What would a backline look like of Cheslin Kolbe Players

Cheslin star continues to rise. He might not have the pace of Habana, but now that he is 25 and have bided his time and worked his way through the ranks to become an invaluable player to the boks and Toulouse. 

I have to ask myself the following questions. 

Can we produce a backline full of Cheslin Kolbe players, slight smaller, lighter but still able to hold up their own in defence and tear a team to shreds in attack through agility and guile. 

We had a few midgets around back in the day but we always opted for bigger backline players. 

Brent Russel, Andre Pretorius, Deon Keyser, Adrian Jacobs are the only small players that come to mind

What do you oaks think?

No. You'll end up with a team that attacks laterally, shuffling the ball down the line, giving the pack a very hard task of tracking back to secure possession. Penalties will ensue and then we'll start kicking far upfield aimlessly. Australia have been going the route of these x-factor players, believing they are too intellectual for brutish play, but it's the missing ingredient that sees them fail. 

So how would you setup your perfect backline from 9 to 15? 

Cheslin can play wing, scrum halve and 15. 

Matt Gittau and O Connor were 2 players that excelled at 10 and 12. 

But is not the game plan of the coach and how to use them

Or do you think it is more a game of attrition. 

If you have a pack like SA to create the space by playing a couple of phases with the forwards, pick and drive, blind side, etc. 

Why do you even need your 12 to become a battering ram when he can be your 2nd flyhallf. 

The only concern I have is defence. 

Big Fijian wingers can steam roll these players as witness when the boks under Coetzee lost to the Baabaas. I was at that game this monster Fijian winger ploughed through 4 midgets at a time. Poor Sergel Petersen got smashed even though he was very brave

A wee Bok backline

9. Faff

10. Andre Pretorius

12. Franco Smith

13. Adi Jacobs/ Dejong

14. Kolbe

15. Brent Russell / Aplon

11. Mapimpi  Breyton Paulse

Adrian Jacobs was a very under rated player....he had the best centre stats in the TN in 2009 I believe. Apron was another really gifted player....small but maybe the best open field tackler we have had at fullback in the last 10 years.

You can’t have these small blokes at 10 and 12 (like George Ford) they become targets. But small, fast runners with lightening reflexes like Kolbe are one of our unique strengths......it was great to see Erasmus was willing to take that risk.

I do not think that small players are necessarily poor in backline players    I rate Kolbe very highly - as I did Paulse,    The rest of the small backline players like De Jongh. Apron and Jacobs  were all poor defenders.    They just vanished in defense.

As to Mozart's comments insofar as Ford is concerned it is farcical.   Ford as excellent in the AB semi and that is why he was  retained by Jones at  10.   The player who neutralized Ford in the final was Du Toit and the latter did  the same with Farrell.

Lets just go back to 2014 - 2016  when Mozart  wanted Frans Steyn as flyhalf and  not Pollard,  That is after it became clear that his ideal flyhalf Morne failed and needed to be replaced. -  so Mozart's assessments of flyhalfs is farcical.             

Mike the only word that describes you is ‘tiresome’.....you are such a liar. You were the anti Pollard poster on this Board, I have always rated him. 

de Jongh is the second best defensive SA 13 there's ever been all things considered. His stint at 12 wasn't great, but at 13? He was the cornerstone of the Stormers defence, back when they were actually winning games. 

I agree on de Jongh, he was much better at 13 vs the physical slog at 12.  His step was every bit as good as Willemse and he had real pace over 40 metres.

Defensively he was up very quickly, often making tackles behind the advantage line.....much like Marius Joubert.

AO

With a miss tackle ratio of 23% on Super Rugby level De Jongh  was one of the worst defenders ever to play on that level since he came on the scene.    He also had a habit of  disappearing when  faced by bigger outside centers.   

Mozart

You even claimed that  Steyn would terrify opponents and there was a huge argument between Dave and you at one stage since he claimed that Steyn flopped at flyhalf  when he as tried in that position and you obviously was for Fransie at 10,   

Dave will obviously confirm that you wanted Steyn ahead of Pollard at flyhalf.  

