Club Pro421 posts
05 Oct 2015, 10:24
#41
05 Oct 2015, 10:24#41
Lood to start with Victor off the bench....for both knock outs and then the final.
Your vote Matfield or Lood
Started by Saffolk 94 REPLIES830 VIEWS· 04 Oct 2015, 20:05
Pro3,977 posts
05 Oct 2015, 10:36
#42
05 Oct 2015, 10:36#42
Lood
Captain30,741 posts
05 Oct 2015, 11:47
#43
05 Oct 2015, 11:47#43
12-3 ouch.......really close that one!!
One has to wonder what rugby the 3 clowns are watching......but that can be said of the majority of their calls
Hell one even has Kurandrani as a better centre than BOD.....I kid you not.
Quality rugby observers these chaps are!!!!! NOT
sharkbok
Captain23,281 posts
Captain23,281 posts
05 Oct 2015, 12:16
#44
05 Oct 2015, 12:16#44
Lood still needs to have a good game, against good opposition.
Pro3,977 posts
05 Oct 2015, 12:26
#45
05 Oct 2015, 12:26#45
Not true Shark! He has played well in all the internationals he played in this year..regardless of the opposition!
I must add here, that I was NOT impressed with him in international games last year and called him lazy, but the boy has really turned it around.
I must add here, that I was NOT impressed with him in international games last year and called him lazy, but the boy has really turned it around.
Coach57,555 posts
05 Oct 2015, 12:27
#46
05 Oct 2015, 12:27#46
Dave the three are rugby retards - they still live in 2007 and do not want to accept that it is now 2015.
One just have to bear in mind that rugby rules made in 2008 have had no impact on the game. They do not realize that the changes have resulted in a situation that the skills of the elderly people cannot be adjusted to play in a different environment.
If one looks at the Australia game on Saturday and the Argentine game yesterday you cannot but help to see the impact of those rules on the changed rugby environment in those two countries. Looking at the Argentin game yesterday I am not surprised they managed to beat us in the RC, They play total rugby - while we struggle to play the "stampkar" model Meyer and his psycho adherents wants us to play. Problem is that they do not realize that their Old boy favourites have set ways and cannot adjust their playing style. Because they cannot do it - the three dunces believe it applies to all SA rugby players - so any change to the playing style will be a disaster.
One just have to bear in mind that rugby rules made in 2008 have had no impact on the game. They do not realize that the changes have resulted in a situation that the skills of the elderly people cannot be adjusted to play in a different environment.
If one looks at the Australia game on Saturday and the Argentine game yesterday you cannot but help to see the impact of those rules on the changed rugby environment in those two countries. Looking at the Argentin game yesterday I am not surprised they managed to beat us in the RC, They play total rugby - while we struggle to play the "stampkar" model Meyer and his psycho adherents wants us to play. Problem is that they do not realize that their Old boy favourites have set ways and cannot adjust their playing style. Because they cannot do it - the three dunces believe it applies to all SA rugby players - so any change to the playing style will be a disaster.
Captain30,741 posts
05 Oct 2015, 12:50
#47
05 Oct 2015, 12:50#47
Shark go paint your nails
Pro6,663 posts
05 Oct 2015, 12:55
#48
05 Oct 2015, 12:55#48
Comparing Victor to Lood is like comparing a Bently to a something a mechanic drives on his way to service one .
Captain49,914 posts
05 Oct 2015, 14:56
#49
05 Oct 2015, 14:56#49
Lomp, Kriel and Allende are massively over hyped. When that happens a code of silence is agreed upon.
So Allende's missed tackle on Kuridrani isn't commented on.....nor is Kriel's missed tackle in the Japan test, best explained by D'Arcy of all people.
In the same vein....Grey outleaping Lood to strip the Boks of a try is totally supp ressed in the SA media and on the site. It simply doesn't fit the plot. We are now a nation of liars.
So Allende's missed tackle on Kuridrani isn't commented on.....nor is Kriel's missed tackle in the Japan test, best explained by D'Arcy of all people.
