Reinach Man of the Match

Careful Mozart are still studying how poor Reinach was - he is bound to find something to discredit him.   Remember what he wrote about Reinach all along - how useless and clu eless he is.  

Careful Mozart are still studying how poor Reinach was - he is bound to find something to discredit him.   Remember what he wrote about Reinach all along - how useless and clu eless he is.  

A definite improvement over Hougaard. A few hiccups in the first half but a solid second half. Great open field tackle on a flying Brown as well.

I thought Lambie did very well, missed one kick to touch but executed a great play with Willie for Re inach's try. 

That try was a lovely touch - exactly the kind of thinking rugby that was missing against Ireland.

 Now some praise for Lambie - are you lot planning to give Mozart a seizure?   

 I suspect he can manage that comfortably on his own, it is his retraction about Lambie and Reinach that Mozart might need a bit of help with :lol:

 Ou maaaikie you are conveniently forgetting how you were trashing Burger - you and ou snapster!! BwahahahahahaNow as for me I predicted a Bok win, have always said Reinach was the deal and was calling for Burgers inclusion as he was raring to go. Beeno's predictions and assessments 100% correct.
Thats how you do it oaks.  Dr Moz struggles in appreciating younger players. It takes him time to really assess them. Hahahahahahahahaha. Doesnt like change.

 Reinach was very good today, as was Lambie. In fairness to Beeno, he has been saying Burger should be playing and Burger was colossal today! 
Was it just me or did Etzebeth look closer to his previous form today?

AgPleez Deddy: All of them were rated very highly.
Bok player ratings

Have to agree, Reinach was good, I like the snap and crackle he brings to the backline and the player I bagged last week, Elzebeth, had his best game for the year. 

Etzebeth was mammoth in that game. When Matfield was off, he was the only option at the lineout, but took a few tough balls. Schalk  had a great game as well. Willie was masterful in the try. 

Now to the halves....here are the numbers
 FHLambie0/0164/4/20000110/10/000/0SHReinach1/0510/29/62511025/20/000/0

Let's start with Reinach....he certainly passed better than Hougaard, and handled better than Hougaard. And he made one brilliant open field tackle among five made,  while missing two. He lost the ball twice and was charged once. I'd say about a 6.
Lambie gained zero metres ball in hand, his goal kicking was patchy and he lost the ball once. His game hinged on two things, the drop and the chip kick off a clearly practiced move. Those were fine, but hardly meriting all the huge hyperbole.
Then we have the missed kick to touch, with the Boks a man up and the game in the balance. This was as bad a fault as Morne against Oz....overlooked because we happened to win. And also the cross kick in the Pom 22, a poor effort, easily marked by England.

Lambie handled the ball 10 times....Reinach 45  times. The few incidents noted above aside...Lambie was strangely missing in action. Farrell had a shocker but still handled the ball 27 times. Ten times through the flyhalf's hands may be a record low.
Reinach was a step up, but Lambie? Pollard must be wondering what the hell has happened. Are we about to go back to a kicking flyhalf....with all the approval of a very ordinary flyhalf performance, it would seem so.

Some punters say getting his kicks charged down is an old Reinach problem. Not sure if that's true since I've only really started following him during this test season. There were a number of charged down kicks in all three the big tests. NZ/Scotland had its share and France/Aus also a few.

I also thought Lambie had a quiet game. Tackled well though, he had some big runners coming at him and he seldom missed. But I won't say he controlled the game or stamped any authority on it. He still seems to me a better option coming off the bench. With his frame he is never going to be as direct and in your face as Pollard, or very effective at it when he decides to go that route. Pollard, on the other hand, needs to a learn a few tricks outside the inside break because he's a marked man now. Just like France managed to tackle Kuridrani out of the game (for the most part), the same happened to Pollard against Ireland.

I'd say Reinach was a tale of two halves. The first the Reinach that is a concern. The second a more fluid player that was good value for money. Importantly he kept his head up when we were a player down. But until the first half Reinach is history, the concern has to be there.

Lambie did tackle well, he has always done that...a good low tackler. For the rest he was invisible, but for those few kicks.....good and bad.  

