FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Waaahahahaha....the good OOM does the deep dive

Waaahahahaha....the good OOM does the deep dive

Started by Mozart37 REPLIES817 VIEWS· 18 Aug 2013, 00:38
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
18 Aug 2013, 00:38
#1
18 Aug 2013, 00:38#1
Man that was close......and OOM was spot on to say things could go wrong. Hell until the Boks passed 70 points the match was still in doubt....and when that Bargie swotted JJ and they scored that last try, we only won by 60 points. - And the Oom's command of the details was spectacular. Firstly Meyer only coached the up and under....those backline tries were just an accident. And how stupid was he to bring back the sublime F du Preez when he could have had Reinach or van Zyl. - To top it all Old Morne just lost his nerve completely knocking over kick after kick, when clearly he was a basket case. Pienaar also, soooo ineffective. And the rotten Alberts. Hell if only we had Labuschagne. Then there was the useless Juandre Kruger....he just kept on doing useful things and getting an "8" rating , when we could have had Lood! Serious ommission! - And finally there was old man Jean. The guy Dave said is past it.....breaking tackles at will.....showing a violinist's sense of timing in vacuuming up that interception. - After this perhaps Meyer will get a little more respect. The experienced players were huge in both games....Genia, McCaw, Reid, Conrad Smith, Ashley Cooper in the other game as well. So Heineke's decision to bring back F du Preez looks like an even bigger stroke of genius than the decision to bring back Louw last year. - The egg is dripping like the Niagra Falls.
SH
ShezzaPro2,471 posts
18 Aug 2013, 00:49
#2
18 Aug 2013, 00:49#2

 De Villiers was horrible for the first 30, he nearly let the Argies score a try when he ran off the line, but Kruger managed to turn it over.

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
18 Aug 2013, 02:33
#3
18 Aug 2013, 02:33#3

I must have missed the bit when he was horrible

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Aug 2013, 02:57
#4
18 Aug 2013, 02:57#4
Mozart It was a top performance by most Boks - but there were still problems with certain players that should be eliminated. First of all there was Basson - who was mostly invisible throughout the game - then there was Alberts - who did have an average game - his ball carrying was similar to that of the past - short distance covered without too much benefit, and he missed his first tackle and continued with a low tackle count - and Kruger - did do his line out work and virtually nothing else. In a highscoriing game with the opposition caving in in the second half more specifically - it is easy to overlook deficiencies in teams and they were there. In the first half far too many aimless kicks by Morne Steyn and Pienaar were in evidence and although Morne Steyn's goal kicking was excellent - his contribution to the rest of the game was average at best. The real thrust in the backline was provided by Le Roux - and that is a fact. Morne was Morrne - more of an aimless kicking flyhalf and he together with Poenaar kept the Pumas in the game until the penalty try was awarded in minute 32. At that stage the score was 9-6 so that is also a fact of life. Your sweet talking of players are devoid of substance - and gloating after the fact is obviously easy. And then also your real problem is that through gloating you try and hide away mistakes and poor play by your favouired players. Learn to be objective and do not think that average players will perform adequately against tougher opposition. By the way - when Lambie came on late in the game - he did in two moves do more in ball carrying then Steyn did in the whole game. Does that not tell you something - or are you too prejudiced to see and appreciate that one.
SH
ShezzaPro2,471 posts
18 Aug 2013, 03:05
#5
18 Aug 2013, 03:05#5

 Mike, Morne played well and just thought I'd mention who began the move from our 22 to set up JJ's try? Morne Steyn did. He saw the opportunity and took it, ran with the ball and passed it to Le Roux and the rest followed.

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
18 Aug 2013, 03:12
#6
18 Aug 2013, 03:12#6

 OOm let me be totally objective.....the Boks won by 60 points, not the 6 that you were predicting. Meyer did a fine job preparing his team. The loosies were powerful. Morne was superb, Jean was a force, and F du Preez was excellent. Is that objective enough for you or are you having trouble reading with all that egg on your face?

