We need to talk about Sacha Feinberg-Mngomezulu

Yes, we already talk about him but it's mostly praise and adoration, and I'm on the hype train with everybody else, so this isn't a "but" post.

He is an alien who slows time down. That's my conclusion. My mind has been made up, no new evidence will change that.

But what do you do with him from a coach's perspective?

When a guy like that comes along, into a system where the coach has been building towards a plan, how much does he change those plans? What happens when suddenly you have a guy who will win you one in three games on his own? A guy who is able to take simple parity and, out of nowhere, turn into total dominance.

Does that change your plans?

Surely, over the last 4 months, Rassie must have been going back over his ideas and saying "Ok, well this or that is pointless now, because Sacha makes doing x,y or z irrelevant."

So, what do you do with him, and how does it change the "Bok way"?

And Sacha shoots himself in the foot a little because he makes so much out of nothing, that it creates a conundrum for the coaches in that how do you create more situations where he can make something out of nothing, because he seems to thrive off not having any set up. Do you just give him a licence?

I feel like the best you can do is put the best possible people around these types of abstract genius types - If you look at the Japan game on the weekend, the advantage he brought was almost external to the "system". Not part of the conventional Bok mode. His name is quickly becoming Sacha-does-it-on-his-own-FM and he's earned it and i have no problem with it. But I do feel a bit for Rassie because what do you do with lightning in a bottle?

Plum

South Africa for decades suffer from hea bsence of instinctive flyhalfs, A system developed where 10 man rugby became the norm and yur friend Mozart alwys climed that it is "Traditional Springbok Rugby, Polalrd slowl introduced improvement of flyhalf play - ut was badly damaged as a plyer by Meyer who caused him to be in and out of the teams in 2015.

Erasmus considered Pollard to be a gifted player and gave and used him as a top flyhalf but hisa ge and pace slowed down a fter a number of serious injuries,

In 2022 according to his father phoned Sacha at thats atg suffering from a seriosu injuiries and told him to be patient and fully recoverd before eh palyed any further rugby since Erasmus ahd big plans for himas Springbok flyhalf since he realized that Sacha as a real good prospect as a flyalf, He had two advantages - a natural ability to read games and instinctively knew what tactics should be used to best advantage of he team - a really rare ability at flyhalf, The only other player I have ever seen that is comparable to that requirement was Dan Carter.

That peraps is why Araasmus was mad at Sacha for hsding a knee injury in matches played,

Now what can a cach do in dealing wh talent like Sacha? Nothinmg much o the emtals ide anmd only amintennce of his physical side, Nobody shoud try and destroy a genius player by - like Meyer did with Pollalrd - theys hould b allowed to paly rugby isntinctively and build on experiences in matches,

I was very disappointed in claims on this site only la week that Sacha is selfc-enmtered and not a team player - that was and is BS. With a player like Sacha it is ncesary for other palyers toa djust to Sacha play - not adjust to coaches instructions. Playes will elarn from Sacha play and adjust their games themselves to fit into the model.

The nearest to wht I expect to be another thinking palyer - not on par with Sacha though is Willemse, But even on that there are differences of opinion.

; .

.

I think the key is to embrace what he brings, give him the free licence to express himself and surround him with players on a similar wavelength

Luckly we have a good few surround players that can tune into what Sacha brings and feed off his ignitions

Williams, vd Bergh, Pead, Libbok, Willemse, Hooker, David Kriel, Moodie, JJ, Henco v Wyk, Kolbe, Arendse, Edwill, Seb de Klerk, Horn, Green, Fassi, Jordan Hendrikse all lend themselves to feeding off what Sacha brings

Some on here call him a God and now he,s even reached Alien status:) Haha…..

If you knew he wasn’t going to be injured…..you’d build everything around him. But without him, if he’s injured, the game plan has to change. So thus far Lucky has solved this by having two game plans and to some extent two backlines…Dud Allende/Kriel…..Willemse/Moody.

Sacha has played with both backlines, the more expansive one and the Dud line.In Dud mode, he is still Sacha, who by himself can do a Rumplestiltskin. So one doesn’t lose the explosiveness….but there is more kicking and he lives off scraps like Kolbe and Arendse.

The real sticking point is neither Pollard nor Libbok can ignite the expansive game plans. So either we find an understudy to Sacha or we are left with the two faces of Bok rugby. Which in a tactical sense is not so bad because the opponent never really knows which Springboks they are playing against.

Disagree Moz - Libbok is all about igniting those outside him - that’s his strength

The DA / Jessie model will come to an end soon given their ages

One wonders what would have happened had Fassi not got injured

Mozart is however shrtsighted sufffering from Meyer diease, Let take an example Meyer wanted Pollard to play the aimless kicking game and nearly destroyed him as a player = when Erasmus became coach he asked what game plan Pollard would like to play and after approval by the team he played a much better game than ever under Meyer. Pollard became a vey good flyha;f and he players outside of him changed their own games to tie in with Pollards game

Dave is 100% right - the players must adjust their own ways of playing to tie in with Sacha's ideas to play games,

Mozarts ides are hogwash, Same a was the case with Dobson last year, He played Sacha at 12 and he was cpnmstantly injured, A 12 must be physical and has very little sace to operate in.- often drawing in defneders - hile Sacha is in a position where he can opimize attacks. One of the tries scored by Sacha typifies that situation.

