The Idiot Speakers myths

I have read what was said by the Idiot Speakers about the game on Saturday and had another look at the game to see what was going on in their hate-filled top storeys:-

The Kerevi break - Disallowed Try

This was a classic,  First of all AO said that Du Toit was to be blamed for scoring of the try by he Aussie number 8.  Never a word about the try being disallowed because of a forward pass and the fool did not even refer to that one again.   He will obviously change his original posting on the issue - same as he changed his ridiculous rating of Esterhuizen;s performance from 7,5 to 6,5 after an outcry on site.   

Kerevi ran a line through the about gap between Du Toit and Elstadt - with Esterhuizen standing around amongst the other forwards about another three meters away.   He never was in any defensive line anywhere.  In three other cases the same happened with attempted breaks by Kerevi - in one case the tackle was actually made by Etzebeth and in the other two cases by De Jager.  One of the three incidents happened while Esterhuizen was yellow-carded.

The Hallet-Petty try

This actual try was scored while Esterhuizen was off the field and was a direct result of Mapimpi charged inwards to make a tackle on Kuridrani leaving Hallett-Penny with no defendant in sight,- so easy blame Elstadt for the try being scored scored.

So who is to blame for the try anyway.   Pakie claimed It was the result of a "clumsy tackle" by Du Toit made about 4 minutes before the try was scored.   The breakdown ball was recovered and another carry followed and another breakdown followed;  At the second breakdown the Springboks was penalized and a corner kick followed.  That is where the actual attack started leading to the try.  All the result of the despicable Du Toit. 

The Springbok tries

Three of the five Springbok tries were scored by players under constant attack by the Idiot Speakers,  The De Jager ty was typical,  When reference was made to the line break and pace by Du Toit (remember he is according to AO pace- deficient and according to Mozart useless because he has a long neck, thin shoulders and a thin wrists)  Mozart came up and claimed that the kick was showing no thinking as the ball could have bounced the wrong way and benefit the Aussies,  The ball was fielded by H Jantjies - who nearly scored and the weak upper body De Jager (another statement by the idiots) forced his way over the line and scored.  According to them no reference to the scoring of the try - remember according to the Idiot Speakers it did not happen.  The attacks on De Jager was all out because he missed two line-outs - one of which was the result of a poor throw-in.

The other try by Reinach was another ignore case,   It just did not happen at all - but the attack on Reinach was all out - AO could not contain himself. 

There was total silence on the Nkosi try as well.  However, the Idiot Speakers in the past did not rate tries at all.   Mozart's attitude always was that accurate kicking at goal was more important than scoring of tries - remember his classic that 90% of the requirements of a flyhalf was kicking when he used to defend Morne's poor defnse and non-existent gain-line attacks.  Add to that the wonderful flat backline attacks under Meyer invented by AO and the picture is clear - it is a free-for-all mechanism to distort what happens on the field of play - especially if you have pet hatreds against any player.

The classic also was the comments of Jean de Villiers on deficient mid-field defense during the half-time break.   Pakie came out and said there was no such a deficiency and in other words either De Villiers is ignorant or distorted the situation.  Classic Idiot Speak at its worse.

The Foley Try

Easy - blame other players for the try.  I expressed reservations about where Steyn was in the case of the Beale break and my question was rubbished.  So where was Steyn?  He rushed out of the defensive line and the ball carrier just ran past him,   It left a five meter gap in the defensive line through which Beale ran.   So who was to blame for that defensive lapse?

Conclusion

One has to be very careful to read what comes out of all three Idiot Speakers - they are twisted in their comments on rugby issues.  

You would have been well advised not to make this thread. You have been debunked on every issue. Thoroughly. Slinging more mud doesn't change that. 

Reinach
His poor passing revealed itself again. We saw nothing of his boot. what did we learn? That he is a runner. I always said he was a wing at heart with poor skills. Conclusion confirmed. Do quote this "all out attack". 

Kerevi Break & Disallowed Try
Trying to obfuscate the discussion. Just as you did when I debunked your golden rules of kicking when citing the exploitation of Folau! When beaten, you try to weasel your way out by shifting the point of discussion. The point I made was the break which allowed Kerevi through acres of space. Plain and simple. You refused to acknowledge the role Steph made in that break. Who is the liar? 

Lood Try
He scored a pick and drive. Try. There is very little more I can say then that. Some members even question the legitimacy of the try. What did we learn from this? Not much. Why raise the issue? He didn't even create the opportunity which led to the pressure. You bring up Steph's speed. Why did he kick? Was he lacking the speed to breakaway? You are straining desperately to create the impression of winning position for your battered arguments of yesterday. 

