Players with X factor

Players that are able to create something from nothing......usually the players with speed and dancing feet, or those with vision and creativity or sheer power that sets them apart......that has them leaving defenders for dead or creating for those around them.
Every good squad should maximize their inclusion.
Amongst our backs, we have those with speed and dancing feet in Gelant, Kolbe, Senatla, Sergel Pietersen, Jessie Kriel, Faf de Klerk and Hougaard
Vision and creativity is provided by Willie and Jantjies
Skill and power is provided by de Allende and Pollard
Other players have a good combination of these attributes that function as a whole making them well balanced players who augment the above....some lean more towards speed and dancing feet in Reinach, Skosan, Rhule and Jordaan....others more towards skill, power and creativity in Combrink, Serfontein, Frans Venter, Vorster, Odendaal, Dries Swanepoel, Andries Coetzee, Taute, Mnisi, Mapoe, du Preez and  v/Wyk....others lean towards power in Esterhuizen, Sithole, Rohan Janse v/Rensburg and Ulengo......skill, vision and creavity gravitates towards Lambie, Groom and Goosen.
In the forwards its all about power and a bit of skill!!

 If it walks like a list and talks like a list.....it has to be....a new Dave list.

Have you got nothing positive to add.....get back to your afternoon nap  

 Hey Saf, I've got the XXX factor...well, XXXL actually,  but what the hell. You a XL or XXL?

 

 

 SB, taking your previous posts into consideration,  have you got a few X's on your shirt labels?  Or have you got something against us XL types?

@Draad, in winter time yes. It is too cold to surf in mid-winter in England- or at least unless it is really good. When it is cold I do not go outside- and pack on extra pounds. 

Frans Venter - has looked impressive this year so far, goes looking for work and ticks all the boxes for a center through 4 games:
39 runs, 199 meters, 10 defenders beaten, 5 offloads.

Esterhuizen - maybe he is still finding his way, or maybe he's just not that good. After 4 full games (all 80 mins) his X factor has meant:
17 runs, 62 meters, 4 defenders beaten, 1 offload. 
Take out the Jaguares game (where most of the meters came from one run) and in the other three full games:
10 runs, 9 meters, 2 defenders beaten, 1 offload.

 oimatey
I do not agree with many of the players on Dave's list.   Players with the X factor must not only have physicality - but also the brain to read games and make decisions.   
That is why so many of the players fail in the end.  Frans Steyn is a typical example of a youngster with promise and ultimately fell flat because he failed physically and was also not the cleverest of players because of deficiency in reading of games.
We need players who can think on their feet and sum up situations during games.  Those players are to my mind players with the X factor - and the factor does not allow  for a wide range of players - the numbers are in fact limited.  
    

 Did you guys see Brummer run round Esterhuizen last Friday  to set up the Bools Try.....does X factor mean slow as a cart horse?

 Mozart
Like Frans Steyn -  a slower center than Esterhuizen - I would not rate the latter as having the X-factor.   Of the SA centers there are about 2 or at a stretch 3 that could have some ideas about reading of the game coupled to physical ability - who may reach that mark.  
Unlike Dave I rate players havng the X Factor as being brainy players, as well as having the necessary physical attributes.   

Did I imply every player on that list had x factor......why not try read it again and engage the brain a little this time.
Actually dont bother I cant be bloody asked.....this site is boring the shit out of me......its the same old shit
Just for the record if Esterhuizen was so bloody slow that makes Jake White a fucking idiot for playing him on the wing at times
Just like Etzebeth, Lood, PSDT, McCaw, Hooper, Pocock, Fardy, Louw, Schalk, Vermeulen, Robshaw, Lydiate, Coenie, Beast etc are shit because hey ho they gain the same number of metres per carry in traffic at CJ does and by all accounts he is shit.....because hey ho one man says he is shit despite said player being Munster player of the year and making the 6N's side of the tournament
Fuck me, so everyone else is wrong and you are right......I honestly give up......fuck it, its boring

 Ja like the lighty Jordaan has the X factor according to you Tokkie. 

Speaking of X factor - does anyone know if/when Senatla will appear in 15's again?