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Aug 2013, 03:34
#7
18 Aug 2013, 03:34#7
The loosies were not all that powerful when it comes to Vermeulen who had trouble under high balls, but did one very good and effective ball carry. Alberts was visible - in the first 30 minutes he did nothing of consequence other than knocking on a ball and missing a tackle - thereafter he had four ball carries with very limted gain in territory and a low tackle count - end of story. What was Morne Steyn superb in other than his kicking at goal? He in the first half kicked far too many balls away aimlessly and he showed nothing exceptional in ball carrying himself at all. How superb was that - I would call it superb goal kicking and for the rest average and one-dimensional. You missed completely what I said about Lambie above - in two cases of ball carrying he did twice as much as Steyn did in the whole game. I have no problems with Jean - never had and Fourie was very good - better than expected after a three month lay-off from the game. was just worried about that aspect of the game The Argentinians had their own problems - they were in the game for thirty minutes with the score at 9-6 and then lost the plot - for nearly half of the remainder of the game they played with 14 players because of two yellow cards. The cards were definitely deserved - but that shows that indiscipline was a problem on their part. You obviously missed the first thirty minutes of the game completely and that cause the gross amount of gloating and self-satisfaction to be really a joke. Look at the whole game and not segments of it. Against stronger opposition than was in evidence yesterday - will the same things happen? I doubt it very much.
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
18 Aug 2013, 07:52
#8
18 Aug 2013, 07:52#8
So Morne together with Pienaar kept the Pumas in the game? Haha....you mean Morne's 28 points wasn't enough. And have you checked Pienaar's stats? Here they are for your convenience, along with Morne's numbers: - SH Pienaar 0/0 0 7/40/6 95 0 2 2 0 2/0 0/0 0 0/0 - FH Steyn 0/1 28 8/26/3 15 0 0 0 0 1/1 0/0 0 0/0 - You will notice a few things. Morne gets a try assist. You will also note that Pienaar makes 95 metres in 6 carries....gee I guess he did something useful after all! Now I direct your attention to the kicking stats. Morne and Pienaar together kicked the ball 15 times. Oddly enough if we look at the NZ halves who are considered to be attacking players, Smith kicked it nine times and Cruden 6 times for a total of 15. Australia only kicked 6 times....but they lost! - So I understand, you think Pienaar and Morne were terrible....they stopped our attack according to you. But the facts say they kicked 15 times, ran 9 times for 110 metres and passed a whopping 66 times. As Anthony Quinn said in the Wind and the Lion......they were a river unto their people. - Nope you made a fool of yourself with your silly prediction and your subsequent rationalizations just make it worse. It wouldn't be worth commenting on, but for the fact that you spend much of your time denigrating other posters and telling us the national coach is a moronic fool. How does it feel?
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Aug 2013, 10:49
#9
18 Aug 2013, 10:49#9
Mozart Back to the selective stats phaze again. How did Morne make the 15 meters in five carries? All three cases where he made meters were when he he collected the ball after high kicks and he ran circa 15 meters before kicking the ball himself.. That means he either kick the balls or passed it immediately after receipt when functioning as a flyhalf in getting balls from structured play - much like Toomuah did fir the Aussies - without the latters ball handling flops. Really game breaking efforts from that perspective. He made one tackle and missed another one. Would also watch carefully where the try-assist come from. Without his goal kicking - bog ordinary in performance and even his goalkicking could have been handled by most other kickers with equal results - since most kicks were straight in front or with small angles to contend with. Insofar as Lambie is concerned - the other alternative as a flyhalf - his stats was as follows: after being brought on with 8 minutes to play:- Lambie 0/0 0 0/3/1 30 2 2 0 0 0/0 1/0 0 0/0 One carry doid more than double the distance than Morne diid in all his from a similar point of departure. And bearing in mind the points from which goal kicking was done - he would have converted everything himself as well. Morne Steyn will always remain Morne Steyn - a one-dimensional player with very little to offer as a pivot. I have a problem with the interpretation of the stats of Pienaar as well. Most of his 6 runs came from the same plays as Morne Steyn's runs originated - and there was one significant run where he did make a contribution from his position at scrummie. I did not have a problem with Du Preez - other than that he had no gme time for thre months and played in different circumstances in Japan. Nobody knew what he could produce - it was a gamble that paid off in his case. You love selected stats so I will remind you of the stats of Alberts - whom you described bullshit like as superb:- Alberts 1/0 5 0/1/5 12 0 0 0 1 5/0 0/0 0 0/0 Wonderful stuff - he scored a try through a maul situation where he happened to have the ball - so did Strauss as well. He lost possession once - beat no defenders and in five carries made 12 meters - real game breaking stuff as far as you are concerned - while his defence stats were poor for a loosie.. Taken into broader perspective - in comparison with Luatua and Kolisi his stats are extremely poor. Check those yourself and you may find why I say Alberts was the poor show within the context of the game. Superb performance - in the twisted mind of a prejudiced person only. While at it - you conveniently left out the stats of Basson and did not mention him once - when a major part of my criticism was directed at his performances. So let me quote those as well for your info:- Basson 0/0 0 0/1/6 13 0 0 0 2 2/0 0/0 0 0/0 My main concerns were about Morne Steyn, Alberts. Kruger (the agile defender of note according to you) and Basson. Other than his goalkicking he produced nothing of consequence in the game, Alberts and Basson produced nothing as well and Kruger was bog ordinary as well. And then there was Steenkamp - another player you unreservedly support - he really was a poor joke in the context of the game. Twist as you like - everything conformed my initial expectations of the performances of those five players. The real weak links in the team. And those weak links will be more pronounced against stronger opposition.- mark my words. PS. I looked at the try-assist credited to Morne - it was an inside pass he made to Vermeulen - with no defenders in front of the latter. Good effort - but most reasonable flyhalfs would have done the same.
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
18 Aug 2013, 11:53
#10
18 Aug 2013, 11:53#10

Mozart & clevermike: here are some unbiased player ratings for the Boks to throw into the discussion.

