Springbok Player Ratings vs Georgia

Ex- Rugby365

https://rugby365.com/countries/georgia/player-ratings-rusty-boks/

15 Willie le Roux
The veteran fullback had a few wayward kicks and some of his options on attack was not the best. However, he looked dangerous when he ran at the Georgians.
6/10

14 Rosko Specman
He did not get much of the ball out wide in what was his debut in a Bok jersey. He did look energetic when he did get it.
5/10

13 Jesse Kriel
It was not his best outing in a Bok jersey, but he showed that he has got an eye for space for his outside backs.
6/10

12 Frans Steyn
He lost the ball in contact on a couple of occasions and just looked predictable with ball in hand.
4/10

11 Aphelele Fassi
It was a fantastic debut for the 23-year-old. He showed off his finishing skills for the game’s first try and he set-up another with a chip kick. He also showed how good he is under the high ball.
8/10

10 Handré Pollard
His distribution to his backs was excellent and his neat grubber kick led to Herschel Jantjies’ try in the second half.
7/10

9 Cobus Reinach
He was one of his team’s try scorers, but it was a mixed bag in terms of his distribution from the base of the ruck.
6/10

8 Albertus Smith
The livewire No.8 had a few good runs with ball in hand and he scored a great try off the back of a scrum.
7/10

7 Pieter-Steph du Toit
The 2019 World Player of the Year was the best player on the field. He carried the ball with great power made some serious metres doing so. He also defended like a man possessed.
9/10

6 Siyamthanda Kolisi (captain)
He was missing in action in the first half. He came to the party a bit in the final quarter with some strong carries.
5/10

5 Franco Mostert
He had a high work rate, especially in the line-outs and mauls.
7/10

4 Eben Etzebeth
The lock made his presence felt in the physical exchanges and played his part in the line-outs and mauls as well.
6/10

3 Trevor Nyakane
He had some troubles in the first two scrums, but he got things right eventually. He did not do as much work as his front row teammates.
6/10

2 Bongi Mbonambi
He always lifts his game when he is in a Springbok jersey. He found his jumpers in the line-outs and he carried the ball well.
7/10

1 Retshegofaditswe Nché
He had a couple of powerful carries, which got his side over the gainline, he was solid in the scrums as well.
7/10

Replacements:

16 Malcolm Marx (on for B Mbonambi, 50th min)
He put in some big hits on defence and was part of a strong front row in the final 30 minutes. He also scored a try.
7/10

17 Steven Kitshoff (On for R Nche, 50th min)
He constantly looked for work when he came onto the park and showed his power in the scrum.
7/10

18 Frans Malherbe (on for T Nyakane, 29th and 50th min)
Powerful in the scrums and that is his main job.
6/10

19 Marvin Orie (on for E Etzebeth, 40th min)
It was a solid performance in the second half.
6/10

20 Jasper Wiese (On for A Smith, 60th min)
He certainly made the Georgian defenders work when he got the ball and he made his presence felt on defence as well.
7/10

21 Herschel Jantjies (On for C Reinach, 55th min)
His distribution was good and brought some pace into the game.
7/10

22 Elton Jantjies (On for H Pollard, 64th min)
It’s wasn’t the best from Jantjies. His passing was not as crisp as Pollard’s.
4/10

23 Damian Willemse (On for F Steyn, 55th min)
Perhaps he should have started the game. He was way more dangerous than Frans Steyn out wide.
7/10

My Ratings: Ex-SharkBok

15 Willie le Roux - 7.5/10
Was the heartbeat on the attack with some good runs, while also creating space and tries.
Repetitive and inaccurate chip kicks ruined a few attacking movements. 

14 Rosko Specman - 5/10
Limited contribution but had little space to attack. 

13 Jesse Kriel - 5.5/10
Ok but isolated himself killing some of the attacking movements or slowing them down.

12 Frans Steyn - 3/10
Looked slow and clumsy and unfit. Have we seen the return of Fat Stain?
Gave away 2 penalties. If he stayed on the field longer, he might have gotten a yellow card. 
Did have a few strong carries, but was pretty one-dimensional overall.

