Captain49,914 posts
28 Jul 2013, 02:31
#41
28 Jul 2013, 02:31#41
I dont have to defend the Morne or Alberts they will be in the Bok team.
Springbok team for Tri-Nations
Started by clevermike58 REPLIES1,454 VIEWS· 25 Jul 2013, 11:55
Coach57,555 posts
28 Jul 2013, 18:34
#42
28 Jul 2013, 18:34#42
Mozzrt
Syre they will be in the team but that is exactly the reason for under-performance by the Springboks and losses in crucial tests. Passengers like Steyn, Alberts and Kruger brings nothing to thegame and that was clear from their test performances of last year.
MORNE STEYN
The player who missed nearly 60% of his kicks at goal last year - whose so-called strategic kicks were nothing but methods to hand over possession to the opposition - who has no idea about attacking backline play and contributed to the exact opposite. Last year in Super 15 he was very good - but petered out badly and was poor in the last few games in Super 15. Exactly the same happened this year. He is totally predictable and easily read by the opposition. As he is our flyalf - so long you can expect virtually nothing from the backline.
WILLEM ALBETS
The reputed strong ball carrier who makes according to you bone crushing tackles. What happened last year is exactly opposite to the praise singing advertised all over the show. Last year he never managed to exceed 3 meters in the so-called strong ball carrying scenario -his speed is too slow to allow for him carrying balls in more open play - he plays a mindless game that is not good for a loosie - he makes good tackles - but never the bone crushing type where a player is tackled back or lose possession of the ball in tackle situations, but he also miss tackles because of low mobility (2 examples in the recent Samoa test)/ Lack of adequate mobility reduces his contribution to forward play by the Springboks - he contributes virtually zero to line out play. In essence he is not good enough to play international rugby.
. All the above is statistically proven and als evident on the field of play.
Kruger
Big and strong physically - but his contribution to the team does not match up with his physical side - no Grunt at all.
You apparently suggest that since Kruger has no grunt - he must nonetheless stay in the team and the lack of grunt could be off-set by the so-called grunt of Alberts - who statistically also have no real grunt
I could understand your argument if the three players involved proof that they do belong and is irreplaceable. But they are replaceable - there are many youngsters coming through who are much better players in all spheres of the game than they are.
Captain30,741 posts
28 Jul 2013, 22:24
#43
28 Jul 2013, 22:24#43
Yeah Shark there were a few games where Morne was the best 10 of the week and he made my Bokbarometer side of the week, but I would never select him for the Boks.
Lambie would always be my choice in the absence of Goosen.
Moz, sorry but I have to disagree on the Taute take, missing touch by a 13 with plenty of work to be done by the opposition after receiving the kick does not constitute fault on the part of Taute alone. Had tackles been made after fielding that kick, no try would have been scored.
Taute missed a great step by Dagg, something Dagg does all the time as he is one of the worlds best. That miss does not define Taute, much like Lambie slapping Schalk does not define Schalk as a defender.
As for the third one, well that is simply incorrect for Jean just a few weeks ago committed to the rush out against the Scots and failed to snuff the attack, leading to the Scots try.
Bottom line is, Taute has never had an issue with his defence and therefore to say he lost the test for us is simply not true. His miss on Dagg was his only real negative, but after all it was Dagg.
Taute is a quality young player who still has plenty to offer Bok rugby. He is up there with Serfontein, JJ, Goosen and Lambie.
Captain30,741 posts
28 Jul 2013, 22:36
#44
28 Jul 2013, 22:36#44
Oimatey my issue with Meyer is not so much who he brings in - we can credit him with the selections of Willie, JJ, Serfontein, Goosen, Etzebeth, Coetzee, Kolisi and Botha........these are obvious selections that any coach would or should have made.
My issue with Meyer as opposed to Hansen, is that Hansen retains quality experienced players unlike Meyer who continues to invest in the likes of Kirchner, de Jongh, Morne, Pienaar, Juandre Kruger and Spies........but worse than that brings in the likes of Guthro Steenkamp, CJ v/d Linde, Heinke v/d Merwe, Franco v/d Merwe and at one point it was nearly Marco Wentzel.
Herein lies the difference and the very reason Meyer ended the year on 67%, he selects the wrong players and then snubs a class act like Brussouw, which would equate with Hansen snubbing Richie.......Hansen would not be so stupid.
Meyers problem is that he is relying on the wrong experienced players, while doing a good job of bringing in the right youngsters. Sadly his kick and chase tactic is also flawed, but thats another debate.
Pro6,277 posts
28 Jul 2013, 23:06
#45
28 Jul 2013, 23:06#45
@saffex,
meyer finished the year on 58.3%, 7 wins from 12 games, but he is currently on 66.7% after the june tests.
i have doubts about meyers selecting players had injury not been issue, not everywhere of course, but if jp and taute were available in june, would willie have even got a run???
same goes with frans steyn and serfontein and jj.
if u go by the 2012 EOYT, theres no way meyer would have played them over others.
