What is real and not real about performance of Francois Steyn

This site is constantly bombarded by Mozart and Disaster about how excellent Francois Steyn is and how he is the ideal no 12 we should have in the team.   The following are the standard claims made by them:-
Disaster:-
"Actually, Frans was the best performing 12 of all SA 12s. Has done plenty right. It all depends on whether you can follow play or not." 
"Frans is the only centre in world rugby who has a concentration of up to three defenders."

"He is not a fleet footed strike runner, he is an inside centre by design and nature. He does what a real 12 is supposed to do."
Mozart:-
"Who would an opponent rather face, the innocuous Step or a powerhouse like Frans with his huge boot and strength. Frans has gravitas, the aura of a player who has done the business on the games biggest stage."

The above are just the kind of statements constantly made on this site.   Since it reflects an exceptional player I asked the two members to substantiate their generalized comments by quoting specific examples of what Frans delivered in games since 2012 on a regular basis    This was done under another thread - so I decided to raise this issue for specific discussion.
It should be easy to quote examples - very easy in fact to prove that his stats in the said period is wrong and  that he is the exceptional player they claim him to be.  
So the request remains - provide us with information where in practice on the field of play Steyn actually qualify for the high praise showered on his by Mozart and Disaster.  so far Mozart responded twice on this issue under the other thread mentioned, but not once give an example to substantiate his claims - he basically tried diversion tactics.  So let us have the practical examples of where Frans did what they claim he is capable of.         

Mozart 
Examples of outstanding performance asked for and what did one get - another series of vague songs of praise without any substance whatsoever.  
Let me quote some of the things which is vague and unsubstantiated as per normal:-
"He instills the team with confidence. Frans is one of the players you can't measure by standard stats. It's his effect on the team that counts, the attention he gets from the opposition....the fear factor anywhere up to 60 metres out.....backed up by the example of a 50 metre WC winning kick."

So the above cancels out the need to perform and he needs not make tackles, beats defensive tackles or make line breaks?   He can just wander around on the field of play and the opposition will be paralysed with fear.   Is that what is expected from a Springbok player - no direct practical performance - just a vague and unsubstantiated "fear factor" instilled by him?
Is the "attention he gets from the opposition" any more than any other 12 would get.  Is that be the case why does he not make any tackle breaks - is he in fact not tackled by the first defender getting to him because of a series pace deficiency on his part?
So Steyn on his own wins the games for the Springboks and the Sharks merely by his presence in the teams concerned.  He need not make any practical contribution - other than maybe kicking at goal - where he occasionally make a long distance kick.   For the rest he need not contribute at all - since standard stats does mean anything in his case.
Teams win matches in rugby - not individuals - especially if individuals do virtually zero in actu al performance in matches.  
Just one question - could you find no evidence of substantiated good performances by Frans in matches since 2012 - cases where -

*   he made line breaks that counted and resulted in tries being scored?*   he drew in defenders and off-loaded balls leading to gains in territory?*   he made accurate kicks out of hand that put his team in an advantageous situation?*   he made good tackles that caused turnovers in possession o save tries?
Mozart - I can go further on what you wrote - but what it boils down to - it is a severe case of verbal diarrhea based on wild substanceless statements.   Opposition teams would enjoy it to have a non-performing player at 12 - they would laugh themselves senseless if they are told that he inspires fear in their minds.
     
             
  

 The case is not closed at all.  You make it out that the mere presence of a player with a poor personal performance record is what is needed in a team.   You cannot point out anything where he made a real contribution to team performance - you just refer to matches his team won - without any reference to his own real contribution in those matches.
I can now understand why you think Steyn is essential and that is based entirely on prejudice in favour of the player - nothing of substance in actual performance by himself counts.  
Let me put it plainly - a player can have an aura - but that aura is built on actual performance - not mythical performance based on vague and unsubstantiated statements.
I think that a player like De Allende instills much more fear in opposition players - he even instills fear in Fransie after the latter's tackle attempt was shrugged off as if he was not of any substance - twice in the same game.   He played the fool with Nonu and Williams as well - something Frans has not achieved ever.  That type of thing creates fear in opposition players - not a player that produces nothing practical in matches and have not done so for years.   
What is tragic is that you run down De Allende who has a ten times better performance record and all in an effort to justify your support for Steyn and then wants us to believe that your views is realistic and based on fact.  Try again - and then come up with some practical examples.   You have done nothing but a fresh round of verbal diarrhea.                

