The mistake of not subbing Etzebeth in Durban

Probably one of your rare reasonable postings - it is not the first time a player performs well and then flop subsequently,   A recent example was Vermeulen -- who lasted for two tests and his performances went down in the third test,   

Fact is Etzebeth did not last 30 minutes in the second test.  However, Erasmus made a mistake -  Meyer was a serial offender with many similar mistakes,      

How did the over team performance affect the individual? The Bok's played a different game in Mendoza. The third England test saw very sloppy play by the Boks around the fringes. They were slower in their positioning. Overall they were out matched by the English for accuracy. 

Eben and Duane  are exceptional players, not literal supermen.

I agree that Rassie overdid it. It sounded to me as though he was planning to win both test and go into the latter half of the fixtures ready for losses. He said that the loss in Mendoza ruined his plans. What plans? You did the have plans to win before? You weren't going to field your best players? It smells of defeatism to me. So he over-played Eben trying to get those early wins. 

One has to wonder why this suddenly became an issue with Erasmus - was never one with Meyer.  One purely had to see what happened in the case of the WC squad and the layers involved:-

*   De Villiers had one sub-standard game against Argentina in the 10 months after his horror injury in November 2014  and that was followed by a flop erformance in the Japan test - De Villiers was obviously not matchfit.

*   Matfield was virtually off rugby for 5 months - 

*   Du Preez played no rugby for 14 months before the start of the WC

*   Alberts no rugby for virtually a year before the WC

*   Vermeulen - neck injury - no rugby for 5 months before the WC 

*   Both Habana and Pietersen had virtually no rugby for three months up to the WC. 

All the above players were to a higher degree not matchfit and  some were never used as starters in virtually most matches.   All the mentioned players failed to a substantial extent in the WC - with Du Preez and Vermeulen being somewhat better - but still performance-wise in the 5 to 5,5 out of ten range.   The worst of the above was Alberts - played circa 15 minutes from the  bench - followed by Pietersen, Habana, De Villiers and Matfield. 

The fact is that because Erasmus made one mistake - the major problems caused by Meyer in the relevant regard was never a topic for discussion.   

One has to wonder why this suddenly became an issue with Erasmus - was never one with Meyer.  One purely had to see what happened in the case of the WC squad and the layers involved:-

*   De Villiers had one sub-standard game against Argentina in the 10 months after his horror injury in November 2014  and that was followed by a flop erformance in the Japan test - De Villiers was obviously not matchfit.

*   Matfield was virtually off rugby for 5 months - 

*   Du Preez played no rugby for 14 months before the start of the WC

*   Alberts no rugby for virtually a year before the WC

*   Vermeulen - neck injury - no rugby for 5 months before the WC 

*   Both Habana and Pietersen had virtually no rugby for three months up to the WC. 

All the above players were to a higher degree not matchfit and  some were never used as starters in virtually most matches.   All the mentioned players failed to a substantial extent in the WC - with Du Preez and Vermeulen being somewhat better - but still performance-wise in the 5 to 5,5 out of ten range.   The worst of the above was Alberts - played circa 15 minutes from the  bench - followed by Pietersen, Habana, De Villiers and Matfield. 

The fact is that because Erasmus made one mistake - the major problems caused by Meyer in the relevant regard was never a topic for discussion.   

Habana and Petersen both bolsters the Boks considerably. They were very Sound defensively and under the high ball. Excellent. Petersen looked revitalised. -1

Alberts was nowhere near his best. This is the only accurate point you make, but you make it for all the wrong reason. Points deducted. -1

Matfield was a good performer. Better than Lood and Steph in a 15. -1

Jean had one poor showing and played better than all the other Bok centres in the World Cup. Actually surpassing anything they did all year. If Jean wasn't injured, we'd have been in a World Cup final! -1

Du Preez was a massive figure for the Boks. Without him, we wouldn't have beaten Wales. He was a tireless général. -1

Duane was the best 8 at the World Cup. End of discussion. -1

You've scored -6 points Clever Mike. I'm sorry, but you failed to reach the F bracket. Your work is only good for a U . 

Habana and Pietersen never mentioned by me  

Alberts only played for 15 minutes during the whole WC - what was he doing there?

De Villiers only played in the Japan test where he was sub-standard and was injured in the next game  and could not play in subsequent tests.  Was never matchfit.   How could he have surpassed anybody with that being the record?

Du Preez was barely satisfactory in the games he played in - nothing to write home about.  He was a key in Meyer's plan to pass balls not to the backline - but to forwards.

Vermeulen did squat most of the WC and in the semi did something he was forbidden to do _ namely to off-load the ball to Du Preez.   That was the only thing of note during the entire WC.  For the rest as no 8 he was very average - nothing to write home about.

I gave the real outline - you got 2 out of 2 for inventing something I did not write about,

For the rest you get 4 out of 4 for daydreaming about things that never happened - but that is very normal with you.   

This guy is waiting for the next injury to hit him. Because of the battering ram part he is forced into.