Your Bok hopefuls

Somewhere around halfway through the franchise season, considering the Bok side is basically settled, outside of few looming departures that are already seemingly replaced, who'd you add to the squad for the 2026 season?

For me;

Seb De Klerk

Elrigh Louw

Cameron Hanekom(don't care if he's injured and hasn't played)

Maybe Ruan Venter if he continues to play well this year.

Papier if this was Reinach's last Bok season.

(Space) for the Stompies loosie you are all raving about ;)

Dave please don't comment because you are actually incapable of producing realistic lists.

I liked the look of Bulls no 6 Rudolf.

Maart on the wing for the Stormers looks useful.

Schickerling looks like a decent lock.

2026 is the year to largely finalist the 2027 world cup squad so a lot should happen Plumpster.

Bye the way your boy Esterhuizen look pretty ineffectual this week end. Just saying!. Looks to be a better option at 6.

Missed most of the Sharks game Beeno...but who does look effective when playing for them? Even Eben and Bongi look like amateurs in that Durban clown show.

Perspective

Ruben van Heerden should have been a Bok already...

You mean Paul De Villiers, he is about two bricks high (180cm, 5'11) and weighs 101 kg and only 22, will be 23 in January. I think he is a must for the boks and a replacement for Kwotalisi. Kwotalisi is such a coward when it comes other the ruck. Just watched him again over the weekend literally over the ball and saw two players coming to clear him and instead of latching on he jumps back to avoid contact. What a coward and never a menace over the ball.

Paul is the the biggest, not the fastest but he sure knows how to get around the park. His stats are phenomenal as an opensider and I would say the reason why the Stormers are able to rack up wins with a player that is so disruptive and effective. Very useful as a ball carrier and support players. Makes phenomal tackles. Not as explosive as a Kwagga but he is sure build like an olympic wrestler.

The rest haven't really impressed me for bok hopefuls. Will take a while for Louw and Hannekom to make a come back.

Jacque Rudolph is 32 already and won't have the engine for test rugby

We haven't seen much of those 3 junior springboks, Batho, Hasheem Peed and that black hooker. Jooste has had a few games and scoring. So I was hoping to see these boys get on the park.

I like PDV fine, but no, I meant Ruben van Heerden, the Stormers lock who's been playing good rugby for the past 3 seasons now...more physical 5 lock who does the hard yards.

Fuck off

It is a rather difficut situation since there are aother factors to bear in mind:-

1. To my mind the players ove 30 ears of age mut maintain top class performances to qualify to play in the 2027 RWC, Of those there re twpo certanties based on present performances - Marx and D u Toit. Possibles aare De Allende, Kolbe, Pollard and Reinard/
2. There are also some players that may have to move to play in differnt positions - namely Hooker in particular,
3. As a back-up flymhalf ny fst choice would be Jurie Matthhee.
4. One has to look at the loosie situation. Bearing in mind my first three loosies I would select iss Hanekom, Roos and D e Villiers,
5. Of the rest I think we need locks and in my book I would pich Van der Heever and Schickerling

For the rest I tink the exossting younger players wil make the grade in 2027.

Snickersling….you can’t be serious!

Schickerling is very good but at 30 it’s too late for him

He is better than Mostert ever was and is better than Nortje

Do we like Hooker for 12?

For me, the MVP this year was Wiese. Incredible that he was barely noticed by most here, until he wasn't there and the Boks could barely cope. Note how David called him Dumb muscle - imagine a dumb person being that important to the best pack in the world LMAO ;)

The reason I bring him up is because most here, myself included, are probably looking at Hanekom as his replacement but Hanekom is totally different player. So, assume that you had to replace Weise tomorrow and Hanekom was fit and in form, do you pick him?

Honestly, I'd instead be looking at Hanekom as Siya's long term replacement.

And who do we rate as PSDT's replacement? Looking purely at PSDT's role in the current Boks...out wide, occasionally carrying up middle and generally used as a hitman, I'd probably say that Roos, Elrigh and few others come to mind and could do most of that. (Liked how Roos had a shocking start on Saturday but never went away and ended up being heavily involved in closing out the game. That kind of heart in a player is what wins me over.)

