Pollard the flyhalf of the future

Forum » Rugby » Pollard the flyhalf of the future

May 14, 2014, 18:48

Provided he avoids serious injury and isn't rushed into pressure situations too soon, Pollard is a great prospect. He has the physique and head for serious rugby and is quite an athlete. 


All the hype about Lambie, Goosen and Jantjies seems so silly in comparison.


No I wouldn't start him this year or possibly even at the RWC.....but he would be on the bench behind one of the Steyns, preferably Fransie.

May 14, 2014, 19:15

  I like Pollard, Stormers should be kicking themselves for letting the kid go. I think that he should be part of the wider springbok training group but should not be capped until after the world cup. We will have to make due with the Flyhalves we have. 

 Meyers choice would probably be Steyn, Lambie and Goosen. Jantjies aren't getting enough game time and Mauritz Boshoff showed some promise but need to pick up his game and be more consistent. 
 I think Pollard has the right temperament. He showed that as a 17 year old when he took over from Tony Jantjies that had a lot of hype but probably were to blame for the baby boks losing to Ireland. I also think Kolbe should not be considered as he proved that he doesn't have the right temperament when he tried to run the ball from his own 22, got turned and allowed the wales to counter to get a try and converted it. That tournament was the baby boks to lose and Kolbe shoudl shoulder the blame.
 Pollard knows how to vary his game, showed that he can break the line, good line kicks and solid in defence and his goal kicking is pretty spot on to. At 20 he might be playing a few test matches next year.

May 14, 2014, 19:20

He is also being grounded in Bools rugby, which face it, is a lot closer to Bok rugby than Cheetahs rugby. I think we need to move towards a more expansive game, but as we saw on saturday, without a great kicking game South African teams rarely win. 

May 14, 2014, 20:38

 As we saw Saturday was the Bulls actually running with the ball.

May 14, 2014, 22:41


 Get it into your thick skull - Fat Fransie is not a flyhalfs backside.  Slow and clueless - cannot read games and has no plan.  If you want to destroy a backline put the Fat Fairy in the backline.  And your other hero Morne is nowadays the water carrier and toilet cleaner at Stade Francais, since he cannot play rugby properly.   What a collection of arseholes do you support.   :D:D:D How clueless can you get.  :D :D:D  

May 15, 2014, 00:22

 Morne is nowadays the water carrier and "toilet cleaner" at Stade Francais, since he cannot play rugby properly.   :D

May 15, 2014, 00:25

Ag ou Maaik you are an ANC water carrier yourself.....did they pay you enough for the loss of your self respect?

May 15, 2014, 02:16

Oh boy. Here we go again. I see the "understanding" of Bok rugby falls away and is replaced by the "let's have a go at Mozart" when in fact Moz is 100% correct.

Now before I say why, let's all agree that Bok rugby will take the best part of 7-10 years to be able to compete with the AB's in a running/passing gameplan at a consistent level. You don't just see a fly half that looks like he can run a bit at age group level and chuck him into the Boks. Go ask Brent Russell how that worked out for him. It needs to feed through our school system.

I ask you with tears in my eyes. Where the fuck is the 2015 WC being held? I think some guys are forgetting. Playing Fransie or Morne at fly half in those conditions is a huge advantage. Running rugby on those fields is not the same as in the RC in the Southern Hemisphere. This is why the AB's scraped through all their eoyt games and we nearly kept a clean sheet in terms of tries against. Our game plan is what works over there. Guys like Etzebeth,Alberts, Vermuelen, jdv, j.fourie are what work. Now chuck the biggest boots we have at 10 and a guy like Fransie that can get u go forward in contact too and we will enter most games there as favourites.

It's ugly rugby to watch but let's face it, SA are years away from being "pretty" so give up on the idea of playing little guys with good feet right now. If we do that, we give away our only advantage and we struggle past Scotland and co!