You are the biggest liar on site,   I said that Meyer did a real demolition job on Pollard and in the WC in 2015 he was there but did near to zero in games other than kicking at goal.   He was not even Meyer's  regular flyhalf and after the famous AB test in 2014 he virtually never attacked the gain line.   The Japan Disaster forced Meyer to use Pollard at flyhalf  for the rest if the WC.    Pollard played virtually no rugby in 2016 and 2017.   All I said that Pollard would have to proof  that he is still the best flyhalf.  That was the fact that I mentioned and never attacked Pollard in any way,   Erasmus made a huge difference by allowing  Pollard to play his natural game and he was at last back to where he was in the 2014  AB test  and Meyer did a nasty job to change him into  a dud  rugby player in the Morne  mode.          .   .  

Your right, he is 90kg. He looks small when he runs. 

k

I don't think Tony Jantjies started in the Under 21 Final - he came on fairly late as a replacement.

I like Pollard - but I think he is not as good as a ball player.    I think he is more like Morne Steyn in most of the games I saw him play in.   Solid - seemingly a better ball distributor than Morne is at present - but on the "dull" side.   That is perhaps why he decided to move to the Bulls - their style of play would fit him like a glove.

I believe smaller players - Like Lambie has to have a cleverer approach to play - and they are much more adventurous.   As an example I don't think Pollard would from his style of play ever score 14 tries in Craven week - like Swiel managed to do.

I also think Goosen can be classified as a "clever" player.   Let me add - I prefer "clever" players - ie those with ball sense - at flyhalf than the more predestrian ones. " 

Mozart

Who concocted that BS you quote above - definitely not me".   If I wrote that why did you not use you normal method of quoting past responses on the forum.   Any sane person would know that Tony Jansen failed badly in the first game in the 2012 JWC series and for the rest of the series was dropped from the team.   That concoction was not written by me so shame on you - you dishonest bastard..    

Suck on this you disgusting liar:

osts

clevermike
 
Status: Hall Of Fame 
Posts: 12224RE: Timo Swiel- Fullback or Flyhalf
January 11, 2013, 22:52:35

Sharkbok

Ater watching that video - I called Swiel "the Ball Sense Wiz Kid"  - he really is something special.   I think he is equally good -whether at full back or at flyhalf.   Even Saffex rates him as a better flyhalf than Pollard.   We will see lots of him over the next decade.

Let me add a prediction - within 5 years time this kid will play rugby for ENGLAND - because the politicos here will insist that place must be found for Earl Jantjies - the useless. 

Hall Of Fame

32447 posts

 clevermike
 
Status: Hall Of Fame 
Posts: 12224RE: Sasue Special Message
December 14, 2012, 16:18:04

Ek

I don't think Tony Jantjies started in the Under 21 Final - he came on fairly late as a replacement.

I like Pollard - but I think he is not as good as a ball player.    I think he is more like Morne Steyn in most of the games I saw him play in.   Solid - seemingly a better ball distributor than Morne is at present - but on the "dull" side.   That is perhaps why he decided to move to the Bulls - their style of play would fit him like a glove.

I believe smaller players - Like Lambie has to have a cleverer approach to play - and they are much more adventurous.   As an example I don't think Pollard would from his style of play ever score 14 tries in Craven week - like Swiel managed to do.

I also think Goosen can be classified as a "clever" player.   Let me add - I prefer "clever" players - ie those with ball sense - at flyhalf than the more predestrian ones. " 

As  you can see the Oom had a very low opinion of Pollard, and now the hypocrite is pretending he was always a big fan.....stinking liar.

Hall Of Fame

32447 posts

 clevermike
 
Status: Hall Of Fame 
Posts: 12224RE: Latest SA u20 squad
December 12, 2012, 15:04:59

I watched a replay of the Under 21 final and looked specifically at Swiel and Kolbe -  I liked very much what I saw.   Kolbe is a class act and Swiel has a lot of ball sense - clever player.   In the latter repect he is actually better than Pollard.   

Not sure about the others though.   Any news about the ancestry of Morne Du Plessis?   I could phone Rob Louw and ask him - he may know. 

I wrote that in 1913 before Swiel  decided not to play for the Under 20's and opted  out of the  WC,   However, there were no mention of Jantjies at all  which you mentioned in one posting as coming from me - you are not only a liar - your are a fraudster as well,  The worst kind of person one can have on a site where adults discusses the game of rugby;

I admit that I wrote about Swiel and that I thought he was an exceptional player  but he enver live up to his potential ever,    So if that is the only clip you find where I sad that I like Pollard - but that was many years ago when both were Juniors and Pollard mature and Swiel did not,   By the way Swiel was neve r in the Under 20 team and Kolbe was NOT in the 2012 Final - so whatever you found I wrote was probably also fraudulent  anyway.   

