If he can't kick, why must he continue to prove this week after week.
His service at the base of the ruck was so slow it looked like he was playing with a back brace on. Reinach made a fool out of him when reading what Hougaard was going to do, before Hougaard himself with that intercept try.
What a poor pass....
And Fouche looks like a loose forward playing at flyhalf.
With this combination, the centres should not be expecting much quality in possession .
Saffex
With respect Hougaard was crap yesterday - he had am extremely poor game. Descriptions like ascribed by you do not remove the fact that he was not the scrumhalf he used to be. His service was slow and ineffective.
Saffex has one problem - if he supports a player - that player always have a good game - he could have a shocker - but it still was a good game. Excuses flow like water over a waterfall,
Hougaard had a shocker despite his statement to the contrary. Hougaard has been poor since 2012 - when Meyer with reason removed him from the scrummie position - and yesterday was just a continuation of the poor performances he had since then,
One only have to look at what Reinach produced and then realize how bad Hougaard was compared to Reinach:-
Saffex
Cool down - if based on yesterday's game I had to select a Springbo scrummie - Hougaard's name would be the last one I would consider of the four players who played.
He was not solid as you said - too many basic errors
I do not think that he is the player he used to be and cannot justify selection to the Springbok team on present form - ie the form he was in since 2012..
"He was a bit of a balls up"...couldn't say it better myself, Moz. And what a shame, the zip, crackle and pop he possessed is gone, much the same as it went with Spies.
Hougaard could easily have been a factor, the next big thing..it must be the demons within.
Saffex
And you manufacture myths that never happen ed. Happy Delusion Day to you.
Saffex
That Hougaard was SOLID.
oimatey
I have been saying that Hougaard has a mental block about scrummie play and that block reduces his capacity to perform. That could perhaps be changed - but it is difficult - if not impossible - unless there is a complete change of scenery and there is no sign of that.
U will bot at all be surprised if Hougaard does not start this week. He was just not up to standard.
Sun Tzu
And the moon is made of green cheese. It s weird how you cannot see that tour favoured players flopped badly.
"Basically their attack is going to take some time to sort out, and they must settle with an adequate 10 as quickly as possible."
Sure - it will take some time to improve. Replace Hougaard first before that happens - he was bad since 2012 and Meyer could not fix that. Lydeke has been at it ever since - and there is zero improvement.
I think they will replace Hougaard with Van Zyl this weekend and bring in the Morne Steyn clone - Pollard - as flyhalf. That will ensure a better servic e to the flyhalf - but whether their attack will improve is a moot point. It will inevitably be an improvement - but every change will be - it cannot be as worse as it was on Saturday since it will involve the removal of the clueless Hougaard. .
Spot on Sun, there was nothing wrong with his service at all and to say that v/Zyl improved things is a crock of shit.
Hougaard has been out for months, this was his first game back........in time, we will see his attacking clout back in full swing.......for now he just needs to keep his service sharp and continue to build on a solid enough start.
Saffex
Keep on thinking that - but as you know most people do not agree with you about a "solid start". He has shown nothing since Meyer with reason dropped him as scrummie in 2012 - matter of fact he goes further back every time he played since then. His "service sharp" must be he joke of the week.
Am afraid he is not likely to see another start at scrummie soon - I am sure Van Zyl will replace him this week.