Fransie at 10 in the WC would be a massive positive. Forwards grinding teams down and Fransie keeping them pinned back with the boot. It's no secret that is what the boks gameplay will be so it only makes sense to have your two best kickers in the squad and they just so happen to share a surname! Possibly even both the Steyn's at 10 and 12. Sounds a bore but so does Bok rugby! That is more likely to do the job against the bigger teams over there than say goosen and steppie! 

Pollard as back up to one if the steyns at 10 will give us options if we wish to switch it up which we won't! 

Trust me, I have 2 very different bok teams. 1 is one that I would like to see play and the other is a realistic team of how we do play. Very different. It's no use being dreamers right now. It ain't gona happen. We had the carrot dangled infront of us and NZL still managed to put 35 points against us at our "fortress" so let's get real about the challenge we face in the NH at the WC. Guys like Faf de Klerk and co just won't be what u think they will over there! Get real guys!

May 15, 2014, 02:37

@Boklogic. The tournament is held in September which is one of the warmest month of the year in England. 

August is often the most summer month in the UK in terms of warm weather. 
A bit like how February can be the hottest time in Durban.

By December it is pissing it down in the UK, so the the fields are mud baths by that time.

So the pitches are not going to be as bad as when playing in winter, not like on the highveld- but not a mud bath.

May 15, 2014, 03:22

 To be honest, so many fans want to play a me too AB strategy. But all they have to do is look at the 7s to see how successful that's going to be. The first principle of strategy is to define your relative competitive advantage and impose it on your opponent. Any sensible campaign starts right there.

May 15, 2014, 03:30

Exactly. Irrespective of time of year. The point is that we will encounter adverse weather conditions and the Boks are not a running team. We must play to our strengths! 

May 15, 2014, 03:42

Oops - I poke fun at two of Mozart's favourite players and now a very funny personal attack about politics followed.  The spiteful old and fool rakes up something what happened years ago from a political angle and then implied I am dishonest.   What a bloody idiot we have to content with here.

And he said I have no sense of humour - what about the balls up who calls himself Mozart?  :D:D:D    

May 15, 2014, 04:37

Oops I said nothing about honesty OOM, I mentioned self respect....so. I take it honesty is an issue? 

May 15, 2014, 05:08


Nobody in his right mind wants to play a continuous running game - not even the New Zealanders do.  They play a game with variation in plays - and they use accurate kicking for strategic purposes.   So does most of the stronger NH teams as well.

All the NH teams we will meet in the WC has game plans where strategic kicking will be utilized.   I have no problem with kicking - but I certainly have a problem with donkey kicking - as opposed to strategic kicking and the absence of a Plan B.   The Steyns can never be accused of using strategic kicking as a weapon.   There kicking game is inaccurate and easily dealt with by opposing teams.   That is for instance the reason why Morne Steyn is out of favour with Stade Francais - he is clueless about what strategic kicking entails.  Francois Steyn is no better.

Let me be explicit - nobody in world rugby play one-dimensional rugby anymore.  The New Zealand teams kick balls - even more often than we do - but their kicking is strategic and aimed at achieving certain objectives - ours are just "donkey" kicking - aimless and with the hope that the opposition will make mistakes that would benefit us.  Way too often the result of kicks by our half back pair is just a means of handing over possession to the opposition - nothing else.

The common idea is that we must play New Zealand rugby to be successful.   That means according to some mad passing of the ball at all costs.  The New Zealanders do not do it - when they pass balls it has a purpose - when they kick balls it is done with  a purpose. 

We have a major problem in our teams -

*   our half back pair and especially our flyhalfs have no idea about reading of the game - they must be told in advance what to do and they do not understand when to vary games with due regard to what is happening in the game; and

*   in the rare event that they do try and pass the balls - the same mindless situation exists and the ball handling skills of our backline players are poor and totally inadequate.

