SA vs USA - what a terrible game

This was terrible according to Mozart - here we have a case of De Allende tractoring again - of De Jager calling all line outs to himself only - of Malherbe failing in the scrums - all his fears were met.   And De Allende being MOM is inappropriate,   Last week De Jager, this week De Allende - what a disaster.
In the first half I think there were too many handling and other errors on the part of the Springboks with too much inaccurate passing.  Even Du Preez was not always making the right decisions and making some inaccurate passes - as did Pollard.   However, these are fairly minor problems that would or should not happen and I am sure would be corrected within the next week.
To be fair I would not change the starting team who played today in the quarter-final and it is evident that Jannie and Matfield would not help in strengthening the team. Insofar as the bench is concerned,  I have my reservations about Alberts - because of his deficiencies in ball protection and recovery.   I would prefer Lambie ahead of Morne on the bench, but is quite happy with Paige being on the bench.   Morne inspire no confidence - even his goalkicking was problematic - two misses out of 5 kicks at goal is not acceptable.             

Morné misses two in five and you are worried; Lamebie misses four against England as well as that kick into the corner, a botched restart, a charge down in our 22, a botched crossfield kick, a hospital pass to Serf, a line breach that nearly led to a try (Vic with the last gasp stop) and you say he was the MOM? There is something very wrong with that. 

 Morne was actually very decent with ball in hand when he came on. His kicking could have been better, which is not something you associate with Morne.

I'd still have Lambie on the bench, but Morne showed he is a good 3rd choice to have. 

 I wouldn;t start exactly the same against Wales/Australia, I think JP in for Mvovo. The rest is good though.

Morne had a nice little outing outside of his goal kicking. Crisp and accurate distribution. Alberts as well was strong and effective for the time he was on. Paige looked sharp for a man who hasn't played in over a month, and how nice to see a scrumhalf that can just pass the ball without taking a few steps first. De Allende got his first test try and his first offload in test rugby, big night for him. 
We'll have to reconsider our kicking game with Pollard at the helm. His kicking out of hand just isn't accurate enough to justify the amount of it we expect him to do. That kick over the dead ball line before the penalty try was a shocker.
Pretty much everyone had a good game, some only eventually. But the USA really looked like a schoolboy side in the second half. After all the heroics from the minnows this far in the tournament, this was the first total implosion. They even got themselves bamboozled by a simple telegraphed inside switch when Kriel scored. Shambles.
Not sure what to take out of this game. The Boks were dismal in the first half. The second half was a rout. We still don't seem to know how to dismantle tight defenses outside of brute force. Things only started clicking on attack when the USA lost any semblance of structure in the second half.

Interesting assessment Pakie, I'll take of that when I watch the game later. But I somewhat agree that our attack does struggle. Mostly because our centres don't create space and we don't have centres that can really rope in the defence before trying to play wide. 

I got the impression that Kriel was looking like he was trying to hard to score a try himself instead of just waiting for the moment and then go for it. IMO, there were a few times in the process were he could have put Habana away for another try or two Instead of it looked like he rather tried to go through himself, only to set up another phase again.

I'm a big fan of Pollard, but Morne (and I know this will get opposition from the peanut gallery) brought a smoothness to the attack when he came on. I'm getting the feeling Pollard tries too much on his own and he clings to the ball as well when he should be letting it go - both he and Kriel were guilty tonight of ignoring clear support runners and taking the tackle instead. He is a big physical presence, but he is just overdoing the inside step now while not getting the ball away.

 Our centers wasn't the problem today. Most of the good front foot ball was used by Pollard today...to goid effect I might add, but the centres did very well with the scraps. Standout players for me was:

1. Eben
2. Louw
3. Pollard
4. De Allende
5. Bismarck
6. Special mention to Trevor when he came on, Brits OK too.

 Pakie
Are you nuts or just pretending to be.  Morne - cannot attack the gain line - one tackle came his way and he missed it.   No thank you - I hope Meyer is not nuts enough to select him in the quarters - not on the bench either.
But then Meyer is likely to foul up anyway.   Matfield and Jannie should not be anywhere near the team in the quarters and if he puts Morne in - a lunatic asylum visit is necessary.  

