The amazing lack of new talent in the Bok team

We are in the second year after the RWC. Our team Jake put together in 2004 had it's swan song in the RWC11. So we would expect new talent to be pouring through. But the picture is different. - Sure Lambie is only 22, but he is on the bench and was already in the team at the RWC....he has gone backwards. There is JJ, more of a mid career player for a back, at 24. Coenie at 24 is still very young for a prop....and there's Eben at 21 and Serfontein at 20 on the bench. But that's it. - There are many vulnerable players in this Bok team....just waiting for new talent to pick them off. Basson, Morne and Pienaar in the backs. The struggling Jannie....place holder Juandre and really the whole back row. We know we dont have enough loosie pace, but there isn't one test ready youngster to give us that pace...no young Skinstad or Big Joe. - Some would argue Meyer is not looking for youngsters. Not true he has given many players chances and they have failed. Looking at it from a historical perspctive, it seems we are in one of our talent deserts.....as we were in 2000 and 2001. One can only hope it changes. With more than half our current team compromise selections, things aren't particularly healthy in Bok rugby. - Meyer will get the blame, but the real issue is talent.

Mozart Myer has one trait that is really amazing - his absolute refusal to recognise performance as a means to assess talent. He also has a game plan that allows for a very restricted format of play and he will always select players he believe would meet with that requirement. Basically he has a one-tracked mind and that is a problem. Meyer also have an absolute belief in two aspects and that is - * that any past Springboks - irrespective of how viciously poor they are in performance - are selectable ahead of anyone else: and * the issue of the Blue Bulls past or present selectability. From day 1 of his appointment - from his initial squad selection - he was faced with the fact that he had to replace players who should have been replaced in the period 2009 to 2011. His first reaction lasting throughout 2012 was to select players from the Blue Bulls or players with previous Blue Bulls association. Matter o0f fact he selected for the bench or starting line-up 15 such players in his first years and most of them let him down badly. That is how we got the Steenkamps. Krugers, Greylings, Kirchners into the team. No Bulls contracts - no chance. Their selection was an insult to the Springboks as a team. You shout and scream about changes in players introduced by Meyer. Sure he did make changes to the squad - but why did he do that? There were basically two reasons - the one was injury and the second one complete collapse of performance - so much so that the public was booing the players concerned. Lets look at the injury cases:- * Francois Steyn - even when he was completely out of form and in a atrocious physical condition - Meyer still called him up to his first training camp this year. If Steyn was not injured - we would not have seen a player like Serfontein in the team at all. * Kirchner - after an absolutely disastrous performance record in Super 15 - was injured. Meyer wanted him in the June tests so badly that he let him play for half a match before the announcement of the squad. Kirchner was disastrously poor again and despite Meyer's expressed wishes could not be selected at all - which forced Meyer to select Le Roux. * Whilst Francois Steyn was around - Meyer selected Engelbrecht to be on the bench initially. Engelbrecht was disappointing in performances and Meyer dropped that idea and brought in Taute - a player who in his whole adult playing career had a total of 3 matches played in the 13 position. One would question this selection - his option was between Taute and De Jongh - and the latter was also an absurdity. What iunfluenced him to go for Taute was anybody's guess. However, he went for him and after the Pretoria game was satisified with him - since De Jongh - when he came on - buggered up an excellent try scoring opportunity. That was followed by a further three tests by Taute - all faulres - and the AWIL performances of De Jongh in two tests. Despite that disaster and his absolute joke as a defender this year - De Jongh is still in his squad. * Morne Steyn completely cpollapsed as a fly half last year and if Meyer was going to continue with him in the CR - he would have been out of his job by public demand. He then turned to Goosen as the next option with Jantjies on the bench. Both new player - you would say. Goosen played much better than Morne ever did last year when he came on in the test in Dunedin and was an automatic selection for the Pretoria test. Despite a persistent heel injury problem he had a top game. Then came the Soweto test - where there was a clear indication that Goosen was not 100% fit. He did - despite your prejudiced ramblings - not performing badly before he was injured and had to leave the field of play. Meyer then brought on Jantjies - i9nstead of Lambie and we know what disaster ensued. * There is no need to deal with the so-called forward changes made by Meyer - other than to mention his bench players. Etzebeth was one and happened despite your constant bleats about him being not good enough - he literally forced himself into the team through outstanding performances. That bring us to the question - how many players did Meyer really brought into the team without enforced injury - exactly two, namely Goosen and Etzebeth. The rest were all injury-forced replacements and replacements forced on him by disastrously poor performances. Meyer has a history of selecting absurdities to be part of the squad - one just have to think of players like De Jongh, Alberts, Kruger and Steenkamp to realise his poor appreciation of performances by players. Those are players that let the team down last year and all had ruibbish performances in Super 15 - yet they are still in the squad and even the match squad. Meyer fails to recognise performance as a criterium for selection - that does not mean there is not abumdemt talented players for selection ahead of the Meyer absurdities - there are and they should have been given preference - but they are not. Lets face facts - because Meyer fails in his selection of players and you have prejudiced views by starting a thread like this - do not man that we do not have talented players. WE have - and there should have been changes based on performance - the blindness in seeing that amazes me and other site members all the time.