It's closed...you look like the fool you are. Frans is a proven winner....all that's left for HM to decide is whether he is fully fit. If he is, he is a shoo- in for the Match 23.

 The case is not closed at all - you are not a fool - but an idiot in supporting a non-performing player for Springbok selection.  A player with a non-existent attacking record and a worse defending record than De Allende.   You cannot in three years find a single example of outstanding performance by  Steyn (the serial saboteur of backline play) - so you revert to verbal diarrhea to support him.   What a bloody idiot we have here. 
Individual players do not win matches - teams win matches.   Anyone thinking individuals - who factually contributes very little in performance in matches is a deciding factor in winning of matches must be delirious.
If Meyer is foolish enough - he may have him in the squad - but that would be another nail in the coffin of the Springbok team in the WC.  Matter of fact your support of non-performing players is not restricted to Steyn - add Willem Alberts and Ouma Victoria Matfield to that Ship of Fools.
     

 Frans sadly hasnt performed for years now. Can he ever get fit and perform is the question. Frans has to PROVE he can do it. We dont need half fit serial loafers.
Meyer must take guys with fire in theirbbellies detwrmined to win the world cup.Hence Fans and Alberts have alot to prove. Oaks like Kolisi and carr have candles in theior belly and cannot be considered. Take the real men to go to war with. No show ponies like wee matfiled the fop.
I hope Meyer understands all this!!! Sometimes he is denser than the kbbs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

 Beeno
According to Mozart Steyn need not perform during games at all - he can wander around on the field of play and his mere presence struck fear in opposing players and paralies there performance.  He does not need to carry the ball,  beat defenders, make line breaks or make tackles - because the opposing players fear him so much they become senseless.
This is the kind of thinking that can only please opponents - since they love non-performers in our team.  Can Alberts and Steyn recovers in a few weeks what they have been unable to do in 2013, 2014 and 2015?  There is about a snowballs hope in hell of that happening.
Sorry - I started this thread to find the logic behind the support of Mozart and Disaster of Steyn and what came up above is a flood of verbal diarrhea.            

Actually the verbal diarrhea is yours....the stats are mine.  

 Frans is not a shadow of the player he once was. Would that he would prove me and others wrong!I note in passing one doesnt even see him taking those very long distance kicks anymore. Something must be wrong with those knees etc. 
If you want a big 7 I would take Jaque Du Preez or even Rhodes. Elstadt would have been great but is injured. Alberts simply does not contribute enough. Meyer must watch what he actiually does and decide on actual form.

So France win the matches by kicking at goal and doing nothing else?    He was so bad in other phases of play that he kicks away balls that should be passed - frequently enough directly into touch losing ball possession 32 times in matches.  His defense was shocking and his attacking play zero.  Lets put it bluntly 90% of the goal kicks converted by him would have been converted by other players.
His destruction of backline play was so bad that it caused the public to stay away from home games of the Sharks.  
Lets be blunt - the Sharks won those games despite the presence of Frans - not because of it.  The players who won the matches was the ones who force the opponents in giving away penalties that could be converted - Frans had nothing to do with causing such penalties to be awarded.
This from a fool who claims 90% of the functions of a flyhalf is to kick balls - so hence his support of duds like Francois Steyn in the team.             

 I have closely watched Frans. The disturbing finding is that the once formidable ath lete is not there. Its a huge pity as he could have been a world beater. 

 Beeno
Same thinking here - Steyn could have been a world beater.   It is entirely his own fault - he tried to eat France empty, got overweight as a result of which he lost his pace and his ability to perform.  
His glory years is past tense and Mozart and Disaster would not accept it.    
They think their case would be strengthened by continuous attacks on De Allende -  most of their attacks being based on utter BS - misrepresentation and even lies -  they are spreading on this site.
Tragic really.   

Can they give me one example of Damian straightening the attack for the Boks, or one successful unders line? He has already been exposed on defence, so I will push that issue aside. I just want to know if they can find one example of some things Frans does routinely.

 The mere fact that Frans is the sole  key to winning of matches must have his head read.  The team wins matches and in Frans's case the Sharks won matches despite the handicap he presented on the field of play.   That is factual - just look at matches he played in - he made more balls-ups than the rest of the backline combined.   Plumtree realized it and said so publicly - but then Mozart thinks that anybody who disagrees with his version is a fool.  Should the fool not be the other way around in his case.         