Now lets get back to our flyhalfs - there is ample evidence that our flyhalfs are clueless as to when to donkey kick balls and when not to.  The Steyns are both robotic players - they must be told in advance what they must do in games.  They kick when they are supposed to pass balls and they pass balls when they are supposed to kick. I can give you many examples where both fouled up in the relevant regard.

Their kicking game is inadequate - their passing game is even worse.   In the case of Francois Steyn - he is totally clueless in the relevant regard.   He uses skip passes that eliminate overlaps and his passing is often so inaccurate that the recipients cannot do anything but knock on the balls.

Whether your like it or not - some passing of the balls is necessary - even in NH conditions and our players will be tackled - so there will be need for proper tackle ball protection and recovery.  That is where we come seriously short.  One of the main problems we have had is that we lose turnover possession under such circumstances or give away penalties - this is an issue with the Sharks as well and has even been mentioned by Jake White.   The same applies to tackle ball after opposition carries.

The question is why does it happen?  It brings me to the role of our loosies and players like Alberts.  Even when he gets to the tackle ball position - he virtually never enters mauls - standing around behind mauls.   This happens throughout games.  Loosies should be able to play a role in tackle ball situations insofar as ball protection and recovery is concerned.  In NH conditions the fields are generally heavier and the game slower - but the game is not so slow that you can play a player that does not undertake basic functions like mauls and ball recovery - in other words you cannot play an additional lock and hope that things will be fine.  They will not be and our ball ball retention and recovery will remain inadequate - since loosies like Alberts are totally deficient in the relevant regard.  His few mostly ineffective ball caries will never off-set that deficiency.

In summary - nobody in his right mind is against the so-called kicking game - what most people are against is mindless and aimless kicking for the hell of it - and certainly against no variation in play.  Any team unable to vary games when the situation needs it - will come short in the WC and that is the problem we have to contend with.     





May 15, 2014, 05:16

Number nine...number nine....number nine 

May 15, 2014, 05:23


I wonder about your integrity as a person - you are totally devoid of honesty and you are indeed a rugby illiterate.  You are clueless when it comes to the game and made generalized comments that showed serious deficiency in rugby thinking.

Your repeating of number 9 reminds me of a person in urgent need for admission to a lunatic asylum.   

Are you too ignorant to read and understand what is written above or are you too rugby  illiterate to comment on it constructively?


May 15, 2014, 05:52

On the contrary I understood what is written above the first time it was written OOMpie....and all the many times it has been repeated. And unfortunately it's trivial. 

May 15, 2014, 06:21


Certainly what is trivial is your constant harping about certain players, your constant misrepresentation about what happens on the field of play and your constant tendency to hark back to players who reached their peak in 2007 to 2009 and now is really deficient in performance - something you try to paper over.

Start to think about modern rugby and future scenarios and not living in the past - that would make your contributions interesting.    

May 15, 2014, 09:42

 A few years ago Goosen was the future, so dont get to carried away with Pollard. I think if required NZ wld change their gameplan in NH conditions, but why wld they. The perception is NZ employ a running gameplan, but they dont just run aimlessley from their 22, you hardly ever see NZ run fr 22 these days. They play just as much a territorial pragmatic, conservative gameplan. As anyone else, difference is they have more varaitions in their game, and are not predictable like some teams. They are also alot more proficient then most teams. NZ scored 454 points last year, for an average of 32 Points PG. NZ scored 52 Trys last year for an average of 3.85 Trys PG. SA scored 404 Points PG last year, for an. 