In the same vein....Grey outleaping Lood to strip the Boks of a try is totally supp ressed in the SA media and on the site. It simply doesn't fit the plot. We are now a nation of liars.
Coach57,555 posts
05 Oct 2015, 15:07
#50
05 Oct 2015, 15:07#50
Duplicate BS.
Just a reminder Matfield was outjumped by Read in the Ellis Park test in 2014 - leading to an AB try was never mentioned by the dunce - and when it came up he went ballistic. He lied about the Kuridrani missed tackle and De Allende lining up to defend against Kuridrani - while another favourite of his - De Jongh - who was in fact lined up to defend against Kuridrani, did not even attempt to make a tackle and he also lied about the consequences of the missed tackle by De Allende as well. Was caught out as per normal.
Just a reminder Matfield was outjumped by Read in the Ellis Park test in 2014 - leading to an AB try was never mentioned by the dunce - and when it came up he went ballistic. He lied about the Kuridrani missed tackle and De Allende lining up to defend against Kuridrani - while another favourite of his - De Jongh - who was in fact lined up to defend against Kuridrani, did not even attempt to make a tackle and he also lied about the consequences of the missed tackle by De Allende as well. Was caught out as per normal.
Captain30,741 posts
05 Oct 2015, 15:09
#51
05 Oct 2015, 15:09#51
Well Moz who would be stupid and pathetic enough to define Lood's performance against Scotland by a missed line out take on the Scots line........are you really going to be that pathetic?
Not to mention the fact that the throw was hardly a good one given it never looked like it was going to reach Lood and we are talking 6'10 Richie Grey one of the better young locks around.
One would swear that Lood actually fumbled the throw in and lost the ball.
But that's beside the point. Lood had an outstanding game was named MOM and you want to define his performance by a missed line out throw.
Do you know how utterly pathetic you look - seriously?
Captain49,914 posts
05 Oct 2015, 15:46
#52
05 Oct 2015, 15:46#52
When the press writes that he dominated the lineouts and totally suppresses that bit of information about Grey, they have an agenda. Lomp is fine. I have my doubts that he will maintain intensity when his starting spot is not up for grabs....but he is a genuine test lock. Still, he isn't in Matfield's class.
Pro3,977 posts
05 Oct 2015, 15:52
#53
05 Oct 2015, 15:52#53
"still, he isn't in Matfield's class" You're right, he is in a better class! Maybe Matfield 7 years ago we can argue was better than Lood is, but Matfield is no longer that player.
Captain30,741 posts
05 Oct 2015, 16:02
#54
05 Oct 2015, 16:02#54
Moz he dominated the line-outs, one miss does not define his line out work especially when that miss never even went to hand.
How you can even begin to advocate Matfield ahead of Lood is seriously beyond comprehension.
It is not even close between them......Matfield was great in his day, some 5 or 6 years ago.
I am seriously dumbstruck by your preference of Matfield over Lood.....it makes you look silly seriously.
Matfield is useless these days, offers the odd line out take, the odd kick off take, the odd open field tackle and the odd pass down the line......is that seriously want you want from our test lock over the physicality Lood brings along with his all round skill.
Who in their right mind would select Matfield over Lood, given Lood's performances this year.
Its chalk and cheese stuff. Mind boggling
Captain49,914 posts
05 Oct 2015, 16:13
#55
05 Oct 2015, 16:13#55
These are all opinions. Matfield to my eye plays no differently to what he did 5 years ago...and his stats back that up. He was never physical...but the Bok pack always achieved a balance, while benefitting from his nous and superb ball handling skills. Once Vermeulen came back we got back into balance.
There is huge Lomp hype going on. But it's more instructive to look at where he never showed....against the Bargies. Once he was physically matched, his contributions fell off alarmingly. Matfield has so many skills, he always finds a way to be relevant.
Lomp will be matched by NZ and any of Oz, Bargies, France or Ireland....Wales not so much. Will he know what to do then....not if Durban is the measure.