Captain30,741 posts
29 Jul 2013, 15:40
#46
29 Jul 2013, 15:40#46
Sas, yeah that makes Meyer even worse than I first thought. 58% is pathetic.
The man is clearly a conservative coach with a conservative game plan - we are going nowhere with this man. Come the Championship, we will see Kirchner at 15, Basson on the wing, Jean at centre, Morne at 10 and Pienaar at 9 - heaven help us!!
Club Pro201 posts
29 Jul 2013, 15:55
#47
29 Jul 2013, 15:55#47
Dave stop being pedantic mate. the boks beat everybody last year but new zaealand won a clean sweep up north (yeah like that justhappens all the time for saffers) ends 2nd in the rc and ends 2nd in the irb rankings. you just overshoot your point way too far!!! aand hellooo, gurthro saved the bok scrum which would have totally cocked up the EOYT! remember beast and jannie together cost you guys two tests by getting smashed in the scrums.
what ive seen from meyer is a gradual building from the pack to the backs, he is slowly evolving the team which is obvious if you want to see whats going on. the contact areas have improved alot, ball retention and attacking opposition on defence is a big few steps up from anything since jake but he cant go crazy because there arent many superstars around. you guys have good props in general play but no scrummagers, you guys are not strong in the loosies right now, the locks need time to develop, the centres are very poor right now too. he is being logical and putting pieces in place after pieter failed to develop the team over 4 years. like i said dave drop the emotion and just calm the hell down! meyer has done a good job and has taken the boks forward. oh and by the way the real disasters for the boks were not morne and pienaar, but lambie, goosen, taute, coetzee, spies, beast, jannie, bismarck (but had massive first 40 in second England test), alberts, louw, jean. these guys have made the most costly mistakes and soon willie will join them and after the rc you guys will all say it was obvious that willie was garbage and how stupid meyer was for trying to play headless chook rugby.
Pro9,905 posts
29 Jul 2013, 16:26
#48
29 Jul 2013, 16:26#48
Hey Stupid ... please take note of what Ihihaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahaaaaaa is saying.
I know you'll agree with this idiot cause he sounds just like you.
99% of his posts are ignorant (like yours) ... he doesn't have his facts straight (like you) ... seems to see something that doesn't exist (like you) and walks around in a dazed stupor probably dribbling on his chin (like you)
My recommendation is that you put this chump on your xmas card list.
You guys will get along famously ... !!!
The two stooges!!!! Add ol Beano to the mix and VOILA!!!!!!!!
Captain49,914 posts
30 Jul 2013, 21:50
#49
30 Jul 2013, 21:50#49
Look at Basson in your post to open the string ....OOOOOM Maaik. If you are going to lie and continue to insist you never picked him....I suggest you edit your post.....that way you wont have the outward appearance of being a fool, while you are lying. Just trying to be helpful OOMpie.
Coach57,555 posts
30 Jul 2013, 22:37
#50
30 Jul 2013, 22:37#50
Mozart
This was a much earlier post than the one where I discussed the statement by Jean de Villiers that performance is the key that impact on selections. You never commented on that one - since your favoured players are standard under-achievers performance-wise.
At one stage this past week where I wrote about Mvovo - you said Basson is good under high balls - butt he is poor in defence. You went waaaa-haha and said Mvovo is poor in both high ball takes and defence. I can clearly remember that one.
Basson did reasonably well in the June tests - but lost the plot completely subsequently - so I changed my mind about that one. Unlke ypou I change my mind in cases of under-performance - witness your constant support for the rubbishy De Jongh.
Pro1,044 posts
30 Jul 2013, 23:59
#51
30 Jul 2013, 23:59#51
Did you change you mind about Basson from the 25th of July when you started this thread selecting Basson in your team till today? I think you're being a shade 2 faced here Mike.
Pro2,471 posts
31 Jul 2013, 00:31
#52
31 Jul 2013, 00:31#52
I'm too busy laughing at Ihi... He can't tell between a good performance by a player to a poor one! Guthrio being the good performer and Goosen being the poor, in his eyes...
Captain49,914 posts
31 Jul 2013, 00:37
#53
31 Jul 2013, 00:37#53
Guthro edged Old King Cole in the Pom test.....perhaps not fully fit, but still able to handle himself in the scrums. Goosen had a brilliant test against Oz and a mare against NZ. I guess that means on balance he was average.
Captain30,741 posts
31 Jul 2013, 00:45
#54
31 Jul 2013, 00:45#54
Sorry Moz, Steenkamp never came close to edging Cole and Goosen played with an injury against NZ, the lad was limping from the start, go check the tape.
He picked up that injury in his brilliant test against Oz the week before. Meyer should not have played him against NZ, but his form saw Meyer selecting and injured player - this is a fact.
