FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  The infamous Bakkies penalty

The infamous Bakkies penalty

Started by Mozart27 REPLIES393 VIEWS· 26 Aug 2014, 00:02
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 Aug 2014, 00:02
#1
26 Aug 2014, 00:02#1

The infamous Bakkies penalty occurred when he was offside on the kick charge. Bosch nailed a beauty from 55 metres and we almost lost the test. I have read much about the sheer stupidity of Bakkies...but I recall Jean making a point about the kicker being taken out. So I checked.

 

So this is what happens. Willie has the ball just outside the 22 and lofts an U&U. The players, including Bakkies lurk for a second or two and then move up with Bakkies in the vanguard. Perhaps he should have looked but I'm sure Bakkies assumed Willie would run them onside....hence the slight delay.

 

But nope. Willie was splattered by not one but two Bargies, both of whom arrived late. It was a late tackle...Bakkies was not guilty.

 

He did, however, take it to heart and roared up on the kickoff to make the tackle deep in the Bargie 22....showing more energy than Lomp had done in 80 minutes.

SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
26 Aug 2014, 00:05
#2
26 Aug 2014, 00:05#2
 Bakkies should not be anywhere near the squad he is past it, another of Meyers pathetic pa ssengers
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
26 Aug 2014, 00:11
#3
26 Aug 2014, 00:11#3
 Mozart
Why don't you do something useful for a change and check what Bakkies produced in the games he played for the Springboks since November last year.   There was an article dealing with the problems of the Springboks and it wa spointed out that Bakkies appearance on the dfield of play lasts for 15 minutes at the utmost - then he disappears into invisibility.   
Botha was invisible again - and now you fantasize about a tackle he made - as if that was so wonderful?  How many meters were he dragged in the process?   Anyway he tried 3 tackles - missed one and gave away a penalty.  No other indication that he did anything while he was on the field of play.  The normal low work rate individual in evidence.      
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
26 Aug 2014, 00:13
#4
26 Aug 2014, 00:13#4
 The answer mike is sweet stuff all. He looks all of 34 on the field these days. He is blighting his good name a s is matfield,  steenkamp and co
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 Aug 2014, 00:18
#5
26 Aug 2014, 00:18#5

Well lets see who were your picks in the last year;

 

SP Marais....not test class

 

JJ being dropped by the Bools at CC level

 

Rhule....eina

 

Serfontein...dropped after a barren S15

 

De Allende....the new JJ

 

Goosen...avoids contact

 

Lambie....a fullback who bombed in the semi

 

Hougaard ....bumbling

 

Reinach.... subbed off to win the S15 quarter...bombs in the semi

 

Coenie...failed

 

Marcel....will fail, the signs are there

 

Malherbe can't stay on his feet

 

Kitshoff....ordinary and mostly hurt

 

Lomp....a myth

 

Lewies....dominated by the Saders

 

Steph du Toit...an injury nightmare

 

I'm leaving out all your mystery Boks who went overseas and guys who were already flopping before last year like Jantjies.

 

So far we have only a few newbies showing up. Willie who you didnt pick. Hendricks who is the new Basson...good on offence, weak on defence. Pollard who you didn't pick. And Coetzee...your only claim to proving me wrong. And I admit he added real value on Saturday. But I also remember how the Saders wiped him out, so I'm hopeful after two years he is finally ready, but I'd like to see him against the other RC teams.

 

It's a depressing story for a self proclaimed expert like you Dave

SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
26 Aug 2014, 00:46
#6
26 Aug 2014, 00:46#6
 Oh what rubbish SP showed ages ago he was test quality but today he would never play ahead of willie but a good back up he remains.
JJ has never been dropped at CC that is a lie. The fact that Meyer dropped him means stuff all as Meyer gets most his selections wrong as proved over the past few weeks and to be confirmed in more was than one on the weeks to come.
Rhule remains a test quality wing, he has more potential than hendricks. 
Serfontein dropped by clueless Meyer at the time Meyer said he was one of his best performing players in the incoming tests this year. That about sums Meyer up. Jan would only need to take the field to be an improvement on awol Jean. 
Goosen avoids contact - what utter rubbish. He is twice the player morne is, the true contact avoider.
De Allende was huge this s15, was solid on sat and will kick arse soon.
Lambie is a 10 and did not bomb in the semi at all what rubbish. Twice the player morne is.
Hougaard has found his mojo and was a big improvement on useless pienaar.
Reinach was one of the few good sharks players who had moments of brilliance. Compare that to the rubbish pienaar dishes out for the boks.
Coenie failed what utter garbage. He is our best young prop of the lot, sadly injured again. Coenie vs the insult steenkamp is a no brainer
Marcel is up there with Coenie,  the man mountain is just what we need in the Bok engine room.
malherbe is a quality 3 yet to be beaten.
kitshoff is a class act and only been injured once being at this moment.  Meyer is an idiot for not selecting this kid much like missing out on willemse. 
Lood has been huge for two seasons - man you have no idea. The boy is as good as bakkies and matfield were at the same age. One of the finds of the year, sadly making his test appearances in a shit bok side under a shit coach.
Lewies dominated by saders again what utter rubbish, 2nd highest line out taker in the s 15, great work rate and aggression. Rewarded with a test cap for good reason. Great find.
step du Toit is pure class and it's early days
These youngsters offer so much more than the useless washed up geriatrics dragging our beloved game into the dirt



MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 Aug 2014, 00:59
#7
26 Aug 2014, 00:59#7

Marcel the man mountain....

 

Full name Marcel van der Merwe

Born October 24, 1990, Welkom Current age 23 years 305 daysMajor teams Blue Bulls, Bulls, Cheetahs, Free State, South Africa Under-20s, South AfricaPosition PropHeight 6 ft 2 in Weight 246 lb Big enough for a hooker perhaps.  
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
26 Aug 2014, 01:02
#8
26 Aug 2014, 01:02#8
 Safes- ex Jy hap na bubbles ou Beesblaas. Djy praat kak bru.
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
26 Aug 2014, 01:04
#9
26 Aug 2014, 01:04#9
 Funny that for all his other profiles have him at 128 kg as did the super sport stats before the game. As I keep saying you only need to look at Marcel to realise he is a monster
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 Aug 2014, 01:09
#10
26 Aug 2014, 01:09#10

Not all:

 

Full nameMarcel van der MerweDate of birth(1990-10-24) 24 October 1990 (age 23)Place of birthWelkom, South AfricaHeight1.88 m (6 ft 2 in)Weight112 kg (17 st 9 lb)

 

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 Aug 2014, 04:41
#11
26 Aug 2014, 04:41#11
A related point, Walsh appears to give the penalty a good 2 metres closer to the poles than the spot where the tackle was made. With such an edge of the range kick that mistake could have been significant.  
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
26 Aug 2014, 09:36
#12
26 Aug 2014, 09:36#12
 Mozart
The penaly was given where Bakkies went off-side - not where the tackle was actually made.   That could have been even be nearer the posts - but we were lucky tht he chose to not give the penalty nearer to the posts.   Poor Mozart - he knows less about the rules of the game than anyone would have imagined.      


BO
bobbok...Captain10,129 posts
26 Aug 2014, 10:31
#13
26 Aug 2014, 10:31#13
Oumaaik, we were unlucky not to be awarded a penalty ....... Mozart's explanation makes perfect sense .
PA
PakieCaptain17,321 posts
26 Aug 2014, 10:52
#14
26 Aug 2014, 10:52#14
I wouldn't say Willie was "splattered" Moz. The first Argie was coming down from the air so couldn't really do much to pull out. He also hardly touched Willie. The second one was the problem as he clearly took a step or two to his right to get in Willie's way. I would agree that it warranted a penalty.

Bakkies is another matter. He appeared to be looking straight at Willie when he went down (my video is not top quality but it seems like he's looking at Willie).

72:26 - Willie kicks and goes down
72:27 - Bakkies still looking at Willie
72:28 - Bakkies looks up for the first time to track the ball and begins advancing

Unlike the other guys here I don't have a vendetta against Bakkies, I just think he had stupid moment here because he had to know he was in front. Maybe he even thought Willie was hard done by and just decided to splatter the first Argie that got in his way. Either way, should have been our penalty in the first place.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
26 Aug 2014, 11:21
#15
26 Aug 2014, 11:21#15
 The argument is about nothing - we were not given a penalty and all our arguments here is futile.  Was Bakkies off-side - sure he was  and the penalty was given against us and converted.  Was it necessary for Bakkies to stay back and not expose us to a penalty - sure it was.   Did he made a fool of himself in the process - yes he did.   
Problem was that bakkies had a poor record in tests since November last year and this performance was no better than his previous ones.    No amount of arguments on this particular issue would take that away.
Pakie
I have nothing against Bakkies - what I do have a problem with is his perfornmances in tests since November last year.  In all tests played he plays for about 15 minutes and then vanish from the scene.   If you look at his line-out takes and the number of line outs taken away from him - as well as his tackle count and his missed tackle ratio - his record is much worse in five tests than the much-maligned De Jager did in one test.    He is defnitely not the player he used to be four years agio and to try and make out that tht statmnt it is not true is  ridiculous.
The reason for Bakkies's inclusion in the squad has nothing to do with actual  performance - everything to do with reputation.        
   
