The centre situation

No - I was just commenting on one of your statements above.

Mozart 

In essence I agree with you about Pollard.   He has a history of tackle deficiency playing at 12 and there were a number of misunderstandings  between Jantjies and him in the tests where Jantjies came on.

I am not sure about Janse van Renburg at all.   He played very few games for the Lions in 2017 due to injury.   In the games he did play there were altogether too frequently handling errors and even when he was available he was alternating between him and Vorster as starters and bench usage.   

I hope he gets his game back on track playing for his club.   According to my latest information he played zero games for Sale this year in the 2018-19 games.   I tried to check - but could not find his name on the recent Sales team-sheets and the question arises whether he is injured again.   Ceradunce may be ale to help out.

However, he last played for the Springboks in 2016 and went off the screen afterwards - so whether he is still a possible selection is really unknown.

As to Willemse - my comments are factual and he could be a consideration to play at 12,   But I also mentioned Serfontein and Sage (the grandson of Doug Hopwood) as well as Impi Visser to watch out for in future.           

Interesting,  10 is too soon for Willemse in tests...and we have no clear contender for 12...might work.

Shall we just suggest Venter with Serfontein and call it a day?

Mozart

Your comments on Pollard at 10 and Willemse at 12 are very interesting,    Despite his age Willemse is built like a tank and have the muscle power as well.  Together with speed that can be a dangerous combination. 

We have another Super Rugby season coming - that is why I mention  Sage and Visser to watch out for.    Both are big guys. 

From what I have seen in the Sevens games and in CC games - Sage has both speed and the ability to read the game,  He played for the Bulls at 13.

Nobody knows anything about Visser.  He played under 19 rugby for the Bulls at center - and then vanished from the scene.   From what I heard he went to Stellenbosch University to get his engineering degree and when that was done he entered the Sevens Academy and was picked for the Team to play in Dubai this weekend.   A clever guy - and we must see what happens in Sevens this coming weekend.  He will be one of the props of the Blitzbokke.   Because of his size and the fact that he did play at center in his junior years - he may end up being a serious contender.

Another longer term contender would be Simelane of the Lions if his performance in the Under 20WC earlier this year is borne in mind.        

Shucks, Sevens time already?!!!

Oh...

Nice posts Rooi and Moz.

Not ashamed to say I learnt a bit. 

A second 10 at 12 is an interesting proposal. I wouldn't be averse to giving him a couple of tests next year. It would be a hell of a gamble to throw him in and expect him to carry our midfield in a WC campaign. He lacked composure and displayed problems reading the game; He looked unready for test rugby. Starting him at 12 may ease him into the role of 10 later down the line, who knows. He may fold. It could go either way. He is an elusive runner, and that is no doubt what draws alot of attention. Can he carry the ball up? Can he distribute from 12? Can he organise and lead the rush? These are the things which will make or break him. We don't need anymore dead-end runners at centre. As we saw with the possession stats t his season, we concentrate an obscene amount of ball through 12, ball that typically goes nowhere. 

AO

Willemse did all that you say he cannot do when he played at 12 in the Under 20WC.   You really specialize in BS at best.  How much game time had Willemse had at flyhalf in tests this year to lead you to the statement you made as factual?

You  are the worst decisionmaker I have seen for years.   You have made deductions that are never factual and based on prejudice.  

BB

Unless Erasmus asks the Stormers to play at 12 - it just would not happen.   They have De Allende as their inside center and in 2018 SR he was the second from the top performing center in the competition as a whole -ie in respect of all centers playing..   

Unless there is a problem with De Allende the Stormers would not do that voluntarily - they would use De Allende and Nel as their starting center combination and Willemse at their starting flyhalf.   

The proponents of mediocrity always demand more time, squander resources and, ultimately, achieve nothing. What did Willemse do with the time he had? He was horribly out of position against New Zealand, a mistake you blame on Pollard. He also threw an intercept at a precarious stage of the first Puma test. He was toothless against England. You attempted, quite feebly, to conceal reality, branding everyone who didn't agree with you as liars, only to be exposed as a liar yourself. 

How many matches has he played at FLYHALF total dimness and as per normal you are too bloody stupid to claim that a single passing mistake is career-defining - same as your superior in total dimness believes. 

And as for the other incident - where would Le Roux would have been in the case of the AB test?   I doubt if you know enough about rugby to work that one out.  

Is it career defining? It can be. An intercept can result in demotions that change the course of careers. How do you think Robert Du Preez's two charge downs affected his standing with Rassie? We lost a test because of the second. Willemse's intercept wasn't even with a great deal of pressure. He had no feel for the play and threw a horrible pass for Van Staden. Try. His positional play was poor in all of his tests. Hence, he looked unready for test rugby. Talented, but unready. 

It did not change the career in the case of Jantjies who made similar mistakes.  I asked for other examples where other than the case you referred rightly or wrongly as being out of position - you went back to you generalized BS.  No examples - just waffling.    

You never failed to live up to my expectations of a total failure as a commentator on rugby issues.    

I'd never want your approval. That would be the surest sign of failure. Keeping in good company is always the best policy. 

And your opinion on rugby issues is total failure.  

Correction:

"and your opinion facts on rugby issues is are a total failure success. They make me weep bitterly"

Aren't you happy I'm here to help you? Yes? Of course yes! 

I am always happy that we have members who cause much amusement and give me an easy opportunity to kick their buds - but that may sound like cruelty to vulnerable humans.