The AAs nobble vs Willem Alberts

 Alberts definitely not done yet. Bruiser of note. Question is, does the Boks need 2 of them? We have Thor, would Scalla not add more to the big picture at 7 than another bone crusher? 

Schalk is playing like Campese these days...his passes show Zen like awareness. But I can't help but thinking one is going to be intercepted for a try one of these days
Our WC loosies could include Schalk, Vermeulen, Louw, Alberts and Coetzee. The match combinations could vary depending on conditions and opponents. What terrifies me is the Spies drum beat coming from the Bools nutters on 365.
The bleats for Liggies, Arno and Brussouw don't worry me, HM won't take those seriously. But believe me if there is any drop in Vermeulen's form, which arguably we have been witnessing, Suspies will be right there.

 Moz, if they drop Thor for Spies, I'll support Ireland in the RWC. Spies is regaining some form, but Thor has been the benchmark @ 8 for the past 3 years. Should have gotten IRB player of the year ahead of jaws, but sadly the hill is always a bit steeper for non NZders.

Agreed on all counts, Ireland is a decent sort of second team.  

 Ja got to agree with Moz here...
Alberts is playing the way he did back in 2012 / 2013.
However i also agree with DB... do we need a 3rd bruiser when we have Duane and Schalla?
I'd much rather have Coetzee or Brussouw playing to the ball...

In saying that, we, as usual, have a dearth of loose forward talent... l ets not forget J Kriel, Whitely and Flo amongst others...

 Alberrts had a different game today - he did the work normally done by the 8 by covering the balls from the back.  That gave him a chance to carry the ball over a distance.  He did it three times - never thinking of passing the balls in the process - and charged straight into the first tackle.  He never beat any tackles - got tackled  by the first defender and in the process lost ball possession once.  The one time he lost ball possession was when he was tackled by Labuschagne - who played for only 24 minutes.
Lets look at the tackle stats of the various players who normally plays at 7:-
Alberts     -    80 minutes   -  11 tackles made - 1 missedBotha      -     38 minutes   -  13 tackles made - none missedLabuschagne - 24 minutes  -    7 tackles made - none missed
Alberts made 1 very strong tackle on Jacques Du Plessis - the rest was not of the same quality.   For the rest he played no part in ball protection and recovery.   He was rarely involved in maul situations and stood around at the back thereof.
Admittedly Alberts - because of the ball recovery function and the one very strong tackle on Du Plessis - was more obvious yesterday and he did have a better game than normal.   However, I would not get carried away by this performance.   He would not have that covering function in future and has to prove that his game is acceptable in all aspects of loosie play.    
I knew from the word go that this one performance - his best in Super 15 over the last three years - would have the drones shout for his inclusion in the Springbok team - where he has not made the grade since 2013.  However, we will see how he performs in the Sharks upcoming tour and see whether he will perform on a similar basis to the one yesterday.   After that tour an objective assessment will be possible. 
      

    

 Mozart
Your initial story about Francois Steyn and Burger is not realistic at all.  Steyn has done nothing for the Sharks this year and was a handicap in the backline - FACT.   Esterhuizen did more in the backline in  the three games he started in than Steyn did in the whole year he played in 2014 and in the three games this year.  He made more line breaks in those games at center than Steyn did since the beginning of last year and made more meters in ball carries than Steyn did at center in three games than Steyn did in 10.   
Steyn's defence was definitely worse than that of Esterhuizen.  Steyn's defense last year was poor (his missed tackle ratio was over 26) - this year with a missed tackle ratio of 28 it was even worse.   
Would he have done better than Esterhuizen did under miserable circumstances that the Sharks faced the past month?   The answer is a definite NO - there is no indications that he was missed at all.   
Insofar as Burger is concerned - your assessment is utter nonsense.  The strength of Burger has always been his ability to link up with the backline in attacking play.   So what IF one of his passes is intercepted?    Would that be the end of the world - NO it would not be.       

    

 RE: Andre Esterhuizen switches position!
August 20, 2014, 07:30:07

So let me dispel this ignorant rubbish. Frans didn't start 10 games at flyhalf....the Sharks lost 4 or nearly half of those games. Frans did start 8 games at flyhalf, the Sharks won 7 of those games.

