Would they make your World Cup team

I know we have now debated this for some time now but while we wait to see which hand Rassie plays come the BaaBaa game next week I thought it might be an interesting debate whether these 30+ should remain in the team and when should we sunset them.

All I would say is that Rassie has a soft spot for the oldies. Unless it is a major injury, he won't discard them. We saw that with he played Frans Steyn in 2022 when we had our flyhallf crisis and only because Frans done his knee in that they decided to leave him behind. It was very evident that Frans was not quite up there. We had the same with Vermeulen.

So here is the list.

Name | Current Age | Age at World Cup | Caps | Form

Bongi, 34, (36), 77 - Club form average, test form was good last season

Vincent Koch 35 (37), 61 - Club form average, test form was good in 24

Frans Malherbe 34 (36), 76 - Injury prone during season, Test form was above par

Eben Etzebeth, 33 (35), 131 - Injury hit season, but amazing form when playing - Test form excellent

Mostert, 34 (37), 78 - Inured last season, haven't seen much of him this season

Lood, 32 (34), 59, - Been injured for a few seasons, is he up to speed

PSDT, 32 (35), 87 - Player of the year, injured this season.

Kolisi, 34 (36), 92 - Club form was awful, but he played really well for the boks

Kwagga, 32 (34) 51 - Bit part player for boks, not seen much of him in the highlights at all

Reinach, 35, (37) 40 - Bit part player, no idea what he did for Montpellier

Pollard, 31, (33) 80 - Good club form, but Prem final, Riding pine behind SFM last season.

Am, 31, (34) 42 - Poor Club form, poor test form, injury issues.

Dud, 33 (36) 88 - Good form in Jap, Great form last season for boks

AE, 31 (33) 19 - Great club form, bit part for boks, Rassie needs to back him now

Kriel, 31 (33) 80 - Great club form as seen in highlights, Great test form, reaching his potential

Kolbe 31 (34) 42 - Great club form, great form last season

Mpimpi 34 (37) 45 - Great club form, good for bok last season

Willie 35 (38) 98 - Good club form, makes a difference for bulls, but erattic season, Good for boks

18 of these players are still in Rassies plans. All of them except Willie will be under 37. Let's assume Rassie will pick them even when they are 39.

I'm just wondering if Rassie will try to retain as many of them. I honestly would only keep the core

1. Etzebeth
2. PTSD
3. Lomp - Still a youngster in comparison, hope he regains his form
4. Kwagga - borderline but could bring value
5. Pollard - first name on the sheet
6. AE
7. Kriel
8. Kolbe

So for me there are 10 Passengers who Rassie really need to drop this season. They are just taking caps from other players. I mean, that is insane that he has 18 of them in the current squad of 35. That doesn't give a lot of room to develop players.

They can't make it to the next World Cup.

I think Willie will have his swan song, but Rassie need to keep player like Quan Horn on the fringes and get some caps to him as a back up to Willemse and Fassi.

But I really think that even the 8 players may be too old for World Cup time

Dud and Am could make the team. Dud with a better chance given how good he was last season

I would not keep AE - he was and remains a fringe player that produce zero on test level - his retention would be a farce. De Allende is still i top form and the replacement player at a12 would be versatile and thinking player Willemse will be his repalcemnt in due course,

The fact is that Erasmus has already announced h ould like to see Willie to complete a 100 test caps - he is now on 98 and that would be thed f Willie for keeps. His form this year as a total farce ayway - especially in the final where he acted like a headless chicken. Willie will then join the coaching training programs initiated by Eramus, Other candidates for joing that program is Kolixi and Pollard,

Pollard I believe is getting slower than he used to be and I frankly cannot see him sirvoving untul 2027. I also like to ee younger players in the team - but ul;tinmately performace is what counts, No thinking coach will drop players based entirely on age - performnce must always be the norm. Where that happena nd age and not performnce in

With all the younger and better locks and 7's we have there will be no place for Mostert in the team. After all he was a classical fringe player most of the time only used when better players were injured or not available,

. ,

Genuine new WC players….assuming we continue to play Rassie ball:

Hooker….reliable, smart and physically ready.