Glad you noticed that too Pakie! I warned in 2012 that a 10 who does it a on his own becomes easy to stop eventally. We need Morné on the bench at least for those tests where Pollard becomes a blunt force, i.e., like the Argie test we lost. Most certainly Lam bie is not the answer.

 Mike, Morne was good for someone that hasn't played in ages. He got DdA into play better. Yes, the game was done and dusted by that stage and it was easier, but still.

 
I would certainly hope that all the boys had a good game ... they were after all playing against the dregs of the rugby world.

The EP Kings B side would have thumped these Americans by 50 points.

Oh wait ... now that the Goats have beaten the USA by such a large score, does that mean we're world beaters again??

I can never tell.

Morne must surely be the starting 10 from now on ... he brought a certain "smoothness" to the attack.

Haaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahaha!!!

Let me remind you that it's always nice to play against the Gr 2's. An easy win without any effort is inevitable.

Having said that, I thought Kriel was poor against these Gr 2's ... and as usual, Pollard didn't impress at all.

Luckily Morne was there to save the day.

 Nope CC, the pecking order for 10 has been clear for the last 2 seasons, but an injury to the top 2 would bring him into contention and he got a good run today. No need to bash him.

 It is what it is. But the USA were dismal and my goodness me, the TMO was awfully kind, I felt. Oh for the days when one is so generous to my team !! " Benefit of the doubt must always be given to the attacking side ".....since when ?! 

".....since when ?!"
Since England isn't playing

 Well I was hoping for some chest-beating but no luck so far. I guess we will have to wait for wee Beeno 

 
Ol Poef's likes and dislikes are becoming clearer every day.

He doesn't like Lambie, and Pollard is too green as far as he's concerned should be set aside for the "smooth attacking" Morne Steyn.

He did so well today against the ferocious Americans. Really showed his class.

Damian is also a useless 12. He just leaks trys all the time and isn't ready for test rugby.

Next he'll be telling us that Fat Fransie is the answer at 12.

We now have his opinion on Kriel as well. Not sure who he has in mind to replace him ... I just hope it's not JJ or Taute or JP Pietersen.

I suppose we'll find out soon enough.

Can't wait!!

 Mike I think when the good Dr Mozzz and my friend Card start trahing aplayer you can almost be sure they will win a man of the macth award.Taine Randal and Mallet cant find aspot for wee  viuctor. They say Lood and Eben are simply too god. Bwahhahahahaha Beeno calling it spot on yet again.
The boks can play good attacking rugby. They just need to practice doing it!Randal says the Oz side lacks grunt in the forwards. Two small loosies and lock etc.He says direct rugby taking them on in the forads where they are vunerable.
Means really that the Wallabies will beat wee abs but not the Boks.

 Beenz, I like Damian,  but his tractoring must stop! I can live with a BMW sponsor and even Landrover, but the day we get MF, JD or Cat sponsorships for the Boks will be too much for me. 

 

 Beeno 
Even thinking of playing Matfield mus be nuts.  He just does not measure up (even remotely) to the present lock combination.  Mozart and Dim Fox will obviously disagree.  And Jannie would insist on Jannie be the no 3.
Annd then we have a campaign for Morne to play - really sillu  those nutcases are.

 With Matfield playing, we might get a Raleigh sponsor! Think about the possibilities! 

 Carter does it all on his own that is why his influence is not as significant. Can't have anything to do with his injuries over the years, oh no. And don't ever compare Morne to the greatest ten in the history of the game, Carter has been in far better form this year then 2013-2014. Morn brought a smoothness, wow if you want a conservative players, who does the basics but never breaks the line, or manipulates space, and actually takes space away from de Allende and co. Then this may as well be 2010-2015, Morne is the last person you need at the helm if you want any chance of even making the final.

 I loved the part where they were debating whether Etzebeth has taken a lineout in the WC.....he certainly isn't being called by Lomp or Stephanie. Old Lomp's calls are as predictable as they come.....the hooker lines up and Lomp  shouts out....."one, two three....Me" 

 The stupid old fool is back with a vengeance.   He is on about the line out calling again today.   The Springboks regularly used driving mauls yesterday, but dos not reailse in that case the calls fo not go to the number 4 jumper - but to the middlr ot back of the line-out.  Hurrah for stupidity  reigning supreme.   
So must we play Matfield in the quarters, stooge ?          

