Walk in the park.

 MoZart
Lets get this straight - - I agree about some players with you - not about others:-
*  JP is not a center - the sooner we forget about that the better - he is a wing*  Serfontein - I agree*  Morne is useless and clueless *  Du Preez - canno t play two successive games without petering out*  Alberts buggered up before his injury*  Matfield is the same as Du Preez - he really lost it today*  Flip is a disaster - he seems to play a card a game plan
Matfield good in general play - are you joking?  Is knocking on a ball, losing possession, giving away a penalty and missing tackles being good in general play?   Most of the game he was invisible other than in line outs in any event.  Definitely a tired old man.
   

Disagree on Matfield?...he made 10 tackles and missed none.. Morne was a mixed bag, he tackled well, but I really disliked that fly kick that nearly cost us. Alberts had a decent game defensively. 
Hopefully by the RC jean and etzebeth will be back....we desperately need a sub for Jannie. A full test with Coenie could mean 5 scrum penalties.

Mayfireld is a tired old man - very bloody awful.   
Sure - Coeni will giove away [penalties if Burger has to be in the lock position as a result of the absnce of Flippie.  
Hopefully De Villiers will be back and that we can get a decent 13 - Pietersen is not a center.   Hopefully Pollard will be fkllyhalf and not the clueless Morne Steyn.  Hopefully we will get a decent 7 - neither Alberts oor Burger are good enough anymore.  Hopefully Matfield will be out and our lock combination will be Etzebeth anbd De Jager.   Hopefully Malherbe will replace Jannie.   Then at least we will have some hope in future.  

 I would invite everyone to watch the game again and note the following: how many times did Wales charge in from the side, lie offside at the rucks and not release tackled players? Look, the Boks did not play all that well, especially in the first half, but we have to give them credit for remaining calm in the face of all the illegal stuff and go on to win the game. Thank goodness for the experienced heads........a team full of youngsters would have cracked.

Spot on Mance...winning from a man and 13 points down with10 minutes to go....pretty awesome.  

 If that was pretty awesome your expectations are very low. If that last tackle had have been conventional it was game to Wales. We were very LUCKY that it wasnt just an ordinary tackle as Hendricks would have been out into touch and Wales winning the game. That you lot are satisfied with the pack coming off second best is extremely weird. 
Wales deserved to win on the run of play. FACT. I take little comfort that we are progressing given that performance. Last week we scored 14 points whilst Wales were down to 14 men. Again this match we had Wales down to 13 men!!!!!!!!

Play at that level against Oz and Nz and we will struggle.
Please get real.
Fortunately we have good players coming back and the reality is that we can field a stronger side. However the fly in the ointment is that pap matfiled. Will Meyer send him away. That worries me. How locked in is Meyer to certain older players. Will he pick on merit or be swayed by old loyalties.
Time will tell but to be happy re this win and think all is well is delusional. 

Balls. The Boks outgained Wales 424 metres to 249......nine clean breaks to four clean breaks.. .19 defenders beaten to 14 defenders beaten....90 per cent of mauls won to 83 per cent of mauls won...100 percent of scrums won to 83 per cent for Wales....92 per cent of lineouts won vs 83 percent.

The Boks made some silly mistakes which gave Wales oxygen. They were a decent international team massively motivated to win. And who says if the Welshman made a fair tackle he would have got Hendricks into touch. Besides which the Welsh try as you yourself point out in the match thread...was no try.
So cut the guys a break....I repeat winning from 10 minutes out , 13 points and a man down, was epic.

 Agree.

 Mance...................it was a youngster that broke the line and scored...AKA Willie Le Roux.Your cool and calm heads of experience is out the window.Btw...here in the army in the uk,experience counts for nothng in recruitment.We dont care what you are or what you have done.You might have been a special opps who knows but here it counts squat.Then pressure is applied and stress.Guess what?I have seen old guys beet young guys and young guys beat old guys.It makes no difference.ITs all about stress management.How an individual can cope under tremendouse stress.

