MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
09 Mar 2014, 22:41#1
When Pita Ahki ripped past JJ through the outside gap it completed another dismal defensive display by the former Bok centre. He made 7 of 10 tackles...one on Luatua when the big AB was trying to avoid touch. And his 7 successful tackles were again a series of hang on efforts waiting for help. I can't remember when last I saw him cleanly put his man on the deck inviting the turnover.
So I was amazed to hear Joel opine that in spite of getting no chances ( a tired old excuse) he had made a dozen or more crucial tackles. What rubbish our commentators produce.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
09 Mar 2014, 23:04#3
Dear boy I would never be your guest.....who would want to share a hovel with an imbecile?
FOForeverArizona
Club Pro580 posts
FOForeverArizonaClub Pro580 posts
09 Mar 2014, 23:11#4
What a pathetic come back!!!Piss off fag boy and come back with something that has substance.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
09 Mar 2014, 23:18#5
You have me confused with somebody who wants to correspond with a half-wit.
FOForeverArizona
Club Pro580 posts
FOForeverArizonaClub Pro580 posts
09 Mar 2014, 23:22#6
More fag boy comebacks!!!
KEKeaganzulusmith
Club Pro175 posts
KEKeaganzulusmithClub Pro175 posts
10 Mar 2014, 01:05#7
Forever if your going to have a go at someone and be a what can we say a cunt! then at least back your side up with facts or time based events!
Mo personally i believe that jj played the best game of his super 15 this year against the blues this weekend he had a distant game with ball in hand and would of likely but basson through for the corner if the latter had stayed on the outside instead of cutting in looking for the switch. As you know mo im not a stats guy so i dont really look at tackles missed and how many he made, i look at in game events that he directly pressured and as you said he did get beat on the outside which should never happen but he also did make some good tackles he put steven out in touch which was good regardless of him getting some help he wrapped the ball up preventing the off load. He had his up and his down this year but this performance was one of the ups for me
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Mar 2014, 02:29#8
I had a good hard look at Engelbrecht over the last four games and will use the ESPB stats to support my reading of the issues involved:-
Attacking play
Engelbrecht thus far thus year handled the balls on the following basis:-
Balls handled : 28Balls passed : 5Balls carried : 23Meters gained : 84 metersAverage : 3,65 meters per carryLine breaks : 1Defenders beaten : 2Ball losses : 5Penalties : 3
That is by far not really the type of performance one would expect from a Springbok center. His best attacking game was his last game - when he made 40 meters from 7 carries and made 1 line break beating 1 defender - but 2 of the 3 penalties given away was in that game too.
Defence
This always was a problem raised by many about Engelbrecht in the past:-
Tackles made : 27Tackles missed : 4Missed ratio : 12,9%
This would appear to be ab acceptable scenario - but the problem is again what happened this past Saturday. He missed 3 of the 10 attempted tackles - putting a serious question mark over his overall performance.
Summary
In essence Engelbrecht DID NOT MAKE A FAVOURABLE IMPRESSION in respect of attacking play with a sign of improvement in his last game.
Up to his last game his DEFENSE was EXCELLENT, but in his last fame it was desperately poor.
In essence one really expect much more from him as a Springbok.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
10 Mar 2014, 02:59#9
This is your problem Oom. You rate a tackle by Alberts who knocks a player flat and enables the turnover as the same as a JJ tackle, where he hangs on desperately until help comes. Mostly because that's all the stats tell you.
JJs defence has never been excellent this S15. It's a desperate affair...and the outside gap tackle he missed on Saturday is much more destructive than the more usual inside step, into the cover, miss.
But if you want to do some real research, here's an assignment for you....tell us how many of JJs tackles resulted in the opponent hitting the deck inside 2 metres of where contact was made....I'd guess very few.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Mar 2014, 06:38#10
Mozart
Don't invent things again. I said that Engelbrecg's las game should shockingly poor defence - the rest of the games his defense was acceptable.
You statement as to poor defense in the latest game was supported by me. However - you added a twist and that reminded me of a lie you previously peddled on this site about how De Jongh dragged Engelbrecht 5 meters every time a tackle was made. That one was proven to be an outright lie and you kept quiet for a while and now started it again in a different environment to prove what?
You added a joke about Alberts as well. 75% of the time he makes bog-ordinary tackles - the other 25% he missed - and never once tacked a player during the past two years where a turnover resulted from a tackle he made. Nice invention that one - just stick to the truth and it will be OK. Besides we know your logic - the more tackles a player missed the better he defends because his tackling technique is SO STRONG, And Alberts missed plenty tackles and in some cases I have seen he is dragged along clinging to a player's jersey for dear life. . A standard Alberts' miss - Read in the Ellis Park test - look at that one again and then tell me he missed the tackle because the technique he was using was SO GOOD/STRONG!!!!!
