Musical chairs - Help me understand

Looking at the team selected for Saturday, the musical chairs continue.

As I've now stated in numerous threads, it's really starting to annoy me. I have a question and perhaps one of you could shed some light. Let's look at the 12/13 partnership for this weekend. It's Moodie and AE - Mike, please don't comment because I can promise you that I won't read your reply, and nobody else will either.

Okay, so we have both Moodie and AE being brought in together. But we know that Rassie will never play AE against the ABs, France and Ireland. He's gonna go right back to DDA for those games. Same as he's never gonna start Moodie against those guys either.

Here's my problem, in the form of a question. What do we need to know about Moodie playing next to AE, when the two of them will never ever start an important game together? The only way they will start important games is if the Kriel and DDA are injured together...and Kriel and DDA are never going to be injured at the same time.

So what is the point?

Players don't play in a vacuum. I would rather play two 7/10 players that have excellent synergy than I would two 9/10 players with no synergy.

Here we have AE and Moodie being matched up again, but for literally no reason because they will never see important minutes together anyway.

They can both play test rugby, we know this. They are both excellent players, we know this. They are both good enough to be there.

It doesn't make sense to me. What would make sense is to see DDA/Moodie or AE/Kriel, because then we see how well the understudy combines with the 1st choice partner and those two get game time together. And it makes sense because those are combinations that you might actually see against the big teams because DDA or Krielf might get injured at some point.

Somebody explain to me what I'm missing.

I can't see the logic and it's really ticking me off.

Let's assume that AE and Moodie score two tries each and make numerous tries for each other this weekend.

Do you think that means they'll be considered as a starting combinations against the ABs? You already know the answer. It's doesn't matter at all what they do this weekend because Rassie will go with DDA and Kriel regardless.

So, again, what is the point????

Playing Moodie at 13 makes perfect sense given he could be the answer at 13 post Kriel and Am

He is being exposed to 13 at test level - makes perfect sense

Im 100% for the broader squad getting game time so its good to see Edwil, Moodie, Libbok, Williams, Thomas, Moerat, Nortje, Wessels, Nthlabakanye, Cobus Wiese, Sacha and Hooker getting game time against lesser opposition

No point in having a squad of 35 and not playing some of the players, especially the younger ones

While I don’t agree with some of the squad selections I completely get wanting to play some of your broader squad players against Italy

You completely missed the POINT.

Here, I'll copy and paste for you...

"What would make sense is to see DDA/Moodie or AE/Kriel, because then we see how well the understudy combines with the 1st choice partner and those two get game time together. And it makes sense because those are combinations that you might actually see against the big teams because DDA or Krielf might get injured at some point."

And the point is very valid in Rassie's case because he is the one that says that is not about the best player but about the best fit. But never combining players with 1st choices js ONLY an exercise in seeing how good they are and has nothing to do with seeing if they're fitting into the system.

How do you know if the guy fits when you never play him alongside 1st choice starters?

Assume DDA or Kriel cop an injury against Oz. Boom, now AE or Moodie suddenly have to play alongside guys that they hardly ever combine with.

You can't tell me that this logic escapes you?

It’s not logic - there is very little that is logic when it comes to rugby selections

I hear what you are saying combining an A and a B player in a game but equally Rassie could go with playing his A players as a combo in one game DA/ Kriel and his B in the next AE/ Moodie

That is as logic as your A/B mix

Personally in the first 4 games given the opposition I would have used 3 of the games to blood youngsters and one as per your theory playing your strongest side as a run out before the big games in the season

Where Rassie has failed is hanging onto old non first choice players like Willie, Mapimpi, Faf, Reinach, Koch, Kleyn and Mostert. Finding favour in the likes of Fouche, Nortje and v Staaden. Much like his snubbing of Tyrone Green, David Kriel, Papier, AH Venter, Ruben v Heerden, Ruan Vermaak, Ruan Venter, Manu Tsituka, Buthelezi etc

That to me is more of an issue than the composition of the teams right now

Plum, looks like Rassie got you right in the plums with this selection.

I ?? agree with you on this.

Why waste so many caps.

Will we ever see our best team playing consecutively and dominating like we should. This is the year to really get our best players on the field.

Rassie is a thinker. Reminds me a certain Liverpool coach that could never get his best team on the park

Exactly, KC

Every rugby content creator last year was bigging Rassie up for the insane amount of caps handed out and all the experimentation. We basically spent the entire season experimenting with players and combinations.