Mozart Myer has one trait that is really amazing - his absolute refusal to recognise performance as a means to assess talent. He also has a game plan that allows for a very restricted format of play and he will always select players he believe would meet with that requirement. Basically he has a one-tracked mind and that is a problem. Meyer also have an absolute belief in two aspects and that is - * that any past Springboks - irrespective of how viciously poor they are in performance - are selectable ahead of anyone else: and * the issue of the Blue Bulls past or present selectability. From day 1 of his appointment - from his initial squad selection - he was faced with the fact that he had to replace players who should have been replaced in the period 2009 to 2011. His first reaction lasting throughout 2012 was to select players from the Blue Bulls or players with previous Blue Bulls association. Matter o0f fact he selected for the bench or starting line-up 15 such players in his first years and most of them let him down badly. That is how we got the Steenkamps. Krugers, Greylings, Kirchners into the team. No Bulls contracts - no chance. Their selection was an insult to the Springboks as a team. You shout and scream about changes in players introduced by Meyer. Sure he did make changes to the squad - but why did he do that? There were basically two reasons - the one was injury and the second one complete collapse of performance - so much so that the public was booing the players concerned. Lets look at the injury cases:- * Francois Steyn - even when he was completely out of form and in a atrocious physical condition - Meyer still called him up to his first training camp this year. If Steyn was not injured - we would not have seen a player like Serfontein in the team at all. * Kirchner - after an absolutely disastrous performance record in Super 15 - was injured. Meyer wanted him in the June tests so badly that he let him play for half a match before the announcement of the squad. Kirchner was disastrously poor again and despite Meyer's expressed wishes could not be selected at all - which forced Meyer to select Le Roux. * Whilst Francois Steyn was around - Meyer selected Engelbrecht to be on the bench initially. Engelbrecht was disappointing in performances and Meyer dropped that idea and brought in Taute - a player who in his whole adult playing career had a total of 3 matches played in the 13 position. One would question this selection - his option was between Taute and De Jongh - and the latter was also an absurdity. What iunfluenced him to go for Taute was anybody's guess. However, he went for him and after the Pretoria game was satisified with him - since De Jongh - when he came on - buggered up an excellent try scoring opportunity. That was followed by a further three tests by Taute - all faulres - and the AWIL performances of De Jongh in two tests. Despite that disaster and his absolute joke as a defender this year - De Jongh is still in his squad. * Morne Steyn completely cpollapsed as a fly half last year and if Meyer was going to continue with him in the CR - he would have been out of his job by public demand. He then turned to Goosen as the next option with Jantjies on the bench. Both new player - you would say. Goosen played much better than Morne ever did last year when he came on in the test in Dunedin and was an automatic selection for the Pretoria test. Despite a persistent heel injury problem he had a top game. Then came the Soweto test - where there was a clear indication that Goosen was not 100% fit. He did - despite your prejudiced ramblings - not performing badly before he was injured and had to leave the field of play. Meyer then brought on Jantjies - i9nstead of Lambie and we know what disaster ensued. * There is no need to deal with the so-called forward changes made by Meyer - other than to mention his bench players. Etzebeth was one and happened despite your constant bleats about him being not good enough - he literally forced himself into the team through outstanding performances. That bring us to the question - how many players did Meyer really brought into the team without enforced injury - exactly two, namely Goosen and Etzebeth. The rest were all injury-forced replacements and replacements forced on him by disastrously poor performances. Meyer has a history of selecting absurdities to be part of the squad - one just have to think of players like De Jongh, Alberts, Kruger and Steenkamp to realise his poor appreciation of performances by players. Those are players that let the team down last year and all had ruibbish performances in Super 15 - yet they are still in the squad and even the match squad. Meyer fails to recognise performance as a criterium for selection - that does not mean there is not abumdemt talented players for selection ahead of the Meyer absurdities - there are and they should have been given preference - but they are not. Lets face facts - because Meyer fails in his selection of players and you have prejudiced views by starting a thread like this - do not man that we do not have talented players. WE have - and there should have been changes based on performance - the blindness in seeing that amazes me and other site members all the time.

