Sharks selection - no real surrises

The only real change was made by playing Steyn at full back because of the injury worry about Ludick.   If there was not a real concern - Ludick would have played with Steyn on the bench.   Unlikely that Steyn would be used by the Sharks again at 12.  

Is this the gospel according to Mike - that Frans wont play 12 again?

Well lets see what happens to the Sharks against the Saders with Bosman at 12. This Sharks side has no hope in hell of beating the Saders as the selections are piss poor.

Bosman at 12 is a liability as is Franco at 5 and a loose trio comprising Botes and Daniel. Plum is losing the plot in a big way

Dave, I suppose it all depends whether you're picking players on form or on reputation.

If you're picking on current form, Frans Steyn is very lucky there's a gap to be filled at fullback because there's no way he'd be picked at inside centre for the Sharks U13 girls B team on his current form. He looks fat, sulky and disinterested and I'm glad Plum has replaced him with Bosman. Yes, Bosman is a plodder but at least he looks like he wants to be on the field . . . which is more than I can say for Vetgat Fransie.

If Frans needed a nudge, I'm sure the past few weeks will have done that, not that I am convinced he needed any special mention given the rest of his team mates have been just as poor.

I just would never pick Bosman as he is that damn average. I'd rather have an unfit Frans at 12 - that's my call anyway.

Plum has stuffed this selection up. Ndungane has long passed it, Bosman adds no value, Franco is poor and taking on the Saders with no grunt in the loosies is madness.

He should have played Steph du Toit at 7 and had Bresler and Jandre Marais at lock, with Daniel at 6 and Coetzee at 8

Rooinek

You are a guy with real insight - Vetgat Steyn -   I really must remember that jewel.

Saffex

Your idea is laughable.   It is not only Vetgat Steyn being unfit - it is what he does on the field of play as a 12 that is totally destructive of any backline play.   You must dream of his effectiveness in that position - because reality is far removed from what you carry on about.   The rest of the backline was poor - BECAUSE OF STEYN AND WHAT HE DID OR RATHER WHAT HE FAILED TO DO   Capice.

The Sharks only lost one game - but their backline was disfuctional throughout the competition.   Plumtree saw what happened and he is trying to do something about it.  He also saw that after Steyn was benched in the games against the Kings and the Brumbies - the backline started to show improvement and performed better.   Steyn - fit or unfit - is so poor at center that any half-fit center will be better than him.

You always accuse me of ignorance - but I was the first person on this Board that after the first game of the Sharks said that the Sharks backline was disfunctional and pointed Steyn out as a reason for it.   I persisted with that statement and was really surprised that  he lasted as long at 12 as he did.    You failed to identify the weaknesses in his game - because you did not want to see it.   Somehow this reminds me of the Hougaard case last year - where I said he was really buggering up.   You also saw nothing wrong in his case - but Meyer saw it and took action.   

My advice to you is - look hard at especially those players you like - see what they really are doing well - but also see where they really are deficient.   You will then be able to be more realistic on what to expect in selections.   And don't base your arguents on what reporters say about matches - that is hardly credible evidence at all.

I can undertand Plumtree's problem with the loosies.  Daniel is his preferred captain with his preferred position at 8 and that is where he has to play.   Coetzee is his second choice loosie - but Coetzee was not that hot this year in Super 15 - and he apparently wants to see him at 7.   The vacancy at 6 needs to be filled and that was Botha - who performed very well in his last two games.  Juggling players around is not really the way to go as players tend to not perform in the juggled positions.

i for one i am not a fan of juggling players around. after a decent win against the rebels one would have liked to see a bit of consistency. that said players like franna needs a big game to prove his worth. he needs a good old kick up the backside.

all in all we need a better performance hopefully the sharks can keep up there ruck speed and the backline needs to run on the ball quicker and have better off the ball running options. the saders like most NZ teams a are brilliant ont he dirt and at the ruck. the sharks can pin them there but i dont buy into the fairytale that we can target them in the scrum. the stormers front 5 did not make much damage against a reconfiged saders pack on saterday.

the ruck area will be where one can beat the saders so lets hope we have the numbers there and generate quick ball and slow down the saders ball.