Dave the only thing that is boring is your continuous, monotonous, repetitive, clueless discovery of new talent. A boreathon that  gave us JJ, Stepfonten, Wynand, Esterhuizen, Whitehead etc etc etc. 
Do you really think other posters can't see the obvious stuff you trumpet. We all do. But some of us put the strengths and weaknesses together and project those factors against test class opposition. If you do that with Esterhozen his lack of mobility and pace would leave him massively vulnerable....so som e of us understand he can never be a test centre. You apparently don't.

And that just covers selection....I have never read anything vaguely cogent from you on tactics. 

Repetitive and errant stuff.

 Queenslanders love their XXXX beer [ some say its cos' they cant spell 'beer' but that seems a wee bit harsh ] so they must be chokkers with the "X" factor ! Milner Skudder ,now theres yer X-factor !

 Sharkbok you ever go surfing in Cornwall ? I hear they have a pretty staunch surfing community there ,and given the conditions they would need be !Hats off to anyone who braves the frigid British waters .

Moz big difference between us is that I actually know my rugby you dont....you back losers and fail to grasp the basics.....look no further than players operating in traffic.
Tactics......let me guess you have offered your insightful take on tactics have you?
This place is not about tactics, there are only a handful of variables on how the game can be played....the board is about players, choices and takes on actual games......opinions on tactics feature very little
You have to be one of the worst rugby brains I have ever come across....we are drawn to argue petty points as there is very little substance on here.....those that have substance to offer appear too infrequently......but my time is drawing to and end I think.....I am bored of listening to your take on how poor all our players are, having idiots like Denise appear with nothing to add and read the same warped crap from Beeno or the childish shit between you and Mike.
You have to be one clueless or warped rugby follower to find so much negative in the likes of Senatla, Kriel, de Allende, Serfontein, Lambie, Goosen, Jantjies, Hougaard, Faf, Reinach, Coenie, Jaco Kriel, Kolisi, Marcel, Koch, Malherbe, Lood, PSDT, Jacques du Plessis, Coetzee, Labs, Arno Botha and CJ Stander......I only mention these because you sort of know them......the same would of course apply to the likes of Andries Coetzee, Gelant, Sithole, Jordaan, Rhule, v/Wyk, Sergel Pietersen, Ulengo, Combrink, Vorster, Mnisi, Mapoe, Rohan Janse v/Rensburg, Esterhuizen, Dries Swanepoel, Odendaal, Frans Venter, Pat Howard, Tyler Fisher, du Preez, Groom, Thomas du Toit, Kebble, Pierre Schoeman, Wilco Louw, Maks v/Dyk, Marx, Scara, Akers, Mbonambi, Jenkins, Snyman, Ruan Botha, Kleyn, Lorens Erasmus, Mostert, Lewies, Ettienne Oosthuizen, Wegner, Carr, Notshe, Mtembu, du Preez twins, v/d Walt, Elstadt, Hattingh, Jean Cook, Kwagga, Liebenberg, Kirsten and the likes who you know very little about.....one has to ask why you even bother watching or supporting SA rugby.....I mean that sincerely, what the fucking point?
You rate all the washed up has beens, a few pretenders like de Jongh and co.....and the only youngsters you find favour in are Kitshoff sort of, Etzebeth, Willemse, Willie and Pollard....that's it......so what is the point of you watching our rugby?
I honestly dont get it at all

Warratahs hooker Number 16 the Roach

 Dave....Your only loyalty is to your own perceptions. With the possible exception of Tokkie, no Saffa has been as anti Bok as you....so don't give me the anti SA rubbish, just because I have enough sense to know a bunch of youngsters are never going to win the RC or the WC.

 Mozart
I am never anti-bok - I am against non-performers.  Non-performers ultimately will never win anything - and will contribute to disgracing of SA Rugby - taking it down to low levels where they have never been before - examples losing against Japan and being rated 6th in the world.
The difference between you and Dave represents two extremes, namely -
*  you refuse to accept that team renewal is needed in any sports team and dote on the has-beens and in some cases never has-beens of the past; and
*  Dave is placing too much hope in promising youngsters who still have through proven performance must still prove that they belong.
In the process you are 100% negative about any players who may pose a selection threat to any players you dolt on and refuse to recognize any positives about them, even when your heroes are out of the picture completely.   That represents a serious negative on your part.
Dave at least had some success in identifying new players coming through - you represents the real negative in virtually all major aspects of team identification.            