Point is, one could arguably find very decent, if not better replacements for most of the guys. Everyone but Wiese. When I look at what he does, nobody jumps to mind as a natural replacement. You guys will hate this but I'm honest when I say the best I can think of is Marco Van Staaden, and he's 30 already.

Agreed Plum...Wiese will be very difficult to replace...Hanekom, Roos main contenders for 6 and 7 in my book...with PDV maybe getting the Kwagga role from the bench.

"As a back-up flymhalf ny fst choice would be Jurie Matthhee."

Please no...rather Manie or Pollard for the short term.

Wiese is dumb muscle there is nothing subtle or creative coming from him. It’s just head down and bash - I don’t think I’ve ever seen him pass the ball.

But as I keep saying, he is very effective dumb muscle

He is not the MVP - that goes to Ox and Marx, followed by the likes of Eben, Wiese, PSDT, Wilco, Thomas, Willemse and Sacha

If I was going with the Wiese, Roos and Hanekom combo the obvious would be 6 Hanekom 7 Wiese 8 Roos…. the least creative / ball player of the 3 is your 7 hence Wiese at 7

"Wiese is dumb muscle there is nothing subtle or creative coming from him. It’s just head down and bash - I don’t think I’ve ever seen him pass the ball."

Just to confirm, Dave - Dumb muscle = no passing?

No dumbfuck - dumb muscle = a player with limited ball skills, natural talent and rugby IQ.

Your perfect 8 needs to be both skilful and physical. Wiese is only physical

He offers dominant carries and tackles nothing more, nothing less.

It’s effective

Hope that helps, but I suspect not

Plum

During the years the AB's rei g supreme their looisie and even hooker had major roles to play iro open-fields attack and defense. The idea that loosies was an extension of the Tight 5 ruled the S pring b ok teams for decades and weakened the tam.

One of the main apppointees of Erasmus was Browne - an expert in the wider roles of loosies, The onmly player that espouse that element of the game is Du Toit, Although he is blamed to be wider out it is a fact that many of the tries scored by the Srpingbok backline stemmed from assistance by Du Toit,

It is a problem that Wiese is an old style loosie - not really pacy enough to beccome invovlved in teh wider game promotedd by Browne, Wiese is a crashballer and not of much value other than that,

Two of my many comments my father - a rugby fanatic - made was

1. that there must be a jew in the Springbok backline - so now we have Sachal and
2. rhat player must have instinctive ball sense,

The latter relates to a instinctive bball sense - particularly when it comes to this issue through the years produced utstanding loosies like Rob Louw, Shalk Burger and Du Toit. From what I have deen of Hanekom and Roos are players with an advanced sense of ball sense - but e Villiers is a top class palyer in that situation.

Up to 1986 the Springbok backline was the strength of the team - after 1992 the sotiationcanged totally and backline attacking play vanished from site, In 1997 there was a new approach introduced by Carel du Plessis in the 6 months he was the coach. He had to elect backline player with the necessary abilitiy - the first few months it did not work out and the peoples had to go through a transition stage. In the end in 1997 the S pringboks beat the Aussies and BRI Lions by record margins/ Mallett inherited that backline and made two chan ges - he broughtin Mooore at 12 and moved Montgomery to full back. That team won 17 tests in a row in 1997-98. However players started retiring and Mallett failed to find replacements. So for the next near ro two decades it was back to 10 man rugby - with the loosies being an extension of the Tight 5,

It is the latter aspect which will result in a major change of the structure of loosies in future Du Toit is still the best loosie in the world - but I like a lot from what I have seen of the three youngsters mentioned That is why I support players like Hanekom, Roos and De Villiers as loosies.

If offloading is discouraged you might as well have maximum muscle….hence Wiese.

Interesting - so you are saying that Wiese has limited rugby IQ and talent?

Yes he does not strike me as someone who uses much brain power on the field - it does not take much to put the head down and head for contact or smash someone in a tackle

Hardly the kind of player that gets into definitive positions, or runs great lines or plays a great linking role with deft touches - your Roos’s, Hanekom’s, Read’s, Perisse’s, Skinstad’s, Big Joe’s, Savea’s or Doris’s of this world

Actually Plum I’m agnostic on Wiese’s intelligence….but Lucky’s game plan requires none, so muscle max is the idea.

