Rugby 365 Ratings
BS as per normal. each of Fatso and Esterhuizen and 2 tackles and missed 1 And slow Esterhuizen's valuable meters produced zilch. Slow Esterhuizen run like a prop - as slow as possible straight into the forwards averaging about 3 meter oer carry,
4 and 5 each get 6 - but read what was written - huge difference. Five made the line-out turnover - not 4. 4 made four tackles and missed 4 ;
The real ratings are as follows based on actual performance are as follows:-
15 Gelant - 4
14 Nkosi - 8
13 Kriel - 5,5
12 Esterhuizen - 4,5
11 Lleyds - 5,5
10 Jantjies - 4,5
9 Reinach - 5
8 Coetzee - 6
7 Elstadt - 7
6 Smith - 5
5 De Jager - 7
4 Snyman - 4
3 Koch - 5,5
2 Brits - 7
1 Du Toit - 3,5
17 Gqoboka - 5
20 Van Staden - 5,5
22 Frans Steyn - 3 .
Damian this year: 15 runs for 32m.
Andre yesterday: 6 runs for 31m.
But somehow Andre is the slow one whose meters produce nothing.
Exactly Pakie
But it is not only carries that count - it is what carries produces. Aside from that defense is curiously absent from what both Esterhuizen and Steyn produced.
Lets go through the latter aspect:
De Allende - Tackles made 12 - Missing 1
Esterhuizen - Tackles made 10 - Missing 2
Steyn - Tackles made 7 - Missing 3
Esterhuizen is bad compared to De Allende - Steyn a disaster,
Duplicate
I saw the ratings and thought they were not in line with what actually happened and decided not to post it. Mozart should have realized the same yet he posted it. .
FIXED
Xavi
Sorry - but read what the motivation was in respect of the following for the granting of the various point allocations starting with the following:-
Esterhuizen
Big and powerful and used his size to good effect. Made some valuable metres. 6/10
The outcome is not the valuable meters - half of which was for two carries from the back - where he ran slowly towards the forwards and was stopped in his tracks - resulting in a very slow recovery of the ball. Quiet about defense though - he made 2 tackles an missed one - very poor defense,in anybody's book.
Steyn
Made all his tackles and produced a couple of decent offloads. 6/10
He did not make all his tackles - he made 2 and missed one. He did not make a single off-load at all, However, two charge down kicks and a questionable tackle on the Argentine try scorer (Matera) did not cover him in glory. By all accounts bad day at the office.
Snyman
Produced his usual skilful performance, with some decent carries and great offloads. Also had a line-out steal. But his work on defence was lacking. 6/10"
Lets put this into perspective. Snyman made 6 carries for a meter gain of 5 meters - he never passed a ball - but made one off-load. He made 4 tackles and missed 4 - losing ball possession once. The commentator credited the line-out steal to De Jager not Snyman - so why credit him with that,
He got a 6 - the same allocation as De Jager made 15 tackles missing 1. He lost ball possession twice. De Jager was in fact given credit for his role in the first try of Nkosi and also for the line-out steal. He passed the ball 4 times and carried it 5 times for a meter gin of 12 meters.
Just compare the above and see whether the contributions both warrant the same points, The answer is inevitably NO.
Gloriication fo players should not play a role in point allocation and here De Koning went overboard in case where the allocation should have been negative,
“ Posted by: clevermike (37129 posts)
Aug 18, 2019, 10:41I saw the ratings and thought they were not in line with what actually happened and decided not to post it. Mozart should have realized the same yet he posted it. waited until I have decided to debunk Koning’s ratings and replaced it with my own and then he should have fully agreed with my ratings . “
Fixed
Dimwit can you read English? I gave my reasons and corrected the BS clearly for stating that the ratings of De Koning was flawed, That is why I differed from him and ultimately give what I believe is the realistic ratings.
Thanks Mozart - the truth always prevail in the end. .LM AO
HE SURRENDERED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!lmao
I love the comparison between tackle numbers. That's not how you evaluate defence. One "successful" Damian tackle does not equal an Esterhuizen tackle. They are not even remotely comparable. Andre is a vastly superior defender, one who can reliably take any key weapon of any nation in world rugby out of the game. Damian cannot boast such a thing. At the very most, Damian can just about hold firm, firm enough that the opposition do not breach our line. These tackles are most commonly supported by another more reliable tackler.
In short, Damian has produced nothing to justify him going to the World Cup. He will be our starting 12 though, which is very disappointing. When Rassie turns to our 12 in big games, he will receive another 7-9% of team possession and cul-de-sac for more static phase play. Can it take us to a final?
Poor idiot - Esterhuizen is more likely to be stepped than he is to make a tackle. This Andre Esterhuizen BS is just boring and we have seen an average SR player not capable of taking up the step to Test Rugby, '
And then we Fransie who landed on his ass when trying to tackle Matera - something that De Allende did to him twice in one match,
One thing that is evident - when AO supports anybody - whether coach of players - accept that he is wrong and go for the exact opposite to what he says and you will be right,