Overall they are very positive ratings against an outclassed team - seems Beano1 was wrong with his pre-game bleating about it not being fair that the Boks always have played the Argies first each year :):

 

SOUTH AFRICA Player ratings: 'Madiba magic'

Sat, 17 Aug 2013 14:38

“Madiba magic” had a greater effect on some of the Springboks than others in the record 73-13 thrashing of the Pumas in Soweto on Saturday. They took some time to get going, but once they found their rhythm there was no stopping the Springboks as they got their Rugby Championship campaign off to a flyer.

It wasn’t a flawless performance by any means, but the nine-try hammering highlighted how far the Springboks have come since the last time the teams met in the 16-all draw in Mendoza last year. Quintin van Jaarsveld rates the Springbok players.

15 Willie le Roux Came into his own as the match progressed but his shaky first 30 minutes must be a concern for Heyneke Meyer. Gained confidence when he chipped for JJ Engelbrecht to run in a try and kicked on from there but tried to be too “cute” on occasions when simple passes would have been sufficient. Overall, a good offensive outing. 7.5/10

14 Bjorn Basson Another underwhelming Test. Chased well but didn’t bring anything special to the table. 6/10

13 JJ Engelbrecht His blistering acceleration and hard-running had the Pumas at sixes and sevens and hinted at a long and successful Test career. 7.5/10

12 Jean de Villiers (captain) A strong performance by the Springbok skipper. Made ample metres in midfield, was resolute on defence, communicated well with the referee and bagged a trademark intercept try. 7.5/10

11 Bryan Habana Butchered a try early in the second half but his workrate and kick-chasing, as always, were of the highest order and he got his try in the end. 7.5/10

10 Morné Steyn An accomplished all-round performance. Not only kicked brilliantly at goal but proved to his detractors that he’s not just a kicking flyhalf as he got his backline firing on all cylinders. 8/10

9 Ruan Pienaar Very lively, much quicker to the breakdown and good decision-making. Solid in all departments. 7.5/10

8 Duane Vermeulen A beast with ball in hand and made some hard hits. However, his rustiness after a lengthy injury-enforced layoff was evident under the high ball as he dropped three up-and-unders. 7/10

7 Willem Alberts His workrate was rather disappointing considering the amount of ground he was able to make when he did carry the ball. 7/10

6 Francois Louw Like Alberts, he could have made a few more ball carries but he was good on the ground and tireless on defence. 7/10

5 Juandré Kruger Dominated the line-out following Patricio Albacete’s early injury-enforced departure and subsequently channelled a lot of his energy into general play. Made a crucial turnover inside the 22 and a fair amount of tackles. 7.5/10

4 Eben Etzebeth A near unstoppable force with ball in hand, swatting would-be defenders aside with relative ease. A dependable target and stole one against the throw at line-out time. Worryingly, though, his fiery temper reared its ugly head again. 8/10

3 Jannie du Plessis Anchored the scrum with aplomb. Like Etzebeth, guilty of ill discipline when he cleaned out a player from the side. 7.5/10

2 Adriaan Strauss With Bismarck du Plessis back to full fitness, Strauss had a point to prove and he did exactly that with a man of the match performance. His set-piece play was exemplary and a strong leg drive saw him power over from the driving maul. However, it’s his workrate and prominence as a ball carrier that were most impressive. 8/10

1 Tendai Mtawarira Took his young foe Matias Diaz to school at scrum time. 7/10 Replacements:

16 Bismarck du Plessis (on for Strauss, 54th minute) Stayed hot on Strauss’ heels with his strength and explosiveness. 7.5/10

17 Gurthrö Steenkamp (on for Mtawarira, 57th minute) Struggled somewhat with the new scrum sequence. 6/10

18 Coenie Oosthuizen (on for Du Plessis, 54th minute) Kept up his side of the scrum but one has to question the decision to have two specialist looseheads on the bench. 6.5/10

19 Flip van der Merwe (on for Kruger, 57th minute) Brought more physicality to the mix. 6/10

20 Siya Kolisi (on for Alberts, 64th minute) Not enough time to be rated.

21 Fourie du Preez (on for Pienaar, 54th minute) Simply sublime. Pienaar did little wrong but the manner in which the pace and fluency of the Springbok game improved once the veteran came on was eye-opening. His vision hasn’t diminished - as he showed with the cut out pass for Habana’s try - his speed to the breakdown was impressive and his distribution spot on. 8/10

