The Scrummie Problem

The Springboks have a real problem in the scrumhalf berth.   The first idea was to use Hougaard as a scrummie.    He is a very physical player and that showed at scrummie as well.   However, from a technical point of view he did not really make the grade,  mainly because in reality he is not a natural scrummie that can actually read the game properly.    He did not pass the ball quickly and accurately enough, at times got caught in possession and his kicking game was inadequate and really problematic.   There can be arguments about him as a scrummie - but I do not think he would be selected again as the starting line-up scrummie .  However, to sum it up - Hougaard had too many theatrics behind the maul, line-out and scrum situations to be regarded as a proper scrummy.   Meyer realized that and is extremely unlikely that he would be selected in that position again.   After all what is expected from a scrummie is completely different from what Hougaard effectively delivered..

The one real scrummie that played particularly well for Ulster in the Heineken Cup and was nominated as Player of the Year in that competition is Pienaar.   He is a natural scrummie that has the ability to read situations well - a typical example is the try scored by Pietersen in the thrid POM test.    He has the natural ability for service to the  backline to be quick and accurate.   However, he has a problem at present - he is not allowed to play his natural own game.   In the tests where he was the starting scrummie - he thus far he passed 60% of possession to forwards after standing behind especially mauls and delaying the game flow.   He kicked away 10% of the balls - a third of whcih can be regarded as aimless kicking.   All-in-all he should be allowed to take better options - but he is limited by especially by Van Graan in what he may or may not do.   I would like to see whether the situation changes on Saturday.   Be it as it may, Pienaar is already 28 years of age - and it would be foolish not to start looking at alternatives.

With Hougaard not really a contender - where can we look for alternatives.    People talk about Vermaak - but he was never used on Super 15 level and as a squad member of the Springboks, he never played a single game.   If he had game time equivalent to 240 minutes this year - it would indeed be a miracle.   He may be a guy to go further - but more actual game time would be  essential so as to really give an indication of his real potential.

McLeod is a real problem - he blows hot and cold - 90% of the time very, very cold.   He is erratic as was shown in the game against the Reds - where a wild pass of his went over the dead ball line.  Similar situations like that - the Pretorius try in CC being an example - has meant that he is not secure in the scrummie berth for the Sharks - Reinach is really pressing hard to replace him as a scrummie in the starting line-up of the Sharks.   The final nail may have been the atrocious pass that cost the Sharks victory in their latest CC game.   One to watch out for in future is in fact Reinach.

Van Zyl was frequently mentioned as a potential future candidate - but the Cheetahs apparently prefers  Pretorius as their first choice scrummie at present.   Pretorius was very prominent before he went to the Waratahs - but since his return he was erratic.   For instance  - despite a surfeit of balls in the latest CC clash where the Cheetahs had possession of 70% - he did not shine and despite that situation the Cheetahs lost the game.  

That effectively leave us with the Western Province scrummies.    Duvenhage is to my mind not an option.   The one player severely criticized by many is Scheuder.   He was a few times brought on from the bench in Super 15 and CC games - but not showing much during the short periods he was on the field.   With Duvenhage out of the picture due to injury - Province used Groom and Schreuder.   Groom played particularly well against the Bulls - but was much quieter and less effective in subcesquent games.   Schreuder was really brilliant against the Griquas and showed real class.

There is only one conclusion to reach in this case.   We need to find players to develop further as scrummies.   The only real contenders catering for further development are in fact Vermaak, Reinach, Schreuder and Groom.   I think they desperately need  more game time and more  skills development - to show us the real future urgently required scrummies.  

Piet Van Zyl was great during S15 so he would be my choice, Vermaak is good but not Test standard.

I noted that Reinach looked very promising the other day. Van Zyl seemed to start very well and fade?

To me curently Vermaak has the experience and is a very nice all round scrummie. Made a superb break last Saturday.

How much Pienaar is being shackled I do not know. What I remember most about him were some brilliant breaks he used to make. These days those are entirely absent. Maybe we will see more of him this coming test at Loftus.

I do hope those loftus oaks dont rock up in pink and disgrace the entire nation!!

There is no problem at all. Hougaard is one of the best 9's in the game and should never have been moved from 9. This was a pathetic call by Meyer fueled by Hougaards kicking display.

