FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  The popular concensus Bok pack

The popular concensus Bok pack

Started by Mozart95 REPLIES1,068 VIEWS· 05 May 2015, 15:37
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
05 May 2015, 15:37
#1
05 May 2015, 15:37#1

If we gave the fans their way this would be the pack that trots out in QF of the RWC:

 

Kitshoff

Strauss

Malherbe

Etzebeth

Du Toit

Kriel

Coetzee

Vermeulen

 

That would be the least experienced Bok pack I can ever remember, with only Vermeulen and Etzebeth as players with real mongrel. A sure fire loser pack in my view....but what think you all?

SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
05 May 2015, 15:43
#2
05 May 2015, 15:43#2
That's a damn fine pack...beats the shit out of having Jannie, Matfield, Louw and Alberts in it  
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
05 May 2015, 16:17
#3
05 May 2015, 16:17#3
A pack without mongrel.....that will implode the moment things go wrong. Suspect tighthead. Vulnerable  number five lock, who will be schooled again. Only Vermeulen to take on the tough  duties at loosie. No linking skills, no cover defence.

CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
05 May 2015, 16:20
#4
05 May 2015, 16:20#4
 Another Mozart invention - false as they can be.   There are some indication that Kriel may make the team, but there is no popular selection of him at 6.  There are some suggestions that Coetzee be in the team - but no general agreement on that either.   Since both are based on Mozart disinformation it is difficult to discuss the issue.
Lets look at the various positions:
No 8
There is no disagreement as to Vermeulen being the first choice no 8.  The back-ups could be Arno Botha or Whiteley.
No 7  
I have never seen any suggestion on this site that Coetzee should be the number 7 loosie - it is just a pipedream of Mozart.  His own favourite is the slow prop masquerading as a loosie - Willem Alberts, but Alberts is totally inadequate and incapable of performing 75% of the functions of a loosie.   The real candidates are Burger,  Arno Botha and Labuschagne plus a number of other potential players.  Burger, Botha and Labuschagne are regarded as top loosies by NZ and Aussie commentators and would not let down the Springbok team.
No 6 
Again a totally false assumption.  There is no general consensus amongst the fans.  There are in fact differences in opinions expressed on this site and the players under consideration would include Louw, Coetzee, Brussow and Kriel.  None of the four players mentioned will let the Springbok team down.
No 5
Other than a few dunces - the general opinion is that Matfield is a disaster that should not be anywhere near the Springbok team.  The candidates are Du Toit and Lewies - with Mostert as another option.  Unlike Matfield - none of the players mentioned would let the Springboks down.
No 4
The general consensus is Etzebeth - with potential back-up from Willemse, Du Plessis or De Jager.
No 3  
Any of Malherbe, Koch or Coenie would be an improvement on Jannie whose age has caught up with him and is not 50% the prop he was two years ago.  He would only weaken the Tight 5 if he is selected.
No 2
Strauss is accepted  by most members as the choice hooker, but Bismarck also has support and the up-and-coming youngster is Akker van der Merwe
No 1
Beast and Kitshoff are the potential candidates here and there is division of opinion who should start at 1, while Nyakane also has some support.
Then the following opinion from you:-
"That would be the least experienced Bok pack I can ever remember...  A sure fire loser pack in my view....but what think you all?"
The surest way of losing is to select players based on reputation without meeting performance requirements.     You went on to mention mongrel - but since you have not mentioned all the contenders for the various positions and grabbed names from thin air - comments on the mongrel issue is a dead letter.
The reputation players are Alberts, Matfield and Jannie du Plessis.  Jannie du Plessis has no mongrel - Matfield is even worse - and Alberts is a dead letter performance-wise and has been a disaster defending against other loosies and scrummies.  Albert's mongrel is in evidence only two or three times in a match - the rest he is a useless loafer.       
Even the forwards listed by you would be a vast improvement on what we had last year  as forwards, so that is the reality of the situation.  Added the other potential candidates it would represent the best forwards we have available  in SA by some distance.   

DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
05 May 2015, 16:47
#5
05 May 2015, 16:47#5
Strauss is definitely the form hooker, though Bissie did have a good second half of the Super XV. Victor and Eben are our premier locks. We have problems at 7, will Alberts be back to his best? Coetzee has yet to step up to the plate. We do have Schalk, though he will be an unpopular choice given his age. Mostert is a bench lock. Duane and Whiteley at 8. Never Coetzee. 
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
05 May 2015, 17:31
#6
05 May 2015, 17:31#6

Ah yeah when was PSDT ever schooled?


Let me guess Matfield has mongrel......bwahaahaaa


Malherbe a suspect tighthead - wow, the guy that has kicked arse all season


 

CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
05 May 2015, 17:41
#7
05 May 2015, 17:41#7
 Dave
The so-called schooling of Du Toit by Matfield is a standard Mozart BS story regularly punted by him on this site.  So don't expect any logical response on that one.  
He started off another fib about Malherbe - because he is a threat to Jannie - so we can expect nothing from him in that regard as well.
As to Matfield having mongrel - I cannot wait to have another laugh as to his response.  It would be extremely funny.  
  
     
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
05 May 2015, 20:06
#8
05 May 2015, 20:06#8

Matfield doesn't need mongrel. But we need smarts, which he gives us in spades....probably the best forward tactician in the cou ntry, playing or non playing.

DB
DbDraad
Captain26,388 posts
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
05 May 2015, 21:31
#9
05 May 2015, 21:31#9
 Moz, that might be so, but he was never that great a captain and picking him as RWC captain would be a disaster. As it stands and even if JDV makes a successful return, Vermeulen would be my Bok captain going forward. He is the best 8 by a long yard, he leads well for the Stormers and at 28 years old he has enough in the tank to go to the next RWC if managed properly. Using Matfield in that capacity would be taking a step back...a big one at that.
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
06 May 2015, 00:10
#10
06 May 2015, 00:10#10
Captain candidates in order of preference:
  1. Victor
  2. Schalk
  3. Duane
  4. Strauss
  5. Frans
  6. Jean
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
06 May 2015, 00:43
#11
06 May 2015, 00:43#11
I think we need a forward for sure...otherwise you have two captains! I agree Duane is probably not enough of a tactician....Schalk has enough going on with his come back. That leaves Strauss and Victor. For me it's Victor for the WC, Strauss after. 
DB
DbDraad
Captain26,388 posts
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
06 May 2015, 00:53
#12
06 May 2015, 00:53#12
 I have the same problem with Schalk as with Victor as C. Straus is not even captain for the Bulls. If he was that good a leader he would have stepped into the captaincy void at the Bulls with ease. Although Bismarck has some disciplinary issues, he still brings more to the table as hooker. I'm not saying Vermeulen is the answer, but there is more to him than meets the eye. 
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
06 May 2015, 01:05
#13
06 May 2015, 01:05#13
Hard to say, sometimes these uncompromising types make great captains.    
CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
06 May 2015, 10:07
#14
06 May 2015, 10:07#14
 In the RWC, you need to take note of a player's track record as a captain on the highest level, i.e. S15/International level.
Duane hasn't captained the Boks yet but these are Matfield's test stats. Unfiltered are all his tests and filtered are the ones that he captained. 

Career FiguresSpanMatStartSubPtsTriesConvPensDropWonLostDraw%unfiltered2001-201412111653570007643263.63 filtered2007-20142020051000155075.00

I know that a win or a loss is not quite a clear-cut indication of a player's leadership qualities but it cannot be totally ignored either.
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
06 May 2015, 10:24
#15
06 May 2015, 10:24#15

Victor is utterly useless these days......we don't need him anywhere near the field, neither for the Bulls or Boks.


Vic returns to the Bulls side and bang the scrum is hardly as solid as the week before.


Case closed......the guy is a physical liability who adds nothing to the game......if he was that smart we would not have lost to Oz, NZ, Wales and Ireland last season.


Only a complete idiot would select 38 year old Matfield ahead of a host of great young locks we have on board. But our stupid coach is to blind to all this......the fool would have liked a WC side comprising Kirchner, Habana, Fourie, Jean, Olivier, Morne, du Preez, Pienaar, Steenkamp, Jannie, Bakkies, Matfield, Louw, Alberts, Schalk, Spies, Roussouw and Juan Smith on board. 

CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
06 May 2015, 10:35
#16
06 May 2015, 10:35#16
 Lets face facts - the following s statement of Mozart needs evaluation:-
 "Matfield doesn't need mongrel. But we need smarts, which he gives us in spades....probably the best forward tactician in the country, playing or non playing."
The above is the standard Mozart BS.  What smarts did Matfield bring to the team as he is virtually totally unproductive as a forward.  Moonlighting in the backline does not need smarts.  What forward tactical play are you talking about?   There was none at all the time he was in tests since he came back.  There were plenty forward flops as a result and that is evidenced by the alarming decrease in the effectiveness  of the Springbok Tight 5.
I knew the answer on the mongrel issue would be funny - but this even exceeded my expectations.  A lot of meaningless phrases without any supporting facts.  So I laughed my ass off when I read the mumbo-jumbo Mozart managed to produce in this case.    What a bloodly idiot he is . 
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
06 May 2015, 11:18
#17
06 May 2015, 11:18#17
I remember you said Matfield was unproductive on the EOYT, that despite being involved in the game more than any other forward. You just can't help yourself. 
BO
bobbok...
Captain10,129 posts
BO
bobbok...Captain10,129 posts
06 May 2015, 11:28
#18
06 May 2015, 11:28#18
 Oumaaik, all of us are well versed with your Matfield views  .............. tell us about life in Riversdale please .
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
06 May 2015, 11:39
#19
06 May 2015, 11:39#19
 blob bok
I bought a house there - but am unlikely to move there before early in June.  I have left Riversdale in 1960 and only gone back there for holidays.  What it is like now I will have to see.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
06 May 2015, 11:43
#20
06 May 2015, 11:43#20
 Letsal
The fact is what was Matfield active in in the EOYT.  Moonlighting in the backline and making weak tackles does not represent positive activity of a lock.  For the rest he was useless with his line-out takes dwingling constantly as the tour went on.
At best what Matfield did was of minimal real value to the team - but I do think that it would be beyond your understanding of rugby as a sport to grasp what was going on.     
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
06 May 2015, 13:41
#21
06 May 2015, 13:41#21
Matfield involved more in the games than any other forward on the EOYT.......what utter bloody garbage......he was a liability.......we lost the battle against the Irish and Welsh forwards thanks largely to his powder puff contributions  
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
06 May 2015, 13:50
#22
06 May 2015, 13:50#22
Oh quite the opposite Saffex, quite the opposite. But maybe you couldn't see these things because of the egg dripping down your face. You still said Lambie was outstanding against England. Man what a gaff that was. And to speak of powder puffs, there is Lambie... complete with treadmarks all over his face. Almost a Gilbert imprint as the ball came flying dangerously close to his head after that charge down! 
RO
Rooinek
Captain18,117 posts
RO
RooinekCaptain18,117 posts
06 May 2015, 14:24
#23
06 May 2015, 14:24#23
How do you know when Letwat has slunk back onto the board? The anti-Lambie rhetoric returns . . . even though he hasn't played a game in a month!

LMAO! I know we have some haters on this board . . . like Ou Maaik with Willem Alberts, Baboon-ou with Victor Matfield and Moffie with every player under the age of 30 . . . but there is no-one who even comes close to LeTwat and his bitter and irrational hatred of Patrick Lambie.

Oh well, at least LeTwat provides a few laughs with his rabid and vitriolic tirades against Lambie . . . because the dullard doesn't provide much else . . . certainly not when it comes to rugby!
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
06 May 2015, 14:27
#24
06 May 2015, 14:27#24
Well Dave I'll take your comment about the Bools scrum being hammered as an inadvertent admission that Marcel got smashed on Saturday. S o you did see the cork popping
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
06 May 2015, 14:32
#25
06 May 2015, 14:32#25
 Mozart
No comment on your BS about Matfield's tactical play  thoroughly dealt with and destroyed by Dave and myself?  
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
06 May 2015, 14:42
#26
06 May 2015, 14:42#26
Destroyed? Like Samson, except you were in the Colussium del Dave, and you two were the only ones present.
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
06 May 2015, 14:50
#27
06 May 2015, 14:50#27

Provide the video clips, the stats, the time stamps. All you are providing is errant opinion. There you have Matfield against Ireland.....eight tackles, none missed....nine lineouts taken, three more than anybody else.

