The crazy world of Mozart

When anybody reads Mozart's posts he or she would find that the BS he spreads really hit the fan 90% f the time.

Mozart's regularly harp on three things - 

*   the playing of "Traditional SA Rugby;

*   the kicking game; and 

*   defense

He has a long list of players he supports - they must be near to 30 years or older.  Defense do not count in his case and they can do the most stupid kicks imaginable and miss unbelievable number of tackles and not a word about it would ever be uttered by him.   Other players on his pet hate list would be hammered for even less.

Traditional SA Rugby

I always asked him what that could possibly entail and all one gets from him is that is forward dominance and the halfbacks kicking the ball away aimlessly.   The roll of the rest of the backline was to follow up mainly aimless and poorly directed kicks and defend.   

Meyer's remarks that SA backline players do not have skills to play differently was supported by Mozart all out.   He adored Morne Steyn and Fat Fransie endlessly because hey could kick balls and do nothing else.   Fat Fransie had a wonderful record of aimless kicking and ball possession handovers - but because he could kick the Shit ot of balls - he was regarded by Mozart as the most wonderful flyhalf or number 12 center imaginable.

I am asking the umpteenth time - what does this myth of "traditional SA rugby" actually mean?

Mozart's beloved kicking game

Mozart always loved kicking way balls and he said in the past that 905 of the roll of a flyhalf was to kick balls and that there are no bad and aimless kicks in rugby.

Looking at the BS dished up yesterday by the SA halfbacks one wonders whether SA players have ever been coached about the kicking game and what is acceptable and what is not.   95% of the kicks by he half-backs was actually BS by brainless halfbacks.  Du Preez and Du Plessis was slightly better - the rest was atrocious.

Yesterday was another example when it was clear that SA Halfbacks hated the idea of ball possession and that the answer is to hand possession over to the opposition by poor kicking,  

Defense

 Mozart hates some players and adores others.   He will attack players all out for missing tackles - but will always support players with atrocious defensive records provided they are also kickers irrespective of how poor the kicks are..  What a joke that is.

Another slow Sunday in Riversdale.

Cold and slow - but the result of yesterday's disastrous or near disastrous performance by some of our players and the BS spread by Mozart regularly.  

Mike

Counter attacking, tactical kicking, solid set piece and running from the right territory.

None of that is delusional.

It's a way to play the game.

We all have an idea of what we think will be the most successful.

Mine is smaller forwards with quicker rucks while punching long and short. Keep tired minds guessing.

What is yours?

Plum 

Thanks for the explanation - but that ii not what really happened in the past that Mozart admires so much.  He endorsed the 10 man game as traditional SA rugby and that is my point above.   

To meet what you outline above there should be ball skilled players - especially amongst the backline players and the loosies and Meyer was strongly supported by Mozart when he made those ridiculous comments about the backline players.

Can you imagine Morne could ever be a part of the process outlined by you and Fat Fransie as well.      It is that idiocy that I find unacceptable.  

Listen dim one - it is an evaluation which you mad rof ugby in the Meyer era and the BX continued endlessly since then.    It belongs right here to keep new members aware of he BS you propagate on site.

No response to the serious statements contained above - because you know full well that it is factual.    But then the rugby illiterate now full well tht it reflects his standard BS on site.    

Yes Mike I can easily imagine Morne as part of that type of plan...tactical kicking and quick passing when required. Weren't those the things he was good at?

Worked pretty well actually.

No?

And yes, I can imagine Frans as part of that type of game as well. 

Great boot, hit the line hard and often found himself in the right positions. 

Both Steyn and Frans suite a forward dominated plan perfectly. 

I don't see the problem.

No disagreeing for the sake of it.  

No Plum

Morne himself would never attack the gain line and he stood so far back in the pocket to avoid being tackled that any pass of his was a hospital pass - potential defenders would ignore him completely - they fall back to cover too frequently misdirected and aimless kicks and went for the poor inside center unfortunate enough to receive his passes/   

Morne was the worst defending flyhalf ever and also the only one whom commentators called his kicking BS while on the air,    

He was a one-trick pony - his only achievement was kicking at goal -   and even that went haywire  in some cases/    The worst and most predictable flyhalf SA had since 1992.   

Fat Fransie in 2014 and 2015 had the worst attacking record of any center in Super 15.   In the whole seasons  for two years running  he  made 4 line breaks and beat 17 defenders over two years.   He was in the process the wort ball possession loser in the 2014 season ever.

