Who should be no 1 flyhalf theis EOYT

After a campaign of six months of Mozart comprising of often mythical castigation  of Lambie -  he proved today that he is really at this stage our top flyhalf choice - especially taking into account the debacle of  Morne  in the Ellis Park Test.   The back up should come from Catrakillis and Goosen - who shows signs today that he is still a real option in future.

The player that was useless today was Jantjies and it was not surprising that he was replaced early today - showed nothing  in attack or defence and the Lions backline in fact was better when Boshoff moved to the flyhalf position.  

So for flyhalf we are down to three candidates - Lambie, Catrakillis and Goosen.  The order is likely to change after Goosen gets some more playing time.

It would be a huge relief if we are last rid of the robotic and useless Morne Steyn - hope Meyer sees it that way too. 

Mozart

You never based you line breaks and tackle breaks on anything but your selective imagination.  After you made the comparison between Morne and Lambie I went to the trouble to check the ESPN Scrum, stats for the first 8 rounds of Super 15 and found that your information is fictitious.   In fact throughout all those games Lambie was ahead of Morne in most categories relating to attacking rugby except at goal kicks - where Morne was successful in 80% of the kicks and Lambie in 75%.

So your comparisons were not based on fact - but on the normal discredit program of Mozart.      

Obviously I do apologize when I am wrong - I don't try and wiggle myself out of the situation like you do.  I checked the first 8 matches each of Morne and Lambie played in and did not find it necessary to check other facts as well.

Just one thing though - meters gained is not significant because flyhalfs often fall back to cover kicks - run meters and then kick in return - that means really nothing in the gaining of meters over the gain line - where attackers are beaten or lines are broken.   Those two are the real issues  as to the value of a flyhalf in attacking rugby.  Meters gained is in that way not really of value to the team - unless the recovery is followed by a backline attack - but Morne never does that - he merely kicks after running around 10 or so meters with the ball.      

 Mozart

Why don't you just concentrate on "beat more tacklers per run.....made more clean breaks."     Those are the crucial issues - because the meters gain is not really a true value norm - unless it is meters gained over the gain line and that is not clear from the ESPN stats.   I will give you an example - before Taute was injured - he had the most beneficial meters gained stats of virtually all full backs in upper 15 - because he gathered balls kicked at him and ran with it long distances before he got tackled or kicked the balls himself.    OK - you can say Taute played at full back and Morne at flyhalf - but Morne's playing style often enough allows for -

*   making so-called strategic kicks; and

*   falling back to cover return kicks together with the wings and full back.

He often enough receives the return kicks and run some meters before kicking again.  If you have not noticed that in his playing style you must be kidding.   That type of play - makes the meters gained very suspect and really affect the value of meters gained negatively - so stick to the following and I will be happy to accept those as value measures and make the necessary apologies you seek:-

*   Line breaks affected

*   Defenders beaten

*   Loss of possession

*   Conversions

*   Missed Conversions

*   Tackles made

*   Tackles missed

Those certainly are enough to test the value of the respective two players comparing them to each other.