 I am sorry to say that all the sayings about how good the Springboks were is absolute BS.  Everyone - from the commentators to the media reports says they were bloody awful and the win was a miracle occasssioned by one playwer - Willie le Roux.   There were a few players to be added - players like Vermeulen, Hendricks, Beast and Louw - the rest was a real bloody mess.   
The problem was that the elderly especially looked busy - in the case of for instance Burger - but was tackled easily and even going backwards.   The play of the locks did not contribute to tight 5 actions - the mauls were pathetic.    The lack of consistency in play by the "tired old men" was pathetic.   
There are at least 6 changes needed to make that team even remotely competitive in the RC.   The centers, the flyhalf, the no 7 and the locks needs to be changed.  The player in that positions will cause us to lose in a major way in the RC.   
The excuse that Matfield is essential for our line outs to function is a major joke.   Every decent lock will take every ball he took in line outs and will contribute to our driving mauls - something the less-physical Matfield is not doing.                    

 Actually there is considerable admiration for Matfield....he had a big second half as these numbers show:
LMatfield0/000/2/48000110/010/110/0
I agree we need two additional centres...presumably Jean and de Allende . There is a question mark about Schalk, as you said he wasn't  physically imposing. Etzebeth solves our number 4 lock puzzle. But I see nobody better than Victor at 5.
I also agree with Denny that Bismarck has been much less imposing and has looked slow about the field.
We desperately need a second tighthead.

 Mozart
Matfield is NOT physically imposing - where physicality is essential in the TIGHT 5.   You talk about the tackles he made - but was there really any good tackles carrying the tackled player backwards or causing him to lose possession of the Ball?  None.  Beast made more tackles than Matfield did - the invisible Serfontein made more.  Incidentally De Jager in 40 minutes last week made an equal number of tackles than Matfild made in 80 minutes this week.   
Look - Matfield will be played the fool with by players like the Aussie and New Zealand locks.  We cannot play him in those games - he reduces the physicality of our Tight 5 too much.
We desperately need a tight head prop = we do not only need only a second tight head prop.    
Bismarck struggle because the Tight 5 as a unit struggle.  He has to give more in tight phase of the game because the rest of the Tight 5 - especially the locks - were so pathetic.        

 Serfontein was bloody fantastic, what a player he is! Made all his tackles and was as composed as Jean. In a game where the backlines weren't fully utilized he shined. I for one am glad he played yesterday, anyone else would have let the Bok's down.

He " shone" shezza.....at least get the language right. Serfontein was invisible the whole second half. Hahahaha another great offensive performance! 5 runs....no clean breaks, no defenders beaten....a massive 18 metres gained. You are delusional punk.

He held the best center partnership in the NH at bay, that's an achievement. Especially as JP was lost. 

 Mozart dislikes Serfontein with a pzassion - and he is finding fault with him all the time.  The real problem cases were Morne on his insiide and Pietersen on his outside.   Both were really problematic - but Serfontein gets the blame.
That is normal with Mozart.  His favourite players can do no wrong.  Lets look at the stats of Sewrfontein to see what the sitation really is:-
 Serfontein0/001/2/518000012/10/010/0     He got very few balls - 8 in total - and did well enough with those 8 balls.  His tackle stats were excellent.  So how miserable Mozart can find fault with the above is beyond me.   

 I take no comfort or confidence in that match at all. Kiwis and OZs, even England will have us for breakfast if we showed up and displayed that type of performance.  Just ask an unbiased Kiwi or an OZ individual.


As Beeno pointed out, we still couldn't score more tries against 13 man Walsh team, lads.  Can you imagine facing an en-song NZ team with 15 man on the field!


     

 Ntanga
Agrees 100% with you - just see how dismal the R365 player ratings are.  There needs to be drastic upgrading of the team to make us competitive against OZ and NZ.    If that is not done a repeat of 2012 - and even worse is on the cards in the RC.   
Our present Tight 5 is a disaster area and players like Alberts, Morne Steyn, Matfield and Pieterse at 13 - needs urgent replacement and they should start to phase in younger players in some of the other positions like scrummie, no 3 and especially 13.  .   .       

Moz you are delusional - walk in the park my arse - my guess is that is your way of excusing that pathetic performance.
Love your pathetic take on Serfontein who was clearly one of the better players on the field again.  

