FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Victor Matfield v England 2014

Victor Matfield v England 2014

Started by DezertFox25 REPLIES432 VIEWS· 03 Jan 2015, 14:57
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
03 Jan 2015, 14:57
#1
03 Jan 2015, 14:57#1

First Half


  1. 00:07 - Joins ruck.
  2. 00:18 - Ruck defence.
  3. 00:52 - ENG L/O: Throw to Hartley.
  4. 01:12 - Tackle: Takes 5 to ground.
  5. 02:32 - RSA L/O: Throw to Eben.
  6. 02:47 - Joins ruck.
  7. 03:45 - ENG L/O: Throw to 6.
  8. 05:20 - RSA Scrum.
  9. 05:50 - ENG L/O: Throw to 4, Matfield steal. Boks penalized.
  10. 06:31 - ENG L/O: Throw to 6?
  11. 06:46 - Tackle Assist; attacker overwhelming Lambie, Vic puts him down.
  12. 07:35 - RSA Scrum.
  13. 07:58 - Drops high ball.
  14. 08:30 - ENG L/O: Throw to 5. 
  15. 08:42 - Tackle Assist; Duane takes attacker low, Vic wraps upper body and takes him to ground.
  16. 09:06 - Pass: Takes scrumhalf position at ruck, pass to JP.
  17. 09:40 - Joins ruck.
  18. 11:25 - Ruck Clean.
  19. 11:30 - Ruck Clean.
  20. 11:42 - Tackle; Diving tackle on 15, taking him to ground.
  21. 13:07 - ENG L/O: Throw to 4. Viv joins maul.
  22. 14:06 - ENG L/O: Throw to 6.
  23. 14:19 - Tackle; Attacker (5) runs at Vic's inside, Vic grabs his upper body and pulls him to ground.
  24. 14:33 - Tackle: Attacker runs back towards ruck, Vic dives and grabs his legs whilst Duane takes him high driving him to ground.
  25. 14:42 - Tackle Assist: Supports Jannie in driving 7 back and to ground.
  26. 14:54 - Tackle Assist: 15 breaks through Serfontein, Vic grabs and dumps attacker to ground.
  27. 16:00 - Restart: Vic fields restart.
  28. 18:05 - RSA L/O: Throw to Eben.
  29. 18:20 - Vic runs decoy line.
  30. 18:24 - Pass: Vic takes scrumhalf position, pass to Coetzee for quick drive.
  31. 18:32 - Ruck protection.
  32. 18:38 - Ruck Clean.
  33. 20:20 - ENG Scrum. Schalk destabilizing scrum. England win penalty.
  34. 21:20 - ENG L/O: Throw to 6.
  35. 21:37 - Tackle: England throw inside ball to 8 who runs over Lambie, Vic latches onto him dragging him to ground haulting a dangerous breakout.
  36. 22:04 - Ruck Clean.
  37. 22:57 - ENG L/O: Throw to 8.
  38. 23:22 - Joins ruck.
  39. 23:28 - Joins ruck.
  40. 24:56 - ENG Scrum. 
  41. 25:29 - Ruck Clean.
  42. 28:17 - RSA L/O: Throw to Vic. Bok's maul.
  43. 29:24 - RSA L/O: Throw to Vic. Bok's maul.
  44. 29:47 - Ruck fring protection.
  45. 30:37 - RSA L/O: Throw to Vic. Bok's maul.
  46. 32:44 - Restart: Vic joins maul that collapses immediately.
  47. 33:45 - ENG Scrum.
  48. 36:33 - RSA L/O: Throw to Eben. Bok's maul, win penalty.
  49. 38:12 - Joins ruck.
  50. 38:20 - Ruck protection. 
  51. 38:42 - Tackle Assist: Serfontein is overcome by Eastmond (12), Vic grabs him by scruff and throws him to ground. 
  52. 39:30 - ENG L/O: Throw to 4.
  53. 39:54 - Tackle: Vic drives into 5 and pulls him to ground with a turning descent.