average of 33 Points PG. SA scored 47 Trys last years for an average of 3.95 Trys PG. 250 of NZ points came from trys, 225 of SA 
points came from trys. The average trys PG 
between NZ and SA were pretty much equal 
againgst other oppossition. So NZ just have 
alot more variation in their gameplan, and 
are alot more proficient particularly againgst 
SA. So SA obviousley have no problem with 
scoring trys, its their execution that lets 
them down. NZ scored 67 points againgst 
SA in its 2 matches last year, and 9 Trys. NZ 
in its two matches againgst SA last year,  averaged 33.5 Points PG. 33 Points is way 
too much to concede againgst NZ, so as 
much as their is a focus on SA abilities on 
attack, a focus should be on the defense too just ask JJ .  The fact too SA let in on 
average 4.5 Trys PG againgst NZ in their 
two matches last year, defense needs just 
as much focus. On contrast SA lost both games againgst NZ last year sorry to rub it in, scoring 42 points in its two matches last 
year againgst NZ, scoring 6 trys in both games. On average SA scored 22 points PG againgst NZ 35 pg, and 6 trys Vs NZ 9 Trys. SA scored 3 Trys PG vs NZ 4.5 Trys PG. 
Stats show for SA to beat NZ they need to be 1. More proficient 2. Score more Trys and 
at least 30 points on average 3. And be 
better defensively. So considering this you 
have to look at the players who are capable 
of doing all this. 
2013: Attack and Defense

M. Steyn: Vs Italy Carries = 5 Metres Ran = 

M.Steyn: Vs Scotland Carries = 7 Metres Ran = 31 

M.Steyn: Vs Samoa Carries = 3 Metres Ran = 16

M.Steyn: Vs Argentina Carries =3 Metres Ran = 16

M.Steyn: Vs Argentina Carries = 3 Metres 
Ran =17

M.Steyn: Vs Oz Carries = 2 Metres = 2

M. Steyn: Vs NZ Carries =1 Metres Ran = 4

M.Steyn: Vs Oz Carries = 8 Metres Ran = 54

M.Steyn: Vs NZ Carries = 1 Metres Ran =4

M.Steyn: Vs Oz Carries = 8 Metres Ran = 54

M.Steyn: Vs NZ Carries = 1 Metres Ran = 51

Carries PG = 6 Metres Ran = 26 m ran PG

P.Lambie (only had two starts, and two off the bench againgst NZ)

P.Lambie: Vs NZ Carries= 3 Metres Ran = 26

J.De Villiars: Vs NZ Carries = 5 Metres Ran = 29

J.DeVilliars: Vs NZ Carries = 3 Metres Ran = 105

Carries PG = 4 Metres Ran PG = 67 PG (just vs NZ)

Le Roux: Vs NZ Carries =5 Metres Ran = 28

Le Roux: Vs NZ Carries = 9 Metres Ran =117

Carries PG = 7 Metres Ran = 72 PG

D. Carter: Vs SA Carries= 4 Metres Ran= 0

D.Carter: Vs Fra Carries = 11 Metres Ran = 

D.Carter: Vs Argentina Carries = 10 Metres 
Ran = 58

D.Carter: Vs Japan Carries = 4 Metres Ran = 18

D.Carter: Vs France Carries = 6 Metres Ran = 17

D.Carter: Vs Eng Carries = 1 Metres Ran = 0

Carries PG = 6 Metres Ran PG = 16.3 

B. Smith: Vs SA Carries = 6 Metres Ran = 27

B.Smith: Vs Oz Carries = 8 Metres Ran = 78

B. Smith: Vs Oz Carries = 6 Metres Ran = 46

B.Smith: Vs SA Carries= 6 Metres Ran = 26

B.Smith: Vs SA Carries = 5 Metres Ran = 59

Carries PG = 6.2 Metres Ran PG = 236

M.Nonu: Vs Oz Carries = 7 Metres Ran = 28

M.Nonu: Vs Oz Carries = 9 Metres Ran = 28

M.Nonu: Vs SA Carries = 6 Metres Ran = 8 

M.Nonu: Vs SA Carries = 4 Metres Ran = 28

Carries PG = 6 Metres Ran = 18 MR PG

As you can see JDV and Le Roux hd the best effect on NZ defense. Le Roux shld be molded into a ten. The Steyns may not be any betrer, but presently considering the conservative ways of Meyer, The steyns well be best at implementing at that. Dont expect any new blood at ten. Looking at the breakdown stats, in the first match NZ wan on possesion and terriotory, but in the Breakdown SA dominated Rucks wan by 92.5% to 88.5%, altho NZ wan Mauls wan by 100.00 % to around 85%. Shows NZ supeior proficiency. Point is SA need to pick the right players, but whether or not they can b. More proficient then NZ remains to be seen.

