Victor's last stand?

Quite possibly the Samoan test is the last time we will see the great Victor in Bok colours. We may beat Wales but if so will HM rattle the cage by bringing back such a big personality into a small personality team. F du Preez seems to say nothing, so if Vic opens his mouth he could upset the apple cart.
Still if he is gone he went out in a blaze of glory...here is the 24 Rating vs Samoa:

Victor Matfield: 7.5

Some critics felt he should be demoted for this one: instead he got up for it superbly. Constant bastion of reliability in first half, either at kick-off collections or the lineout, where he caused mayhem on Samoan throw. Rousing applause as he left field on 55 minutes, sound job done. Had ice pack on left leg afterwards – hopefully just a 38-year-old’s lot

I read garbage on this Board about how he has diminished his legacy. How? By playing magnificent rugby at 38? The man is is a phenomenon.

But we have the howling mob syndrome in full cry. And the funny thing is, members of the mob don't even realise that's what they are....an unthinking, back slapping organism.

I hope we see Vic again, but if not it was a privile ge to witness the greatest lineout forward of all time do his stuff.

 Mozart
Matfield should never have returned to play rugby after his retirement in 2011.  As from 2014 he never was what he used to be in his hay day and he has really damaged his own reputation by coming back to play in an environment where he was out of his depth.
So what shall we remember about this once great player:-
*   The fact that in his last test he played for 54 minutes and was replaced by De Jager who played for 26 minutes.   The comparative stats for the two players were as follows:-
 Matfield0/000/4/1800008/09/220/0   de Jager0/000/0/41401008/03/000/0
Matfield made no ball carries in traffic and in one case when in open play he carried the ball for 8 meters.  He made as many tackles in 54 minutes as his replacement did in less than half the time on the field of play.  He only did well in line-outs - but still gave away 2 penalties - which has become noticeable after his return to play rugby again.  His main problem he was just not good enough anymore in Tight 5 play.
*   The look on his face after the disastrous game against Japan;
*    The way he buggered up in two line outs against the AB's in the two EC tests in 2014.
It never is wise to do what Matfield did by coming back and be in way too many tests lost by the Springboks because of a poorly functioning Tight 5.     
 

 I hope the old bloke does well ,its always good to put the wee leiblings in their place ! And its shameful some of thhe stuff you guys heap upon wee Victors Manly Mane ....

matfeild one of the greatest locks ive ever seen and makes the uzumaki clans best ever world XV easy peasy.

but hes 6 years past his use by date, and thats one of the reasons why the Boks have had a sore tummy of late. using prodcuts which should have been discarded a long time ago.

@warhammer,


hey buddy, hows it going???

went to the naruto movie boruto on thursday, on for a limited time at selected theaters.

worth a look for u and the kids if u follow it and are up to date, and if ur not update then warning huge spoilers.

ps wait until credits are finished, extra scene at the end which made naruto geek filled theater go OMG!!!
lolz,

 In his day he was good as a line out lock but I would never rate him as the best lock of all time.
M Andrews, F du Preez and J Pickard are all greats that deserve to be considered as SA great locks.
There are also some great locks that played for NZ and the British Lions.
 

Good in lineouts but even this has been overhyped. For the rest worst "lock" ever to play for the Boks hey day or any other day. Simply pathetic. Send the show pony home NOW.

To siggest that victor was ever physical is ludicrous. He has always been this pap. Always been absent as a tight forward and always been a con artist. The idea he was once good but now o er the hill is simply an escape route for those who now realuse how poor he is. He NEVER was any good at all.

No test team has ever been messed up for so long by one useless player. NEVER EVER

3 x Currie Cup Winner
3 x Super Rugby winner2 x Tri Nations Winner 1 x World Cup winner

But no, you're right beeno, 'no team has ever been messed up for so long by one useless pl ayer'

 I do not agree with Beeno's assessment about Matfield - he was very good in asects of the fame when he was in his hay day.   My problem is that he did what I feared would happen when he returned to play rugby in 2014 - and that was that he would seriously mar the great name he built up in his years as a great player.
Despite the protestations to the contrary by some, Matfield was not the top player he used to be in the past.   All the claims that he was what he used to be were based on things any other lock would have done routinely - without bringing to the table the physicality required from locks in the present era.
That is why a youngster like De Jager foiund it not at all difficult to over-shadow him in performances over the past year.  That happened in the Aussie test this year when De Allende replaced him,   It happened in the Samoa test as well and De Jager in all tests that De Jager played this year even  in partnership with him.
This type of return to play rugby has ever worked in the past and it did not work in his case.  He would now be remembered as a player that has damaged the Springbok performances in tests and Meyer - despite his personal friendship with Matfield must have realized it himself if his comments on playing Matfield from the bench is taken into account.   This was not the first injury Matfield had over the last 20 months - he never before was put on the bench after returning from injury.
      .             

