The three crucial moments that lost the test

Balls - you are indeed totally deranged as per normal.

Instead of slinging mud, refute what he says. You look impotent and devoid of ideas. Devoid of facts too. 

Listen

I have responded to Mozart's craziness so many times - I am losing interest in what he dreams up.   He is just like you in that -

*   poor and average players get write-ups as if they are champions if they are weak contenders for selection to positions occupied by your pet hate players; and

*  proven good and proven players are derided - mostly on spurious and false grounds invented by the two of you and your faithful assistants Pakie and Ceradunce.

Whatever anybody else writes is ignored when your stupid postings are opposed and  even though it is at times funny and a cause for real pity it becomes a bore in the long run.

How many threads have the dunce Mozart started on Du Toit and the coach and you contributed on De Allende - stating the same BS repeatedly.   Have you nothing else to write about? Are you two ignoramuses too stupid to start anything new on rugby.

Now suddenly Mozart attacks Erasmus because he regards building a squad for the WC in 2019 important.   I think Erasmus is also in that respect miles ahead of Meyer as a coach - the latter did not know what team-building means  - he was only interested in luring retirees back to play.   If that was teambuilding one can understand the Japan disaster and the non-existent game plan (?) used in the tournament.     

"You don't build depth by sending on rookies in the last 10 minutes of a game against the All Blacks."

Well, Mike is certainly rubbing off on you, Chabal. That response was right down there with Mike's slew of personal attacks on this thread.  You guys just can't debate the topic at hand. Always back to the insults and the moral high horse.

With regards to building depth, what have we learned about Willemse during the RC? He had the jitters against Argentina, so nothing there. We already knew he can step, so his step against the All Blacks taught us nothing new. Is he a viable test flyhalf backup? We still don't know. Is he a viable fullback backup? We still don't know. We haven't seen him tested under the high ball. We haven't seen his feel for positional play. We know nothing.

Same with Papier. We know he can pass and run a bit. We knew that already. Building depth is not about getting the player on the park. It is about getting the player on the park in a situation where his all round game can be assessed.

A few minutes on the park in a desperate defensive situation? That is not building depth. We still know nothing. All those bench players can take away now is that when they came on we were winning handsomely, and when the final whistle blew we had lost. Not saying it's their fault, but that will be playing in their minds.

Your comments on Willemse is typical BS best to be ignored - That is the problem with you two.  You grab things from the air and then state it as facts,  Whatever you wrote would be a disaster if any coach took not e of what you say and implement it.

I have fits of laughter when reading how good Jantjies is in defense - a new invention by AO.  he has been poor for years - but now the latest discovery.  

Grab things from the air? Like that Puma before jogging to the try line? 

He has talent, nobody is disputing that. He simply isn't ready and it's hurting the Boks. What good is failure for his development? Throwing him into the fire was a bad call by Rassie. If you like the kid so much, you should at least be honest enough to admit it. 

Reason Rassie brought those players on, is because he could afford too. At that stage it was 30-18. So Game seemed safe. Abs at that point could not get any possesion. Looking at the stats. Last 20 NZ Carry per metres were supeior. And Mozart those moments were crucial. But their are 3 plays I think from the ABS that were just as. 

1. Ardie Saveas stunning turnover. Way he took responsiblity. And changed the game. Leading to the RM penalty, and touch finder. Sure Willemse was out of position. And most of the Boks fell asleep. But without Ardies play. Does not happen.

2. The A Smith try to get to 30-18. You notice De Klerk is out of position. He should be at the base of the ruck. Like A Smith normally is. But he is not, and Codie Taylor exploits it. Leading to A Smiths try. 

3. The play from Hanson to bring on RM. And put him in BB together it changed the game. Barrett and Ardies tries. Was built on red zone players. Picking in pairs. 

Good observation about Faf's MIA, Luke. He was setting himself up to defend in the backline out wide for some reason.

