Matfield at his prime was a top lock and nobody ever disputed that. His return from retirement was an unmitigated disaster for his reputation and the Springboks.
Victor was brought in because the next generation was uncompetitive. Lood, Kruger, Steph et al were hopeless, amongst others. Victor's last campaign successfully exposed Lood. Victor was top quality.
And he was less competitive than they were and was a disaster when it came to any element of performance - even in line outs he turned out badly. Despite all the warning signs Meyer was stupid enough to select him for the WC squad, He was even poor against Japan and that says a lot. By 2015 Meyer was scraping the bottom of the barrel insofar as the Matfield was concerned and he effectively became one of the 8 unplayable players in the squad.
I’m guessing one of the 6 best locks of all time was money whenever he played.....proven by his MOM in the WC 2015 3rd place match. Lomp was the disaster gifting Kaino a try in the semi.
Victor, Schalk, Kirchner were three of the best players against Japan. Where was Steph? Kriel? Coenie? Lambie? Lood?
Coenie was on the bench with a yellow card.....apart from Kriel’s pathetic missed tackle that was the incident that lost the Japanese game. I’ve noticed everybody is blamed except the two guys who actually are mainly culpable.
The misfits do not realize that it was not one incident that lost the Japan test in 2015 - it was a series of blunders by the over-the-hill players - most of whom should not have been in the WC squad. Among those were Matfield as well.
Wanker what you are not processing is regardless of what anybody else did, the match was still going to be won until Coenie got his card and even then it was likely going to be won until Kriel tackled like a girl.
Is there a flicker of understanding or is it still too hard to grasp?
There should never against Japan have been a point difference of less than 7 points in any test against Japan - a team that was much weaker than their 2019 counterparts in any event, In 2019 the Springboks played the much stronger Japanese team and the smallest point difference in those tests were 23 points.
No excuse Mozart for the loss resulting from a string of f#ck-ups by especially the senior players in the team. That is the real situation and basing the loss of the game on one incident is as simplistic as most if not all your rugby postings normally are on this site,
You know I’m right Wanker, which is why you keep digressing....Kriel makes his tackle at minute 79 the Boks win the game. Here’s a picture:
If my auntie had balls she would have been my uncle. You cannot dispute the fact that the game was horribly buggered up from the beginning by the Springboks and that gave the Japanese a chance to win. After the game Jones said the Japanese used a move against the Springboks which should have been covered if they had proper defense coaching and he expressed surprise about the try - FACT,
However, how the hell do you account for the Springboks being only 5 points ahead near the end of the game - then fuck up the defense totally for a try being scored? Those ae facts you totally disregard and become simplistic when trying to dilute the facts surrounding the whole game.
The positive from that loss is that it was the final reason that convinced SARU not to renew the Meyer contract and save SA Rugby from further embarrassment and decline. I sometimes wonder why you never attacked Meyer - even when he was a disastrous coach - but you are constantly attacking Erasmus from the time that he as appointed, - to my mind that is a sick situation.
Will have to ask a doctor friend of mine - I am getting worried about you having Stupidity Disease attacks all the time. You urgently needs help.
No, given your proclivities she would have been more of a man than your uncle. Look at Kriel’s face...he knows he has just lost the game.
Sorry, but Kriel did not lose the game - the team did and the team played horribly badly in the full match.
Kriel directly blows the defence and we concede a game losing try, but it was all Matfield, Schalk and Kirchner's fault. Great logic. The yellow card and try don't count. Typical logic.
Your logic is BS as per normal. The Springboks played a much weaker Japan side in 2015 than their 2019 world cup side. How the hell could the team allow the Japanese to be within 5 points from the Springboks in 2015 - a 5 point win against that Japan side would also have been a disgrace.
It happened because the unplayable oldies buggered up badly throughout the game. Meyer was a shit coach - but he wanted the forwards to control the Japanese, He therefore had two issues, Pass the ball mostly to Burger and not the flyhalf and enforce driving mauls. While Burger knocked on \balls constantly giving away scrums - Matfield decided that driving mauls were for the birds. Bismarck also decided that he can make the rules and play accordingly so a string of penalties went against him.
The whole game was a farce played in accordance with a farcical so-called game plan. The only player who stood out on the day was De Jager - the rest was rubbish.
However, the loss had two consequences, namely -
* since the loss meant that the Springboks had to win every other round-robin match, and since the squad contained 8 unplayable players - there were no rest matches for the 23 playable players and by the time the play-offs came, the frontline players were totally tired out and less effective than they otherwise would have been; and
* the result was the final straw that led to SARU deciding not to renew the Meyer contract to save SA Rugby from inevitable demise.
They buggered up badly by appointing an equally poor coach to replace him and it took them 18 months to realize that as was the case with Meyer - same was the case with Coetzee, Both were total failures as coaches.
To put the matter in real perspective the Springboks in 2019 played the much stronger Japanese side - that even got to the play-offs by beating Scotland and Ireland - by huge margins with the smallest winning margin being 23 points in the quarterfinals.
To blame Kriel for the loss is typical of Mozart and you - cover up the muck of the other players and the deficiency of a defective game plan that Matfield ignored is typical of you and Mozart. Start thinking for a change as to what really happened and you may yet be showing a bit of unexpected thinking ability. .
"It happened because the unplayable oldies buggered up badly throughout the game."
How many more times? You are the most boring, errant, petulant and childish poster I have ever seen.
Even though I try to get some sense into you insofar as rugby is concerned - it seems to be an exercise in futility, However, take the team against Japan and see how many of them got virtual starting game time afterwards, Then see how much game time all the players had in he series.
Two of the players who became unplayable was two who should for different reasons not have been in the squad at all - De Villiers and Matfield. Be it is it may ultimately it was the coach and his foolish selections that caused the main problem.
I don’t know anything about McBride long before my time as was Meads
Martin Johnson was bog ordinary
The likes of Bakkies, Etzebeth and Retallick were/ are far better
I saw Meads and McBride playing and they were at the time top class locks. Whether they would be the same should they have played in the professional era they might mot have been that great, Both were 6'4" and both weighed 102 kgs. They could perhaps make the scale of loosies nowadays.