 Certainly teams win games, but rare individuals can make the difference between success and failure. Like Frans with his huge penalty in the RWC final, or Frans in the 2011 RWC pool game against Wales where he scored a crucial try.
Frans' record in RWC matches.? Eleven won...zero lost. Undoubtedly the best ever.

 Actually Michael, I provided stats for every player that played 12 for Dumbtrees last season and just from that alone it was clear that Frans OUTPLAYED all of them. Dumbtree was insistent upon Bosman who flounder and eventually tried four other players in the position but all to no avail! Only a fool will bring up an issue that exposes their lies! LMAO!!! And to my question, no answer? 

Disaster
The stats you provided was utter and unadulterated BS since there was no evaluation done to determine the effectiveness of Steyn in performance.  It was consequently a string of meaningless info that needed to be evaluated on the basis that your fellow-idiot Mozart does it.
Mozart has consistently refused to do his standard evaluation because Steyn was poor statistically.   When I used the system Mozart normally uses and the stats provided by you was evaluated it proved that Steyn was failing in performance - he was definitely the worst performing player that year.   You on your side could not even understand what was the done in evaluation of the stats  
I brought up this thread to find out why you and Mozart support Steyn and see whether there is any substance in the reason for your support.  What you and Mozart came up with was utter BS.  None of you could even name 1 instance where Steyn in any way contributed in a major way to the Sharks benefit.  Not one over a period of three years where he made a decisive line break - where he beat tacklers - where he made decisive and effective tackles.   That is what I actually expected to happen - since Steyn has been sh!t poor during the period since his return from France. 
         

I actually documented four Sharks games this year and most of last years Super campaign. I added the usual diagrams for your benefit. I have provided ample detail along the way. I reference specifics, the problem is that you disregard anything you don't like to hear. Like the Sharks v Stormers game when it didn't turn out the way you imagined! Hilarious. The only person here who doesn't provide detail is you. Quite funny then that you berate stats in one debate but amplify their irrefutability in another when it suits you: "stick to the stats for that is where you can never be faulted". You attack video footage in every instance and run away with your tail tucked between your legs. What a joke.

Crushed....the Wylie Coyote of posters Oompie pours himself a stiff one.  

Mozart
What Steyn produced in the WC have no bearing whatsoever about what he produces in games at present.  Your comments have everything to do with reputation - nothing with present performances.   if his present performance is in line with what it was in 2007 or even later in 2011 you have an argument - but it is not the case.  His performance has deteriorated to a level where he is not a shadow of the player he used to be and that is factual - a rare individual he definitely is not at this stage of his career.   
Anybody selecting a player on reputation with no tangible performance is making a massive mistake.   
So I accept that in your book reputation means everything - performance nothing.  Steyn should be in the team because he was in the WC winning team in 2007.  He was also in the flop in 2011 - although not playing in the quarterfinal.  In the Round Robin stage  the Springboks won by disgraceful small margins and a loss in the quarterfinals were to be expected.   
Since 2011 has produced nothing of substance and that is forgiven - because he was in the 2007 WC team.   This is a serious joke and really laughable - in your case ignorance is bliss.
         

 Disaster
I do not read of of your BS - because it is so weird and totally false - but I would not have missed the alleged info provided in the following :-
" I actually do[removed]ented four Sharks games this year and most of last years Super campaign. I added the usual diagrams for your benefit. I have provided ample detail along the way. I reference specifics, the problem is that you disregard anything you don't like to hear. Like the Sharks v Stormers game when it didn't turn out the way you imagined! Hilarious. The only person here who doesn't provide detail is you. Quite funny then that you berate stats in one debate but amplify their irrefutability in another when it suits you: "stick to the stats for that is where you can never be faulted". You attack video footage in every instance and run away with your tail tucked between your legs. What a joke."
I NEVER ATTACKED VIDEO FOOTAGE - I DISPROVE YOUR GARBAGE GIVEN AS INTERPRETATION OF WHAT HAPPENED ON THE FIELD  OF PLAY - A MIXTURE OF MISREPRESENTATION AND OUTRIGHT LIES.   I DID IT IN THE RECENT AUSSIE TEST - AFTER WHICH YOU COULD NOT DISPUTE WHAT I SAID AND RAN AWAY LIKE A COWARD.
I only disregard what is obviously totally false in interpretation what happened and your interpretation is a mixture of disinformation that can hardly be expected from a normal person - it is mostly twisted beyond belief.
However, why don;t you reproduce the items as discussed in previous games of the Sharks.   I can remember one of your contribution where all that was said about Steyn continuously was that Steyn took up his position in the backline with no indication why that natural response by a player is so overwhelmingly important on the part of Steyn.  Fact is he did bugger-all all game long but to take up his position in the backline.   The real description by you was a farce - a real joke by somebody he projects what happens in matches.
Why don't you do us all a favour.   Post the Sharks-Stormers game this year and discuss every time Steyn was involved in any facet of the game.  That will allow us to see what the real value of your evaluation of what happens really is.  The two things that I clearly remember was when steyn was on his backside on the grass after De Allende brushed off his feeble tackle attempts.    Your explanation of that one was a real joke.   
SO YOU CLAIM YOU HAVE THAT GAME - SO POST IT AND ADD YOUR COMMENTS - WE ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR GOOD JOKES AND THAT IS GOING TO BE A TOP CLASS JOKE.    
       