May 15, 2014, 10:37

Umm ... playing Fat Fransie in any condition shows a lack of proper judgment.

No way he should be allowed anywhere near the Bok team ... or any other team for that matter.

May 15, 2014, 11:03

 Yeah sure Clown..Lets take your word for it. Would be more convincing if the man was not already an established Bok with some pretty prestigious medals behind his name..

What have you ever won besides the silent "poes of SA rugby.com" award?? Hang on a second..Maybe we should switch Fransie out for Volmink?? Fucken weirdo!!

May 15, 2014, 12:39

I like Pollard but he certainly is no better than Goosen, Lambie or Swiel 

May 15, 2014, 12:41

Talking about achievements ... didn't I read somewhere that your an employment consultant of sorts?

Did you have to go to High School for that?

I presume you have the basic reading skills needed to establish whether a person's application qualifies him for a position ... right?

I take it you're not asking your "Maori" friend to explain the bigger words on the application to you ... are you??

May 15, 2014, 12:54

 You would be wrong again..I am a CFP obtained through Sanlam before leaving SA and I currently serve as a BDM for a recruitment firm...

What are you clown cunt?? I take it not very much!!

May 16, 2014, 21:11

 From the little I have seen of Pollard I do like. But he must not be rushed into international games against top teams as they will target him as was Goosen.

But in RSA due to a lack of a top class #10's of international class we tend to place the talented youngsters in the firing line before they have matured physically for the role.

Lambie...showed class but he has lost that zip. Also his kicking has deserted him and he does suffer from injuries sustained in his short career thus far.
Jantjies.....showed early flare but has developed a habit of making suicide passes, is this due to his hesitation to take a hit or just hit a ceiling with his play.
Goosen.....classy but injury prone unfortunately. Not physically able to take hits.

Lets hope that more talented players are coached correctly and step up but not pushed into battle to early.

I think SA coaches (in particular) are desperate to win at the S15 level and place players in the line of fire to soon after injuries or to early in their careers.

Thoughts appreciated.

May 16, 2014, 21:42

 There are two schools of thought here.  The one school of thought is that the only role of the flyhalf is to kick balls - either at goal or out of hand irrespective of how poor the rest of their game in fact is.

The other school says a flyhalf must be -

*  able to read games and decide on strategy based ion that reading;
*  kick well strategically and must have a good conversion rate of penalties; and 
*  must be able to initiate and be involved in attacking backline play

The issue is consequently between the one dimensional robotic players on the one had and the multi-dimensional players in the other hand.   The problem is that we have had the worst one-dimensional flyhalf imaginable since Morne Steyn cme on the scene.  Morne had to get precise instructions before the start of the game and he followed those religiously causing serious dilemmas like the case was iro the second Messam try in the Ellis Park test.  Francois is even worse in that regard.  Since there prime task is kicking of the ball - they kick when they should pass the ball and sometimes pass when they should kick. 

This is the type of flyhalf that cost us matches and initiate the dead backline syndrome we have suffered from for years.

A move to the contrary produced players like Goosen, Lambie and now Pollard.  All three are thinking players - not robots and when they play the backlines functions better and we have a more multi-faceted game.   

Since the Steyns "donkey" kick balls without any regard to strategy and their kciking game is widely inaccurate - the answer is that we need to up our game to ensure that kicks are purposeful and with strategic objectives - the present kicking scenario is easily countered and detrimental to the Springbok team.  A more varied approach is more difficult to defend against.    