 Interesting list of playwers Dave. One thing I whole heatedly agree with is creative play. Many of our coaches have tried to eliminate this. However it would appear the penny is dropping.

Tokkie the success model is simple......well demonstrated in all the WC teams since 2003.  The team is established, inc.umbents are given the benefit of the doubt, which builds team spirit and confidence. Youngsters are challenged to out perform to secure their place.
I ask you again what youngster has outperformed who has not been given his place and what youngster has been denied the chance to prove the point.

Just the names....no long epistles. 

 Mozart
To keep players in a squad on the basis of "given the benefit of the doubt" is in my opinion junk - especially i f those selfsame players has under-performed in a number of tests since 2014.  Team spirit is important and if you put it as important it would account for 20% - while performance makes up the other 80%.  No team spirit without performance ever wins a match - performance does.  
The other problem is that reputation players should not be in any squad and if needed replacements should be phased in over a period and not like Meyer did as an emergency measure.  This was the main reason why we were in trouble in the WC from the start.  "The most experienced team in the history of Springbok rugby" - ie the incumbents - was disgraceful in the test against Japan.    The result was that some players had to be brought in in every subsequent test, because Meyer could not trust his "experienced players".  None of the replacement players could be rested and played in less tests - a disastrous approach in WC competitions. 
The fact is that Meyer was forced into playing youngsters with less than 10 test matches experience in the WC because his reputation players got injured or under-performed so badly Meyer had no choice but to play inexperienced players.  A typical example is playing De Allende and Kriel as a center-combination after playing together in only three tests prior to the start of the WC.  
The other player was De Jager - with the alternative being a failure like Matfield in the series.   He was consequently over-played like some of the other players were.  The issue is not only over-play - but the need for Meyer to adjust his game plan to a format that his experienced duds could play - the result being that what by doing so predictability was the end result.      
The question which has been asked already - what was duds like Kirchner, Morne Steyn, Willem Alberts, Victor Matfield and Jannie du Plessis (players who in the main barely four months later being used as bench players by their clubs, because they are not good enough to start) doing in the Springbok squad?  Those players should have been phased out years ago and new players phased in.  
That is also why Meyer was effectively fired - he never even endeavoured to develop a usable squad to be competitive in the WC, because he followed to a T what you wrote above. That model - without ability to perform - is what caused SA Rugby to go progressively backward over the last three years.         


 

 

 Many players can be exceptional but is an exceptional player that plays within the team game plan able to show X-factor? 
N-M Scudder & D. McKenz ie have x-factor. I would say SBW has x factor but so do players like Ben Smith, Ranger, Barrett off the bench, Nadolo, Dane Coles & the list goes on.
In SA, wee Willie had it but is too erratic to qualify IMO. Etzabeth is also a game changer type player. Poc*ock is & Folau was but he faded badly last year (injuries).

 JW 
I do not entirely agree with your categorisation of players with X Factor in NZ.  I would say McKenzie and Milner-Skudder definitely - but I do not think that Barrett, Nadolo and Dane Coles can be described as having it.  Reasons -
*  Barrett is a player that comes up with occasional amazing plays - but can also be bad under pressure;
*  Nadolo is a physical player - I rate players with X Factor as clever players and that is not present in Nadolo's make-up; and
*  Dane Coles likes to stand around in the backline - while he is supposed to be a crucial member of the Tight 5 - part of the reason why the Hurricanes Tight 5 regularly fails.
To my mind the physical part is largely off=-set by clever play and I look at an X-factor player pri marily as a clever player and where there is also physicality it is a great advantage.   