PA
PakieCaptain17,321 posts
26 Aug 2014, 12:10
#16
26 Aug 2014, 12:10#16
All our arguments here are futile and about nothing Mike, since none of it makes any difference out in the real world. Therefore, analyzing and discussing a match situation has just as much right to exist as your equally futile and repetitive bleating about Frans Steyn or Matfield or whoever.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
26 Aug 2014, 13:28
#17
26 Aug 2014, 13:28#17
 Pakie
Granted - but then we as rugby supporters certainly has the right to express overall opnions as to the performances of players and whom we think would do better in relevant positions.   It is futile to write about if this happened in a past game - or if this did not happen - sure.   
However, if things did happen in past games - it confirms performance tendencies of individual players in tests and other games and indicates - to me at least - the suitability of players to be selected.   I always base my arguments on those tendencies - not on individual matches and incidents in matches.   A player can have an off day - or makes a mistake - and if you then damn him for life - like some members of this ste do - it is really laughable.   However, if it is a tendency with playaers in a series or a number of games - there are signs that he is either questionable or that he should be selected despite of one match.
My comments on players are not bleating - they are absed on factual situations and the constant praisesing attached to some players - like for instance Francois Steyn - is to my mind sickening.  His selection  is not based on performance, but on reputation.  I sometimes bring him in when other players are criticized for exactly the things he does - they praise him and demonise other players for doing the same things.   That is just about as useless as discussions on teh site becomes in some cases.            
BE
becsPro4,378 posts
26 Aug 2014, 13:44
#18
26 Aug 2014, 13:44#18
He was lucky to stay on the field.He lumbers around trying to act tough and smash people. The man is a charicature. 
Quite pathetic.
 And as for official stats. We had this conversation years ago.I remember discussing this with some players that I knew. They were always different height and weights in programmes and reality. I mean, Neil Back...........

Never ever trust anything written in an official programme. It us usually wrong ! 
PA
PakieCaptain17,321 posts
26 Aug 2014, 13:50
#19
26 Aug 2014, 13:50#19
Expressing an opinion: not bleating.

Repeating that opinion ad nauseum, even in a discussion where it's not relevant: bleating.

Look Mike, if I want to analyze a match situation and post it here I will do so. If you want to bleat on about Matfield being physically deficient you can do so. No one really cares, we're ultimately entertaining ourselves.
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 Aug 2014, 16:56
#20
26 Aug 2014, 16:56#20

Setting aside the legalities it was an iron hard tackle that left the Bargie struggling to get up. On the kickoff Bakkies beat the chase to bring down the Bargie receiver deep in the 22, whilehe was at full tilt. All of which proves he still has physicality, pace and agility.

 

 Pakie you will find the environment here is a bit two faced. Every new player can be lauded as the next Bok great. But defend an old player and you are a fool. Then when the new player fails, the same group for a while blame the coach and finally they pretend they never supported the player in the first place.

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
26 Aug 2014, 17:27
#21
26 Aug 2014, 17:27#21
 Mozart
The joke is all on you - Bakkies's record since November 2014 was as followis in the five matches he played in:-
Scotland
Botha0/000/3/6200104/31/200/0
France

Botha0/000/0/3000014/14/000/0
Wales
Botha0/000/0/4300010/01/000/0
Argentina
Botha0/000/1/1000002/13/000/0

Argentina 
Botha0/000/0/0000002/10/010/0
Combined Stats
Botha0/000/4/z45001212/79/210/0
You have the audacity to criticize De Jager for what you call non-performnance in one test - yet you praize Botha despite non-performance in all the test he played in.  He is so strong - he had 14 ball carries and gained 5 meters in territory.    His tackles is totally inadequate and aside from that his tackle ratio is BS as well.  He was a name on the teamsheet and produced near to bugger-all.   
What a load of BS.  The day you start being objective and stop praising under-performers (and trying to whitewash under performance) because you favour that player -  that day is when you will gain some credibility on this site.  At present - whatever you right can only be regarded as warped BS to favour players you like and denmigrate those you dislike.  

