Throw, timing or jumper

I got nothing wrong. That was the very first comment I ever made about their necks. I also never said the photos are wrong, I did state that they were not being analysed correctly. They weren't. Indeed, look for yourself, who has the thicker neck? Is it not Steph? Did Eben not have his neck raised and stretched up in that prior photo? He did. The comparison was ridiculous. Not to mention Even has a slightly different structure to the collar bone, with naturally higher traps. Steph is flatter.  In the end, this is a pretty mundane topic; We don't learn anything useful about either player. 

AO

Tell your lord and master Mozart to stop his nonsense - he is the one who started attacking Du Toit based on his standard  BS.    

One has to wonder the low Mozart is prepared to take discussions on this site to and obviously often enough with your support.

What about the thin wrists? I can't properly see their wrists .

Draad

Can you see the thin shoulders?     

Two points . . .

First off, I don't care if Pieter-Steph has the neck of a giraffe, the shoulders of a sloth and the wrists of a nagapie, it's not what you look like, it's what you actually achieve on the field and Pieter-Steph does just fine for me.

Secondly, I don't know how many of you have ever seen pictures of Moffie but hearing this ugly, weedy, bandy-legged little stick insect of a man having a pop at a specimen like Pieter-Steph has to be the very height of irony.

Mike...

Please answer the following.

Just talking from memory here but I'm sure that in the last three years the Lions have scored the most tries in SR in at least one season and been close to the most in the other two. Something like 1st, 2nd and 2nd.

And if I'm not mistaken again, they scored more tries form driving lineouts than any other team. 

Please explain to me, how Mostert, their main jumper and set up man for these driving mauls is so inadequate yet has managed this? To the point where for long periods during the last three seasons, a lineout inside opposition 22 was converted to 5 points almost at will. And this with a pack that contains another two lightweights in Kwagga and Whitely.

Considering that he is competing against both bigger SA locks, and the all the Kiwi teams, one has to wonder how all his technique and ability suddenly vanishes when he puts on a Bok jersey.

Here, allow me to answer for you...

Oh, yeah in SR it's a hundred times easier. Don't you know that the NZ and SA SR packs aren't even close to the level of the packs from France, Ireland and England...or even Argentina?

Also Plum, the techniques required in test rugby are entirely different to SR. 

It's basically a different sport all together.

Plum

You actually answered a substantial part of the issues raised.   

There is in fact some weak points in your argument.   The June tests proved that the English pack is not stronger than the SA pack.    The English missed a  number of players on Saturday - but in June they fielded their strongest forward  side and not a weakened   forward pack.   

I do not know what the situation with the French pack - but I doubt whether they are any stronger than the English pack.   We would also see how the English perform against NZ.

So that part of your argument does not hold water.

As to Mostert I would think he would be a better 7 than he is a lock.  But we have all our own preferences.

Plum - I am very worried about the creeping absence of using rolling mauls in the Springbok game - as well as the weakness to stem opposing mauls.   Both of those are in fact a key role of the Tight 5 - and to this date  there is no evidence  that Mostert played a sufficient role in that regard.       

There is no evidence Mostert is a hindrance. Just as  there was no evidence Victor was a hindrance either. It's all fantasy. 

AO

So why is Mostert incapable of starting rolling mauls on test level?   Why is the Tight 5 of the springboks incapable of defending effectively rolling mauls of opposing teams.  Why is rolling mauls successful when Du Toit is involved and why is it not the case when Mostert is involved?

Simple questions - but I assume way over your head,

Why did Matfield failed repeatedly when mauls were called for in 2014 - eg in he Wellington test against the AB's.   Why was he yellow-carded in the English test because of ineptitude by him in particular to deal with mauls.   I saw twice in the test against the Welsh in 2014 - how he landed on his backside outside of mauls when he tried to have mauls, the mauls ending up being unsuccessful.   Why was the mauls cut out in the Japan test - when Meyer wanted forward dominance and Matfield made sure it was not applied?

You claim you have such a wonderful collection of data and video's available - if you really have - proof me wrong about the issue. 

When dimness - when?   By 2014 Matfield was a liability - so much so you had to lie about his world cup performances. 

Meyer said the forwards must lay the basis for the game and there was no instruction that Mauls should not be used.    The game was in fact buggered up by Burger nd Bismarck  with the active help from Pienaar.    

Matfield was severely criticized for what happened in the forward play in the Japan game.   The so-called ball-in-hand game was an invention of yours to explain the bugger-ups made by Matfield and the forwards.  

Theere were 15 line-outs on own throw and one line-out won by De Jager on opposition throw-in.   Of those line-outs ten went to Matfield and he did nothing insofar as setting up  mauls.   How many more line-outs is normal in a test?  A few it definitely was not.    Clean up your act!!!!!!!

I ask a simple question and that is why did not try and form  driving mauls after line-out ball catches in tests this year if he is capable to do it.  I went further and gave a detailed explanation why he cannot form such mauls.    Both went straight over your head.      

When dimness - when?   By 2014 Matfield was a liability - so much so you had to lie about his work cup performances. 

Meyer said the forwards must lay the basis for the game and there was no instruction that Mauls should not be used.    The game was in fact buggered up by Burger nd Bismarck  with the active help from Pienaar.    

Matfield was severely criticized for what happened in the forward play in the Japan game.   The so-called ball-in-hand game was an invention of yours to explain the bugger-ups made by Matfield and the forwards.  