Sebastian de Klerk….a turnover ball artist

Kriel….solid and sensible

Wilco….not young but very little test exposure

Kobus Wiese,,.a blindsider who is also a potent ball carrier and can fetch

V Tchituka….potent and sensible.

Hanekom….Vermeulen like for like if his body holds up.

And now the players who have something to prove, mostly mentally and because they aren’t easy fits with Rassie ball

Fassi, Sacha, Julius, Williams, Nortje, Roos all the young locks

…..

Players who may already be gone….the Hendrikse brothers, Libbok, Wessels, Gelant.

…….

So if we stick to the genius game plan….highly likely new additions are few and far between. But losing the likes of Eben and Pollard may force changes in the game plan which could favor some of those who have something to prove, like Sacha. Fitting an attacking mega talent into Rassie ball seems like a square peg into a round hole proposition.

1. Etzebeth - if he makes it
2. PTSD - if...
3. Lomp - Still a youngster in comparison, hope he regains his form...we have better.
4. Kwagga - borderline but could bring value
5. Pollard - first name on the sheet...backup
6. AE....maybe in the squad..
7. Kriel...backup
8. Kolbe...definitely a starter if fit.
9. DdA...probably a starter.

Mozart

We know what Jakeball is - it is kicking the shit out of the balls with no clear objective and result - in other words a chaotic problem during matches.

So what is Rassieball - please gve us a description why that is a system in playing rugby/ .

Why the fuck would Wessels be gone after the amazing season he has had - that is plain stupidity

Same applies to Jordan Hendrikse - good strong player who should not be playing flyhalf

The crossed-out players need to be removed. They will not make the next World Cup.

We need the next 2 years to give players enough game time before the next World Cup. We have to see how many players make the grade, and which ones will not.

Bongi, 34, (36),: Way past his best. No way he will be effective at the next World Cup

Vincent Koch 35 (37): Way too old to make the next World Cup. Has never been a first-choice player.

Frans Malherbe 34 (36), : Constantly injured. Already played too much test rugby. He must be so unfit now.

Mostert, 34 (37), 78 : Far too old by the next World Cup

Reinach, 35, (37) 40 - It makes no sense to be considering him at his age.

Am, 31, (34) 42 - Way past his best. Looks slow and ponderous

Dud, 33 (36) 88 - 36 is too old for the next World Cup

Mpimpi 34 (37) 45 -37 is far too old for the next World Cup, given he is an outside back

Willie 35 (38) 98 -He would be the oldest back to ever mark the World Cup for the Boks. Too old, move on.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The players below will probably make the World Cup, but it remains to be seen how far past their best they will be.

1. Eben Etzebeth, 33 (35), 131 - Has become injury-prone; he might not make the next World Cup

1. Lood, 32 (34), 59, - Very injury prone, and not a first choice. Perhaps he should be discarded.

1. PSDT, 32 (35), 87 - Another increasingly injury-prone and ageing player, but even at 80%, he is a world beater.

1. Kolisi, 34 (36), 92 - He should be replaced, but with transformation and team spirit might remain.

1. Kwagga, 32 (34) 51 - Could still be an impact player.

1. Pollard, 31, (33) 80 - Solid player, but not sure he will make it on form if decent backups emerge.

1. AE, 31 (33) 19 - Should make the next World Cup.

1. Kriel, 31 (33) 80 - Should make the next World Cup.

1. Kolbe 31 (34) 42 - Should make the next World Cup.

By next WC I’d only be looking at the following current 30 year olds

Kolbe, Pollard, Marx, RG, Thomas and Wilco

Looseheads who are dominated don’t work with Rassie ball. Does that help?