I would rather have players like Lambie  and Goosen ahead of the donkey-kickers in the team.  I think that Pollard will fit into the same category of thinking players and could become a real option in future.           


May 16, 2014, 21:52

AJ, Pollard has much better shot. Face it Jantjies and Lambie are small chaps....pumped up to the max by diet and training, but still small. Goosen is taller, but like JJ a player with a light frame....easily discarded in the tackle.

Pollard is a solid 6 ft 2 inch youngster....naturally up around 210 lbs. he has the physique that the other three lack. The body to function and survive in test rugby. He also has a good boot, an excellent eye for the gap, leadership credentials and a competitive nature.

He is the first of these young fly halves that probably has  a genuine chance.

May 17, 2014, 04:35

 Mozart is the dolt of the century.  He makes wild statements mostly without facts and that makes him earn that role with distinction.   

The following are the basic information about the foremost flyhalfs of the pasty to decades:-

Wilkinson       =    1,78   -   89 kgs
Carter           =    1.78   -   94 kgs
Barrett          =    1,75   -   82 kgs
Barrett          =    1,87   -   92 kgs

Now lets look at the SA flyhalfs:

Goosen         =     1,85   -   89 kgs
Lambie          =     1,77  -    87 kgs
Pollard          =     1.88  -    97 kgs

Morne           =     1,84  -   91 kgs

None of the above flyhalfs are particularly big players.  His favourite flyhalf is Francois Steyn - who is 1,94 and 112 kgs - with Morne Steyn after him.   

Since Mozart is clueless about backline play and the role of the flyhalfs - he is addicted to size and not the qualities shown by the better flyhalfs in world rugby over the past two decades.  According to Mozart - the less the ability to think - the better the flyhalf.  Then as to defense - the two choices at flyhalf of Mozart are poor defenders as well.

Pollard is still very inexperienced -  In the Under 20 WC last year he was not very good - but he shwed signs of improvement in the recent CC games.  He is one to follow - but is not a clearcut choice at flyhalf at present.   


May 17, 2014, 06:24

Number nine....number nine.......number nine. 

May 17, 2014, 10:24

Pollard is really looking good. An Under 20 playing doing well at Super 15 level is proof of his ability. As Moz says he is also physically up to it. We really have no problems at flyhalf barring injuries. Lambie is also an international clas flyhalf. Goosen is still a kid and will toughen up.

One thing though. We are absolutely and totally able to play attacking rugby. Look at the Cheetahs and how many tries they score. Look at how things changed when the Stormers changed their strategy.

I have also always maintained you need to have a different pack when you play at Loftus to that when you play on a rainy afternoon etc at Twicks.
You need to tweak the pack. Option are loosies and hoooker. We must play a more mobile loose trio when at Loftus etc Its really so simple one wonders why there is any confusion.

May 05, 2020, 00:57

Another Pollard prediction thread. 

May 15, 2014, 12:39

I like Pollard but he certainly is no better than Goosen, Lambie or Swiel 

May 05, 2020, 01:06

And then Pollard does what he does at Ellis Park the following Rugby Championship...

May 05, 2020, 01:21

What’s your point Sharktwat you fucking pathetic little loser

May 05, 2020, 04:12

This was Mozart's comments about Pollard in May 2014 - six months later In October 2014:- 

"No I wouldn't start him this year or possibly even at the RWC.....but he would be on the bench behind one of the Steyns, preferably Fransie."

There can be no greater insult of a player than putting them below the Steyns in rating,  That was  the sick idea,   A month later Pollard started his Springbok career after Morne Steyn disgraced himself near to totally against the Welsh.   He played three tests and then Meter brought back Morne - only to drop him after he again disgraced himself in Perth,  That was followed a year later by Meyer selecting Morne  as an unplayable player in the 2015 WC squad,  

Meyer was a total incompetent as a  coach -  Morne was the worst flyhalf ever playing for SA and there was indeed some really poor ones in that category,          

You need to Log in to reply.
Back to top