert was a nonentity when it came to line-out play and his open-field defense was non-existent.   His contribution to line-out play was non-existent as well.   So at best he was a  5 or worse.    

Esterhuizen always was a sub-standard defender and proved it again  on Saturday,   At least one of the Italian tries came from poor defense on his part.    Should be a 5 or below insofar as the real quality of play is concerned.   

Kicking story on the part of De Allende is another myth.   His defense was good and his involvement in at least one try was evident.   His real rating was as follows:-

 "Damian de Allende: 7

Made a couple of incisive carries and had a bit more space to work with at outside centre, compared to his usual No 12 battering-ram role."

Clearly the team had a good day. All very embarrassing for mozzz and his little echo lame ou. The anti Rassie brigade tool a big knock on Saturday! 

Keep their feet to the fire Rassie. Keep calling out crooked/incompetent refs. 

The ratings are usually emotionally driven and dictated by superficial impressions. The Italian defensive line and organisation from broken play deteriorated. They troubled us a lot, and if they could have maintained more discipline in the second half, this would have been a much tighter result. The worrying aspect is how they were able to trouble us across the board. A better team would have severely hurt us yesterday. So, when balancing the ratings, we must take these all into account. The Book midfield wasn't very impressive in terms of manipulating and creating opportunities. With the Italian disorganisation came numerical advantages that were walk ins, you don't get those against the top teams. Or at least, you cannot rely on that being the case. The only players that really stood out to me were Eben, Kwagga, and Wiese. Kwagga was pretty much a game changer yesterday, and easily the MOM. He has pretty much been the best Bok in every game this season. I'd give him a 9. The backline, nobody gets higher than a 6. Faf was shocking again. He stood out, but for all the wrong things. He never did have good skills, but he used to create pressure. However, he has become incredibly sloppy and petulant. This is not a test calibur scrumhalf. 

Arendse was MOM hands down...Libbok close second.

Draad, Arendse is a flat track runner. Very susceptible to physicality and suspect manage the outside on defence. He is fast, and, of course, he will exploit open space. Kwagga in the other hand was the driving force early in the second half that broke the Italians. He changed the result, and he made the greatest contribution. He is by some margin the MOM. I wouldn't give any Bok back higher than a 6, as this was a result that was driven home by he work of the pack. That's where the result was won. 

Saffex, you're a very angry man. Stay off the computer and go eat your porridge, I'm sure you'll discover a more agreeable disposition shortly thereafter. 

You know the guys are desperate when they talk up performances against Italy. But would the stupid coach who is trying to turn Dud Allende into a tactical kicker please stop…..the man is clueless.

Horses for courses….the Boks are too physical for Italy, just as we were too physical for Japan in the WC. Accidents can happen, but the Boks handle these fast paced teams without much difficulty.

Reaching positive conclusions based on yesterday’s game is silly….but if something was amiss against Italy it needs to be fixed.

The likes of Italy can't sustain high performance week in and week out. They never have been able to do that. But for some perspective, Australia are on course for their worst season of all time and Italy, who are quite lowly these days, managed to notch over 20 points against us. 

Mozart

I am not desperate enough to change the writing of the De Allende performance as you are by writing in your own wording and changing the rating you8rsxlef.   Very bad indeed of you - w hat an arsehole.

Mozart

I am not desperate enough to change the writing of the De Allende performance as you are by writing in your own wording and changing the rating you8rsxlef.   Very bad indeed of you - wqhat an arsehole.

……..

I can only assume you are judging me by your own standards. Nothing was changed. I was simply cutting and pasting to avoid the ads which screw up the format. Below you will find the full article.

Apologize or you will see this baseless accusation after every posting you make…you piece of dog shit.

Mozart 

You are a total BSter.   Let me explain.   All the above have had a yellow background  - the one on De Allende had a white background where the typing is done and t=for the rest a yellow background.     When I quoted the real rating  of De Allende the rating had the same background and it was clear you fiddled with the rating yourself.   I have never seen a rating like this where a selection opinion was expressed and the issue of performance were limited to two kicks made by De Allende.    How many times did he handle the ball.   Esterhuizen managed to pass the ball 8 times and carried it 8 times - so lets assume that other players passed the ball to him 6 times.  and he handled the ball 14 times and in that 14 times he kicked the ball twice.     Was that a realistic assessment at all?               

Mozart 

You are a total BSter.   Let me explain.   All the above have had a yellow background  - the one on De Allende had a white background where the typing is done and for the rest a yellow background.     When I quoted the real rating  of De Allende the rating had the same background and it was clear you fiddled with the rating yourself.   I have never seen a rating like this where a selection opinion was expressed and the issue of performance were limited to two kicks made by De Allende.    How many times did he handle the ball.   Esterhuizen managed to pass the ball 8 times and carried it 8 times - so lets assume that other players passed the ball to him 6 times.  and he handled the ball 14 times and in that 14 times he kicked the ball twice.     Was that a realistic assessment at all?   It was in fact total BS by somebody making a contribution in Rugby Pass and an opinion expressed is accordingly total BS - which you love to repeat.            