Very difficult to make selections like that stretching back to before 1995 when the s port became professional/
Talking about Matfield - being comparatively light in weightn at 108 kgs - he was easily lifted in line-outs and that was his special ability, From the Tight 5 perspective he was physically not strong enough to be competitive, and Bakkies was the real lock that kept the Tight 5 going,
Another sneak attack on Matfield....I remember when you said the Bok tight head was suffering with Matfield behind him, only for me to point out Matfield was behind the loose head. A liar and a fool.
No sneak attack - just the real situation. Matfield was physically not strong enough to compete in Tight 5 situations, He made his name on line-out play and in fiddling around in the backline - even Bakkies remarked about that, Was he a top lock to be included in a list like the .above is debatable - but as I stated such a list is always also debatable.
The game has changed over the last 50 years and the physical aspects now is vastly differen t from the 1970's, .
Must agree that the locks mentioned performed well in their day but Matfield was a disaster after he was recalled for the WC.
Locks that also should get a mention are:
and the one and only the great one the gentle giant Frik Du Preez.
Matfield in his prime had muscled up to 115kg - he was brilliant in his prime - tarnished a little by carrying on way past his sell by date
In his autobiography Matfield claimed his playing weight was 108 kgs, Be it as it may his thin legs earning him the nickname Kiewiet probably was the reason for his relatively low weight,
Matfield was our premier lock for the WC, Eben coming close. The disaster was the Lood: Hands of stone, slow, ponderous, lethargic and untalented. Next was the Steph who Andrews said we should build our campaign around. Such egg that flowed that year.
Matfield was as useless as possible in the 2015 WC and played exactly in two matches and loafed through start of a third one. He was the worst lock in that series and contributed to the loss against Japan - at least the Spnngboks were kept in contention by a very good try by the De Jager, and in the semi against the AB's. The latter was a farce - he came on at lock and lost the first line-out on SA throw, He then tried a neck wrestle with a AB player and caused a turnaround in a very kickable penalty. Despite the fact that he was not the best player in the Bronze medal game against the Argentine B team - he was made MOM as a farewell gesture.
The best lock by some distance was De Jager. Matfield was unplayable and his minimal game time he did play caused De Jager to play in every test and that is not the situation players in a WC should ever be in. The egg that flowed that year was all around the loss against Japan and the resultant effective firing of Meyer by SARU.
The 2019 WC team in the final would have beaten the Meyer lot by a cricket score, You remain the dumbest idiot on board - keep it up, you are always good for as good laugh.
Cite one instance where Victor made one mistake or negative contribution to the Bok effort that day. If you want useless, look no further than the Welsh test: Lood was bullied and blew two try-scoring chances in the red zone with poor handling. We were nearly knocked out because he couldn't man-up when it mattered most. Surprise surprise, Twickenham 2018, Lood comes on, gets knocked around like a teddy-bear. We are attacking hard and he again knocks on in the red zone. Lost a lineout to Japan in 2015. Such shame. You get the stuffing knocked out of you in every exchange because you are a liar who lies out of your big, far liar hole.
Listen dimness I gave you three examples and cannot help if you cannot read or understand plain English. Nobody ever knocked around De Jager in any match and your assessment is made up imagination again. The only player knocked around that day after he came on the field was Esterhuizen who isolated himself and then lost possession of the ball.
Bullshit Matfield was a complete physical liability in the WC he was utterly useless
Lood was far far better and had useless Meyer woken up to this fact things might have been different
I do not know how AO comes up with the garbage he writes on this site - the good players he rates as poor and the poor players he rates as good - he must be a replica of Meyer because he is as poor in performance assessment of players as Meyer is. He is either a total idiot who knows nothing about the game or he is trying to stir up controversy on site.
I can clearly remember that Supersport in 2015 ran a series about selection in various positions which showed that before the WC Meyer was waffling about badly and nobody had an idea whom should be in the WC and who should not be - please note their was not a similar program in 2019 - the squad was as clear as daylight months before the selection announcement was made,
However, back to 2015 when the lock issue was discussed on TV and the selections was proposed by two previous locks. They did not even mention Matfield as a recommended selection and neither did anyone else, The media at the time was so shocked by the squad announcement of some names and they challenged Meyer about some selections and he then stated that he is aware of what players were capable of in the past and his selections were based on that, Present performances counted for nothing and some of the duds he selected did not play any rugby for more than 16 months before the WC,
The 2015 WC squad had at least a third of the squad who should never have been in the squad - to my mind it was the worst WC squad ever selected by any SA coach,
More utter tripe from Wanker.....this ‘worst’ WC squad beat at least as formidable a Welsh team and missed the final and probably the WC by 2 points....playing what is probably NZ’s best team in the professional area. Wanker you are an old never has been in control of about half your faculties.
Dave.. Lood played in the WC semi where we exited, almost for the whole game....and was run over by Kaino. One of two tries conceded ...I suppose Matfield was responsible for that try?
Nope every player gets run over, ask Bismark
But I know Lood was very good that WC and Matfield was every bit the old light man he was
Stupid Meyers faith in washed up has beens was part of his downfall
He was great but he got run over....sure, got it!
Yes he was very good that WC, being run over does not define how good a player is all tournament - you know that
The three reasons for my statement are as follows:-
* There were at least 8 unplayable players in the squad,
* The loss against Japan - in itself a disgrace - had nasty consequences - since another loss would have eliminated SA from the series, So Meyer effectively limited the real squads to 23 players from 31.
* A WC allows for 31 players - the idea being that each player would get some rest games in the series, There were no rest games for the playable Springboks given a rest and by the time they reached the playoffs the players were tired out, In 2019 all the players had plenty game time and the main team players had in the main two rest games.
If the 2015 WC squad came from proper team selection not providing for unplayable players the team could have done better, And the Japan loss would have been avoided.
Lomp....ball in hand vs Wales in 2015, 11 runs no defenders beaten, no breaks, 7 metres and he lost the ball twice. I am in awe!
What’s wrong with this picture:
A Springbok squad led by Siya Kolisi, that combines youth with some hardened experience, has been confirmed for South Africa’s seventh assault on the Rugby World Cup title.
Oh boy we still have locks being judged as centres
Locks gaining 50m a game in traffic, beating defenders at will
Is Lomp a great lineout forward....nope pretty average.
