FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Some views of Mark Andrews

Some views of Mark Andrews

Started by Beeno123 REPLIES594 VIEWS· 09 Oct 2014, 13:10
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
09 Oct 2014, 13:10
#1
09 Oct 2014, 13:10#1

Cape Town - In an exclusive interview, MARK ANDREWSshares the real reason why he left South African rugby, talks the fundamentals of effective second-row play and casts an eye over the November Tests.

Sport24 asked: In terms of epic Test matches against the All Blacks, where does Saturday’s rank?

Mark Andrews: That Ellis Park Test would absolutely be in my top 10. What most pleased me about the Springbok performance was the way we kept ball in hand, that we put the All Blacks under pressure and exposed them for not being as invincible as the whole rugby world seems to think they are. I was also impressed with the way in which the Boks produced a more educated kicking display.

Sport24 asked: The crowd is often referred to as the 16th player. Where they a decisive factor in referee Wayne Barnes reviewing the hit on Schalk Burger in the 77th minute of the match?

Mark Andrews: They were, but they should not have been, as the incident occurred right in front of the referee (Exactly so how was it missed - once picked up on the screen barnes had no choice and gave the minimum decision) . It was a blatant shoulder charge to the head and should have resulted in a yellow card (A red would not have been amiss!!!). While the Springboks were able to take advantage of the ensuing penalty, it was still a big error on the part of the referee and his two assistants. As far as the citing commission is concerned, which I was sadly exposed to during my career, I would just like to see common sense prevail. Rugby is a physical game by nature and big hits are a constant diet. However, when deciding if further punishment should be meted out, it should all come down to intent.

Sport24 asked: Victor Matfield will be 38 by the time the 2015 Rugby World Cup kicks off. Is good enough, old enough?

Mark Andrews:  The public have to remember that if said player is fulfilling the role the coach expects him to perform, well then he can play until he’s 40. While Victor has bossed the lineouts as expected on his return, I find it hard see him being physically effective at the age of 38 in a World Cup tournament. At that age you just can’t hit rucks, clean out and make offensive tackles as effectively as young players would do (AH THE VOICE OF SANITY AT LAST. The game today is just too physical, so he would be superhuman if he could. Victor’s lineout play and kick-off work is fantastic, but I do worry about his combination with Eben Etzebeth. Both players don’t make offensive tackles, hit rucks and neither of them are big ball-carriers. However, I believe our locks get away with it at the breakdown and on impact, as we possess highly-physical and hard-working back-rowers who perform the above duties.(TALKING NONSENSE ABOUT ETZEBETH WHO RIGHT NOW IS DOING THE JOB OF TWO LOCKS)

Sport24 asked: Which you second-rower most excites you within South African rugby and why?

Mark Andrews: Pieter-Steph du Toit. The 22-year-old is fantastic at lineout time, kick-offs and carries the ball. He gets across the gain-line not only owing to his size but because he runs at spaces more than faces. When you weigh 116kg, you almost have a duty to make offensive tackles, carry the ball and clear rucks to get front-foot ball from which the backs can launch attacks. For me, Du Toit simply has to be included in the Springboks’ World Cup squad.(AGREE AND HE WEIGHS MORE THAN 116KG)

Sport24 asked: Please explain what the primary differences are between No 4 and No 5 locks.

Mark Andrews: The major difference between the loosehead lock (No 4) and tighthead lock (No 5) actually comes down to their position in the scrum. Your number as a lock doesn’t determine where you jump in the lineout but rather where you scrum. While there are no fixed rules, normally your five lock is weightier, because he scrums behind the tighthead prop. He’s also generally taller, which is why he jumps in the lineout. Whereas, your four lock is usually shorter and thus jumps at two.

Sport24 asked: You’ve been there and done it. Outline the fundamentals of effective lineout play.