Carpetmuncher

In another thread you said that Steyn is playing the Meyer game plan,  The latter plan consists of three critical elements, namely  -

*    kick the ball away in the forlorn hope that the opposition will make a mistake and you gain territory by that means;

*    crashball at no 12 - whenever the kicking game does not produce results he is hoping for; and

*    for heavens sake - do not pass the ball out because it is wrong for the backline to play attacking rugby.

Fat and unfit the crash ball approach fitted Steyn like a glove and he did it persistently.  As expected the Meyer approach did not work and it destroyed oneof the Sharks main weapons - backline attacking.

Will a kick under the backside works in he case of Steyn?   Frankly do not know.  He needs to get his weight down to 106 kgs and improve his speed - but he also needs to recover his ball sense that has somehow got lost in France.   The first two problems is physically solvable - the third one is a real and serious problem.     

ou maaaikie I hate to tell you this but everyone knows Frans has been out of condition but some of us realise that it is not impossible for that to change and once fit that Frans would make  a fine 12.

Snapster is totally correct re Frans still being a future possibility at 12. I also think Du Toit should be at 12, with Coetzee at 6 and  kan kan at 8.

This does not look good as Plum looks to be loosing the plot.

These chest beating blowhard guppies like ou maaaaik and rooiTWIT could be in for a crash?

Ou maaaaik will you please stop blaming Meyer for everything the sharks do. Prove first that Meyer has told Frans how to play at the sharks. Are you sying ou Plum is such a weed he has no say in how sharks players are to play?

Ou maaaikie is so full of stories some bigger than others!!!!!!!      

Ou rooitwit sure rates the sharks under 13 girls team. Perhaps one of the young ladies beat up on him!!

Baboon-ou, what is the first name of this Du Toit person that you want to see at inside centre for the Sharks?

I'm sorry but I think Dave will attest to the fact that I was the original Steyn at 12 critic. But this has gone way too far. Firstly Plums comments in the press about his own player were totally self serving. Whatever regime he had Fransie on, should have been between him and the player.

Secondly the idea that Frans is not good enough to play 12 in the S15, when he played 12 in the RWC final is absurd. Frans actually had a decent start to the season and then went quiet along with Lambie. He had a poor game against the Brumbies, but was the Sharks biggest ground gainer, made two offloads and beat one defender. He also missed a few tackles, but JP missed 2 of his 4 tackles and that's never mentioned

I personally would choose Frans for Bok 15, I don't think he has ever had a bad game there. But this piling on about the player is unsporting. Is Fransie sulky, or has he maintained commendable reserve in the light of a disloyal, self serving coach?

This reminds me of the vitriolic attacks we have seen over the years from Bok fans against players like Skinstad, Joubert, Adi, Monty and Butch James. Sickening really.

i agree 100% mike franna is lost that x factor that made him into the player that he was under the jake white era. hence the fact that he needs to pick it up. bosman had a decent game so in view deserves his place because of that performance.

i think franna has maybe some mental issues and unsure of what is expected of him clearly he his free thinking ways has been coached out of him by the meyers of the world ext. we all know he can but on current form he does not deserve a start but needs to show that he has that skills that made him into what he was a couple of years back.

he is slow makes bad decisions and does not offer a lot but that being said he will be wasted at 15. he had the ablity to change. he lost a few kilos before the rwc i reckon need needs to more gym work and some pylometric speed work to increas his speed. it a tough road to undone some serious donkey coaching

Oops Fransie has lost his x factor according to the Muncher.......he is slow, makes bad decisions  and doesn't offer a lot. He is also fat, sulky and disinterested according to RooiAAS . And a half fit centre would be better than him according to that renowned rugby brain, Ou Maaik.  Old Plum sure passed the "Bok" to a willing group of suckers.

Mozart This is really the most unthinking post I have come across for a long time - because it ignores your whole post history on Francois Steyn completely. Last year you brought up all the stats comparing the performance of Steyn, De Villiers and even Olivier to prove that Steyn's performances in the tests he played in was not up to the standard compared with those of De Villiers in particular and also Olivier's performance. However, I should have known that your usage of stats -

*  only applies if it could enhance the interests of players you want to promote on this Board - in this case the position of De Villiers; and

* is totally disregarded when a player you favour is statistically wise looking bad.

So must I assume that Steyn in your book was good and De Villiers outstanding?   The way I looked at the games played - both the two centers mentioned was sub-par - with Steyn doing worse than De Villiers did.