Meyer's Boks
We can pick any Meyer Bok test, especially after the Dunedin test in 2012, and we can evaluate it. Compare it to anything Rassie has done. How about that? I have absolutely roasted this argument of yours at least a dozen times. Why even bring Meyer into the discussion? You perpetually return discussions on Rassie to Meyer. You must feel very threatened by Meyer. 

Jean's Midfield Assessment
Pakie blew Jean's assessment apart yesterday. This isn't even remotely open to discussion anymore. Your only defence has been to call Pakie a liar and an idiot. If Pakie is wrong, go ahead and prove it. I dare you. 

Nkosi Try
Total silence? I discussed this try in detail at least three times. I described the role of Jantjies, Frans and Eben in particular, whose skills created that try. There is nothing more to say. 

Petty Try
AUS L/O: Maul, A2 at the tail. A9 takes it off A2, passes long and flat to A12. AUS have three spaced out runners which isolates S13. S10-S13-S11 are marked up on A11-A12-A13. S13 takes A12 low and S10 takes A12 high. A12 stands in the tackle as A11-A13 converge to clean ensuring ruck. A9 takes an offload from A12. S11 fans out as S5-S6 fold around the back of the ruck. A9 passes long and flat to A10. S11 is marking up on his inside. S15 is the next defender outside of S11. A10 fixes S11, passes flat to A15, who in turn draws S15 and passes to A14 who is now in space out wide. S6 is the next defender behind the line and is beaten by A14. S11 is on up next and takes A14 high. A14 twists in the tackle and scores.

The Bok forwards were very slow tracking behind the line. Where was Lood? There was nothing more the backs could have done in this situation. Had Kriel been able to stop Kerevi like Andre did, the offload doesn't happen. Perhaps there is no try at all. 

In the sequence of play before that try, Lood fumbled a restart at 25:20. AUS scrum, Steph slips the tackle in the first ball off that scrum. AUS go through several phases around the same area, gradually moving forward. Lood misses a tackle on Kerevi at 26:51, Kerevi gains very good ground. Louw almost wins a turnover here. Nic passes wide to Foley. Foley has a box formation outside of him: 

A1  A3
A2  A12

Foley passes to A1. Elton rushes out of the line and misses the tackle on A1. Kriel takes him high, and the ref plays advantage here for offside. The players are in an upright cluster now, Steph pushes them to ground. Nic quickly passes out to Foley who has A4 advancing immediately outside him, which holds Elstadt in place. Nkosi rushes out to meet the deeper lying Kerevi who is behind A4. Foley dummies a short ball to A4 and passes to Kerevi, who is now behind Nkosi. AUS have a staggered line of 4: A12-A13-A14-A7. Gelant covers that space between A13 and A14. Kerevi fumbles the ball which Gelant gathers. Knock-on. Play comes back for AUS advantage. They kick into the corner and the lineout which results in the try occurs. 

Foley Try
AUS L/O: 5 man lineout, Hooper is the designated receiver. He takes it and darts around the maul. Louw tackles him at the seam behind the maul. Genia passes out to Foley. AUS have A10-A22 marked by S22-S13. Both Boks rush up, Frans taking Foley. Foley passes short to Toomua who runs into the space between Frans and Kriel. Kriel made the mistakes of passively ball watching and allows Toomua inside leverage, gifting him space outside Frans. He is brought down by Kriel and Elton after gaining good ground. Toomua passes up from the ground to Genia flat to Beale. Coetzee and Orie have a sizeable gap between them, which Beale darts into. Kriel tries to catch him from behind the ruck, but cannot. Nkosi and Kriel converge upon him, but Beale offloads to Foley. Reinach flubs a last opportunity to stop the movement. Try. 

No - not debunked by you ever - just dealing with the truth which is not acceptable to you and beyond your comprehension.  You obviously do not know the difference between the truth and mudslinging - that says it all.

You cannot counter anything I said above because your contributions on site and those of your comrades are so far removed from being true reflections as to what was really happened in games \ it is unbelievable and in some ways farcical showing zero interest in the true performance evaluations in games.    

Well this whole sorry thing can be dismissed by exposing two lies in one sentence:

Kerevi ran a line through the about six meter gap between Du Toit and Elstadt - with Esterhuizen standing around amongst the other forwards about another three meters away.