Ardie's try was made easier by Mostert not assuming the correct body position for tryline defense. Far too upright, Ardie dove under him virtually unopposed.

So according to Luke - a very good analyst - Aaron Smith's try resulted from a mistake by De Klerk and the Savea try by a mistake by Mostert - a real surprise acknowledgement by Pakie.   

Wait till Mozart start with his further BS.   

By the way my sympathy is entirely with Seb - an absolute gentleman.   He put up longer with the repetitive BS posted by Mozart and AO than me  and could not take it anymore.   Nobody could blame him for that - I took two years before I realized what was going on and reacted.  I tried three times to try and live in peace with Mozart and that did not last either - within two weeks he started with his personal attacks.

SO WELL DONE SEB - KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.       

No, you can't blame Mostert for the try. He was the only forward alert enough to move around the ruck to the left where NZ were shifting the momentum. Ardie picked up the ball probably a foot and a half from the line. It was virtually impossible to defend, Mostert's slightly high position just gave him no chance.

No Mike, I don't mind Pakie and even ol' Moz...yeah I had a jab...perhaps a little deep but what gets my goat (and we have plenty of those in SA) is that this Saffa attitude of creeping back to past...to the typical conservative mindset, trapped no further than Jake White and Heyneke Meyer bondage...the minute someone like Rassie appears and brings a new approach a new attitude and what's more it's very sensible and has deep vision in the long term aspect.

Mozart and Pakie's views are typical of SA rugby public and it's precisely those type of views that keep us in bondage.

A friend of mine who is a medical man said...it's rather like trying to do neuro surgery by correspondence...or building depth by warming benches...waahahahahahahahaha.

That's the best one of all. If Rassie did not bring the subs on we would probably would have won but that is not his priority goal...what Pakie is insinuating is that Rassie should have kept the same players or he should have brought them on sooner. Rassie does NOT appear to get tempted or side-tracked to his original goal, even the win glory, to me thats strong.

Mozart in turn thinks the reason we are successful are the returning of Jake White and HM rugby...hilarious to say the least. Mozart, stick to Grid Iron...it's more up your street or down whatever...hahaha

What new approach? The Boks are using a similar game to what the Wallabies have been doing. Which is what Coetzee did. Maybe the implementation improved, but he is no visionary. The game Meyer had in mind was much closer to the All Black model. Not so rigid. 

Mike knows Rassie was wrong. He is just looking for excuses. Another coach and the knives would be out. As Pakie said, nothing was gained and we lost the biggest test of the year. A very rare opportunity. Very careless. 

Crumbs...is it so hard to see...or do some of you have no insight  at all...you might have some knowledge here and there of technical areas but struggle to see the wood from the trees or the trees for the wood....hahaha.

The "team" is the goal...a long term one...heart, spirit, mental...as well as technical skills...there can be different individual approaches not necessary tailor-made but adaptable...approach is new and long over due...team spirit departed long ago...we became a circus show for the rest of the world...Japan's victory and Italy's was not a fluke...we were headed for more under AC.

Maybe I'm reading too much into it but I get my views from one of the best rugby coaches ever...he was a schoolboy coach who's past on...Doc Craven knew and respected him, Keith Oxlee and other players accredited their success to him.

He built teams, he built people and inspired them and he was shrewd , a tactician but I maintain his success was in the mind, the mental focus, the belief.

Our rugby is looking good because the team is living, it's alive, it's a unit.

Mozart

What the hell do you mean.   Should Erasmus have kept 2 injured players on the field?   he had no choice in the case of Le Roux - the medics would not allow it.

Secondly when last has you seen any prop playing through a game.   Props are normally replaced at around minute 60 in every game I have watched for years.   Now in hindsight you can  say his selection of Koch was a mistake - but I believe Louw had so many chances where he failed - that Erasmus was forced into looking for another option.   Ultimately I think he will revert back to Oosthuizen nd Du Toit. 