Your use of the term sucker is plain funny. After the first game of the Sharks I said there was something very wrong in the Sharks backline and I thought the problem was with Steyn. After the second game I was sure that the problem was indeed Steyn and said so clearly on this site. I was quite sure that Steyn's performances were jeopardising the Sharks backline and made no secret of my feelings in the relevant regard.  

That was followed by a statement by Plumtree in which he mentioned NO NAMES - but admitted there were problems in backline performances and they are working on it.   Next two games the problems were worse and Steyn got subbed after 60 minutes in bth cases.  

The Monday after the Brumbies game Plumtree gave a talk-radio interview and then was asked specifically about the apparent problems with Steyn.     Plumtree was cornered - he could have tried to lie his way out or give the true situation as to what the real problems were.    He chose to speak the truth and was not "self serving" as alleged by you. By then the rugby public in KwaZulu-Natal realized what the real problem was and Plumtree would discredit himself if he did not admit the problem and indicated that they are working on it.    Plumtree also realized that the way Steyn was playing he would not make a success at 12 and indicated he intended to use him as a 15 in future.   Again an honest statement.

Now for the real joke - I know your philosophy by hard - "once a Springbok - always a Springbok" - irrespective of how bad the player is - he is entitled to continue playing for the Springboks. The real Mozart at it again. So I am not surprised at all by your sudden turnaround about Steyn.

No turnaround Ou Maaik. On February 12 I had Steyn as my fullback in the predicted YE team. On March 13 in a posting called My Bok Bawrongmeter, once again I had Steyn at 15. I have consistently said I would pick Fransie as my Bok 15. The only other player I have mentioned as an option, and only this week, is Willie le Roux.

I have also said from the start that picking Fransie as Bok 12 because of his physique only makes sense if he also has centre software. I raised doubts about that, saying his RWC  performances at centre had issues. My conclusion has consistently been, he needs time, he doesn't react well when he is rushed....hence 15 over 12. I think his best games have been at 15 and have said so many times.

But all this Vetsak stuff is getting old. As for Plum being cornered....you can be cornered without blurting out the players' weight and making him look foolish.

And yes, I do believe in the incumbency principle....but so do Woodward, White and Henry....the last three RWC winning coaches. Are they stupid as well, Ou Maaik?

Mozart

I think Plumtree tried to explain what they are doing to help Steyn correcting his problems - hence his mentioning of the weight issue.

I never said anything negatively on the issue of Steyn at full back - but did mention when he came on against the Rebels he made two mistakes and there is a lot of hard work to cut it out.   He could make it at full back but there is a lot of hard work to be done.  At his stage I believe Le Roux is the better full back - but that can change in future.

As to incumbency - yes I believe in incumbancy - but there is a condition which I accept and you do not.   That condition is that an incumbent must  not do nothing for a year and then claim a place in the team - he must prove through continuous meritorious performance that he is still selectable.

So you wouldn't have chosen Monty and Os for our RWC07 team....."continuous" eliminates them.

Mozart

Crap - Monty and Os played for the Sharks and the Cheetahs in 2006-07 and did perform well during the two years leading up to the WC.   Continuous here means at least  during the year leading up to selection - not over the whole career span of players.   

I do not take a player who under-performs through two years of playing on Super 15 level - and after he scored a flash in the pan try in the CC final as a selectable player.     One instance in one game over a two-year period is just not acceptable - that while in the same game he scored the try - he gave away two penalties - both converted - through being indisciplined.   That is just not good enough.

Moz, you are spot on regarding the treatment of Frans by Plum and the biggest issue I had with this whole episode is that Frans seems to be the only one taking the brunt of the criticism, given his team mates around him have been no better.

Hell we have seen no spark in Lambie at 10. JP, the best wing in the game last year, has not made a single impression this year. Jordaan, the next big thing has been a complete damp squib and the list continues with the rest of the Sharks backs.

The issue with DomMike is that he is too stupid to acknowledge the fact that Frans was good in his first two games of the S15 and then like the rest of his team, slipped in standard in the following two matches.

I disagree with you regarding Frans's credentials as a 12, he has all the attributes to make the perfect 12. He has the skill set and physicality to play the SBW role, something he did perfectly in that first S15 game of the season. I have never witnessed an issue with his decision making at 12 or his execution for that matter. Decision making at 12 is less tactical than at 10, where he was exposed.