 I think we have all seen what Mozart and Disaster says about their reasons for supporting Steyn on this site.  Lets summarize there reasons:-
Mozart
Steyn performed well in 2007 and was in a number of games where his teams - either for the Springboks or for the Sharks - won the games.  He has an aura which inspired fear in opposition players.  So their is no need for him to do anything on the field of play - his mere presence is enough to scare the opponents witless.   It is consequently not necessary to make line breaks and beat or make tackles.  In essence it means that his reputation counts for everything and there is no need for any performance on his part at this stage.
Mozart could not provide a single case of any exceptional play on the part of Steyn in games since his return from France - so that is further proof that his support is entirely based on the fact that Steyn played in the 2007 WC Final.
Disaster  
Mozart at least provided anything tangible at all.   He quoted stats he provided about the 2013 saying that the stats proved that Steyn was better than the other players that was used as 12's by the Sharks.  However, he d id not do a proper evaluation of the stats - and after evaluation was reflecting poor performances he went on regardless comparing Steyn with Bosman and whomsoever else played at 12 for the Sharks that year.   That may be so - but every one used was poor - with Steyn no better than being a poor player himself.  No comparison was made with other frontline 12's in other SA franchises    .        
Then there followed the normal statement - he had posted match reports on this site and his version of what happened was correct.  One must bear in mind that these comments of his on what happened represents misrepresentation of what actually happened and can include outright lies as well.  
Despite all his waffling and blustering he also  could not provide a single case of any exceptional play on the part of Steyn in games since his return from France 
CONCLUSION
According to Mozart and Disaster present performances are not to be considered - his reputation is enough to qualify his selection.
LMAO - the two Village Idiots think they are right - everyone else realized that Steyn is a non-performer.    
     

Oh gosh, HM shouldn't choose Frans on the basis of prior achievements. So Jake shouldn't have chosen Monty, Os and Butch in 2007. Good thing Jake paid no attention to the " experts" who offered him that kind of stupid advice.
Seuntjies running gloriously through open fields to win the WC, no defence, no lineouts, no kicking.
Can this get any more silly?  

It was common knowledge in 2007 that Du Preez, Butch, Smit, Monty, Os, Juan and Schalk should be dropped. Pienaar and Pretorius were dead certainties to win the World Cup, so too Watson... the best fetcher in world rugby. The experts seldom get it right. They don't really go over these games like fanatical fans do. It was also common knowledge that Ireland were going to be a real force, so too Australia. A panel of experts including Eales, Fitz, and other winning captains and notables gave South Africa no chance of reaching the final either. Not one of them! These experts should be followed cautiously at best. Some of the thickest things I have ever seen or heard have come from them.

M ozart it gets worse. To play attacking rugby you cannot use punch runners because that is detrimental to attacking play. You must pass along the line too, miss passes - which are used constantly in real life - prevent one from taking advantage of overlaps or getting the ball out wide. He berated Frans for doing this all through the season (take careful note of that for future reference ). You must also go through as many phases as possible because defences don't reset and get stronger after a certain number of phases and there is no chance of conceding a turnover. Just pass down the line until you get on the outside and score... all this from deep in your territory! Can you honestly believe what comes out of his mouth? It's like something envisioned from a bad LSD trip, and the worst thing is that isn't even the worst of it!!

 How silly of me - Steyn should be an automatic choice - he needs not do anything at present at all.   And then somebody wanted a list of players dropped in the WC 2007 squad - heavens knows who - but it was "common knowledge".
Then we cannot have a bunch of "seuntjies" in the team - so we must make sure that there is nobody under the age of 25 in the team - since they are "seuntjies".  Maybe some excuse could be found for Etzebeth - but the rest are all "seuntjies" who should not be anywhere near the team, irrespective of performance.  

