Journalists are people working for the media and their reports are there to sell the papers - nothing else. The real impact is that thy write what they believe - not what really is the truth. The most notorious issue Is for instance the assessment of player performances in test matches. Often enough - they assign points out of 10 to players - but they rarely quote anything of substance that would support their point allocations.
Media hype normally centres around certain favourite players - and over the years there can be no doubt that certain players have been selected or given contracts on the basis of media hype and not sustained performance on an acceptable basis.
I am not going to go back far - but would quote a few examples. During 2011 Elton Jantjies every week got an unbelievable write up as to how well he performed in games. Deficiencies in his game was routinely ignored by the media and if you believed them he was a miracle flyhalf and the best thing that ever happened in SA Rugby. He consequently was -
* a constant in Meyer's squad and preferred to Lambie when Goosen was injured during the Soweto test - during which game the weaknesses glossed over by the media was badly exposed; and
* he was contracted by the Stormers for Super 15 and flopped badly.
Then we had the case of Jaco Taute. After playing very well for the Lions on both CC and Supr series level at full back for nearly two years, the Lions suffered a series of injuries to their centers and Taute was moved to center for four games. He showed very little in the four games - got injured and was out of rugby for 5 months. When Francois Steyn got injured during the Super Series there was a vacancy in the centr position. Just before th team announcement - Taute came back from injury and played one CC game a center. Despite a very average performance in that game the media hype about him being selected at 13 was incredible. He was selected - played a few games at center with very little to show for it. He was lways a god full back - but his recycling to center was a flop - so his selection at center followed massive media uprights not matched by subsequent performances.
The present case we have is about Willem Sloth Alberts. He is normally accredited by the media as a massive ball carrier making bone-crushing tackles. When anybody analyses matches he in fact shows up badly since -
* his mighty ball carries is a myth - when he does carry balls his average meter gain per carry is less than 2 meters and since he never breaks tackles it is evident hat he is tackled by the first defender in front of him;
* he made some good tackles - but the number of average tackles and especially missed tackles are amazing compared to the number of tackles made - that is added to that if a player is circa 2 meters on either side of him he never attempts to make tackles.
In for instance the last test against the French the media hype was incredible - but what was never mentioned was the number of tackles missed by him. Since Sloth Alberts -
* is too clumsy to recover balls in breakdown situations where his role is zero;
* never pass a ball to another player and plays n role in comprehensive attacking moves; and
* has poor ball-handling skills,
he really is a dubious selection. The media hype originated in 2011 - when he got the reputation of being a mighty ball carrier and tackler after one match and that is still being carried on despite no present proof.
Media coverage on certain players should always be treated with a back of salt - a pinch is not enough - and inclusion of such players in teams can only be negative insofar as team performances are concerned. The problem is that the hype players never actually lives up to the hype.