 

Sharks winning % without Frans at 10....60%

 

Sharks winning % with Frans at 10.....87.5%

 

The disaster was when Jake caved to Natal bias and played Lambie at 10 against the Saders. The Sharks only chance was to play Frans, the player who guided them to victory over the same team with 13 players on the field at times.

Edit post

•  0 Likes

FAlberts0/000/4/11450021 11/10/000/0

 

 

 

R)Labuschagne0/000/0/4110000 7/01/000/0

 

 

Hmm. Labuschagne makes his usual process tackles....Alberts dominates in the tackle. Labuschagne makes 2.75 metres a carry....Alberts makes 4.1 metres a carry. Alberts offloads twice (you confused turnover with offloads Moronic) Liggies can't offload.

 

 

I know who was the better loosie and it wasn't Liggies.

 Mozart
That story of winning percentages is utter BS and you yourself has admitted as much when you agreed that it is not scientifically based at all - yet you keep on repeating it on this site as if it is a fact - in other words the Sharks won the matches because of Steyn alone.
Steyn's guiding them to victory is meaningless as well.  The guiding is BS - he never was the captain of the team and in fact had a negative impact on the backline players playing with him.  His constant and aimless kicking and record ball possession losses was demoralizing all his fellow team members last year.    This year he was worse.   A red card and a yellow card in three games were showing the worst in him - an ill-disciplined player who under-delivers and is consequently out of zinc letting down his fellow team members.  In that he was on par with Bismarck and Deysel.   
His main role last year was to convert some penalties caused by other players and 90% of those would have been converted  by other goal kickers as well.  In dealing with this type of issue it must be borne in mind that rugby is a team game - but that each member of the team must play a positive role in the broader context of the game - and that Steyn over the past two years was a flop in respect of every aspect of the game - other than making long distance  kicks at goal.   
   

 The Sharks won despite Steyn being at 10 - based on his contributions that is a fact as well.   His personal contributions were BS and that is the reason for my statement.  

 Mozart
Did you read what I said about Alberts?  Obviously not.  And your BS comes out clearly as per normal.   Alberts made one strong tackle - thee rest was bog ordinary.  He played for 80 minutes - Labuschagne for 24.  
What made you so abysmally stupid is you missed half of the game.  Pollard converted two penalties when Labuschagne made turnovers in possession and the Sharks was penalized when they tried to prevent it.  That contributed 6 of the Bulls  17 points.   Huge difference - but you are too stupid to realize that.   Labuschagne's "process" tackles consisted of one on Alberts himself - where the latter lost ball possession as a result.
Look - I said we have to wait and see whether Alberts maintains what he did yesterday and to compare his 80 minute performance with Labuschagne's 24 minutes and then come up with the BS Mozart process tackle story is laughable.       

 Mozart
Sorry - you are worse than stupid.   I looked at the contributions made by players throughout the season and Steyns contributions in both attacking and defending was abysmal.   You looked at one game and that suddenly is the alpha and omega of your assessment of a player.
You never considered Steyn's poor attacking and defensive record confirmed by stats last year and when it is mentioned you ignore it.  What a farce.
Incidentally the players that really made a difference in that game you dredged up last year against the Crusaders are the same ones you constantly denigrate on this site - namely Reinach who scored a brilliant individual try and Jordaan who was critical in the try scored by Cooper.
Steyn played a major role in one try - but that was cancelled out by his non-existent defense in the case of a try scored by Slade.   
     

 Alberts was outplayed by Du Plessis by some distance. Jaque's work rate is about double that of Alberts. 
So our number 7 players are likely to be Burger and Du Plessis. No room in the RWc squad for serial loafers like Alberts. 
Some established NBoks are in great danger of getting the boot if form is the criteria and not other factors - think wee matfiled. I fear Meyer is going to bungle the selections and add in the quotas and we could go to the RWC severely understrength. We shall see. Meyer needs to wake up his from last year was dismal.