 The stupid old fool is back with a vengeance.   He is on about the line out calling again today.   The Springboks regularly used driving mauls yesterday, but dos not reailse in that case the calls fo not go to the number 4 jumper - but to the middlr ot back of the line-out.  Hurrah for stupidity  reigning supreme.   
So must we play Matfield in the quarters, stooge ?          

There is no denying Vic is still the best lineout manager in the world. Not having access to that at any point of the competition would be the biggest mistake. But lets take a look at Michael's conclusions: Damian, Lam bie, Steph, Reinach, Malherbe have no weaknesses in their game, apparently. Yet Morne, Frans, Alberts, Vic, Jannie are the worst in their positions in world rugby, with no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Players who have managed to play a pivotal role in successful teams, some winning World Cups, Tri Nations, Super Rugby, Currie Cup and foreign titles. Interesting perspective to say the least.

 We will start Matfield in the Quarters...and Alberts will be on the bench. And here's the big news, we will be in the Quarters. As I recall you claimed we wouldn't make it.
By the way the worst Bok player  by some distance was Stephanie...don't look for him in the Quarters.

 Ignorance is the name of the game.    Lets forget about the game plan tonight.  There was a major emphasis on driving mauls and the decides where the ball in line-outs should go - not to the front of the line-out.
Matfield is the best line-out caller in the world.   Never mention of the fact that he is weak in Tight 5 play - so take him in the squad n the quarters and let the Welsh dominate our Tight 5 because of his inclusion.  It happened twice in the last three tests of the Springboks against the Welsh - so what is wrong with making it a third time out of 4?
                      

I forgot to mention Steph! Worse than Kriel. Was so bad I see it pretty much unanimously accepted that he was well short of the mark. I wonder how Mark Andrews is feeling right now. 

 Yep. This kid is way not ready for test  rugby let alone the WC.

 So what was worse by Du Toit - you moron?  He came on and called line-outs to himself and then controlled amd c0o-ordinate the resultant mauls - did not stand around in the backline and sabotage the game of the centers so often found with Matfield.   Du Toit was good ion Tight 4 play - and that was all that was required from him in this game.   
But then the two dolts do not know what is meant by Tight 5 play - they prefer to a Tight 4 to a Tight 5 and does not realize that it removes competitiveness or domination up front.  
But they are the world authorities on rugby and we know nothing about the game.   By the way Du Toit was not in a daze like Matfield was in the Japan test.  And he is not afraid of initiating and co-ordinating driving mauls like Matfield is.
Taine Randell is right - bring in Matfield and Jannie du Plessis and we lose our most potent weapon in the play-offs.  But after all Randell was only an AB captain - what does he know about rugby!!!!                   

Who is "we"? I haven't seen anyone apart from you give him a good review.

Sorry I should not have said "we" - I should be more expansive.  All commentators - all ex-players who discussed the game - all the reporters in newspapers and all the dolts on this site who dares to disagree with Dim Fox and Mozart.  
If you miss it the key of my comments in fact is the following:-
"But then the two dolts do not know what is meant by Tight 5 play - they prefer to a Tight 4 to a Tight 5 and does not realize that it removes competitiveness or domination up front."     
Two useless idiots in agreement on everything - what a scream. LMAO

"He didn't stand around in the backline and sabotage the game of the centers" .... so, I guess you missed him in the backline spilling a perfectly good pass.

Well, we'll see. I'll splice that game and you can have more egg. You should have learned after the Damian and Lambie and G oosen disaster to be more careful who you listen to! It only ends with you alone in the corner, weeping bitterly in disappointment. Alas, there is still hope for you yet. We'll teach this old dawg a trick or two yet, chin up Mika

Sure - I also did not note the magnificent kicking away of balls by Matfield!!!  
Dim Fox - it would not help - I am unfortunately a realist and do not thrive on theory and imaginary performance  - so you have no chance to reform me.  Sorry I would not be able to oblige.       

Video is theory and imagination? First it is a gross fabrication of the truth, now this? Are you afraid of technology? Back in your day a first glance was all a man needed, right? 

 Dim Fox
You bloody iudiot can you not read - your descriptions as to what is actually happening as shown on the videos represents  "gross fabrication of the truth",  Hell you do not seem to undersand that yyou are a low life liar and idiot.