Frans is an established Bok, one that the coaches respect and its insulting the way idiots like DomMike climb into him with their ignorant takes on his performances, especially considering how average his team mates have been around him.

To say Frans will never play 12 again is ignorance of the highest order - but not surprising coming from DomMike

Saffex

The great dunce Saffex and his reading of games at work here.    Plumtree suddenly gets the blame for identifying the real problem in the Sharks backline and trying to correct it.  Look - dunce - a player outside of he number 12 position depends largely on the number of times he gets the ball and the quaity of balls received from the 12 for performance purposes.   If they do not get the ball properly - they cannot play well themselves.

Look dunce - during  the first game of the Sharks against the Cheetahs - there were signs that the backline was not functioning to maximum benefit and could have been more effective.   I did identify that the outside players never got enough decent balls but when they got it - they did as well as can be expected.   If you look objectively at the game - you would find that Steyn crashballed the ball more than he passed it.      You went ballistic when I wrote that - so let it be.

The second game of the Sharks was pathetic from a backline perspective.    lambie kicked far toooften - but nevertheless made 16 passes to Steyn.   He kicked the ball away 6 times - adding to the kicking game of Lambie - passed the ball 4 times and crashballed 6 times.  The outside players were stymied by the combined efforts of  Lambie and Steyn - no real attacking possibilities at all.   Steyn in particular took bad options and in most cases where he crashballed or kicked he shoud have passed the balls.    It was after this game that there were serious queries about the Sharks backline and attacking capacities.  Plumtree said he realizes there are problems - but they are attending to it.

If you want to summarize those two games - the one rep[resented  a pass mark insofar as Steyn is concerned - not a house on fire - but more or less a pass mark of 55%.  The second game was a failure at best with 40% of Steyn's play ineffective.   As theseries was going on Steyn got worse in every game.

I don't think the problems there are is in fact as physical as people make it out to be - it is in Steyns reading of the game more than anything else.   I would refer in this case to two examples - but there are many, many others as well:-

*    In the game against the Kings the Sharks won a turnover of possession halfway between their own 22 and the halfway line.   The ball was passed to him and although there were accres of space in front of him and the outside backs - he kicked the ball so far away that it went over the dead ball line and the Sharks lost possession as a result.

*    In the Brumbies game the Sharks was attacking at last and Steyn did the inexcusable - kicking the ball straight to Mogg and tghus destroying all forward momentum.

The problem is that Steyn kicked and crashballed when he should have rather passed the ball - and passed the ball when the recipients were under pressure themselves and where crashbaling would have been better. His indecisiveness and slowness mentioned by Mozart was there for everyone to see.   I think the main problem with Steyn is the apparent loss of ball sense and bad reading of the game more than the physical probems he encountered.   Physical problems can be fixed - bad reading of the game is not really fixable.    The key to my mind lies in the following comments by Mozart:-

"I have also said from the start that picking Fransie as Bok 12 because of his physique only makes sense if he also has centre software. I raised doubts about that, saying his RWC  performances at centre had issues. My conclusion has consistently been, he needs time, he doesn't react well when he is rushed....hence 15 over 12. I think his best games have been at 15 and have said so many times."  

Although you disagree with that point - I think that is why Plumtree said Steyn needs to recover his performance on the physical side and then he will e used at 15 - Plumtree in fact said that twice.  

Unfortunately somewhere during his career Steyn's ball sense became less and less and it is in fact killing his game and the game of those around him.

DomMike, I am not sure how long you took to write that load of crap, but for your information, I stopped reading it after the second line - its the same old ignorant bullshit.

You dont have the rugby brain to make an informed rugby post - I am bored with your contributions

Saffex

You really make life interesting.   You manage always to make wild unsubstantiated statements completely devoid of fact and if people do not accept what you say - they are stupid.   No logic - no willingness to recognise the viewpoints of others - a complete lack of understanding of sequence in plays - are just examples.  Defence of prefered players deficiencies are "it happens" and blaming of other players.

Although so utterly without foundation and largely based on flights of fancy - I always enjoy your contributions because they are so ridiculous that they are indeed a source of great mirth.

Nope, there are no wild accusations relating to Frans at 12. Its a fact that he got higher player ratings than any of the other Bok backs last year, other than JP.