So have fun you stupid wreck.        .

Now for the other lie,  Did you or did you not want to see Pollard replaced at flyhalf  with  Frans Steyn?   Dave told you you were talking kak and will remember what you carried on about,   So be careful and not use your normal lies in this answer.   

So a backline of 

9 Faf

10 Pretorius 

11 kolbe 

12 De Jongh

13 Jacobs 

14 Paulse

15 Brent Russell

Reserve, Hougaard, Aplon

Not many other midget midfielders out there at the moment

I think with a rush defence that they would have coped, but not sure 1 on 1 against big players if they would have been able to stop teams getting over the advantage line. 

Will have to rely on a very big pack as well as covering a lot of ground by the loose forwards. 

I have long maintained 10 and 12 need to be physical in the modern game. Veloorius and De Jongh were not suited. De Jongh and Adi were fine at 13.

De Jongh was NOT fine at 13 and was so poor in 2012 that even Meyer dropped him from the team because he went AWOL in two matches,   On Super Rugby level his missed tackle ratio in one year was 23% and he ducked out of certain tackles - eg against Kuridrani,   He was a poor passer and for a while putting him at 13 and Aplon on the wing had catastrophic defense results.

A player that only a total rugby illiterate would support,     .     

But not as illiterate as a fool who concocted a whole story about Schickerling and Mostert....based on a training camp Schickerling supposedly attended. Except he attended no such camp.

Players who played badly in matches they never played in... other players selected to camps as a prelude to replacing your pet hates.....except it’s all an old man’s delusion.

When I made a mistake om site I generally admitted I was wrong - like any other human.   I never concoct and make up false descriptions as to what happened in matches like you do 99% pf the time and when it is proved that you concocted a story that never happened and your description of what happened was made up garbage and got caught out you never admitted you were wrong,  

I never posted falsified quotes of what you wrote on site - the way you did  above and you are despicable in two cases which obviously was fraudulent - the one was the reference to Jantjies - which I never wrote and was total garbage from the word go.   Jantjies started  in the opening match against the Irish in 2012 - which the juniors lost badly because of him - with the result that he was replaced by Pollard - who then was only 17 tears old.

Kolbe was the other one - he never played for the under 20 SA team, but made his name in Sevens Rugby.

Those two  references are just many of hundreds  where you lied and was caught out  lying openly and  in those two examples you actually committed fraud.   That is really despicable and you should be ashamed of yourself.

If ever there was somebody on site with a long string of pet hates - you through hundreds of postings showed pet hate.   Your false description of Erasmus's career and conditions under which he accepted the post of DIRECTOR OF RUGBY in 2018 was typical of the garbage you post on site.

Then their was the winning of the WC in 2019 must have been a terrible shock to you  and it resulted in a lukewarm acceptance of the result and within 14 days after the final the attacks on Erasmus and certain players started.  A typical example was the creation of a try-scoring opportunity that never existed and the total description you gave was a fake.   A case where Willie carried a ball just inside the English half and was covered by both Ford and Farrell and he carried the ball for about 8 meters and not 20 as you described. as well as it happened outside of the English 22 and not inside as you claimed was typical of your lies on site.

It is not hard to be honest on site and all members who made mistakes  other than you from time to time admitted they were wrong and so did I.  You are the exception  as you not make mistakes  and admit you were wrong - you try to lie yourself out of the holes  you dug yourself/    There are literally hundreds of examples I can quite where you did that.

Tim e to clean up your act is long overdue.             

I think what Kingkorn meant a backline like this...not identical players but similar obviously.

Yes it probably would work...if you had a powerful forwards to balance.

https://youtu.be/tMeVi7DeUqs

It doesn't work like that. A string pack cannot compensate. You can play predominantly through your pack, but the become itself is a generator of momentum and can determine the effectiveness of that pack. Sterile phase play is the result of a headline that cannot move the ball, and without the ability the breach the gainline, you cannot generate space. So what do you do? Kick? Who will chase and win those aerial battles? It becomes so the worse when we consider defence. 

SA for many years suffered from what can be called 10 man rugby trying to regard the backline as of nothing other than defending,   In moist provinces were that scoring of tries were extremely low when compared to the New Zealand and Australian teams.

Two reasons for that was what the unlamented coach responsible for some of the malaise said that SA players do not have the ball skills to play 15 man rugby.   By the 1992's the efficient backline play pertaining  to SA rugby was replaced with what they call  "Traditional Springbok Rugby" = that is 10 man rugby, which was unadulterated crap.

