07 Nov 2014, 12:43#2
Lood should not be in the team.
Willemse isn't wanted.
Neither are 5 locks anyway ...
BEBeeno1
Captain40,032 posts
BEBeeno1Captain40,032 posts
07 Nov 2014, 12:56#4
Of course lood isa class act and so is Willemse especially in the slower NH conditions.
What woud be very nice is if ou hacked waaaugh and JW would use pictures to accurately reflect real ity like I have just done! But bent gives rise to bent I guess.
07 Nov 2014, 13:03#5
Disagree ... Lood is not test material.
To easily intimidated. Needs to be policed all the time.
Disappears after the first twenty.
Useless.
Willemse is what's needed ... but sadly he's not wanted.
BIbiltongbek
Club Pro749 posts
BIbiltongbekClub Pro749 posts
07 Nov 2014, 13:10#6
Vicki and Heyneke are very, very tight. Ask Jake White
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
07 Nov 2014, 13:25#7
Matfield is a drawback in the team and since he contrubtes zero to tight 5 play - there will always be a problem and a serious one at that. Bakkies is in the team because his name is Bakkies Botha and as close to Meyeras Matfield is.
Whereas Matfield did take some line -out balls and did do a substantial number of weakish tackles it can be said that he has been in some aspects acceptable even though he was in the main moonluighting in the backline where he would be in a position to make tackles - while other players had to tdo the Tight 5 work. Bakkies on the other hand has done zero in all the tests he played in -a normal lock would do the wotrk in his 9 tests since last year in a maximum of two tests - probably less.
So what these to reputation "monkeys" are doing in the squad only Meyer would know. There are better locks that could be selected. We will see what happens to these two tomorrow. My guess is that Matfild will do the pordina ary - call the line outs to go to other players and try and find pout which lock will not give him problems and then change his position in the line outs accordingly. He cannot really afford to fluff crucial line outs, like he did late in three of the last four tests.
07 Nov 2014, 13:32#8
You guys are all stamping your feet regarding Matfield ... throwing hissy fits regarding his inclusion ... but when I ask who he's to be replaced with ... silence.
Replace him with a skilled competent test 5 ... I dare you ... or shut the fcuk up.
BIbiltongbek
Club Pro749 posts
BIbiltongbekClub Pro749 posts
07 Nov 2014, 13:35#9
CC, I said they were tight, very, very tight.
07 Nov 2014, 13:45#10
I agree with Clean!
I am one of the most vocal in the anti-Matfield clan, but he was adequate in the Castle Champs. The big question is who is a reliable replacement? We need to blood the younger guys ahead of the world cup, this I know, but it is also massively important that we win our EOY games, because giving away psychological dominance over a potential opponent at the World Cup, will be more costly than one 50/50 player.
07 Nov 2014, 13:46#11
Haaaahahahaaa!!
Your ducking and diving!!!
I got you on the ropes huh??
Yes I know they're tight. They've been friends for many moons.
I know Meyer likes to select players that he has a long standing relationshi p with and perhaps Victor is just another friend he's given the job to ... BUT ... WHO ELSE IS THERE??
Come now my eloquent friend ... TELL ME!!!!!
07 Nov 2014, 13:58#13
I take it then that you want a young 4 lock to play at 4 ... and not embarrass himself and us by attempting anything at 5 ... right?
If that be the case then I'm with you.
The only alternative is to play Etzebeth at 5 with a decent 4 like Willemse coming into the mix.
NOT LOOD ... HE'S USELESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
07 Nov 2014, 14:07#15
Well ... why don't you just be short and sweet and to the point next time .. ??
BEBeeno1
Captain40,032 posts
BEBeeno1Captain40,032 posts
08 Nov 2014, 10:22#18
CC is talking nonsense about Lood. Wake up CC! Make that 200 % wrong!