          

Matfield has played better since his come back than most Springbok locks over the last 5 days.
The Springbok lineout was the worst I have ever seen it in most of Meyers reign- and the kick offs not much better. 
Only Ezebeth- and recently Dejager. 
Juande Kruger was a clone of Matfield- but a version that was not test standard.Flip had a few good games but could not play within the rules of the game.Stephanie has spent more time injured than playing. 
Otherwise their has not been many specialist 5 locks- and Matfield has added value. 
Lood still needs to produce a good performance against top opposition. The choice between Lood and Matfield starting is a close one. 

 meant 4 years- not 5 days

' Ek sal antwoord op jou roepstem ' ...................... if Victor was a NZer he'd be kneeling alongside Richie receiving their knighthoods in the New Year's Honours List .
Instead he gets denigrated & abused by a troop of rugby philistines . Sies . Shame on julle .

 Hi there Naru ! One step ahead of you mate my youngest boy and I are off to see then son of  Naruto today ! Cheers mate !

That's a pretty fair assessment Sharkbok, I agree with that and especially about how bad our lineouta and restarts were. 

 The story of Marfield is not only criticism by some on this site.   It has been much wider than that and it was essentially ex-Springbok locks who was critical of him.  It as also his relationship with team mates that from time to time boiled over into spats between them - even seen on TV.
I have yet to see anybody from the public - other than a few on this site - who actually had positive feelings about his presence in the Springbok team 0 most was severely critical about his presence in the team.  
The story about the line-outs has been over-emphasized.  When started in tests in June last year Matfield took enough line-outs - nut by the end of 2014 he rarely called line outs to come to him and his line out takes consequently became less and less.   His taking of opposition throw in line -outs over the 15 months was few and far between.   His fumbling  of line-outs against the All Blacks last year - the one leading to a try by the AB's that could bar a penalty kicj conversion by Lambie - would have lost the game for the Springboks the game and the opther to a failure to start a rowing maul from 5 meters out - where if a try was scored the Springboks would have have let to a Springbok match-winning try was ignored by his supporters on this site.
The story that Matfield only have had a positive effect on the team has been denied by results by the Springboks in matches in which we played.  Since June 2014 the Springboks lost half of the matches in which Matfield played and the main reason was that we lost competitiveness in the Springbok Tight 5 against major nations and eve against the minnows.  In that period we beat England and the AB's once despite and not because of his presence in the team.  
Sad to say - his return to play test rugby coincided with of the worst performance record in tests ever of the Springboks in the professional era.   His lack of physicality was just ignoired by his supporters.   
Be it as it may - he is our best hope?  Far from it - he became what most people and rugby professionals believe - a serious nightmare for the Springboks.                           

 PLEASE OAKS NO SICKLY SENTIMENTALITY. PAP VICTOR HAS ALWAYS BEEN PAP AND HE WAS AS PAP IN HIS SO CALLE DHAY DAY AS HE IS NOW.
WHATEVER WE ACHIEVED WE ACHIEVED DISPITE HIS ABSENCE AS A TIGHT FORWARD.PATHETIC IS THE ONLY WORD THAT DESCRIBES HIM AS A LOCK.
THOSE DISAGREEING HAVE NO CLUE WHATSOEVER.
IF YOU CANT SEE THE DIFFERENC IN CONTRIBUTION BY A LOOD AS COMPARED TO A WEE MATFEILD YOU NEED TO GET YOUR EYES TESTED AND YOU BRAIN EXAMINED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 Good riddance to bad rubbish!

 We would rather not be the recycling bin for your " bad rubbish ", Beeno !! 

Well, Stephanie Du Toit Pom has been poor. 

 Jealous Andrews called for Stephanie rather than Victor....not Lood. I remember the article. Andrews is a very thick fellow.

 If it looks like a peanut, it must be a peanut, therefore the brain power of a peanut. Simples.

 Both Wiese and Gekdenhuys said the same about Victor on TV.  This is BS by the two non-thinkers with their bird brains.  They know better than locks who played for SA - or so they think.
There is no way that Matfield produced the goods in the Tight 5 and that is where he fell flat.

Yes I do. And that isn't too hard to do to be quite honest. Imagine, these experts pick Pretorius over Butch, Conradie over Du Preez, Watson over Schalk, Lambie over Pollard and Morne, Goosen, Britz, Bekker... your pal Mallett is such an expert that he played his premier loosie at scrumhalf in a game against a big England pack. 

 Mike all those locks know matfiled is a complete dud.
I see Dr Mozzzz now backpeddaling and diverting the argument away from Lood to Steph Du Toit another fine young lock.
Supporting matfiled was a sinificant blunder.