In Serfontein we would at least have a competent 12, if not a world beater. That would be my pick if he is available. 13, who knows. Kriel, Mapoe, Am. Can't believe we don't have one proper 13 to call on.
De Alende is the best of a poor lot at 12...not the answer, but it's an unfair question. Maybe the Boks should play with 3 flyhalves instead of a FH and a 12 & 13. 10, 10.1 and 10.2...or should we try a 11.1 or 14.1 instead of the 10.2?
In the absence of a clear choice at 12, I like the idea of a 10.1 instead of a 12.
We don't need a 12 who is a try scorer, but a creator of space. Someone with a at least some feel for the position. As I have said before, Damian makes errors on a game by game basis that I have never seen another pro centre make. There are kids as young as 10 who have a better appreciation for the position than him. There is no aspect of his age you can't point to that can justify ridiculing my position, or sway my position. Damian gets run over continually, can't read the game at even the most rudimentary level, has poor skills and worst of all, our opponents know it. Damian is pathetic. Best of all, he naturally wants to go wide and beat opponents in space. When is the last time you saw cut an unders line? Under Meyer against Scotland, but it only worked for one half. He is actually quite weak despite his size. Worst of all, passive. You can't succeed with passive players. I stand by what I have said. You don't have to like it, but it stands as that. Unless Damian can start playing like an under 15s star. If he can at least reach that, I'll call him a real centre. Not even the blue ferry can save this lost cause. He is an imposter at centre.
Pakie, your choice is a smart one. Serfontein isn't faultless by any means but he is the closest thing we have to Jean. He reads play very well, this is a player who is very tactically aware. He communicates well and is alert. Given Damian's tendency to be swatted around and run over, any defensive concerns are irrelevant. Serf would be a good option at 12. If we weren't in such dire straits at 13, he'd be my choice at 12. However, he does a very good job of shoring up the outside. Even if there is a disconnect with his 12. There is never a reason to play Damian, who has become an open highway.
Moz, I agree with you, not the answer to the right question...
Lurker, I'll pick Pollard at 12, Serf at 13 and Rob Dup at 10 untill Damian sizes up/ mature ....or someone else steps up. Not nearly ideal, but we have very poor choices at centre.
The thing with Damian is that it isn't a matter of maturing. He needs to rebuild his entire game mechanically and relearn the game. That's an extraordinarily tall order. He has shown no signs whatsoever of being an independent learner, and a stern teacher type will probably exhaust themselves in frustration. He seems like a humble guy, decent fella, but not the sharpest flint in the hunting pouch.
Your solution is an interesting one. Certainly the strongest centre pairing we could possibly field.
Mozart is deluded as per normal - one has to understand his approach though - he has pet hate players and does not care what lies he spread to malign them.
The man is totally devoid of honesty iro rugby and that adds to the impression that he knows near to nothing about the game in general. . His BS about Mapoe and Am is typical.
So misleading. Looks like just another occurrence in the non existing quota policy. Or maybe someone in SA had the idea of officially pushing down the number so that the non existing quota policy no longer jumped that much to the face.
At some point, maybe, someone in SA rugby will get it that claiming a quota policy in a rugby team composed with white and non white players is quick to be checked and does not take much brain juice to infirm or confirm .
It might be that. Or another attempt to dress the non existing quota policy.
Clever Mike, the only one I have seen lying is you. You lie very often. Not only that, but in the face of the most damning evidence. You have these players that you don't like, most often players that have contributed significantly to Bok rugby, and continue to repeatedly press that narrative with no end in sight. It you cannot win a debate, you become aggressive and begin insulting people. That's how you approach winning a debate. It's actually very immature. However, you then begin to label these people with your behaviour. Externalizing your own characteristics and applying them to these individuals. It leads to very static and dull discussions. Certainly, very repetitive.