Steph is close enough to stretch out his arm in an attempted tackle, but this, apparently, is a 6m gap according to ou Mike.

with Esterhuizen standing around amongst the other forwards about another three meters away

4 Seconds (note the time stamp) before the break above happens Esterhuizen is pinned by an Aussie after having just participated in a tackle/maul situation on the other side of the field. Unless he can get up and travel across field at the speed at which a rugby ball is passed, there is no way he can end up 3m from the Kerevi break as Mike claims (he is, of course, nowhere near).

Mike, you're a disgrace to the game and to this forum.

No you are - the story about the clumsy tackle by Du Toit  and the scoring of the Hallett -Petty try four minutes later says it all.

Distortions is your stock in trade.\ so accept the punishment when it is pointed out.

And there sis a four second difference between the Kerevi break that happened earlier and the tackle involving Esterhuizen - a separate issue altogether from the one I raised.  How long does it take for a player to get up from a tackle?   Maybe for Esterhuizen - slow in everything as he is - he cannot get up in four seconds.   

So my estimate as to the width of the gap was too wide in looking at the gap on actual TV it looked wider than is shown on the photo.  When the actual break took place Esterhuizen was shown on TV standing up - so maybe he was not as slow in reaction as Pakie claimed to be the case.     

Liar Mike at it again. Lowering the level of discussion on the forum. 

the story about the clumsy tackle by Du Toit  and the scoring of the Hallett -Petty try

No see, the clumsy Du Toit challenge for the ball on the ground (not tackle), was in the leadup to the Foley try. Keep it together.

Here is what I meant, and as I said when I explained all the little things that could have gone differently in this play, it was simply one of many little misjudgements, nothing to make a song and dance about.

The red area is where Steph is attempting to compete for the ball, the white circle indicates the ball. From here Toomua simply rolls forward past Steph and presents quick tackle ball, from which the breach is made.

There I updated my post. Nice one Pakie. 

Lügnerin, when handling a gun, aim away from y our feet. 

When the actual break took place Esterhuizen was shown on TV standing up

Excuse me, I thought you said he was 3m away from the break standing among a bunch of forwards? So you just admitted that you lied. Thank you.

And then you try to fix your lie with another lie, as there is no TV angle that shows the far side of the field as the break takes place. The first wide angle pan is when Kerevi is already 10m further on. Esterhuizen is up then, but he is also about 30m away. Not sure what point you're trying to make, unless you think the guy is Superman.

The Haylett Petty try - you started off the story by saying there was a clumsy tackle by Du Toit - now suddenly it was a clumsy fumble of the ball    So the story is changed after being challenged by me.

The BS is never ending getting caught out makes the Idiot Speaker helpless   By the time the actual Kerevi line break took place, Esterhuizen was standing on his feet meters away    No I do not think Esterhuizen is a Superman - slow and slow thinking - but not a Superman  

That photo had nothing to do with the Haylett-Petty try sequence at all - but you had to cover for your earlier distortion of what actually happened. soo lets face facts 0 you were guilty as charged LIAR. 

Show me where I made any connection between Steph and the HP try. Quote me.

Better yet, I'll quote myself:

So lets analyze the BS of the Idiot Speaker AO above:-

Reinach

"His poor passing revealed itself again. We saw nothing of his boot. what did we learn? That he is a runner. I always said he was a wing at heart with poor skills. Conclusion confirmed. Do quote this "all out attack".

Lies aplenty.   Reinach made one relieving kick from the red zonme that went into touch about 10 metres inside the Aussie half of the field.  He made another kick downfield thatw as effectively followed up by the Spriongboks and put the Aussies under pressure,   One pass was not really effective - but he did scopre a try which was toptallym ignored by the Idiot. 

Kerevi Break & Disallowed Try

Trying to obfuscate the discussion. Just as you did when I debunked your golden rules of kicking when citing the exploitation of Folau! When beaten, you try to weasel your way out by shifting the point of discussion. The point I made was the break which allowed Kerevi through acres of space. Plain and simple. You refused to acknowledge the role Steph made in that break. Who is the liar?

As per normal you are the liar,  Don't bring in your tale of Kirchner being a better fullback than Folau here.  You are a big enough idiot already.  I never ever said that Kerevi did not make a break running a line between Du Toit and Elstadt.