A great tackler....nope Kaino shows that
A particularly good kick off receiver....nope
Rugged.....Etzebeth put the lie to that
So we are left with his ‘powerful runs’....but it turns out he’s not that good at that either.
Bullshit Lood is one of the best locks in the game
Is physically good with ball in hand - one of our best, always breaks the advantage line and carries the momentum forward, on par with the likes of PSDT and Etzebeth.
His tackling is up there with the rest of the locks in the business. Has a high strike rate
His line out work is as good as any Bok lock we have
Lood is a class act - Etzebeth and Lood are the best lock pair in the game
Big physical guy who makes a great impact. A real lock unlike powder puff Mostert
Because in a game in 2015 missed a very difficult tackle on Kaino he is according to Mozart a poor defender, In that semi De Jager played for 50 minutes and made 14 tackles missing 2. In the 30 minutes Matfield played he made exactly 3 tackles,
In the WC final this year Mozart welcomed the injury of De Jager and claimed that Mostert as replacement prevented the Springboks from losing the game - which obviously was total BS.. Mostert cannot tackle a player without that player going forward in the tackle - in other words physically deficient tackles, When Mostert missed standard and easy tackles in the Argentine RC game and against the AB's in the WC - Mozart claimed that the reason for the misses was Du Toit, However, it was obvious that Erasmus came to realize that Mostert is a deficient tackler and the AB test in the WCC was his last starting test.
Mozart claims about Mostert saving the Springboks related to the 5 minutes the English was on constant attack near the try-line, Mostert made two weak tackles - so weak that you reckoned he missed them,. All the forwards manned up in those 5 minutes the best defenders were Etzebeth, Du Toit and Malherbe, the latter making two effective tackles on Billy Vunipola that prevented him scoring a try.
When does a player get run over in a tackle? As far as I get it it happens when a player is trying to make a face to face tackle and is unsuccessful in that. The term does not apply to a player coming from the side trying to make a tackle such as the case was in the De Jager miss on Kaino - but does apply to the two Mostert misses I referred to above.
It is amazing - in the more than 5 years since that test - nobody bar you and that Kindergarten imbecile blamed De Jager and De Allende for the two tries scored by the AB's in that test, IN both cases you have distorted what happened .
Is it not time that you start assessing incidents in matches objectively and stop your prejudice from taking over?
Mostert and Faf were the only two players to miss tackles when the Poms kept pounding our line in the final
That’s a fact
Mostert is all energy with little productivity as he has zero grunt
He is not a test standard lock because he lacks the required physicality to make the necessary physical impression
It’s the very reason Lood thankfully replaced him in the starting 15. Personally I would not have had him on the bench either, I would have had a real lock on board like Jason Jenkins or Ruan Botha
Actually Mostert replaced Lomp when Vunipola bumped into de Jager and left the poor dear on the deck.....then Mostert delivered the best tackling stats of the WC final. He was a warrior in the goal line stand.
So you think Rassie is a genius. I don’t. But if you do, how can you be smarter than him Dave? Erasmus picked Mostert from the start
I have to agree, Johnson was bog ordinary, but probably there because of his leadership and being the captain for England. Not I really liked the man, huge ego.
What about Frik Du Preez, he was the player of the century for SA, played lock and was a Freak, but he was actually on 1.89 cm for a lock which is in todays standard a flanker or a back line player
Rubbish Mostert missed two tackles as evidenced in previous discussions, despite what ESPN stats tell us, confirming how inaccurate those stats must generally be.
Rassie picked Mostert to start with as Lood was injured. As soon as Lood was match fit, he demoted Mostert to the bench.
What I like about Rassie and what makes him so good is that he worked out that Mostert was not bringing enough physicality to the role and therefore made the correct decision to replace him with much more grunt in Lood.
He is astute enough to work these things out unlike useless Meyer who stuck with Matfield when Matfield was doing a Mostert each game.
Great coaches make good calls. In 2018 we only won 50% of the games with powder puff Mostert in the engine room that all changed in 2019 when Lood was introduced
You never learn from good advice; De Jager was injured when Vuinipila and two other players fell on top of him and the following is utter BS again:-
"Actually Mostert replaced Lomp when Vunipola bumped into de Jager and left the poor dear on the deck".
Will you ever learn to be honest on site?
Mike, how many tests did “Cuinipila”and “twi ither o0klaters” play between them and who for? Having trouble locating them on Google....
You are such an easy target Dave. So Mostert was involved in too many losses? Here are the facts:
Lomp played in 45 tests and we won 24.
Mostert played in 39 tests and we won 24.
I trust you can do the simple division. Schplotttttttt!
Moz I’m not talking overall record I’m talking their records under Rassie
Why keep rep eating garbage on site. You were told repeatedly that that kind of comparison is to be used for evaluation of coaches.
De Jager played most of his tests under the Meyer and Coetzee disaster eras and was injured when Erasmus came in as coach, Mostert played no tests under Meyer, and played under the equally disastrous Coetzee.
Anyway what has not reached your besotted mind is that teams and not individuals lose matches but serial flops like Morne and Matfield in 2014 and 2015 could contribute to losses.
Mostert played in Erasmus’ awful 50/50 first year....the comparison is valid.
That’s my point Mostert was in Rassie’s first year which was hardly awful as you say and Lood was not in the side that year.
In 2019 Rassie replaced Mostert with Lood and look at the results compared to 2018
More grunt in the pack lead to better results
So Dave, I take it Mostert wouldn't make your top 1,000 locks?
Actually the real problem in 2018 was Dud Toit at lock......these are games he played:
Wales lost 20 to 22
Argentina won 32 to 21...in Durbs
England lost 11 to 12
France won 29 to 26
Mostert won 6 and lost 5 against tougher opposition including the away test vs Bargie vs the home test. And of course the win in NZ.
Dud’s your huckleberry.
What is this junk again, Mozart is a total wreck in abusing stats and the real situation again He is not bearing in mind that in the Wales test in 2018 Erasmus send a squad of players to Washington consisting of only 5 regular Springboks to play Wakes - for the rest it was an experimental team and most if the players tried out the first tine failed badly, This was more a trial match than a real test.