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Mar 2014, 06:38#11
Mozart
Don't invent things again. I said that Engelbrecg's las game should shockingly poor defence - the rest of the games his defense was acceptable.
You statement as to poor defense in the latest game was supported by me. However - you added a twist and that reminded me of a lie you previously peddled on this site about how De Jongh dragged Engelbrecht 5 meters every time a tackle was made. That one was proven to be an outright lie and you kept quiet for a while and now started it again in a different environment to prove what?
You added a joke about Alberts as well. 75% of the time he makes bog-ordinary tackles - the other 25% he missed - and never once tacked a player during the past two years where a turnover resulted from a tackle he made. Nice invention that one - just stick to the truth and it will be OK. Besides we know your logic - the more tackles a player missed the better he defends because his tackling technique is SO STRONG, And Alberts missed plenty tackles and in some cases I have seen he is dragged along clinging to a player's jersey for dear life. . A standard Alberts' miss - Read in the Ellis Park test - look at that one again and then tell me he missed the tackle because the technique he was using was SO GOOD/STRONG!!!!!
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Mar 2014, 07:31#13
Mozart
I tried to go into that reference you gave and it came back - BAD REQUEST.
I will promise you one thing - I will apologize -provided you apologize for the outright lie you peddled about Goosen.
STSun-Tzu
Club Pro713 posts
10 Mar 2014, 12:08#15
"Oh dear OOM....Alberts never made one tackle in the last two years where
a turnover resulted? Try the tackle that set up the Jordaan try on
Saturday. Here's the clip.....I'll assume you are too small to
apologize, but really man, your lies are just bloody awful:"
Classic!! Here's a working link though:
http://www.superxv.com/video/sharks-v-lions-rd4-2014-super-rugby-video-highlights/sharks-v-lions-rd4-2014-super-rugby-video-highlights-video_8f876d0ae.html
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Mar 2014, 14:29#16
Dim Tzu
I went to watch the video - thanks for the link. That was not a particularly strong tackle - the player went forward in the tackle by at least one meter. He did not loose possession because of the strong tackle at all. The loss of the balls stemmed from the fact that the tackled played tried to push the ball backwards to be recovered by the Lions - who did not protect the ball and the ball was recovered by Kankowski from the side of the tackled player - not in front of him. The movement went further from there.
When will you and Mozart - the lying village idiots ever learn? Mozart was shouting and then came up with a bog-ordinary tackle as an example of where a tackle by useless Alberts resulted in a turnover in possession. The tackle was not strong - the ball was not lost as a result - the fault was on the Lions side that they did not protect the ball in a tackle situation.
Just an aside - a strong tackle is where a player spill or lose possession of the ball in a tackle and where a player is tackled back. Nothing of the sort happened here.
- but th ball was recovered by Kanskowski and not one of the Lions players - Rather the loss of th aball was ovccassioned by the tackled player made a mistake the player went forward in the tackle
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Mar 2014, 18:07#19
Mozart
Not shameless - but real time evaluation not your regular bullshit. You went on about the strong tackles of Alberts and the one you mentioned was anything but strong. Have you any idea what a strong tackle means? Obviously not. The way you were carrying on I thought the tackled player lost possession of the ball as a result of the tackle - as it turns out Kankowski got hold of the ball because of deficient ball protection by the Lions.
O yes - and Steyn was not there to fuck up the move as well.
STSun-Tzu
Club Pro713 posts
10 Mar 2014, 18:53#20
Real time evaluation? You know better then that Michael, stick to the stats for that is where you cannot be faulted
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Mar 2014, 23:11#22
Mozart
Standard distortion by you - Let me quote you on that one:-
"This is your problem Oom. You rate a tackle by Alberts who knocks a player flat and enables the turnover as the same as a JJ tackle, where he hangs on desperately until help comes. Mostly because that's all the stats tell you"
I then said that I have not seen a tackle knocking a player flat and causing a turnover in two years from Alberts. You then came up with the example where Alberts did make a bog-ordinary tackle on a player - the player going forward in the tackle - NOT KNOCKED FLAT, The player then tried to place the ball for his side to recover it - but there was no tackle ball protection by the Lions and Kankowbsji recovered the ball and the try followed.