There was some efforts made to change back to the comprehensive game SA used to play by Carel Du Plessis  and in a recent article an expert stated that Du Plessis  was 20 years ahead of his time when trying to introduce comprehensive rugby in SA,   Du Plessis  established a squad with the necessary skill sets and the squad was remarkedly successful winning winning 17 tests in a row,   One of his key players were Percy Montgomery - himself a small guy Du Plessis used as outside center and Mallett moced to full back.  So why was it possible - because the so-called  :Traditional Springbok Rugby" myth resulted in skill-deficient players selected for teams  based on size and bulk.

White to his credit realized that there was something seriously defective in SA rugby and in the 2007 RWC he brought in Eddie Jones to try and see what can be dine to upgrade backline play.  After the 2007 RWC some of the players said that Jones taught them things they have never heard about from any SA coach.

After  White's Departure  15 man rugby vanished totally from sight,   To maintain forward domination  the  coaches  after  2012 especially selected loosies that had zero ball skills and ball sense  to make up a Tight 8 and the result was there were no affective  contribution by loosies to effective backline play at all.   Even Burger lost the abilities that he showed in 2004 when he was the World  Player of the Year by 2012.   

As a result aimless kicking was the norm and what was  most upsetting was that the Springboks was addicted to 10 man rugby and had nothing else to offer.  

To his credit Erasmus realized there was a serious deficiency  in the game that needed to be corrected,   In essence Erasmus did select smaller players too - like Nkosi, Mapimpi and Kolbe to play in the backline - but he also insisted on forwards being ball-skilled and able to link up with the backline in attacks, 

Two examples of where it effectively happened were the two tries being scored in the WC Final in 2019,   In both two players played a key role - namely Marx in the Mapimpi try and Du Toit in the Kolbe try.  

So to come back to the situation raised initially - if the loosies and even Tight 5 players have the necessary ball skills  and ability to link up  with backline players in attacking moves size of backline players is not all that counts - ball sense, ball skills and pace is very important - provided that all backline players - irrespective of size  are sound defenders,   

However, a mix between smaller and bigger players are probably the way to go.           

AO is a stereo type...one game plan for all games until the opposition can read it like a book.

I  emphasized, BALANCED with a backline like the Japs...a Jap backline with a SA pack would be effective I think, with a few tweaks here and there.

AO is not the only one...he wants the rugby of yesteryear...incidentally the Jap backline is not fragile by any manner or means...they be relatively small on the traditional sense  but they very strong for their size and extremely athletic and intelligent.

Champagne rugby over branderwyn and coke rugby.

Incidentally they improved Andrey Esterhuizen.s style from a crash bang to at least be able to make some swerve's 

The trouble AO you don't listen or should I say read the content or context what people posters say and make assumptions...I don't think you are stupid but you never gel what other people are saying...sadly too Germanic ie fundamental...everything in black or white...I'm not being nasty, that's not my nature...but you tend to be so otherwise just for the sake of being otherwise.

A typical example is the PSDT issue...it's so ridiculous it's embarrassing.

"Du Plessis  established a squad with the necessary skill sets and the squad was remarkedly successful winning winning 17 tests in a row"

Really Lügnerin? Carel is, to date, the third worst Bok coach with a 38% record. Worse than the 44% of Coetzee. One is a visionary ahead of his time (like the Gary Gold who obliterated the "shackle free" Sharks in 2015); the other a failure. Now attributing a turnaround to the failed predecessor, yet does not acknowledge the upswing in fortunes before the departure of the Coetzee (an upswing noted by prominent NZ sports writers). You are one biased, dishonest fellow Lügnerin. Ironically, the only coaches to form a successful attack post '99 (the year defences changed dramatically) were Jake and Meyer. That's it. 

Chabal, the trouble is you do not understand the principles of the game. 

"Can we produce a backline full of Cheslin Kolbe players, slight smaller, lighter but still able to hold up their own in defence and tear a team to shreds in attack through agility and guile."

The answer is no, and you have a glaring assumption: They will be shredding defences with agility and guile. This assumption leads one to think that there is a positive to be entertained. Where do we see this in the modern game? Rugby is a collision sport, and that is where the game is won and lost. Japan were the better-coached team, with a vastly superior system in place, but were overcome by a ponderous error-strewn Bok side because they could not secure possession and lay down a platform. You do not have sustained success with your model. You talk like Dick Muir, and he famously took a very solid Lions team and ruined them, conceding 585 points in 14 games, conceding 72 tries in the process (an average of 5.5 per game)! I t doesn't work. 