"Actually Plum I’m agnostic on Wiese’s intelligence….but Lucky’s game plan requires none, so muscle max is the idea."

Hulk Smash...doesn't need Bruce Banner for the mayhem.

Mozart

What is Lucky's game plan?

What bullshit that Rassie’s gameplan does not require rugby intelligence. We’ve scored more tries, made more clean breaks and beaten more defenders than any other side in 2025

Is that not good enough for you?

We see far more offloads than in the past, far more balls passed than in the past, far more interplay between backs and forwards than in the past, We have wings with the best strike rates in the game

But hey ho, no intelligence needed - pathetic really

Lucky’s game plan is to win matches based box kicks, penalties, turnover ball, defense and above all scrumming. The ball is not used from set pieces and standard breakdowns, it’s hoofed in the air where it becomes a 50/50 proposition….if the opponent knocks on, there is the scrum…..often followed by a penalty to the Boks. Then there is the maul.

It works primarily because the opponents are being outscrummed in every game and because the likes of Kolbe, Edwil and Arendse are deadly on turnover ball.

This style of play depends heavily on opponents making mistakes under pressure and tends to produce close contests….eg in crucial games like Oz2, NZ1, Bargie 2. All these games were decided in part by random events.

Then there is the window dressing. When players are allowed to express themselves. NZ2 which was a shot in the dark which came off….Dud Toit running like a snail on the wing.

What suddenly made us effective when we had possession was Sacha. His deception and acceleration added a dimension to our attack which was absent and decided several key games….this is not a new strategy it’s individual brilliance.

Where does that leave our opponents . In a deep, dark hole. The Bok defense is the best in the game and the Bok scrumming is the best in the game. With the addition of Sacha to these fundamentals their challenge can’t be finessed. They have to be able to scrum…without that they are pretty much lost. But they also have to be more disciplined.

France had 20 minutes of dominating after the red card…which they threw away with extravagant ill disciplined play and the moment they were challenged they collapsed. There is going to be no easy way to beat the Boks, teams will have to step up and show some courage.

For the Boks Sacha is now indispensible and scrum dominance is almost assumed in the game plan. And our team has many old players 10 of the starters against Ireland were 30 and over. That means with the same team at the WC 10 of our starters will be 32 or older. Change has to happen, but it’s not happening among the forwards.

So there it is, the whole thing laid bare. We still play the same narrow tactics in big games, we rely heavily on a few elements, our team is aging. Our opponents seem almost unprofessional and incapable of addressing obvious needs like scrumming.

Do we win in 2027….perhaps, we have 10 times the resources we had in 1995 and all our opponents seem to be going backwards. But we haven’t evolved from scrappy winners to the dominant world’s best. So it’s likely to remain a close run thing in all the big games

Every side uses the box kick - why do our wings have such high test strike rates

Why did we score more tries, beat more defenders, make more clean breaks than any other test side in 2025?

We thumped NZ in NZ, we thumped France playing with 14 men

And you see us as one dimensional? That is utter bullshit based on your childish bias against the best coach the Boks have ever had and that is another fact unless you would care to point out a better Bok coach ever

Why did we score more tries, beat more defenders, make more clean breaks than any other test side in 2025?

Because we dominated at forward and in field position would be my guess. It certainly wasn’t because Dud Allende did anything with the ball.

But reproduce those stats if you would, that would be appreciated.

??

South Africa (Springboks) — Most tries scored in 2025 Tests

According to rugby statisticians tracking Test match data across the full year (not just one tournament), the Springboks scored more tries than any other tier-one nation in 2025. They averaged around 5.8 tries per match over the season — significantly higher than other top teams such as France or Ireland — making them the highest try-scoring Test side for the calendar year.

??

South Africa Springboks — Most Defenders Beaten in 2025 Tests

1. In the 2025 Rugby Championship, South Africa led their competition in defenders beaten with 160 beaten defenders across six matches — a significant tally and a major indicator of their attack’s physical effectiveness.