 Beeno
I was not all that impressed by Jacques du Plessis at 7 either.  Jacques is a hard worker - but he is more a lock than a 7.   The ball protection and recovery function - to my mind an essential for a loosie - was never in evidence when Jacques played at  7.
Where I am in agreement with you as that Alberts is not a hard worker - his productivity is low.  Fact is he made 11 tackles as a 7 missing 1 in the 80 minutes he played on Saturday.  That sounds reasonable - but if compared with the 20 tackles (missing none) made by Botha and Labuschagne - whose combined playing time was 62 minutes - the issue of Alberts tackling rate is brought down to earth as low.
However, his tackle rate normally is much lower than 11 - so he did show some advance on Saturday.  We will have to see what he produces the rest of Super 15.  What made him visible on Saturday was a strong tackle on Du Plessis - but the rest of his tackles were not better than average.    
      

 You might be right Mike but that boy plays hard for  80 minutes and gets through amountain of work. if you want abig loosie he will do although Du Toit may be better as he looks a bit quicker.
Botma is palying good rugby and so is Tecklenburg. Labbers we will see how he goes.We have loose forwards to burn. Rhodes is excellent as is Elstadt. We have so many!! 
Quite frankly there is no reason why, barring injuries, Meyer cant pick a very strong RWC squad. However old favourites and quota picks could scuttle the ship.
When you pick an old dud its always easy to mention experience to justify the selection and most will nod wisely. Experience is a magic word for many. It has value but must not be overvalued. 

 Selection of experienced players without the necessary performance showing that they are still up to top standard is in my book an abomination.   I also prefer it that players should have experience - but to use that as the only norm for selection is a joke in bad taste.  

Mozart
After watching the game again - it is clear that Alberts made one good tackle on Du Plessis and lost ball possession when Labuschagne tackled him hard - so that evens out the score.  For the rest the tackles of the two players were on par.  So if  Labuschagne made process tackles so did Alberts.  But then process tackles in your mind is applicable only in respect of players you do not like - in all other cases (even in the case of the weak tackles made by Matfield) it is not process tackles. 
The difference between the two players was that -
*   Alberts as blindside flank allowed Paige to run past him like he was not there The space between the scrum and the touchline was no more than 4 meters) - to initiate the move that led to the try scored by Hougaard; and
*   Labuschagne made two turnovers that led to penalties converted by Pollard.
So plus 6 top Labuschagne and minus 5 to Alberts.   That represents more or less the difference between the two players at 7.
   

Wow! Just how childish is Moffie . . . and really, how silly and infantile to think that real life sporting results can be influenced by what someone says on a message board?

LMAO!

The decrepit old fossil seems to be regressing into senility quite fast!

"Moz, if they drop Thor for Spies, I'll support Ireland in the RWC."

"Thor"?

Only the mincing Cape Town gurly-boys would name one of their players after a god!

LMAO!

I'm guessing "Thor" is Duane Vermeulen and I'm also guessing that this means the limp-wristed little Stompie supporters have a different meaning for "getting hammered" than the rest of us!

 Ou Maaikie. Have a look at your argument about the Labuschagne/Botha v Alberts defence issue. Ever heard of synergism? Sometimes 2+2 equals more than four. It is quite possible, if not likely, that two players playing less than half the number of minutes than a third player would be able to commit to more tackles than a player playing 80 minutes. Don't you think? 
Also, bear in mind that Alberts was playing in the Sharks team who were on the receiving end in all departments, bar maybe offloads, while Botha and Labuschagne were playing in the team that had the upper hand. Then, the most important factor. The Sharks' defence, as a whole, is pretty crap this year. Go read Brendan Venter's admission to this. Yes, I know that you believe that it is just a cover up to safe face but check the defensive comparison. 
It is true that the Sharks made more tackles than the Bulls because the Bulls had more possession and that is probably where you would stop and say "QED". You should, however, also consider the Sharks' success rate when it comes to tackles. They missed 12% of their first time tackles compared to the Bulls' 8%. That is where their problem lies as far as defence is concerned.
Their problem is not the fact that Alberts has made a few less tackles than Labuschagne and Botha. Their problem is that their entire defensive set-up, and in the backline in particular, is pretty crap at this stage. That is one of the reasons why the Bulls managed to have four more clean breaks and has beaten defenders 22 times as opposed to the Sharks' 13 times. 
Why do I mention that backline when we are arguing about Alberts' defence as a forward? Easy. The Bulls attacked out wide,with their backline,  more often than the Sharks. Go check the stats. They kicked more, They made more passes and they covered more running meters than the Sharks. As mentioned earlier, they also made more clean breaks and they beat more defenders. The Sharks, on the other hand tried a lot more upfront. That is possibly why there were more offloads in the tackle by the Sharks than the Bulls. Go check the stats on this as well. You will notice that the Sharks' backline players had to make much more tackles than the Bulls' backline players. Not one of the Bulls backline players got into double figures for tackles attempts. Esterhuizen, Sithole and Reinach had more than 10 tackle attempts. 
You are always, when you are in a corner, shouting about the fact that stats should not be viewed in isolation. Problem is that you are constantly looking at the stats in isolation and in a clinical manner. 