Trust you to be stupid enough to define his entire season by him being compromised on the engage and ignorant enough to ignore the fact that he is also an option at hooker

There is one certainty and that is Wessels is going to have a long test career

Ja, I just wanted to see why Rassie selected so many old heads. Especially in a season like now.

He has 4 soft games to really get the team to run through their paces.

I would have shortlist 35 players under 30 and then make sure they form the core. I would only keep 10 of the older guys around as backup and when we need to call upon them.

Then, I would not keep to many of the old guys around. We need to find the next gen players to come through.

Marx, Willemse, Pollard, Kwagga, AE, Kriel, Kolbe, Moodie and Arendse are players that has world cup medals and can help the next gen along.

We can then work with the likes of Hooker, Wessels, Hannekom, Roos, Nortje, Louw.

Then we have fringe boks who needs a proper break.

Du Toit, Willie, Grobbies, RG, Jean Luc need proper investment as they have been performing and up there year in year out.

I still want to see more youngsters come through.

But having 18 players over 35 will not work. They will break down and tire. It is a long tournament and it nearly cost us last time around. It paid off , but we came very close

KC

I still want to know what the 31 year old AE has contributed to in the 21 tests he played in. It was one big zero - so how can he help in development of younger players?

Wessels may very well be a great prospect as a hooker….but not a loosehead. And he wasn’t compromised on the engage, that’s untrue, the scrums were neutral after the engage and then he got dominated.

If you think that’s incorrect, find a scrum that demonstrates your point…there’s a good lad.

Mozart

Wessels struggled because White played ping pong with him - sometimes not selecting him in matches and when he did select him sometime as a hooker and other times as a loosehead prop. That was grossly unfair towards a younger player finding his feet as a prop or a hooker. It goes back to what White did with Smit and Bismarck in 2007 - when he used Smit as hooker instead of the better hooker Bismarck.

.

First scrum

Fuck me you have to be pretty rugby ignorant to define a players career based on one match

Fuck me could you get more short sighted than that - it’s a fucking joke especially considering how good Wessels has been all season

We heard this same ignorant shit about Malherbe, Kitshoff and Thomas

I looked at the first scrum and you are talking balls.

Coming from you I take that with a pinch of salt given I’ve seen the same scrum myself and picked up the early engage straight away.

You of course informed me that a prop could not engage before the other lol

You picked up what you always pick up….what you want to see. Utter balls about the first scrum.

But if you want to be schooled here’s what happened:

Okay the first scrum at minute 2.40, Leinster feed. They go down and actually the Bools push first, Leinster responds and the scrum goes down. No sign of Clarkson engaging early and the scrum is reset.

They engage at exactly the same moment on the reset…Clarkson drills Wessels backwards and the whole Bools front row is driven back for a penalty.

I repeat, no early engagement by Leinster, the two front rows engaged as two units. Wessels makes a slight forward move, but is down on his knees……one can see the ref looking at his legs. The lift from Clarkson allows him to regain his feet, but he is going backwards…..the Bools are penalized.

There was no early push from Leinster, the Bools engaged properly, but Wessels was dominated.

Stop deliberately talking nonsense Dave, you talk enough nonsense without trying.

Your take is utter bullshit as it is with any passage of play you proclaim to have studied

Facts of the scrum was the tighthead got in an early engage which comprised Wessels before the shove. On the engage Wessels is on the back foot

You don’t even know the finer arts of a scrum engage so how the fuck am I to believe your take on that scrum?

Mozart - what is Rassie Ball? Please enligten us on that score,

1 Jan-Hendrik Wessels

It was a tough outing in the scrums for the Bok. He was under pressure in the first scrum, which gave Leinster a penalty and it set the tone for the rest of the first half.

4/10

1. Jan-Hendrik Wessels – 5

Carried with his usual vigour and wasn’t bullied physically, but struggled to assert dominance at the set-piece, with Tom Clarkson more than matching him in the scrum.