Mark Andrews: The ability to read how the defenders set up in the lineout and then being able to manipulate the opposition into spaces in which you are not going to jump is the secret to success. Furthermore, if you are attacking in the right areas of the field, you want the ball to come from the middle or back of the lineout. However, if you want to drive or are experiencing rainy and windy conditions during a particular match, you want the ball from two and four as it’s lower risk. It’s imperative that the lineout caller understands the team plays. For instance, it’s no use taking a two-ball on the 10-yard attacking, because the ball has to travel so much further from the front of the lineout to the flyhalf. Therefore, calling the ball off four or seven, when you’re attacking is best, because the ball will be able travel to the ten quicker and the backline will then enjoy more space with ball in hand to execute their plays.

Sport24 asked: You played under seven Springbok coaches in your nine-year national career. Which coaches stand out and why?

Mark Andrews: The first coach I most enjoyed playing under was Ian McIntosh. He was a genius as far as getting players to understand a common strategy. In 1994, he was one of the first coaches to introduce the concept of momentum rugby, which he later shared during his coaching courses with the Investec International Rugby Academy. The principle rests on crossing the gain-line and using crash-ball runners to create momentum. The rugby we played in 1995 was basically inspired by Mac. The second was Nick Mallett. He was a breath of fresh air for the first 18 months of his tenure. He possessed an incredible rugby mind and was a man-motivator. However, the last part of Mallett’s reign was probably the worst I ever experienced as a player. He became incredibly arrogant and his ego walked into the room about two minutes before he did (MALLET HAS OF COURSE HAS A GREAT RUGBY BRAIN. HE HAS MATURED AS A PERSON AND WOULD NOW MAKE A TRULY GREAT COACH). I also enjoyed Harry Viljoen’s business approach. He introduced accountability and responsibility for your actions both on-field and off.

Sport24 asked: Tell us the real reason why you left SA to play for Newcastle Falcons in 2003.

Mark Andrews: Both the Sharks and Springboks told me that I had no more value to offer as a player. I was forced to further my career overseas and did not leave South African rugby out of my own free will. At that stage, Kevin Putt and Brian van Zyl believed that I had nothing left to offer the Sharks, and as far as the Springboks were concerned, Rudolf Straeuli felt the same way. It can be a ruthless environment. At the time, I was 29 years of age and told my days of adding value were over. But I came to accept it, as such is life and the nature of professional team sport. The reality is that players’ careers are often dependent upon the management and coaches in power at the time.

Sport24 asked: The contracted Springboks will play no part in the closing stages of the Currie Cup. In your opinion, does the oldest provincial rugby tournament still carry as much weight as before?

Mark Andrews: I think the Springboks’ absence does detract from the overall product. To offer an example, when the Sharks hosted the Lions at Kings Park only 12 000 people showed up. It was a match which pitted second versus third on the log and was also Jacques Botes’s final home match. At Kings Park, never once during my entire career did I play in front of such few spectators. I’ve heard supports in Durban say that they are not going to renew their season tickets for next year, because they are already paying for DSTV which, in turn, makes it very tough for the unions.

Sport24 asked: Share your impressions ahead of the Boks’ end-of-year tour and your most memorable sojourn.

Mark Andrews: It’s always a fine balancing act, as the fixtures in November represent the end of our year. In terms of selection, I believe we need to build some momentum yet blood some new players with the 2015 RWC in mind. On tour, you need to have a gold team and green team, as the late Kitch Christie termed it. As a coach, the key is to combine dirt-trackers and glory players effectively. The 1997 end-of-year-tour in which we trounced the French 52-10, sticks in my mind. We produced great performances and results, because we had fun and didn’t train like mad men ahead of the Tests .