 As per normal Mozart's ratngs are BS - and blighted by prejudice.  
Lets look at the following in respe of Lambie:-
"Lambie gained zero metres ball in hand, his goal kicking was patchy and he lost the ball once. His game hinged on two things, the drop and the chip kick off a clearly practiced move. Those were fine, but hardly meriting all the huge hyperbole.
Then we have the missed kick to touch, with the Boks a man up and the game in the balance. This was as bad a fault as Morne against Oz....overlooked because we happened to win. And also the cross kick in the Pom 22, a poor effort, easily marked by England."
Two outstanding achievement of Lambie is just brushed aside as if it was of no importance.   That it contributed 10 points to the score of the Boks is meaningless in Mozart's diatibre.    The second issue is the failure to find touch near the goal line - Mozart had to talk absolute tripe here to compare that one to the kick where Morne fiound touch in the Aussie game.   There was a huge difference in these two cases.   Morne never found touch - the kick was from inside the Springboks 22 and the Aussies could counter-attack.   In the case of Lambie's kick the kick went into touch behind the tryline and was from about 10 meters inside the English half.   The only thing that could happen was in Lambie's case a scrum inside the English half - not a counter-attack like ahppened inthe Morne case - when we had 14 players on the field of play in the Aussie test.   So the BS to even compare those two incidents and it is clear how totally useless and unrealistic Mozart's player assessment are. 
Now for Reiuinach:-
 "Let's start with Reinach....he certainly passed better than Hougaard, and handled better than Hougaard. And he made one brilliant open field tackle among five made,  while missing two. He lost the ball twice and was charged once. I'd say about a 6."    
Not a word about Reinach's try - not a word about some really top class kicks by Reinach.  He kicked the ball tiwice directly into touch - granted.   But the whole assssmen is about the mistakes made by him - not aword about the possitives.   Normal Mozart BS.
This after he was spouting rubbish from the time that Lambie and Reinach was included in the Springbok squad.     Sorry Mozart, but Lambie yesterday was better than Morne evr was in tests he played iin and REeinach was in his few apprences better than Pienaar was over the past three months
So forget about your spouting of BS - Reinach and Lambie will be around for years to come.   
 

    

Actually based on your quantitative ability RooiAAS I'd pick Zuma any day.  

BB Nobody has made a clear cut case at this time. But I do think Pollards performances in many tough situations have been remarkable for such a young player. I looked at the Ireland test a second time, and concluded he had a very fine game.
Frans  Steyn has the perfect physical assets to be a test flyhalf, but our rugby wise men decided he wasn't right. He could have been a dominating player at 10. Even this year on sore knees at 10  he racked up the best Sharks patch of the S15, in some tough away games. No Bok offloads better in heavy traffic
Lambie is a safe pair of hands, but inherently a small, not particularly quick player. He has good rugby instincts so he tends to avoid big mistakes, and is a good low tackler. But yesterday was a typical Lambie test....when not kicking the ball, he seemed uncertain. He was tackled back a few metres on one occasion because he hesitated.
Morne by contrast is decisive, but not a great defender. He can control a game well though, and there is nobody in world rugby, except maybe Halfpenny, who I would trust more with a kick to win the RWC. But he may have slipped out of contention unless there are injuries. Sad, because his mistake against Oz was so atypical.
Goosen is the best open field runner, but no so much in traffic. He hardly made a significant break in the S15 this year. He has a mighty boot though and pace to burn. I like the idea of him at 15, but the high ball may be a bridge too far.
Boshoff, Swiel and Jantjies need to remake their reputations.
For the RWC I would rank them as presented....but I recognize Frans is toast after walking out....you can't do that even if you have a case.

The front running halfbacks are very clear.Reinach and Pollard are first choice.
The second choice is less clear.Scrummies in the running are:Hougaard, Du Preez and Faf De Klerk. Du Preez though is really getting on.
Fly halves are Goosen, Lambie and Boschoff.
We dont know how well Goosen is maturing. De Klerk was outstanding before injury.