 Moz that has stuff all to do with our talent and everything to do with a pathetically conservative coach who in my opinion should be sacked sooner than later.

 

Basson, Jean, Morne, Pienaar, Kruger, Louw, Alberts, Vermeulen, du Preez, Steenkamp and Flip should not be in the match 23, for the simple reason there are better youngsters available.

 

v/d Heever is better than Basson

Serfontein is better than Jean

Lambie is better than Morne

v/Zyl is better than Pienaar

de Jager is better than Kruger

Brussouw is better than Louw

Elstadt is better than Alberts

CJ Stander is better than Vermeulen

Reinach is better than du Preez

Kitshoff is better than Steenkamp

du Plessis is better than Flip

 

The issue is the coach and nothing will convince me otherwise - our results under Meyer speak for themselves

 Van Der Heever has shown nothing.

Serfontein is too inexperienced to start, Jean has played superbly and is our Captain. 

Morne is better than Lambie at this point in time. Van Zyl can't kick. De Jäger isn't a number 5 lock. Brussels is off to Japan. Elstadt is unlucky. Stander is in Ireland. Reinach is good, have to wait and see what Du Preez plays like. Kitshoff is too inexperienced. Du Plessis has played 1 Super Rugby game.

Van den Heever wasn't preferred to Basson at the Bools, and hasn't been able to crack the Stormers starting team. I doubt all these professionals have it wrong. - Jean is our best back, game in and game out....he is very consistent. Serfontein isn't in his class yet and may never be. - Lambie is a basket case at the moment. It's not that we all never rated him....I picked him at the start of the season as the player who would really break through this year. I was wrong. - I like van Zyl, but Pienaar (who was your pick for Bok flyhalf for years Dave) is a consistent performer and much more experienced. Van Zyl will probably never be our established scrummie. - De Jager has played a handful of S15 games and is not a natural 5 lock. I would be far more confident with Kruger...who is an experienced lineout caller and a great player on kickoffs. - Brussouw is the one player you mention Dave, that still deserves to be in the mix....he gives his all. But not at the expense of Louw who is our most rounded loosie. - Elstadt is not better than Alberts. Alberts is vastly underrated....but is the one player we have who can really bust tackles and deliver big hits. His reactions when scoring that try against the Poms demonstrate his rugby smarts. - CJ Stander wasn't good enough for the Bools...he isn't better than Vermeulen. He is an energetic journeyman. - Reinach is better than du Preez...eina....I'll just leave that alone. - Kitshoff is better than Steenkamp. Well that's hard to say if we are talking bench. Kitshoff improved his scrumming this S15. But if we are talking starter against Franks, I'd take Steenkamp's experience every time. And that's why he's there, as a potential starter. - Du Plessis is better than Flip. Well Dave I always told you, a great Flip advocate, that he is bog ordinary. So is he better than a complete neophyte? Who knows but I'll accept Meyer's view that Flip is the better choice....pity about Bekker and Steph.