   

Just the names Tokkie....which world beaters should have been in our WC team against NZ , who weren't there.
Names only names

 This is crazy - the man ask for world beaters who were not in the WC squad while losers were in the squad. 
Why not put the question - which I pose as to who were there and should not have been.   I gave a list of who should not have been there.   If those players have been replaced and phased in over the three years preceding the WC - it would have been clear who should have been there and was not.
The names are asked for in this case when the rest of the discussion is being ignored because it deals with the silly point made by you about WC selection (incumbents are given the benefit of the doubt) when the incumbents have not been performing well enough for at least the year before the WC.
The answer is if Meyer did not select the squad on the basis you support - as dealt with above - a sound squad of experienced players would have been available, but he had to do what you said is required and picked players on reputation and not performance causing  SA to be represented by a core squad of has-beens and never-has-beens.                   

 Barrett has that 'X' factor when used as a super-sub 'specially when administering the coup de grace against the boks or Wales or the wobs....Dane Coles is the best in his position by a long way unless you can show me better ? Does his core functions extremely well and has pace to burn off wingers and other supposed speedsters which is not supposed to be an attribute of a hooker .And the hate directed at wee Matfield of the flowing lion like mane and leaping ability to rival his teams namesake just astounds me .It would never occur to me to attack one of the elder statesmen in the ABs like Maccaw who was denigrated by many as being too old too slow and just past his use by date .These people were of course not ABs fans and definitely did not speak of Maccaw within earshot of Ms Cloudy !

 Sharkbok is the wee miss Jordan Foley in the run on side for one of the SA teams then ? Along with the 4 below I gather she is to be the bools new tight five eh ?

Coles in fact is not a hooker - he is the best in NZ - but would not pass as a hooker anywhere else as he is a quasi backline player - making zero contribution to the Tight 5 of which he is supposed to be a member.  That does the wonderful thing of turning the Tight 5 to a Tight 4.   Ultimately that resulted in a negative for the AB's - same as Matfield did for the Springboks. 
A hooker is a p[layer that contributes to the Tight 5 in the first instance and can be used outside of that as well.  The ideal hooker in fact is a player like Marx of the Lions.  He at 21 years of age is a better Hooker than Coles would ever be.    
   

 Really ? I dont think Hansen sees it your way ,care to point out where Coles has been a liability in the ABs ? And Marx who ? Has he got any RCs ,RWCs under his belt ? A perfect year ? Come and tell us about him when he has earned something.And wee Mikey in the first instance a hooker hooks the ball,he then throws to the lineout and THEN contributes to the tight five.You are the only person in existence who complains that he doesnt contribute to the tight 5 ,maybe his coach has decided to use his skills in a less traditional and more devastating fashion .I know the other 4 certainly have no complaints.Just wee Mikey.

 Wardad
With respect - Hansen has no other option - the rest of the NZ hookers are even worse in the hooker position than Coles is.   He may be able to hook the ball when the forwards are in full retreat, because he cannot add value to strength in scrums.  The Hurricanes are an awkward mess in scrumming - and the fact is that the NZ backline is the real issue when it comes to winning games, their scrumming is not what it should be either.
I think Coles would be an excellent openside flank - a hooker he is not. I like him as a fantasy selection - but would not like to see him as a hooker in any team.   He is the type of hooker Schalk Brits used to be - flashy in loose play and a disaster in Tight play.         .   

Names Tokkie, who are these young world beaters, surely you can come up with one player who never got a chance, or who left out significantly lowered our chances.....names no bs.  

 Coles is one of the form hookers in World Rugby and fat t!ts Tokkie thinks he should be an openside?!!  Add that to the long list of sh!t calls he's made....topped by claiming Morne Stern signed for Paris St Germain.
Try again fat t!ts Tokkie

 really Mikey ? Your opinion means more than the most successful coach ever ? Pfft talking garbage now.ABS scrum seemed to do okay against Oh I dunno Boks,England ,Australia,Argentina ,Wales ,France ...did I miss anyone ? You do realise Mikey that we play the style of rugby that suits us ,you know more mobile forwards who can run and pass ? Coles may not suit you but he sure as hell suits the most successful team ever.Hi Poi-e how goes it Bro ? Poor wee Mikey thinks he's a bok selector which makes him an expert on the NZ style of rugby and how we should select our players.