Both Jannie and the Beast clearly had the wood on Koch and the rest of the Stormers scrum.
Captain49,914 posts
13 Jun 2015, 21:32
#1
13 Jun 2015, 21:32#1
The Bok front row remains the Bok front row
Started by Mozart30 REPLIES521 VIEWS· 13 Jun 2015, 21:32
Captain40,032 posts
13 Jun 2015, 21:37
#2
13 Jun 2015, 21:37#2
Dr Moz this was a very different pack. Scrumming takes cordination practise etc. The two youngsters were fine in some of the scrums and are probably a year off it. However they are very promising so no trashing them please!
I really doubt though that they wouyld have got the better of Kitshoff and Malherbe.
My stated view is Jannie and Beast should still go. Give Kitshoff and Malhebe RC time.
I really doubt though that they wouyld have got the better of Kitshoff and Malherbe.
My stated view is Jannie and Beast should still go. Give Kitshoff and Malhebe RC time.
Captain26,388 posts
13 Jun 2015, 21:37
#3
13 Jun 2015, 21:37#3
Moz, the Stormers Vodacom scrum+Koch is NOT a measuring yard. And Jannie did not actually cover himself in glory. Koch would have done better in the usual pack. Kebble did well for a rook.
Captain26,388 posts
13 Jun 2015, 21:38
#4
13 Jun 2015, 21:38#4
Beenz, Koch is better than Malherbe.
Captain49,914 posts
13 Jun 2015, 21:49
#5
13 Jun 2015, 21:49#5
Look the way the Beast monstered Koch in the scrum where the fight started was pretty definitive. To Kochs credit he kept his shape, didnt pop up like cuckoo Marcel or dive, dive, dive like Malherbe. He is a credible reserve forthe Boks.
I would go with Kitshoff as our second loosehead, but Nyakane fixed the ailing Bools scrum today and he will get the nod for obvious reasons.
I would go with Kitshoff as our second loosehead, but Nyakane fixed the ailing Bools scrum today and he will get the nod for obvious reasons.
Captain18,570 posts
13 Jun 2015, 21:57
#6
13 Jun 2015, 21:57#6
Mozart: clearly the Bulls were missing Matfield.
Captain49,914 posts
13 Jun 2015, 22:03
#7
13 Jun 2015, 22:03#7
Case closed wouldn't you say?
Captain18,570 posts
13 Jun 2015, 22:11
#8
13 Jun 2015, 22:11#8
How could any one possibly disagree? I wonder if CleverMike has been re-connected to the internet
Captain40,032 posts
13 Jun 2015, 22:28
#9
13 Jun 2015, 22:28#9
JW stop talking rubbish even if for just a moment.
Wish ou JWs grandson would superwise Jw better!
Captain18,570 posts
13 Jun 2015, 22:36
#10
13 Jun 2015, 22:36#10
Beeno: I believe you got you syntax mixed up but I appreciate you calling me "superwise", lol
But I digress, if one was to check the stats Matfield has been involved in most of the Bulls wins & he probably has been absent during many of their losses. Coincidence or competence?
But I digress, if one was to check the stats Matfield has been involved in most of the Bulls wins & he probably has been absent during many of their losses. Coincidence or competence?
Captain49,914 posts
13 Jun 2015, 22:40
#11
13 Jun 2015, 22:40#11
Take two scenarios.
1 Its the WC semi, the Boks are ahead by 2 points within the last two minutes and get a scrum feed 15 metres out and in front of their posts. Who would you want at tighthead. For me it's Jannie by a mile over Malherbe, Koch and the Cuckoo.
2 it's the WC final, and the Biok scrum is under the gun....Matfield wasn't available hehe. Who do you want as your loosehead, Kitshoff. Or the Beast. I go with the Beast. Because while he hasn't always dominated....he has always found a way to cope. When you aren't dominating, while the pressure is on you, experience and predictability have value.
1 Its the WC semi, the Boks are ahead by 2 points within the last two minutes and get a scrum feed 15 metres out and in front of their posts. Who would you want at tighthead. For me it's Jannie by a mile over Malherbe, Koch and the Cuckoo.
2 it's the WC final, and the Biok scrum is under the gun....Matfield wasn't available hehe. Who do you want as your loosehead, Kitshoff. Or the Beast. I go with the Beast. Because while he hasn't always dominated....he has always found a way to cope. When you aren't dominating, while the pressure is on you, experience and predictability have value.