Captain49,914 posts
31 Jul 2013, 01:37
#55
31 Jul 2013, 01:37#55
This is what the Telegraph said:
-
"Gurthro Steenkamp: Not the physical presence in defence we are accustomed to. Enjoyed his tussle with Cole at scrum-time. 6 "
-
Hard to see how he could have enjoyed it if he wasn't at least at parity. Which in itself was a miracle because Jannie was in deep trouble against the Corb ....again I quote the Telegraph:
-
"Jannie du Plessis: Found Corbisiero very difficult to counter. Demonstrated that the Boks are not a nation of great scrummagers. 4 "
-
I know Steenkamp looked a bit lardy, but why all the animosity towards a player that I think you formerly rated above the Beast. I don't get it.
Captain30,741 posts
31 Jul 2013, 02:12
#56
31 Jul 2013, 02:12#56
Moz no animosity at all, he is just a player long past his prime and was in poor physical condition at the time he was selected. Hell he had played all year off the bench for a French club when he was selected. His and CJ's selections were just poor and sent the wrong message to the young props back home.
I will never condone the selection of players past their prime - Meyer showed his conservative side with those selections.
In his day, many days ago Guthro and CJ were the best props we had in SA............selecting them last year was just plain stupidity and it showed in our dismal performances on the EOYT. Yes we won but man we were poor
Captain49,914 posts
31 Jul 2013, 02:34
#57
31 Jul 2013, 02:34#57
I saw it as a patch, which Bok coaches have used before....eg the use of BJ back in 09. Introducing a youngster like Kitshoff could have set back his career.....the NH is not the place to blood new props, in my view.
Coach57,555 posts
31 Jul 2013, 08:37
#58
31 Jul 2013, 08:37#58
Mozart
There is no place on earth where you would say that new players should be "blooded". You constantly oppose new players being selected and want to retain even duds in the team. I can clearly remember that last year you made postings where you queried Etzebeth's performances as being inadequate to qualify for selection. That being only one example. When Bakkies Botha's name came up before the test against the All Blacks - you went on the rampage again and again you were prepared to show Etzebeth the door - if only Botha could be selected.
In the EOYT you were in favour of the dud selections like CJ van der Linde - who failed to make the starting line-up of the Lions and also Steenkamp - who was as Saffex said on the bench for Toulouse. When van der Linde kept on being disgracefully poor - penalized consistently for poor scrumming - you found excuses for that one. You would rather have Van der Linde in the team than a player like Malherbe. I must admit it was at tighthead where the scrums collapsed constantly and where the SA props were especially poor - but ay loosehead it was also in disarray. Steenkamp scrummed well in the Scotland test for 15 minutes and then collapsed in a heap. In the England test he lasted slightly longer - with the same inevitable result.
In th case of Pieter-Steph du Toit you went ballistic when he came on from the bench for the Sharks and said he was over-active and would not last through a match. After his first full game - that one was turned on his head and you started off with a debate while Kruger should be on the field of play for the Springboks because he was calling line-outs and organise the defence when the ball is kicked in - virtually taking over the role of he vice-captain in the latter respect.
I can name any number of players - like the poor De Jongh - where you went lyrical about performances - and refused to see any deficiencies in performances. When the latter went AWOL at Twickenham the excuse was that he did not make any mistakes - obviously so - a player that did nothing in the whole game - would not make mistakes.
You can name any under-performer in the team and you would find all-out support and a flood of excuses and inventions as to why that player did so well. The inventions became obvious even recently when you made hilarious comments about how De Jongh dragged along Engelbrecht for five meters over the advantage line every time he was tackled. When that was disproved by quoting statistics the gyrations in countering that one was better than any snake could achieve.
So when must a player be replaced? De Villiers said a player must perform and must be dropped if he under-performs - but Mozart apparently is opposed to that. The under-performances are ignored - and examples of good plays are invented where the plays were defective or bog-ordinary.
When queried you refer to how good the player was in 2007 or 2009 as the reasons why the player should still be in the team in 2013. The only time you will accept the replacement of a player - is when a player himself decides to stop playing rugby altogether. If th player decides to quite test rugby and take up contracts to play for clubs in foreign countries - you still keep on harping about why he should be in the team.
Mozart - do you never realize that sub-par performances by many of the players you keep on punting is the reason for the poor performances of the Springboks in recent years. It was not the younger and newer players that caused havoc in performance - it was the senior players that caused mayhem as a result of poor performances. When Goosen missed two kicks at goal in the test against the Wallabies he was severely criticized - but not a whisper of criticism in the case of the oodles of goal kicks missed by Morne Steyn.
I would rather support younger players who make mistakes early in their career - because they have time on their hands to rectify those - than has-beens or never has-beens who is way past their prime and under-performed constantly. You can have them in the side - but then accept crunch matches in competitions will never be won by the Springboks.
Captain18,570 posts
31 Jul 2013, 09:14
#59
31 Jul 2013, 09:14#59
I agree that the Boks are developing some good players - that’s for sure. I hope this year the games are in the old tradition of "give no quarter". All Blacks are in transition also so it will be good to see this year's version of the 100 year war.
Sorry to say though mates, we kiwis have been hearing about the Boks re-building for a long time now. Do you think this is the year that you assert Bok supremacy?
— END OF THREAD —