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 Aug 2014, 17:42
#22
26 Aug 2014, 17:42#22

 You miss the point. We know Bakkies has been a great test lock, the question now is whether age has robbed him of strength and pace. The stats have some bearing on that....but the team trials are much more definitive. And obviously he got a passing grade in HM's mind. His pace and apparent strength in the last few minutes against the Bargies is further evidence. If Bakkies is athletically still there he remains a useful player in the mix.

 

My "doubt" about Lomp is fostered by his disappearance against tough packs. A flat track bully to this point, running over a totally trashed Welsh scrum. Against the Bargies he took on a tough, aggressive pack, and decent locks. He disappeared. Not only that but he missed a tackle for a try and even that didn't release his competitive juices. His reactions were slow, his pace around the field was slow....he showed no competitive zeal.

 

In short Bakkies only has to prove he is Bakkies, Lomp has to prove he is somebody.

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
26 Aug 2014, 18:09
#23
26 Aug 2014, 18:09#23
 Mozart
So wghat have we got here - Bakkies has not proved that he is what he sued to be and is unsuitable to play at lock for the Springboks anymore.  
Your idea of a dominant scrum against the Welsh is absurd - there was nothing of the kind.   
There is no wauretion mark about De Jager's actuual tight 5 performances against the Argentinians.  In the first test he was strong enough and int ehs econd test the try of Coetzee centered around De Jager's strength in the maul.   In teh first test he had near to zero supoort from Bakkies.
The problem relates entirely to his tackle stats and the fact that you accuse him of not supporting the useless two props in scrumming - was that so - or are you guessing the locks did not support the props.   The way the two props popped up it was clear there were strong support - and they could not take the pressure from their front and from their backs.   When Beast and Malherbe replaced the two starters - the scrums suddenly became stable - a fact recognized by everyone - but you.
Mozart   you disliked De Jager from the start and talk enough BS about him all the time.  So any comments from you in his case is not worth the paper it is written on.  
      
MO
moolaaPro2,380 posts
27 Aug 2014, 01:29
#24
27 Aug 2014, 01:29#24

 Mozart, I've had a close look at the Willie incident and he tried to milk it for all it was  worth! The Argie defender didn't have to move ground and Willie just ran straight into him; no "splattering" (as you emotively put it!) involved at all!

Bakkies the thug on the other hand basically shoulder charged the Argie player and should have had a yellow card himself! He can say he had his right arm outstretched but it was still a charge as opposed to a tackle. Think Butch James.....

Amazing what a neutral like myself can see with both eyes open!

PA
PakieCaptain17,321 posts
27 Aug 2014, 10:31
#25
27 Aug 2014, 10:31#25
 Moolaa, the Argie player moved right into Willie's path. To demonstrate that I've layered two images over each other to show Willie kicking and the impact on the same frame.

W - Willie kicking
Circled - The Argie player advancing
X - the Argie player's line of advance at the moment of the kick

Y - the position of Willie's impact with the circled Argie after the kick

The second line shows where the impact was in contrast to the Argie's original line of advance (X). He moved at least two paces to the right to put himself in Willie's path. Willie did milk it, but it was clear obstruction.



MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
27 Aug 2014, 18:31
#26
27 Aug 2014, 18:31#26
 Moolah it's amazing what a smart Bok supporter like Pakie can demonstrate with a bit of analysis. As for the Bakkies tackle, every hard tackle by definition is made with the shoulder....as long as the arm is engaged its technically ok. But if you want to see a pure shoulder charge in all it's glory....watch Nonu.
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
27 Aug 2014, 18:38
#27
27 Aug 2014, 18:38#27
 Exactly. Ask Dan Carter.


MA
MachiavelliClub Pro323 posts
27 Aug 2014, 18:49
#28
27 Aug 2014, 18:49#28
 Pakie

Status: Orange peeler
Posts: 71 RE: The infamous Bakkies penalty
August 26, 2014, 11:50:09 Expressing an opinion: not bleating.

Repeating that opinion ad nauseum, even in a discussion where it's not relevant: bleating.

Look Mike, if I want to [removed]yze a match situation and post it here I will do so. If you want to bleat on about Matfield being physically deficient you can do so. No one really cares, we're ultimately entertaining ourselves.

________________________________________________________________

Very true!  Well defined.  I see there are a few here who need a lot of entertainment.  However some are so delusional they entertain us all!  Some need entertainment so much they think they are a step above all coaches.. Hahahahahaa
— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news