Team for Ireland named

Springbok team:

15 Zane Kirchner Vodacom Blue Bulls 21

14 JP Pietersen The Sharks 45

13 Jaco Taute MTN Golden Lions 2

12 Jean de Villiers (captain) DHL Western Province 81

11 Francois Hougaard Vodacom Blue Bulls 24

10 Pat Lambie The Sharks 17

9 Ruan Pienaar Ulster, N-Ireland 60

8 Duane Vermeulen DHL Western Province 4

7 Willem Alberts The Sharks 17

6 Francois Louw Bath, England 14

5 Juandré Kruger Vodacom Blue Bulls 5

4 Eben Etzebeth DHL Western Province 8

3 Jannie du Plessis The Sharks 39

2 Adriaan Strauss (vice-captain) Toyota FS Cheetahs 18

1 Tendai Mtawarira The Sharks 41

Replacements

16 Schalk Brits Saracens, England 3

17 CJ van der Linde MTN Golden Lions 73

18 Pat Cilliers MTN Golden Lions 4

19 Flip van der Merwe Vodacom Blue Bulls 20

20 Marcell Coetzee The Sharks 9

21 Morné Steyn Vodacom Blue Bulls 41

22 Juan de Jongh DHL Western Province 12

23 Lwazi Mvovo The Sharks 7

Much as I expected - Meyer has a serious problem with the backline - but then he brought it onto himself.   There are some comments to be made in regards to the team;-

  *   The defensive nightmare is back with a vengeance.   Taute and Hougaard at 11 and 14 are going to be a repeat of the two players that caused the defensive nightmare situation at Soweto.   Will it be better this time around?

  *    Aside from his defence qualifications, De Jongh is so poor that even Meyer - despite the fact that Taute was selected as full back in the squad - thinks that Taute is a better selection and against expectations De Jongh is not in the starting line up, but on the bench.   That despite the fact that Taute and Hougaard was a sieve in the Soweto test.

  *    I think Meyer is getting wiser about the Jantjies issue - especially after the Soweto fiasco.   Not even on the bench this time around and I originally thought that Morne Steyn would be on the bench and not Jantjies.  Personally I think Meyer would have preferred to start with Steyn - but that would have caused a massive PR problem.  

  *     I think Steyn is on th bench to cover the 12 situation as well - there is a danger that De Villiers would be injured again and Meyer has no other cover for 12.   Bad news that one - but also the result of an original flawed selection.

  *     I am somewhat surprised by the selection of Kruger ahead of Van der Merwe  as lock - this despite his poor line out record and deficencies as to other aspects of the game.

  *     Despite all the noise about the props - Meyer stuck to two mediocre bench  players in the form of Cilliers and Van der Linde.   Watch out for the scrummaging disaster when those two come on.

I think that the team has a 50:50 chance of winning.  If the Irish exploit the defective backline of the Springboks - the odds in their favour will increase drastically. 

so we have a 15 playing out of position 2 players under a injury cloud and offcourse mister roboto himself zane kirchner

well at least we have a opensider playing that a huge bonus :)

The centre combination of JDV and Taute is not effective, Taute should be at fullback not Kirchner. De Jongh has progressed to higher level and definitely deserves to be at outside centre. Im sure the majority of the fans want De Jongh to be there not on the bench. Hougaard defence is poor i don't think he is the answer on the wing, Lwazi Mvovo should be there. Come on! 

Schalk Brits is one of the best players in the premiership, his form is outstanding certainly better than Strauss, why is he on the reserves? 

 

Lucid-

Mvovo Really?

I won't even have him in the Squad to be honest but it's probably personal opiion.

Brits I won't start, I will use him off the bench as heyneke is suggesting here, as he will have a tremendious impact in the second half when the other guys legs are tired.

Meyer makes you happy,  then he makes you sad.

From this touring side I would have liked to see the following team

Note that I dont rate all these players, but Im only taking the players on Tour into consideration

15.Taute

14.JP

13.JDJ (Not a fan, but give him a shot, not a liability)

12.JDV

11.Hougaard

10.Lambie

9.Pienaar

8.Vermeulen

7.Alberts

6.Flouw

5.Kruger(cant start with 2 enforcers, someone has to call the lineouts)

4.Ebzebeth

3.Jannie

2.Strauss

1.Beast

16.Britz( again, who else? Maybe playing in the NH improved his scrumming and lineout throws as it was horrible when he played in SA)

17.Gurthro Steenkamp

18.Pat Cilliers

19.Flip

20.Coetzee

21.Jantjies

22.Mvovo

23.Kirchner(only other 15 on tour)

Ek
In regards to Brits if we use him off the bench it could be too late at that period of time, i've been convinced that in the past Meyer has been too slow on the reserves, lets hope he replaces these players at the right time needed.

Whats wrong with Mvovo?

What is wrong with Mvovo, hmmm lets  seee. Nothing special.

Personally, I don't really know, just not my cup of tea, I don't see what everyone sees in him. To me is is good but not a test player, on the same level as a Gerhard vd Heever. I'd rather have Mapoe, more versatile and tactically astute or Aplon.

but as I say some you like and some you don't You guys seem to like the player, i think we have better. No need for a great explanation.

mvovo can perform his only downfall is that he is not given quick ball in space to work with.