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
09 Oct 2014, 13:27
#2
09 Oct 2014, 13:27#2
 Beeno
Mozart would hate to read what Andrews said here about Matfield.   The remarks made bt Matfield tied in with what I always thought and wrote.   I always said that Matfields tackles are average and that he is not a physical player insofar as ball carries are concerned.   He knows what he ostalking about and the continued presence of Matfield in the Springbok squad is depressing.   
Etzebeth came back from his latest injury not displaying the vigour in ball carries and his tackles have also lost some vigour.   Somebody should tell him that - maybe he will read what Andrews said and change his attitude.  No more dealing with tacklers likehe dealt with Bismarck - he is not playing the STRONG game anymore and is shows in his performances.   Should buck up.     
Another helpful element for Etxebeth would be when Pieter-Steph  comes back - the vooma may then return.  At this stage he seems to be playing the softy-softy game of Matfield and taking him as the example of what is expected from a lock.    Matter of fact I think Matfield and the resting Bakkies Botha have a bad influence on Etzebeth.
   
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
09 Oct 2014, 13:27
#3
09 Oct 2014, 13:27#3
Duplication
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
09 Oct 2014, 14:03
#4
09 Oct 2014, 14:03#4

Now Mark wouldn't be just a little jealous of Victor, would he? The man that took his place as the incumbent Bok 5....not only in the team of the day but in the team of the open era. Sour grapes perhaps?

 

 

People keep saying Victor can't make the tackles, but I keep seeing him making crucial try saving tackles. The theory that a man of 37 can't be as physical as a man of 27 is perfectly plausible. I am amazed Victor has returned so effectively after two years away....but the eyes have it. The man is still huge....concensus Team of the Rugby Cup player.

 

The one thing I totally agree with is Andrews view on Mallett. His record in 2000 of 5 losses in 8 games, including three straight losses to Australia was our worst of the Open Era. As a commentator he is in the Johnny Miller mould, without any particular loyalties. Which should make him interesting. But he lacks Miller's insights so it comes across as bitter whining.

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
09 Oct 2014, 14:18
#5
09 Oct 2014, 14:18#5
 Mozart
You differ here from an expert and Andrews have no reason to be jealous of  Matfield.
You constantly see Matfield making tackles - but have you really looked at the tackles he makes.   The players goes forward in the tackles and the ball is recverd with ease after the tackle.   He cannot tackle a player aggressively anymore.   
He is not physical and it is only in your imagination that he is.    He cannot carry balls intraffic and he is chucked aside in mauls - it happened constant ly in games previously and it happened again on Saturday.   
Sorry - but at 37 he is i most requuirements of a lock a passenger in the side.   We will gain from his departure from the team - he wekens out Tight  5 too much.
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
09 Oct 2014, 14:43
#6
09 Oct 2014, 14:43#6
Ou Maaikie pounced on Andrews' remark about Victor, ignoring the one part that was debated ad nauseam on this board.

Mallett's decline in the second half of his stint........
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
09 Oct 2014, 14:52
#7
09 Oct 2014, 14:52#7
 Ceradyne
I did not comment on the Mallett issue because it was old news.  As you said the decline of Mallett was discussed many times.   Mallett had some srious caoching problems -  the worst one of whixh was his ability to find replacement players for those he inherited and was lewaviing the game.  He also had an atrocious relationship with Teichmann - who happened to be his captain.
Be it as it may - it was old news.  
The present news is about Matfield - and I think as a player of distinction he is corect about Meyer.  Unlike Mozart and yourself he knows what he is talking about when he says there is deficiencies in Matield's play and to say that is the result of jealousy is a skyscraper.  
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,294 posts
09 Oct 2014, 14:54
#8
09 Oct 2014, 14:54#8
It is interesting that he says neither Matfield or Eztebeth are effective ball carriers....Eztebeth has been very average this year so far. 
At least Matfield has lineouts and kickoffs. Matfields tackles are not offensive tackles in the way that Alberts can tackle, but he does do allot of tackles.

BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
09 Oct 2014, 14:58
#9
09 Oct 2014, 14:58#9
 I suspect Andews could have been more critical of wee victor 106kg but refrained - neverthe less he said quite enough. Andrews was a genuine lock and far, far better than matfiled.Time for all victor fans to bid a sad farewell to their hero and look to the future.Etzebeth is suffering from not having a real lock partnering him. He is still though playing a lot better than some give him credit for. He is doing the donkey work so needed from a tight forward.Ou maaaikie you were still singing matfileds praises when I had twigged to the con man.Anyhow let's all keep calm like Beeno. Lets us sadly bid wee victor adieu  and bring in a real lock to partner poor Etzebeth.Mallet of course may have been arrogant in his youth but it would appear that he is maturer now. It is very clear, listening to him that he, like Rassie, has a first class rugby brain.We need to get him coaching again in the Super 15 as a start. What an utter waste!
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
09 Oct 2014, 15:00
#10
09 Oct 2014, 15:00#10
 Sharkbok
Etzebeth since his return has had to play with matfield and Bakkies Botha and I think they have a negative impact on his performances.
As to Alberts makig aggressive tackles - I can faintly remember a tackle he made in 2012 - since then ZIP.   Matfield did make a lot of tackles - but he also missed too many tackles.  
Ultimately there is no way Mmatfield does not weaken the Tight 5 of the Springboks.      
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
09 Oct 2014, 15:52
#11
09 Oct 2014, 15:52#11

Spot on by Andrews, it's what I have been saying from the start. Matfield adds no physicality to the equation, we never see him clearing out rucks, going on the charge or putting in big hits. His physical contributions are powder puff......we see him join the line like a back, instead of hitting contact and enforcing himself physically, we see him effect nice low technically correct tackles like a back, we never see him smash attackers backwards.

 

He plays like a back, we don't need that from a 38 year old lock.

 

His line-out work and kick offs is no better than any other lock out there. Its good as its always has been but certainly is not giving us an edge in those departments.

 

Matfield is a liability......I have said so from day one and one of the best locks to ever play the game has effectively confirmed that.

 

Case closed, thank you Mark  

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
09 Oct 2014, 17:22
#12
09 Oct 2014, 17:22#12
 Beeno
You write crap at times - you know.  I was horrified when Matfield came bak nd was his strongest critc on this site.  I never sang his praises as suggested by you.   Wake up - and smell the roses.  
However, you are probably correct - Etzebeth has to do the hard work in the engine room, which Matfield is not doing.    
GE
generaltitPro3,164 posts
09 Oct 2014, 18:11
#13
09 Oct 2014, 18:11#13
MA was an exceptional player ...probably a chip off Colin Meads block but never better...dear old Kitch who understood big match temperament and pressure of titantic finals...nothing bigger than WC 1995 final slotted this big but athletic lock at number 8...paid dividends...well not too sure but the result is all what matters...was this a good shift...and again it does not matter...this is a topic on it's own. 
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
09 Oct 2014, 18:26
#14
09 Oct 2014, 18:26#14
 Beeno
Mark Andrews is the same height as Matfield - but Matfield weighs 10 kgs less than Mark did - ie - 106kgs as against 116 kgs.
Andrews was very strong and athletic - Matfield is not strong but athletic.   Andrews was strong in the Tight 5 - Matfield is anyting but.
Mark can see the potential of Pieter-Steph du Toit - our resident morons only see the averae to week tackles of Matfield and build skyscrapers areound it - they refuse to see the quality of the tackles.
Get the message.  Dave is right - Matfield mostly stands around behind mauls as an extra backline player.   Watch him and you will see,  

