SARrugby.com

I have studied and looked at most games twice and have now finally made up my mind about the team of the week for Round 2 (the players in brackets are those bubbling under):-

15    -    Marais (Danillier)

Wings -  Pietersen, Habana (Mvovo, Petersen)

Centers -  Steyn, Jordaan, (Venter, Sadie)

10     -     Lambie (Goosen)

  9     -     Reinach  (Pretorius)

  8    -     Vermeulen (Engelbrecht)

 Flanks -      Coetzee, Van der Walt (Botha, Watson)

Locks   -     Bekker, Van der Merwe (Du Toit, Flippie)

Props   -   Du Plessis, Beast

Hookers -  Strauss, Rallepele

Some of the above players came from the bench and had limited playing time - but made a real impression when they came on.

Others were excluded for a variety of reasons:-

*    It was a close call between Danillier and Taute for the bubbling under position - since Danillier is a very limited player - on the day however he some prominence in the one movement of the Cheetahs that swung the scale in his favour. 

*    I do not support one-dimensional donkey-kicking flyhalfs - Morne Steyn meets that description - and even though good at converting goals - the rest of his game was sub-standard.

*     Hougaard did show some improvement in performances since last year - but has some way to go before he can be a top contender for selection as player of the week.

*     Not sure about the bubbling under props.   However Malherbe when he came of the bench did contribute to stabilizing of the Stormers scrum to a marked extend and he may just be one.

*     Fourie - his line-out throwing in was atrocios

The standard of play was often poor and not comparabel to the standard in other conferences.   The Stormers backline was virtually destroyed by the sub-standard performances of Jantjies and other than the indicated players nobody really stood out..

What a load of crap, Hougaard gets selected as the bubbling under 9 out of all the S15 sides and he cant make it as one of your SA 9's - how ignorant.

Here is a true reflection of the SA standings:

15. Taute / SP Marais

14. JP / S. Petersen

13. Sadie / Jordaan

12. Frans / de Allende

11. Mvovo / Habana

10. Goosen / Lambie

9. Hougaard / Reinach

1. Beast / Mellett

2. Strauss / Chiliboy

3. Jannie / Frik Kirsten

4. Flip / Bresler

5. Bekker / Steph du Toit

6. Watson / Kolisi

7. Coetzee / A.Botha

8. v/d Walt / Ebgelbrecht

Hell - but you are one-eyed - never see anything when your favoured players are not up to standard.   I think that Taute came near to being my second choice full back - but on the day he was more or less on par with Danillier.Marais was definitely better than Taute - but he was up against a weakish team insofar as defence is concerned.

On the day I think venter was a touch above Allende.  Venter is nomally a 12 - but he played at 13 - so maybe I was wrong and shouldhave put in De Allende.

Hougaard - hype and blinkers on - Saffex.   Hougaard was better than last year - but I think there are some issues where he should still show marked improvement.  Reinach was much better as an all-round scrummie

Kolisi did sweetbugger-all of note on Saturday and he cannot be in the team because of what you regard as quality performance.   I saw him carrying the ball twice - but with minimal effect - and his defence was average..

Sorry Saffex - I have not reached the stage where I use blinkers when looking at games. 

Ah so you dont have blinkers on when it comes to Hougaard - you really are a joke. Your take on Hougaard is the biggest load of shit I have read in ages

Daniller did stuff all of note bar run and collect a kick off that nearly resulted in a try, it was a fluke.

Which 6's were better than Kolisi huh - Stegman, Labascagne and Botes? What crap

Saffex

On actual performance all three loosies mentioned by you were better than Kolisi.    

What complete bullshit - as was correctly described, Kolisi was the best of the Stormers loosies, but the Bulls were better as a unit

You clearly watch different games to the rest of us

 The correct- definitive SA team of the 2nd week was- (without bias to favour younger players, or incument springboks)

15. SP Marais/ Danilier (Taute offered only a crash ball option- many carries- little metres)

14.  S. Petersen/JP  (JP was average on the day with few touches)

13. Sadie / Jordaan

12. Frans / de Allende

11. Mvovo / Habana

10. Goosen / Lambie

9. Reinach/ Pretorius (Hougaard started well but faded as the match went on, as did his service)

1. Beast / Mellett 

2. Strauss / Chiliboy

3. Jannie / Frik Kirsten

4. Flip / Bresler

5. Bekker / Franco van der Merwe (Steph du Toit came onto the pitch very late and contributed more in the loose than the tight)

6. Watson / J Botes (Kolisi was very average. Not very effective on the floor with few carries)

7. Coetzee / A.Botha

8. Ebgelbrecht/ v/d Walt 

Disagree Shark, nothing to do with bias.