This is the only team-level defenders-beaten figure published for a major test-level competition that we can use as a proxy for the whole year. Because the Springboks also played additional international Tests (summer tours, autumn internationals) where they continued their expansive attacking style and strong ball-carrying, it’s reasonable to infer that:

? South Africa likely beat more defenders across all international Tests in 2025 than any other tier-one national side.

This matches broader reporting on their attacking dominance during the year.

?? Why South Africa Likely Leads in Defenders Beaten

1. Rugby Championship Dominance

1. The Springboks beat 160 defenders in the 2025 Rugby Championship — the highest reported defenders-beaten total in that competition.

2. Expanded Attacking Style

1. Analysts note South Africa’s increased attacking output and improvement in clean breaks and defenders beaten compared to past seasons, emphasizing both efficiency and effectiveness.

3. World-Wide Test Performance

1. South Africa finished 2025 as the world’s top-ranked nation and won most of their Tests with an attacking style that relied on quality ball-carrying and breaking tackles — key contributors to defenders beat

??

South Africa Springboks

? In the 2025 Rugby Championship, South Africa recorded the highest number of clean breaks (48) among the four competing nations (South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Argentina). In that competition they also topped tries and other attacking metrics.

That tournament is the only major international competition where team-wide clean break stats are publicly available, and South Africa led that category there. While no single global aggregated ranking exists for all Tests in 2025 (including Six Nations, summer tours and autumn internationals) published by an official source, South Africa’s attacking output trends—leading clean breaks in the Rugby Championship combined with high try scoring and defenders beaten—strongly suggest they were also the top team overall for clean breaks across the year.

It’s about the team not de Allende who himself had a good 2025

Chat GPT?

Dave ut is a wate of spxce tro deal with game plans and as NO idea what game plans entail as is indicated of his following comments and it shows himsekf up as an idiot:-

Lucky’s game plan is to win matches based box kicks, penalties, turnover ball, defense and above all scrumming. The ball is not used from set pieces and standard breakdowns, it’s hoofed in the air where it becomes a 50/50 proposition….if the opponent knocks on, there is the scrum…..often followed by a penalty to the Boks. Then there is the maul.

I do not udesrsrtnd why an ubntelligent person can cme up with shot like the above, Perhaps he should read the following and realize what he wrote ios idiotic shiy:-

"Rugby game plans are strategic blueprints guiding a team's attack and defense, built on core philosophies like physical dominance ("Physical Game"), structured kicking ("10-Man Game"), or fluid movement ("Motion Game"). They involve controlling set pieces (scrums, lineouts), exploiting opposition weaknesses, managing game rhythm (tempo), and adapting tactics for phases like turnovers or restarts, all while ensuring clear communication and disciplined execution.

However Mozart is just believing the shit he sputs because the is a suppoerter of Jake White - the superking of playing the game without any game plans loosely based on the physical game and gwent no further than the famus 10 man game - on other words a totally deficient coach.

You are right in you assessment. Under Erasmus backline players score more tis than they did in the period 2000 to 2017/ The Springboks imder Eramus use the physical game and fluid moving games as a basis for attacks and victories..

Well I’d appreciate you checking those numbers. I went back to the RC the only comprehensive stats I can find. Here are the results:

Australia bested us 37 to 19 on defenders beaten and equalled our clean breaks at 36..

We narrowly beat NZ 13 to 12 on clean breaks and substantially 68 to 58 on defenders beaten.

Bargie was 16 to 12 in our favor on clean breaks and 55 to 49 on defenders beaten

Which across all games put us at 65 clean breaks to us vs 60 to our opponents. They however beat us 144 to 142 on defenders beaten.

All of that suggests to me that despite the two blow up wins where our opponents collapsed, attacking stats were about even and we were in fact behind in the tight matches. Do you concur?

Yes Chat and no I do not concur especially when you talk of the opponents collapsing

We dominated the year but for the Oz glitch. We extended the gap at the top of the world rankings for the year

You don’t dominate like that without scoring more tries and beating more defenders and in the process play with supreme rugby intelligence

Your dislike of Rassie is shameful and serves only to cloud your reality. If only you could celebrate our success like the vast majority of Bok supporters do.

You really are a strange one - I sincerely would hate to be in your shoes and have your rugby outlook. Im so proud to be a Bok supporter right now - are you?

Let's try something...