You have to love the OOm trying to justify Lambie's  kick into touch in goal. Let me try to explain. The Boks were ahead, but not by much.....the Poms had just got a yellow card..the Boks had a penalty in a position to put the ball out 10 metres from the line. So a simple touch kick would have yielded a high probability of scoring a try, and putting the game away.
Morne's kick into touch, likewise would have yielded a high chance of putting the game away...but even having missed touch, the Boks  should have defended Oz from running the ball in from 60 metres. A week later the Boks couldn't get it in from one metre because Lomp got pushed into touch by a flyhalf..
Just trying to keep things real....four players made match losing unforced errors this year....Morne, Lomp, Hougaard and Lambie. Happily in Lambie's case the Boks won the test, all the other players are gone.

 Lomp was bundled out by a couple of players. Lood is ten times as physical as wee victor 106 kg. About ou pa's weight.
Away with the show pony! !

 Mozart's story above shows  a completel lack of understanding of the game of rugby.   His concept of only one of the requirements pertaining to flyhalf play - namely the ability to kick at gaol - nothing else matters to him.   
He writes about Francois Steyn and Morne Steyn as if they are the real candidates for selection - yet they are bad in all aspects relating to flyhalf play and the true problem is -
*   their chronic imability to read games and take decisions to optimize th ball possession to the maximum advantae for the team;
*   their total  inability to use the postiion as the pivot for functioning of the backline;
*    their atrocious defensive record in tests and in the case of Franie - this year in Super 15;
*    their deficiencies in passing and off-loading of balls -  Mozart's statememt in  Fransie's case is typical - " No Bok offloads better in heavy traffic"   - in the whole of Super 15 this year Fransie off-loaded two balls oin traffic and both led to nothing;
Now lets get to the issue of understanding of the game.   Mozart made a great show of how the missing of finding touch by Morne as comparable to the case of Morne in the Aussie test.   It is seriously funny.   Morne missed touch altogether - Lambie found touch - but behind the goal line.   The impact is as follows:   
*  in Morne's case the kick was from about 5 meters out from the goal line in the Springbok 22 and the result was normal - a counter-attack while the Springboks was in diasarray from a defensive perspective with one of their players still carded - making defense even more difficult.
*   in the case of Lambie the kick was way insdie the English half of the field and the ony possible result would be a scrum from where the kick was made.
Both cases were unacceptable - but Morne's one was ten times worse than the one of Lambie.   The obvious addition is blame the whole team for poor play by Morne by blaming the whole tem for poor defense.      Failure to even understand that basic difference was really funny and  could only be based on a degree of prejudice that is near to unbeleivable. 
But the basic issue hre relates to Morne's failure to ever be a real flyhalf with only one real ability - namely to kick at goal - and the jokingly funny read on Fransie - who basically sabotaged the backline play of the Sharks during the whole of Super 15 this year.   
As per normal - a sideshow is being introduced here by Mozart and suddenly De Jager was brought in.  W are discussing flyhalfs here and then brings in De Jager - He is bringing in a lock and based entirely and falsely on what happened in the AB test.   I did not know when De Jager changed his position and became a flyhalf - maybe Mozart can enlighten us on that one.
Lambie gad some criticl positive roles in all the recent tests he played in -but tht is not recognized by Mozart - the unhappy soul has been slapped constantly in the face by performance of players he constantly demonized in the pa st - the egg supply in the USA - must have been nearly denuded by the amount this one has in his face.      
  

"Lomp was bundled out by a couple of players."

No, he was bundled out by one tackler (Barrett if I'm not mistaken). Go watch the footage.

Youare probably mistaken Pakie so you go and watch the footage. If he was positioned correctly no ways Barret would bundle him out,Wee Beau would struggle to bundle a girl guide out of the way! Very pap player.

Sigh. Kindly let me know if you see anyone other than #22 (Barrett) touching Lood.

 

 That is Loodvoet done and dusted then, I suppose.

Where da f.... wus he going? Apart from Barrett, there were 5 ABs backing him up ! We had a lineup to our left ... being lood-less ?

Lambie & his kicking will always remain a 50/50 proposition for me ..... that missed penalty from out in front .v. the ABs & Saturdays misdirected touchfinder were both abysmal efforts, unforgiv able & only glossed over cos we won both games .

Lomp  is a slow thinking,  lazy big man with ordinary skills. Just another hype job. Thanks Pakie....but dont expect the Lomp brigade to accept the visual evidence....they live in a fantasy world.