There is huge Lomp hype going on. But it's more instructive to look at where he never showed....against the Bargies. Once he was physically matched, his contributions fell off alarmingly. Matfield has so many skills, he always finds a way to be relevant.
Lomp will be matched by NZ and any of Oz, Bargies, France or Ireland....Wales not so much. Will he know what to do then....not if Durban is the measure.
Captain30,741 posts
05 Oct 2015, 16:24
#56
05 Oct 2015, 16:24#56
Disagree, Matfield in his prime weighed 115kg and added his presence to the equation.
These days his is a light 108kg, looks all of 38 and is no longer able to impose himself in the areas that were his strengths.
Against the Bargies the whole side was poor and moving forward Lood is going to have games where he wont stand out as much......hell we have even seen that in the freak that is Etzebeth.
Lood has the measure of any top international lock out there. Only Etzebeth and Retallick can live with him right now. The Oz locks are hardly world beaters and O'Connell of Ireland is another old Vic. The Irish locks are nothing these days. In fact the Welsh pair are better.
Coach57,555 posts
05 Oct 2015, 16:36
#57
05 Oct 2015, 16:36#57
Duplicate BS again - does it never stop.
Pro9,374 posts
05 Oct 2015, 16:42
#58
05 Oct 2015, 16:42#58
The so-called law changes in 2008 was mentioned a few times now. I was wondering if my learned friend would care to elaborate on the nature of those changes.
Captain18,570 posts
05 Oct 2015, 16:43
#59
05 Oct 2015, 16:43#59
Lood to start Matfield off the bench. What a mess for the Boks to be in this situation.
Lood is not ready but this is because of player mismanagement - injuries & not being brought along slowly. Matfield has to have his time managed in the RWC because of his age. So Lood to start and if he is messing up Matfield will be the baby sitter & stagger off the bench.
Matfield will be able to help with line outs and link play in the backs but in the last 20 minutes if they need muscle the Boks will have to rely on other subs because Matfield will not be able to provide it.
Lood is not ready but this is because of player mismanagement - injuries & not being brought along slowly. Matfield has to have his time managed in the RWC because of his age. So Lood to start and if he is messing up Matfield will be the baby sitter & stagger off the bench.
Matfield will be able to help with line outs and link play in the backs but in the last 20 minutes if they need muscle the Boks will have to rely on other subs because Matfield will not be able to provide it.
Captain30,741 posts
05 Oct 2015, 16:44
#60
05 Oct 2015, 16:44#60
JW why do you say Lood is not ready.....I disagree 100%
Captain30,741 posts
05 Oct 2015, 16:45
#61
05 Oct 2015, 16:45#61
That's 13-3 to the mighty Lood
Pro2,288 posts
05 Oct 2015, 16:56
#62
05 Oct 2015, 16:56#62
I love that the same people lambasting Victor are the same who want to play like NZ. They are calling for TWO immobile powerlocks. The ELVs have placed a greater emphasis on speed and mobility. Vic brings the mobility and skill to play an All Black style game.
Coach57,555 posts
05 Oct 2015, 17:05
#63
05 Oct 2015, 17:05#63
Lets remember the Aussie test this year. Matfield was on the field of play for 17 minutes and then went off injured. In the 17 minutes Matfield's contribution was near to zero. De Jager came on and showed what a real lock should do in a game - yet Mozart went on the attack about Lood letting Hooper in to score a try, Mind you he was the third player blamed by Mozart - first it was Malherbe, because Van der Merwe collapsed the scrums and Malherbe was to blame for it. Then it was Lood holding up the Aussie lock about a meter out and the latter off-loaded to Hooper who scored a try. If he did not held up the lock and prevented him from scoring - he woiuld have been blamed anyway.
The only thing that is clear is that Mozart has an agenda iro his attacks on players. In the case of De Jager it is the fear that his idol Matfield will not be used by the team. So when everyone rates De Jager better than Matfield it is hype. So has to try and find something during a game to discredit him. He was caught lying about the line out calls in the Aussie test - but that did not prevent him from repeating the lie.