Second Half

  1. 40:15 - Vic pressures kicker with a charge down.
  2. 40:32 - Ruck clean.
  3. 43:44 - ENG L/O: Throw to 7. ENG maul. ENG win penalty, Vic yellow card.
  4. 55:46 - RSA L/O: Throw to Eben. Bok's maul.
  5. 58:00 - ENG Scrum.
  6. 58:23 - Ruck clean. 
  7. 58:29 - Ruck protection.
  8. 58:36 - Pick-and-drive support for Strauss.
  9. 58:58 - Ruck protection.
  10. 59:02 - Pass: From ruck base short pass to Tendai for quick drive.
  11. 59:06 - Ruck clean.
  12. 59:26 - Ruck clean attempt and ruck fringe protection.
  13. 60:05 - ENG L/O: Throw to 4. ENG maul.
  14. 60:44 - ENG Scrum.
  15. 61:35 - ENG L/O: Throw to 7.
  16. 61:42 - Joins then exits ruck.
  17. 62:17 - Tackle Assist: Helps Bissie with shove on attacker.
  18. 62:40 - Ruck protection.
  19. 63:15 - ENG L/O: Throw to 7.
  20. 63:35 - Tackle: Vic takes 1 head-on to ground.
  21. 64:40 - RSA L/O: Throw to Bakkies. Bok's win penalty.
  22. 68:48 - ENG L/O: Throw to 5.
  23. 71:04 - ENG L/O: Throw to 20. ENG maul.
  24. 71:49 - Ruck clean.72:40 - ENG L/O: Throw to 6. Steal by Duane, ruck protection by Vic.
  25. 72:56 - Tackle: Lateral tackle on 11 and brings him to ground.
  26. 73:40 - RSA L/O: Throw to Vic. Bok's maul, win penalty.
  27. 74:50 - RSA L/O: Throw to Schalk. Bok's maul,
  28. 75:06 - Ruck clean. 
  29. 75:11 - Pick-and-drive.
  30. 75:40 - Pick-and-drive support for Duane.
  31. 75:49 - Ruck clean.
  32. 75:46 - Ruck protection.
  33. 76:49 - Vic takes up scrumhalf position at ruck base, quick pass to Willie.
  34. 77:28 - ENG L/O: Throw to 17.
  35. 80:39 - Ruck clean.



So this is all "piss poor" Michael? His work rate was phenomenal. Shame about the yellow, but there was a lot of work done that day, to be quite honest he outworked even Duane. He has added alot to the Boks, going over it again in more detail makes me wonder if we could ever win a World Cup without him!

CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
03 Jan 2015, 15:51
#2
03 Jan 2015, 15:51#2
 A load of balls in description again.     Lets take the plays where Matfield played a role and highlights those:-
 