Moz you were the one singing v/d Heever's praises along with myself, he is better than Basson.......him not cracking it has nothing to do with rugby. 

 

Jean is not our best back, he is not even our best centre......our best centre has been JJ, closely followed by Serfontein. I'd put Jean and de Allende in the next bracket.

 

Why is Lambie a basket case, its simply not the case. What makes Morne suddenly our test saviour when he has never been that. There is nothing wrong with Lambie just like there was nothing wrong with Goosen's nerves etc against the AB's.......the only issue was an injury.

 

Pienaar was poor last year and even worse this year. I see none of the spark of his youth, he is done. I stand by my selection of Pienaar at 10 ahead of Morne back then as would be the case now. I cannot condone the selection of a 10 who is going to kick our posession away.

 

de Jager has been one of the finds of the season making many SA Bok sides of the week this S15. He might not be able to play 5, but Etzebeth can. Kruger is not a test standard lock so why retain him.

 

I prefer Elsatdt, who is far more visible and active than a player like Alberts who has probably given us his best days.

 

CJ Stander is by far our best young loosie, he is better than Arno Botha and played for the Bulls and made the Bok squad aged 20. Your call tells me you know very little about the guy. He is the one young loosie we had that possed skill, strength and pace......Arno Botha is the next closest.

 

du Preez is done, he has played in Japan for 2 years, its madness calling him in for 3 tests, whats the point?

 

The selection of Steenkamp is insulting.........I could never approve of that. Kitshoff, Nkanyane, Marcel v/d Merwe and Mellett are all better options.

 

Flip is a good lock, but there are better options out there now. Baby Bok Jacques du Plessis is up there with Etzebeth and Steph du Toit.

Well as usual we take opposite viewpoints, but that's what makes this all fun. The one thing you said in this last post that resonates is the point about Van Den Heever. I have rated him. He is superb physical talent....but something is holding him back. And I really don't rate Basson. It's a hard call, but ok I agree, van den Heever over Basson.

Yep we disagree on the experienced vs youth thing.........I dont buy into the experience thing as it has done us no favours under Meyer.

 

The best days of Habana, Jean, Pienaar, du Preez, Jannie, Flip and Alberts are past.............I have never been a fan of Morne and Kruger.........but somehow we persist with this list in the belief that they will challenge the worlds best - I just dont get it and our record to date confirms my misgivings.

 

I do think that this side coupled with Meyers game plan will lose us the tests against Oz and NZ - I hope I am wrong but I just cant see it.

 Van der Heever has done nothing and cannot understand it  , he should be flying, a provincial thing well, maybe.

Morne would not change him and if had to would have Lambie  who wont let you down.

Pienaar has still to play his best game for boks he has stepped up for sharks but will for boks one day he is a great player . FDP is another that is great but might be past his sell by date. But have appreciated his intuition.