 

ForeverArizona

Status: Squad member
Posts: 361 RE: Walk in the park.
June 22, 2014, 04:14:25  Mance...................it was a youngster that broke the line and scored...AKA Willie Le Roux.
Careful now. In terms of some of our resident "experts" Willie, at 24, is bordering on "old".

tighthead.

clevermike

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 11284 RE: Walk in the park.
June 22, 2014, 05:24:02  Mozart
Matfield is NOT physically imposing - where physicality is essential in the TIGHT 5.   You talk about the tackles he made - but was there really any good tackles carrying the tackled player backwards or causing him to lose possession of the Ball?  None.  Beast made more tackles than Matfield did - the invisible Serfontein made more.  Incidentally De Jager in 40 minutes last week made an equal number of tqckles than Matfild made in 80 minutes this week.  
And then we have the Oom juggling with the mind games again..... You do not even understand which locks sre scrumming where and who is supporting who in the scrums but you are judging Matfield's play in the tight five. The question, also, is not how far you are carrying back the tackled player, it is a question of are even finding yourself in a position to make a tackle and then whether you attempt the tackle, then whether you stop him or not. How far you "tackle them back" is last on the priority.


And then, in addition to the above we have the Oom juggling with the stats as  usual..... Matfield made more tackles, without missing any, than any other lock in this particular game. Yes, it is great the Lood made those tackles in the previous game in half the time that Matfield made his but you seem to forget that by that time Matfield already had 40 minutes of play behind him and Wales were down and out. Having said that, the biggest number of tackles made, by a lock, in the previous test was 11. Matfield was one of the locks who made 11. Fact is though that he committed himself to more tackles than the rest of the locks in the previous test . Go check.

 Ceradyne
Stop talking BS.  Even the tackles made by Matfield are mostly weak tackles and not effective at all.   The guy is physically not strong enough and fades out badly in games. That is the end of the story.  Matfield should never again play for the Springboks - that is a fact.    He will be a disaster in the RC - end of story.

 

clevermike

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 11289 RE: Walk in the park.
June 22, 2014, 14:10:29  Ceradyne
Stop talking BS.  Even the tackles made by Matfield are mostly weak tackles and not effective at all.   The guy is physically not strong enough and fades out badly in games. That is the end of the story.  Matfield should never again play for the Springboks - that is a fact.    He will be a disaster in the RC - end of story.

Jy praat kak  en jy weet dit. If you had any balls, you would watch the game againa  and then gives us the time stamps, during the game, of the tackles that were (in  your opinion) weak. I don't want you to tell me which tackles were weak. I want a reference during the game. I know that you will either ignore this or find some kind of excuse not to do it. You have, after all, followed this tactic many times in the past. So let's see what kind of man, or mouse, you are.

Ceradyne 
There was not a single strong tackle made by any of Matfield, Alberts or Burger where the player was tackled back - where the tackled player lost possession of the ball r where there were turnovers in possession.  Those are good tackles - the rest are powder-puff ones.
There was at least n Matfield tackle where he hand onto the jersey of the tackld player and he off-loaded the ball with ease.
If you really believe that Matfield is physically strong enough to compete with younger players - you must be delusional - he is not capable of that anymore.  He enver was a physical player and was always to much of a striongbean to be effective in Tight 5 play - he is worse now.    

Ceradyne 
There was not a single strong tackle made by any of Matfield, Alberts or Burger where the player was tackled back - where the tackled player lost possession of the ball r where there were turnovers in possession.  Those are good tackles - the rest are powder-puff ones.
There was at least n Matfield tackle where he hand onto the jersey of the tackld player and he off-loaded the ball with ease.
If you really believe that Matfield is physically strong enough to compete with younger players - you must be delusional - he is not capable of that anymore.  He enver was a physical player and was always to much of a striongbean to be effective in Tight 5 play - he is worse now.    

 Back it up with facts or STFU. I knew that you would try to duck and dive again. Come back  when you have something better. All you have is your opinion and that us is worth shit. Let me  give you another piece of research to do. Give us the facts of how many tackles, by all the Bok tacklers led to a turn over of possession. Come on. Get of your lazy arse and give us something substantial for a  change. Not just a little string of ESPN data.

In two tests Sefontein has run 14 times....beat one defender and made no clean breaks. He has one weapon an inside step...and he can't break tackles. This is going nowhere.
As for Victors tackles. They are higher quality than those made by the  other locks? Why? Because many of them are open field tackles of players in space....Victor is a superb open field lock. His hands are also much better than almost all of his contemporaries. He offloads brilliantly and times his passes like a centre. 

