Beeno
I am very worried about Saffex - not a word from him over the past week. As a friend of his I really am worried. Any way to find out whether there is anything wrong with him? I sincerely hope he is alright.
Yes I hope so too Mike. Snapster is a lo tof fun and makes the occasional good point. Trust its only because he has a big job on the go - for once!
Moz might have a contact detail?
Am about bud, just massively busy these days - I need to do a Moz and retire!!!
SAFFEX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11
I missed you you blonde fatso!
Where you been????
What you think about the Cheetahs potentially being relegated?
Jantjies did alright against the AB's hey! I hope he is given more opportunities!
Not too busy to have missed comments of mine that were made in your absence and lapsed off the Board days ago. HuH? You showed your hand on the Morne string. Admit it, you lurked, reading all the comments , but just preferred not to face up to your Taute disaster.
Wigboy, surely it cdnt be a bigger "Taute disaster" then the idiot who thought Taute came running off his wing way too early but was planted like a pylon at the same time? Oh wait, that was u!
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Moz, how long have we been exchanging on rugbyboards - in your experience have I ever shied away from responding to you - give me a bloody break, its insulting to think I would.
No disaster at all, Taute missed tackles as did Jean and Habana - so what's your point exactly?
My point is Taute's missed touch gave the ABs their first try. His atrocious attempt to tackle Dagg gave them their second try. And he added to those goofs by standing dead still like a pylon, instead of advancing or drifting for their clinching try.
I had you pegged as a guy who had enough honesty to admit Taute was not prepared for test centre.
Fruit, just a quick tip....Taute couldn't come "running off his wing". He wasn't playing on the wing.
I knew it was just a matter of time before U screwed up......bwahahahaha. Imagine U not knowing Taute wasn't a wing.
GS&M
Okay, so u didnt say he came off his wing, but this is what u did say:
"Taute plants himself in Gear's path without moving....he neither advances to close down his space....nor does he drift to make the pass harder....he plants."
And that was soon after u said this:
"And just to make sure, a bit later, he rushed inside way too early leaving Conrad Smith with a trot in try."
My question 2 u (the question u still havent answered) is how can those two things happen at the same time? How can Taute "rush inside" and be planted like a pylon?
One wd think it wd be alot easier to admit u mistook Hougard 4 Taute but obviously u have a problem admiting u wrong about anything..... but its v funny!!!!!
Oh what bullshit, Taute proved in the test against Oz he is more than ready for test rugby.....fact is you pointed out how good he was in defence against Oz so bang goes your naive take on his defence.
So its bad that Taute missed tackles, what about your hero Jean's misses, I take it they were excusable?
And to find fault in an outside centres attempt at finding touch is pathetic - if he had been our 10, then fair enough.
Taute is the test against Oz was better than Jean has ever been at 13.
Two missed tackles against the AB's does not make him a test no hoper and its pathetic to begin to even conclude that. He has had two tests, one good one, one average one - the same average one his captain and star wing had - FACT
I am more than happy to concede Taute had an off day as did Jean which you fail to comment on. I am just not stupid enough to conclude that after one average showing the lad does not have what it takes to play test rugby - what complete crap, especially after his impressive start against Oz and the fact that we know he is a good defender and that all players miss tackles - remember Schalk on Lambie
So because he is playing outside centre, he can't find touch.....even though much of his life has been at 15. What rubbish....that kick which he tried to send too far, started the rot. I'm not saying he will never play tests, I'm simply saying he is not ready.
Fruit, what's really funny is you thought Taute was a wing. And you're still confused you say ...."okay so he didn't come off his wing".....he had no wing to come off you poor confused twit.
Oh so he misses touch and is the sole cause of that try - what crap...............plenty had to happen from that missed touch before the try was scored, blaming him is short sighted.
I have no major issue with his missed touch, its hardly career defining, much like his poor miss on Dagg, it happens, its called rugby - ask Schalk on Lambie.
We all know that Schalk, Jean, Habana and Taute are good defenders.
Taute is ready for test rugby, he proved that against Oz and was better at 13 than Jean has been all year
I'll concede Jean has been better at 12. But Taute has a less than 2 metres a carry average, and his defence resulted in 3 tries. How can that possibly be better?
On the kick. Any rugby player with nous knows there are some kicks that simply have to go out....that was one of them...our defence was in tatters.
I would agree that kick had to go out. Our defence was in tatters and most players were behind the try line.
Especially against the All Blacks, they love unstructured rugby and counter attacks. A lineout to slow the game down let our players get back into position. and play form 1st phase.
When our defence came up it did not seem to be in a flat line so it was easy to cut apart.
Taute at 13 against Oz had the best Bok performance for a 13 under Meyer by some distance. He beat the first defender every time he challenged with ball in hand - that was in traffic and was always stopped soon after beating the first man - a job well done considering he never received the ball in space when he challenged.
His defence in that game was outstanding.
Against NZ he had no opportunities on attack, was solid enough in this department carrying the ball in contact. His defence was poor where he missed Dagg. The missed touch is inconsequential, I dont expect test 13's to be kicking pro's.
