SARrugby.com

Zane Kirchner
The Springbok full-back didn't have a lot to do, and most of his efforts went into mopping up work during Scotland's second-half fightback. 6

JP Pietersen
Like Kirchner, the wing was seen rarely with ball in hand, but he still looks a class act when the thing does come his way and he defended beautifully. 7

Juan De Jongh
A real star in the making, though this wasn't the game to show it. A couple of darting runs showed why he has been making waves. 7

Jean De Villiers
Marshalled his backline as you would expect, with quiet authority throughout. Put in some ferocious and effective tackles at times. 7

Francois Hougaard
Again. Hougaard was mostly tied up on defensive duties. Made one significant break but never looked like getting over the line. 5

Pat Lambie
Not one of the great Springbok playmakers yet, but growing into the role and kicked steadily from hand and in front of goal. 6

Ruan Pienaar
Pure class at the base of the scrum. Pienaar has played better than this, but the Ulster scrum-half made few errors as he shaped his side's game. 7

Gurthro Steenkamp
Had his hands full dealing with Euan Murray in the scrum, and the Toulouse prop made too many errors on the ball to earn star billing. 5

Adriaan Strauss
Capped an afternoon of quiet excellence on the touchlines with an improbable solo try when he intercepted Blair's rash pass early in the second half. 8

Jannie Du Plessis
A typical Springbok tighthead who offers little outside the set-piece, but not to be faulted for that after a strong scrum showing. 6

Eben Etzebeth
Put the spring into the Springboks' lineout. The athletic young lock has had a huge year and this was another fine performance. 7

Juandre Kruger
Added a lot of grunt to the Springboks' scrum and driving maul and cleaned out the rucks aggressively. Formed an impressive and promising partnership with Etzebeth. 6

Francois Louw
Made a thorough nuisance of himself at ruck time and made sure Scotland were never able to build rhythm through the breakdowns. 8

Willem Alberts
A bear of a man and the giant flanker used his physique to good effect, whether carrying the ball forward or driving Scots in the other direction. 8

Duane Vermeulen
Not one of the most athletic number eights in the world game, but Vermeulen fits in well in the sort of muscular back row the Springboks prefer. 6

Not too dissimilar from the Rugby 365 ratings....which have been hammered on the Board. The fact is, players like Kirchner, de Jongh, Pienaar, and Kruger were not bad. Sure we would always wish for better but they were solid. And if Steenkamp struggled a bit with Murray....he is not the first prop to do so.

Meyer has resuscitated our loose forward play, made the right choices at hooker and scrumhalf.....and introduced the young guns at flyhalf for the last 4 tests. Our back play remains impotent, but some of this has to be down to the players. The only bit of attacking rugby we can ascribe to our young flyhalf threesome....is Goosen's break against Oz. But clearly he was not told to eschew running the ball....I doubt if Lambie or Jantjies have been told that either. They simply haven't spotted any gaps.

de Jongh star in the making - what a joke. I take it this clown has watched him set the world alight all S15 and CC for that matter?

de Jongh did stuff all in the test yesterday mostly because he got very little ball. One half break and a poor miss tackle about summed him up

Well I'd rather have a break from de Jongh versus three matches in a row where Taute never registered one clean break. Face it this guy is going the way of your previous huge picks at centre....Olivier and JJ Engelbrecht.....the way of the Dodo!

Mozart

You yourself should realize that the De Jongh rating is completely fictitious.   De Joingh played like he did in Super 15 - he knocked on the first ball he received - he knocked on many balls in Super 15.   He made a run of 5 meters on Saturday - no other"darting runs" ever took place in the game - so where the reporter got that mischief from - heaven only would know.    His  attacking play in Super 15 was basibally non-existent - so he matched that as well.   No word about his missed tackle as well.

As for Steenkamp - his rating elsewhere was 6.5 now it is 5.  My own rating of 4 is probably on the high side.    

If the ratings are to be believed the Springboks should have won the test by a mile,   They barely managed to win it - should have lost it through strenuous contributions made by Steenkamp, Van der Linde and Alberts    if they converted two kickable penalties early - like they should have - the Scots would have won the game.

 Back to De Jongh - he is statistically at this stage probably one of the weakest 13 in the Super 15 franchises.   Did zilch this year and the WP team backline functioned better when he was not playing.   At present the best 13 on performance on a contnuous basis in both Super 15 and in the CC games was Jordaan.   Not the hopeless De Jongh.     

De Jongh is from an attacking perspective the real DODO - I would pick at least 4 13's that  is more effective than he is. 

So are you saying that Taute never made any breaks against Oz old man - Oz being real opposition?

De Jongh is a star in the making indeed. If he got more opportunities to run in that game he probably would've prove that he is the best 13 we currently have. It would keep the others mouths closed.

 Except from Pienaar I would give our backline an average of 5 out of 10.

The defence may have been higher but then again Scotland have never been renowned for backline play. 