Coach57,555 posts
14 Jun 2015, 08:11
#12
14 Jun 2015, 08:11#12
I do not think yesterday was really a yardstick to measure the abilities of the props. Against what was obviously the second choice and third choice props of the Stormers, Beast looked very good - Jannie against a rookie like Kebble, was not convincing at all.
Problem is that against stronger opposition - chances are that Jannie would fail - like he did consistently in Super 15.
I would say that the no 1 Tighthead prop remains Malherbe. Van der Merwe is just not a strong enough scrummager to be the second choice and we have not seen anything from Coenie for w while now. On form the Tightheads should be Malherbe, Coenie and Jannie - the latter should at best be on the bench.
The loosehead props should be Beast, Kitshoff and Nyakane.
Problem is that against stronger opposition - chances are that Jannie would fail - like he did consistently in Super 15.
I would say that the no 1 Tighthead prop remains Malherbe. Van der Merwe is just not a strong enough scrummager to be the second choice and we have not seen anything from Coenie for w while now. On form the Tightheads should be Malherbe, Coenie and Jannie - the latter should at best be on the bench.
The loosehead props should be Beast, Kitshoff and Nyakane.
Captain40,032 posts
14 Jun 2015, 10:37
#13
14 Jun 2015, 10:37#13
Looseheads should be Beast, Kitshoff and Schalk van Der Merwe. VAn has been miles better than Trevor!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LLooseheads would be Malherbe, Jannie and Koch.Draad Malherbe is a better scrummager than Koch at the moment. Malhebe is as Mike correctly says our best tighthead. Better also than Jannie outside the scrum.Many folk also think Kitshoff has over taken Beast. What is definite is that Kitshoff is quite a bit better than Beast outside the scrum. Lastb year beast could budge Malherbe as I recall. Malherbe is a year on.
It was a pity the wee guppies didnt encounter the full strength Stormers pack. Little doubt they would have got quite a hiding all round. It was a mercy to my friend rooitwit!!!
JW oak, a spelling error doesnt negate the need for your grandson to supervise you. Bwahhahahahaahaha
It was a pity the wee guppies didnt encounter the full strength Stormers pack. Little doubt they would have got quite a hiding all round. It was a mercy to my friend rooitwit!!!
JW oak, a spelling error doesnt negate the need for your grandson to supervise you. Bwahhahahahaahaha
Coach57,555 posts
14 Jun 2015, 11:46
#14
14 Jun 2015, 11:46#14
Beeno
I know about Schalk van der Merwe - but also the BEE requirement and that is where Nyakane comes into the picture.
If Coenie is nto available - and I doubt whether he will be - I agree with you about Koch.
Jannie remains an enigma - he had his last Super 15 game yesterday and never scored a a single try in the 138 super rugby games he played in. His game outside of scrumming has never been up to standard - both in ball carrying and tackling.
I know about Schalk van der Merwe - but also the BEE requirement and that is where Nyakane comes into the picture.
If Coenie is nto available - and I doubt whether he will be - I agree with you about Koch.
Jannie remains an enigma - he had his last Super 15 game yesterday and never scored a a single try in the 138 super rugby games he played in. His game outside of scrumming has never been up to standard - both in ball carrying and tackling.
Pro2,288 posts
14 Jun 2015, 11:58
#15
14 Jun 2015, 11:58#15
This is exactly what I predicted would happen: The Sharks beat an under strength Stormers side with nothing to play for and everyone thinks the Sharks are now a force. This game proved very little. It's meaningless. Whether or not the Stormers front row is truly better depends on who we have behind it, and has yet to be tested at test level. But given that the Sharks front row is traditionally over-powered at test level and in big moments in Super rugby, thus grossly overrated, I would take a chance in the RC and try something different.
Captain40,032 posts
14 Jun 2015, 12:01
#16
14 Jun 2015, 12:01#16
Sorry Mike I have no interest whatsoever in any BEE requirement and am totally against racist selections.If Trevor isnt worthy of a position he must not go.
Instead of condoning this racist practice we should be raising the roof about it.End of story.
Jannie will go to mentor the others and he can still play a reasonable 60 minutes.
Instead of condoning this racist practice we should be raising the roof about it.End of story.
Jannie will go to mentor the others and he can still play a reasonable 60 minutes.
