The only way Mozart describes are
based on a number of serious misconceptions – basically because he is against
everything new in rugby. The
problem is not only with the players,
but as he referred to with the s0-called game plan as well. He believes there is a game plan – most
people think there is none.
The Game Plan fib
Coetzee at the Stormers had a
concoction of what he believed was a game plan – most of which neutralized the
backline from any real attacking opportunities. The plan consisted mostly of ineffective kicking
– representing handover of bal possession to the opposition. When the recipient then counter-attacked
defence is stretched to the limit and often enough penalties are given away.
Kicking of the relevant nature
straight to a waiting recipient is never acceptable and when one suggests a
more ball in hand approach Mozart flips a lid and suggested that the idea is
representing All Blacks style of play.
The question he never contemplates is what are the results of the
kicking game he prefers? The answer
in the main is just easy handover of ball as it happened on Saturday when balls
were kicked constantly at Folau – one of the best high ball players in world
rugby.
However, there is in Coetzee’s case – like in his coaching of the Stormers –
no real game plan and to eve suggest there is one is really silly. As
long as Coetzee i in charge the team will be a flop since he is really clueless
when it comes to team selection, as well as player development and utilization.
Team selection
Selection is a major problem
since there are effectively three problems involved, namely –
* the need to make quota selections;
* total ignorance of any need or selection
of combinations; and
* selection of players incapable of
playing a cohesive game plan.
Much has been written about the
quota issue – but not enough is being said about player combinations. This also was a weakness of Meyer – but it
is a disaster with Coetzee. He just does
not get it right. The Tight 5, the
loosie combination and the various backline combinations are all wrong and then
we get individual players being blamed for that deficiency. As
long as the need for combination play is ignored – that long the team will
lose.
Te worst problems are with the
team selection where the worst combination is found in respect of the loosies and the inside backs. The loosie comnbination is a joke in bad
taste and to bring in another pace-deficient loser in the form of Alberts will
just make matters worse.
The ideal team
The problem is that the injuries of
key players are causing problems and some players are incapable of combining
with the replacement players brought in.
My personal selection of the ideal team would be as follows:-
15 Goosen, 14 Combrinck, 13 Vorster, 12 Van
Resburg/De Allende, 11 Habana, 10 Pollard/Lambie, 9 De Klerk, 8 Vermeulen,
7 Whitley/Labuschagne, 6 Kriel, 5 Du
Toit/De Jager, 4 Etzebeth, 3 Malherbe/Redelinghys, 2 Marx, 1 Kitshof/Beast
/16 Marx, 17 Redelinghuys/Malhere,
18 Mtawarira, 19 De Jager/Du Toit, 20 Labuschagne/Whiteley, 21 Reinach, 22 Pollard/Lambie, 23 Mapoe
However, the above team will from a quota perspective not be
acceptable. And there are too many
players not available due to injuries. Based
on the available players I would pick
the following team for Saturday’s test:-
15 Kriel, 114 Hougaard, 13 Mapoe, 12 De Allende,
11 Habana. 10 Goosen, 9 De Klerk, 8 Whiteley,,
7 Louw, 6 Kriel, 5 Du Toit, 4 Etzebeth, 3 Koch, 2 Strauss, 1 Kitshof
16 Marx, 17 Mtawarira, 18
Adriaanse, 19 Mostert, 20 Louw, 21 Paige, 22 Steyn, 23 De Jongh
The last three players should not have been anywhere near the
squad – but stupidity by the coach reigned supreme in that case.