Rubbish, Alberts was outplayed by Jacques du Plessis who was far more effective with ball in hand  

" Rubbish, Alberts was outplayed by Jacques du Plessis who was far more effective with ball in hand "

Bwahaha! Du Plessis' feathers were so ruffled, that he resorted to kicking at a player in a tackle, but still missing by miles. Then tried to pick a fight with a winger, because he was unable to handle opposition of similar size...

Yeah right......what game were you watching  

 I think that you are trying to soft-soap the facts that Alberts did not make as many tackles as the other loosies made.  But your arguments are not entirely convincing.
The first comment is really not of any value.  A fit player makes tackles throughout the game.   The fact that players play for a lesser time does not count and has no real basis for an argument.  I have watched the tackle stats for Botha, Labuschagne and Alberts when they play at 7 over the past two seasons - 2013 and 2014.  During all that time the respective average tackle stats per match of the three players concerned have been as follows:-
Labuschagne   =    13,9Botha             =    10,5Alberts           =      6 6
The missed tackle ratio of Labuschagne was  6, Botha 9 and Alberts 18.   Comparative to his low tackle count per march Alberts missed tackle ratio is way to high.               
In dealing with the issue comprehensively I would try and explain it in more detail.  Alberts due to his deficient pace is not a player who normally makes tackles on backline players - his tackles are normally close to the Tight 5 and over the years rarely are more than 7 tackles in any given match.   Both Botha and Labuschagne made not only tackles around the fringes - a high percentage of their tackles are of players wider out - inclusive of backline players.   That in the main account for the higher number of tackles made by them.
I look at stats - but more importantly what happened on the field of play.  The non-attempt to tackle Paige on Saturday is typical of Alberts.  He routinely miss tackles on backline players and that often leads to scoring of tries.   The minimal space that he had to tackle Paige and non-attempt indicates a tendency on his part.  That type of thing would never happen with Labuschagne or Botha at 7.          

 Jaaaa ou Maaikie. First you were on about the stats in this particular game and when I showed you that you had no clue about the bigger picture, i.e. you can only assess little compartments at a time, you suddenly want to drag in two/three years of bumf stats. Stick to the point, mate, and deal with the dynamics of this particular game. 

 The Stats in that particular game was a reflection of what Alberts normally done in tests - but this game was particularly favourable to him - so I gave him credit for a better performance than normal.   Mozart was raving about him - and I just wanted to point out that Alberts have serious deficiencies in his game and in my opinion he should be miles away from the Springbok team.      

 Jaaaaa swaer..... en my pa is die Pous.

Poor old RooiAAS. The nobble is becoming a bit of an embarrassment. A prediction of great form is followed by three catastrophic losses. Stop putting the curse on our teams, you old lush.

 Ceradunce
Jou pa kan nie die pous wees nie as hy half so toe/dof is soos jy.  Jou soort moet in 'n huis vir ernstige verstandelik-vertraagdes aangehou word.  Dink jou pa mag moontlik kwalifiseer vir wagdiens by the gestig -sodat hy die helfte van sy breinsel van tyd to tys aan jou kan leen. 

 Ek het altyd gedink jy is 'n lae f'kken doos, maar nou weet ek dit vir 'n feit . Ek herhaal 'n horing oue grappie wat ek al honderde kere gehoor het en jy gebruik die geleentheid om my pa, wie jy nie eens geken het nie, se inteligensie aan te val. F@k jou, jou f@kken agteraf imbesiel. Jou soort behoort met minagting bejeen te word. Mag ek nooit in my lewe so laag daal dat ek ander mense se ouers op so 'n gemene wyse aan te val nie.