22 Pat Lambie (on for Le Roux, 58th minute) Asked plenty of questions of the Pumas defence in an exciting cameo. 7/10

23 Jan Serfontein (on for De Villiers, 67th minute) Not enough time to be rated.

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Aug 2013, 12:05
#11
18 Aug 2013, 12:05#11
Just-win This was a very one-sided match and the euphoria of that has shown up clearly in respect of the above ratings. I think there were deficiencies in the team and some players were much stronger than others. If taken into account he rates Steenkamp - who factually failed yesterday - as a 6 - then you would get the message. Same with Basson. I would rate some players substantially lower if really based on acual contribution and not on the ome-sided affair in general. It is dangerous to over-credit the players in a case like the match yesterday and the ratings of some players in particular are inflated.
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
18 Aug 2013, 12:11
#12
18 Aug 2013, 12:11#12

clevermike: for sure the coaches will have their own assessment of player & team performance. It will be interesting to see who the select for the next game.

Playing the Argies for a second time will still be a warm-up game but what more could you ask for as a coach? It has to be a good thing.

My assessment is the Boks are looking good & we are building towards a fantastic matchup between the RWC (ABs) v the Boks. Couldn't ask for more.

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
18 Aug 2013, 12:43
#13
18 Aug 2013, 12:43#13
@Maaik. So that is where you were. You were busy compiling all this bullshit. Or did you in fact start compiling it before the kick-off? I think it was the latter. I wonder if you have even watched the game at all. Having said that, I was waiting for a long time for something like this to happen. Want to know why? Last year, when we beat a massively disrupted Aussie team by a big margin, you would hear nothing of that. On that day, the Aussies had to make massive changes before and during the game, with very few players eventually playing in their usual positions. In addition they had a yellow card. They had quite a number of blodd substitutions which disrupts the moment, whether you like it or not. They had there first one after 5 minutes, with the reversal 8 min later, with the next one 6 min after that and the reversal after 4 minutes. 7 Minutes after that Robinson was swapped for Slipper. A minute after that they lost Berrick Barnes, and so it carried on for the entire game. Despite all of that, you were one of those with the loudest mouths claiming that that win was because Morne Steyn was dropped in favour Johan Goosen and that it was Johan Goosen who was mainly responsible for beating Aus. Fast forward to yesterday, and all your chest-beating bullshit before that game came to nothing, but you are too much of a yellow-bellied coward to admit that you just could have been slightly wrong with your "predictions". You rather choose to blame it on the disruptions in the Argentinian team. And before you choose that route to attack my post, I am not saying that this win in the fashion that we did, means that we are on track to whitewash this series and win the RC. I am just saying that things look a lot different and much more promising than this time last year. Your problem is that you are sitting with a dilemma. Heyneke Meyer is busy making progress and you just cannot bring yourself to admit it, due to your hatred for the man.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Aug 2013, 13:24
#14
18 Aug 2013, 13:24#14
Ceradyne The typical useless contributor - who cannot write anything normal. He looked at yesterdays game and all the players - and Meyer's selections - were perfect. Forget about the facts and based his whole argument on the issue of a one-sided match. Meyer was forced into picking Le Roux at full back - up to the last minute (in his own words) he was trying to see whether Kirchner would make it - but the latter was in his come-cack match as bad as he was in Super 15. Plus point to Mewyer. Basson was putrid in Super 15 and again yesterday - irrespective of what you say. Negatiove point in selection. Steyn was good in goalkicking and bog ordinary for the rest - his strategic kicking was sub-par. Can do a better selection. In respect of attacking play Lambie did more in 8 minutes than Steyn did in the whole game. Questionable selection. Back Row - Vrmeulen was slightly better than Alberts - the latter produced nothing of real value yesterday. Vermeulen - neutral selection. Alberts - poor selection. Kruger - did his line out work and lost the plot for the rest. Poor selection - we can do better. Steenkamp - SHIT selection Out of 6 players - one neutral selection and 5 where the team would benefit from having better players on the field of play. If you cannot see that - you must be blined by ignorance - or bullshit - which you normally spouted in any event. If you cannot see with your own
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
18 Aug 2013, 13:43
#15
18 Aug 2013, 13:43#15

Moz when was JJ swotted by an Argie, that is simply not the case. JJ's running skills are sublime and his defence was sound, not that we had to do much defending.

 

Jean was good, but Serfontein in his short time on was even better.

 

Good preformance by all, except for Basson, Morne, Pienaar and Kruger.......cant say I saw much from Louw either. Steenkamp was useless, he was the only prop who got folded twice.

 

Lambie showed with his few touches what a class act he is. Why on earth he did not replace Morne is beyond me. Basson and Kruger were anonymous, Pienaar was at best solid as was Louw and Morne.

