South Africa vs Argentina (RWC '15) Stats

1. Kriel missed 4 tackles. 
2. Lood made 3 and missed 2. 
3. Victor made 16 and missed 1. 
4. Alberts did miss 4 

Willie and Pollard had an even spread of passing and kicking. Pienaar made 70 passes and 9 kicks. Argentina's backs kicked more across the backline than the Boks.

Kriel showed his ability to run with the ball in an open game, notching up 71m in 6 runs; beating 3 defenders, making 1 clean break and offloading once. Damian made 23m in 9 runs and had one beaten defender. Duane, Etzebeth, Victor, Malherbe were around the same in meters. 

 Victor was MOM & received a player rating of 7 out of 10.

The fan favourites had a disappointing year. It should be a moment of humiliation to many of the critics who stood against me, but they still didn't learn. 
Kriel is an effective attacker with some space, which is unfortunate because Damian isn't creating any space. Damian needs to be put on the edge of the defence or outside of it. That is where he was his most damaging all season, where he actually did anything. He had tremendous difficulty carrying the ball up. Kriel on the otherhand had a greater ability to hit the line with direct running. I think a combination of latent speed and strength accounts for that. He was used on hitups a few times. Often he would be paired with Willie when  the backs were broke into separate units. Damian would be paired with the flyhalf, which was mostly Pollard. Willie was the glue that bound the wings and the centres. So much play tan through him. It was such rotten luck that Willie was in horrible form. It seemed that nothing would stick for him. If you look at the other nations, their 12 and 13 bring the outside backs into the game, not the other way around. Willie was the extension of the halfbacks and if he didn't distribute to the centres or wings, it was Pollard. What would we do without Willie? When we wanted to carry it up we used our forwards off 9. Seldom 12. In fact, Pollard did a lot of that grunt work. Schalk was a tremendous link. A forward with a complete skill set to lead his pod around the field and confuse the defence. 
Those who criticize personnel are ignorant of how the Boks play and what options each player provides. This is where I have disagreed all year with the critics. Yet they will not learn the true way of things. 

 What has emerged in this RWC re our centres is quite surprising. Allende who seemed like a major defensive liability has tightened up his defence. but his running has seemed increasingly predictable.....he always seems at half pace. I know I have jocularly called this tractoring, but over time it has rung true. He needs to be coming from deeper harder....Mortlock should be his role model.
And to be honest I'm still not convinced about his defence, time will tell on that score.


Kriel has always looked like a fine runner in space....much like JJ, but perhaps with a bit more creativity. If anything though, his defence is worse. He seems gun shy and very uncertain in the tackle. Yesterday was awful. He needs lots of centre play and some really top notch coaching.

So we have two half solutions to our centre situation. Two guys who have strengths and occasionally look like world beaters but presently have feet of clay. We have had effectively no production from them through the RWC....only one try against the USA where they got the try itself or an assist. A bleak record. And one which impacted our WC. One good break from either could have influenced that semi.

Are they the answer going forward? It's not a given  by any means.

 What we learned in the world cup was entirely different from what DF and Mozart said.    

Moz, one on one he will still be a weaker defender, but with the gang tackling he gets more support and has fewer decisions to make. There was always the worry that a team would align wider and attack him, like Australia did. But we just didn't face an opponent who plays that way. Still, he has made his greatest growth as a player with Meyer. Without Meyer, we may see the end of that growth. By hounding Meyer, the knock o  effect may the disruption to the growth of some of these newer youngsters. 

 Sorry something went wrong worth posting of the above message so let me start again.  Only the dumbest of rugby idiots can agree with the garbage written by the two Village Idiots.   Lets be quite frank the two missed everything of substance and that makes them looking at individuals and not where the rot really set in.  
The main thing that went clearly over their head is that the game propagated by them caused all NH teams in the competition and that the game plan adopted by Meyer for the tournament was fatally flawed.   The plan allowed for passing of the ball to forwards instead of backline players with the result that our center combination rarely saw usable balls,   The kicking game was sh!t poor and the whole let down was by most of the flawed selections by Meyer.
Centers cannot use sub-standard balls and if it got to them they are in trouble.  If the balls are constantly handed back to the opposition by BS kicking and ball possession losses - then any player will end up with having defensive problems.         This constant harping about centers is a joke.   Meyer buggered up his selections over a period and in the end we ended up with a center pair that has a total of 3 games as a center pairing at the start of the WC.   Without reasonable ball possession we could not expect much from the two players concerned and with the handover of possession to opposing teams we have had problems against the Welsh, the AB's and the Argentinians "B" team.
Any real rugby supporters will start looking at the wider impacts that were wrong basically in the WC and not look at certain issues based on personal prejudice.   If the to can get hold of what Naas Botha said when discussing the campaign in the post-match panel discussion - they may learn something about hat went wrong in th Tournment insofar as the Springboks are concerned.   But the7y would not and will carry on with their prejudiced rubbish.       .  

The next year in South African rugby is going to be tough. There is Etzebeth, Pollard and a bunch of wannabees. Much has been said about Lomp, but he has been totally ineffective in the knockouts. The bully boy tactics don't work against the better teams if you don't have real power like Etzebeth to back it up.
In the backs many conclude we have found a new centre partnership. Why? Hell they aren't even a partnership, I haven't seen one play off the other once in this WC.
The good news is we will have time to build before the next WC. But make no mistake, in 2016 we will be in the basement, with a long way to climb.

The coming year will be a treacherous path to tread. Whoever is in charge is going to have to rebuild almost from nothing, with nothing. Maybe then there will be an appreciation for Meyer. Then again, maybe not. 

 I agree. The glue is gone. We are left with a bunch of individuals (wannabees) and not a team. Some people are just too stupid to understand the value of experience at the top level.

One small thing in our favour, is that the All Black will also lose a lot of experience, but they still have better quality than us when you use Super Rugby as the yardstick.

I actually had the same thought on the ABs Truth, but their near test talent pool of players who have shown they can contribute is much deeper it seems.  

 The next year will be the start of a wonderful rebuilding exercise after years of increasing poor performances by the players favoured by Meyer.  Over the past year our winning record was the result of selection of non-performing donkeys by Meyer - new players would bring a breath of fresh air into a near dead donkey Meyer turned the Springbok team in to.
No rude awakening - matter of fact the changes could move the Springbok team forward after years of stagnation.     

Dream on.  

 I am not dreaming - I am making a statement of fact.  Over the last year Springbok rugby hit rock bottom - a fact that members do not recognise because they feel that their constant support for the retirees would weaken if they criticize even one of the duds previously good players became.  
I am not dreaming - you are hallucinating and has been for the past two years.  Come down to earth and you will see the logic in arguments pf the realists on this site.
And the Trooth Fairy's glue was applicable to players who could not perform and carry tales to the coach.   They were glued to their reputations and forgot that they need to play as well.     .