Then the story about the playing style - we must never pass balls - unless Francois Steyn makes wide passes. So what must we do?   Since passing of the ball can lead to loss of possession and from what was said earlier in threads - the ball must not go past the flyhalf - it must be kicked away so Morne Steyn is the ideal flyhalf to do that.  If he is not there Fransie should be there to kick the ball away.     
In the case where you pass balls - use the Francois Steyn style and pass out wide and cut out overlaps (never mind potential intercepts) allowing defenders to drift out to defend in such cases.   In other cases passing the balls would lead to ball possession losses - so that is for the birds.
To achieve what the two geniuses want to achieve is that the backline is only there to defend - nothing else is necessary.   
Keep the ball amongst the forwards - but who should be the forwards to be selected?   Matfield is a must - we must have him in the Tight 5 - he is magnificent as a player at lock.  Alberts must be there - all else are "seuntjies".  They need to somehow do the job up front - their work rate is not important - there mere presence is.  They will scare the wits out of opponents.
WE GOT IT NOW - PICK THE 2007 WC PLAYERS - FORGET WHAT HAPPENED IN 2011.  PLAY "STAMPKAR" RUGBY AND EVERYTHING WILL BE FINE.   ABOVE ALL DO NOT MAKE THE MISTAKE OF COUNTING ON PRESENT PERFORMANCE - MAKE ABSOLUTELY SURE THAT REPUTATION IS THE ONLY NORM.   BEWARE OF THE "SEUNTJIES" - THEY ARE A RECIPE FOR DISASTER.
WHAT A LOAD OF ABSOLUTE BULLSH!T THESE TWO RUGBY GENIUSES SPOUT.  THEY WANT US TO BELIEVE THAT IS THE FORMULA FOR WINNING A WORLD CUP.  THIS IS REALLY UNBELIEVABLE.  

                

 Dave and Beeno
This thread is really an eye-opener on the thinking of Mozart and Disaster as to who should be in the WC squad and the style of rugby essential in that tournament.
I would like to hear your comments on this one and whether you agree with my comments in the relevant regard - as summarized in the last posting made by me.  

 Fransie's last 3 Tests:

1. Argentina,  Mendoza, draw,  one tackle,  one miss. 
2. Ozz,  Perth, loss,  5 tackles,  one miss. 
3. NZ,  Dunedin,  loss,  6 tackles,  no misses

12 tackles in 3 test matches! 

 The luxury of selective stats. Why not try Fransie's stats in his last two tests? Eleven tackles one miss. 

What's wrong with 12 tackles in 3 tests? Not bad, and quite high success rate. Note too that he is not targeted. How about the fact that he is very dominant in contact. Then two players who are lauded: Lambie, one dominant tackle in over six years (on a player off the ball, in conceding try to lose last years test), and Damian one dominant tackle in two tests, two in five. And to make matters worse for the groupies, Frans carries more responsibility on defencr. Breakdown defence, the heart and soul of all aspects of defensive systems. Frans is routinely positioned around the fringes and sometims covers the blindside on his own. And in spite of being put in the red zones for physical bombardment he still comes out on top. For the Stormers Damian is positioned more towards the middle and this year Meyer has him further out, even further still after the Aussie loss. All the little details the guppie don't know! You want to talk defence but don't have the faintest idea what these systems are, the players role, or the attack in any defensive situation. Yes lets just bring out some numbers... Sometimes, if it suits us.., hey? Of course *rolls eyes*

Ceradunce. 
Try his stats in Super 15 as well.  Selective stats is what you and the other idiots specialize on.  Frans made 11 tackles in two games missing one.  is that enough?  De Allende made 26 tackles in two tests missing 8.   I agree there was too many misses - but that was because he tried to make 34 tackles in 2 matches and some where really desperate efforts.   
I would really want a player who is active - than a player who is inactive, and Steyn was inactive in those tests.  So lets look at Fransies last four test stats:-