Its also a fact that Frans was named in the SA side of the week after their first week of S15 rugby and was then named in the S15 side of the week in the following week - all FACTS.......no unsubstantiated statements at all.

Its also a fact that Frans was no better or worse than the other Sharks backs in the matches against the Kings and Brumbies and its also a fact that Bosman was no improvement on Frans at 12 against the Rebels. I hate to think what we will be saying about Bosman at 12 after this weekends game against the Saders - its going to be train smash stuff.

Wild unsubstantiated statements apply to your prejudicial takes on players like Frans and this is a FACT

Saffex - my friend

I do acccept the fact that Steyn had a good game in his first outing for the Sharks - there were question marks as well - but lets forget about our arguments on that game.   Lets look at what happened subsequently and also at the position of Steyn in particular.  

Physically there was a problem from the start.   It is public knowledge that he was overweight and probably still is.   Based on his height an active sportsman like him should weigh 105 - 106 kgs.   I said that in the beginning of this year - and in his subsequent interview Plumtree indicated that s the objective that needs to be achieved - and no doubt will be achieved if Steyn is persistent in dealing with the issue.   The one thing that stemmed from his weight situation was his speed - and especially speed off the mark - an essential requirement I believe of all backline players.

To be quite fair - if the physical issue is overcome from a fitness perspective - there seemingly would not be a real problem in playing Steyn at 12 - the problem actually goes into the realm of ball sense and reading of the game.    This is where I believe Steyn lost it.   As Mozart says his decisionmaking is problematic and often enough he takes the wrong decision as to what to do with the ball.    People talk about kicking, crashballing and passing - but all of the above has its place in the game - the question really is when to use those options.   In the case of Steyn - his using of options is problematic to say the least.   I mentioned two examples above where he was clearly wrong in what he did - but in fact those decisions are merely the tip of the iceberg.  His decisionmakig at 12 is what cause problems in functioining of the Sharks backline - especially in view of the fact also that Lambie suddenly turned into a mini-Morne.

I think the issue of decisionmaking is what got Steyn on the wrong side of Plumtree - and that is why he thinks that Steyn should move to full back.   Mozart and many others obviously thinks the same and I am also beginning to become convinced that it would be a good career move.   Let me explain.   A fit and more mobile Steyn would add value to the the Sharks backline - more value than he produces at 12- by joining the backline in attacking backline moves   There were good signs in the Rebels game - when Steyn came on.   He launched a massively long relieving kick and started two attacking moves making a lot of ground in both cases.   Unfortunately both those plays did not have te result it should have had.   In the one case there was a forward pass and in the other case Steyn crashballed instead of passing the ball to supporting runners.   Both these problems are technical and could through coaching improve when he recovers his form - I would rate it as good signs of things to come.   

It is critical that we get better full backs.   As you pointed out Le Roux seems to be the best at present.  Taute is blowing hot and cold - but it is probably the result of the deficient selection policies of Coetzee.  Steyn is the other potential candidate and he could solidify his claim in games to come.   To be quite frank - I am delighted to see him playing at full  back this weekend.  He really can stake his claim if he does perform well.

Insofar as the no 12 jersey is concerned - I believe that the only real candidates are Serfontein and De Allende.   Both have been treated like sh!t by their coaches and both are outstanding youngsters.   My own preference is for Serfontein.    

I also share your point of view on De Villiers.  Despite the fact that he really is playing well at this stage he is too old to be a longer-term candidate with 2015 WC in mind.

As to Bosman - he really is a stop gap measure until the return of Whitehead.   Nothing to write home about.

The above is my honest opinion on the whole scenario and not the normal rubbish that I dish out to get discussions on topics.           

Bullshit, there is nothing wrong with Frans's decision making at 12, he executed his decisions perfectly in his first 2 games and then resorted to the crash ball in his next two. That may have been down to fatigue as he was unfit, who knows.

A fit Frans has never had issues with his decision making at 12........provide examples of where there have been issues and I will counter them at every turn. His decision making at 12 is no worse than the likes of Olivier, Jean, Roberts, Darcy, McCabe, Nonu, Barritt etc.

