Some phasing out needed

Not so Fassi….my prediction of about 3 years ago is still accurate.

Well 19 of our 2019 Springbok WC 23 were gifted to Harrassmiss by his predecessors. More stunning 16 of our match 23 in the 23 WC final were already Springboks when Harrassmiss started 6 seasons ago.

Clearly he has an aversion to new faces or he can’t spot talent. I’m guessing in 2027 we will field a team with an average age around 34. Now that’s a team I could support!

No I already disproved that…Pollard lifted us from losers to winners. And Harrassmiss only picked him when Marx was hurt.

Pfffffffffffffffffhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

The initial selection of 4 scrumhalves, the decision to exclude Pollard from the original squad, the selection of Am to replace Mapimpi when we didn't use him even once, the 7-1 split for the final, the kick-and-hope game plan . . . all stupid shortsighted decisions made by an egotistical fool trying to prove he's some kind of genius.

Good team, just wish Esterhuizen would head back to the sharks to link up with Am, but both would be 33 at the next world cup. 

We don't have that many young players that got a crack at this world cup. 

So it will be a hard push. 

What's your thoughts of Moodie at 13. Having a player like Esterhuizen on his inside, which we saw when they played the All Blacks would be massive. 

Esterhuizen was yet again the difference this weekend for Harlequins when he came on in the 2nd half to punch a whole open for his backs. 

I definitely want us to get at least 4 players in each position under 33. Not sure how we would spread it evenly, but players also get injured. So who knows. 

Worried about our centre stock as well as our flyhalf ls. 

We are covered at 9 and our pack. 

We also need a new 10. Libbok could be the answer but haven't seen any other 10 really step up for us 

Nohambe was rubbish at 10 for the lions 

Not really …..you can’t do a lot of these comparisons in rugby, but you can with the kicker. It’s a plain as day…if France and New Zealand kicked as well as Pollard, they beat us. Obviously lots of players put us in position to win….but make Ramos our kicker, France beats us. Make Ramos our kicker and Pollard their kicker it’s not even close.

I’m totally convinced without Pollard we don’t win. The players were motivated, but the game plan was rudimentary and the bench selections were ludicrous. Save the genius nonsense for Peeper.

Once again you miss the point….let me make it as simple as possible. After Pollard took over we made all our kicks, our opponents made about 75% of theirs.

Everything else, the scrums, the runs, the defense, the mauls  and the penalty and conversion opportunities  got us to a point where we would have lost to France and NZ…..if our opponents converted all those penalties and conversions, just like Pollard.

Pollard was the main difference. So not genius, general play neutrality and better goal kicking.

Case closed.

You keep ignoring the general play of our opponents who outgained us :

459 to  360 …..14 man NZ

236 to 190….boring England

524 to 424….France.

They also beat more tackles and made more clean breaks. So we were inferior in general play but Pollard rang the cash register. No genius…goal kicking

And all that ‘genius’ depended on Pollard clipping over a 53 meter kick against France and a 45 meter kick against NZ. And if Marx never got injured Libbok would be taking and missing those kicks….now that’s genius you can take to the bank.

Except one team had 14 men….genius, brilliant that!

NZ is making a habit of getting cards...even reds...only their own discipline to blame, not our luck...commit the crime,  do the time...there's a clear pattern these last few years.

If Rassie wins a third RWC mozzz and Doos will still be doing all they can to find reasons why Rassie is no good, worst coach ever etc. Note the devious Mozzzzquito never takes issues with the crazy statements made by Doos.

Looks like we are saddled with jackass opinions regarding Rassie regardless.

Without Nienaber’s defense and Pollard’s boot Harrassmiss wouldn’t even have won one WC.  I mean seriously, the maul was neutralized, NZ even had an edge in the scrums….we had no running game. Take away kicking and defense and what was there?

The defense won’t get better without Nienaber and the kicking won’t get better without Pollard. And the team won’t get better another 4 years older….hell they are 31 already.

That leaves Harrassmiss doing something new….building his own team and diversifying his tactics. Nope….no chance of a threepeat unless he leaves to go into politics.

Right we defended valiantly….none better than Mostert. But the try count was 5 to 4 …against  one good side, a mediocre English side and another side playing with 14 men. Parity would be charitable,

Why do I always win these arguments….let’s see…because I have the facts on my side? Got to be it, it’s such a walk in the park

 we wouldn't have been in with a chance vs France if it wasn't for atleast 2 tries that came off two pin point accurate Libbok kicks...a true team effort. 

4 tries to 3 against France…..but thanks for spelling it out for me Dave. Hahahaha. And Libbok should have passed instead of kicked…the kick introduced a risk which wasn’t necessary with an overlap.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahhahahahahahahahaha!

Still cracking up every time I see Moffie's tearful comments about the RWC win.

The thought of this self-important egg-faced old fop feeling all this hurt and pain because we won the trophy just makes me . . . well . . . pffffffffffhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

Tearful, pain….hardly. Honest is the word you are looking for.

I’m convinced if we played any other flyhalf we would have lost the WC. That’s my honest opinion backed up by the numbers. I never said he could do it without the team. But given how close the games were and our single try in the semi and final….the team could not have done it without Pollard’s phenomenal kicking.

Well, it's just like us saying that if the All Blacks had played with another flyhalf in the final, they could now be the world cup winners.....

If's and but's

Agreed…but this is a discussion about whether the World Cup was decided because of Erasmus’ ‘genius’. My argument is that genius gave us no more than parity at best, and the deciding factor was Pollard’s perfect kicking….no ifs ands or buts.