I would not say he hit the line hard - if he did the results would be evident/   

His kicks could never be followed up - they were really aimless and inaccurate  and an excellent means of handing over ball possession to opposing teams.   He was in 2014 rated as the number 32 center in Super Rugby and in 2015 he was even worse.  

And he is slow - with the result he cannot defend properly at all.   It really si a pity - he was such a promising player in his youth - but went sour early.      

Ignoring the BS kicking that took hold,    How much tactical kicking was there with Morne and Fat Fransie around -  zero.   Mozart does not know the difference between tactical kicking and the BS he supports.  Admitted that himself when he said no kicking is not tactical.

Nobody ever said that kicking is not part if the game  when it is strategic.  But the junk kicking we are fed regularly is BS.   Nobody wants to replace anything -  fact is the reading of he game and ball skills needs to be enhanced.   

This is typical Mozart BS.    The poor Bulls defense was the main problem and Mozart would not mention it since the worst defender was in fact Pollard -  whom he previously supported as no 12 center.      Their kicking game  was the means to hand  over possession more than anything else./      

Duplication

Mozart

You did not watch the game involving the Bulls yesterday- did you?    If you did you would not come up with the BS you said was the reason for the loss.      

The Bulls backline  made 22 tackles and missed 17 - a regular sieve and the main reason for the loss

What the hell has De Allende got to do with that game - piss brain?

Listen dimwit

I did mention elsewhere that the Bulls missed De Jager nd that the reason given by you for the loss was totally false 0 but you keep harping on about  Mitchell.   A nut case if ever there was one.    

Agree Moz.

With the likening the Dups bros, Marx, Kitshoff, and few other in the mix, we could and should certainly look to work on offloading more and be successful with it. Many of the guy's are capable but seem to carry poorly into contact. 

Eben probably being the biggest culprit here.

For some reason Mike seems to think that you support the 100% kicking game. I know that's not the case. I think everybody does and I'm not sure why he's so intent on proving it. 

For me, looking at the guy's who are regularly talked about on here and are likely to make up the Bok squad this year, it will probably be better for us to focus on winning targeted encounters.

Slowing the game down and then smashing the opposition to pieces at critical times. 

Jantjies is not the man for that. Pollard is. In fact, and I know Mike will hate this but a Steyn type of 10 would work well.

Is Dimitri CatPenis totally forgotten about now?

We have a good enough front row to do that and we have fast and big enough loosies to target moments in the game, dominate and score points.

The Bok team that is looking likely to be selected won't be able to play a flowing game. That much is obvious.

So yes, those skills from the JW and White era, in my opinion, are going to be more than necessary. Vital actually.

When Meyer was around he said that the backline players of SA does not have the skills to use their backline and the piss brain suggested that all-out.   He said that 90% of the function of flyhalfs are to kick balls.

In the  WC Meyer reverted back to the Bulls game plan of 2004 and they passed the ball constantly back to the forwards and Burger became the stand-in flyhalf,   The ball was only passed to the flyhalf when he had to make relieving kicks.    This again had the all-out support of Mozart - who could see nothing wrong with it.   Another example of 10 man rugby.  

Mozart is also the dud who said ball protection and recovery is not expected from loosies and some really weird other statements.   

I cannot see anything in what he w rites is the kicking game - he said no kicks are  poor and misdirected.   

I also think that Fat Fransie may join the Springbok squad - but he will flop badly and shall not last in the team.   The sooner he gets tried out to confirm that he will flop - the sooner that silly debate about him will end..   He flopped badly on Super Rugby level and he will certainly flop on test level too.            

Mozart

1    You lied in respect of item 1 = the 90% was definitely put on this site by you.   There is one other thing - nobody is against kicking the problem is that the SA kicking is poor and often used to hand over ball possession.

2    When ii was proved that Alberts could not recover balls at breakdowns - you came with a story that he pushed the opposing team players off the ball - everybody found that super-ridiculous,  Now you say ball protection and recovery is not the thing is still not important - to push the players off the ball is.   At how many breakdowns does that in fact happen?   Very few.

3     There is no difference between what Morne did and what Sexton and Murray do for Ireland.   This is exactly where the problems come in.   Morne had to be told in advance to kick and he was the most inaccurate and poor kicker known on international level.   Most of hic kicks were entirely predictable and  served basically to hand possession over to the opposing teams.    There was nothing strategic in his kicking game and  his kicks were even described as BS by commentators.   Predictability was Morne's biggest problem 

4    You really are surprising me.     The one story I do remember is about never passing balls when not in the opponents half - which is crazy too,   The problem is you support players who  routinely kick turnover ball away aimlessly - both Morne and Fat Fransie are famous for that.  Very vague about the other advantaged situations.    