His service is spot on and there is no better attacking or defending 9 in the game. Its pathetic that he is being wasted on the wing. Our back-up 9 should be v/Zyl

Well one thing about Hougaard's time at scrummie in these recent tests is that he was not well protected by the forwards. With an improved showing by the forwards he maybe better. However there is still that nagging feeling that he doesnt flow in the position. However I am not set against him having another shot.

One thing he could do is leave as much of the tactical kicking as possible to Goosen who has a big boot. Hougaard can take on the opposition with sniping runs and cause some problems. He and Gossen would b ea constant threa ton attack on keep the loosies interested. We have not had this with Morne and Pienaar. This will give the rest of thebackline a bit of a better chance.

No ways should van Zyl be our back up - let him playanother Super 15!

Give S

Sarel would be an interesting choice - a very dangerous player.  Not too much on defence though. I thought Vermaak shaded him on Saturday? He went very quite at the Warts. He is recvering his mojo again at the Cheetahs.
Who do you support Dan?

Sarel cant pass and thats why the Tahs did not select him - his service is pathetic

Saffex

You think about two issues that is really problematic.   Hougaard on very rare occassions try to make a break - but in recent tests it only happened when he collected the ball from open play - not actually in the position he is in at scrummie.   You did mention his kicking problems - not his passing problems.   He normally runs a few steps before he passes balls.   The latter is a definite no-no insofar as scrummie play is concerned.  The two issues combined probably weighed heavily with Meyer before he took that decision.

You saw how difficult it is for Meyer to change players if the Morne Steyn issue is borne in mind.   He is sticking with Jean De Villiers and Kirchner like it is unbelievable.   The fact that he moved Hougaard earlier surely means that he identified the Hougaard deficiencies  quite early and realized  that Hougaard has too many deficiencies in his scrumhalf play to justify keeping him there.  

Whatever youu may think - there is no way that Meyer would sacrifice a good player without proper analysis and reasons.   Meyer is no fool - he will not do anything that weakens the team - and the Hougaard decision was obviously based on sound analyses and research - that is for sound and indisputable reasons.  We on the sidelines may not see the reasons easily - but after repeatedly looking at the tests this year in which Hougaard played - I also thought that there are in fact serious problems that caused the change

Um most scrummies run before passing and while Hougaard did at one point do this, he cut it out in his last few outings at 9 and his service was great. Hougaard has always had a crisp service, it has never been an issue.

Here is a FACT for you, if Hougaard cant break from 9 then no 9 in the game can. There is no-one to touch him in the attacking stakes.

Any fool who does not see the value in Hougaard at 9 versus wasting him on the wing, knows stuff all about rugby.

Hell we discard Hougaard and bring Pienaar in who completely fails - why is that do you think?

It has very little to do with the individuals and everything to do with how we are playing the game........Meyer is too structured, Hougaard has no freedom to play instinctively.

I cannot not debate the 9 position with clowns, only a fool would not want Hougaard at 9

Saffex

Lets get back to the issue at stake here.  No personal comments would help.  As to the running a few steps - tht means the opposition can defend easily and the backline of the Springboks is neutralized completely.   That is in fact where the rot started - ably augmented by Morne.

I am sure it is not possible to discuss this issue objectively with you - but then the decision on the issue does not rest with you or me - it rests with Meyer and the decision of the latter must have been made after due consideration taking into account all aspects of Hougaard's play.   I am still of the opinion that Meyer must have taken all issues into account before he decided on moving Hougaard from scrummie to wing.   It is easy for us to criticize - but the only one that is really open to criticism for his decisions is Meyer - not us.   I cannot remember one newspaper or other report in SA where Meyer;s decision about the Hougaard issue was in any way critcized - so there must have been in wider rugby circles an agreement that Hougaard did not meet requirements.   

Anyway I think we are argueing about somethinh which iss irreversable and the chances of Hougaard being returned to play at scrummie is really remote.   No use crying about spilled milk. 

Cheetahs supporter ey beeno1

Houggard is a great 9 but most of his best moments for the boks have been on the wing,he has great speed,the ability to beat a player one on one and is pretty strong. With JP out injured hes the best option we have to partner habana on the wing!