11 Aphelele Fassi - 8/10
Looked like a test-level player right away. 

10 Handré Pollard - 7.5/10
All-round performance. Easily one of the best flyhalves in the world. 

9 Cobus Reinach - 5.5/10
Another Hougaard 2.0 performance. A small wing that does not have all the skills to play at 9 at test level. Great in open play, as another attacking option, but slow at the base of the ruck. 

8 Albertus Smith - 6.5/10
One of his better runs. Good in space. Seemed to get more into the game once play was more broken up. When things were tight, he was outmuscled. 

7 Pieter-Steph du Toit - 8.5
A high work rate as usual. 

6 Siyamthanda Kolisi (captain): 5/10
He was no where to be seen for most of the game. When the game started to loosen up, he started to play well

5 Franco Mostert - 6.0/10
Solid all-round game.

4 Eben Etzebeth - 6/10
The lock made his presence felt in the physical exchanges and played his part in the line-outs and mauls as well.

3 Trevor Nyakane - 5.5/10
Seemed average in the scrums, which improved when he left the field. 

2 Bongi Mbonambi - 6.5/10
Mike Tyson junior made his presence felt. 

1 Retshegofaditswe Nché - 6.5/10
Solid around the park. Strumming seemed stable.. 

Replacements:

16 Malcolm Marx (on for B Mbonambi, 50th min) - 7/10
He put in some big hits on defence and was part of a strong front row in the final 30 minutes. He also scored a try.

17 Steven Kitshoff (On for R Nche, 50th min) -7/10
Scrums improved, as did the overall pack performance when he entered the game. 

18 Frans Malherbe (on for T Nyakane, 29th and 50th min) - 7/10.
Scrums improved, as did the overall pack performance when he entered the game

19 Marvin Orie (on for E Etzebeth, 40th min) - 3.0
Minimal contribution. 

20 Jasper Wiese (On for A Smith, 60th min) - 6/10.
Physical with ball in hand, and lots of tackles. 

21 Herschel Jantjies (On for C Reinach, 55th min) - 8/10
A noticeable improvement when he got onto the field. He cleared rucks much faster, and his distribution was better than Hougaard 2.0. 

22 Elton Jantjies (On for H Pollard, 64th min) - 4/10
A disaster. He butchered a certain try by skipping Willie Leroux, and the pass ended up in the stands.

23 Damian Willemse (On for F Steyn, 55th min) 5/10
His one-dimensional goose step just isolates himself like a deer in the headlights - while he dummies his own supporting play. Still, it was one of his better tests. 
Once again, he looked average at test level. A utility player that delivers the same levels on inconsistency.
He did almost score a try, and he did try to get involved but needs to see more playmaking ability for the players on his outside- if he is going to be an inside back

I would rather not make any ratings  on my own - but have to agree that Jantjies and Frans Steyn were disasters,   We really missed De Allende to give the backline bite and then we also have to look for another flyhalf - Jantjies is no test material.    

I do not rate Nyakane at all - his scrumming was poor.     Ori is not a logs backsite.  I would rather have Schickerling as back up if Snyman is not available.    

I like what I saw about Wiese.     

I think that the team was a bitt of trial selection - some veterans to keep the less-experienced and  new players in line - but one will have to see what the next test produces,.             

Imagine how red-faced the rugby noobs who have been bashing away at Fassie and PSdT must be feeling right now!

LMAO!

Because they weren’t exposed by Georgia? Hahaha….you can’t be serious.

I am just finishing my analysis of Steph's first 40 mins (I didn't watch the first half live). Interesting points to be made. Steph really wasn't a factor at all. Kwagga and Kolisi having better first halves. None of the centres were really in it. Most of the shapes are the same as José, but with a stronger emphasis on moving the ball quicker; a move towards the more modern Meyer blueprint (which was ahead of the trends of the past five years). 

Meyer blueprint was 20 years behind the rugby played in 2012 and  the only time he was ahead of anything was when he signed his resignation letter before he was due to be fired by Stade Francais.  

Actually, the Meyer model was a fluid 2-4-2/1-3-3-1 system which utilised shapes and sequences that the NH only began using from late 2015 onwards. He was and still is ahead of every incarnation of the Boks before and since his time. There were more sophisticated ideas in Meyer's Boks than I have ever seen from Coetzee, José or, albeit one test, Crutch.  