Pro2,288 posts
14 Jun 2015, 12:29
#17
14 Jun 2015, 12:29#17
The reality is South Africa should be banned from international competitions. But as can be seen in South Africa and America, if you are black you can be racist without restraint and nobody can say a word. I love how third wave feminists are targeting white men, yet the rife misogyny of the African Americans is never once uttered! The power structures above doing a wonderful job of ripping society apart.
Captain40,032 posts
14 Jun 2015, 12:44
#18
14 Jun 2015, 12:44#18
Quite so Card. So hence I say to ou maaaikie why on this board select a player on the basis of colour.
The one argument for Nyankane though could be his versatility.
The one argument for Nyankane though could be his versatility.
Captain49,914 posts
14 Jun 2015, 16:24
#19
14 Jun 2015, 16:24#19
So I see you are no longer mentioning Marcel, HasBeen. Why is it so hard for me to set you on the right path? now here's the truth....
On the loosehead side we are fine....Beast, Kitshoff and Nyakane are all solid. Nyaknane had a poor day against Wales but scrummed very well against Castro.....he rescued the Bools scrum yesterday. Schalk van de Merwe is ok. But he is very prone to falling flat, a guy like Kitshoff supports his weight much better and is less likely to get into penalty trouble.
That's also the problem with Malherbe who was penalized once for scrumming against the Lions. He falls flat.....he did it in all his scrums against the Bargies in far Bargie land. Koch supports his weight much better, but isn't as powerful, so once full contacts was made the Beast put him in reverse.
Marcel is incredibly vulnerable.
So on the tighthead side it probably has to be between Malherbe, Coenie and Koch as our bench tighthead. Oddly enough, while he has been a disaster at S15 level, Coenie had good outings against France, Italy and Wales on our last two YE tours. Given what he adds in the loose a fit Coenie might be the best sub choice.
Jannie remains the best choice to keep us out of trouble.
Pro2,288 posts
14 Jun 2015, 16:56
#20
14 Jun 2015, 16:56#20
Beast squats something in the region of 330kg. He is by far the most powerful loosehead we have. Once he gets the edge on you he marches you back like a panzer. Just ask Vickery! At best we have a collection of malformed obese specimens who dominate at junior level through sheer size, but get taken to pieces by more athletic and technically sound opposition abroad. It was embarrassing in 2009 watching the Italian 10th best loosehead take us to the cleaners. I don't understand why we are considered a scrumming nation, sure, maybe in the 1950s, but not in my life time!
Coach57,555 posts
15 Jun 2015, 06:26
#21
15 Jun 2015, 06:26#21
Sure Jannie got pushed back by the speed of a jetliner against the Argentinians and got penalised against a rookie like Kebble - but he is fine. Malherbe came on and stabilized the scrum against the Argentinians and got penalized against a very strong scrummager - so he is the one that falls flat on his face.
Jannie is the best choice after failing constantly in scrums and collecting penalties - but he is fine. What a joke!!!!!!!
Jannie is the best choice after failing constantly in scrums and collecting penalties - but he is fine. What a joke!!!!!!!
Captain30,741 posts
15 Jun 2015, 10:31
#22
15 Jun 2015, 10:31#22
What rubbish, the Sharks scrum had the upper hand at first, but it all became an even battle after that........you seem to fail to pick up on the obvious......we have the Sharks frontrow having played how many games together vs the Stormers who as a combo were in their first outing together.....let me guess, in your informed mind this counts for nothing?
Captain49,914 posts
15 Jun 2015, 14:16
#23
15 Jun 2015, 14:16#23
One step at a time Dave.....after he was monstered by the Cheetahs replacement loosehead are you finally ready to admit the Cuckoo is scarcely better than Werner? Or does the delusion that he is a test tighthead still have life in your addled er informed mind?
Captain30,741 posts
15 Jun 2015, 15:05
#24
15 Jun 2015, 15:05#24
Oh what utter crap, he was never ever monstered, what a laugh......Marcel has already proved his worth at test level when he kicked some serious arse.
Your problem is that you don't see the obvious......if Marcel was so poor why is it that when Nyakane replaced Mellett, the Bulls scrum drove the Cheetahs back with interest?
What do you conclude from that clever man? That possibly, just possibly Mellett was the issue and one has to ask why on earth Big Vic and co decided to go with Mellett ahead of Nyakane in the first place.
Not to mention the fact that the Cheetahs were getting an early hit in every scrum, but we'll ignore that for now.