One has to worry about your lack of logic and your total disregard what actually happened in games and your tendency to use dishonest description of what actually happened.   Please get your act together - at present you are being treated as a joke in bad taste.      

AO

What was Erasmus wrong about?   I cannot write total BS like you can - so what are you talking about?

Pakie

A quote from you:-

"With regards to building depth, what have we learned about Willemse during the RC? He had the jitters against Argentina, so nothing there.:

I could not find any sign of jitters and want to know when the jitters occurred?   Careful now - you have to prove something and I am going to look at your explanation.  

Well I watched Os play the full 80 in RWC 2007. Guess the coach thought it important to maintain scrum stability in a close game.

I don't have a copy of that game to hand but yes, slinging an intercept pass over Van Staden's head comes to mind. This from a Sport24 article:

It was a high-pressure situation, and Willemse threw a horrible pass that directly resulted in an Argentina try before kicking one out on the full that put the Boks under even more pressure.

As for your "careful now" bluster - you make a horrible internet tough guy. Just drop it, it's embarrassing.

The tried and trusted Lügnerin debate strategy:

LOL AO...quiet true in the overall context...the trouble here is that points are always diverted and the arguments are side-tracked...my point was not respected and taken out by the "technical experts" who really are not experts at all...they present a case of one dimension.

Rassie,by contrast to all our past coaches, at least appears to me as a good team builder...a good team builder can take a bunch of chaps from mediocre to good  ability (some more or more stronger and effective together) and change them into an effective working unit...if you have been in the forces and conflict you will understand that. We are improving because of the team spirit...it's healthy and good... humans are NOT programmed automatons.

Lets forget our differences for a while and take a break...here's something that Moz, Mike, Seb and even OA will agree on...the rest probably not...it's exceptional taste

RIP Dimi tri

https://youtu.be/wV1kzblUElY

That is weird - Argentina scored NO tries after Willemse came on - so try again - nutcase.

No, what is weird is that you claim to have reviewed Willemse's performances, but somehow missed a try being scored off an intercept pass by him. You didn't review anything, did you? You sat there staring at a stat sheet and then came blustering on here flapping your big mouth .

Here's a video for you:

I'm surprised at you Chabal. Everyone knows this is Russia's cult classic.

I don't even care about an apology to be honest. This bullshit about him attacking other posters, calling them names, calling them liars only to be proven to be in the wrong time and again is getting old now. An apology would mean nothing because he will just keep on repeating the same behaviour.

Some of Lügnerin's lies of late:

1. Morné is becoming a soccer player. 
2. Morné cost Stad the game against Krasny Yar, but wasn't playing - Plisson was. 
3. Goosen wasn't on the field for New Zealand's lineout try in 2012. 
4. He sparked all of the attacking play against Australia in 2012. 
5. Louw was useless in the World Cup. Was in fact the second best fetcher in the competition. 
6. Damian didn't make a defensive error in the World Cup for a try against New Zealand. 
7. Willemse didn't throw and pick 7 against Argentina. 
8. André was run ragged by Toomua. 
9. Issue with Louis's carry distance against New Zealand. 
10. Damian didn't get beaten at a lineout in Wellington. 
11. Steph misses no tackles. Makes no defensive lapses. Videos are lies. 
12. Meyer's gameplan was kick chase, Rassie's aimless kicking game is advanced expansive rugby. 
13. Louw lost the second Puma test. 
14. André lost the Welsh test and the third England test. 
15. Tui didn't run over Whiteley and Mostert. 
16. Faf stifled Damian's game with slow service. 
17. Schalk played flyhalf for Meyer. 
18. Jake cut Morné for the 2007 World Cup. 

You either have a feel for the position or you don't. Kind of Monty at 10, it just didn't work. Willemse looks to be a good Bok in the making. In time he'll be ready. People take Pollard's transition to test rugby for granted. It seldom happens like that. Butch is the only other exception to the rule since readmission.