Power without intelligence and talent is less effective than power with intelligence and talent. Do we agree on that?

A 10, on the surface and as general logic goes, would need to be of higher intelligence than a player in most other positions.

But is that the case?

One could argue that the things a 10 does are very visible but the complexity level of his role isn't necessarily higher than, for example, an 8.

A ten would have to call plays, decide whether to pass, who to pass to and if kicking then what type of kick has to be made. And then the 10 would have to make defensive decisions.

How many decisions does an 8 have to make and how complex is his role? An 8 plays most of their rugby without the ball in hand. Even the most linking of 8s still does most of their work off the ball. Either defending the ball or pressuring the opposition ball. This is, by default, doing to be less "visible" than the things a 10 does.

So the question, how much intelligence is required?

Some decisions an 8 has to make(GPT);

1. Keep it in, pick, or release to 9 at the base
2. Pick short side or play open side
3. Pick and carry, pick and pass to 9, or pick and link to 10/12
4. Detach early as a carry option or stay bound to secure/steady the ball
5. Clean pickup vs leave it for 9 when the ball is messy
6. Call/adjust 8-9 link timing (hold, go now, go after set)
7. Carry tight at guard, carry at bodyguard, or tip-on/out the back into space
8. Carry to win collision vs carry to stay on feet and place for speed
9. Take contact and go to ground vs fight for extra metres and risk isolation
10. Offload in contact vs secure ball and set ruck
11. Run a decoy line vs demand ball as primary option
12. Hit ruck vs stay out to reload as next carrier
13. Clear past the ball vs stop short and “post” to protect the 9
14. Compete/jackal vs stay on feet and fold to the next phase
15. Contest breakdown vs leave it and fix the defensive line
16. Stay in the tramlines to hold width vs tighten in to protect around the ruck
17. Fold around the corner vs hold the line and keep spacing
18. Track, drift, or shoot on 9
19. Track inside runner vs press out to shut down the wider option
20. Take the first receiver (10) vs slide to 12/13 vs stay connected to forwards
21. Commit to a tackle/assist vs stay up for the next threat
22. Target ball-carrier vs target the support line to kill the ruck
23. Rip attempt vs complete tackle and reset
24. Slow ball legally vs release and get back on feet immediately
25. Call for a counter-ruck vs set the next defensive line
26. Choose who to “hunt” (9/10/inside shoulder carrier) based on cues
27. Hold backfield/edge cover vs join the front line (phase/field-position dependent)
28. On lineout: be lifter, be tail/transfer option, or be first cleaner/guard defender after the catch
29. On kick receipt: carry back, set a ruck, pass to 9, or link to a pod/backline

I read though these and while I don't agree with them all, it does demonstrate how "dumb" muscle wouldn't cut it in the best pack in the world.

There are simply too many decisions to make for a guy that is "just strong". Wiese is by some distance the best 8 in a country packed with ridiculously talented loosies. There are 100% other 8s that are as stronger and faster than he is. So if he is dumber than most of them...why is he so effective?

I'm reminded of a story I heard somewhere, can't remember where;

A famous Samurai visits a feudal village in Japan. Everybody bows. One man does not. The samurai dismounts and asks the man why he didn't bow? The man replies that he didn't bow because he possesses a skill greater than the Sumarai's. The Samurai insists that he demonstrates this skill...

The man gets out a jug full of oil and with his other hand he makes a small loop, about the diameter of a pinkie finger, by curling his forefinger on the inner side of his thumb...

He then proceeds to pour the entire jug of oil into another jug, though this tiny orifice, without any of the oil touching his forefinger or thumb.

The Samurai gets on his horse and leaves.

The next year, when the Samurai again visits the village, he gets off his horse and bows to the man.

Um how many times a game does Roos have the ball in his hands as a 8?

He then proceeds to pour the entire jug of oil into another jug, though this tiny orifice, without any of the oil touching his for finger or thumb.

Ockay, but what brand of oil was it? Extra virgin olive oil, or just some cheap samarai-grade Canola?

Mozart

No response on game plnas village idiot? Usage of ESPN stats are for idiots who believe in inadequate ESPN stats and does not realize that it is a very poor basis for determianion of actual player and team performances,