We've now had three teams this year and it's just more of the same.

Does Rassie know what his best team is? I don't think he does. I don't think anybody does.

This team on a Saturday is yet again just a bunch of players chucked together and told "Let's see how well you play to our system."

What system??? A system is partly on paper and the rest is on the field. So they guys will know the theory of the "system" but they have to combine with guys that they rarely play with in order to actually make the system work. So everybody is finding their feet in terms of the combinations and then of course they now need to bring the system out somewhere in that. I call massive BS on it all.

It is a million miles away from picking your best team and then bringing in a couple of guys and saying "Right, when you go onto the field, every guy you'll be playing with plays according to this system so they all know what to do, and they all know each other's game very well...now let's see how well you fit in with them."

And then it's very easy to see if that guy fits or doesn't fit.

Instead we now have another mixed bag team on Saturday, and we'll learn exactly zero from it. Oh, but they'll get a test cap...against Italy FFS. Italy probably not even being in the top 40 rugby teams in the world since all the Kiwi, most of the French, South African, English and Irish franchise sides would spank them.

To me, it's a total waste. There's all this talk about "competition for places". Well there ain't really that much competition when everybody gets caps all the time and we never play our best side and let them find a rhythm.

Honestly, I'm hoping the ABs absolutely spank the Boks and bring this madness to and end.

The best team will be on the field for the important tough games - that’s 8 this year

You two need to wake up

Our side is an old one - how the fuck is Rassie meant to test the younger players if you don’t want him to field them against lesser opposition

Are you guys dom?

Lol, from all of the above, you take that we don't want to get younger guys in the team.

I think you're the dom one here, Dave.

I strongly doubt adding Libbok, Moerat, Nortje and Wessels will do anything for us…..maybe on Saturday against an overmatched opponent, but not when it counts. These are much weaker players than the incumbents.

I dont mind mixing and matching combinations to allow new players to play alongside first-choice established players.

Over 50 players were capped last year. It was worthwhile as some came through, while others got discarded as proven not up to standard. We need to separate the wheat from the chaff, and game time in an established team with combinations is the only way to do this.

However, it is pointless to persist with older players who are not first or second choice in their positions, even now, let alone by the next World Cup. We know that some of these players will be long past their best in 2 years, so why persist with them against minnows, especially?

The Boks need more new players coming through, and they need to be peaking for the next World Cup, so they need game time.

Do you really think Libbok, Moerat, Nortje and Wessels will help us win anything? If not, what’s the point. Better to regularly play newbies like Sacha, Kobus Wiese and Wilco alongside the regulars and build team cohesion.

We need a 10/12/13 axis that can productively use copious good ball.

We need a hard yards forward ball carrier that can give us the go forward Dud Toit can’t provide… Dud should be shifting to 5, with Snyman shifting to 4. There’s your replacement lock combination.

And we need an effective fetcher. What could a Brussouw have done fetching over the current defense….we need to find that kind of player.

In short rather than blooding players that have already failed in big URC games…..select newbies who have a shot at resolving current shortcomings. And make the obvious rotations to provide more cover in the older group. A 35 year old Etzebeth will still be way better than Moerat.

Dave, for these games I agree that we should be trying new players, but I also don't understand why he select certain players.

I did not expect to see the likes of Etzebeth etc so early but more warm them up for the Australian games.

But we are ending up with more questions than answers

It's a classic case of slim vang sy baas.

There is a massive wake-up call in stall for the Boks this season.

Again, why do we have 3 10 all starting games?

Why is Manie there? I get that Sacha or Pollard could get injured, but that's when you bring him in. He's basically telling all three guys that he doesn't know who is better.

A 10 should know if he's first pick or not. VD Berg is new, so tell you what, let's not allow him time to settle with a 1st choice 10. Let's make him start with a different 10 in every game. Because who cares about building a solid synergy between them. Much better to make sure all my 10s can give me 80% rather than my best 10 firing at 100%.

Why?

Well because who gives a shit about the backs anyway. We're never gonna run the ball. We're afraid to run the ball against Italy so why on earth would we ever run the ball against good sides?

Manie is 3rd choice, Pollock 2nd and Sacha 1st. It's just how it is. There might be some argument to say that Polalrd should be in 1st, but either way, it's Pollard and Sacha. Why the hell are we starting with Manie this weekend??? Manie is the back-up for the back up. He shouldn't be starting games.