Oh for crying out bloody loud Mike, get a bloody grip. Taute missed one big tackle on Dagg, the week before against Oz, he was fantastic defensively as he has been all S15 and now all of a sudden you have Taute down as a liability in defence - get a grip man.

Schalk missed Lambie in that CC game last year, does that make Schalk a poor defender.

Hell Hougaard is one of our best defenders, no questions asked - I am getting a little sick and tired of your anti Hougaard, its abouts as pathetic as Moz's anti Fourie. Hougaard is one of SA's best players by some distance. Only JP has more clout than him

Dave

You are probably irked by the fact that  I stated the truth about two of your favourite players - between Hougaard and Taute they gave away 4 tries in 2 tests - one against the Wallabies and 3 against the All Blacks.  Sieve descroption fully justified.

You are quiet about the rest of my comments - whay do uou really think about the rest?

Nope Mike only a complete idiot would label Taute and Hougaard as poor defenders and bullshit, Taute missed one tackle that led to a try - FACT

I don't recall Hougaard missing a tackle to let in a try and even if he did, so what it happens - I am just not then stupid enough to call him a poor defender or raise concerns about his defence, for everyone with a little rugby brain will tell you that one of Hougaards strengths is his defence

Saffex

Go and watch the games again and if you look even superficially you wont miss the tries.   Hougaard missed the tackle  on Beale  in the Wallaby test - leading to the sccore by Harris.   Taute missed two tackles that let to All Black tries and Hougaard one.   That makes 4 - if I can still count.   28 Points in all - sieve is the correct word.  

Bullshit Taute only missed one tackle that led to a try and as for Hougaard as I said only a complete and utter idiot would question his defensive abilities

Saffex

I will leave it to Mozart to correct you on this one - he will get the tackle stats and publish same for your info.  Let me just add - Hougaard's defence was clueless and hopeless  while he played on the wing - so what will suddenly change that? 

So Mike, would you conclude that Hougaard is a poor defender - just a simple yes or no will do?

I dont need Moz's view on anything - if I say its green, he will say its blue!!

Saffex

Easy answer - good defender  as a scrummie

Hopelessly poor defender in last two tests on the wing.   

Unfortunately the rest of his scrummie play went   AWOL - hence his removal from that position.

Oh so while he is out on the wing he loses the ability to tackle??????

Actually Mike the Swami is right on this one....Taute only missed one tackle. More to the point he failed to bring up the defensive line at 13 waiting for the ABs to run onto him parked 5 metres behind the advantage line. That caused the Smith try.  He doesn't have the software. Whether his outside gap miss on Dagg was a one off, or a pattern will emerge in due course.

Hougaard has always been a fierce tackler. I have no problem with him on the wing....especially when the alternatives are so unproven. It's at scrummie that the deficiencies are apparent.

Thanks Moz - while I disagree on your take on Taute's software, he proved he had that against Oz and in the S15 all year.

I also disagree re Hougaard at 9, it was never an issue a year ago and the years preceding that - why should it be one now. Poor man management by Meyer has Hougaard wasted on the wing.

Mozart

I stand corrected about the second defensive lapse and I accept that he did not even try to defend in that case - is that not even worse than actually missing a tackle????????

There is defiinitive proof about Hougaard's defensive flops = so leave that one as coorect. 

So Mike, would you conclude that Taute and Hougaard are poor defenders

Saffex

They were not really shining stars in the two games mentioned.   We'll see what happens on Saturday

mvovo can perform his only downfall is that he is not given quick ball in space to work with.

Therefore he is only a finnisher. I like my wings to have a bit more than that:) Well international Wings that is. Finnishers are fine for CC and SuperRugby.

Safesex...

Mind if i ask you a question:

Please list Tautes strong and weak points as a 13.

I agree 100% that he is a fabulous fullback, but im not convinced having him at 13 is good for his career.

I know he is big and fast, but I worry about his passing and lateral vision.

He kinda reminds me a lot of the Old Aussie legend Chris Latham ... amazing with ball in hand and good on defence... just didnt have the vision to make a great 13! But has the natural ability to make it at 15.

Lets hope we will have our own Chris Latham! HE was awesome to watch! Pity he was a Wallaby.

Taute as you say is big and fast, so that is a bonus for a start. He also always looks to be in the action, which was a weakness of Fourie who at times went awol.

Taute is a well balanced runner, who looks to beat his man with a step or swerve, this comes from all that time at 15, where the straight route never bears fruit. Taute's passing is fine and certainly good enough for a 13, where passing is not as important as 10 and 12. The fact that Taute has played many games at 12, tells me the coaches have enough confidence in his hands.

I like the way Taute attacks the defences at 13, much like JJ Engelbrecht showed us he could do earlier in the year. If I was Bok coach, I'd be looking at these 2 as my options at 13, with the likes of Pat Howard and Jordaan pushing as well. Add JP du Plessis to that list.

Taute is good at 15 and 13, but I think we need him at 13, as Lambie needs to move to 15 when Goosen returns. I dont see the lack of lateral vision you mention. Taute needs to settle in one position, I would play him at 13

At the moment it looks like our two future flyhalves will be Goosen and Lambie and the fullbacks Taute and Kirchner.

Lambie to me is a flyhalf NOT a fullback. You have to ulilise that priceless asset - a rugby brain - and that is best utilised at flyhalf.  Next tier flyhalves are Jantjies and Cat. Nothing is cast in stone of course.