The same principle was used in the third England test in June 2018. In any event the idiot did not mention that loss. The November 2018 loss we have the continued idiocy blaming Du Toit for the fact that Marx made a mess of line-out throw-ins and admitted that he messed up, while Esterhuizen killed any potential chance of winning that test by isolating himself and losing possession in the final minutes of the game.
What the idiot missed out on was that both the two tests he mentioned was outside the test window period and the Springboks could not use foreign club players in the two tests - thus weakening the team as a whole. What was clear in other tests were that the Springboks lost the ability to use driving mauls from line-outs because of lack of physicality of Mostert,
As per normal Mozart ignored what really happened and the facts of the games he was always carrying on about. Fact is further that Mostert was for very good reason dropped from the starting team in the WC because of serious defensive flaws on his part and it is already clear that the WC final was the last test Mostert played for the Springboks. He is too physical deficient to feature again as a Springbok lock.
Anyway what has not reached your besotted mind is that teams and not individuals lose matches but serial flops like Morne and Matfield in 2014 and 2015 could contribute to losses.
I would say that the more Mozart attacks Du Toit as a player the sillier he becomes,
You can say that again and I’m sure you will. Unfortunately if you look at all Dud Toit’s games starting at lock the record is only 5 wins in 12 starts at lock. . The man was actually worse at lock than flank.
Prejudice in your case caused stupidity and that makes for a very real imbecile on site, There are people who use all means to assess player performances objectively and they made Du Toit and De Allende top class players, while you use distortion and basic dishonesty in assessing players in ane effort to discredit them,
So keep it up - it least it is always amazing to see what you will come up with next,
Denny - I could name 20 SA locks I’d select ahead of powder puff Mostert
Only position I would consider him is blindside but certainly not ahead of PSDT, Dan and JL du Preez, Jacques du Plessis or Ruan Ackerman
In a nutshell do I rate him - no I don’t
I’m not blinded by his heart and energy
It’s that lack of actual productivity that shines bright
Frankly I do not see why any discussion on Mostert is necessary since I believe he has played his last test for the Springboks in the World Cap. He will not make the team in future - not even on the bench,
He left Gloucester together with Ackerman and of he was as good as some site members claimed he is - Gloucester would have tried to retain him. I think they tried him at 7 in some games as he was not physically adding to their Tight 5 and he was not good enough when the Lions tried him at 7.
The problem on this site is that some members for some reason or other never criticized Meyer as coach when he failed and praised failed players like Matfield when he returned from retirement, They criticized Erasmus when he was appointed based on false narratives about his coaching career and kept it up ever since, As to some players they hate they use totally false narratives about what happened in games and in some cases invent things that was totally unreal like the one myth about a try scoring opportunity that never existed when Le Roux made an unsuccessful effort to outrun Ford and Farrell claiming that Ke Roux carried the ball for about 20 meters and the incident happened in the 22 when in fact it was not even near the 22 line, Ford was tackled by Ford and managed to make a very poor pass to Kolbe who hung onto the ball and when tackled by the cover-defense, De Allende protected the ball ensuring that there was no possession turnover,
I was amazed when reading about the whole incident - it was described as a definite try-scoring opportunity - which it never was, The falsification of the facts became obvious - it was outside the 22 and never reached it while in the whole test Le Roux according to ESPN stats carried the ball for 8 meters showing that Mozart was lying about it.
I do not think one should bother too much about the malignant nonsense they come up with,
So Moz are you saying you would select Mostert over PSDT be it at lock or blindside?
I’d select Mostert ahead of Dud in both positions.
He tackles as well, more often and has better sense of where to be defensively.
He is a much better lineout forward....both in terms of taking his own ball and in terms of poaching where he regularly leads the stats. He is also a better lineout tactician. This from the WC where he played fewer minutes than most:
Admittedly he isn’t a great runner but nor is Dud....they both just reset the phase, but Mostert knows how to offload.
An Etzebeth/Snyman/Mostert at 7 combination rules the lineouts totally....and with Snyman and Mostert you have modern forwards who don’t die with the ball. Add a fetcher and a real replacement for Vermeulen....not one of the Deysel twins.
Perhaps you should read this Dave....from the 2018 Super Rugby team of the tournament:
The nutcase is the biggest fool ever on site. His support of Mostert in tests is taking the cake and his make up garbage about Du Toit is just total imbecility as expected. When Mostert got run over on two critical tests - one in the RC and one against the AB's in face to face tackles he blamed Du Toit for the misses.
He did not say a word by the flop of Mostert in the 41st minute of the first half in the WC final yay really prevented the Springboks from scoring a try. That was a real try-scoring opportunity - not an imagined one dreamed up by himself,
He missed the lack of physicality of Mostert and the deficiencies stemming from his lack thereof, A nutcase whose prejudice against Du Toit started years ago and since then he specialized in discovering BS situations that never happened in the way he described them to discredit the player,
He even had the audacity to quote a newspaper article of 2018 about Super Rugby and then lost the plot in the process again, In 2018 Erasmus asked the Lions to try out Mostert at no 7 and they did for three weeks. Mostert was tried and failed badly so after three weeks the experiment was called off.
By the way Mostert did go to Gloucester - where he was not the success the Club hoped for and they released him and allowed him to go and play rugby in Japan. There was obviously np effort by Gloucester to retain him - something they would have done if he represented value for money,
I am obviously happy that Erasmus selected the Springbok WC squad and not our local rugby illiterate, The latter would have picked a team that would have suffered another Japan disaster like the team whose selection he supported all-out did in 2015.
In any event his comments are always hilarious and he is lucky that the people who read his comments on the internet is amused by his total stupidity as well. All I can add is Happy Idiots Day to you Mozart. LMAO.
But Erasmus the man you revere kept Mostert in the team and adopted defence as his lead card... whereas you say Mostert isn’t club level and seuntjies running gloriously through open fields is the way to go.
Happy wankers day to you Perv!
That was because De Jager was injured and not available and bot decided to look for somebody else, So he asked the Lions to use Mostert at in the blindside flank position.
Moz I can’t believe you can’t see beyond the heart and energy
PSDT is far far better in every aspect of play
I’d say they are on par in the line outs and that’s about it
They both have loads of heart and energy, difference being that PSDT is physically productive while Mostert is not
A lock or blindside need to be physical, Mostert is not in the least bit physical
Well Dave, Mostert is a much more intelligent player. If you look at the try NZ scores against us in the 2018 home test you will see Mostert waving to Dud, showing him where he should be. Likewise I don’t think Mostert would have got trapped as Dud did in the Welsh test....he would have understood the need to cover the Welsh scrummie after Faf over committed.