Mozart I do not have many complaints about your comments on the various players - but has to point out that you are inventing arguments like it is unbelievable. Take the following for example:- DE JAGER "De Jager has played a handful of S15 games and is not a natural 5 lock. I would be far more confident with Kruger...who is an experienced lineout caller and a great player on kickoffs." What is a handful of games? 15 Games can surely not be described as a handful. Your argument about Kruger is based on Kruger being a caller of line outs as if that is of unbelievable importance. Has Etzebeth never played at 5 and called line outs? Really - that type of motivation is a joke. As to Kruger - gone is the mythical statement that he is an agile defender - after stats proved that he is one of the poorest defensiv3e locks in Super 15 - now suddenly it is the prowess in receiving kicked balls that suddenly makes his selection so necessary. How many times per game does it happen that kick ins are to near Kruger and have to be received by him. On average virtually zero number of times per game. This argument is about as strong as the one of him taking over the captaincy in the case of kick-ins, spouted by Meyer and strongly supported by you. All of the reasons provided by you has virtually zero impact on games and actual player performances.. It is for that reason more than anything else that the support is actually based. ALBERTS " Elstadt is not better than Alberts. Alberts is vastly underrated....but is the one player we have who can really bust tackles and deliver big hits. His reactions when scoring that try against the Poms demonstrate his rugby smarts." Why is Alberts vastly underrated? Because despite his abilities as mentioned by you as to - * 'bust tackles' has not happened the past year on both test and Super 15 level (statistically proven as well); and * ' big hits' is a myth as well, because he has a very low tackle count with critical missed tackles in evidence and none of the so-called hits are really in evidence at all - since they do not result in any real advantages for his team - the so-called big hits you pointed out previously in specific cases was bog ordinary tackles with no consequence negative to the opposition and positive for the Springboks. Nice inventive reasons - with zero substance in the statements made. The player being under-rated? As a player with virtually no mobility in his favour - he is in fact grossly over-rated by Meyer - a fact not accepted by most people in SA really interested in rugby. LAMBIE "Lambie is a basket case at the moment. It's not that we all never rated him....I picked him at the start of the season as the player who would really break through this year. I was wrong." Again a statement that is indeed questionable. This must be viewed suddenly based on Super 15 experiences - which in most cases of players you said should not count at all. But then to justify your support of players - series performances or lack thereof and stats can be ignored when it suits your argument. The question is - when did Lambie let down the Springboks and simultaneously when did Morne Steyn let the Springboks down? Steyn last year was a joke in the tests he played in - a bad joke as well. So what is to happen this year? All the signs of last year is back and can hit us with a vengeance again. Steyn was poor in the last few games in Super 15 last year and the same this year. STEENKAMP Kitshoff is better than Steenkamp. Well that's hard to say if we are talking bench. Kitshoff improved his scrumming this S15. But if we are talking starter against Franks, I'd take Steenkamp's experience every time. And that's why he's there, as a potential starter." I am amazed - a player not good enough to start for his Toulouse club team - is suddenly good enough to start for the Springboks. You cannot possibly be serious about that one. It is always better not to make sweeping and unfounded statements to support non-performing players - since it does not help on the field of play where delivery is an essential requirement. Incidentally some of the players you support had their glory years years ago - but over the last two years have been sub-standard in games in the CR and contributed in no small measure to losses. Reputation is a bad thing if not supported by performances of an acceptable nature. That is where Meyer goes bananas. "

 

10. Willie Le Roux

11. Habana

12 De Villiers

13 Serfontein

14 Engelbrecht

15 Ludeke

 

Tries! Tries! Tries! 

OOm you are always talking about how players are kept in the team when their form deserts them. Well Lambie's form has left him so live by your own rules. And we put Matfield on a pedestal because he called the lineouts brilliantly and played as a pure number 5 lock......now according to you, any lock can do that. Old toppie the sweeping statements are yours, the hyperbole is yours and the inability to apply stats as well. I wait with "baited breath" for your next move.

Mozart As per normal a general response to specific examples I have quoted specific statements made by you and indicated in detail why they were not supported by fact. Obviously unable to support his spurious statement - my friend Mozart turns to other totally irrelevant issues. Lambie is suddenly the peg for hanging a coat on. Lambie did not let the Sharks down this year - there was a number of factors that impacted negatively on their performances - but those are ignored and Lambie's form is suddenly the issue. Unlikeyour blatant prejudice - Lambie did not let the Sharks down this year like Steyn did last year. Lambie - despite the negative environment in the Sharks team (inclusive of a massive injury toll) - was solid. Last year Steyn was anything but - and the fact that he showed similar signs recently - is blatantly ignored. Suddenly only Kruger has the ability to make line out calls - what a load of utter baloney. Kruger is not a locks backside compared to Mattfield. Mattfield did produce some positive elements in the game - though I disliked the way he was too often moonlighting in the backline - Kruger produces virtually nothing. Masking line out calls the only criterium for selection of a lock is really hilarious and extremely silly. I am no the one to make sweeping statements totally invented by you to justify your viewpoints. I do base my arguments performance evaluation and stats - you base yours on flight of imagination. Funny really. .