Based on two tests at 13, Taute has been better than Jean there all year - Jean has been damn poor there offering nothing on attack and missing tackles regularly
No Wigboy the player who came inside too early off his wing was F Hougard who was actually playing in the wing position but u thought it was Taute.
All this ducking and diving rather then just admitting what everyone can allready see for themselves! Bit pathetic if u ask me but while u trying yr best to change the subject and lie about answering the question (for the 5th or 6th time now), nowhere have u explained how Taute can cut inside too quickly and be planted like a pylon at the same time.
U accuse Stampax of ducking yr questions but just look at yrself! Try be a man and answer the question.... how does a player rush inside and be planted at the same time.... or did u make a mistake and blame Taute for Hougards error? No more fibs now.
Greenjallopy just come out of the closet - all this yapping just to avoid doing so is affecting your cred. What are you hidingfrom, why so scared?
Actually no Fruit. I assumed Taute had come inside because of his alignment....the moron whO thought Taute was a wing was you.
Moz, I think ou rooitwit is just using this as an excuse not to reveal himself!
Quoting Wigboy after the match: "And just to make sure, a bit later, he rushed inside way too early leaving Conrad Smith with a trot in try."
The rushing pylon! Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Jala, this borders on OCD, just as much as ou Rooinek trying to prove Moz wrong. Let it be, you're going nowhere with this.
Damn, you okes are so obsessed with Saffex's opinion that you'd swear he actually knew what he was talking about. LOL! Just kidding...well, sort of. I am very much of the opinion that Saff see's what everyone else is saying, and then says the opposite. Although, here and there he does have some pretty sound logic.
As for Taute, he had a decent enough game against Aus, and a crap gaim against NZ. He seems to lack the ability to break the line effectively and as a result his running meters so far have not been very impressive. I still think he has potential, but I am not sure he has what it takes to make a real name for himself as a Springbok. Just another fringe player.
So Fruit you want me to address your accusation, before you do the great reveal. So here are the facts.
1) My first posting came from an internet viewing of the game, with no opportunity for replays. My later posting of the incident was accurate, after I had the benefit of looking at internet replays.
2) My error was believing Taute had come in to defend against the NZ wing cutting in.....in fact he never moved. He didn't close on the player, drift with the pass or try and force him inside. He planted.
3) Why did I think he had come inside or "cut in too early"? Because his marker was unopposed outside him, not because I confused him for Hougaard. If anything Hougaard cut in too late allowing penetration close to the line. You speculate from my wording I didn't know the difference between Taute and Hougaard. I think I have seen Hougaard play enough rugby to make that a non starter. The two players don't look at all alike. So speculate to your heart's content, you are wrong.
4) Was Taute still culpable. You betcha....Taute and Jantjies simply planted like pylons, not closing down runners or trying to obstruct the pass, when a clear overlap existed.
So I have addressed your gotcha posting......now I hope you have the guts to tell us your identity.
Wigboy:
1) If u havnt seen the game properly & u screw up & then someone corrects u, accept the correction with a bit of grace & dont act like a pork chop.
2) Yr error? U made a error Wigboy? LMAO! This is the first time u admit u got anything wrong..... & it only took u 10 days to finally admit it. 10 days!!!! Hahahahahahahahaha!
3) I think yr still lying & u mixed the 2 players up. Hougard was the only player who cut inside when that try was scored.
4) Tautes only culpable 4 that try if u such a rugby noob that u dont know a backline player has 2 tackle his opposite number before anything else.
Ok Wigboy, apart from u still lying about some stuff, I accept this grovelling and embarresing explanation from u, but where did I ever promise to give my real identity? I dont see any other posters putting up there real identities. What I did promise was 2 confirm if I am the poster u guys used to know as Rooinek. The answer to that is....... no!
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Former All Blacks Assistant Coach
about 1 year ago
There are a lot of different defensive systems around the rugby world. The blitz defence is fairly popular up north. It puts the ball carriers under pressure, but it also has its risks. If the defensive line is broken there is no recovery time. To stop the ball getting wide, the second last defender often gets up really fast ahead of the line and umbrellas in.
The drift defence tries to push the ball towards the sideline and makes the attack go laterally. It is not as aggressive as the blitz or a fast man-on-man defence. It won’t hurry the attack. The other team is less likely to make a line break against you, but they are more likely to get over the gain line.
A lot of the different types of defences depend on the game situation. If you have turned the ball over, the team is in an unstable situation, you need to hold, to stay alive. That’s when the drift defence comes into its own.
Defending a scrum in centre field with a split backline will need a different approach to a wide scrum close to the line. If the wings and full back are hovering in midfield you again need to be ready to adjust. Super 15 sides are likely to use a different defensive pattern against the Bulls to the one they use against the Reds.
The All Blacks spend a lot of time looking at teams and tweaking our defensive strategy according to the opposition. Some teams might blitz the Bulls in order to pressure their skills, but would guard against being picked off by the Reds. Having said that England used Lewis Moody to rocket through on Quade Cooper from the back of lineouts in order to reduce his time to take the ball up to the gain line.