Thomas Clarkson - First scrum penalty after 4 minutes, murdering the Bulls scrum for his 55 minutes. 10

Thomas Clarkson's place in the Irish rugby hierarchy was cemented as he monstered a supposedly superior Bulls front-row.

Ireland may have Tadhg Furlong and Finlay Bealham on the Lions Tour but Clarkson is now firmly in place behind them.

……………..

Stop talking utter nonsense Dave you moron.

Fuck me how stupid are you - I did not say Wessels won the scrum battle you idiot

I said it was a technical issue he had through lack of experience allowing the tighthead to get the upper edge on the engage - a fact

It’s also a complete lie that the tighthead monstered the Bulls scrum for 55min - that is absolute bullshit

Fuck me you are so rugby ignorant you did not even know one prop could engage before the other and you expect me to take you seriously on the subject

You are a joke

Okay moron….I asked the question properly. Here’s Chat’s Response and the question.

…..

In the rugby scrum….is it possible for an individual prop to engage meaningfully before his front row partners

In a properly officiated rugby union scrum, it is not possible or legal for an individual prop to engage meaningfully before his front row partners (hooker and the other prop). Here's why:

?? Laws and Mechanics:

1. World Rugby Scrum Engagement Protocol (as of 2025):
2. The referee gives a three-part command:
3. "Crouch – Bind – Set"
4. The entire front row (both teams) must engage as a unit on "Set".
5. Engaging early (before “Set”) is a penalty offense.
6. Binding Requirements:
7. Props must bind to their opposite numbers correctly and simultaneously.
8. The tighthead prop binds onto the opposition loosehead’s upper arm.
9. The loosehead binds on the tighthead’s back or jersey.
10. Coordination:
11. The front row moves in synchrony, driven by the pack behind.
12. If one prop lunges or engages early, it usually destabilizes the scrum and draws a penalty or reset.

… .

Just accept the fact that the your idea is a joke, that every player rating says Wessels was owned.

Just another example of your complete inability to see what’s happening on the field….especially when it conflicts with your announcing a player as a star.

A complete joke…but then nobody ever accused you of being observant.

Mozart

Are you unable to answer a simple question - what is Rassie ball rugby play?

Not so as you could understand.

The most stupid answer to a real question asked - fact it is must really be the most BS ib site history,

By the way watch the following video and then tell us what Rassie Ball is:-

, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wk_sOaI7N_M

Fuck you are an idiot

What is this then numbnuts

Chat - is it possible for a loosehead prop to engage before his tighthead does

In theory, no — but in practice, yes, it can happen, though it’s not ideal and often penalized.

In Law:

Under World Rugby’s scrum engagement sequence (“crouch, bind, set”), the entire front row is supposed to engage together. That means the loosehead, hooker, and tighthead on one side should move forward in unison, meeting the opposing front row as a coordinated unit.

So by the laws of the game:

1. The tighthead and loosehead should engage simultaneously.
2. Early engagement by any player — including the loosehead — is penalizable.

In Practice:

Yes, a loosehead can end up engaging slightly before the tighthead — usually due to:

1. Poor timing or technique in the front row.
2. The loosehead trying to get an advantage over the opposing tighthead.
3. Imbalance or miscommunication in the setup.

This can lead to:

1. The scrum becoming unstable or skewed.
2. Penalties for early engagement or scrum collapse.
3. The tighthead being put under pressure, especially if the opposition uses it tactically.

Except dumbass….it was the loosehead under pressure. You do know Wessels was the loosehead I hope. And as Chat says a ‘slight’ early engagement frequently results in penalties and scrum instability.

There was no significant instability on the hit…and penalties can result. They did but not once for the hit….they resulted because Wessels imploded.

As he did in the first scrum where he was penalized for over extending and having his knee on the deck…..the exact opposite of being pushed back by an early hit. From there he was shoved back as he was shoved back legitimately all game.