There were 15 line-outs on own throw and one line-out won by De Jager on opposition throw-in.   Of those line-outs 7 went to Matfield and he did nothing insofar as setting up  mauls.   How many more line-outs is normal in a test?  A few it definitely was not.    Clean up your act!!!!!!!

I ask a simple question and that is why did not try and form  driving mauls after line-out ball catches in tests this year if he is capable to do it.  I went further and gave a detailed explanation why he cannot form such mauls.    Both went straight over your head.      

"and to this date  there is no evidence  that Mostert played a sufficient role in that regard."

Mike there is 3 to 4 years worth of evidence that Mostert is not only capable but excellent at taking the ball cleanly and getting a successful maul going. 

Stop this b.s. with size already Will you?

How big are the Bulls, Sharks, Saders, Canes, Landers and Chiefs packs? The same bloody size as any test pack.

If you think the Lions would have the maul success that they have while Mostert, the key man, is defective and not able to form a maul...THEN EXPLAIN THEIR  MAUL DOMINANCE TO ME?

By what miracle did they manage to be one of the, if not the best mauling side in SR for three years?

If you are gonna insist in sticking with your 10kg to light argument then please take the following criteria and place them in order of chronological importance as concerns a successful lineout drive...

Lift/Cohesion/Clean take/Correct call/Drive position and direction/10kgs/Deception/Ball Protection/Ball distribution

Where exactly does your magical 10kg sit among those factors? Clearly right at the top. 

Plum

Sorry to disagree 

We are dealing with test level requirements.   Have you any evidence that Mostert successfully start any rolling mauls on test level?    It is not about size - it is about what the player achieve in that component of the game.

No the 10kg issue does not sit on top at all.   It has in fact nothing to do with the issue.  What has to do is whether the take is clear and where the player landed after the clean take,   I saw clearly that the landing spot is slightly behind the players in the rest of the line-out and that makes the forming of mauls impossible.   If from that spot Mostert try to form a maul it would place the other players off-side.

The problem remains that I tried to find why mauls are not successfully used regularly by the Springboks and why the defense of mauls all to frequently fails.   I raised the issue a  number of times and am prepared to admit I was wrong about the issue.   Nobody took up the challenge and look at the issue merely as an invention of mine. Unfortunately it is a major negative and if the Springboks really wants to be competitive up front the problem should be solved.   

My suggestion is that people should look carefully as to what happens in line-out takes by Mostert and then we can discuss the issue further,    

"How many times has Mostert taken opposition balls in line-outs if he indeed is the better jumper? "

More than any other lock in SA presently playing the game.

Next...

Mozart

Please you were ridiculed by members for the BS about long neck. thin shoulders and thin wrists.   Why do you want to persist with what is clearly BS.  Why not keep quiet and spare yourself further embarrassment?    You are hopelessly wrong about the issue and I even feel embarrassed on your behalf.

I would suggest you call quits and not make a total arsehole of yourself again.   

plum

You are a nice guy and I am not happy to differ from you.   I wish somebody would come up with a reason for our maul failures in TESTS and indicate where I am wrong.

I refer only to tests in discussions - never to Super Rugby.  

Proof it BSter in the tests he played in. steals, setting up mauls.   You are known to make wild statements - so provide the proof please.  

Mike, do you think that Lewis Hamilton was better or worse than the other kids at racing go-karts?

Question is...was there anyone that did worse than him at lower levels and then ended up outperforming him in F1?

Plum, I'm no Mosterdt or Hamilton fan, but I do see his worth...but he has not proofed himself yet( as the true best 5 in the land) ....Hamilton? ...Really????

Mike really let's himself down. I'm supposedly in the Mostert camp as a fan boy, yet I berated Mostert heavily for his play in the second Puma test. What did I say? It wasn't worth shifting Steph to 7. I was actually hasty, as Mostert went on to have a very good RC. My ultimate preference is to have Snyman partner Eben. However, how do we balance the production we already have with Mostert? Do we shift Mostert to 7 and drop Steph to the bench? Or have Mostert on the bench? Snyman can replicate everything Steph does, and offer more. So I don't think we lose anything. We'd now for sure, if Rassie tried this at least once. 

Snyman is a 4.

Haha Draad

I don't watch F1...ever. Just used Hamilton as an example.

Mostert may not have 100% proven himself but he's not that far off. 

He's not at any point looked out of his depth. Far from it. Eben is getting injured a lot lately and the way PSDT is playing, which is bloody good, won't go unpunished by his body. Then who is there?

Snyman is quality. Lood just isn't complete enough a player for test rugby these days. Not for me anyway.

Mostert has to be in the mix, and it's just annoying when his "physicality" is constantly weighed against everything else he does. The guy has earned it. Maybe I'm an underdog fan. But what I'm more a fan of  hard work and guts rewarded.

Remember this gem: Faf's pass just isn't good enough for a test 9. 

I think we tend to get stuck on one theme and ignore everything else a player offers, often to our detriment.

Faf's passing progressed well during the RC. Mostert handles himself well. One of the reasons why our pack was effective was because we had dynamism. They are the foundation for our entire game. It would be foolish to go the opposite direction. 

Yes Plum, Mosterdt must be in the mix...Lood not methinks...and there is some animosity between Lood and Eben....been there since 2015., but we'll see I suppose. 

Lol Blue, you stepped-in-it again! Don't worry, I can't help myself either.

I hear Faf has thick ankles.

Weigh more this his thighs.

That's the word on the street anyway.