  1. 00:07 - Joins ruck.
  2. 00:18 - Ruck defence.
  3. 00:52 - ENG L/O: Throw to Hartley.
  4. 01:12 - Tackle: Takes 5 to ground.
  5. 02:32 - RSA L/O: Throw to Eben.
  6. 02:47 - Joins ruck.
  7. 03:45 - ENG L/O: Throw to 6.
  8. 05:20 - RSA Scrum.
  9. 05:50 - ENG L/O: Throw to 4, Matfield steal. Boks penalized.
  10. 06:31 - ENG L/O: Throw to 6?
  11. 06:46 - Tackle Assist; attacker overwhelming Lambie, Vic puts him down.
  12. 07:35 - RSA Scrum.
  13. 07:58 - Drops high ball.
  14. 08:30 - ENG L/O: Throw to 5. 
  15. 08:42 - Tackle Assist; Duane takes attacker low, Vic wraps upper body and takes him to ground.
  16. 09:06 - Pass: Takes scrumhalf position at ruck, pass to JP.
  17. 09:40 - Joins ruck.
  18. 11:25 - Ruck Clean.
  19. 11:30 - Ruck Clean.
  20. 11:42 - Tackle; Diving tackle on 15, taking him to ground.
  21. 13:07 - ENG L/O: Throw to 4. Viv joins maul.
  22. 14:06 - ENG L/O: Throw to 6.
  23. 14:19 - Tackle; Attacker (5) runs at Vic's inside, Vic grabs his upper body and pulls him to ground.
  24. 14:33 - Tackle: Attacker runs back towards ruck, Vic dives and grabs his legs whilst Duane takes him high driving him to ground.
  25. 14:42 - Tackle Assist: Supports Jannie in driving 7 back and to ground.
  26. 14:54 - Tackle Assist: 15 breaks through Serfontein, Vic grabs and dumps attacker to ground.
  27. 16:00 - Restart: Vic fields restart.
  28. 18:05 - RSA L/O: Throw to Eben.
  29. 18:20 - Vic runs decoy line.
  30. 18:24 - Pass: Vic takes scrumhalf position, pass to Coetzee for quick drive.
  31. 18:32 - Ruck protection.
  32. 18:38 - Ruck Clean.
  33. 20:20 - ENG Scrum. Schalk destabilizing scrum. England win penalty.
  34. 21:20 - ENG L/O: Throw to 6.
  35. 21:37 - Tackle: England throw inside ball to 8 who runs over Lambie, Vic latches onto him dragging him to ground haulting a dangerous breakout. 
  36. 22:04 - Ruck Clean.
  37. 22:57 - ENG L/O: Throw to 8.
  38. 23:22 - Joins ruck.
  39. 23:28 - Joins ruck.
  40. 24:56 - ENG Scrum. 
  41. 25:29 - Ruck Clean.
  42. 28:17 - RSA L/O: Throw to Vic. Bok's maul.
  43. 29:24 - RSA L/O: Throw to Vic. Bok's maul.
  44. 29:47 - Ruck fring protection.
  45. 30:37 - RSA L/O: Throw to Vic. Bok's maul.
  46. 32:44 - Restart: Vic joins maul that collapses immediately.
  47. 33:45 - ENG Scrum.
  48. 36:33 - RSA L/O: Throw to Eben. Bok's maul, win penalty.
  49. 38:12 - Joins ruck.
  50. 38:20 - Ruck protection. 
  51. 38:42 - Tackle Assist: Serfontein is overcome by Eastmond (12), Vic grabs him by scruff and throws him to ground. 
  52. 39:30 - ENG L/O: Throw to 4.
  53. 39:54 - Tackle: Vic drives into 5 and pulls him to ground with a turning descent.


Second Half

  1. 40:15 - Vic pressures kicker with a charge down.
  2. 40:32 - Ruck clean.
  3. 43:44 - ENG L/O: Throw to 7. ENG maul. ENG win penalty, Vic yellow card.
  4. 55:46 - RSA L/O: Throw to Eben. Bok's maul.
  5. 58:00 - ENG Scrum.
  6. 58:23 - Ruck clean. 
  7. 58:29 - Ruck protection.
  8. 58:36 - Pick-and-drive support for Strauss.
  9. 58:58 - Ruck protection.
  10. 59:02 - Pass: From ruck base short pass to Tendai for quick drive.
  11. 59:06 - Ruck clean.
  12. 59:26 - Ruck clean attempt and ruck fringe protection.
  13. 60:05 - ENG L/O: Throw to 4. ENG maul.
  14. 60:44 - ENG Scrum.
  15. 61:35 - ENG L/O: Throw to 7.
  16. 61:42 - Joins then exits ruck.
  17. 62:17 - Tackle Assist: Helps Bissie with shove on attacker.
  18. 62:40 - Ruck protection.
  19. 63:15 - ENG L/O: Throw to 7.
  20. 63:35 - Tackle: Vic takes 1 head-on to ground.
  21. 64:40 - RSA L/O: Throw to Bakkies. Bok's win penalty.
  22. 68:48 - ENG L/O: Throw to 5.
  23. 71:04 - ENG L/O: Throw to 20. ENG maul.
  24. 71:49 - Ruck clean.72:40 - ENG L/O: Throw to 6. Steal by Duane, ruck protection by Vic.
  25. 72:56 - Tackle: Lateral tackle on 11 and brings him to ground.
  26. 73:40 - RSA L/O: Throw to Vic. Bok's maul, win penalty.
  27. 74:50 - RSA L/O: Throw to Schalk. Bok's maul,
  28. 75:06 - Ruck clean. 
  29. 75:11 - Pick-and-drive.
  30. 75:40 - Pick-and-drive support for Duane.
  31. 75:49 - Ruck clean.
  32. 75:46 - Ruck protection.
  33. 76:49 - Vic takes up scrumhalf position at ruck base, quick pass to Willie.
  34. 77:28 - ENG L/O: Throw to 17.
  35. 80:39 - Ruck clean.

