Positives and negatives of Boks

Based on Saturday's performance I noted a few things of significance;
Positives:1) Our Centers we very effective in attack2) Our scrum was able to dominate3) We were able to turn over a lot of ball4) Lood was able to compete against AB's for the full 90. (More to add on negative though) 5) Pollard is a great attacking flyhalf that can kick accurately enough.6) Brussouw started off a little slow, but did exactly what was hoped of him. Would still start with Coetzee, but Brussouw is an able replacement.7) Pienaar is capable of a good game!!! I have been heavily against him, but he did prove his worth on Saturday. I am still not sure it was not just a flash in the pan performance.8) Hendricks is a better option that Pietersen, and did not have a bad game defensively, but that may be due to not having a high tackle count.
Negatives:1) Strauss has been my first choice over Bizzie for a long time, but I am starting to doubt weather he is even good enough to be second choice on current form.2) Our line out is starting to look no more than average.3) We seem to have faded in the last 15 minutes in the last two games. Do we have a problem with fitness or is our bench that far behind our run on team?4) Reinach is not a test Scrummy. He's had a number of chances and has not taken any of them.5) There are still question marks on the defence of both our starting centers. Defense wins World Cups. This needs to be sorted out urgently. 

Agreed with most of what you say but I might just add that you're a touch harsh on both Strauss and Brussow. Brussow hasn't played at test level for yonks and was thrown into the deep end against the best side on the planet. Strauss needs to start not play off the bench.  

Denny I was very impressed with Brussouw, don't get me wrong, But Coetzee has been in great form.
As for Strauss, it just seemed to me the moment he came on our Line-out started to struggle. Same last week. 

Did Strauss throwin?..thought we lost 3 against Bismarck throws? No?  

.

 Bluebok
Sorry to point out a mistake on your part - De Jager only played for 59 minutes when he was replaced by Flippie.   The line-outs really went pear-shaped after his replacement.  The problem really was something I wrote about last week - namely the deficiency of having not a real line-out option other than the two locks.   Burger was apparently thought of as the third line-out option - but he ws not uip to standard in that component of the game.  
I was worried by the questionable defense of the centers previously - but also pointed out a problem - namely that we do not actually have alternatives.  This week De Allende was much better - his tackle stats were in the satisfactory range.  The problem was with only Kriel this week - but one should remember it is only his second test and he is bound to get better.  I think that by the time the WC comes around the problem would in fact be solved.   
I hope Meyer keeps those two as starters in the upcoming tests and add De Villiers from the bench.  To change the two starters at this stage would be counter-productive.  
 

That may be true Denny, I was watching in a pub, so my attention to detail may be a little off. The point is our line-out has not been what it was in the past, and couple that with the fact that we have faded two weeks in a row in the last 15 minutes, and it points to the fact that there seems to be an issue with our replacements. 
Mike, with regards to our centers, their defense was not terrible, but in order to win a world cup, your defense needs to be more than just adequate. Especially the center channel. I agree with you regarding their inexperience, and it does make the flaws in their game excusable, but the fact that it can be explained does not mean it does not need to be improved upon. 

I am not a Reinach fan, but you have to question the substitution of a player like Pienaar who is set and having a solid game, with very much a rookie low on game time 5 minutes from full time with your team under pressure. I don't get these replacements. Reinach came on and basically sunk any chance we had, just like he came on against Aus and got us under pressure with a terrible little box kick. Leave him off the field or send him on with 20 or 30 minutes to go so he can get into the game and settle. These last minute substitutions are pointless, and more often than not detrimental to the cause.

 Pakie
Spot on - a 5 minute replacement is a joke and put pressure on any player.
Bluebok
I am sure they are attending to the defense issue of the Boks - but I am more unhappy with the fact that the line-outs went pear-shaped after De Jager was subbed.  More so by the fact that they did not have enough line-out cover in the first place - we did not have cover for line-out by a loosie as I pointed out last week already.    

Very good comments Bloo, I agree with almost every point you made there. Our problem with the defence is technical I believe....Allende is outside his opponent too much and gets stepped,  Kriel is back on his heels waiting. If you watch Jean/ Fury they were technically very sound ....always bringing up the line. One of the two needs to emerge as the defensive leader....right now there is no leadership.