The only time he has been found wanting was when he played 10 and got charged down a few times. That should never have defined him as a 10, for he was young and learning. But we dont need him at 10, so that's not worth debating. Shifting to 12, entails less of a demand on decision making and Frans has been fine here.

I am not sure what this issue with decision making is, I dont buy it at all. As for ball sense and all that, as I have said in the past, you dont even know what that means, so I cant be bothered debating the subject with you. One thing Frans has plenty of is ball sense.

Saffex

Clearly objectiity is not the case when I really attempted to outline in some detail where many people, includimng Plumtree and members of this Board,  believe that Steyn went wrong.   I named a number of open and shut cases where in full view of the public Steyn obbviously took the wrong decisions in earlier postings and proved those conclusively - yet you go into denial and merely state that there is nothing wrong in what Steyn is doing at 12.

Believe me - even you really fail to see what went wrong in his case - the answer is careful study of he games he played in - really confirms what I said above.   The way things turn out in his decisionmaking indicates a very one-dimensional approach to the game.   That means that you would never find in any game he played in, that he really made a positive contribution to line breaks, scoring of tries by himself or any other backline players.  When Steyn is in the team the backline becomes sterile as he does nothing to even indicate that he can create space for outside players.   

You apparently accept that it is standard with other players at 12 - but it is not and that is a fact also.   A typical example to the contrary is the try made by Ebersohn (scored by Rhule)   in the Cheetahs - Rebels game.   It often happened in other ases as well - the line breaks by Serfontein in the Bulls-Reds games are examples.  question is - if Ebersohn and Serfontein can do it - why not Steyn as well?

You are in denial on this issue and plain denials won't help at all.   And as to ball sense - it is blatantly absent in Steyn.  Ball sense mean that a player within th context of a given situation on the field takes instantaneous decisions as to what would be the best achievable advantage his team can get from that given opportunity.   The decisions Steyn made are often wrong and non-productive and that places his ball sense in question.  

You admitted he made wrong decisions at 10 - but his decisionmaking at 12 is no better.  Apparently you - for reasons unknown to many - believes otherwise.   In the meantime Plumtree will not play him at 12 - and you may be assured that the issue of decisionmaking is key to Plumtree's decision in the relevant regard.

Mike you are too stupid to challenge......but in short, you pointing out any of Frans's errors was a load of fabricated crap. For a start Plum said nothing about Frans's errors in particular, but mentioned his game in general. This was as a result of a direct question relating to Frans that was directed at him. I agree with Moz on this, it was poor form of Plum to say anything, given the fact that the rest of his side was performing as poorly.

Your example of Ebersohn against the useless Rebels is a laugh and typical of your rugby ignornce. I said nothing of Frans's decision making being an issue at 10, I said he was exposed there given the times he was charged down.

You are lying about Plum not playing him at 12 over decision making, he dropped him for conditioning reason and he is now playing 15 as Ludik is injured.

After Bosman fails completely this weekend against the Saders, Frans will return to 12, for once certainty is that we will see Bosman exposed for the limited player he is.

Frans will be back at 12 for the Sharks and he will be there for the Boks. Just like Hougaard will be at 9 for the Bulls and Boks

Saffex

Allow me to ask you two questions:-

1.   Did the Springboks backline in any of the tests - bar the one against the Wallabies in Pretoria - showed any signs of being an attacking back line combination last year?

2    The same question about the Sharks backline this year?  

For the rest your comments above is absolute crap.  Whys was Steyn exposed at 10?  Because his decisionmaking was too slow.   Is ws slow at 10 and slow at 12 - where he even has less space than he has at 10.

You write off the example I quoted about Ebesersohn - but he had as much space as Steyn has in matches and he did use that space - by clever playing and then off-loading effectively to.   What about the Serfontein line breaks I mentioned?   In all the games Steyn played in - not a single line break and not even one in the tests last year.

DomMike, no the Bok and Sharks backline was not an attacking force, regardless of whether Frans, Jean or Bosman were at 12 for the Boks or Sharks - what's your point?

Um being charged down has stuff all to do with decision making you ignorant twit. It has everything to do with execution - hand to foot speed - wake up.

The Rebels are a poor side, they offer more space on attack - so bullshit Frans did not have as much space as Ebersohn did against the Rebels. Bosman did against the Rebels but did nothing with it.

