The man they call The Beast matches awesome scrummaging strength with hurtful ball-carrying ability.
Mtawarira has been the first-choice loosehead since making his debut against Wales in 2008 and at still only 30 years old, could well be in line for 100 caps, no mean feat in the harsh environs of international front rows.
Agreed, he was very consistent. That's the difference between good and great. Longevity. We haven't had a great scrum without him since 2008. It's a shame about the injuries, otherwise we could be saying this about Steenkamp.
Steenkamp was good until he spoiled his reputation when Meyer against all reason replaced Beast with Steenkamp. Huge mistake, My sympathies were always with Beast - but he unfortunately had to content with Jannie as prop partner who by 2013 was over the hill. I can remember the two being going backwards at jet speed in two tests against the Argentinians, in 2013, In the first test Beast was not involved and Steenkamp and Jannie failed spectacularly in the scrumming,
Beast had his best scrumming ever under Erasmus and that reconfirms what Mozart said above.
Beast had his best scrumming under PdV when he had a huge role in winning the Lions series by destroying Phil Vickery:
The Lions will be horrified by the way they were dumped in the scrum.I can’t remember as many penalties in the scrum for one player, Beast Mtawarira. It will be a mystery to many how he managed to hold such ascendancy over Phil Vickery? Very difficult to understand form the touchline.
.
Just one question - why did Meyer replace Beast with Steenkamp when the latter was the bench prop of Toulouse? Another incident proving that Meyer really believe that club bench p layers must be in the Springbok team based on reputation.
Look at the stats and Steenkamp's win% (77%).
Are you more stupid then ever? Win percentages used by the two dullards on site is meaningless since rugby is a team game and teams lose tests and not individual players - unless your name is Morne Steyn or Matfield (after returning from retirement).
I ask you a simple question - why did Meyer replaced Beast with Steenkamp? Steenkamp would have been in the WC squad if to his credit he insisted on not playing international rugby anymore since he was not delivering the goods anymore and there was nothing Meyer could do about it. Meyer would not have known whether Steenkamp was delivering the goods, since his selection criteria related to reputation and not performance.
Replaced? Do you do any research before posting? He first featured under Meyer at the tail-end of the 2012 EOYT (where we won all our games), primarily because he was already playing in the NH and was in form for those conditions - would José take those factors into consideration? He was a reserve for all but two games in 2013, again, on the EOYT, where we again won all of our games. What next? He started in the away win in Salta, 2014. That's 5 in 15 tests, and you tell me Steenkamp was the go-to loosehead under Meyer. He never lost a test he started under Meyer, and only lost 2 in total. You set yourself up to the point where I now believe it's a strange uke-seme fetish.
The Springboks struggled in tests he played in because he failed in scrumming in 2012 and 2013. Teams win tests - not individuals - will you never learn Kindergarten imbecile? Lets put it in simple language - the Springboks won tests despite Steenkamp being poor in scrumming. Answer a simple question - did Meyer in his idiocy and lack of performance assessment replace Beast with Steenkamp - yes or no.
Actually, the Bok scrum has a very good record with Steenkamp and our strongest scrums of the past twelve years were under Meyer.
FACTS:
2012: Beast undergoes "minor" heart surgery. His words:
"It's sad to miss out on the last two Tests of the season, but I've enjoyed a good year and am looking forward to 2013 very much. There are obviously positives to come out of this as well, one of which is that my little girl was very happy to have me home a bit earlier than expected. To all my fans, the medical staff that helped and everyone who passed on good wishes – thank you for the support and love."
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/nov/17/south-africa-tendai-mtawarira-heart-surgery
So there we have it, Beast missed the last two tests for medical reasons. He started every test of 2013 aside from the last two on the EOYT. In 2014, Meyer started Steenkamp in the opener and the Salta test, the rest Beast, one Coenie (against Scotland in the Spring tour). You are always too eager to force an agenda, and embarrass yourself. Do yourself a favour and start being honest. Start by owning up to who and what you are, what you have been all these years. A liar.
Well, last year, the Bok scrum finished 3rd in the RC with 96%; Australia and New Zealand with 100%. The Boks had 92% in 2018. In 2013, the Boks were at 100%. The only other Bok scrum that comes close is the 2009 season. Those were our two strongest scrumming seasons.
Spooking around with figures again - I have never heard anything like that one before. When a team is penalized for poor scrumming it is not recorded under scrumming - so England was credited a 100% win on own throw and so was SA - despite the penalization of SA in one - so where did he get that assumption from about 100%. Absolute worthless and the 100% for NZ and Australia is a joke in bad taste since scrum penalties are not reflected in scrumming stats, NZ scrumming was sub-standard against England and that was a major reason for the AB loss and Australia was even worse in their campaign.
"so England was credited a 100% win on own throw and so was SA"
We're talking scrums here darling.
We never played Oz Dave and scarcely dominated the AB scrum.
I see 1 penalty against Lualala and 1 against Kitshoff. (Match high was Dud Toit with 2... so no Coles scenario). And NZ won 8 of 8 scrums....the Boks only 5 of 6.
"Our eyes told us our scrum dominated both the AB and Oz and that’s a fact"
The old one eye?
Cannot read and understand stats again. That is what is rank stupidity and foolishness and rank disregard of what happened in scrumming actually means. That is one reason why the stats in this case is worthless,
In the WC match between the Springboks and the AB's the AB scrum all the time on the back foot and going backwards and they were not penalized for it, Garces must have realized that he was wrong and he strictly applied the rules in the final.
I do not think that anybody could help that Mostert showed his real and total inability of making open field tackles - which directly led to one of the AB tries and he was dropped from the starting line-up of the Springboks as a result. Without that try the Springboks - especially bearing in mind the excellent try scored by Du Toit - could have won the match.
Dave
The stats Omelette used excludes scrum penalties - so in the WC Final on own feeding gave away penalties or were on the back feet and they got 100% for scrumming, In the AB match in thwe world cup the AB scrum frequently went backwards - bit the team was not penalized/ The same happened against Wales.
The other story Mozart came up with was a penalty against Kitshof, That penalty was not a scrum penalty at all it was ion breakdown play,
To try and use Stats to deal with scrumming without looking at whether scrums were static ior teams won the ball despite going backwards is really a farce and the stats really tells nothing about what happened,
That leads to misinterpretation of what happened in scrumming and the fat is Omelette is so ignorant he cannot understabnd even the most basic usage of stats and so is Mozart - who try to blame individuals for losing of matches irrespective of what actually happened in tests, St ats must never be abused and Omelette and Mozart are actually experts in statistic abuse.
"Garces must have realized that he was wrong and he strictly applied the rules in the final."
A little fudge of the facts. The Boks haven't been an especially good scrumming nation for most of the past twenty years. Our best scrums were in 2009 and 2013. The stats show that in 2018 and 2019, we were nothing special. One big performance in a season is an anomally, not a trend.
I give up - you are indeed an amazing fool making a total idiot of yourself, The stats you try to use is false reflection of what really happened, in scrums. The scrumming was bad in the Meyer and Coetzee eras - but 100% better when Erasmus took over.as coach. .
Verification that Schickerling was at a Bok camp just before the WC.