What has Matfield done in all cases where he joined mauls - his involvement  was peripheral and of minor value in view of his physical deficiency.
All the so-called tackle assists was exactly that - the other player already had the tackle doen - and Matfield made an assist.   What was he doing taking up the scrumhalf position - mostly buggering up the game.   
The oher issue is the above gave a poor description of Matfild tackles.  He generally makes weak tackles - not of the tackles made in this game was strong tackles.
When reading the garbage written by the morons - one always had to check out some facts as well as provided by ESPN stats.   Here they are -
Matfield0/000/4/13000112/24/011/0
Letsallbemorons claimed that -
*  Matfield made a line out steal (9)  -  no line out steals by Matfield in the stats.
*   All the pick and drives?   What role did Matfield play in that - in two cases he so-called support the carrier.   He carried the ball once and made all of three meters.   The rest are all verbal siarrhea.
*   Nothing about the penalty given away by Matfield and nothing about the two tackles he missed.
Matfield was around and he was credited with tackles - the rest is plain and simple garbage - any other lock would have done better than Matfield - since they are physically stronger than he is.    Incidentally how long did ittake you to work out 35 involvements by Matfield - when he actuually was only involved 2 times - 6 of which as bugger-ups and three was taking balls that the scrumhalf should have handled.       Nothing surprising there - he always moonlights in the backline.
Useless - he should retire asap.        
 




DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
03 Jan 2015, 15:58
#3
03 Jan 2015, 15:58#3
You should know I only posted this to give you a platform to expose your bias. Congratulations Michael *pats head*.
BE
becs
Pro4,378 posts
BE
becsPro4,378 posts
03 Jan 2015, 15:58
#4
03 Jan 2015, 15:58#4
You also have to take into account that we gave you 10 points in the First Half, through direct mistakes, and played quite poorly throughout that match. We were not a patch on ourselves even against NZ the week before..... 
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
03 Jan 2015, 16:01
#5
03 Jan 2015, 16:01#5
 Actually Becs, England completely dominated our halfbacks and centres. They were strong in the lineout. Bad decision making cost them, the platform was there.
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
03 Jan 2015, 16:38
#6
03 Jan 2015, 16:38#6
Matfield has been a liability all year, one of the prime reasons the Boks are failing to assert themselves. He is a physical liability. Its funny how since Matfield has returned, we have only won 55% of our tests against the major nations......case closed.
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
03 Jan 2015, 16:59
#7
03 Jan 2015, 16:59#7
Lestat lying again......so in your pathetic eyes Eastmond and Barritt dominated Serfontein and Jean......what a pack of lies. As for the halfbacks, geez......Farrell was so poor he got dropped......stop bloody lying man, its pathetic  
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
03 Jan 2015, 16:59
#8
03 Jan 2015, 16:59#8
 Well, all evidence to the contrary Saffex. All to the contrary.
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
03 Jan 2015, 17:00
#9
03 Jan 2015, 17:00#9
Provide the evidence, liar
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
03 Jan 2015, 17:17
#10
03 Jan 2015, 17:17#10
 I just did. 
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
03 Jan 2015, 17:54
#11
03 Jan 2015, 17:54#11

Serfontein has done two things the whole year. The break against Oz where he miraculously found himself marked by an Aussie lock in space......and the interception against the Poms. In neither case did he beat a backline tackle. And he has hardly beaten a backline tackle all year....stepped inside away from them to  be sure, but never carved past them in a dangerous way.

 

 

His underlying problem was clear in the Pom and w elsh matches. Against the Poms he was easily gassed by Farrell following up a kick. And against Wales he was dominated by Roberts in contact.

 

 

Puny and slow willl never cut it in test rugby.

DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
03 Jan 2015, 18:20
#12
03 Jan 2015, 18:20#12
"All the so-called tackle assists was exactly that - the other player already had the tackle doen - and Matfield made an assist.   What was he doing taking up the scrumhalf position - mostly buggering up the game."

