Pass: 6
Run: 14
Metres Run: 70
Clean Breaks: 4
Defenders Beaten: 7
Offloads: 2
Tackles: 4/1
Turnovers: 2
He was statistically the most effective centre in the game. However, we are being led to believe that he was a primary reason for our loss. The dishonesty abounds. Nothing new under the sun.
I'm busy going through the game again. Slowed down. The Boks tried to get the ball to the wings more, but failed to engage the defence enough. They kept going wide but kept getting caught by a good rush. We need more hit ups close in to tie the defence in. A few times we were guilty of not drawing and passing. Obviously, they were instructed to go wide and it was evident in their eagerness. Rushing too many passes as well. This wasn't like past Bok tests where an individual made several catastrophic foul ups, especially not like Damian's gaffs. Esterhuizen is fast enough for a 12, how many speedster 12s reach the top of the pecking order in world rugby? I can't think of one. It's shameful that someone can point out Esterhuizen as a reason for the loss. Though not surprising.
If pace is a concern at 12, Damian is not going to add one yard of it.
Listen dimness - I gave real reasons why despite the line breaks Esterhuizen's performance was on the whole non-productive and inadequate,
You wrote why the Springbok attack was not effective and inadequate - look no further than the number 12 and ask the simple question why was he replaced/
Pakie
De Allende has played on the wing and at one stage the magnificent White wanted to use Esterhuizen as a loosie - comprehende?
Damian is not fast. Even worse, he can't read play. He is a cul-de-sac that pours into the line like treacle. He has poor hands, can't tackle, is positionally a nightmare, doesn't communicate well, is passive and can't carry the ball up. There is no advantage in playing him. He can win the odd turnover though. Maybe we should play him at 6.
Fact of the matter is, in all his tests he has been a dud. I'm sure if Esterhuizen had conceded 3 tries in one test, almost 4, you'd be gleefully attacking him viciously. Damian is the worst Bok 12 I have ever seen. The most fundamentally flawed centre I have seen. There are school boys with more sense than him. Literally.
Just 2 simple questions,
* If Esterhuizen - a duplicate of Fat Fransie - can read the game so well, why did the line breaks end up in nothing and why was he obviously ball hogging?
* I have asked you before in which test did De Allende conceded 3 tries - why not answer that one?
Ball hogging? 6 passes and 2 offloads? I suppose you had not noted the Puma's rushing up on the outside to choke the Bok's wide game. Here you are criticising one of the most productive players we had and it never occurred to you that maybe Rassie was out coached. Maybe he made a tactical error.
Oh, and I was waiting to see how long it would be before you dragged Frans into the discussion. You are so predictable. Reading your posts for the first time leaves me with deja vu.
By now it should be very obvious to even the most one eyed that Allende and Kriel are a better combo. Esterhuizen had a better test than usual but still doesn't show the skills of Allende or the rugby acumen.
The more i sees of pap Am the less i like it. He did very little in the test.
Afraid all those backing Esterhuizen and AM against Kriel and Allende have thus far had the egg land!
Listen - ball hogging came into the picture when a player carried the ball 14 times and passed and off-loaded just about half of his number of carries.
Merely an example of another pace-deficient center with no idea about reading of games and called a player who for the very same reasons as given by you was identified as not a center at all by his coach - Esterhuizen being a carbon copy of Fat Fransiebut only slightly better than him.
By the way Erasmus was indeed out-coached. They looked at the deficiencies of some players and decided to concentrate on causing havoc iro those players. Like Hansen said years ago - they knew exactly what to expect from a certain player - but they do not know what to expect from his successor. In the case of some players and the loosies and centers were neutralized and even the locks ere in jeopardy because of the Etzebeth card and early replacement. They also knew exactly what to do to neutralize Mostert. So there y ou have it in a nutshell. .
Another thing we saw immediately a pick up in tempo after half time. Kolisi does not get his charges going. if Whiteley is going to play make him captain - look what an inspiration he i s with the lions.
Listen Mozart
You are unfortunately dimmer every day - comparing a lock with a center. How many times must I plead with you to think before you write BS on site? It is really a Tragedy that ypu have descended to that low level.