Lood Try
He scored a pick and drive. Try. There is very little more I can say then that. Some members even question the legitimacy of the try. What did we learn from this? Not much. Why raise the issue? He didn't even create the opportunity which led to the pressure. You bring up Steph's speed. Why did he kick? Was he lacking the speed to breakaway? You are straining desperately to create the impression of winning position for your battered arguments of yesterday. 
The BS continues unabated.  Du Toit outpaced the defenders - but there was an Aussie in front of him and he made the strategic and very effective kick.   And you are the idiot who claimed that De Jager lack upper body strength.  No I am not straining anything - merely providing the truth.         

Meyer's Boks 

Will not waste time in quoting further  idiocy on site - but the flat effective attacking by the Springbok backline was the biggest BS I ever heard.  

Nkosi Try

Steyn made a total flop of his defensive requirements  a nd you bring in Reinach who tried to catch Foley unsuccessfully from the back .  The Reinach story is simply another distortion by you. 

Xavi

I have no problem with discussions on site - but I abhor distortions and BS aimed at specific players.   I have enough of the junk AO, Pakie and Mozart puts on site,.   I watched the game3 again last night nd looked specifically at what they wrote and every one of the issues they wrote about was distorted  

Even their responses have elements of distortions in it.  Guilty as charged is the real situation. 

Lets get some honest player performance evaluations on site for a change.  

Steyn was NOT involved in that movement at all

Funny, here he is drawing two men out of the line and offloading to Jantjies, from where it goes Elstadt - Eben - Gelant - Nkosi.

By the time the actual Kerevi line break took place, Esterhuizen was standing on his feet meters away

There is not one single piece of footage that shows Esterhuizen meters away from the break. The first wide pan is when Kerevi is about 10m into his run after the break, and that shows Esterhuizen about 30m away, retreating from where he was last involved.

So you want to tell us that Esterhuizen, in 4 seconds, got disentangled from an Aussie tackle, got up, made 30m across field to be within meters of the Kerevi break, then within one second made 30m back the other way again for this shot to catch him where he is.

If so, he is indeed Superman, but unfortunately this is more a case of you being a senile old coot whose mental faculties are deserting him.

Baloney BSter - Total Baloney as per normal

Not to worry - your worst balls-up was that clumsy tackle of Du Toit 4 minutes before Haylett-Petty scored - which suddenly vanished and was replaced by a clumsy something else.   This kind of report by you i s total and utter BS.   .  

Okay, go through your copy of the game and give me the exact time stamp when you see Esterhuizen standing meters from the break and I'll take a screenshot. You can see the time frame during which this incident happens (17:35 - 17:40), so it will be easy to find.

Come on, here's a simple, straightforward way to vindicate yourself.

Why avoid the issue about the clumsy tackle issue?  

Already dealt with, scroll up to my post at 9:07.

Time stamp for Esterhuizen meters from the break please.

No you lied about he clumsy tackle and now duck the issue.  So your hero Esterrhuizen according to you did not get up even in 5 seconds - slow and slow in thinking as well.

Time stamp please.

In this scene Vinnie Jones plays Pakie dishing out a dose to Caught Out Again Oom Mike (played by the Masked Men). The Deagle 5.0 of video evidence trumping the Ooms bs.

I have lots of respect for the integrity of the game and of this site,   I am losing my temper when members deliberately try and discredit players in the way AO  and Mozart do all the time and you join in from time to time.   I do not find it funny that members study games to try and find deficiencies in players they dislike - ignoring any potential positives and come up with things nobody else in the wide world of rugby coms up with. 

There is no problem in supporting players you like - but it is very wrong when  unsubstantiated rubbish is used to discredit other players.  

The constant attacks on Erasmus by especially Mozart and AO is pathetic and the giving of \demeaning names to the  coach and players is plain idiotic.   I have criticized Meyer in the ast for his team selection - but never called him anything else but by his real name. 

Is it not time that we get some real objectivity on site and treat the coach players, abnd members with some dignity and respect?     

I have no problem with real discussions  - but have problems with m embers trying to identify deficiencies, which are not a all proved.  

I am not necessarily supporting some players such as De Allende.  I criticized him in the past myself - but when people unfairly attacked him and invent reasons to do so  I would always defend him.

The fact is that we are unfortunate as to the number 12 position.   Despite every possible attack on De Allende he is still the only real option at 12.   Esterhuizen is a one track mind player that is not a real 12/  Jake wanted to use him as a 7 because of a variety of reasons - one of which is that he is not really a center.   Steyn has been used in all backline positions bar the scrummie - but he was a very promising youngster who somehow went sour and by 2012 was a reputation player.    I think it was in 2014 that Foxsport rated him as the number 32 center in Super Rugby  and his club (Montpellier) used him initially s a flyhalf and center - but found him wanting in those two positions,  They contracted Goosen and Serfontein to play at flyhalf and center ahead of him and it was reported the Club is not extending his contract.  Sorry for the guy - but he made a mess by going to Europe and picking up weight at the rate he did.    His rugby suffered as a result of that.