FPL Steyn

1/0

11

6/20/29

60

1

7

2

1

18/5

0/0

1

0/0

So lets look at the stats of the inexperienced De Allende :

de Allende

0/0

0

3/11/31

172

6

12

1

3

30/10

0/0

0

0/0

Lets look at the stats of the two players objectively
*   Frans scored a charge down try against Argentina in Mendoza - Positive Frans*   Frans converted three penalties and a try in the 4 games - Positive Frans*    Frans handled the ball 55 times - De Allende 43 times *   Frans carried the ball  29 times for a meter gain of 60 meters - average gain  2,07 meters per carry -  De Allende carried the ball 31 times for a fain of 172 meters - average gain of  5,55 meters per carry -  Positive De Allende *   Frans made 1 line break in four matches - De Allende made 6 line breaks - Positive De Allende*   Frans beat 7 tackles - De Allende beat 12  -  Positive De Allende *   Frans attempted 23 tackles - De Allende attempted 40 tackles - Positive de Allende*    Frans made 18 tackles - De Allende made 30 tackles - Positive De Allende *   Frans missed 5 tackles for a missed tackle ratio of 21,74% - De Allende missed 10 tackles for a missed tackle ratio of 25% - Positive Frans
Summary 
Francois Steyn
Steyn did well in scoring a charged-down try and converting kicks entrusted to him.  A charged-down try is a freak incident and other players are likely to covert the kicks Steyn did, but in fairness Styn must be accredited for those two issues as positives.
Steyn showed virtually nothing in attacking play - he carried the balls 29 times for a meter gain of 60 meters - ie 207 meters per carry.  In effective at best
Carrying the ball 29 times - he made 1 line-break and beat 7 defenders.  Ineffective in ball carries - lack physicality to do better.
Steyn attempted 23 tackles - making 18 of those.  A very low tackle count for a number 12 center.   Obviously did not look for work - hence the low tackle count.His missed tackle ratio is better than that of De Allende - but still ahead of the required rate of circa 14 to 15%. 
In essence in all four tests Frans was a low-production  player - rather ineffective in all four games.
De Allende          
A very strong and effective ball-carrier averaging an average of 5,55 meters per carry - nearly double the figure of Steyn
His strength in line breaks and defenders beaten is already known - 7 line breaks beating 12 defenders in four tests is extra-ordinary.
De Allende is a very active player in defense - he is probably attempting to make some "impossible" tackles.  His tackle attempts is near to double that of Steyn.  His missed tackle ratio is too high and needs urgent attention.
In essence in all four tests De Allende was a high production  player - effective in most aspects in all four games - his missed tackle ratio being a problem.

The above is a real indication of the effectiveness of the two players concerned.  The four tests happened to be against the same teams.   In the four tests Frans played in the results were as follows:-
1 win1 draw2 losses
In the games De Allende played in the results were -
2 wins 2 losses
It could have been the same result in the four games played - had De Allende not saved an almost certain try by Bosch in the Pretoria test last year.   

   

  

 Mozart
I did not need help from them - I just wanted to hear what they said about your rank idiocy.   "Seuntjies" is going to be your name in future and I am sure all will think that you are super-stupid in using it.
So - Seuntjies - good luck with your effort to give yourself  some creditworthiness.   .  

 clevermike
 
Status: Hall Of Fame 
Posts: 18286RE: What is real and not real about performance of Francois Steyn
August 02, 2015, 16:16:55

Ceradunce. 

Try his stats in Super 15 as well. Selective stats is what you and the other idiots specialize on.
No mate. That is your field of specialty. Examples:
Morne Steyn is a crap defender because he has tackles for the 2013 Ellis Park test was 7 made and 4 missed. Then again, against NZ, nogal, in 2012 in Auckland, he made 6 out of 6. Also in 2013 and also against NZ he made 9 out of 10. In Nelspruit, against Wales in 2014, he made 8 out of 8. Those are only a few examples. 
Of course you always fall back and  the missed tackle %s. I can remember in one argument about Steyn and Goosen, you had  us believe how crap Steyn's defence was because he made something like 7 out of 10 attempts, which would have been 30% missed in that case. You compared that to Goosen's 100% success rate. Only problem was that you failed to mention that Goosen only attempted 3 tackles.
In any case, You have totally missed the point of the discussion between myself and Draad, as usual.

 Ceradunce
What has this to do with Francois Steyn - you stupid idiot?  Trying to by diversion help out Seuntjies to get out of the BS he got himself into.
You started the idea to look at Steyn's stats and see where it got yourself - dunce.   Cannot help to be an idiot - now can you?    Well if a thread ever show up the village idiots on this site - this one has.   

Incidentally Morne is a sh!t defender - just look at his figures for the last three tests he played in.  But that had nothing to do with this thread.