I’d say Dud is better at the pick and go ....and that’s about it.
Campesi was as slow as a cart horse, but he was the most dangerous wing of the early 90s. Mostert isn’t a physical monster, just a very smart player who makes all the right moves.
"Mostert a much more intelligent player" - how do you know that? Would Erasmus made him captain of the Springboks and demoted Mostert to the bench if that was so. That example you quoted nobody else saw any significance in. Fact is you are manufacturing BS you have no proof of and then make laughable statements on site,
But then - what you think is so obsessively prejudiced that anything you write on site becomes worthless tripe. So keep it up - you have no substance at all in what you "think",
By the way - this is a near to the previous record you set when you gave a detailed description op MATFIELD and then attributed it to Du Toit - at least the fellow players confirm the description as his nickname was KIEWIET based on his thin physical appearance, That one keep the record for rank stupidity on site and will most probably never be equaled by anybody,
This new one came very near to the level of idiocy you showed then - but warnings against you showing complete and utter ignorance of the game and of players seems to fall on deaf ears in all cases.
Yes which makes him a handy provincial player
You can’t have your test lock or blindside lacking physicality
Sorry but he just does not cut the mustard at the highest level and it’s his own laziness off the pitch that has left him short physically
He shows no evidence of gym work - 10kg of muscle would have seen him the complete player
Has all the attributes with zero grunt
You can live with a little less grunt if you are a Matfield, which he is not by any stretch
Campesi, McCaw, Mostert. Kolbe even Faf...players that don’t fit the physically dominant mode you insist on Dave. When are you going to learn....handsome is as handsome does.
In the case of Mostert Dave is dealing with a lock as part of the Tight 5 - and size and in backline players there is a difference, In the case of no 7 flank size is also an asset - but Mostert for reasons the coaching staff determined was a failure at 7 when tried in that position
Um we are talking about a position in rugby that requires physicality unlike wing or scrum half
McCaw was average and played as an openside. He was physical enough for the role
Mostert is not physical enough for a blindside and even more so for a lock
Um.....wing requires pace, which Campesi never had, Scrumhalf has been ever increasing in size....Faf is a throwback, flank requires physicality.....you yourself noted McCaw isn’t physical enough....and locks have to be giants, Mostert clearly isn’t. Kolbe is too short....he shouldn’t be able to cover the high ball.
But all of them have been brilliantly successful at the highest levels. Which goes to show you.....heart and vision is just as important as the physical attributes
Nothing wrong with Campo’s speed in his prime
There are many small scrumhalves size is of little consequence
The best 9’s in the game are the small ones - Faf, Reinach, Jantjies, Nohamba, Smith, Care, Youngs, Davies, Webb, Dupont, Cubeli, Nic White, Genia, Laidlaw
Height is of little significance for a wing if they are able to launch themselves in the air like Kolbe does. Of primary importance is speed and feet
I never said McCaw lacked physicality, I said he was not the most physically imposing. It’s not like he stood out physically to contribute to the bullshit we read about him being one of the best ever. But he is physical enough for an openside
You need your most physical players at 1,3,4,5 and 7
Mostert falls well short for a 4,5 or 7 and has never achieved anything of significance at the highest level other than being dropped to the bench for the very reason I have an issue with him
He adds zero grunt to the equation - a handicap you just can’t live with at test level
Mostert was your man Erasmus’ third pick at lock.....either Erasmus is stupid given all the ‘more physical’ locks available to him....or Mostert brought valued skills to the team.
Wrong again - Snyman was his third pick and Erasmus called up Schickerling to one of his camps in 2019 and the problem was that Schickerling just came back from a rather serious injury and was shor t of game time. If the squad announcement was a month later Mostert would never have been in the WC squad, Fact.
Wrong again - Snyman was his third pick and Erasmus called up Schickerling to one of his camps in 2019 and the problem was that Schickerling just came back from a rather serious injury and was shot of game time. If the squad announcement was a month later Mostert would never have been in the WC squad, Fact.
I would like to refer you to a typical example where Mostert came physically short in competition,
In the Aussie RC test in 2019 a try was scored that showed up how good both De Jager and Du Toit really are, Du Toit made a clean line break and then madr a box kick which was gathered by Jantjies who was tackled about two meters from the tryline. The fact is Du Toit was the first forward there to protect the ball and prevent a turnover, Be it as it may the ball came back to De Jager - who forced his way through the Aussie forwards and scored a try,
In the Japan game before the WC an exactly a similar situation arose and that time it was Mostert who picked up the ball. He was carried back 5 meters by the Japan forwards and the Springbok forwards struggled to retain possession.
Obviously Mozart the scoring of the try against the Aussies totally and when I called him out on it his feeble comment was that the line break and kick by Du Toit meant nothing and the ball could have bounced differently and there would have been no try, That is exactly why Mozart's player evaluation is based entirely on prejudice on hi s part with no link to reality,
Rassie obviously at first rated him but then started seeing what I see - all energy with little physical productivity
My guess is we won’t see much of Mostert in the squad moving forward
I’m not saying he is a shit player I’m saying he lacks the physical grunt needed for a test lock or 7
Coming off the bench for the last 20min once the physical battle has been won is a different function to starting
Reality is Mostett is the only player that has been demoted from starting side to bench - hardly a positive for the guy
Mike I can forgive Moz for liking Mostert but his anti PSDT makes no sense at all
Mozart likes Mostert because of his physical resemblance to Matfiekd. Light weight lock easy for lineout lifting - but the problem is that he is a liability when it comes to setting up rolling mauls. At one stage the Springboks rarely used driving mauls because of Mostert weakness in the air and his s inability to resist initial pressure from the opposition.
Personally I believe there i no chance that he would play for the Springboks again.