GE
generaltitPro3,164 posts
09 Oct 2014, 18:42
#15
09 Oct 2014, 18:42#15
Frik Du Preez was short for a lock...but he was the greatest line out forward...what's so incredible it was the days of no lifting in lineouts but despite this heigt outjumped every body else. As a loosey which he often played he was fast off the mark and a real terror in full flight...could do the 100 YARDS in 10 secs flat. Also a kicker , once did a drop goal, from the half way with the heavier leather ball right through the gap. A real tough man..very uncommon , also a very nice, simple and ordinary person...I still have a program...somewhere with his and a few others autographs the day SA played Wales...in 19 foetsak when I was two bricks and a penny high. 
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
09 Oct 2014, 19:39
#16
09 Oct 2014, 19:39#16
Seb
There is a massive difference in size f players a mre two generations ago.
Lets go back a bit further  - in 1938 Philip Nel was a lock and regrded as a giant - hee was 6'1" tall weighing 104 kgs -  the New Aealand forwards were overawed by his size.   By the time Flip Du Preez came along that size became normal for a lock (6'2" and 106 kgs)  and he was athletic as well.  The next generation of locks were bigger - but now two generations afterwards the sizes are 6'9" and the weight between 118 and 125 kgs.
Another interesting stat is that Piet "Spiere" du Toit - the Grandfather of Pieter-Steph -is 6'1" tall and weight 106 kgs when he was playing.   Look at his grandson now.  Piet Spiere would have to look up to his grandson and asked him hw the weather is up there.
The old locks had to jump well because assistane was not allowed.   The present generation gets assissted - but bearing in mind their weight the player will have upward mobbility to ease the lifting job for the supporting player.
Although Matfield is  the same height as most other locks he weighs crica 106kgs - he himself wrote in his book that was his weight when he was in the prime of his career and it is unlikely that he weighs more now - making lifting by the supporting player easier than the case is with the normal locks playing at pesent.    That is perhaps why he is still fairly good in line out play   

MO
moolaaPro2,380 posts
09 Oct 2014, 20:43
#17
09 Oct 2014, 20:43#17
 Andrews is right on the mark re Itsabutt. You guys complain about Victor but his locking partner has been a passenger this year in the RC. Totally overrated!
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
09 Oct 2014, 21:54
#18
09 Oct 2014, 21:54#18
Always make me smile when Boks supporters, coaches, ex players, etc. go on about how they Boks played great because they "kept the ball in hand". Shows the sad state of affairs when this is seen as such progress.
AJ
Arthur JohnPro1,748 posts
09 Oct 2014, 22:00
#19
09 Oct 2014, 22:00#19
 Mark Andrews was an excellent lock and rugby player plus he was a gentleman off the field.
A credit to South African/Sharks rugby and to the game in general.As was Colin Meads.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
09 Oct 2014, 23:14
#20
09 Oct 2014, 23:14#20
 AJ
I agree with yoouin allrepects.   I saw mark playing many times and one thing was clear -he was good because he was a thinking player.   Mozart is uncommfortable about the deficiecnies pointed out by mark - and there fore try to use a absurd reason why Mark's comments should be ignored.   
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
09 Oct 2014, 23:20
#21
09 Oct 2014, 23:20#21
 ou maaaikie the difference between you and me is that I never ever thought matfiled was a test class lock. Never ever. 

OI
oimateyPro1,870 posts
10 Oct 2014, 20:31
#22
10 Oct 2014, 20:31#22
Just saw this thread - sorry, didn't mean to rehash on the other one.
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
10 Oct 2014, 20:57
#23
10 Oct 2014, 20:57#23
Andrews was a fine player but his negative stuff towards Matfield does him no credit. You don't hear Victor ever responding to or initiating this kind of niggle. The best lock I have seen in sixty years of watching rugby.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Oct 2014, 21:13
#24
10 Oct 2014, 21:13#24
Mozart
The difference is that Edwards is 100% correct in what he said - when another journalist said the same thing - you went ballistic as well.   Matfield was a good lock 6  years ago - but then he was at his prime.    I would never say he was the best lock ovr the last 60 years.   He was moonlighting in the backline too much and never of much use physically. 
There were  far better lock forwards then him over the last 60 years - starting with real locks like Jan Pickard - through to F rik du Preez - and a lot since then.   You are a biased idiot to make a statement like that.         
— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news