What has how many meters you run got to do with how good a captain you are. Whiteley if on the field should captain.
We can do this another way, let's compare Esterhuizen to the centres in the All Black game. I think you'll find he compares favourably.
Laumape (12)
Pass: 14
Run: 16
Metres Run: 81
Clean Breaks: 1
Defenders Beaten: 5
Offloads: 0
Tackles: 9/0
Turnovers: 1
Goodhue (13)
Pass: 14
Run: 19
Metres Run: 45
Clean Breaks: 1
Defenders Beaten: 2
Offloads: 3
Tackles: 2/3
Turnovers: 1
Beale (12)
Pass: 25
Run: 10
Metres Run: 59
Clean Breaks: 1
Defenders Beaten: 1
Offloads: 2
Tackles: 7/6
Turnovers: 2
Hodge (13)Pass: 1
Run: 7
Metres Run: 35
Clean Breaks: 1
Defenders Beaten: 1
Offloads: 0
Tackles: 8/2
Turnovers: 3
Mozart and AO
Dimness is on parade in full swing, First of all you two did not read what I wrote about your new hero - new because Mozart despised him in the past,
I credited Esterhuizen credited him with making the breaks and making the carries but -
* queried the value of the carries with due regard to what happened to the ball subsequently; and
* and described the situation where the passing and off-loading represents 36% of the total number of ball handling as ball hogging,
This was way over the head of you two - so try and think what followed the ball carries and although thinking is in short supply in your case (prejudiced BS reigns supreme),
Mozart
Unlike you I always give credit where credit is due and do not try to create false manipulations when trying to find reasons to criticize players. I deal with issues on merit not based on prejudice based on their selection threat to your erstwhile favourites; I look at most positivesm but also at negatives when players do deserve it.
Your new support for Esterhuizen is far from genuine - it is based on your pet hate De Allende being suggested as a replacement if him - nothing else. Esterhuizen played in four tests - he was poor in two of them and slightly better in his last two tests - but he even came short in the last test insofar as ball distribution is concerned.
Now lets get it straight - you know zero about my career and never knew what I have done = so your demeaning remarks are based on total ignorance and a real escape from having counters for comments I make on site, That is in fact the same level of discussion you have on site and make me believe that your HR are BS and you are only interested in who on site supports you in your seriously defective rugby ideas n site, Anybody differing from you are attack en dlessly - quite often based on extremely false assumptions and utter BS,
Before I lose my temper and respond further I better end this message.
You look at positives as well as negatives?
Clever Mike never needs to work a day in his life give how much baloney comes out of his mouth. He has perfected the art of zero point sustenance.
Listen I have said a series of tests can indicate a tendency in player performances.
Sure I do look at everything and I make informed opinion decisions. I do not only lookat where I can demean players like you do and make statements far removed from fact and entirely based on prejudice.
Take as example the case of Frans Steyn. I wrote on site how delighted I was about his return in 2012 and partnership with De Villiers as a center pairing. However, that delight did not last very long. He was poor in the test matches played in 2012 and there are numerous examples of what occurred. He was in shocking physical condition and together with Morne -who in those tests failed as well - caused a negative impression. However, the first four games in 2013 was a total disaster insofar as Steyn's performance was concerned. He was so poor that Plumtree - because of public outcry - had to clarify what was really happening. Steyn was grossly overweight and was according to Plumtree not a center at all. FACT
That was followed by his performance in Super Rugby in 2014 and 2015, He obviously was protected by White and went on making so many mistakes for which White took it out on other players. When White was forced to resign at the end of 2014 it was clear that Steyn was in a poor situation as to contract renewal. He was in fact on contract with SARU for three years from 2012 to 2015 and based on his substandard performance during that period his contract was not renewed. FACT.
He then followed White around and the latter's protection of Steyn was always in evidence. Not a real positive insofar as Steyn is concerned.
Sorry - but I still cannot believe how bad the deterioration of S teyn was after a good start in test rugby - most disappointing.
* and described the situation where the passing and off-loading represents 36% of the total number of ball handling as ball hogging,
So then you admit that De Allende, with an average pass rate of only 30% across his entire test career, is also a ball hogger?
Run/pass handling total: 321
99 Passes
222 Runs