The size of a lock has no bearing on his ability in the line outs
All test locks including PSDT who is fundamentally a lock are all equally good in the line outs. The notion that Mostert for instance is better in the line outs than say PSDT is nonsense
The only lock I have seen who was ahead of his peers in the line outs was Matfield
I don’t look at a player like Mostert and go wow what a line out forward
Line outs are so technical these days that’s it’s hard to stand out as an individual. Even Matfield in his prime would have struggled to gain the edge in today’s game.
Much like centres don’t stand out anymore. They grab the odd classic break but mostly it’s head down and grind for the advantage
Steph and Lood have shown themselves to be average at best at lineout time.
And Mostert has a serious problem - his open-field defense borders on the non-existent and that was why he failed when they tried him at 7. For the rest he is questionable in attack and often tackled back by opponents - like the example given against Japan and his tackles are weak as well,
Just give me two examples where he did anything of note in tests in 2019? Beware I have always check inputs for BS.
Lood and PSDT are great line out jumpers
So Snyman was Erasmus’ third pick....but when Lomp got bumped he brought on Mostert. Yep that figures.
Geez Moz, Mostert was the number 5 lock replacement for Lood, Snyman was the 4 replacement for Eben
So with Lood going off, Mostert was sent on
Somehow I don’t think so.....at that stage of the game Mostert was going to come on regardless which lock went off. Our best locking pair was Etzebeth/Snyman.....but Erasmus never had great confidence in Snyman. He was too creative for the stodgy Erasmus game plan.
Dave is 100% right here and what you think is twaddle, What stodgy Erasmus game plan are you talking about? The one that beats England 32-12 in the RWC Final?
Why don't you think before you write garbage on site>? You write about a stodgy game of Erasmus - but what made it stodgy compared to the non-existent Meyer Game plan in the Japan disaster and the rest of the 2015 RWC?
If you have nothing better and realistic to offer why pollute this sire with garbage?
Erasmus simply adopted the Jake plan of strong defense and counter attack off turnover ball....the tries in our final conform to that. But unlike Jake he doesn’t encourage the offload.....I can’t even remember one offload the Boks made at the WC.
So I checked the knockout games....and we did offload twice against Japan, twice against Wales and 4 times against England. Eight times in all...twice by Am....once by Willie, Pollard, Bongi, Etzebeth, Marx and Frans. None by our two key runners the Duds.
And here’s the thing we did it 8 times in 3 games.....the Poms offloaded 12 times in the Final alone. Unlike the Duds, Vunipola offloaded 3 times. Erasmus basically discouraged offloading the one skill all the critics and this Board have been calling for us to develop for the last 10 years.
Of course I prescribed a return to the Jake game plan, only I never thought we had to outlaw offloading to do it.
Absolute junk again about Jaker's game plan. His plan did not allow for backline usage on attack and an all-round game - that is why he had to get Eddie Jones in to try and save the SA team should they meet stronger opposition. I can remember plenty of off-loads made by the Springboks. How come with all the off-loads the Springboks scored much less tries in the 2007 WC than they scored in the 2019 WC?
Be it as it may - your constant attacks on Erasmus is indicative of a out-of-control prejudice situation, Erasmus left the White coaching staff because White's approach to the game and the players was directly opposite to his ideas about coaching.
The fact is the questions remans -
* why the continuous maniacal criticism of Erasmus,- the best coach SA had since 1995?
* why did you never criticize Meyer as coach - incidentally he was the coach that banned off-loads?
* why did you never attacked individual players when they failed during the Meyer disasters other than Du Toit, De Allende and Kriel?
Every time you come up with garbage it is sillier than the previous effort - so far there were five "I think" statements in this thread alone by you and each one was more idiotic than the previous ones.
You obviously are really a brilliant economist - so why soil your intelligence when it comes to rugby issues?
Oh what rubbish - why would you send on your number 4 lock replacement to replace your number 5 lock? These guys train in their positions - scrums, line outs etc. Imagine the message you send to your players and the team in general if you send out your number 4 replacement lock to replace the injured number 5? Rassie is not that stupid
Moz you are clutching at straws as always
Moz do you really think that Rassie is adopting average Jake’s game plan - an outdated plan from 2007
The game has moved on somewhat from then
Stodgy my arse - we ran Japan and England off their feet in that WC final thanks to all the hard work put in in the first half beating the sides to pulp.
Rassie’s brilliant rugby brain came up with the 6/2 split on the bench - it was a game changer.
He is our best and most innovative coach I’ve seen. Subtle changes like moving the point of kicking from 9 to 10 in the final completely throwing the Poms. Or giving the ball to the Japs and smashing them into submission killing every ounce of confidence they had coming into the game.
All brilliant stuff. They said Rassie was a rugby genius, it’s starting to show. And best of all his man management skills are second to none. The players love, trust and respect him
There is no genius to the Rassie model. Had Beast, a player you said should have retired, not dominated, we'd have no platform to have won that game. That was the factor that threw off their game. All the same clunky patterns and plays that have persisted throughout his tenure were present in the final. Deep lying units that develop slowly and are so predictable no one falls for them. The only difference was the occasional pass behind the first pod, something which was nothing new either. Defence and set-piece dominance. That was it. Thanks Nienaber, the architect of the 2019 victory. He seems like a nice guy, too nice if you ask me. Just someone that doesn't like the limelight and is content doing his job under the less talented José Erasmus. Sadly, we are the most outdated and one-dimensional team amongst all tier 1 and tier 2 nations. Were it not for physical dominance, we'd be no better than Russia.
Kak - it was a forward dominant performance. Kitshoff is as good in fact probably a better scrummager than the Beast so stop speaking out your ignorant arse as always
Rassie is brilliant and his current record proves it
Everything Neinaber knows, Rassie taught him - fact
Now this is rich coming from a person I rightfully call a Kindergarten imbecile, I cpouild start off:-
01.There is no evidence of Erasmus being a competent coach at any level of the game. We've never had a head coach so heavily reliant on an assistant before.
If you do not realize it yet Erasmus saved the Springbok team from the depths Meyer and Coetzee took them too. When early in 2018 and even at the end of that year mnobody gave the Springboks a 1% chance to win the WCC and they were before the 2018 the no 7 ranked team in the world and at the end of 2018 the number 5 team in the world, Erasmus was called worldwide a miracle maker in coaching and that is what he always was. You missed out but Erasmus was in 2017 rated as the top coach in the Guinness Top 14.