What you can't get it into your prejudiced skull is not the bog -ordinary tackle made that caused the turnover - it was the lack of ball protection by the Lions that resulted in the problem for the Lions. That tackle DID NOT "KNOCKED THE PLAYER OVER - IT WAS A TACKLE WHERE THE PLAYER WENT ANOTHER METER FORWARD BEFORE HE ACTUALLY CAME DOWN,
Your own deluded description of what Alberts tackles entail is what is at stake here - not the bog-ordinary tackle Alberts in fact put in in the relevant case you quoted.
HOWEVER - I DON'T THINK AS A MASTER OF DISTORTION YOU WOULD ADMIT THE ABOVE.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
10 Mar 2014, 23:11#23
Mozart
Standard distortion by you - Let me quote you on that one:-
"This is your problem Oom. You rate a tackle by Alberts who knocks a player flat and enables the turnover as the same as a JJ tackle, where he hangs on desperately until help comes. Mostly because that's all the stats tell you"
I then said that I have not seen a tackle knocking a player flat and causing a turnover in two years from Alberts. You then came up with the example where Alberts did make a bog-ordinary tackle on a player - the player going forward in the tackle - NOT KNOCKED FLAT, The player then tried to place the ball for his side to recover it - but there was no tackle ball protection by the Lions and Kankowbsji recovered the ball and the try followed.
What you can't get it into your prejudiced skull is not the bog -ordinary tackle made that caused the turnover - it was the lack of ball protection by the Lions that resulted in the problem for the Lions. That tackle DID NOT "KNOCKED THE PLAYER OVER - IT WAS A TACKLE WHERE THE PLAYER WENT ANOTHER METER FORWARD BEFORE HE ACTUALLY CAME DOWN,
Your own deluded description of what Alberts tackles entail is what is at stake here - not the bog-ordinary tackle Alberts in fact put in in the relevant case you quoted.
HOWEVER - I DON'T THINK AS A MASTER OF DISTORTION YOU WOULD ADMIT THE ABOVE.
SASaffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SASaffolk Captain30,741 posts
11 Mar 2014, 01:31#25
Well that makes no sense for the first time I checked the stats, they had JJ with 11 tackles and 1 miss......it also had him gaining 32m now its 40m and it also had 1 defender beaten and 0 clean breaks......now its 1 clean break as well
These lads seems a little confused, having watched the game again I can see why they missed the clean break.....and he certainly beat 2 defenders stepping Luatua and running through their 12.
His only miss was on that little guy with the goose step.......no big deal at all.
JJ's defence has been one of the best of all the SA backs this S15......better than Jean's just as it was in the RC
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
11 Mar 2014, 01:41#26
He doesn't tackle...he clings. Ideal for offloading....death for the turnover.
SASaffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SASaffolk Captain30,741 posts
11 Mar 2014, 01:47#27
Tell Luatua that.....if he only clings, the attacking player would not go to ground......I am yet to see the offload......for you wont, as he executes the smother tackle......which is exactly what you do in traffic.......you only go low in openfield.......JJ never had to execute an openfield tackle
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
11 Mar 2014, 01:57#28
Dave believe what makes you happy....I doubt Latua even noticed JJ clinging on.
SASaffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SASaffolk Captain30,741 posts
11 Mar 2014, 02:12#29
Yeah I am sure he did not when he was smashed into touch in minute 70 with plenty of force
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
11 Mar 2014, 02:27#30
Saffex
Don't worry - there is according to Mozart a difference between Engelbrecht and Alberts "ckinging" . In the case of Alberts "clinging" on is acceptable - in the case of Engelbrecht it is not.
Mozart in the case of Alberts describe clinging on as "knocked down". His allegations have no real meaning and is dismal concoctions to discredit players he does not like. It is nothing knew - it is the same as -
* his pathetic invention of the phrase process tackling to discredit really good defenders;
* his proven lies about De Jongh dragging Engelbrecht 5 meters every time Engelbrecht tackled De Jongh;
* his constant discrediting of player he does not like by quoting stats if he thinks the stats reflect negatively on a player - while ignoring unfavourable stats of the players he supports;
* His continuous lies that the reason for Goosen being subbed in games is injury.
I would take his allegations not with a pinch of salt - bags of salt would be insufficient to cover up Mozart's bullshit and lies.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
11 Mar 2014, 02:41#31
Mozart
Do you ever stop being talking bullshit:-
"Poor old Tecklenberg never knew what hit him. Once Alberts smashed into him he was on the deck...not a half metre forward, no time for the Lions to protect the ball....smashed. And an easy turnover."
All that while Alberts is layed on the grass behind Tecklenberg clinging for dear life onto the legs. Smashed - you often distort things - but that takes it to a new level. Do you never get tired of writing utter bullshit?