There may be an issue of sheer pushing power. But the counter argument is we tend to have trouble on the tighthead not the loosehead. HM is smart enough to balance these things out...a little more grunt in the loosies for the best lineout and kickoff artist

 Mozart
High quality tackles means exactly what I said thye should be - and Matfield does not make high quality tackles.   High quality tackles ire like those made by De Jager last week - which caused turnovers and penalties against the opposition. 
Matfield's problem is not the open field play - but even there your praise singing is false as well - it happened so rarely in Super 15 that it really is of no account and iit has nevr happened in the last two tests.   Matter of fact all the lofty things so high;y praised have really produced nothing in thus for in the tests - but rather his lack of adequate physicality in mauls and other formats of tight 5 play.    
So we must have loosies to provide a balance to the lack of Grunt by one of our locks.  That bullshit argument was raised by you in teh case of Kruger as well - and where did it land us in the Ellis Park test?  Kruger failed and Alberts was even worse of a failure in that test.
Tour lack of logic is betting more amazing every day.   

 Mike ou windpomp is a bulle you understand. A matfiled groupie of note. You can explain to groupies like this all day that matfield is a powder puff tackler, cant drive the ball up and is no tight forward and he will bleat away protesting till the cows come home. 
I keep asking them how do they think the Bok scrum would be effected if we played Marcell Coetzee (106kg ) at lock. An honest answer is that the scrum might improve as Coetzee is not a long stringbean! 
No I'm  afraid these groupies were badly conned along with many others. But this is a deep delusion and worrying. We may find ou matfiled at the 2019 RWC as captain due to his vast experience! I mean the older he gets the more experienced he becomes right!  
What we have to put up with!
Matfiled is a superb open field lock says the good Dr Mozzzzzzz. How wonderful but I would dearly love him to first be a superb tight forward!!   Yes he does make some powder puff tackles out wide simply because he is shirking his duties as a tight forward. However we MUST be fair. "Vctor does not always play in the backline" said the long suffering Bakkies who had to do the job of two locks. 

Beeno
There is a classic joke that runs as dollows:-
A professor is undertaking a study on IQ's of people and he met three people to discuss the issue with.  
He asked the fiirst person - what is you IQ and back came the answer :  140 Professor. The professor is amazed about it and said :-"It really is a pleasure to meet somebody with whom higher philosophy issues can be discussed.  Can we have a chat about issues?"
Asking the next person what his OQ is - back came the answer 120.   So the reponse of the professior is:-:How do you see the world from a geo-political perspective?"
Asking the third person about his IQ - the answer came back that it is 60.  The response of the Professor was:-"Sprry I really have no topic that I can discuss with you.  Why don't you join the Blue Bulls Rugby Supporters Club?  You will be most welcome there"
Thinking about Ceradyne that really is the problem with discussing rugby issues with him - a serious lack of rugby knowledge is in fact in evidence.      

Oh that's hilarious Oom, but probably the best you can do. After all when you made the argument the tighthead was struggling but the loosehead was fine against the worlds, and it had to be Matfield....only to discover Matfield  was behind the loosehead. And you then said Gurthro and Matfield were going to be destroyed by Wales....only to have Gurthro scrum them out of their sokkies. And to have the same two players do it again yesterday. 

We'll......it all kinda makes you and HasBeen look a little stupid. So maak n paar grappies, I'd rather be right. It's all been quite hilarious watching you, Sapp, Genecut and HasBeen getting it wrong....and then coming back with righteous indignation and dumping  on the coach who just won three games you said we were going to lose. World class stupidity. But when you are the guy with the 60 point IQ, hahaha, what else should we expect.

Well let's see about IQ matters....

We had Morne Steyn signing for Paris St Germain, only to discover that PSG is a football club.

Then we had Bakkies (No 4 lock) being dropped by Toulon in favour of his lock partner Ali Williams (No 5 lock). What wa s even more mind-boggling was that the pair of them were actually on the field at the same time in the game that Bakkies was dropped for Williams. Strange days indeed.

