Match 19 - Lions vs Bulls

Leeubok wrote: valie wrote: emiel1 wrote: Om jong spelers in 'n sukkelende span in te bring gaan net hulle selfvertroue breek. Meeste van die ervare huidige spelers het onder 'n ander afrigtingspan uitstekende dinamiese rugby gespeel. Die afrigtingspan moes al lankal ernstige selfondersoek gedoen het. Rugby bestaan uit meer as lynstaan rolmaalbewegings en skrums. Vaardigheid en die vermoe om die situasie te speel ontbreek tans.  Dis waar ja, maar vaardigheidis nie die afrigter se verantwoordelikheid nie. 'n Speler wat nie n bal kan vang, en ewe goed uitgee na beid kante toe nie, hoort nie op die vlak nie. Die aanvals afrigter besluit oor die strategie op aanval. as die spelers dit nie kan uitvoer nie, kan hy nie alleen die blaam dra vir dit nie. Die spelers sal hard na hulleself moet kyk en verantwoordelikheid vat op die veld. Dieselfde vir spelers wat nie die reels ken nie. Ek wil in my broek kak as die ref vir Marnus se om die bal te los en hy hou aan om dit te speel. Dieselfde toe hy getackle is en hy los nie die bal nie, maar staan op en hol verder. Dit is iets wat jy in laerskool al leer. Dis wel die afrigter se skuld as hy gewoontemisdadigers bly kies, indien daar spelers is wat wel die vaardighede en ondervinding het. Ek stem Valie

Voster, Mapoe, Coetzee, Groom selfs jantjies is in 'n comfortzone... Hulle kort druk van die youngsters af om aantehou perform. As een of twee youngsters die kans kry gaan hulle dalk weer speel vir hulle plek en nie net 'n naam wees op die teamsheet nie.

I have said it before, we seem to lack creativity in the backline. Especially at center. Elton's game depends largely on his distribution skills. We do not have anyone able to break that first line of defence to create space. So we become very easy to defend against, as the passes are easy to read. The rush defences we play against seem to be quicker than the ball. In years gone by, the ball would move down the line, and either no 13 or the wing would be given space to move in and break the line. Now, by the time our 13 gets the ball, his opposite number is on him. Just my opinion on why we seem to be flat in the backline.

Yip, net 'n naam

emiel1 wrote: Lion4ever wrote: I have said it before, we seem to lack creativity in the backline. Especially at center. Elton's game depends largely on his distribution skills. We do not have anyone able to break that first line of defence to create space. So we become very easy to defend against, as the passes are easy to read. The rush defences we play against seem to be quicker than the ball. In years gone by, the ball would move down the line, and either no 13 or the wing would be given space to move in and break the line. Now, by the time our 13 gets the ball, his opposite number is on him. Just my opinion on why we seem to be flat in the backline. Tinkering with team selections is like re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic when the actual problem lies with the captain.

Interesting statement. Are you saying WW is the problem, or the fact that MM did not exactly cover himself in glory on Saturday? 

Lion4ever wrote: emiel1 wrote: Lion4ever wrote: I have said it before, we seem to lack creativity in the backline. Especially at center. Elton's game depends largely on his distribution skills. We do not have anyone able to break that first line of defence to create space. So we become very easy to defend against, as the passes are easy to read. The rush defences we play against seem to be quicker than the ball. In years gone by, the ball would move down the line, and either no 13 or the wing would be given space to move in and break the line. Now, by the time our 13 gets the ball, his opposite number is on him. Just my opinion on why we seem to be flat in the backline. Tinkering with team selections is like re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic when the actual problem lies with the captain. Interesting statement. Are you saying WW is the problem, or the fact that MM did not exactly cover himself in glory on Saturday?