 

What the hell has happened to the Argies in one season? Great Bok performance - a few tweaks and we have a side able to challenge the Kiwi's........we need a real wing, a 10 with attcking clout, a real lock and a real fetcher........Mvovo or v/d Heever, Lambie, Lood de Jager and Brussouw would improve the Bok side tenfold and get rid of fat Steenkamp and play the impressive Kitshoff.

MA
manceRookie63 posts
18 Aug 2013, 13:48
#16
18 Aug 2013, 13:48#16

Mike a few points.

You largely credit Willie Le Roux with "the thrust that got the back line going". He did play well enough yesterday but let me tell you, he will not play against the AB's if he continues with the "twinkle toes, I must do everything" nonsense instead of keeping it simple. The AB's will have him for breakfast.

 

I cannot undertand why you keep comparing Morne to Lambie. Lambie came on as a fullback, not flyhalf so you cannot compare the two. In fact in the little time Lambie was on he showed exactly where his best position is.......fullback.

CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
18 Aug 2013, 13:59
#17
18 Aug 2013, 13:59#17

Saffex

Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 5178
RE: Waaahahahaha....the good OOM does the deep dive
August 18, 2013, 11:43:38

Jean was good, but Serfontein in his short time on was even better. Agree. I think JDV is realising that as well. Could that be why he has been seen (uncharacteristically) getting his team together and talking to them, as well constantly harping in the ref's ear?

 Steenkamp was useless, he was the only prop who got folded twice. Agree to some extent. I would not say that he was useless, but he was not on par either. As for getting folded, I think Pollock has been doin a bit of guessing again. Steenkamp was the culprit when he was pinged shortly after he cam on. He had his flippin arse higher than his shoulders, which is why he hinged. Later on in the game, after his opponent was replaced, the exact same thing happened again. His hips was once again higher than his shoulders and he hinged again, but this time the ref decided that it was his opponent who was the culprit. The times that he got his body position right, i.e. his hips lower than his shoulders, he had the upper hand over his opponent.

 

 

 

BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
18 Aug 2013, 14:03
#18
18 Aug 2013, 14:03#18

Mike dont worry to much about ou windpomp he is a prick much of the time, lies and is one confused puppy.

Up your game windpomp no need to get this nasty with Mike - keep that to ss board.

Mike there are some players under performing. However I think the return from injury of certain guys will eliminate the problems. Morne however had a very good game in all departments. To me the only players who were ordinary were Steenkamp and Basson. 

Meyer generally is getting it right.

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Aug 2013, 14:06
#19
18 Aug 2013, 14:06#19
Saffex I fully share your views on the players mentioned by you - but would add Alberts to your list. I watched the game twice - and looked out to see what specific players produced It is always difficult to assess one-sided games objectively - but there were elements of the game that was not in zinc with the rest of the players and your are spot on about those. Mozart is talking bullshit about JJ - but that is normal and should be seen from his parst comments about how good De Jongh is and how bad JJ is - remember his omments after the Super 15 game between the Bulls and Stormers for instance. I gave my reasons in detail about the Basson, Morne, Pienaar, Alberts and Kruger performances and where I think we could do better. The lack of real performance opf uality by the mentione players will turn nasty against a stronger team. I think the Argies fell apart after minute 32 - up to that stage they were measuring up quite well - with the Springboks having a lead of 9-6. After that indiscipline cost them 2 yellow cards and in the last 48 minutes of the game they played for 20 minutes with 14 players. There captaincy was not good and Lobbe was sseriously missed. They also lost their best line out player - Albacete due to an early injury. All in all - things fell completely apart after the penalty try and JJ's try followed brilliancy by Le Roux. The second half was a complete mess insofar as they were concerned. I think if they have Lobbe and Albacete back - and they can get away from indiscipline - they would do better - but cannot see them beating the Springboks and a repeat of last years draw is unthinkable. The main reason is a better backline performance and showed why Le Roux was such a good replacement for Kirchner and it also show what a negative effect a combination of Morne Steyn and Francois Steyn had on backline performances. I would still think that something needs to be done about the Basson issue - he needs to be replaced. I think that despite all the accolades replacement of Morne Steyn and Pinmaar would improve backline performances.. My backline for the next game would be as follows:- 15 Le Roux 14 Engelbrecht 13 De Villiers 12 Serfontein 11 Habana 10 Lambie 9 Du Preez The above changes are based on overall performance by players yesterday. Lambie in the few minutes he was on the field of play than Steyn did during the whole game.
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
18 Aug 2013, 14:07
#20
18 Aug 2013, 14:07#20

Vlag, I just see no point in a fat old Steenkamp off the bench when we have impressive young props like Kitshoff, Nkanyane, Marcel v/d Merwe and Mellett as loosehead options.

