Why Morne must go

A team needs to be made up of winners........two or three bad eggs and your team is as strong as the weakest link.......Morne has been the primary weak link for years.

I had a look at the win records of our best players and poor old Morne sits at the bottom of the pile......in a nutshell a loser

Win records for the Boks:

Morne - 61.5%

Jean - 66%

Habana - 66%

du Preez - 67%

Beast - 69%

Lambie - 70%

Brussouw - 70%

Jannie - 70.5%

Fourie - 71.5%

Alberts - 71.5%

Frans Steyn - 72%

Bismark - 73%

Bakkies - 73.5%

JP - 73.5%

I had to throw this one in: JJ - 82%

There is a clear pattern here, the real test stars are winners. Bottom line is, Morne should have been chopped ages ago........he is a loser

Saffex

This is on reason why stats are so misleading.   Some players statistically are statistically better over a period of time than others depending on the nature of the games they played in -- but it gives no realistic reflection of the present form of players.

Anybody who argues that Francois Steyn at this stage is selectable ahead of Jean de Villiers must be nuts.  The same applies to Pietersen - who having  had a relatively poor season  in Super 15 this year and then went to Japan, where his physical condition deteriorated badly.

Matter of fact - on present form neither of the two - Steyn and Pietersen - should be in contention for Springbok selection - same as Fourie who also have the soft Japanese Club environment to blame for a huge deterioration in his  physical condition.

I agree with you about Morne Steyn - he really is past it and will be 30 soon.  Morne's performances outside of goalkicking was always questionable and his defence can at this stage regarded as poor with a missed tackle ratio being 19% in the recent RC series.   In the test on Saturday it was 20% - even though he played for only 30 minutes.   That is just not acceptable. 

Morne Steyn in the RC over the last two years was largely to blame for test losses or even draws.   The drawn tests last year stemmed largely from missed kicks at goal - as well as his generally poor performances where during tests the spectators boo-ing him mostly as result of continuous aimless kicking away of possession.  The Morne Steyn performances is also affected by the robotic nature of his play as a backline pivot and his absolute lack of ball sense.   Both cost the Springboks badly in tests.

There are numerous reasons for that.   Morne's reactions to situations are generally slow and ponderous.   For years he stood far too deep in the pocket so as to allow him time to kick balls more accurately.  Since he never attacks the gain line himself - the opposition loosies and players knew exactly how to counter Steyn's game in all cases.   The opposition wings and flyhalf would fall back to cover his kicks - and the loosies would go for the inside center to defend whenever he did pass the ball to him.   That means that the backline in attack was neutralized completely.   

Since Morne came on the scene as a test player  our backline as an attacking weapon was neutralized and the opposing teams never had to fear any backline attacks.   The only tests in the last year where the backline showed anything as a backline attacking unit was in the Aussie test in Preoria.

In the June test series the opposition was poor and so was the hapless Pumas in the Soweto test.   In the away test in Mendoza was back to his previous form - stood  too deep in the pocket and kicked aimlessly.  The only try scored in that test by the Springboks resulted from innovative play by Le Roux.   The Aussies were sub-par this year and lost by wide margins to the Springboks.  However, there was no way that Steyn had a hand in any tries scored by the Springboks.   In the Eden Park test - Steyn was largely to blame for the fact that the All Blacks scored four tries against the Springboks.  In two cases it happened because Morne failed to kick penalty kicks out of touch and allowed the All Blacks to gain possession and counter-attack.  

Meyer himself told Morne to stand flatter and pass the ball more to his backline before the Ellis Park test - especially in the case of breakdown ball recovery and turnovers.  Meyer went so far as to state that in public.   The instruction had one particularly bad consequence though.   Seconds before the siren had to go off for halftime the Springbok forwards turned over possession in the Springbok 22.  The robotic Morne did not use his common sense to make a relieving kick - but followed instructions to the T and passed the ball with extremely bad consequences for the Springboks.   He also was hopeless in defence - so he was largely to blame for the loss of that test.  In comments on that incident it was evident that Naas regarded that as the most stupid thing a flyhalf has ever done.

His groupie supporters always shout and scream about his accurate goal kicking - but completely lose sight of his negative impact in general play.   They generally attack Lambie for being inadequate because of his less effective goal kicking- but Lambie attacks the gain line himself - he is a more thinking and innovative player and he would not make the foolish mistake Morne made in the Ellis Park test.   His defence is much better than that of the backslapping Morne.

The utterly predictable Morne is a bad excuse for a flyhalf and he has to go if the Springboks ever wants to reach an improved standing in World Rugby.  All objective people realise that and even objective commentators lik e Justin Marshall has said that in public.        

 Cleancut

Same argument - - Morne is an average 10, but his goalkicking is better than Lambie's so he is a preferred choice.  That argument is futile - since there are indications that Lambie is a much more thinking player than Morne and much better in defence.  Since Lambie has had virtually no game time compared to Steyn - there is really no indication how Lambie would have fared on test level in th tests where Morne was the pivot.  However, given his proven abilities as a thinking player it is likely that he would have been better in defence and better as a backline pivot than the robotic Steyn was.  

I know what to expect from the utter predictable Steyn - just like any opposition team knows - but Lambie should be given more game time - since that would create uncertainty in the minds of the opposition and work in favour of the Springboks  

 "Morne is an average 10 ... and guess what ... so is Lambie. In other words, six of the one and a half a dozen of the other."

Well said.

Then there's also the perception that the flyhalf who replaces Morne is going to solve our backline woes, or if you like....the replacement flyhalf is going to fireup our backline, a kinda magic bullet!

Yeah right, just likw the Quadupe fires up the Ozzie backline.

Hilarious.

The Truth

I actually thought Wayne Julies was a damn good 12 and never understood why he was not selected more for the Boks.

But you are too stupid to comprehend my take......I am talking about regular Bok starters, Julies was never that you dunce......most of his caps will have been off the bench.  

CancerC, try catch a bloody wake up.......we do have better 10's than Morne........most are, but lets keep it down to Lambie and Goosen for now who are 10 times better than useless Morne.

Denny, Cooper does ignite the Oz backs, look no further than his display against Italy.......the issue with Oz is not their backs, its their forwards that are not competing.

Cooper is 20 times better than Morne  

Hell  -  but this lot is silly today - usibg stats to prove what everyone with an open mind should know about Morne Steyn -

*   one of the top goal kickers in the world; and

*    one of the worst pivots at 10 in World Rugby

.

Saffex

Typing error above - please read your question carefully - surely you are referring to Cooper before the question mark.