Which of course is what everybody except you saw….because you are a bit of a plank. I quote:

1 Jan-Hendrik Wessels

It was a tough outing in the scrums for the Bok. He was under pressure in the first scrum, which gave Leinster a penalty and it set the tone for the rest of the first

….

So go ahead find one report that suggests Wessels was dominant and while you are about it look up the definition of loosehead.

ROFL….what a moron.

Yes dumbfuck I know he is a loosehead but I know you are not stupid enough to conclude that it’s only a loosehead or tighthead for that matter that can engage slightly earlier helloooooo

Of course it could result in a penalty if it is picked up, which it clearly was not given the ref was on the other side of the scrum

One would swear every infringement on the field is picked up by the ref, again helloooooo

Im only talking about a slight pre engagement, that’s all it takes and is exactly what happened

If you know your rugby you would know that a pre engagement is a well known tactic used by props and is certainly possible by one prop without his other prop engaging at exactly the same time

This evidences just how little you really know.

In that first scrum it’s exactly what happened - Wessels was compromised by a slight pre engagement by the tighthead which had him conceding before the shove

It’s a technical issue - not a technique or strength issue - but all this is beyond you

Best of all you are so pathetic that now and forever more Wessels will be another failure in your books, defined by one outing in his career - that is how pathetic you are. Based on that final suddenly he is not good enough to be a loosehead - fucking joke - the prime example of a moron

By the way watch the following video and then tell us what Rassie Ball is:-

, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wk_sOaI7N_M

Yes, behold the mighty Esterhuizen at 2:02 and the unstoppable Mostert at 5:17. Nice to see you appreciating the top players ou Maaik.

So finally you admit he had a very poor scrumming outing. Case closed.

2 potential positive actuins in 6 years and still mostly BS bar for 2 instances of Estehuizen and the over the hill Mostert. I look at matches carefully and not with prejudice at all. Esterhuizen always was a useless cente as dim as possibl a player and I see amny cases where backline players push of breakdown play by backlinersm

Where the fuck did I admit he had a very poor scrumming outing - lying again are you?

Case closed my arse

‘Defined by one outing’…..clearly an admission that the outing was different. Every report says this. He was dominated in almost every scrum. Which isn’t just a form issue, it raises the question of whether he is really strong enough for the job, he isn’t the biggest loosehead around.

But for you size only matters if you don’t like the player.

Go ahead….use another four letter word if it makes you feel taller than 5’9”.

Listen here old man it’s one thing speaking utter shit as you always do, fuck me you don’t even know that one prop can engage before the other and you claim to know the game, but lying about me saying he had a poor scrumming outing is taking the piss - fuck off.

Wessels not the biggest at 121kg - fuck me and you think powder puff Mostert at 112kg is big enough for a Bok lock lol

Wessels has dominated all season along with Wilco at 3, he lost the battle against Leinster not because he was physically dominated or because of a technique issue - he failed on a technical front on the engage - easy to fix

I’m not pathetic and stupid enough to define him as a loosehead based on that game - that is just fucking pathetic which is exactly what you are

We back to me being 5’9 you pathetic twat - this from an 80 year old loser who is the same height as me - old man you forgot to call me bald and fat - raise your game old timer

I never called you bald Dave…that would be telling porkies like you. I did call you fat and short, which is totally true. A tiny fattie, who has delusions of size. Remember when you called yourself Big Dave….you could have knocked me over with a feather when this midget appeared.

ROFL!

You poor old fucker - you are too stupid to realise that you are not the only poster that has met me in person and exposed you for the pathetic liar that you are

Let me guess, Becs, Mike and Rooi were lying when they confirmed I was neither short, fat or small

Exposed yet again you sad loser - as I said - up your game

Fuck me you have to be profoundly stupid to lie about someone knowing full well three others have also met me - are you seriously this dumb or can we put it down to your advanced age? Serious question?