 

Kruger added no value other than the odd line-out take, Etzebeth was far more impressive in the line-outs. Move Etzebeth to 5 and bring in the impressive de Jager at 4.

 

du Preez was far more impressive than Pienaar, but what's the point he is hardly available, how to you achieve consistency when a player is hardly available. 

 

Jean was good, so it's ok that he remains, but Serfontein is just on another level. As for Basson, he is a complete passenger and you knowmy score on boring Morne.

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Aug 2013, 14:11
#21
18 Aug 2013, 14:11#21
Nance. How many times did Steyn got a high kick ball playing in a smilar position as the full back and how many times did he do squat with that ball? That is the center of the argument - and you missed the point completely. As to the doomsday prophecies on le Roux - you repeat the idiocy spread by people previously by a number of contributors (also about yesterdays game) - so lets rather wait and see what happens. Crap is easy to spread - the truth not so.
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
18 Aug 2013, 14:19
#22
18 Aug 2013, 14:19#22

Mike no way in hell should JJ be moved to wing, it would be a very poor move and it would harm his impressive progress at centre. 

 

I can live with Jean being retained at 12 and Serfontein playing off the bench, its not the way I would go but at least Jean is still a good enough player........unlike the likes of Basson, Morne and Kruger.

 

Alberts was fine yesterday, Louw was less impressve. Vermeulen was by far our best loosies and Kolisi was great when he came on

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Aug 2013, 14:40
#23
18 Aug 2013, 14:40#23
Saffex I still cannot understand your fixation about Engelbrecht not playing at 14 - he has all the elements to play in that position - I want only the best possible attacking backline and in my view nothing that Engelbrecht can do at 13 that he cannot equals at 14. He would definitely be a better wing than Basson is. I do not agree with you about Alberrs - he was average at best - he did carry the balls a few times with very little effect and after and his defence were poor comparative what what is normally expected from a blindside flank. He was useless in line out play as well. In the short time Kolisis was on the park he did more than Alberts did in the whole time he played. I am still not convinced that your view on Louw is justified - he had a solid game yesterday and Vermeulen - was better than Alberts - despite his poor play under high balls. Both Vermeulen and Alberts should make way for better players - they are no real assets at all.
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
18 Aug 2013, 15:07
#24
18 Aug 2013, 15:07#24

 Mike a very atacking backline and one I would like to see have a go. 

But when jean Retires JJ and Jan are our two best centers. We need actually to find some class wings. JP being relatively young was a big loss,

That guy Volmink was it, playing fo the lions looked very promising to me. Size wise he also looked okay - speed foot work and some rugby smarts