It is very late in the day for him to get back his form to what it was in 2008. 

I also think that De Jager is a better player than he is credited by people in SA,   He was over=used in the WC ibn 2015 because of the fact that Matfield was unusable in that series and by the end of the WC was not  good as he was earlier.   

.                

Is that so Lügnerin? Shall I refer to Cuntfield? I feel confident that José Erasmus is a much lesser offence.

This is your problem, you cannot tolerate anything that does not come from you. Everything has to be Lügnerin approved. If not, then it is a hate crime, insensitive, intolerable and must be driven from the forum (your own words). You say what we post is unsubstantiated, that is only in your warped little world. The door is always open for you to make a case for your position, yet you take the lazy way out and reach for the mud sling. The following are your own unsubstantiated opinions or outright lies: 

1. I do not find it funny that members study games to try and find deficiencies in players they dislike - ignoring any potential positives and come up with things nobody else in the wide world of rugby coms up with. 
2. There is no problem in supporting players you like - but it is very wrong when  unsubstantiated rubbish is used to discredit other players.  
3. The constant attacks on Erasmus by especially Mozart and AO is pathetic and the giving of \demeaning names to the  coach and players is plain idiotic.   I have criticized Meyer in the ast for his team selection - but never called him anything else but by his real name. 
   

Here we have your true nature rise to the surface, spoken like a true little Himmler: 

Is it not time that we get some real objectivity on site and treat the coach players, abnd members with some dignity and respect?     

Only you may determine objectivity. The sole keeper of the truth. You use smooth words to coerce members into banding together to oust out those who don't meet your warped criteria. Who is it who has repeatedly insulted other members? Consider yourself fortunate that I take with with a grain of salt. Then, after all of this, you'll post a thread expressing concern for a member who has been absent for a time. How you can do all of this with a straight face is absolutely unbelievable. 

I posted everything Andre and Damian did for the Boks last year, and every word I have ever spoken is verifiable by film. Can you say the same? 

Hew played against Japan and in every subsequent game.   Go and check the teams before you talk yourself into a hole again.

He enverr was a low energy player anyway.  Also tripe

Hew played against Japan and in every subsequent game.   Go and check the teams before you talk yourself into a hole again.

He enverr was a low energy player anyway.  Also tripe

He played against Japan and in every subsequent game.   Go and check the teams before you talk yourself into a hole again.

He never was a low energy player anyway.  Also tripe.  On Saturday De Jager made 14 tackles missing none - more than any other player on the field - wonderful example of a low energy player.  

22-year old Lood played 368 minutes of rugby at WC2015 in the 6 weeks up to and including the semi. That's 4.6 full games in 6 weeks. Hardly overplayed for such a young guy.

30-year old Francois Louw played 461 minutes in that 6 weeks and was labeled a "menace" by the NZ commentators in the semi-final.

Pakie 

Which game did De Jager not play in?   The games were

Round Robin

Japan, Samoa, Scotland, USA

Quarterfinal

Wales

Semi-final

New Zealand

Listen dimness over 6 weeks the squad was made up of 31 players and the idea is to give players one game off  in that six weeks period.   Meyer took Matfield along and he played less than 170 minutes in total - the Japan test 80 minutes and the rest in three tests coming from the bench.

Instead of one game off in six weeks of tests the Matfield saga resulted in him having to play in everyone of the six tests.   Louw also played in all six - but with only being benched once - reason - Alberts was on holiday with the squad. 

H0oweevr, maybe you do not know the difference between  Loosies and Tight 5 players and the arrangements as to replacing those.

As kakpraat 'n siekte is was jy lankal in intensive care      

He played in them all, but not for 80 minutes. Only 26 minutes against Samoa, for example. For a conditi oned 22 year old that's like a practice run.

I'm going to save this thread. It's been hilarious! 

No 

Save this thread because you were thoroughly disgraced in it. You know bugger all about rugby - and that has been proven above.  Are you not ashamed of yourself - you should be.   

No 

Save this thread because you were thoroughly disgraced in it. You know bugger all about rugby - and that has been proven above.  Are you not ashamed of yourself - you should be.