Then we had Beast scrumming better when Bakkies, who was scrumming behind Jannie was subbed.

Then we had Jannie struggling in the scrums because of Victor who was scrumming behind Gurthro.

What next? Bismarck battling with his throw-in in the line-outs because JJ's tackling is crap?

 Hahahahhaha great one Mike!!  I see ou windpomp and Dr Mozzzz harping on endlessly on some errors of yours and totally ignoring the valid points you do make.
ou windpmp trying to be amusing is a sight to behold. BwahahahhahahahaImagine saying you are so happy to beat Wales (Didnt have a good season I hear) by one point at home when they were reduced to 13 men at one stage!!!!!!!!!

Man that is as denialist as the KBBS. Never thought I would see the day! Sidesplitting stuff. The mind boggles 
Dr Moz don't allow ou windpomp to confirm you in your misappreciation of events.  Windpomp can get very confused!!! 

 Mozart
What you missed completely is the quality of the opposition in the three great wins.  Wales is NOT the strongest team around.  The made it to fourth on the log for the 6 Nations - losing by 26 - 3 against Ireland and struggling in their game against Italy.
They came to SA missing their key match winning player - Halfpenny - thus the team the Springboks played against was weaker than what they put up in the 6 Nations
In the first test test they suddenly found them completely at see against the brilliance of Willie le Rouc who scored a try himself and contributed to three other tries scored by the Springboks.   Without hinm - the Springbok's score would have been much less.
What nobidy really observed was the fact that the steamm ran out of the older players in the Bok team.   Matfield - other than ibn line outs - were invisible in the second half of the first test.   Burger played na insignificant role in that test.   Bakkies was thank goodness replaced at halftime with De Jager - whjo had a massive game.   The rest of the forwards were clearly out of gas.
Came the test yesterday and the players were out of gas almost from the start.   Basically the team only won as a result of - once again two brilliant tries in whcih Wi;l;ie played a major tole once again and two penalty tries - the second one also invlving Le Roux in a major way.   
Every knowledgeable person admitted that the Springboks had the luck of a pox doctor to win yesterday.   They should never have won.  They were under-performing massively and it is clear that there was a total lack of application - they were out of steam even before the game started.   
Ejhat you miss out on is that while the Aussies and the NZ move forward in their performances - we have gone backwards.  Yesterday we struggled badly to win - both the NZ and OZ won with the greatest of ease.  England and Frace are better teams than Wales - so what do that teach us?  We played against average teams = NZ and OZ played against stronger ones.
You write prasie songs like it is unbelievable about certain players who showed the bre minimum yesterday - but that does not mean we have a strong enougk team to compete with OZ and NZ.  Meyer must be living in cloud cuckoo land if he believes that his team has progressed since last year = with his latest selections we have gone backwards.  
You make unbelievable remarks how good Matfield and Bakkies are - yet they are nopt 10% of what they used to be in 2008-09.  We have the Stade Francis reject at flyhalf - but you blame Serfotnten - who hardly saw a decent ball - for under=performance and keeps completely quiet about Morne Steyn.  
I cannot see how we can win more than 2 games in the CR with that team - matter of fact a loss in Argentina at Mendoza is most likely to be ost as well.  We just cannot rely on Wille to win all th matches for us.  
It is time that Meyer realizes that we are on the road to nowhere fast.  Players like Morne, Matfield and Bakkies is not going to help in advancing our play levels - they are detracting from it.   Similarly we have seen retrogression - if that was possible - in teh performances of players like Alberts as well.   This year he is loafing even more than before.  He never enters mauls like he used to do - he stands around at the back - hoping to heget a ball where he can demonstrate his "amazing" ball carrying ability.  If he does get balls - he rarely if ever even gets to the gain line. Burger is a powder puff player compared to what he used to be.
One thing is evident - we are troubled by injuuries and the absence of Etzebeth, De Villiers, Du Toit, Arno Botha and De Allende as a result of injuries put us at a bad disadvantage.  However, a player like De Jager showed us the real value of younger players compared to the weaknesses of the elderly - which both Meyer and you prefer.  
None of th players you praise to high heaven will survive this years test series - they will be found out and rejected.   So accept that the signs are there wfor all to see.  Nobody wants a wholeslae rusg to younger players - but the constant weaker players need to be replaced.                          