So when circa 80% of the ball does not go to the flyhalf how did that idiotic  claim  of yours been in evidence?     The fact is that the Springboks backline in the 2019 RC and in the WC scored more triers than the whole team did in the two competitions when Meyer was in charge,

Meyer's backline usage was extremely limited and he  so usage a 15 mean team effort was non-existent.   He himself said that SA backline players do not have the ball skills needed to play a ball in hand game/    How does that statement  of Meyer tie in with your imaginary  claim? 

Meyer was effectively fired by Stade for two reasons - those being  his poor squad and teams elections and his total inability to coach backline players into being part of the  team performances.  He was told to leave because he was destroying the club..    The same happened to Coetzee as well.\\

You are welcome to live on Cloud 9  - but I do not think that thinking people would fall for your BS.      .   

80%? Which test?

Well, lets take the 2012 Dunedin test where the Boks were heavily criticised for kicking and "10 man rugby": Backline with 64% team possession. You see? The old eye test fails you plastics time and again. This is the difference between a conclusion that feels right and one that is right. Have a nice day you old queen. 

PS: Boks vs NZ in game 1, 2019: Backline 49% possession. This was enterprising and modern rugby. Game, set and match. And with said match, I light your fuse and watch you explode in anger. LoLz.

The fact is I was talking about 2019 - which equivalent is 2015 and also refer to a Meyer remark made in 2015  about the issue of ball skills of backline players.    You refer toi the Dunedin test - totally fucked up by Steyn     The backline ball possession stats  can be grossly misleading.  The ball can end up with the flyhalf kicking  balls away aimlessly or players collecting kicks of the opposition and does not even  use that in attacking play.    What counts is the tries scored  by backline players where 15 man rugby is played and that never happened with Meyer around.   

The Dunedin test was lost directly by the incompetence of Goosen. That has been very well established. 

I have done breakdowns on these things in every kind of way. Meyer's 2015 bettered the production of José's 2019 quite substantially. Shall we look at possession stats per player? I have the breakdowns for every test, opposition included. Don't get into another nuke fight with a potato peeler Lügnerin. I could reference Mapimpi's 0.8% of total team possession against New Zealand in the World Cup. Where the entire Bok midfield accumulated 15 passes. You are too easy. 

Morne's only attribute to any test was kicking at goal and in Dunedin he -

*   missed 6 out of 7 kicks at goal; and 

*    his out-of-hand kicking was atrocious  - the commentators clearly on air said somne kicks were BS..

For the rest he sabotaged any potential backline attacking play and was dropped by Meyer after that effort - even the bad coach Meyer realized that he was atrocious and dropped him from the team for the rest of the tests that year.    

By thee way Meyer was effectively fired  as Stade Francais since he was grossly incompetent and he was the same as Springbok coach .    Just as an aside - how many trophies did the Springboks won when Meyer was coach.?   To be exact ZERO,     

Meyer's record in the period  November 2014 to September 2015  was  an example of what he achieved in the case of Stade Francais - 9 played - won 3 and lost 6 games.   The Japan disaster is typical of his achievements as a coach. and was precisely what happened two year later to Stade Francais.   Just see how many balls the scrfuimmies passed in that test to the flyhalf and how many went elsewhere.    That was 13 passed to the flyhalf out of over a hundred passes made..     The other six balls handled by the flyhalf in that game was when he was recovered kicks by the Japanese.    The same trend happened in all games in the rest of the WC series. 

So when  Meyer came back from the WC hew said he is looking forward to continue as coach since the younger  players in the team was doing so well.    He was told not to bother to apply for extension of his contract and  he then said he is withdrawing his candidacy for continuing as a coach of the Springboks. 

Meyer realized he has no future as a rugby coach and is now acting as a financial  Consultant for his new employers,     Hope he is better as a financial consultant than he was as a coach.       