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
18 Aug 2013, 16:48
#25
18 Aug 2013, 16:48#25
Look at the Bargies try Dave and tell me JJ made a crisp tackle attempt. He didn't go low, but going high, with all that arm flapping, he failed to prevent the offload...try time Bargie. You will see a lot of that this season. The lad is unfortunately not a natural defender. On the attack he has great acceleration and pace, but does he have the vision to see the opportunity? Against Oz and NZ he is not going to be fed overlaps. The jury is still out. - Steenkamp had a shocking game. I'm inclined to agree with the views that say we have better options, based on that performance ....note the honesty. - Kruger was excellent yesterday taking 8 lineouts and one of theirs. He was all over the park as well. - Pienaar and Morne were excellent as I pointed out above. As Shezza says....Morne dis start the JJ try. He also made a brilliant inside pass to get Vermeulen over the line. Apparently totally missed by his critics. Lambie came on and made a couple of breaks late in the game....from fullback. Perhaps that is his position. - I see Jean is now calling his team together, because his place is at risk. What a joke.Serfontein like Lambie was impressive late, but he is entirely predictable with a routine inside step. If he tries that against NZ they will be expecting it and look for the turnover....something he provided twice even against the Bargies. He is a work in progress.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Aug 2013, 17:48
#26
18 Aug 2013, 17:48#26
Mpzart Bullshit as per normal. First of all Morne would have kicked - but remembering the poor kick he launched during the Super 15 semi-final - he passed the ball to Le Roux in a better position to kick and what Le Roux subsequently cannot be ascribed to Morne - in fact it had nothing to do with Morne and everything with the brilliance of Le Roux - who saw the wide open space and launch a strategic kick that let to Engelbrecht's try. Now one further question - Lambie came on and caught a ball - starting an attacking move - that nearly let to a try. How many times did Morne caught similar balls when covering high kicks - and what did he do with those balls? Squad - no counter attacks - but aimless kicks. That famous inside pass to Vermeulen was indeed good - but any fluyhalf would have seen it and used it. Morne remains a pivot with limited capacity and yesterdays game did not change it. Then you question Serfontein's ability - because he has only got an inside step. Morne has no step wjhatsoever - neither inside or outside - and he is the great pivot. What a farce. I think the game yesterday would not have stagnated for half an hour if Morne was not flyhalf - he did nothing in the time and later on he always pass the ball immediately - after he and Pienaar kicked nearly everything away early in the match. After minute 32 - the game changed completely and that is a fact.
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
18 Aug 2013, 18:28
#27
18 Aug 2013, 18:28#27
The reason you always end up looking like a fool OOM.....is denial. You start the game saying Morne, Pienaar, Gurthro, Kruger and Alberts are useless. And you keep making the same points after the game. But independent rugby experts give Morne an 8, Pienaar a 7.5, Kruger a 7.5 and Alberts a 7.0. - So by persisting you just look pig headed, petty and stupid. - Be honest, you will find it makes life so much simpler.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Aug 2013, 18:57
#28
18 Aug 2013, 18:57#28
Mozart The problem is that I am dead honest and not mislead by inflated ratings by individuals - I judged games on what happened on the field of play and according to statistical data. I believe that they gave the hopeless Steenkamp a rating of 6? And the equally useless Basson also got a 6. In my book a 4 is over-rating them. Certainly a better and more realistic rating for Alberts would be a five - because what he produced was dead average. To be quite honest - do you really believe that Morne is an acceptable pivot for attacking line-out play? I am honest and say he is NOT and has never been. That is his main deficiency and that is what can be improved. And you comments that kruger was all over the field means nothing - he might have been but did nothing to show any value - outside of his line-out takes. With Du Preez not available - I suppose we have to put up with Pienaar - but for the rest there are better players to replace the dead ordinary incumbents. Am looking forward to the return of Du Toit and De Jager is better than Kruger in all facets of the game. I am saying that the team can do better without Morne, and the other players mentioned.
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
18 Aug 2013, 20:08
#29
18 Aug 2013, 20:08#29
'do0 you really believe that Meyer is an acceptable pivot for attacking line-out play?"....hahahahahahaha. Take your pills OOm.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Aug 2013, 20:27
#30
18 Aug 2013, 20:27#30
Mozart Why be a prick - I obviously meant Mornbe - and corrected the posting. Now do answer that question of be your normal evasive self and come up with a way to sidetrack the issue. However, I really do not expect an answer - because you never answer questions of directly going to the core of the issue.
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
18 Aug 2013, 20:41
#31
18 Aug 2013, 20:41#31
The answer is simple Maaik. Morne is a reliable link....he isn't going to be a runner. But neither was Wilkinson. Steyn has markedly upped his defence and he is a sound decision maker. He knows how and when to play the territory game. - So the question becomes, if not Steyn, who? Goosen is not in the picture and may never be. The Cat is hardly a runner himself. Jantjies is Captain Confusion.....so that leaves Lambie. - But in the whole S15 Lambie hardly made one break of consequence from 10. He looked far more comfortable running onto the end of moves from 15 yesterday.....he does better when he is at pace. So we gain little by way of running with him....and get a less accomplished kicker and decision maker. Based on the current facts it's no contest. - If it was Morne vs Carter....I'd choose Carter. Morne vs Cruden would be very close.....but I'd rather have Morne than the Quaalude or To'omua. Test flyhalf requires a steady mature player.
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
18 Aug 2013, 20:52
#32
18 Aug 2013, 20:52#32

 Morne has been playing well. Oh that he had kicked like that last year and the RC would have been ours and left Meyer with a 90 odd percent win record.

But Moz I have to warn you ou saSUE  thinks the crude walks on water and is the world best flyhalf. He will be frothing over his warm chocolate milk his mum so kindly provides (She must be a great saint).