Mike we have nice forwards for a street fight.

That's all I'm saying.  

So back to BS - Mozart/  I have tunnel vision - you have no vision whatsoever and insofar as rugby is concerned - your brain malfunctions totally. / 

Nobody in his right mind wants the 9 / 10 to aimlessly kick the ball away. Why would they?

Tactical and accurate kicking is an important part of the game and should not be discarded. The players should be alert and aware of when this tactic is employed so that they can chase and put pressure on for ball recovery.  This includes grubbers to break solid defensive lines.  

To dominate upfront is the heart and soul of a rugby match. One needs powerful men to do that. Light weight loosies do not contribute to the scrum set piece ... nor do they win the collision against tougher, bigger opposition. Your smallest loosie should be your openside flank. You need enforcers at 7, 8 and 4. They must be difficult to bring down and very physical. 

Winning the breakdown battle has become the most vital part in a rugby match. One needs a few players that are specialists on the ground ... that includes your hooker ... who by the way should also be an enforcer.

Mauling over the ball is also an important part of the game and can win you vital turnover ball. It should however not be used as your sole method of winning the collision on the ground. It has it's place though and serves as more than just winning turnover ball ... cleaning out opposition players, go forward, front foot ball ... etc.  

One has to earn the right to run the ball out wide. It's madness to play out wide if you haven't laid the foundation for it. Like it or not but your forwards dictate the terms here. It all begins and ends up front. 

There is a time and a place for 10 man rugby during a match. That doesn't mean that the backline has been excluded from play. Getting them to play off the fringes with little pop passes will most assuredly create opportunities for a full backline move.

It's called tactics. A game plan.

Nothing is set in stone.

A good coach will bring any combination of the above out in his team. Even a poorly selected team can be very effective if they adhere to these simple basic principals.

It's a team sport ... and the team should play as one ... not as an assortment of individuals.

Our franchises still don't know how to score tries, neither do the Boks. Almost 25 years into re-admission and the lingering statement I made to the then Bok coach still lingers like a bad smell.

Denny

Please check your facts.   For the first time ever the four  SA franchises are in the top 5 sides insofar as scoring of  tries is concerned.   It never happened before - eg in 2013 only the Cheetahs was in the category - on the last two years the Lions were - not one other team was in the top ten.

The worst ever try-scoring teams were the Bulls and the Stormers - as well as the Sharks.

The try-scoring is not the problem anymore - there are other factors that cause losses.   In the top list of that is aimless ball handover kicking  - which put defenders on the back foot and then the defense evaporates .  The same can be said about poor passing - for instance on Saturday the Sharks passing game was so poor - there were 24 ball losses as a result.   In any event defense was often enough poor.

The above identified problems need to be addresed.

So they've mastered backline play? Yeah right!

Mozart

First of all  you do not know the difference between strategic/tactical kicking and the BS regularly produced by Morne and Fat Fransie.  I never ran down the importance of se t pieces - but indicated that there is a need to move away from the 10 - man rugby you have always advocated.

As to the scoring of tries - the local franchises has in the main being very average insofar as mauls and tries from mauls are concerned.     The main try-scoring came from comprehensive rugby being played/   

You do not understand it because you constantly claim that Morne and fat Fransie do tactical kicking - which even a fool knows they are incapable of.   That is why experts said Morne's kicks are  BS - but you think not so.

LOLZ!

As for scoring tries Den, part of our problem is an over reliance on the maul....once we are in the 22, we are intent on scoring maul tries and the oppo knows it. Why not fake off the maul? 

Moz, I don't claim to be an expert on backline play although I harbor some ideas which I've noted in the past. Winding back the clock I remember the delusional Dawie spruiking Jantjies as the cure-all to  Bok backline woes.....think he said Jantjies was going to ignite the backline. I found that idea hilarious and said as much at the time. I've always believed it's the ability to think on their feet, to offload in the tackle and that all of the backline has to sing off the same sheet. 

The maul cannot be discarded but yes it cannot be the only way to score tries and to me it's a cop-out by our players because they lack the intellectual property to score tries so they revert to the most basic manner possible. I watched a Bulls game a week or so ago, can't remember the name of the Kiwi team they played but the reality was that they walked away scoreless after broaching the opposition red zone a number of times. Clearly they had no idea how to create the space to score a try which we so often see from the Ozzies and Kiwis.

How about a quick pick and go, compress the defence before sending the ball out wide? The Ozzies and Kiwis do it  monotonously....why not our teams? We can go on about it forever and a day but after so many years of readmission we are in a sad state as a rugby powerhouse,