Nienaber learnt what he knows from Erasmus. He was always his assistant where ever Erasmus went Nienaber went, The claim that Erasmus was reliant on Nienaber is one of the biggest loads of BS ever on site.
02.Ban offloads? Meyer's Boks consistently, right to the end of his tenure, maintained a significantly higher attacking output.
I did not make the statement about banning off-loads being banned by Meyer -Vermeulen did in an interview after the Welsh test. Be it as it may the fact that Meyer was a total disaster as a coach and was taking down should bear in mind that he took the Springboks down - same as he did with Stade Francaise. After not being able to beat any team before he was fired - the team is back on the log in position 5 and contenders for the Top 14 trophy. Meyer never had a game plan other the one-dimensional 2004 game plan of the Bulls and no abilities i n coaching at all. How many trophies did the Springboks won from 2012 to 2015?
De Jongh who was the reason why the Stormers backline malfunctioned and they had the worst try-scoring record in Super Rugby, One of the biggest mistakes was to select De Jongh ahead of Huw Jones when he had the latter available, Anybody rating De Jongh as Springbok center knows zero about rugby,
Your list of failures are not supported by proof. I asked you for example for any rugby games in 2019 where Mostert stood out at lock and the answer was zero. The rest of the players you listed are not prime failures and you cannot factually prove that they are. In any event the jargon on them is based on ignorance and on defective rugby knowledge.
I have never read such unsubstantiated BS on site before, Guess the rest of the world rugby experts are wrong and only you think you are right, That is lunatic asylum stuff and you should really consult a shrink.
Kitshoff has never been a dominant scrummager.....if one player crushed the Pom spirit in the WC it’s the Beast who totally dominated Dan Coles for a string of penalties. Get real.
Erasmus.....lost to the ABs and narrowly beat a poor Wales side. Then he got the Poms in the same mood as they were against France two weeks back. A game the Poms should also have lost but for the ref.
And then Erasmus refuses to compete in 2020, with a string of pathetic excuses blown up by the brave Bargies and their fabulous run in the new TN. All we got was the Chicken Run.....which will cost us next year. And has already cost us in the eyes of Rugby men. Nobody admires a chicken.
Four (4) penalties were given away by Coles an one (1) by Vunipila, Of the four Coles penalties two was given away when he scrummed against Beach and two against Kitshof. Beast did a wonderful job in scrumming - but he was not alone in that Department of the game who contributed to the scrumming success - the scrum penalties continued after Beast left the field and whereas his contribution of two converted penalties on the first half another converted penalty followed after Beast was replaced/
Mozart - you are just making yourself into a bigger rugby idiot with every contribution on site. Your assumptions about Erasmus as coach are total garbage and disputed by all rugby experts. Th at means that you should reconsider since it is a known fact that lunatics believe they are the only same people in the world - the rest are all lunatics - that being the stage you have reached with your ravings on site,
The only real idiot on site claims Erasmus is a chicken - the joke of the century on this site - you will never accuse him of that to his face and if you do that you will end up in the asylum where taking your comments into account is where you belong,
Bullshit Kitshoff has always been a dominant scrummager and is as good in fact I think better than Beast in the scrums
To say an England side were not in the mood come WC final time is both pathetic and insulting. There is clutching at straws then saying a side was not up for the biggest game of their live - utter bullshit
There is no such thing as a weak Welsh side.
As for the AB game we dominated that game but for two poor slips, one being the Mapimpi rush
Our 2020 WC win was a far more difficult task than the easy run Jake had and that’s a fact
Rassie’s masterstroke in the final not only to beat England but to actually thrash them cemented just how brilliant a coach he is
He is the best Bok coach I have seen, followed by Kitch and Mallett. Ian Mac should have made that list had he been allowed to select his players
I once gave a rating of the Springbok coaches since 1995 based on achievements and Erasmus was the top coach of them all - followed by Kitch and Mallett. Then came White and the bottom three were De Villiers, Meyer and Coetzee, Please note that the latter three were all fired for gross incompetence subsequently and that put Mozart in a spot.
He must keep up attacking Erasmus to cover up the fact that he was 100% wrong when it came to Meyer and Coetzee particularly and Mozart is too much of a self-opinionated buffoon to ever admit he was wrong on anything ever,
Minute 44 the Beast goes off, minute 50 this happens:
|50'||And now England turn the tables! They absolutely destroy the South Africa scrum and earn a penalty of their own! The biter has been bit, and have England worked out what South Africa have been doing throughout this match? If so, we have a real contest on our hands|
Yeah that was short lived for after that the Bok scrum completely destroyed the Pom pack
I rated Beast as a prop but Kitshoff is better in every department
He is the best loosehead in the game right now
The unsung hero of that Bok scrum is Malherbe, he is a quality tighthead, possibly the best in the game right now
Before that incident Coles were penalized twice when phasing Kitshof - one was on the Springboks 22 and the other was converted by Pollard - giving the Springboks a 15-6 lead on the game. Something went wrong in that one scrum Mozart now carries on about, I watched it repeatedly and noted that Cole was scrumming inwards and then got up in the scrum - which under normal circumstances could be penalized as well.
But in any event the player penalized in that scrum, was Koch - not Kitshof so Mozart went off the rails again. I wonder when he will ever be right?
Mind you it is about the 7th thing in this thread alone where he was caught out spreading BS onm site - so nothing new in this case as well
Kitshoff is a beast
One commentator the other day said he was technically one of the best players in the game
Not sure how he came to that conclusion but it was after Kitshoff turned a ball over
Well obviously Rassie agreed with me once again.....Kitshoff is sound, but the Beast was clearly first choice and in my view even better than Vermeulen in the final.
Unfortunately when it comes to Beast vs Kitshoff the colour of the skin would have been a consideration, so one will never really know which of Beast or Kitshoff, Rassie preferred.
For me Kitshoff has tipped it in the last 5 years or so but Beast has been just as good so the choice is very marginal unlike a Mostert vs Lood or RG choice or Louw vs Kolisi
Erasmus always has his own ideas about issues - one of them was to have the props play about the same length of times of props on the field - eg in the WC final the starters played for 43 minutes and the replacements for 37 minutes.