I really am sorry for Mozart - he has not realized that Matfield of 2007 was great - the Matfield at present is not a shadow of what he used on par with what even a second string lock produces.
The only thing that is clear is that Mozart has an agenda iro his attacks on players. In the case of De Jager it is the fear that his idol Matfield will not be used by the team. So when everyone rates De Jager better than Matfield it is hype. So has to try and find something during a game to discredit him. He was caught lying about the line out calls in the Aussie test - but that did not prevent him from repeating the lie.
I really am sorry for Mozart - he has not realized that Matfield of 2007 was great - the Matfield at present is not a shadow of what he used on par with what even a second string lock produces.
Pro2,288 posts
05 Oct 2015, 17:12
#64
05 Oct 2015, 17:12#64
The only advantage Lood had is his front on power. He is a good ball carrier, if a little slow. He tires easily.
Coach57,555 posts
05 Oct 2015, 17:20
#65
05 Oct 2015, 17:20#65
This is really amazing. Are you really a lunatic - or just pretending to be one. I hope the latter. Just a question has you ever heard of the Tight 5 and the functions of the Tight 5 in rugby?
What balance is required in the Tight 5? is it not that every one of the players had to contribute to the Tight 5? Now it is a fact that Matfield has ZERO grunt and thus reduce the Tight 5 to a Tight 4?
What balance is required in the Tight 5? is it not that every one of the players had to contribute to the Tight 5? Now it is a fact that Matfield has ZERO grunt and thus reduce the Tight 5 to a Tight 4?
Captain30,741 posts
05 Oct 2015, 17:23
#66
05 Oct 2015, 17:23#66
Wow imagine selecting a side with a view to your lock getting into position to make a try saving tackle.......what a fucking joke.
So now Etzebeth and Lood are immobile are they.......I bet both would beat old Vic in a sprint these days
There are no bounds to your stupidity
Pro3,164 posts
05 Oct 2015, 17:39
#67
05 Oct 2015, 17:39#67
Another Matfield supporter...a rugby expert from Indonesia Riodewanto10 wants to joins hands with Desert Fox Moz and Ceradene...so its now 13-4 lolz
Pro2,288 posts
05 Oct 2015, 17:46
#68
05 Oct 2015, 17:46#68
Lood beat Vic in a sprint? If Lood beat anything in a sprint it would have been beating an apple tree in a race to set their roots.
Pro9,374 posts
05 Oct 2015, 17:47
#69
05 Oct 2015, 17:47#69
"Another Matfield supporter...a rugby expert from IndonesiaRiodewanto10 wants to joins hands with Desert Fox Moz and Ceradene...so its now 13-4 lolz
That is the thing with majorities. They are not always right just because they are the majority. I mean 62% of South Africans voted for the ANC in the last general elections.............. Males you think, doesn't it?
That is the thing with majorities. They are not always right just because they are the majority. I mean 62% of South Africans voted for the ANC in the last general elections.............. Males you think, doesn't it?
Captain49,914 posts
05 Oct 2015, 17:52
#70
05 Oct 2015, 17:52#70
This is following the line of all these arguments. I have no doubt it was 14/3 for JJ, 14/3 for Goosen, 14/3 for Reinach, 14/3 for Coetzee, 14/3 for Step .......and in the end the 3 were right. The same thing will happen with Lomp.
Captain26,388 posts
05 Oct 2015, 17:55
#71
05 Oct 2015, 17:55#71
But it didn't make the minority right ether. I honestly feel Matfield bit off a bit too much here. I will be glad if he proves me wrong and I will fully support the team running on, but ATM Matfield should be the bench backup.
Pro2,288 posts
05 Oct 2015, 17:58
#72
05 Oct 2015, 17:58#72
Everyone? When one joins the collective, they are most usually in bad company. Hierarchy of life. Don't be so foolish as to find comfort in numbers. Lood will disappoint you, just like all of your other big picks. You never learn.
Captain30,741 posts
05 Oct 2015, 17:58
#73
05 Oct 2015, 17:58#73
Its a thrashing Moz.......a very predictable one............one that has made you look the rugby fool you are.