You get so worked up because you know the truth. Morné was a key player in the last successful attacking Bok side, and Meyer coached that side. It burns you inside. I recall you calling those victories a moral loss, and that the tries were worthless. Since 1990, there has never been a Bok side so built around aimless kicking like the 2018 to 2019 seasons. It became progressively worse as the tenure laboured on. You say winning and tries matter once you have lost the analysis of performance debate, admit 2017 was more successful than 2018. Let's see how clever and honest you are... 

There are some people that cannot see the wood because of the trees.

Cannot see the whole , in other words. Cannot see the context.

The truth is :

1) South Africa won the World Cup under Rassie.

2) South Africa did not win the World Cup under Meyer.

3) SA ranking in World Rugby is number 1

4) SA ranking under Meyer was number 4 (in 2015).

5) Meyer was sacked from the French club franchise.

6) Why was he fired?? A stupid question.

7) Champions are judged by their RESULTS not their statistics.

KISS...keep it simple stupid.

Simplicity for the simple. 

1. Who was integral to the Bok blueprint? Nienaber or Josè? Nienaber.
2. Nienaber and Josè actually lost their first attempt in 2011. Would they have won had they played the stuttering All Blacks in the semi? 
3. Who kept the Boks #2 for three and a bit years? Meyer. With a heavily depleted roster to boot. He didn't inherit a spine to build around. And of those key losses in 2015, you defended the culprits such as Damian, Lambie, Kriel, Steph, Coetzee. You will cite a loss, but then strangely not hold the player into account. I held Meyer responsible for their selections! That's the difference, I don't have a shrine for a coach. The Church of Josè have no such honesty or integrity. 
4. In terms of results? 2018 is worse than 2017. Key 2019 results: Home win against worst Wallaby side in 45 years, an injury depleted Welsh side and England. Perspective.
5. Output? Meyer's were better.
6. Gameplan? Meyer's was better.

Nienabier has been working with and a close friend  of  Erasmus for near to 20 years and Nienaber was developed as  a coach by Erasmus.   

What attempt of 2011?   The team was not coached by errasmus - nor Nienaber - so what BS are you talking about?

Meyer had more of a spine to build around than Erasmus - who inherited a  demoralized team that even lost against Italy.   Meyer was a complete idiot as to team selection and his constant efforts  to get retired players back to play for the Springboks were all failures and contributed to the poor results of the Springboks in 2014 and 2105.  That is why he was nopt given a contract extension - he was a total failure as a coach.    The losses occurred because of the fact that6 the elderly did not produce the goods  in tests and that is a fact.

Perepective is losing against Japan in 2015 and Italy in 2017 and record losses by the Springboks against the All Blacks in the Coetzee era. 

Gameplan of Meyer - did he in fact have one?   If he did it was absent from sight.   

Key questiion - why is Meyer totally out of coaching after eh was forced by Stade Francaise/?   Not even Namibia or Zimbabwe  will take him as a coach and the same applies to Coetzee..

There ios no debate on analysis - you write garbage  not even wroth reading and garbage doies not require any comment whatsoever.    I will not waste my time dealing with bigoted and worthless comments BS. that you say happened. - but in fact never happened in thne way you describe it.      

You are a Kindergarten Imbecile  and will always be one.       .  

  .   

Erasmus had a game plan:

1 Kick the ball as often as possible.

2 When  running the ball, never pass beyond the first receiver in your own half.

3 Never, under any circumstances attempt an offload.

4 Be patient eventually your opponent will make a mistake.

5 I you can’t make any metres, kick the ball as far as possible and defend aggressively.

….

Elements of the game plan actually work, but it can be as boring as a Mike rant, as we saw against Wales and Japan.

Mozart - the liar 

All of the above has been proven as BS.  

Mozart - the liar 

All of the above has been proven as BS.    He ahs no proof of the above and dreamed it up as part of his standard simplistic attack on Erasmus.    Just as a reminder - according to Vermeulen it was Meyer that prohibited off-loads  of balls by the players.  

Fact …the Springboks offloaded less than half the amount of all their knockout opponents. Their opponents offloaded 25 times, we offloaded 8 times. Eight offloads in 3 matches!