Marcel has test standard written all over him as he has proved all year, just like Malherbe, Coenie and Koch have. We are more than covered at tighthead.......add Nyakane to the list as well.
Captain26,388 posts
15 Jun 2015, 19:09
#25
15 Jun 2015, 19:09#25
Moz, you are correct that the Bok FR is still the Bok FR, but IMO fringe players like Kitsie, Nyakanye, Koch and Malherbe should get plenty of game time in the tests before the WC.
Captain49,914 posts
15 Jun 2015, 19:29
#26
15 Jun 2015, 19:29#26
I conclud e there was 33 minutes to play when Mellett another great former pick of yours was subbed for Nyakani. Then with 25 minutes to play the cuckoo left for Werner. And stunningly the scrum improved.
Marcel is just another embarrassing mistake you are denying. A carbon copy of your history with Werner.
Coach57,555 posts
15 Jun 2015, 23:09
#27
15 Jun 2015, 23:09#27
Mozart
If there are two tightheads that did not impress me this Super 15 it was Jannie du Plessis and Marcel van der Merwe. There is a difference between the two though. Van der Merwe does more outside of scrumming - Jannie does ZERO. What he ever attempts to do is normally a huge flop.
I do not think that either is really up to standard - Jannie because he is past it, Van der Merwe because he has a long way to go before he will be up to standard.
If there are two tightheads that did not impress me this Super 15 it was Jannie du Plessis and Marcel van der Merwe. There is a difference between the two though. Van der Merwe does more outside of scrumming - Jannie does ZERO. What he ever attempts to do is normally a huge flop.
I do not think that either is really up to standard - Jannie because he is past it, Van der Merwe because he has a long way to go before he will be up to standard.
Captain49,914 posts
16 Jun 2015, 00:07
#28
16 Jun 2015, 00:07#28
Gosh, you aren't impressed with Jannie, Tokkie. What else is new?
Coach57,555 posts
16 Jun 2015, 10:49
#29
16 Jun 2015, 10:49#29
Mozart
I am impressed by performance - absence of same does count with me. That is where I differ from you - you deal with sentimentality and reputation - the present performance of a player means nothing to you. So there really is no surprise that we differ in this case.
I am impressed by performance - absence of same does count with me. That is where I differ from you - you deal with sentimentality and reputation - the present performance of a player means nothing to you. So there really is no surprise that we differ in this case.
Captain49,914 posts
16 Jun 2015, 14:46
#30
16 Jun 2015, 14:46#30
No I deal in reality.....one aspect of reality is that beating up weak S15 front rows is no guarantee a prop will succeed at test level. Until Malherbe does the business against good test front rows, and stays healthy nothing is conclusive.
I could say the same about Kitshoff. But I have more confidence in him......because technically he doesn't have an obvious flaw like Malherbe's penchant for falling flat.....in effect an acccident waiting to happen.
Coach57,555 posts
16 Jun 2015, 15:44
#31
16 Jun 2015, 15:44#31
You and reality are far apart - very far apart. This story about Malherbe is absolute crap. You have been carrying on about that for 18 months now and it stemmed from 1 incident during the Welsh test in 2013 - when Jenkins was penalised twice for taking the scrum down and Malherbe once because Owens said he has penalized Jenkins twice and it happened again - so for a change he would penalize Malherbe to see whether the problem cannot be solved. Malherbe was replaced and in the very next scrum it happened again - so was he really to blame?
Since then you have been carrying on with that campaign relentlessly and still is. Now suddenly he is doing well against the "weak Super 15 front rows". However, Jannie did 100% worse against the same "weak front rows" - so what does that statement of yours prove? Nothing at all.
However, he is not in full retreat and a penalty machine to boot like Jannie is. The worst scrumming on test level I have ever seen was Jannie last year on test level. When he was replaced by Malherbe in one test the scrums became stable and not retreating at jet speed like the case was earlier in that test.
Since then you have been carrying on with that campaign relentlessly and still is. Now suddenly he is doing well against the "weak Super 15 front rows". However, Jannie did 100% worse against the same "weak front rows" - so what does that statement of yours prove? Nothing at all.
However, he is not in full retreat and a penalty machine to boot like Jannie is. The worst scrumming on test level I have ever seen was Jannie last year on test level. When he was replaced by Malherbe in one test the scrums became stable and not retreating at jet speed like the case was earlier in that test.
— END OF THREAD —