I find the discussions on that issue amusing since it is clear that Mozart and AO wants to enhance Beast as the matchwinner of the Springboks in the final - which in fact he was not, He had an important role in the match - but other players also had specific tasks to undertake/
I will give Mozart anther kick in the bud by referring to Du Toit who had to destabilize the English backline by neutralizing first Ford and thereafter Farrer so as to disrupt the functioning of the backline. It worked like magic and the English backline never functioned properly in that game, In essence players had their normal roles to fulfil - but others had to deal not only with their normal functioning bearing in mind specific aims to be achieved.
Nobody ever queried the important role Beast played in the final = but to use that as a means to attack Kitshof is unethical.
‘A kick in the bud’ ....sounds sexist to me.
The Beast never had to rely on the color of his skin.....just like Habana and unlike Kolisi. Funny how Dud 1 had to help Dud2 tackle Farrell, I never thought he was that dangerous.
Kolisi is the best openside in the country by a long shot
Beast is no better than Kitshoff so colour will have played a part
Much like Am vs Jessie Kriel
Nope....Kolisi was a political compromise, hell he went off early and Erasmus had Louw on when it counted. Am is way better than the robot Kriel. Kitshoff has never been as dynamic as the Beast.
Nope....Kolisi was a political compromise, hell he went off early and Erasmus had Louw on when it counted. Am is way better than the robot Kriel. Kitshoff has never been as dynamic as the Beast.
Kriel is inferior to Am in every way. So too Kits to Beast. Kolisi is the biggest black quota in Bok history, maybe even more than Deon Kayser. Absolutely no production. Literally 60% of his tackles are attempted assists, even as little as a hand on the opposition. Useless. No other words for it. Leadership? How often is it Eben or Thor getting the team together and rallying them, with Steph and Kolisi just nodding passively? Too often. Worst Bok of the past 20 years easily.
Rubbish Kolisi is our best openside far far better than average Louw. He is by far our best attacking 6 and very powerful in the tackle and carrying the ball in traffic or creating opportunities in open play. Makes Louw look like a pretender. Louw has the edge with turnovers but hell every player effects turnovers these days so it makes far more sense having Kolisi as our dominant attacking forward
Rassie got most things right except Mostert, Louw and Frans Steyn
Jaco Kriel, James Venter and Kwagga are all better than Louw
Kitshoff has been better than Beast for years
Jessie Kriel is better than Am definitely has made more of an impact than Am at test level - better with ball in hand, faster and better feet. Stronger physically and better defensively. Don’t get me wrong I rate Am highly but Jessie is better
Politics is in favour of Am
Myths aplenty on the part of that kindergarten imbecile, He missed totally one incident where Du Toit spoke to the sideline assistant ref to watch out for illegal scrumming by the English the scrum immediately after the scrum Mozart wined about above. If the fact is what AO came on about then one would expect that either Vermeulen or Etzebeth would have done the talking to the sideline ref.. The following was not really evident during the game:-
"How often is it Eben or Thor getting the team together and rallying them," The only time when he forwards got together was when line=outs were discussed and rallying of the team was imaginary BS,
I never wined about the scrum....nor did a whine about it. I simply copied and pasted the match report. Now of course, because Kitsie was exposed it takes on a life of it’s own.
It does not take on a life on its own. The referee decided that Koch was the cause of the poor scrum - but you blamed Kitshof for it. Typical Mozart BS,
Kwagga was blown away by the All Blacks. I like him, but he is not good enough against more robust teams. In 2018, in the opening test against Wales, Kwagga was again blown away and the most anonymous player on the field. Louw, a player who was never my first choice or favoured openside, has been excellent. He is the best player Rassie could have fielded, seeing that Brussow was past his best in that time. Lister, you take your credibility by the throat and slit it, bleeding it into a pool of mud. To elevate Kolisi over Louw? What has Kolisi achieved? One run for an offload and try. What else? Where are his big contributions? I have studied the film very thoroughly, and it is beyond question that he is the most insignificant player on the player game after game. Even those rare big runs in space, most amount to absolutely nothing other than eye-candy for the casuals. He offers the team nothing and has no leadership skills or field presence at all. Now he is an icon, just because he was on the field and is black. He may be a nice guy, but he was never a real Bok. Without Louw, there wouldn't even be a final for us last year.
You are a great one asking for factual information while when I asked you for information as to where Mostert did something noticeable in matches in 2019 - you never responded, When I asked how coaches fired on club level for gross incompetence would be good enough to be international coaches - there was no response either,
Louw was very poor in the tests he played in in 2018 and in the famous test in Wellington against the AB's won by the Springboks, the Springbok forwards made a turnover, when the AB's was attacking near the tryline while Louw was fiddling around in the backline. The ball was passed to him and he promptly knocked it on - that really was shit-poor.
Louw was nothing more than a bench-player in the WC series and got little game time in crucial tests. That says it all.
You asked me about Meyer's ability to coach at test level as if he had no record at test level. I don't need to know about his stint in France to determine what he could do at test level, because he has already done it. Is that really so difficult to understand, or is this how dishonest you truly are? Louw had one bad test in 2018 and one average one, where I said he needed to up his game; he did exactly that. You tried to hang every problem on him, and you were repeatedly debunked time, and time again. You are a liar.
Meyer was one of the worst coaches that ever coached the Springbok team and even though with easy games in 2013 he lost only two tests - the real situation was that his teams started losing virtually everything in 2014 when between September 2014 and September 2015 the team won 4 matches and lost 7 games, He had no idea about teams election based on performance and that is a fact as well. However, he was really a disaster for the Springboks since he never built up a team for the RWC in 2015 and the squad he selected for the WC was horribly poor.
He nearly ruined the careers of a number of players - Pollard included and we were lucky - the Japan disaster saved rugby in SA as he was told he should not bother to ask for a contract extension. He was the only coach that ever lost all matches in the Rugby Championship in a year, The loss against Argentina in Durban was anytime as bad a loss as the Japan disaster was.
As bad as he was a coach of the Springboks - so bad was he at Stade Francais. He was totally clueless as to what is expected from a coach. He had the same problems he had as a Springbok coach at Stade Francaise, and they fired him for the same reason as SARU effectively did - SARU was somewhat late I must admit.
I was debunked? Never - not by you because you are as clueless about rugby as Meyer is. LMAO