But think about this for a second...Sacha is clearly the guy for the future. Easily the best backline player in SA, right? The chap that can turn games on his own. So let's start him against the nothing Barbarians and then start Pollard and Manie against Italy...bringing Sacha off the bench in the last game. Literally the reverse of what I would have done.

When Pollard or Sacha get injured, then the other starts and Manie comes off the bench. There is absolutely no need for this nonsense.

You look at the three teams the Boks have selected this year and there are just so many nonsensical decisions and wasteful picks.

Buy yeah, we'll beat Italy this weekend and Rassie will be all philosophical and pseudo humble at there's briefing again.

King that’s my point to - in theory playing your younger players against weaker opposition should be the order of the day

Those younger players are not the likes of Moerat, v Staaden and Nortje. And what the fuck is old man Fouche doing there?

But the biggest selection bug bear I have is with the older non starters still being selected like Willie, Mapimpi, Faf, Reinach, Koch, Kleyn and Mostert

Thats 11 players who should not be in the squad. The squad would be far better equipped with the likes of Jordan Hendrikse, David Kriel, Jurenzo Julius, Papier, Hanro Jacobs, Ruben v Heerden, Ruan Vermaak, JF v Heerden, Ludwig, Ruan Venter, Buthelezi and Manu Tsituka

It seems Erasmiss is desperately trying to find his best team to take over the reigns, but not really satisfied with what he is seeing so far…

Maybe a bit late already and that is prompting the musical chairs…. A established take over team, should have been in place already….

Surely he should know by now who that team is…time is running out and he is getting more desperate as the days go by….

I am more confused as never before about what is really happening in SA Rugby at present. Take two examples:-

1. About 3 months ago the RC Under 20 team of SA was a disgrace amd lost badly against New Zealand and Australia in the RC. A different team went to the Under 20 RWC and thus far has beaten their opponents - with two wins was by record numbers - eg Australia, So was the ideato completely mislaad the opposing tems to believe was going to be easily beaten - but an entirely different image has been revealed in the RWC during matche thus afar played,

1. Is the same happening in the upcoming test on Saturday, The team named for Saturday is not going to show go anywhere fast 0 thetma may win - buteven if they lose - like happehed in the RC away match last year - the message going out is that the Sprin gboks are in trouble and may kose matches in the RC and rest of the Springbok matches this year or is it a con job like hppened in the Under 20 RWC?

Wrong Mike the U20 squad that lost the RC is 95% the same squad that has done so well in the current world competition

So are we giving Akkers the credit?

...because these score lines are reminiscent of that 2016 Lions team and the way the players are backing themselves and taking what is on offer is basically copy and paste of what the Lions did.

...and doesn't it make you wonder what happens when guys like Willemse, Moodie, Fassi, Sacha, Arendse, Kolbe and Hooker start playing that way behind a dominant Bok pack?

For me, the Boks have always ignored backline play. Watching the first game against Italy, the Boks are five meters out from the line, bombarding the Italians, having drawn them into the narrowest of channels, yet still refuse to go wide, is a clear indication of Rassie's "system". That being, use only the forwards and only ever use the backs to counter attack. The fact that we don't seem to care about developing synergy between Sacha and the new 9, is a further indication that we don't really care about ever using the backs in a balanced way.

Now you compare that to what seems to be how Ackerman wants to play, where the moment the forwards knock the opposition off balance, the backs come into play, back themselves and attack the advantage aggressively.

Isn't the way Akker want sot play the game exactly what Rugby should be?

Well, I can see Rassies logic. On one hand he wants the veterans to help the youngsters settle. So he has gone for Willie and Mpimpi. Neither played that bad, they actually played really for their clubs. But is Edwill at 29 really bok prospect? Why not have Jurenzo and Hooker there instead.

What I wanted to see is Rassie pick a team of young guns that has had a couple of seasons under their belt at first class level. Would have love to see Roos, Williams, Sasha, Hooker, Julius, Moodie, Fassi etc getting onto the park. Vincent etc, then leave a few old heads on the park, maybe 3 of them and then have your Vets on the bench to come on if things implode, but these guys are young and can play the entire game.

Where as our guys can't seem to get past 40 minutes because of how Rassie designed the system to never stretch his players. Only very few players can do that, and that is Pieter Steph.

That said, I do think he is trying to get certain players back up to match fitness.

But I would have far rather gone for Cobus Wiese and Nortje lock combo in this game. I would have included Grobbies in the team and then you don't have to worry about things breaking down.