The Play maker Famine- Fly-half and (inside) Center

 -4 of our sides made the top 8 in SuperXV.

 

-Our defence is great

 

 -We have the best driving maul in the game

 

-We have the best  lineouts

 

- We have considerable depth in the loose forwards.

 

-We have strong carriers to dominate the line of advantage. 

 

-Our scrums are usually fine.

 

We have some great wings. Habana the best in the world for numerous years, maybe ever.

 

 

........................................

 

 

Where are our flyhalfs?, and to some degree our inside centres. 

 

We just do not seem to have enough brains at flyhalf and inside center to create an expansive game plan. (Is it the coaching or the players, or just a combination of both?)

 

Our more promising flyhalf in years- Johan Goosen, unfortunately spends more time injured, than on the field. 

 

We are not going to become number one again until we get some more depth at flyhalf, as well as brains at inside center.

 

Other than Goosen, We have Morne Steyn and Lambie and then some other below Super Rugby standard flyhalfs. 

 

Lambie was so poor this year that I am not even sure if he should continue at 10. 

 

Our inside centres generally seem to lack distribution capabilty, as well as the capacity to run different lines for creating space for outside backs.

 

Are we doomed for eternity with just creatine crashball inside centres with little to no play making ability?

 

Ok we have Frans Steyn, Jean Devilliers and Jan Serfontein, but the Sharks, Stormers scored very little tries in the backs this year. 

 

Gameplan alone could be blamed, but have you ever seen any of our inside centres throw long 20 metre passes when running at full speed?

 

Surely though these 3 could combine better with the likes of Goosen, or anyone else than what we have at the moment at flyhalf

 Good points Sharkbok - I think the inclusion of LeRoux has helped with this aspect. It seems to be part of the Bok gameplan for him to pop up at first or second receiver, especially in loose play. His passing and ability to find space is his best attribute - that gem he threw against the Brumbies for their first try was impressive. 

 

Has LeRoux played flyhalf before? There could be defensive issues (which could be dealt with the same way the Reds handle Cooper), but I think his quickness and flat passes would really open up the attack. Steyn could play fullback and we still keep our best kicker on the field but would get little in the way of counter-attack. 

 

Sharkbok has an excellent point here. There are in fact two issues at play here - the one is the game plan and the other is the players themselves. Lets deal with the game plan issue first. How is the flyhalf to be utilized in terms of the game plan? The plan does not allow for innovation. When talking about the issue of the flyhalf last year Meyer said that he was up to that stage not happy with the kicking game of Lambie - and would hence not use him in that position. That was followed by the EOYT - where Meyer before the England test said he gave Lambie the authority to play his own game. He tried to - but it did not work out that well - because of player deficiency outside of him (DE Jongh went AWOL) and whenever a ball was passed it died soon after leaving Lambie. In them later stages of the CC last year Lambie did very well at flyhalf - he came back from England a changed player - suddenly kicking became the most important function in his game. The second issue is the actual players involved. Our leading fyalf over the past three years has been Morne Steyn. It is hard to imagine finding a flyhalf on international level with less innovation and less ball sense than Morne. When under pressure Morne is not a nice sight to see - he buggers up badly and the longer the game or series goes on - the worse he becomes. In the recent games Le Roux but a shine into the backline which is always absent when Morne is at fyhalf. But le Roux is no flyalf and his inventive play make things happen. I believe that Goosen is the answer. I am sure he will get over his injury problems and when looking at the Van Aswegen history it is quite possible, Van Aswegen two years ago was identified by WP as their future key fyhalf. However, for a period of 18 months he was absent from rugby as a result of injuries. When he came back from injury he normally got injured in the first game he played in. This year he played regularly - and there was no sign of any injury. Why would the same not happen in Goosen's case? Lets face facts - Steyn is not the answer at 10 if you want a functional backline. Lambie had his moments in the past and when he plays his natural game - he is good. I do not think that he was as bad as Sharkbok made him out to be - so to ,my mind he is a better option than Morne. For the rest we have Catrakillis and Jantjjes. The latter is a flop - and that was proven this year. Catrakillis is ten times more innovative than Morne Steyn and is a cool customer. Playing for the weak Kings team - he had a major positive hand in their performances this year. A cool customer that can handle pressure. Despite the view that Lambie did not have a good year = I think in the absence of Goosen - he is our first choice flyhalf this year - followed by Catrakillis, Smit,Van Aswegen, Morne and Jantjies. Reason - Morne's only asset Is his kicking at goal - the rest of his play is less effective than the other players mentioned.

"Steyn could play fullback and we still keep our best kicker on the field but would get little in the way of counter-attack"

 

Oh dear, have we already forgotten the 40-7 drubbing, in Wellington, the Bokke suffered the last time Steyn was played at FB? It wasnt his "counter attack" that let him down that day, it was his pourous defence.