Pakie I agree on the Raainacht call, we were behind and it was desperation city. 

 Mozart
I am not sure about the statement "If you watch Jean/ Fury they were technically very sound ....always bringing up the line"   It may have been the case years ago - but in the Wales test in 2013 Davies ran past Fourie twice and Fourie's tackles was only done when he could get to the player - which due to pace-deficiency was not always the case.  
I am further not sure about De Villiers "bringing up the line".  In this regard I want to refer to  the Barrett try in the Ellis Park test in 2013.  This try was discussed many times on this site s you should remember it well.  In that test the problem started when Jean rushed out of line and was stepped with ease.  That was the start of the problem and was not an acceptable defending strategy in that case - especially since the first cover was Morne Steyn - a poor tackler at best and the next one Engelbrecht. with also a dubious defender. It is history now - but all three buggered up in that case.  
Unfortunately that was not the only time it happened in the case of Jean and would not be the last time either.   
The issue here is not to dwell in the past and give the two players a chance to improve both in technique and in strategy.  I am sure it is receiving detailed attention from the defensive coach.   Jean may be back - but to now refer to Fourie is like crying over spilled milk.  He is just no option in future.   

All that happened was Barrett stepped outside the on rushing Jean, bounced off the iron defence of Morne, straight into the defensive sieve known as JJ Englebrecht.....who should have thumped him providing a good shot a turnover. He tackled like a woosie.  

 Mozart
The iron defense of Morne - you cannot possibly be serious.   He is the only SA flyhalf  ever that has a missed tackle ratio of 46% as in the Perth test.  In the Ellis park test mentioned his missed tackle ratio was  36.36%.  If that is iron defense then you must be facetious or taking the mickey out of us.   

You simply don't understand modern defence Tokkie....as long as your line is not broken there is no issue. Both Steyns are masters at holding their space off a forcing line. Position is as important making the tackle.

 Missing a tackle remains missing a tackle.  The Steyns are indeed masters at holding their space and then missing their tackle despite holding their line.  Sure position is as important as making the tackle - provided they do make the tackle - but they missed the succeeding tackles which are too often normal with the Steyns.  
Is that why you ignore the missed tackle fiasco's of those two players?  .     

 The Kudriani try: to me it looked like it was Flo's tackle to be made.  DdA çame from the side to stop the move. Too late.  He was'nt lined up right,  but still made the effort.  He wi?l get better.  
For Willies try on the w/e.  DdA at SH,  long pass to SB out wide,  another long pass to Willie.... score!! Yet no mention on this site??? Good vision,  hard to bring down with the unique abillity to slip tackles AND to stay upright in the tackle,  but yet some look to call out tackles missed,  that he had no business getting to in the first place.  Some work to be done on his play,  but the firstreal 12 prospect since Jean. 

 Huge positive: we lost by the skin of our teeth. Another more telling positive,  we normally beat the "windgatte" once a year,  barring 2012 & 2023 where we run them close. They almost lose once a year... on average. If they don't lose to Aus in the next game,  they are double due for a hiding when we play them next. We have their number in RWC's.  95, 99 (for 3rd albeit),  2003 (they had our poor sorry asses... poor year for us), 2007... fell to the chickens,  I  mean cocks,  I  mean... well you know.  2011,  bailed out by good old Brycie.... give him ref of the year@ Salute!!! 


GO BOKKE!  SKOP GAT!!! 

Draad
Nothing you say will have any impact - both Mozart and Disaster  run De Allende down because they want Frans Steyn at 12.  They want to justify their support for Steyn by creating an impression that De Allende is weak and does not deserve to be in the Springbok team.
Mozart's anti-De Allende campaign has been going on for two years and nothing will change his mind on him.  He fears that De Allende would turn out to be threatening the position of De Villiers in the team as well.  The louder they scream - the more they think that members would believe their garbage.   I am afraid there are very few takers - the only real one is Ceradunce.       

 Mike,  I don't give a rats ass.  Beeno has it on about Matfield being the biggest con artist in Bok history.  I raise that by Fransie at 12. THE BIGGEST BS EVER SOLD.  To date,  Fransie has done NOTHING against decent oposition,  bar England in the 2007 RWC final.  Pipedream hype if I ever saw one.