Spies' stats for the RWC.....corrected

So Ceradyne you think Spies gained 123 metres against Oz in the RWC QF? I checked on the  ESPN stats site and it's indeed Spies 121, Burger 38 metres. But that made no sense to me, so wanting to watch the match again, I did, and checked Spies' runs in the process.

Here's what I found. Fifteen runs by Spies......1, 0,0,4,1,2,10,1,1,0, 5,3,3,8,and 2 metres. For a total of 41 metres.

I was a bit puzzled but then at minute 70 of the broadcast the commentators held forth on Burger. A stat summary came up showing Schalk had run 123 metres in 14 carries. And then it became clear. Spies had been credited for Schalk's runs and vice versa.

So Schalk was the guy who was enormous and Spiesie? He was the guy who was taken off the park and subbed by Alberts.

I know you laughed at my stats, in another string, but he who laughs last and all that. My stats are usually accurate.

I repeat Spies had a nothing RWC.

Oh Lord it's hard to be humble. So it is back to your old ways, isn't it Moz. Start a new thread to make a stand. Go check again, I did indeed say that it was 121. As usual you would start a new thread, trusting that nobody would go back to the original fact and check out which one is bullshitting............... and that over 2 metres!!!!!! You have not perhaps considered that during the match, Burger could in fact have been credited with Spies' runs and vise versa, especially if you take into account how many times Burger runs towards the touch-line, insted of towards the goal line.

And then we have this apparent new theory of yours, that the kak player is subbed for the better player. Where have you been?

Your stats usually accurate? Hahahaha. In your opinion.

You are blindly against Spies, as you are blindly against Jaque Fourie, as Beeno is blindly against Matfield and as he is blindly against a senseless idiot like John Smit.......................... unless he Jonh says something that is music to his ears. If Alberts was so much better than Spies, why did he not start at 8 in every game?

Shame poor old Ceradyne, the point of the posting went right.....woosh....over your head. It's not about you saying Spies did 121 when he did 123. It's about him doing 41, or more likely 38,  Schalk's number in the stats( I was being a bit generous in giving him metres) instead of 121 or 123.

A bigger person would have said....good catch. All you can do is twist and turn and accuse.

But hey, you did exactly what I thought you would do, which is a laugh in itself.

The twisting and turning is coming from your side. You were the one claiming how useless Spies is. You were shown up once again, and as usual have to claim the limelight by starting a whole new post, by trying to replace the stats by your stats which has been verified by................................... you. Nothing new there, I suppose. Enjoy your little game. Cheers.

Well both of us can't be right. And having watched the game again, I know for a fact....Spies gained no more than 41 metres. I suspect you know that as well, so you might as well admit you were wrong. Hell you have a great excuse, ESPN got it wrong and even though most fans would probably have questioned the stat, it's understandable.

What's less understandable is trying to lie your way out of it, if you get my drift.

So going by your above comment, anyone who is critical of Spies "is being shown up"? Well I be blown. Instead of becoming personal in your debate, why don't you go and verify Spies's stats on ESPN?. That way you've both watched the same feed and the same stats?

Ahhh and Denny jumps in as well. Moz said that I lied, so Denny believes that I lied. Moz was the freakin liar my friend. According to him, I said Spies made 123 meters. Go check for yourself.................. oh of course you wouldn't go there because that would mean that you would have to reply to the post where I responded to your "challenge". Rather stick to the safe haven that Moz has created for the two of you, on this new thread.

Where exactly have I said that I believe you're a liar? Growup you little prick, talk about twisting words around.....my only suggestion was for you to have a look at ESPN again so that both of you are on the same page. Noticeably that's gone straight over your head......and if you'd prefer for me to post on the original thread then I'll do so.....I'm not dodging anything. Got that....drama queen? Man you are anal!

But anyway, I'll wait for you to point me to where I believe you're a liar based on Moz calling you a liar.

Ag FFS. Get off your high horse. The figures that I quoted was actually the figures that I got from ESPN. According to ESPN I said it was 121 meters. Moz then turned around and started a new thread saying that I was lying, and that it I said it was 123 meters. That was the lie, right there, because I have not said that it was 123 meters. That is typical. Start a new threat and change the facts around, so he can call me a liar. That is the SOP. How many people has he called liars using exactly the same tactics. Bloody hell, he even tried to proof that someone he has met and know is not bald, has in fact got a bals patch, based on a little profile picture. I saw the origonal picture the other day. The bald patch that he could clearly see was nowhere to be found.

You have just proven that you believe that I am the liar, because Moz said so, mamparra. You believed that I did not check on my stats. Why don't you get Moz to check on his?

Wrong, I haven't called you a liar because Moz called you a liar....... I've asked you to provide me with evidence to support your assertion which clearly you can't. Why don't you just man up Vlagman and admit that you're jumping to conclusions Huh?

And oh,so you actually took that bald patch and jacket crap to heart....scratching for pictures and all. Man you are narrow, there's a facebook picture of the man we're talking about on the front page of this very site. You could have saved yourself some  anxiety and sleepless nights and ignored all of that BS.....and if not, you were never smart enough to realise that the jacket, or whether he was bald was never of any importance. Anyway now that I've figured out who you are there's no sense in debating you......I mean I don't give a rats about your stats, about who you are and whether you're a liar or not.  I saw enough of you on that Seig Heil site to know your type.

As I said, as thick as can be ou Denny. You told  me that I should check up with ESPN stats. I told you that was where I actually got it from. Duhhhh? I have given you a lengthy expplanation on the original thread where this all started, but thanks to yor gabba starting a new thread, you cannot find it. This is of course very convenient for you, I must say. Saves you some embarrassment.

I haven't scratched through any pictures, I saw it on a link, provided on this site, and opened it. It was importance to your gabba. It was used to start thread upon thread upon thread, trying to proof what a liar the person was. See a pattern here?

Ahhhh now you do not give a rats ass about who I am, or about my stats, yet you made a fuss about it not too long ago. Strange things happen.

How about you concede that you made a complete ass of yourself re the stats. Be a man for once in your life. It wasn't me who was jumping to conclusions, it was your friend Moz and yourself. You jumped to the conclusion that I sucked the figures out of my thumb, meanwhile, back at the ranch, I got it from the site that you suggested I visit. Moz also jumped to the conclusion that ESPN had their stats wrong.

Let me say this very slowly Herr Kommandant......I've said now that I know who I'm dealing with I have no further interest in this debate. Can you spot the difference? As for embarrassment...why, that's you posting on this fine site.

You bang on about others frailties and faults.....ever take some timeout to look at yours? Of course not...ja I know.....you're perfect hey!? Remember how you banged on about Allyphint's support of the AB's? How you lot ganged up on him...and how you lot ganged up against Beeno Hmmmm?  Tell me that board never suffered from a mob mentallity with you and a few others at the centre of it. Beeno and Allyphint are more man than you'll ever be Herr Kommandant....I've seen your "tough" guy mob mentality.

I'll say it again, you are not my type so don't expect a reply. Over and out!

Trrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...............................................Tisssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Nag ou Grote

In the end the point is Spies did no tdo well which was what Moz and I and others were saying.

I hope he comes to light this season as he has had enough time to make his mark and he is gifted. Hopefully whatever is holding him back will be overcome and we wil lsee him oprating at full steam.

Anyhow windpomp what is true is that your man spies is problematic and will have to get himself sorted out.

You clowns keep on saying that Spies this and Spies that, without substance. Nothing, niks............... except your own "expert" opinions. Case closed. Cheers