Lets see how much space Ebersohn is goingto have against Jean and the Stormers on Sat bright boy - lets see how many breaks Ebersohn makes then

Saffex

Complete silence about the other example of Serfontein I quoted.  Let me repeat - the charge down kicks are not purely hand-feet co-ordination - the critical question being - how long did he take to decide to kick?   Most charge down kicks are due to slow decisionmaking - more than anything else.   

My point on line breaks and space creation is clear.   In the tests he played at 12 - De Villiers made 2 clean line breaks -  as against zero for Steyn.  De Villiers to my mind was not up to standard - Steyn was worse.  Futher point - when playing opposite Steyn at 12 - Argentina's Fernandes made 2 clean line breaks and against the All Blacks in Argentina 1. What does that tell you about the capacity of Steyn at 12? Not much does it?

My point with Ebersohn is - he is not really the top 12 in SA and the Rebels is not the top opposition either.  Steyn played against the Kings and 12 - not the top opposition either - but no line breaks - zero, zilch, nothing. 

Look here liar, we know you are stupid and a liar, but if you dont know that being charged down is all about slow hand to feet reaction and very little to do with decision making then there is really little hope for you - but then we knew that anyway. You really are a stupid prick aren't you?

Serfontein had plenty of space when he made those breaks, it was the last 10 min of the match. They were great breaks. Ebersohns breaks were against useless oposition - people in the know, no not to get too excited about them. If he does the same against Jean today then fair enough - but we all know he wont.

You know stuff all about what constitutes a centre and the only you way you try make a point is by lying - your lying about Jantjies is pathetic. You should be ashamed of yourself

Dumpass Saffex

Because I see things on the field of play differently from how you see it - and when I read and understand comments from coaches differently from your ideas - does not make me a liar like you allege.   I never call people liars about differences of opinion.  

You are entitled to your opinions - as I am to mine.   What i see on the fieeld of play relates to a sequence of events that lead to a try - or penalties etc.   When I see a poor eprformance of a player - I always wants to be fair to him and for that purpose -

*   take another look at the game iself and I often change my mind on things based on that second look - like happened to Bosman last week; and

*   if my second impression after the second look is negative, I then go and see wha the statistics on the game was.

Although I may say initially a person had a good, average or poor game that decision may change through verification later on.   

In essence - there was nothing that convinced me that Jantjies and De Jongh had an acceptable game on Saturday - the review process actually showed tham up as worst than my initial assesment was.

Please get away from that constant harping on liars - nobody really deserve that kind of allegation against them

No LiarMike, opinion has stuff all to do with the reality of your take on that try. It was childish and shameful that you blamed Jantjies for the try given the facts tell us otherwise. The only reason you chose to blame Jantjies is because you harbour a childish prejudice against the lad.

You lied about that try - FACT

Mike you can not pick at Steyn with his defence, he is defensively one of the best centers in the world constantly pushing players back! I remember one of the commentators saying he's like a loose forward in the backline, but his attacking play is not up to HIS standard with him being too greedy and not passing (A fullback habit due to them being the last player on attack and not usually needing to pass).

He's a fullback to my mind, just needs to lose more weight and practice his kicking!

Shezza

Whatever Saffex thinks about Steyn is totally different from my point of view.   I think that as a rule Francois Steyn is a good defender - but he was anything but that in the Kings and Brunbies games.   In the Brumbies game he missed three crucial tackles and that is just not acceptable.   However, I think that probaly resulted from his apparent lack of form due to physical factors.

In attacking as a 12 he is in fact weak.   He does not make effective passes since the recipient is normally in a worse position than he is.   He normally runs straight at the first defender and crashball.   That is not an effective center at all.   If you look at his stats you will find confirmation that he rearely if ever make linebreaks - he rarely beats the first  tackler - he does not create space for players.

I believe you are correct in your assessment.  He should play at full back.   He should get his weight under control and do speed exerxises - ie he should get fully match fit - he should exercise his passing game to get it on higher level (important if he is to joint the backline in attacking moves).  A pass like the one to Ndungane last week and crashballing in such cases destroy the attacking efficiency of such moves.

Be it as it may - we will see tonight how he performs at 15.   I think he may do quite well in that position.   He was an excllent full back when he came on the scene and if he could get back to that situation - he would be an excellent full back for the Springboks - we are very thin in that Department - with Kirchner disgracing himself all the time.