Yes, but it was just a mistake in the cut and paste I corrected to provide the full correct rating. Check the the link, the wording is exactly the same. Far from indicating an attempt to cheat, it was an attempt to be meticulous. Read it and apologize. 

All these conspiracy theories of your’s  are nonsense. This one is just easier to prove.

But if you want to persist, just point out where my rating above differs from the one in the link. For a great big conspiracy theorist like you that should be simple….justify your theory

Mozart

I do not trust any postings of yours at all - because most of it are prejudiced BS.    You have nothing else to offer.    There had been dozens of postings of yours that describe incidents that nobody else has seen having happened and were total distortions of the facts as to what happened.

However, a fool you will always be - as is onc e again proved by De Allende being in the Team of the Year in 2022 and the determined by experts on an objective basis - so your shit ahs bneen destroyed again.        

Now, isn't this exactly what I said a few months back about DDA?

"13. Damian de Allende – 5
Seems to be on a zealous crusade to prove that he can kick a rugby ball. He certainly can, just not in any way that positively impacts his team. On two occasions he hoofed the ball when either holding or passing would have been a better option."

And don't give me that "He's not a natural 13" nonsense because he does the same thing at 12.

Saffex, we aren't really interested in what the journos say. They are in their own little bubble where they are searching for material to spin a story, having to balance the responses to said stories. These are not people who study the game, they could never possibly have the time to do so. I'm very confident that most people here do not support Damian's inclusion in the team, a stance that has been thoroughly discussed with considerable evidence. If you are going to change the general consensus you are going to have to come up with more than a "dream team" selection made by some guy, good knows where on planet earth. Screaming it down our throats won't make it any more palatable. 

They are professional what? Writers. They are not professional coaches, or analysts. When Damian blew our semi-final in 2015, why did these "experts" fail to identify it? They miss a lot of detail game-to-game. They are a reflection of the casual fan's perceptions and feelings. This much should be wholely evident from the information that gets posted here.

PS: Thanks for finally putting your yabbos away. 

I have never seen Damian perform to the level expected of even the lower-end centres at test level. There simply isn't any evidence to suggest he is. As per Fluff, can't kick accurately and can't pass more than 2 metres with meaningful reliability. His off-the-ball incidents are becoming a real liability. You can call me any derogatory term you like, I am still correct. 

Some of the above ratings are total BS.  

Only some.

SA rugby players have been overated last week and the previous week.

It would not be surprising that SA rugby players at the end of the series have the higher average by players and for teams.

A lot of people are busy paying lip services.

Let's compare Kwagga to DDA.

Kwagga, hardly noticed by anyone and bemoaned by many on the board until this year...has always been the same impactful and smart player that has a natural instinct for creating momentum and some of the best timing in the game today.

Nothing about him has changed.

Then we have DDA, who according to Saffex is basically supposed to do what a lose forward does but from the 12 position. The best we've ever gotten from him has been a meter or two of gain-line success along with plenty of cock-ups. It's exceedingly rare that he creates an opening and sets someone up for a run. He is basically a crash ball or bust player and his crash ball is inferior to Kwagga's by some distance...while being a good amount bigger than Kwagga.

So why is it that most here never rated Kwagga? He's doing exactly what he's ALWAYS done. I know why...

You have a mental image in your head of what you want a player in a specific position to look like. It's a cookie-cutter mentality.

Unfortunately, DDA looks every bit the part, but it's the rest that is missing. How that isn't abundantly clear at this point is beyond me.

This is exactly why the very same people that love DDA really dislike Mostert... because Mostert doesn't look the part. Those extra 5kgs apparently mean the world, even if it costs you 5 less tackles per game.

There is a lot of truth in that Plum. This is certainly the case with Saffex, who does like his players to meet a very specific profile. Kwagga is not very big, but he is immensely strong. He is, as you said, doing exactly what he has always done before. He is a very, very consistent performer. 

Safesex

Which team of the year? Send me link boss.

Say hi to the family.

"For the record I rate Kwagga highly, he started his test career as a non entity but now makes useful impressions other than his start at 8 the other day where he was poor, ultimately because he is not a bloody 8"

I know he's not an 8.

What he actually is, is a better 12 than DDA 

Saturday backline stats:

….so there you have it, once again Dud Allende gains the least metres, makes the fewest passes and no offloads. The numbers reflect what the journalists miss. The man has no positive effect on our attacking play.