Where is Andre Esterhuizen

One can only laugh about De Jongh.   Like Morne Steyn in his early tests in 2009 De Jongh was good early on.   That happens when players are new - but soon afterwards the opposing teams identify their deficiencies, and the result is career-problems later on in their careers.

De Jongh looked good in 2009 - but was a problem on test level ever since.  AO claimed that Meyer dropped him too soon, but although I differ from Meyer about selections - he had a strong case in dropping of De Jongh.   So lets look why Meyer would not continue with him.

Under Meyer De Jongh played in 2012 in three tests, namely -

*   coming from the bench in the home test against Australia; and 

*   starting in two EOYT tests

In the Aussie test De Jongh fouled up a try scoring opportunity in the last few minutes of the game.   In the EOYT tests it was generally recognized that De Jongh was seriously deficient in both tests and -

*   in the Scotland test he participated in one of the few Springboks attacking moves and knocked on the ball - in the rest of the game he was nowhere in sight when it came  to backline attacking; and

*   in the England tests the Springboks a couple of times trieed to bring Kirchner into the backline to create overlaps - but it failed because De Jongh was absent from duty.

Because of his tendency to "disappear" in games I said in the past he went AWOL.  In fact it was confirmed in ESPN stats as well.   I never saw a longer string of zeroes  on stats on backline players ever than was the case of De Jongh.

In Super Rugby De Jongh played for the Stormers,   Since 2012 De Jongh was in a declining cycle in performances.  The problem was he was physically too small to be an effective player - both in attacking play and defense,   De Jongh was replaced a couple of times by Huw Jones playing  in his place at 13 and there was an immediate improvement in attacking play by the Stormers backline.

In defense there were serious indications that when up against bigger and more physically physical player he managed to vanish from sight,   There was a serious case discussed in length on site iro a game between the Stormers and the Bumbies where he was nowhere to be seen when Kuridrani got the ball and attacked.  If that was a single occurrence it would not really matter - but it happened all too frequently in matches he played in.   He really was a very problematic defender with an average missed tackle ratio between 23,3% and 28% in series,  That w hile a MTR of higher than 15% is a sign of negative defense,  

To my mind he encver was a real prospect as a test center - was a very average player in Super Rugby level and above average on CC level.  The latter is perhaps the reason  for his good performance on club level in England.    Most if not all NH club teams will be beaten by the top 12 teams in Super Rugby and wins by Clubs would be a rarity.

I am glad he does well for himself and his club in Englkand - but would never wish for his return to Super Rugby and especially not in tests.            

Kuridrani? That name brings back some memories. 2015 memories, to be exact. Ran over Damian for the Wallabies and Brumbies. 

AO

I would also smile since what happened was a total misrepresentation by Mozart that ended up making an utter fool of himself and you missed \the plot totally as well.

I specifically mentioned that incident as an example where De Jongh  never tried to tackle Kuridrani when he was supposed to defend against him.  He allowed Kuridrani to run past him without any tackle attempt at all.   De Allende had to try and cover for the De Jongh deficiency and made a tackle attempt which caused Kuridrani to fumble the ball and ended up in a scrum about 2 meters from the tackle attempt spot. 

Technically De Allende missed the tackle - but your comment is totally wrong and in line with the BS  Mozart was trying to spread.   He (Mozart) ultimately fled from the thread because he could not admit that he was lying about the incident and the impact of the tackle attempt    

I don't recall that, I do recall Damian being run over by Kuri. He was also run over twice in the Reds game. So this is a common thing for the poor boy. Poor defence is not a common thing for de Jongh, who added solidity to what was the best defence in Super rugby, possibly ever. There's the difference. Damian is a cream puff all by himself. 

That is why your remembering is defective. Mozart wrote about the failed tackle and so did you.  Mozart and you never mentioned De Jongh did not even make a tackle attempt and failed totally from doing his defense in that case and De Allende had to run outside and tried to tackle Kuridrani.   Furthermore the fact that Kuridrani lost the ball possession as a result of the tackle attempt was never mentioned by Mozart and you.   

That is why to look at what Mozart and you write about rugby incidents is totally useless as it is never comprehensive - giving what led up to the incident and what the outcome was.    

So sorry - I did in that case De Jongh showed  his normal AWOL act and De Allende had to try and cover up for the problem.   Any real analyst would give the full story and do not leave out critical elements like Mozart and you always do.

Actually, I always take into account every detail of every phase of play. It's you who has been omitting details all season. It's hilarious how you can say those words with a straight face. When I posed questions in early August about some of the issues with Damian you said those questions were irrelevant as we don't need to know who was the jackal or jam defender, what system was used, what the attacking play was, field position, the facet of play etc. You claimed these were misleading.