The Morne Steyn/Jantjies incendent

It seemed Morne Steyn thought it was a permanent replacement. Jantjies ran back on- and Morne was confused looking to the touchline. By the time, he realised  jantjies almost knocked him over. Morne looked to pat him on the back, but Jantjies seemed to bump him out the way and ignore him. It might have been no intentions- but it seemed he was oblivious to Morne or even intentionally bumped him. I thought Jantjies was off- but maybe Coetzee put him back on because he saw the game was starting to open up. 

 Jantjies is a doos and did nothing special today. In fact, didn't our comeback start while Jantjies was off?Look, he had a very good SR season thus far, bar the canes match, but he was poor last week and didn't look like a Bok 10 today either. I was glad to see Mornè come on, and sad to see Jantjies back on. For a supposed attacking flairy 10, he uses up way too much space and time and his disrespect for Morne shows his real character. Arsehole of note methinks.

 I didn't see any disrespect or bumping.....Morne seemed confused and I also noticed the traditional high five between players when exchanged.

Will watch the game again and look at the replacement incident mentioned before commenting.  However, I think that jantjies was sub-standard in both tests played.   The best game played by the Lions this year was against the Bulls - when Jantjies did not play - so I do t think his replacement would be a positive.  Morne is n star - but he could not be wo rse than Jantjies was yesterday.      .  

CleverMike is for Steyn!

 JW - two bad apples does not make a good one.  Jantjies was poor and Morne Steyn could not possibly be worse.

 Yes I also noticed the attitude from Jantjies ... and yes I agree, he was poor, as expected and is most definitely a doos. 
I have a few more colourful words to describe him but will leave it there.
Hopefully Pat will return to take up his rightful spot at 10.
 

Elton was fabulous in the 2nd half.Why are saffas so quick to dismiss.
He will always make mistakes but that's only because he tries to vary attack and try different things.
I say... stick with him.He is our best attacking fly half.

And somehow nobody noticed that Morne was on for all of a couple of minutes yet managed to concede possession in a tackle. So let's see, if Jantjies had to concede once every two minutes then...

To be fair to Morne, Plum, if I recall the correct incident, he was stripped by a tackler who never released. Should have been a Bok penalty. 

 Really....he was fabulous. Doing what? Running nope.....kicking at goals nope. Defending .....not really. Passing it has to be passing. But many of those passes are like a slap in the face....knocks you back....last minute pops, deep passes behind the line which just slows the movement and the now totally predictable inside pass.
Jantjies played no significant role in any of the tries....he wasn't terrible, just kind of irrelevant.

Moz, i think I can't count on one hand the amount of games in which Steyn wasn't irrelevant. The days of that type of 10 are long gone. Jantjies is a new test player but it seems people cant to crucify him quickly enough. Completely ignoring the horrible performances of the more seasoned players. Considering he is new and they are old hands, when one puts their performances side by side, you'd have to say that some of the experienced lads have much less claim to the jersey than he does. Just my opinion.

 Geez Plum if I want a diatribe about  Steyn I'll push Clever's buttons. I'm not saying shouldn't  give him another shot, I'm simply saying Jantjies was a big part of our first half  swoon and not a big part of our second half recovery. 
But do I really think his Quade Cooper facsimile game is going to work, the answer at this stage is no. It's a pity about Pollard.

 I am not crucifying anybody - but Jantjies do have a problem and that relates to him being under pressure.   He has had a long history of misfiring under pressure.  I can remember a case where the Lions played WP in a CC game.  He ducked out from catching a high kicked ball and WP sored a try.  Mitchell was apparently so mad he benched Jantjies and that was the start of a series of complaints lodged by the players against Mitchell.   At a subsequent hearing the rest of the players said they have no problems with Mitchell - only Strauss and Jantjies turned up at the hearing.  That was years ago and people may "grow up"   The way Jantjies acted when he came bake onto the field indicates otherwise.    However, back to rugby.  I watched the two Irish games again and fact is that Jantjies made more bugger-ups than he did anything positive .   He missed 3 out of 8 calls at goal (circa 40%) - virtually all his kicks were poor and ill-directed and aimless, he even failed to find touch with a crucial penalty kick - he played no role in the attacking moves leading to the tries scored by the Springboks yesterday and his passing game was not of major importance in the backline.   I do not think he really has been good enough when on the field of play.   To my mind the negatives outweighed the positives,   I would say his value to he team represents a rating of 4 out of 10 at the utmost.   Not good enough performances in the two tests - but whether he will survive as a test player is in my view dubious. 

 Jantjes second half was effective once the Boks started to play Lions rugby and attack. He was then at home.Pollard though is our best. We also have good flyhalves coming up at the Storm ers

 What di d Jantjies do to make him good in the second half?