Edited by emiel1 - 05-Mar-2019 at 12:15pm

Ek sien Vorster is maar 25 en Mapoe 30. Albei het nog vrek baie rugby in hulle en behoort eintlik net beter te word (veral Vorster). Swys moet eenvoudig iets doen om die ouens weer aan die brand te kry. 'n Skrummie met goeie, vinnige diens is sekerlik die eerste stappie in daardie rigting.

Leeubok wrote: 5port wrote: emiel1 wrote: Lion4ever wrote: I have said it before, we seem to lack creativity in the backline. Especially at center. Elton's game depends largely on his distribution skills. We do not have anyone able to break that first line of defence to create space. So we become very easy to defend against, as the passes are easy to read. The rush defences we play against seem to be quicker than the ball. In years gone by, the ball would move down the line, and either no 13 or the wing would be given space to move in and break the line. Now, by the time our 13 gets the ball, his opposite number is on him. Just my opinion on why we seem to be flat in the backline. Tinkering with team selections is like re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic when the actual problem lies with the captain. Jag - backline was poor - strike 1 Sto - backline was worse - strike 2 Bul - backline still nbot performing - strike 3 I agree with Lion4ever we need to give voster a rest... but who can get a chance to stepup??? Ek dink nie dit is net Vorster wat die probleem is nie. Maar dit help nie mens drop Mapoe en behou Vorster, want dan gaan die nuwe 13 elkgeval nooit die bal kry nie, of hy kry bal en man terselfdertyd. Dit maak vir my meer sin om 'n nuwe 12 te probeer wat 'n beter spelskepper is, wat dalk Mapoe sal trigger om beter lyne te hardloop of bietjie spasie te kry. Maar ek dink hy raak elkgeval bietjie lank in die tand, hy het nie meer die spoed wat hy 5 jaar terug gehad het nie

ROOIHART wrote: Met die hoeveelheid goeie bal wat ons op die oomblik genereer kan jy Danie Gerber in ons agterlyn sit, dit sal nie help. Begin voor imo en dan sal die backs vlerke kry. Al 7 backs is nie skielik swak, hulle is maar net op agtervoet. Met al die jongmanne wat voor hulle voete probeer vind sal ek ook daarteen waak om nog meer onervare spelers agter in te bring. Ons het Saterdag in die eerste helfte 75% balbesit teen ons gehad en net een drie afgestaan. Ou moet krediet gee vir hoe die manne in die middelvekd verdedig ook.

Amen!

Dit is gewoonlik die gebruik om 'n "linebreaker" langs 'n spelskepper no 10 soos Jantjies te speel,en dan weer 'n spelskepper op 13 vir die buite agterspelers. Probleem is dat beide Jantjies en Vorster beide skeppende spelers is. Tans probeer hulle Vorster as stormram te gebruik (nie su natuurlike sterkpunt nie). Maar dit maak nie saak wie hulle op 10, 12 en 13 speel indien die span as geheel se vaardigheidvlkke drasties verbeter nie.  

emiel1 wrote: Dit is gewoonlik die gebruik om 'n "linebreaker" langs 'n spelskepper no 10 soos Jantjies te speel,en dan weer 'n spelskepper op 13 vir die buite agterspelers. Probleem is dat beide Jantjies en Vorster beide skeppende spelers is. Tans probeer hulle Vorster as stormram te gebruik (nie su natuurlike sterkpunt nie). Maar dit maak nie saak wie hulle op 10, 12 en 13 speel indien die span as geheel se vaardigheidvlkke drasties verbeter nie.

Edited by monster - 05-Mar-2019 at 3:00pm

valie wrote: Dit help nie ons pak wen net ons vaste fasette soos skrums en lynstane, maar wanneer ons by na n paar fases die bal moet vinnig maak, is daar geen momentum nie, maw ons vat die bal deur fases, maar verloor veld of gaan net 3 tree vorentoe. Dis weereens wat ek bedoel het in n vorige post dat ons nie die collisions domineer nie. Die kere wat ons wel momentum opbou, verloor ons die bal, of staan n stupid strafskop af.