Itis rather hilarious to debate issues on player performances with Saffex. He made up his mind before games are played about player performances and then decide what actually happened during games is in line with his pre-match prejudices.
That in fact accounts for his absolute loathing of player stats during games. His statement about performances are wildly irrational and prejudiced.and one has to look at the situation and see his statements on performances in context. The warning lights as to sub-par performances are always glaringly obvious and is totally ignored by him. Lets take a few examples during the past year:-
Francois Steyn
Last year there were serious concerns abut the positives in performances of Steyn after his return from France. Mozart used statsitics to prove how little impact Steyn had when he played for the Springboks in five tests and there were in fact real indications that he was overweight and really slow in what he did on the field of play. His relieving kicks were a joke in bad taste and he was really not the player he used to be. Consequently his performances was average and he really did not bring anything to the game. When he got injured and De Villiers was brought into the team at 12 - there were real signs of life in that position - but my friend Saffex went on the offensive and did not notice any improvement in performances of the number 12 center.
This year Francois Steyn came back from injury and by the second match in the Super 15 series - the public started to question Steyn's performances at 12. He constantly crashballed and killed potential backline attacking moves. The public through the media started to question Plumtree about the lack of backline performances and his response was that there were problems and something was being done about it. The problem was that the backline went dead s the ball rarely if ever was passed by Steyn and his only contribution was crashballing - mostly behind the gain line. The same allegations that he was overweight and slow emerged again. The third match against the Kings followed and the problems of Steyn were clearer than ever. Plumtree got desperate and at minute 60 benched Steyn. After that the ball at last reached the wings and performances of the backline showed marked improvement in the last 20 minutes of that game. That decision of Plumtree was roundly condemned by Saffex and he refused to recognize any improvement at all.
That was followed by the game against the Brumbies where Steyn flopped completely. Steyn's tackling was so poor that the Brumbies ran past him at will. Missed tackles by him was followed by a series of plays during which ultimately the Brumbies scored tries. He destroyed the only first half attack by the Sharks by an injudicious kick that passed possession over to the Brumbies and his decisionmaking came under serious doubt. Ultimately Plumtree benchd him in the second half and there can be no doubt that the performances by the Sharks backline improved once again after his departure. That was followed by a statement of Plumtree that Steyn did have weight problems affecting his performances and that they are working on it. The over-weight issue in fact acoounts for slowness in execution and general poor performances by Steyn.
For a few days Saffex went quiet - he even admitted that 118kgs for a player at center is beyond the level he should be, but when Steyn was dropped to the bench and played at full back from the bench - Saffex insisted that Plumtree was wrong and then came up with the miracle suggestion that Steyn is too slow to function properly at full back and make a real impact from that position, but that there is no problem with his center performances.
In the end due to the injury to Jordaan, Plumtree was forced to play Steyn at 13 and at last there were signs that he did improve in performances and that the weight issue became less of a problem and he was getting fitter at last. Mozart made the statement that at full back Steyn did show signs of life and his decisionmaking was better -because he had more time to decide on plays. At 13 it became less of a problem compared to what he showed at 12. Be it as it may in the one and a half matches Steyn did play at 13 - he showed some signs of life and was better than the form showed previously.
There is one issue that is important. After playing in two games for the Sharks and five for the Springboks last year - Steyn suffered a serious ankle injury in training and was out of rugby for six months. This was followed by the latest serious injury after less match play time than he had last year. The latest injury is indeed a pity since Steyn was definitely slowy improving in performances. However, there is one issue here and that is that physical deficiencies is a contributor to injuries and it no doubt played a role in his latest injuries. One wish him well and hope for a full and speedy recovery on his part.
However in essence Steyn was always highly praised by Saffex even when he obviously under-performed and that is the crux of the argument.
Meyer Bosman
When Bosman was brought in to replace Steyn at 12 - Saffex went on the offensive. Bosman was described as a poor player that brings nothing to the game. Yet Bosman did have a positive impact on the performances of the Sharks backline and he did contribute more than anything than Steyn to the backline performances of the Sharks this year. Saffex kept on insisting that Bosman is useless - and want Steyn back at all costs - yet in all games he replaced Steyn in from the bench and when he played in that position from the start - Bosman showed better form than Steyn ever did.
Elton Jantjies
The latest argument about Jantjies is hilarious. Jantjies had two very average games for the Stormers - but for the rest he was an embarrassment for them. Saffex now came with a new angle. Jantjies is a better flyhalf than both Catrakillis and Francis and on par in performances to those of Lambie. Francis is a stand-in flyhalf in the place of the injured Cheetahs flyhalfs and the Catrakilis and Lambie statements are plainly hilarious.
His attack on Van Aswegn as being piss-poor has never been substantiated and he keeps on insisting that the Stormers should play Jantjies ahead of Van Aswegen. The latter does not show much in attacking play - but his service to the backline is not as erratic as Jantjies service and he was much safer at 10 than Jantjies ever was. He also defended better than Jantjies did and when Coetzee said that the first choice flyhalf of the Stormers now was Van Aswegen ahead of Janthies - Saffex went ballistic. I think that Jantjies made a few good plays in the games he played in - I can think of two to be exact - but any reasonable flyhalf would have done the same and that was no really huge achievement.
Be it as it may - it is evident that Coetzee is under serious pressure from his Board to produce results and that the Jantjies issue is a major problem for him and may result in his firing.
SUMMARY
In essence I quoted the above examples as where Saffex's assessments were in total contrast with what actually happened on the field of play. When he makes statements about player performances it is often based on single incidents in games and he ignores aspects of games that may put his pedestal players in a bad light. He always makes generalized statements about players and ignore completely what they actually did on the field of play. When questioned about his generalized statements and asked for examples -of where the player did during games what he said happened - he never ever came with examples and a lot of excuses for deficiencies.
That is why any reasonable person would take his assessment of performances not with a pinch of salt - but with a bagful of the stuff. When he raves about performances - have another look.
Admittedly he had two really good assessment this year and those were in respect of Jan Serfntein and Coenie Oosthuizen. For the rest he was way off target all the time.
Saffex is a decent guy - but he has one unfortunate deficiency. Once he placed a player on a pedestal - the player can produce nothing and he remains on that pedestal and should be a no-option Springbok. That really showed he is not objective in assessments at all. .The chances are frequently enough that his favoured players did not produe the goods at all and when the coaches made changes accordingy - he refused to accept those as factually-based and goes on the rampage against the unfortunate coaches who are under pressure themselves.