 Just before that incident of De Jager - whom I assumed from te dscussion on Reinach is now being dealt with as a flyhalf following the introduction of him as a divesion from the issue under discussion by the idiotic MOzart - was preceeded by two other incidents that led to it.  Those were -
*   The fluffing by Matfield of a line out by Matfield - the intention was a driving maul, but the whole intention was destroyed by him and the ball went to Hougaard instead; and
*   according to discussions on the incident on Boots  & All - a serious mistake by Hougaard in passing the ball to De Jager on the side-line the ball should have gone in-field and not to De Jager who had minimal space to do anything with it.
It is clear that some members have a very limited understanding of the wider implications of what happeed in this case and is using that incident as a way to attack De Jager in a situation where he should never have been involved in in the  first instance.  
Mozart used that as a means to divert the discussion of the Reinach and Lambie issue - after he was caught out beig idiotic previously about the assessments of both those two players on this site.    He is now supported by the nitwit Ceradunce and now Blokbok - who are in fact in the past were all--out supporters of the discredited Morne Steyn.  Not that these three members never said anything positive about either of the two players under discussion and justified the Morne mistake in the Perth test - by blaming the try scored by the Aussies in the final minute - not on the serious Morne mistake - but on the poor defense by the team.   
Nice effort - but really on your normal dismal level of debate - Mozart.
      

Go to sleep you old Coot, or is it a bladder problem?  

The lineout Mike is referring to was at minute 76:15 and Matfield didn't "fluff" it, he was interfered with in the air. I only have a 360p video of the highlights of the game so you can't see it very clearly, but there's an All Black hand (guy with a headband, looks like Read) pulling on Matfield's arm.

In the video you see Matfield going up comfortably reaching the ball, but once his arm is up it never moves in the direction of the ball. Why? Because it was being held back. Both the AB and Matfield ends up crashing to the deck. It's a clear penalty offence missed by the ref.

There's also more than 3 minutes of play in the 22 between this lineout and the Lood incident, including the Boks pushing the All Blacks off their own scrum to get the feed turned over, which set up a run from Vermeulen off the back, which led to the ruck from where Hougaard and Lood conspired to get over the line - the wrong line.

 Pakie
The line-out was intended as the start of a driving maul and one do not handle the ball the way Matfield did.   As the starting point for a maul - Matield fludffed it  by going for a one-handed knock-back of the ball - not for catching thereof.  
How was Matfield intefered with?   I see no inteference in that photo - but for his left hand being nowher where it should have been.    
It was a better effort than against the AB's at Ellis Park - where he really buggered up badly and lost a line-out throw-in of Strauss - which cost us a try later on.       

How often do my judgment on these things prove to be wrong Mike? You are so anti-Matfield that the notion of illegal play by the All Blacks at a critical moment doesn't even phase you. No man.

Here's a motion image. You can clearly see Matfield being pulled down.

I haven't diverted discussion from Reinach and Lambie. It  amuses me to see the hyperbole about   a flyhalf who missed several of his kicks, kicked a penalty into in goal, kicked  a kickoff into touch, botched a cross kick in a dangerous area ...got charged.....handled the ball only 10 times and gained zero metres

Pakie
 Sorry - but in this case you completely mised the point.  The intetion was a driving maul and Matfield fluffed that one.     If he caught the ball with BOTH hands as he should have,  the inteference would have let to a penalty and possibly a yellow card for the inteference in the air  that happened after the ball left Matfield.   He fluffed the potential driving maul - that is a fact.
Sorry - but you woud not see the bigger picture - only the image counts.  

    

Unbelievable...

Mozart
The idiot at it again.  "I haven't diverted discussion from Reinach and Lambie"  - so why bring in De Jager?  
And then concentrted on some issues - he said were negatives - and says nothing about positives.   What a compete idiot we have here.  If you read your version of events - then one would believe Lambie was an utter failure on the day in question - but thinking and unorjudiced people would not think that.   
You have just proven again - your thinking on issues is so prejudiced that anyone believing your version of events would have to be as useless in performance evaluation as you are.
Hell - but it imust be terrible to be as wrong as you are aboiut players.