The wat playes adjust is wher S acha becomes more valuable.

.

Pollard ….8 test tries in 84 matches

2 tries in 20 tests under HM….try every 10 matches (sometimes as reserve)

1 try in 6 tests under Coetzee….try every 6 tests

5 tries in 58 tests under Lucky….try every 11.6 tests.

Pollard arrived under HM as a tough ball carrier against tight defences, that was his initial calling card, not his kicking. He was punted by many as an inside center option as a result. Under Lucky, time and team tactics made him less of a gain line runner and more of a kicker.

Just keeping it real….more Saaiman bullshit deconstructed.

It’s a full time job Deconstructing this Crazy Uncle’s Bull shit, just saying Moz. Worth it?? Not…..

Good points!

It's a case of Sacha the Sacha plan versus basically everything else.

If you think about it, the Boks actually need three modes.

1) Pollard and the rumble

2) Manie and the expansive game

3) Sacha and whatever the hell he is doing that seems to work better than anything else.

I really do feel for Riassie.

...but also, luxury problems.

Probably not M, the Oom has never changed his mind on anything in 20 years…it’s kinda basic, the pleasure of watching the balloon pop.

If you think about it, the Boks actually need three modes.

1) Pollard and the rumble

2) Manie and the expansive game

3) Sacha and whatever the hell he is doing that seems to work better than anything else.

No you don't, you can't have one foot in the past and two in the future going forward. The 1st mode is slowly suffocating and will be a thing of the past in the not so distant future. While retaining the set pieces and defence the 1st mode has run it's course.

Have a look at the Wilco Louw try to see how many hands the ball went through with a prop doing the honours then have a look at the delight on the faces of those involved in setting up the try.

You may dare ask, would they prefer the primitive pattern of play of the stampkar years or do they overwhelmingly enjoy being part of the new chapter of Bok rugby where they play a part in adding to the scoreboard.

I know their answer.

Tribute to SFM

A quota player, like the others, forced on SA rugby by the ANC.

"A quota player, like the others, forced on SA rugby by the ANC."

Yeah, defos not good enough to be a Bok.

Just ignore the Drip.

Fancy mozzietard making those comments about Libok.

Seems everyone but mozzietard can recognize Libok's strength is to galvanize the Bok backline.

We are fortunate to have these three guys. We can play a test with plan A, B and C. Rassie has but tremendous versatility into the squad.

I would love to see this 15 on the park.

Oz, Marx, Wilco

Eben Snyman.

Hanekom. Wiese, Du Toit

Williams, Sachs

Willemse, Kriel

Arendse, Hooker Kolbe.

Kriel picked to organize the defence.

The Bok 23 to face France is not our best. Too many injuries Bans. Ox, Wessels, Hanekom, Louw, Fassie. Ox being the biggest loss

Mozart

Pollard arrived under HM as a tough ball carrier against tight defences, that was his initial calling card, not his kicking. He was punted by many as an inside center option as a result. Under Lucky, time and team tactics made him less of a gain line runner and more of a kicker.

You are specializing in shit spreadig in this case - but also in spreading lies. In his frst test agains th e AB's Polalrd scored tw tries, In his next test in Irealnd he was required by Meyer to playm a kickng game and for the rest of t he time under Meyer he sometimes play and other imes not - the reason was Meyer wanted hom only to pla 10 man rugby. Thatn situation went on till t he Japan Disaster and after that Meyer picked Polalrd -but ehw as starved from the ball and it was only passed to Pollard when releiving kicks was necessary, In one such game te scrummie pastsed 52 balls - only 9 went to Pollard and only when he had to make relieving kicks.

You under Meyer defended 10-man rugby w hen myou claimed it was "Traditional Springbok Rugby" - which Pollrd had to function. It was utter BS and nearly destroyed his career as a palyer. , Meyer wanted Pollard to play that kind of shit rugby. In a later inteview Pollard said that he becme totally dispirited playing rugby when Meyer and Coetzee were coaching. He was given freeom to play a different style of rugby. after he himslf submitted on Erasmus request proposals as to how he would like to play and after he submtted his ideas it was accepted by Erasmus and the backline players and that si t he style h e played sicne then.

The idea that Erasmus forced the Pollard to paly 10 man ru gby is a total BS dreamed up by you and sine you wanted toa ttack Erasmus continuous since 2018 is based obn hatred of teh amn and with times it got worse. In t his case it was a reepat f revious lies you spread in the past. Since 2018 the Springboks played 15 man rugby - bar in a few cases where weather conditions dictate otherwise,

Trump by 2024 showed signs of pace loss and he kicked more frequenmtly than h e dis in the past - but in 2025 played less tests than he sued o be and in the RC he only played in 2 tests and since hen i is cler that Pollard is being phased out gradually. It was Erasmus who monitored the progress since his Under 20 performance and played a major role in hsi development as a flyhalf. So why was that the case - dimness?

.