Bwaaaaaaahaha....and you were going to fix that by replacing him with Lambie. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahaha. Man you are a hoot.
So Oom you thought you saw Morne choking?
Mozart
You missed thre e-quarters of the Ellis Park Test - and Morne did not choke - he just simply buggered up. Shall I sum it up for you -
* missed tackles galore;
* do not know when to pass the ball and when to kick - ending up in situations like the second Messam try; and
* missed two conversion kicks.
He was as always an average flyhalf who has the tendency to under-perform in major matches- and that remains a fact.
Mozart
Face it - the kicks Lambie tried were in very difficult conditions with a very strong wind included - whilst playing against the wind. The kicks Morne missed in the last test was in excellent conditions and he missed them badly. That is where you are too blind to see what is going on and then start prating.
Not choking - you stupid non-thinker.
It was a continuation of the Super 15 - yet when convenient yopu state that Super 15 performances are not relevant. In any event - the kicks that Lambie missed was understandable - the kicks missed by Steyn in the test were not. The game yesterday was played in very wet and windy conditions - the test in perfect conditions.
Lets put it bluntly statistically Morne missed 80% of all goal kicks in Super 15 - Lambie missed 76%.
Then we have the classic - Morne did nothing wrong in the test and that is to be ignored completely. I would rather not take that 4% difference into account take that into account and pick Lambie - because he would not have fouled up as much as Morne did - he would have made a relieving kick in the Messam try - not get lost because he was told to stand flatter, pass more often and kick less. The Steyn robot then lost the plot and start passing when he was to kick and even vice versa.
Do you ever look at full implications when you think about rugby - or stick with a variety of illogical deductions of one-eyed nature?
Morne "missed 80%" of goal kicks in the S15....Oom you are losing the plot. Perhaps this will help:
"Someone who chokes may be known as a "choker" or, more derisively, as a "choke artist." Choking in sport can be considered a form of analysis paralysis. The opposite of choking is to be "clutch". A clutch player or team rises to the occasion under pressure rather than collapsing or falling apart."
Just in case you are still confused Morne tends to be clutch....Lambie would be your choker.
Oh if only Lambie had played ahead of Morne, watching Lambie steady the Shark ship today reminded me of what we had been missing at 10 for the Boks
Moz how on earth can you find so much positive in such an average player.........Morne is the biggest stumbling block to us challenging the AB's, he single handedly proved that last week.
Watching that game again had me scratching my head as to how scared Morne appears at times when confronted with the tackle and on another note, what the hell was Kirchner doing in the 12 channel so often?
Meyer made a number of mistakes this year selection wise........his biggest was retaining Morne over Lambie..........Meyer has a few lessons to learn selection wise........starting with the discarding of Kirchner, Morne, Steenkamp and Kruger as definites and Alberts, Pienaar and Louw to a lesser extent.
At least we have Steph du Toit for Kruger and Goosen for Morne who are both sure bets.
Mozart
What is meant by Dave is clear Lambie was positive in the game even though he missed two kicks at goal in extremely poor weather conditions. He had about a 5% chance to succeed with those kicks - unless they were 20 meters out straight in front of the posts.
Yes - I agree you are confused - because you refuse to accept it that the main problems in the AB test - that cost us dearly and result in the loss were Morne Steyn, Kirchner, Alberts and Kruger. All of them missed tackles that resulted in tries - Morne did miss three such - and he also through robotic stupidity donated a try to Messam.
In your imaginary world of rugby ignorance it is easy to become confused - especially if facts hit you in the face and sill refuse to accept same.
Mozart
What is meant by Dave is clear Lambie was positive in the game even though he missed two kicks at goal in extremely poor weather conditions. He had about a 5% chance to succeed with those kicks - unless they were 20 meters out straight in front of the posts.
Yes - I agree you are confused - because you refuse to accept it that the main problems in the AB test - that cost us dearly and result in the loss were Morne Steyn, Kirchner, Alberts and Kruger. All of them missed tackles that resulted in tries - Morne did miss three such - and he also through robotic stupidity donated a try to Messam.
In your imaginary world of rugby ignorance it is easy to become confused - especially if facts hit you in the face and sill refuse to accept same.
Mozart
Lets look at it statistically again The situation was as follows insofar as Morne Steyn and Lambie is concerned:-
Morne Steyn
Competition Penalties Try Conversions Missed Kicks % Missed
Super 15 58 22 24 21%
Championship 18 17 8 23%
I added 1 successful drop kick in Super 15 to the penalties number. There is no stats as to missed drop kicks attempts so Morne stats were in his favour in that regard when it comes to % success rate.
In key games like in Super 15 semi-final Morne's miss rate was 50% and in the test at Ellis Park 33%.
Patrick Lambie
Competition Penalties Try Conversions Missed Kicks % Missed
Super 15 44 17 21 25%
Championship 1 - -
Conclusion
The above clearly illustrates that in key games Morne chokes regularly. There was no indication that in any key games for the Sharks the same happened to Lambie. He had an even spread of misses.
Those are facts. If there was any choking in goal kicking it is standard Morne Steyn fare. In tight situations in test matches or on Super 15 he is a regular in missing kicks at goal.
You talk crap if you think wet and windy conditions have no impact on goal kicking - especially if like on Saturday the kicks of Lambie he missed was against the wind.
In whose face Is the egg now - entirely in yours. The same happened when you wrote about your hero's line breaks and tackles beat in Super 15 and he was found statistically to be weaker in that regard in Super 15 than Lambie was.
Best advice - before making sweeping statements like you normally do - check your facts and STOP TALKING CRAP ON THIS SITE - YOU ARE EMBARRASSING YOURSELF.
Mozart
Standard Mozart stuff here - you talk bullshit and when caught out - you don't comment. Next time you repeat the BS and the story start all over again.