 So tell me, given the injuries HM had to deal with in the Welsh series, who were the new players who would have improved team performance? Serfontein certainly didn't...hell you agreed with that yesterday, today not so much. But I'm curious who are these test class match winners?

 Come on ou CowardMike. Back up yoru opinion with something more than just your own opinion. You have said that non of  Matfield's tackles were quality. Why don't you have the balls to discuss and time-stamp them? There are only 10 to discuss after all. Shouldn't be that difficult now, should it? You are such a boffin at analysing games and  keeping notes. Surely it should just be a matter of revisiting your famous notes. All you'll just have to do is to check up on the clock to indicate at what time they happened.

 

The thing that amuses me is how Mike and Saffex have their favourite and worst players. On every thread they are at pains to point out their wisdom and criticize HM on his. The fact that they can not objectively consider counter arguments weakens their credibility on the board. Sometimes you have just got to say yes you are right on that day in that game he was good.

 Mozart
There are clear indications that Pietersen is not a center.  It would have been better to bring in a real center - not recycle one that was problematic in 2012 already when the Sharks tried that one unsuccessfully as well.   Definitely not a wise call that one.
In looking at the game again - I was not disappointed in the way Serfontein performed - his performance confirmed by his stats totally contradicted your unfounded criticism of him.  I still think he is a back up center for De Villiers - but would not let the team down in a crisis situation.
Morne Steyn is Morne Steyn - at best a bench player for Satde Francais and not an international flyhalf at all.   He normally kicked aimlessly and in the recent tests tried to get the ball to Willie in the hope he would do something positive.  he himself does zip positive in any event.  He remains a dubious pivot of little value to any team.   Problem is that injuries forced Meyer to retain him - but it defibnitely is way past the time he should go.
Neither of the scrummies - Du Preez and Pienaar was of any real value during these tests.  The service to the flyhalf was average and most kicks aimless and non-productive.   I think it is high time that they started being phased out - they produce nothing of substance to the team.  
I have pointed out repeatedly to watch the way Alberts play.  He rarely if ever enter mauls and stand around behind hoping that the ball will be past tio him to make an eye-catching carry.  If it does he is mostly caught and tacked with ease behind the gain line.  His tackles are rarely really effective and he miss way too many tackles in any event.    In both tests he was replaced fairly early - but Burger was to my mind not effective at all.   It is high time that this position be filled by a capable 7.
The Bakkies-Matfield combination does not really porduce anything of substance and Bakkies was shown up badly in the first test - when replaced by De Jager.  That is clearly shown by the following stats of the two players:-
Botha0/000/0/4300010/01/000/0
de Jager0/000/0/73000011/10/100/0

De Jager was stronger in carrying balls and his tackling was much stronger as well - one causing a pemalty for the Springboks.   It is time that we forget about Vakkies Botha as a lock option - especially since he showed near to zero in the previous two tests he played in in the EOYT last year.
Matfield is admittedly weak in Tight 5 work and his only real asset is in line outs.   You argue tha that weakness is off-set by Alberts - but the low work rate Alberts is not producing the goods expected from him as well.   So that argument is nonsense.  Bakkies and Botha combined added to the Tight 5 vows of the Springboks.
Flippie is really a problem player - he is totally deficient in discipline and his carding and penalty give aways is just too many.   I like him as a hard working player - but he has way too many liabilities for any international team.
Since Etzebeth an Du Toit is out of contention - the best option would have been to start with the hardworking De jager in the second test - there was no real alternative option to Matfield - but he is just not good enough to play in the RC.
I think the prop problems could be fixed by playing better locks and by resting the props and Bismarck.   
The situation is not entirely bad - but one can only hope that Meyer would realizze that some players are just not adding value to the team and move on getting better players in certain positions.                      

 Ceradyne
You are going to get what you ask for - that game will be re-broadcast and I will try and pin-point all the tackles made by Matfield and record their effects.   Wil specifically follow his actions throughout the game and record them.   
  

 Thank you. I will  be waiting in anticipation. Don't forget about this little part as  well:

"Give us the facts of how many tackles, by all the Bok tacklers led to a turn over of possession."


PS. Why wait until the re-broadcast? What happened to your famous notes?