You then make the arrogant mistake of assuming my preference for a game plan I have never advocated (see every discussion concerning the bland and one-dimensional Rassie model). I laid out the reasons why I think your model will fail, and you have offered no rebuttal. Either you do not understand the topic or you never thought your position through beyond the vague idea that popped into your head. 

You still have not got it...I certainly did not imply that and if my understanding of Kingkorn reference to Kolbe did not mean an exact clone of Kolbe either (that's not possible) but similar style (as I referred to clip of Japanese brilliant  backline play during their WC last year).

You play the same tune over and over again. So predictable.

https://youtu.be/AMwvJQvNodA

Please change your name to Organ Grinder...this time you won't have an identity crisis

Seb

It is no use arguing with AO about rugby issues - he is totally clueless about the game as ot is played at present,  His idea is that the kick and chase game is all that counts and he ahs no idea about how backlines function in the modern game.

For him the rubbish dished  out when Meyer was coached was the alpha and the omega of contributions by him.   He does not understand anything about rugby -0 hence is simplisytic and stupid attack on Erasmus whose thinking on rugby issues is years ahead oof what this clump comes up with,   

I have given up on him altogether and decided that he is in fact a kindergarten imbecile on rugby issues,   According to him good players are poor and poor players good - god coaches are bad and  bad coaches good,   He  is a person that does not listen to sense and when you analyze what he wrote it is totally senseless and  without any facts,   

Take for example the team that lost all three matches in the 2015 RC and won two and drew  in the  same competition in 2019 is a better coached and better team with better players.   A teqam that scored twice as many backline tries as was the case under Meyer - has a weaker backline than the one under Meyer.

A seriously defective rugby brain and dishonest as well.    I caught him out using stats he changed to fit his arguments.    

Seb

It is no use arguing with AO about rugby issues - he is totally clueless about the game as ot is played at present,  His idea is that the kick and chase game is all that counts and he ahs no idea about how backlines function in the modern game.

For him the rubbish dished  out when Meyer was coached was the alpha and the omega of contributions by him.   He does not understand anything about rugby -0 hence is simplisytic and stupid attack on Erasmus whose thinking on rugby issues is years ahead oof what this clump comes up with,   

I have given up on him altogether and decided that he is in fact a kindergarten imbecile on rugby issues,   According to him good players are poor and poor players good - god coaches are bad and  bad coaches good,   He  is a person that does not listen to sense and when you analyze what he wrote it is totally senseless and  without any facts,   

Take for example the team that lost all three matches in the 2015 RC and won two and drew  in the  same competition in 2019 is a better coached and better team with better players.   A teqam that scored twice as many backline tries as was the case under Meyer - has a weaker backline than the one under Meyer.

A seriously defective rugby brain and dishonest as well.    I caught him out using stats he changed to fit his arguments.    

So Wanker just admit you had it completely wrong about Schickerling attending a camp....and as a result the story that he was about to replace Mostert .......was a STINKING LIE!

De Jong and Jacobs never impressed me when wearing the Green and Gold.

I thought that they were marginal selections at best.

No Mozart

I said I may have been wrong about the year he attended the camp - but was right about his injury problem in 2019 before which he was brilliant playing lock for the Stormers.   If he was not injured he and not Mostert would have been in the squad,   A real Lock and not a weak one,   

Erasmus would not pick him because of the injury - unlike Meyer who buggered up the 2015 squad by emptying the hospital wards,    

So how about apologizing for the fraudulent changes you made in postings made by me  in 2012 and 2013 and then reposting it on site?     

Actually, very good point on the Japanese team. They Hove proven with the right game plan you can beat one of the top tier teams.

If you look at how well they did against Ireland and Scotland by winning there group. I was actually happy that we faced them rather than Ireland. 

That Said, SA just pummeled them with our big pack and direct rugby. 

But they are way more skillful then our backline players 

Ooh with emphasis! Let me explain dumbass. I can’t change anything on this Board which is an original posting from you in a string. What you said originally can always be verified, so I would be a fool to misrepresent it. Which I never do.

I know what you say seems laughably stupid now.....but you said it...every idiotic word.

No you did change the messages and included things like a reference to Kolbe playing in the SA Under 20  side and in Jantjies  being ahead of  Pollard.    You know that and is a fraud anyway.

So apologize  or accept that you are super shit.