If the attack had been over 5 out of 10, we would have won the game in the 1st half beyonf doubt

Swami, you are confused, I'm saying nothing. But the match stats, as compiled by ESPN, a responsible and well funded operation, say exactly that for the Aussie game. Trace your fat thumb down the column which says CB....ie Clean Breaks. You will note the zero next to your man Taute.

Mike, get over your 5 metres for de Jongh....the official metres gained was 14 in 3 carries. This has as much credibility as your one lineout taken by Kruger. You should have these hallucinations checked out.

Mozart

I have nevr seen De Jongh making 14 meters in 3 runs.   He got the first ball and knocked it on.   He got the second ball and made five meters.  He got a the third ball and made no progress over the gain line.   Where did the other 9 meters come from?

Like your ratings your stats is fictititious.   When I posted De Jongh's career ratings - you ignored it - now suddenly it is the Bible.   Please get real - you are onto a dead horse here - same as you were with Steenkamp and Van der Linde.   

Let me put it this way - I will hate to see th POMS win - but the selection of Steenkamp and De Jongh will add subsantially to that win.    Both are useless - so please keep on dreaming. 

Moz its the extremity of the views expressed that is problematic. One can say for example re Kirchner he wa solid but one would like mor eflair from the back etc  -fair enough. But its the saying he is totally useless and and Steenkamp and De Jongh likewise. Too extreme.
Steenkamp earns a 5 here and a highr rating elsewhere. But he is totally useless. I saw him put in some good cleanouts and tackles. Scrumming was fine with him and Jannie.  If one believed Mike we were backpeddaling at the rate of knots! Not so!

Taute is going to be playing fullback so why worry too much about him at center anyway. Wonder why Meyer never let him have a run?

You know Hasbeen how often Bok coaches have been hammered for clearing their benches in close games. Meyer doesn't and now fans get after him for that. You can't win as a Bok coach.

My guess is the most common advice to a new Bok coach, is to ignore all advice.

MOz, I think at the moment the ONLY thing that matters is winning. Which is right given the pressures cuase dby the bleaters. The developement will come next year.

I am concerned that if guys play as much rugby next year we will be in the dwang again re injuries. This player management story is key to our prospects.

Beeno

You apparently did  not rread whay I said about Steenkamp.   Let me explain again in detail:-

*   In the first 15 minutes there were 4 scrums.  The first one turned into a short arm free kick because the Scots were early.   That was followed by 3 further scrums.   Steenkamp was solid in those three scrums.

*   These were followed by a further 3 scrums - where Steenkamp was constantly scrumming upwards and inwards - with the Scots winning scrums on their throw-ins 

*   The next scrum the Springbok forwards were going backkwards and the one after that resulted in a penalty for the Scots. 

I did not list the last five scrums in detail as I did now.   I summarized it as saying that th scrumming of Steenkamp disintegrated.    He was good for 15 minutes and for the rest not up to standard or anything called solid.   The latter description was entirely correct in the first three real scrums - that is in the first 15 minutes.   He obviously was completely tired out after the first half - he left the field last of all the players walking very slowly from the pitch.   Saffex said he was huffing and puffing - I really think he was..

With that gut - it showed even with the tight jerseys played in - he obviously was unfit.   Be it as it maty - he came back on after halftime.  The first scrum he was solid - followed by two poor efforts and was then injured slightly.   He then walked off slowly from the field of play - could barely manage a very slow walk.    Whether you believe it or not - he is the unfitest player I have ever seen in a Springbok jersey.

A similar display can be expected on Saturday - but the difference is the POMS will give him an evwn harder time tthan the Scots did.  

Mozart

I fully agree  with you there.   I have seen games being lost because of bench players being brought on.  Meyer is indeed wise not to do so.  But then his selection of the team and bench may have something to do wih it as well.   He had Jantjies on thebench for a number of tests - yet he used him in Pretoria for six minyes and after Goosen was injured in the Soweto test.   In the latte test he really wasa disaster - so he should not have been on the bench at all.   On the other hand Lambie was always solid - yet he warmed the bench and never really fiven any playing time.   The only bench players he brought on fairly regularly was the props, the one lock and the Coetzee.   In all it was very minimal usage of the bench players at all.  That despite constant failures by some starting line-up players.    The only time he did the latter was when Pienaar came on in the place of Hougaard and Goosen (in Dunedin) in the case of Steyn.    .

However, Meyer's selection criteria is a mystery to me and many others.   He picked Steenkamp for the squad.   Toulouse uses him from the bench - not in their starting line up.   He is not really matchfit and it may have something to do with an injury earlier in the season.  On Saturday Meyer picked him in the starting line - up and then he subbed him with Van der Linde.   The latter player was brought to Newlands in 2011 under a huge fanfare and flopped badly - the Stromers ended up releasing him and he went to the Lions - who used him from the bench.   He frankly was poor.   Meyer picked him in the starting line up against Ireland and he flopped badly - then on Sayurday - when he saw that Steenkamp was vitrually on his last legs - he brought on Van der Linde.   That was really a disaster.   However, how Meyer could even have included these two in the squad is really unbelievable.   There selection was not performence-based - so the real result was to be expected.

.