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Aug 2013, 21:14
#33
18 Aug 2013, 21:14#33
Mozart Thanks for a nice answer. You have given a very clear description of a reliable player - normally quite safe to have him around - but definitely not a house of fire.I think that Steyn is not such a good reader of the game as he is supposed to be. A rather colourless and safe player easily countered by the opposition. However, despite his predictability that impact on games - he has a few other issues which I do not think makes him a top player:- * His kicking game indicates lack of proper reading of the game that as well. His up-and-unders are usually way too far and ineffective. H * His passing game shows little forward motion trying to draw in defenders and creating space for players outside of him - allowing for defenders to largely ignore him and aim their efforts at players he passes the ball to. A realy good pivot will occasionally show a bot of adventurism which is absent in his case From a stability perspective - yes he will do - but that is not going to add value to attacking backline play. Lambie is young and went into his shell when he was Springbok flyhalf last year - where he remained this year for debatable reasons - but from an attacking backline perspective - I would rather have him - both because he is safe as well and has the ability to read situations in games better than Morne. I do not think Morne is irreplaceable - if he is not played it would not destroy reliability - but a replacement would add value to the attacking options of the backline. Incidentally voually all the so-called box kicks yesterday was too far and - without adequate pressure - easily fielded by opposing players. The latter statenebt applies to both Steyn and Pienaar. *.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Aug 2013, 21:14
#34
18 Aug 2013, 21:14#34
Mozart Thanks for a nice answer. You have given a very clear description of a reliable player - normally quite safe to have him around - but definitely not a house of fire.I think that Steyn is not such a good reader of the game as he is supposed to be. A rather colourless and safe player easily countered by the opposition. However, despite his predictability that impact on games - he has a few other issues which I do not think makes him a top player:- * His kicking game indicates lack of proper reading of the game that as well. His up-and-unders are usually way too far and ineffective. H * His passing game shows little forward motion trying to draw in defenders and creating space for players outside of him - allowing for defenders to largely ignore him and aim their efforts at players he passes the ball to. A realy good pivot will occasionally show a bot of adventurism which is absent in his case From a stability perspective - yes he will do - but that is not going to add value to attacking backline play. Lambie is young and went into his shell when he was Springbok flyhalf last year - where he remained this year for debatable reasons - but from an attacking backline perspective - I would rather have him - both because he is safe as well and has the ability to read situations in games better than Morne. I do not think Morne is irreplaceable - if he is not played it would not destroy reliability - but a replacement would add value to the attacking options of the backline. Incidentally virtually all the so-called box kicks yesterday was too far and - without adequate pressure - easily fielded by opposing players. The latter statenebt applies to both Steyn and Pienaar.
CL
CleanCutPro9,905 posts
19 Aug 2013, 14:18
#35
19 Aug 2013, 14:18#35

We looked amazing … that is … against an awful Pumas side.

 

One’s as good as your opponents allow you to be. We were never under pressure and had our way with them in every part of the game. They were clueless, didn’t have a game plan, and to be quite frank, it looked as if they weren’t even coached.

 

I realize its early days for the Pumas but honestly … that was really bad. Question is … do they belong in this competition? I expected a hell of a lot more from them.

 

I know there will be a lot of people singing Meyer’s praises and perhaps he deserves it … however let’s not go overboard here. Any team on the planet would have crushed Argentina on Saturday.

 

I’ll wait for the Bokke to take on the Wallabies and the All Blacks before I get all excited.

 

Talking about the All Blacks … wow … they looked fearsome … with all their geezers. McCaw impressed me. He’s at least 10kg over weight but certainly kept it going right to the final whistle. Hats off to the codger!!

 

 

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
19 Aug 2013, 17:01
#36
19 Aug 2013, 17:01#36
Cleancut I would not rate players based on one-sided games and that remains the long and the short of it. I do not think that the Pumas was all that bad in the first 30 minutes of the game - in fact they put in some cases pressure on us in that time and the score after 30 minutes was only 9-6 in out favour. At that point they lost the plot completely - the two yellow cards that followed cost them dearly. You cannot play a game where you have 14 players on the field of play and expect miracles. Also they lost their best line out player - Albacete - early and they also had to play without Lobbe. I think the affair in Mendoza should be won by the Springboks - but doubt whether it would again be a one-sided encounter. Be it as it may - there were good shows by our centers and as per normal by Le Roux - that swung the scale heavily in our favour. How good the Springboks will be against stronger opposition is what we will see within the next four weeks. The issue of the All Blacks - Wallabies game was also not as easy to assess as it seems from looking at their game. What the All Blacks did vey well is to exploit mistakes made by the Wallabies and if you analyse the game carefully there were elements of the game where they were anything but brilliant. Their line out play was poor and their scrumming only slightly better. McCaw will never be criticized by any AB supporter - but he gave away three penalties and made at two very poor handling errors. He may get over those - but I think he showed some negatives as well. Of the All Black players showing real potential there are really only 2 of substance - and they were Ben Smith and Cruden - the rest was at best very average. Again a case where proper analysis is not easy - and where the score - based largely on opposition errors other than really sound play - can be misleading. I have watched the game twice and came to the conclusions as mentioned above. Be it as it may - there are errors that the Springboks should correct and some of the players did not perform that well either. Same applies to the All Blacks and the Wallabies should protect the ball much better than they did on Saturday. You are right - we must wait and see what happens over the next couple of weeks before a realistic assessment of performances would become clearer.
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
19 Aug 2013, 17:08
#37
19 Aug 2013, 17:08#37
OOm you get the award for resilience. Anybody who can come on here on Monday talking about weak opposition....when on the previous Friday they were cautioning that the "weak" opposition could beat the Boks.....has a thick skin.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
19 Aug 2013, 17:31
#38
19 Aug 2013, 17:31#38
Mozart After the event claptrap as per normal - I cannot say wise because there are none of it in your normal spoutings. I wrote some comments in my last posting above - why don't you for a change look at it and comment o9n it - rather than trying to make rubbish remarks - which apparently is the only thing you are capable of?
— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news