Lood over old Vic is a no brainer.........Vic should not even be in the Bulls squad back home.
Coach57,555 posts
05 Oct 2015, 17:59
#74
05 Oct 2015, 17:59#74
Ceradunce
You are dealing with two entirely different scenarios here - namely where the majority of the electorate is politically ignorant and managed by the ABC cadres. In this case the rugby real rugby lovers and knowledgeable members voted for Lood - the ignorant dunces for Matfield. In this case the people who knows rugby has voted clearly for De Jager based on performance - the dunces for Matfield on the basis of fairy tales.
However, that is nothing new - Mozart, Dim Fox and you constantly spin fairy tales in the hope that it will sound convincing - but the members of this site has seen through their rubbish time and time again.
You are dealing with two entirely different scenarios here - namely where the majority of the electorate is politically ignorant and managed by the ABC cadres. In this case the rugby real rugby lovers and knowledgeable members voted for Lood - the ignorant dunces for Matfield. In this case the people who knows rugby has voted clearly for De Jager based on performance - the dunces for Matfield on the basis of fairy tales.
However, that is nothing new - Mozart, Dim Fox and you constantly spin fairy tales in the hope that it will sound convincing - but the members of this site has seen through their rubbish time and time again.
Pro9,374 posts
05 Oct 2015, 18:08
#75
05 Oct 2015, 18:08#75
Ahhhh the expected Tokkie "............ yes, but, but, but...........".
Captain49,914 posts
05 Oct 2015, 18:10
#76
05 Oct 2015, 18:10#76
Dave we have had dozens of arguments like this over the years. Who have I ever been wrong about? Maybe Fury in a sense, but he was never my kind of centre.
Let me be clear....Lomp is a much, much better bet than Stephanie....better also than many youngsters in other positions like Allende. He is already functional, doing the job of a test lock. We're there no better options I would be content playing him.
But there is a huge difference between showing promise against the Wee Scots and being MOM in a WC final, like Victor. Victor is a dominant player at the highest levels, he has proven that. So the only thing left is to decide if he has lost too much of that capacity to be viable. You think he has, as does Draad....I can't see it.
Let me be clear....Lomp is a much, much better bet than Stephanie....better also than many youngsters in other positions like Allende. He is already functional, doing the job of a test lock. We're there no better options I would be content playing him.
But there is a huge difference between showing promise against the Wee Scots and being MOM in a WC final, like Victor. Victor is a dominant player at the highest levels, he has proven that. So the only thing left is to decide if he has lost too much of that capacity to be viable. You think he has, as does Draad....I can't see it.
Captain26,388 posts
05 Oct 2015, 18:25
#77
05 Oct 2015, 18:25#77
Moz, I think his best attributes are better suited in the last 20 of a match...so much the better if is fresh from the bench. At 38, he will have to pace himself to give 60 to 80. We can't luxury in crunch games against the best.
Captain18,570 posts
05 Oct 2015, 18:36
#78
05 Oct 2015, 18:36#78
Saffex, I think Lood is not ready because he is still very young & his body has not matured enough to withstand the pounding he will give & get at the top level. Plus he should have been coming off the bench for all of this year at least so that he is seasoned.
He will be fine but may wear down & his performance will show this or he will get injured. If he was introduced more slowly over a longer period of time he would also have developed a resilient attitude so he would remain calm & determined when the Boks are behind or not playing well.
None of this is his fault, it's the coaches.
He will be fine but may wear down & his performance will show this or he will get injured. If he was introduced more slowly over a longer period of time he would also have developed a resilient attitude so he would remain calm & determined when the Boks are behind or not playing well.
None of this is his fault, it's the coaches.
Club Pro900 posts
05 Oct 2015, 18:46
#79
05 Oct 2015, 18:46#79
I agree with Draad, Matfield coming on at 55/60 minutes is ideal. He'll have the experience to see us over the line.
Captain49,914 posts
05 Oct 2015, 18:58
#80
05 Oct 2015, 18:58#80
↓ LOAD MORE (page 3 of 3)