 

I also provide the stats of the player who lost the game. ...Dave's big pick Hougaard. If you look in Hougaard's columns you wil see three turnovers, two of which were right on the Irish try line. We got in position to score, Hougard let the air out the tyre.

 

 

Hopefully you will study my example....how to use stats and speci fic game references to destroy stupidity. Read and learn.

 

SHHougaard0/002/62/4100203 3/00/010/0

 

LMatfield0/000/1/710010 8/09/000/0
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
06 May 2015, 14:52
#28
06 May 2015, 14:52#28

So I said the Bulls pack got hammered did I? Hmmmmm try again Moz.


The only issue Marcel had was a prop scrumming illegally against him and an ignorant ref you seemed to think that its ok to scrum upwards.


As for Matfield, add him to any scrum and the props are going to have a tough day.


No side needs and old man weighing 108kg as a lock.......its a joke  

MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
06 May 2015, 14:56
#29
06 May 2015, 14:56#29
Poor old RooiAAS, hypocrite supreme. He accuses others of hating when he has been running a 12 year campaign against "Skulk Burger" .....the longest running, most vicious campaign seen on this Board. The only one that comes close is his own campaign against "Bitch" James.
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
06 May 2015, 14:56
#30
06 May 2015, 14:56#30
Our most dominant scrums have had Victor in it. Pop goes the weasel, so to speak.
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
06 May 2015, 15:17
#31
06 May 2015, 15:17#31
Now you are just fucking lying.......which scrums were those then....what utter fucking rubbish  
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
06 May 2015, 15:26
#32
06 May 2015, 15:26#32
 Do I need to bring the lemur out again? LMAO!
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
06 May 2015, 15:33
#33
06 May 2015, 15:33#33
There is no evidence Matfield weakens scrums. Our worst scrumming last year was against the Bargies when Matfield wasn't playing.....the logic is Matfield isn't huge so he weakens our scrums......but he h as scrummed for the Boks for12 years, and as we see from weight lifting static strength peaks in the 30s.
It's all BS. 
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
06 May 2015, 15:39
#34
06 May 2015, 15:39#34
Our scrummaging has been weak because we have no scrumming props, just big ball carriers. That and only one test quality tight- head in nearly two decades! Not Matfield.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
06 May 2015, 16:08
#35
06 May 2015, 16:08#35
 Mozart
Kak story again.  Giving the stats for Matfield for the first game only - why not give it in respect of all the games and let us see whether the same tendency was maintained.  I know why the rest was missing - Matfield's [performances in the later tests declined drastically.   
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
06 May 2015, 16:55
#36
06 May 2015, 16:55#36

Actually the reason I showed only the Irish test is ......wait for it.......Matfield was blamed for the Irish loss by you fools. But he was also blamed for the Welsh loss, so here are the Welsh stats. You will note he made all of his tackles and took the most Bok lineout ball, including one against the throw. He also had two offloads. Game, set and match....again.

 

LMatfield0/000/5/5100002 10/03/110/0
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
06 May 2015, 16:56
#37
06 May 2015, 16:56#37
Moronic you are beyond thick.....you just lie through your teeth.  
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
06 May 2015, 16:56
#38
06 May 2015, 16:56#38

Matfield is a liability, he is an old man with none of the muscle bulk he carried in his prime.


Physically our pack was piss poor against Ireland and Wales with Matfield on board.


We struggled against the Argies thanks to the pathetic selection of Steenkamp at 1.  

MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
06 May 2015, 16:58
#39
06 May 2015, 16:58#39
Hahahahahahaha.....I suppose Steenkamp is why Jannie and Malherbe were slaughtered with Lomp scrumming behind them.  
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
06 May 2015, 18:14
#40
06 May 2015, 18:14#40
Nope it was Malherbe who kicked arse that day  
↓ LOAD MORE (page 2 of 3)

More from Rugby

More news