At the top level you cannot be too predictable in defence. You need to vary things. You need to give attackers a different look to deal with. If they have to think it makes them sluggish.
That variety is less easy to achieve at more junior levels of rugby. At that grade I tend to think the one-out defence works best. If the back row and half back can defend number 10 and the inside channel, then your fly-half can move out onto the 12, 12 onto 13 and so on.
It gives a team security, but the number ten has to be a good tackler to make it work. If he isn’t, then work on his tackling skills. I still like low tackles. It puts the ball carrier down and gives you a greater chance of turning the ball over.
But don’t give your players too much to think about. Players need to be uncluttered to play well. Pick an option and make sure that the team understands it well.
All Black NZ
Thabks for posring this really good article - describing an excellent degensive strategy. In any event there are in fact two issues that I would like to add here.
The best defensive team in Super 15 this year was in fact the Stormers with Nienaber as their defence coach. I am sure he made use of the same methods as outlined in the article. Unfortunately Nienaber is not the Springbok defence coach and the result was a disaster in the Soweto test.
The second issue I wish to mention is the players in the Springbok team and their ability to defend. Lets look firstly at Jantjies - he hung back and would not even try to defend. Him moving to defend afainst the inside center (12) is just unthinkable. Goosen - before he went off at least tried to defend - Jantjies did zero defending.
The question is - will skills development benefit the SA backline players and in that case it is necessary to evaluate the individual players.
The Jantjies scenario cannot change - he has serious defence deficiencies on local level as well. In defence Jantjies only tackle players from behind - never from up front. When he tries feebly to tackle players running at him - he at best slow down the attacking player and somebody else must complete the tackle.
That leaves the 12 to try and deal with the opposition 12 - the 13 with the 13 and nobody to cover the overlap situation at all. The problem was further enhanced by Hougaard - who was basically clueless as to the defensive role of the wing under circumstances like is covered in the article quoted by you.
Can this deficiency be corrected by good coaching?. Yes it can in some cases depending on the integral defence abilities of players. That means a real no possibility in a player like Jantjiesl. The main reason is he shies away from tackles when players run at him - be it his opposite 10 or anybody else by hanging back and not going forward to defend. Normally players run through his feeble efforts to defend and the next player must then complete the tackle. .
Further out - I believe that De Villiers is a cleverer ball player and will make most tackles and when necessary drift out to defend on the basis outlined in the article. However, De Villiers is largely past his best and they will have to concentrate on development of a new 12. The real problem here is that his possible replacement - Francois Steyn really is a poor defender - and needs massive enhancement of his defensive abilities. I think he can benefit substantially from proper coaching though.
Taute desperately needs defensive skills development. He is reportedly going to the Stormers and Nienaber will get him up to standard.
Hougaard - I doubt very much whether he can read the game on the wing and he would not consequently not manage to upgrade his defence - even if he is subjected to a major defensive skills development program.
In essence the article is 100% correct - but what is also evident is that players themselves must have the basic ability and instincts to benefit from skills development in the relevant field. If the latter is deficient - not amount of skills development would be of help.
Draadtrekker, looks like I got somehwere after all which must make you feel a bit dumb.
BTW, I'm not OCD, Im CDO. Its like OCD but the letters are in alphabetical order as they shd be! LOL!
Jalapeno!
Status: Squad member
Posts: 200 RE: Where is Saffex?
October 17, 2012, 11:18:01
Draadtrekker, looks like I got somehwere after all which must make you feel a bit dumb.
BTW, I'm not OCD, Im CDO. Its like OCD but the letters are in alphabetical order as they shd be! LOL!
No I don't feel a bit dumb. It was a stupid argument to begin with and the way you nagged on about it like a wife needing the lawn mowed says more about yourself as you might think.
I said "a" wife, not "my" wife!
If you had half a brain Fruit you would have realised I corrected the record when I posted the video of the incident. It didn't take me ten days to admit I was wrong, it took you ten days and another posting to process the fact.
And no, it's not the first time I admitted to getting something wrong.....for example, I said I was wrong about Jean being more suited to 13 than 12.
Also, I never confused Hougaard that was your unsupported supposition.....but your claim that "Taute never came off his wing" shows befuddlement.
You still miss the point about Taute's role in the try. Sure a player has to tackle his man.....but you don't wait for that player to come to you, especially if there is an overlap. You cut down his space and time. If you don't get that, you understand nothing about defence.
As for your identity, keep it old Fruit......it's hardly important.
Its why jallopy is afraid to reveal the name he used to post under that is of interest to me. I am just a curious type.
Why do u think I posted under any other name, Baboon-ou? Why cant I just be someone new?
Not to prolong yr embaressment Wigboy, but if its so unimportant then why did u ask?
Jallopy there have been give aways. We have met you before. Like a good chess player I have been outmanouvering you!
You are definitely not new! Neither is pooo.
Baboon-ou, are u sure we met before cuz I havent visited a zoo or a circus for a few years now. I hope I was polite to u and I didnt just point and laugh!!
Thanks Cheapo.... I mean Chip-ou..... I mean, whatever yr name is!