Liar Michael at work again. Hiis tackle assists were impactful, the only player that didn't require one was Bismarck, but t's still listed nonetheless. He took up the scrumhalf position because Reinach was NOWHERE to be seen. He would pass it out often to a forward to drive again and hope Reinach would be there. On one occassion he had to pass long to get our exit strategy going. Not Victor's fault, but Reinach's fault. had he joined the ruck mindlessly, we may have been penalized or turned over. Michael, it's a serious thing to consider whether or not there is any value in talking to you. You lie constantly. You get personal and never back anything you say up. I have posed so many questions, given you every opportynity to make a case for what you say, and you come up with nothing. You dared me to post the details of this test with Matfield, and once again you only ended with egg on your face.

CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
03 Jan 2015, 19:02
#13
03 Jan 2015, 19:02#13
 There is no way that Matfield was piss poor since he came back into test rugby.   Matfoe;d is physically the weakest lock in the top 6 nations and is dominated by opponents all the time hence -
*   his fear to call line outs to himself;*   his weak tackle efforts and missing of tackles;*   his poor and ineffective ball carries in traffic; and*   the ease with which he is pushed out of rolling mauls.
All the above is clearly in evidence in each game he plays in.   Any fanciful writing to the contrary is paintiing a seriously defective picture to the contrary as to his real contribution in tests.   Dave is right - he is destroying the effectiveness of our Tight 5 combination - which was totally sub-par in all tests this year in which he played.  
Meyer made some seriously poor selections since he was appointed as coach -   Matfield must be the worst selection he made. .       
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
03 Jan 2015, 19:38
#14
03 Jan 2015, 19:38#14
We saw the effect of losing Matfield when he was carded against England......the Poms  mauled it  in for a try from 35 metres. Victor strengthened our scrumming after Lomp's  poor performances against Argentina. Our loosehead side never had an issue in 8 tests since Matfield returned.

Facts not bias.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
04 Jan 2015, 03:24
#15
04 Jan 2015, 03:24#15
 Dave 
It does not help to argue with dimwits about Matfield - they would never admit that the man is a liability for the Springbok team - not an asset.    
sharkbok
sharkbok
Captain23,286 posts
sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,286 posts
04 Jan 2015, 04:48
#16
04 Jan 2015, 04:48#16
Matfield has never given a go forward enforcer approach. He provides brains in the pack, even it that means standing aside. He often functions as a loosie, outside of set piece phase. With the likes of Fat Albert in the pack it is all good. Still I would prefer 2 specialist fetchers, so Matfield may be a limitation in this regard of the required amount of ball carriers. 
However I still think the best way to go is having a backrow combination of Louw-6, ,Coetzee, Vermuelen-8. 3 experts fetchers,as well of 2 of them being strong carriers
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
04 Jan 2015, 05:51
#17
04 Jan 2015, 05:51#17
If it comes down to having Coetzee as my second fetcher, I'd rather go  for Matfiels and another power loosie. Coetzee is energetic, makes tackles and runs hard. But he runs without impact, charging into the first tackle, never stepping or offloading. Perhaps more of a bench option.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
04 Jan 2015, 09:05
#18
04 Jan 2015, 09:05#18
 Mozart
"I'd rather go  for Matfiels and another power loosie."

 What has this got to do with fetching and ball carrying.    Lets discuss this crazy sentence:-
This is a complete idiot writing the above.   Matfield is useless in Tight 5 play - so he is to be supported by a power loosie -  in this case Alberts.   The latter is useless in ball carries - a serious liability in defense and of absolutely no value in ball protection and recovery.   So what will we have - two players incapable of ball protection and recovery and have to expect from the other two loosies to both protect and recover balls.   - while having two duds to do what?
This is not the first time that idiotic isue was raised by Mozart.   When the selection of Juandre Kruger at lock was brought up and it was pointed out that he had no grunt - Mozart cam e up with the same idiotic idea.   
A lock is a lock - a loosie a loosie.   Both have different fuunctions and to expect from a loosie to do the work of a lock and vice versa - is the most crazy idea ever raised on this Board.   
Lets face facts - Matfield is useless in Tight 5 play and Alberts is useless as a loosie.   The combination can only cause a total breakdown in both lock and loosie play.  We lost our domination  in the Tight 5  as a result of that crazy selection of Matfield by Meyer and the loosie selections have cost us inagdequate  performance by our loosies - since we ewpect from two loosies to do the work of three.     

CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
04 Jan 2015, 11:09
#19
04 Jan 2015, 11:09#19
We had no "tight 5 domination" against Argentina in Argentina and Matfield wasn't playing. 
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
04 Jan 2015, 11:54
#20
04 Jan 2015, 11:54#20
 Funny that since Matfield arrived the Boks have a 55% win record against the major rugby nations. I wonder why that is......I'll tell you why, it's because the old man is a massive liability.
Case closed our results with Matfield on board speak volumes. He is useless these days.
CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
04 Jan 2015, 12:09
#21
04 Jan 2015, 12:09#21
 And there I was, soundly under the impression that rugby was a team sport. Meanwhile it is actually a game played between two number 5 locks with 28 other clowns running around for love and charity. 
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
04 Jan 2015, 15:09
#22
04 Jan 2015, 15:09#22
 "It does not help to argue with dimwits about Matfield"

Translation: It arez stoopidz ta insultz da dimwitz bowt viktor coz we aint gotz no factz ta bakz upz da stuffz we sayz en dey dun listenz to da insultz.

@Saffex: I'm a little disappointed to hear you speak like that. You clearly no better but succumb to your hyper-emotionality once again! Our troubles throughout the year were scrum domination and a lack of penetration in the centres. It was not the result of Matfield. Our lineouts were better, our restarts were far, far better, our forward power was not compromised. When the team was lethargic it was with and without Matfield. I even posted stats showing that Matfield was one of the hardest working players in the earlier tests. And against England? Matfield was THE hardest working player. Who was protecting our halfbacks at ruck time? Matfield. His ruck cleans and continual work in defence were vital. Not Duane, not Schalk, not Eben or Coetzee was able to match that. If there is a weak link in the chain then you must look elsewhere.

I was challenged to have a look at this test with the specific attention to Matfield and the critics have found that all was not what they had expected. you can either learn and salvage your battered credibility by conceding errancy or stuff your head further up your rear and be a fool forever. If you have any time stamps to give me to prove otherwise then provide them. You have no business of insulting people for not conforming to your views if you don't provide evidence. I have once more given you all the platform to make a case for your opinion. Now take it.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
04 Jan 2015, 15:25
#23
04 Jan 2015, 15:25#23
 Letsallbemorons
Matfield the hardest working player against England?   He made as many bugger-ups as possible - yellow card -penalty - possession loss and 2 missed tackles - was a lot of hard work that helped England massively.  Sure h tried his damnedest to benefit England and very little to the advantage of the Springboks.  
The facts you manufacture to benefit Matfield is BS in buckets.   Same as your "facts" about  Morne Steyn, and the rest of the poor players you support all out.       
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
04 Jan 2015, 15:37
#24
04 Jan 2015, 15:37#24
 Michael, as I have said provide the proof! Give me the time stamps. Not one player did more than Matfield in that test. If you feel so strongly about that statement being incorrect then provide the evidence. I've backed myself up, now it's time for you to produce something. And to correct you. Matfield's only error was sacking a maul, dropping a high-ball. No missed tackles as you stated. But that's j ust like your bogus claims of Morné's missed tackle numbers in Perth! Listing more tackles than all the defensive situations he was involved with. And you speak of making things up *rolls eyes*.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
04 Jan 2015, 15:50
#25
04 Jan 2015, 15:50#25
 I provided Matfield's stats and that is good enough for all reasonable people to see what his real contribution against England was.   You managed tohide the missed tackles and even stated he took an $English line-out throw-in - while what he did was penalized.    
The rest of your jargon is a statement of what a lock should do - but with the exception that Matfield is a physically- weak player compared to other locks.   
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
04 Jan 2015, 16:03
#26
04 Jan 2015, 16:03#26
No Michael, you posted errant stats. All that I stated is all that was there. If you say something is hidden, then provide the time stamps. I listed the lineout steal, because it was an active contribution to the game. That the Boks were penalized because of Eben does not dismiss the fact that he did steal that ball. Were I to omit it I would be guilty of hiding information. You would like me to do that of course, so as to create a narrative that supports your deceitful narrative. 
— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news