Um Mike given Meyers record, he is hardly the measure so what he thinks about Hougaard at 9 means stuff all.

Hougaard does not run before passing, that is something McLeod does. There was a period Hougaard did that but he cut it out.

Hougaard is one of the best 9's in the game, in fact he is the best 9 in the game and it is a complete insult to the guy that he has been treated as he has by Meyer

Unfortunately Hougaard is not a scrumhalf....no amount of blathering is going to change that.

 I dont think their is a scrumhalf problem.

Ruan Pienaar has generally played well this year.

I would start with Pienaar and potentially move Hougaard to scrum half in the last 25 minutes depending on the state of game.

Hougaard will play well behind a dominant pack that is giving him clean ball. He is good at sniping runs of rucks and getting his forwards to interplay of fasts offload and ruck plays. If we were chasing a game and our forwards are dominant, or we just want to put a game away Hougaard would be a good option.

However Pienaar is a classic scrumhalf, better distribution and kicking that Hougaard. Also cleans the ball out of rucks faster than Hougaard to keep his team on the front foot, as all in all more consistant.

Unfortunately right now Pienaar is our only international level pro. Hougaard is a great rugby player, but so much more expressive on the wing. The rest are nowhere. That's what Meyer's choices imply....and he's right.

It's an odd thing, but after being richly provided for at 2 and 9.....we suddenly seem pretty thin.

@Saffex.

If you look at the basic requirements of a half back then Hougaard only has some of them.

He has an average pass

No kicking ability

Good runner from broken play.

I think Meyer sacked him from the half back job as he didn't fit into his boring plan of shovelling it out to Steyn   and couldn't put up a decent up & under from the back of the scrum. He is a dangerous runner with the ball but like all Bok wingers, he never sees the ball unless he goes hunting for it!

Best no.9 in the world? Will Genia may have a thing or two to say about that!

Moo

Disagree, Hougaards service is good, always has been. If I had to select between Genia and Hougaard, I'd take Hougaard - its a load of crap that he had an issue at 9, but for the odd kick charge down.

Sapp you are having another lock brain moment. Just as you did about Greyling being a Bok prop. Or more relevantly, just you did when you whined for two years about Pienaar not being selected as Bok flyhalf. I notice that's all gone quiet....hahahaha.

All the evidence suggests Hougaard is struggling with scrumhalf duties. His coach, who has strong provincial ties to him, has moved him from 9. Most other pundits can see the problem......you can't.

Given Meyers record, he is hardly the measure now is he? Given the lack of an improvement by Pienaar at 9, one has to conclude it has very little to do with the players selected at 9 and more to do with patterns and structures - but I guess this is beyond you.

As for Greyling, dont lie, he would never have made my Bok 22, always had him down as a squad member as he is a good player. Beast and Guthro have always been the starters, with Coenie and Kitshoff being the new boys on the block. Greyling after his last test should never be considered again and I have responded as much to your direct question to me on the subject - gone quiet, again a lie

Dave earlier this year you blasted me for saying Werner Kruger and Greyling should never be Bok props. You can lie about it if you wish, but those are the facts. You had Greyling in virtually every squad of 30 you chose.

So I wonder, who was right?

Saffex

You really like to write balls on this site.   Cast your mind back to the third POM tests - that was really a complete bugger-up by Hougaard.   Even the commentators said it would be better to bting on Pienaar yo replave Hougaard - there comments being based on Hougaard's inability to cater for the wet conditions.   On came Pienaar and he did something that would not even enter Hougaards mind.   He saw Pietersen had only forwards in front of him and he passed the ball directly to score the Boks try in that game.  

The last two tests it was evident that Pienaar played strictly accordaiing to instruction.   He had average games - but he was instructed to pass to forwards most of the time - which he did.   His service to the backline was faster and more efficient than Hougaard's has ever been.   He had no charge down kicks like Hougaard had in his previous games.   He kicked six times in the last test.   Two was very effective releiving kicks - two was accurate attacking kicks and two was aimless.  His defence was good.

So where did he fail as scrumnmie according to you.   Please enlighten us with your comments about what he did specifically do wrong to justify your claims that he failed in the two tests.