Watching the CC it’s striking how little offloading takes place vs the European matches. In Europe the players are looking to offload on every run. Our guys are just looking to take contact..   the playing style has totally filtered down from the national team

That doesn’t mean we won’t win if we can out muscle our opponents. But it does mean when we are evenly matched, against the ABs for example, we are fighting with one less arrow in the quiver.

Yet the Springboks scored more tries and beat all the off-loading sides.    Theuy played much more effective rugby than their opponents.    .  

Mozart

Erasmus is not the coach of the CC  sides - he may give advice to the Coaches as Director of Rugby. - but he is not the coach.   In many ways the problem in SA rugby is that even the idiotic Meyer said the SA backline players do not have the ball skills top play a ball-in-hand game.    However - to a large degree  that deficiency has been cired by Erasmus.

As to kicking of balls - there is a problem.     Kicking is part of the game - but thee is a real issue and that is the effectiveness of kicking.   Effective kicking  implies that 

*     the recipient must be put under pressure and that could basically cause turnovers; and

*     kicks can be used as an attacking strategy.

In the final there were  many effective kicks   made and only three kicks did not meet that requirement  of putting the opposing recipients under pressure and one was by De Klerk,  one by Le Roux and one by Frans Steyn.    The AB's use effective kicking frequently - but in the case of Meyer and Coetzee possession handover kicks were the norm.      .              

Duplicate

Nope they didn’t beat the offloading sides…the ABs offloaded  8 times to the Boks  one time by Willie.

You were talking about the play-offs and was talking Kak as per normal - now ducking and diving is all you have to do.   None of the two AB tries came from lay-offs.   The one was the result of an open-field tackle miss by Mostert  - the other by a defensive mistake by Dlamini,    Both were long distance tries and should have been stopped through proper defense.    In the casze of the Mostert miss you blamed Du Toit for the miss initially and that was a flop contribution on nyour part as per normal. 

You really are too obvious a rugby fraud to be taken seriously anyway.     .              

Actually Lügnerin, it was not a Mostert missed tackle, it was a Stephanie missed tackle which left an Mostert a sitting duck. It's the classic Stephanie defensive maneuver. Like the mindless rush where he ran out of the line into an All Black without the ball, in no man's land. The plastics like to call this "heart" and "passion". I call it stupidity and recklessness. 

Listen dimness - the player ran straight over Mostert when he attempted to tackle him- Du Toit was at least  2 - 3 meters away guarding the next player.  Du Toit had Fuck all to do with Mostert's  missed tackle.  Just another example of how you and Mozart messed up the site with totoally false so-called match reports - it is actually total BS what you came up with as was your latest match report as well.  

You are trying to duck out of your normal BS allegations - Mozart..   I  dealt with your Bs about5 off-loading in the play-off's first.    \

After that I dealt with your second  response - ie the normal BS story of your on kicking..   I pointed oput exactly what happened  in the final as to your mad kicking allegations.   You at one stage said 90% of the function of the flyhalf is kicking the ball.   When pointed out that aimless kicking was the norm and what the difference is with Erasmus in charge  - I pointed out the eneed for effective kicking - and even explained what is meant by affective kicking.    In an effort to deal with the broader sense of kicking I referred to the AB's who spe3cialized in effective kicking - the norm Erasmus achieved for the Springboks - not the BS that Meyer and Coetzee thrived on .

Simple - but true -m you are trying to get away from the BS you specialize in.         .   .   .        .   

Meyer's Boks had more metres gained, more offloads, more defenders beaten, more passes and a greater percentage of the tries scored in the RC - which means they were more in line with trends in the game; Josè's Boks have regressed in every category. A hallmark of the Josè tenure is to kick away any slow or slowish ball, even if you're just outside the opposition 22 with a numerical advantage! That's unheard of for any Bok side prior to the Josè reign. But, that's not to be a unexpected, as no Josè team has ever succeeded as an attacking unit. And as we saw in the WC, when the team tried to open up, errors abounded, even against minnows. It's bulk or bust. Plain and simple. 

Meyer's Boks were of the biggest losers in Springbok rugby  ever - and that was whaat made him a disaster as a coach. - both of the Springboks and of Stade Francais.     Not worth while to comment aboutr the World Coach of the Year - the Team of the Year  and the Player of the Year - when BS is all you have to offer.