Rating of Springbok players

15      Le Roux                4,5

14      Nkosi                     3

13      Am                        5

12      De Allende             5,5

11      Mapimpi                 5

10      Pollard                   4

9        De Klerk               4,5

8        Vrmeulen               5

7        Mosytrt                 3,5

6        Kolisi                      4

5        De jager                 6

4       Etzebeth                 4,5

3       Malherbe                 5

2       Mbonambi               4

1       Kitshoff                   4

The rest I would only rate Marx at 6 and the rest all below 5.                         

Belly-Flop Malherbe a 5 ???????????

CM sure the Malherbe's are going to invite you around for supper after that rating.

Kolisi a 4, for what?

Singing the Anthem I guess.

What rubbish de Allende the best back and de Jager the best forward…De Jager misses the most tackles, gets splattered by Kerevi and gets a 6. Kerevi totally dominates Dud .

Six defenders beaten and 2 offloads vs zero defenders beaten and no offloads? Not even taking into account Kerevi’s dominating of Dud in contact,

LOL, right on cue Dave arrives to defend Damian de Nowhere To Be Seen.

No Dave

The idiotspeakers said Kerevio all on his own woin the maytcha dna De Allende all on his won lost the match.   That the rest of the team did nothing to lose the game.

The idipotspoeker Pakie quoted he stats of Kerevi on atatck - nothing on De Allende and they did not see what ahppened ion defense to Kerevi as well.   Whenit fits their stroy they love to quote states - when it does not they do not.   

Damian's stats:

P    R    MR    CB    DB    O
3    2      11       0       0       0

The idiotspeakers said Kerevio all on his own woin the maytcha dna De Allende all on his won lost the match. 

So far, exactly no one has said that.

Pakie

The way you and Mozart carri9ed on it implies that.   There were other deficiencies that you never mentioned - also you did not mention defense stats of the two players involved and logical people would reading your comments assume that ss what you actually meant.  

It is what is normal with Mozart  though - in his comments on the US Open Final he wrote lyrics about how good Djokovic were  and mentioned Sverev - but never the name of the winner.   What happened during the game he wrote how wonderful Djokovic were and distort the picture as to what really happened totally.

So lets have a look at what is really implied in respect of  Kerevi and D e Allende.   De Allende happened to handle the ball five times in total - a reflection of the poor performances of the forwards and  the flyhalf - while   Kerevi handled the ball 21 times.   Like De Allende he passed the ball three times - so in 18 carries he made on average slightly less than 3 meters per carry, while the two carries by De allende measured 5,5 meters per carry.   

Now lets get to defense  Kerevi made 4 tackles - missing one and cause ball possession loss once.  De Allender made 8 tackles missing 1 and did not lose possession once - he in fact caused a breakdown turnover as well.   So what have we got here - another effort to attack De Allende based on BS by both you and Mozart.        .    

Please speak English, Comrade.

So the person who took flight while the Springboks won matches and is abck now they lost a mtach is abck in all hius glory - what a freak.   

Australia's starting backs needed to make 22 tackles. Boks starting backs needed to make 44 tackles. There's a reason for that, but nuances like this would be above your paygrade. Kerevi made fewer tackles because there was hardly anyone to tackle. The Boks kicked and mauled.

So  whay was De Allende blamed for that deficiency as you early implied?    I asked that people lookj atr twhat really went wrong in the game and rated the players according to what really ahpopened - but you and Mozart said hat I rate was BS>    Sorry dimness get  life.  .   

The boks got better when Vermeulen and Kolisi went off. Two yellow cards killed us. Silly Willie going for an intercept which he had no chance and Kolisi lift early on sucked out all of the energy. 

Then not securing the ball in the final minute is criminal,  if anything, just kick the ball deep and get them to try and push up. 

Dumb Dumb play and no real captaincy 

No  - what killed the Springboks were illdiscipline giving away 7 convrtable penalties and poor play by most forwards.   Theree  were 9 of those and 7 was converted /   Who were the worst - Etzebeth tos tart with (2)  and each of   Malherbe, Marx,Wiese and Kolisi and Le Roux one each.  

That lot were bad news at the wrong time and place.   , 

Lügnerin, Thor was by far the best Bok forward. Of the backs, Damian and Nkosi were the worst. This is pure bias. I don't believe you saw the game. 

I picked Nkosi as a potential weakness….boy wasI right.

The string on the US Open final. Mike apologize, you got the date wrong you demented old fool:

Hall Of Fame

34364 posts

Wonderful game by Djokovic against an opponent who hardly made an unforced error until the end of the third set and served huge. How the Joker got some of those serves back boggles the mind. Zverev played exceptionally well, which makes the win under this kind of pressure even more impressive.

Hall Of Fame

44354 posts

Medvedev deserve thoroughly his victory today and a win in three sets is really  very .impressive.   In the end the 6 setter win against Sverev took a lot out of Djokovic and he really showed some difficulties in this game a a result.   The best  player won the Tournament and that deserve praise  - which one could only expect from real fans..       

Hall Of Fame

34364 posts

Real praise like you provided when Djokovic won the other three majors? You just sneaked off the site without a word.

Medvedev played a fine game today. His serve was very effective and he was more patient in  the long rallies……in the end Djokovic ran out of energy. Probably partly because of pressure, but also because Medvedev gave nothing away.

It’s a sad ending to an improbable quest. The greatest year in men’s tennis since 1968 ends in three 6 to 4 sets. It’s going to be hard for Novak to regroup but he may on the faster Australian Open surfaces.

Hall Of Fame

44354 posts

No Mozart

You in your comments about the  match yesterday did not mention who the winner was and the way you carried on with how excellently  Djokovic  performed and even mentioned Sverev, any reader would think that the final was between Djokovic and Sverev, since in your comments  you did not mention Medvedev once and it showed showed a level of spiteful imbecility.

Then you went on to talk about Medvedev serving -  and nothing about the fact that his return of service  was much better than  that of Djok0ovic's.  In three sets Medvedev broke the services of Djokovic 4 times as against one break of service by the latter.    By the way there were two particular games where Djokovic had 0-40 and 15-40 in break points in the first two sets and even though he faced twice as many second serves by Medvedev than first  serves  Djokovic did not convert any of the break points involved. so is that proof of how marvelous his return of service was?           .