I saw nothing of note from Daniller

Happy to have Petersen ahead of JP

Hougaard was our best 9 and this is justified by his bubbling under selection. Pretorius is a very poor distributor and why he got very little game time with the Tahs.

I never saw anything of note from Franco. Steph made more of an impression in the 15min he was on. You cant judge his tight performance as he did what was expected with the Sharks packing continuing to dominate the tight while he was on.

I saw nothing of note from Botes. Kolisi was quiet by his standards but still better than the competition. Watson stood out

Saffex

Do you now realize that that so-called try nitiated by Hougaard - for which you gave him high credit - was actually the most stupid play of the day - and that the ref fouled up badly in awarding a try that shoud never have been?    The grubber in fact placed all the forwards off-side and they did not retreat or even had the remotest chance of retreating at all.   Peyper got a tongue-lashing for that idiocy on his part.  But so should Hougaard have been.  Hope he does not try that bit of stupidity again.

The lack of intellectual honesty always blows my mind.

Face it, Goosen may have been good in the second half.....but by the end of the first half he had more or less ensured the Cheetahs couldn't win. His kickoffs allowed the Sharks complete momentum and his goal kicking and tactical kicking were  poor. Steyn by contrast won the game against the Stormers....nobody with half a brain doubts that.

Then take this kid Venter....he runs 5 times for 12 metres.....and then get's beaten by a lock for a crucial Stormers try that could have swung the match. But he is supposedly better than JdV who scored an opportunistic try and prevented two others with smart defence.

There will be plenty of time to praise Goosen and Venter for real accomplishments, without inventing stuff, if they succeed.  NZ rugby is far more objective and critical about their talent. Consequently they don't have our list of false starts. Every player like Mvovo, Taute, Jantjies, Greyling, Potgieter etc who is chosen for the Boks and fails....sets us back. It's not a zero cost option.

To avoid that, we need to be more critical and more honest.

Moz therein lies the issue, you dont want us praising Venter and Goosen but you tell us Jean was good, when in fact he did nothing all match. That try will be the easiest he ever scored, there was no skill in that. Hell fell over the line.

Venter was the only centre in that game that actually broke a tackle.

Goosen was great in that second half and you cant blame the odd misguided kick-off as player defining. How on earth did he ensure that the Cheetahs could not win by end of first half?

Firstly on JdVs try. He got that ball up and over the line in a flash. Most players would have picked it up and then charged forward. Jean saw the instant opportunity. If he hesisitated one micro second it would have closed. So yes, in retrospect it was easy.....but most players wouldn't have played it that way.

As for Venter, I'm sorry but yielding a potentially match altering try is a big deal.

Take a look at those Goosen kickoffs and where the next phase started....several times he put it well beyond the chase ....and one other time he kicked directly into touch. Four or so huge momentum gifts.

No Moz, any player could have scored that try, even a prop.

Goosen only messed up two kick-offs and that happens. Chances are you wont see that in a hurry again.

Venter was beaten fair and square by a great step by the big man - its rugby and it happens. That was a Venter negative, but the rest of his game was good. I am certainly not going to define his game by that miss and nor am I saying he had a brilliant game - there was very little brilliance from any SA'n last weekend, but then again it was week one. Venter was good is all I am saying, as was Goosen. Jean was neither good nor bad, he was just a bit of a no show.

 Hello all again! with the comments about the second round players above i have to agree with all three of you! saf i agree with you cause i think hougard was a good showing at 9 wasnt his all time greatest game but it was a all sight better than last years games! i think by round 4/5 he will be world class again! also his gubber was fucking stupid the thing every 9 it taught never grubber with you pack infront of you! the ugly boys are the best at diving on that loose ball! 

Moffie i agree with you on venter! yer he was a solid centre and showed he is better than the one step wonder JJ but that miss tackle wich in turn could have lost them the match was huge downer on his game! some boy need to hit the gym and be ready to tackle the ugly boys when they run at him! 

My round 2 starting 15 would be! 

15.marais

14. peterson

13.saddie

12. peter dv/ styen! (these two where to close to call a number one  both affect each team the biggest way and made important plays!) 

11. Habanna

10. Pat lambie (mourne close behind) 

9. reinch (hougie just behind the grubber ruined it)

8. vermulean

7. watson

6.bortha

5. bekker 

4. du tiot

3. kirsten 

2. strassus

1. beast 

For me that was the best 15 some where close and some had some real tough chocies!