There’s been a lot of talk (maybe too much talk) about Peter de Villiers’ magical new game-plan for the Boks. One thing is abundantly clear to me; if you don’t lay the right platform, you’re not going to succeed at anything.
Now, this is not exactly rocket science. It’s something that seems to have occurred to most of us over the last few weeks, but I thought I’d try and put some structure around the thoughts that I had. I’ve chatted to my good pal MorneN about this and I saw KSA post a comment just this morning indicating that he’s thinking along the same lines.
The Boks’ problem right now is that the tight five is not doing the necessary groundwork.
Without the tight five laying the platform, all 8 forwards are effectively taken out of the game, leaving the backs to try and play a high-risk, run-at-all-costs game against a full complement of 15 defenders. It’s as simple as that. Get the right tight five in place, get them playing a tight game and doing their basic job FIRST and the transformation in the Boks’ play will be amazing to behold.
Looking at the guys we picked on Saturday. Every single member of the pack is a ball-player. The balance is completely wrong. De Villiers has made the fatal mistake of believing he needs to pick talented players who can make stuff happen with ball in hand in every single position. This, unfortunately, is completely wrong, because the first, second and third priorities of a tight five player should be to secure the ball. Once they have that under control, they can be fancy with ball in hand if the situation allows it.
Bismarck du Plessis and Beast Mtawarira are both the sort of players that are useful in either situation. Beast’s game at the moment is far too lose and one can only assume he is following the example set by the rest of the tight forwards in this regard. Bismarck is an absolute dervish at the breakdown point, but needs to work on his lineouts, currently a glaring weakness in his game. CJ van der Linde has always been far too loose a player to be a really good tighthead. His discipline problems continue, though, leaving de Villiers needing to scratch his head for a last-minute replacement. Mujati isn’t currently good enough at scrum-time, which means that any other discussions are moot. You can’t pick a prop who can’t scrum, finish and klaar.
To me, though, the biggest problem is in the second row. You need a pair of locks hitting every breakdown in order to ensure quality ball. A big, fast guy hitting the ruck at pace does wonders in terms of shifting momentum your way and the Boks right now are carrying two second-rowers who are shirking in the tight. Victor Matfield and Andries Bekker, I’m told, are in the side primarily for their lineout skills and as ball-playing options. But we aren’t winning any lineout ball and we have enough ballplayers in the backline, thus we don’t need them.
If anything, one can afford to carry one “looser” tight forward in the pack, with perhaps one or two others on the bench. With this philosophy in mind, I would be very tempted to suggest the following combination for the Boks, in order to maximise the chances of the all-attack strategy succeeding.
1. Heinke van der Merwe
2. John Smit
3. Jannie du Plessis
4. Danie Rossouw
5. Johann Muller
16. Bismarck du Plessis
17. Beast Mtawarira
18. Victor Matfield
Jannie is only in at 3 because BJ Botha is (presumably) not available. De Villiers should take that combination on the end of year tour and let them concentrate on winning him the ball he needs to make his loose forwards and backs look really, really good.
Tweet
Dude, you made a heck of a lot of sense untill you named the players you had in mind. 😯 🙄
Jannie??? Not strong enough at that level.
Danie Rossouw??? I would even spare the Bulls there.
Johann Muller??? Yes, but he has to prove himself all over again.
Beast??? Too strong to leave out, he needs to pick up experience any
way.
Bismarck??? Way too good to waste on the bench, but that could pass for the next year as an understudy to John. Imo we should be on a very sharp lookout for a captain to replace John.
Heincke??? Right call, there’s hope for you yet.
All in all you made a lot of sense. You certainly left some points open to debate.
@Silver Fox (Comment 1) : ok – pick a better one, please!
I mean, assuming no BJ, Jannie is our next best bet. Outside of him, we’re turning to inexperienced guys like Kalldo or Gerber.
Smit is there for his leadership, as well as his work in the tight and the lineouts. In his absence, we have seen how vital all of those things are.
Rossouw is there as cover for Bakkies. If we don’t pick him, then again we’re looking at untested guys for the vital no 4 slot; Fondse, Senekal, Sykes? Shit, but the cupboard is bare.
Muller is the tightest number 5 we have and has superb leadership and organisational skills. He will organise the lineouts, since we have dumped the bearded non-entity. Muller is rated by his peers as the best scrummaging locks in the business and regularly tops the Sharks own stats for most rucks hit in a game.
Heinke over Beast is a call based solely on the fact that Heinke is probably a stronger scrummager and can do more damage in the first 50 minutes of a test.
At 3 you need a guy that can make sure that we never go back in the scrum, and then anything else he adds in the game is bonus.
@walter van transvaal.co.za (Comment 5) : I agree. I really had high hopes that Lawrence was coming right, but he seemed to get absolutely stuffed by du Preez last weekend.
So my tight 5 would be
1. Heinke
2. Bismarck
3. BJ
4. Bakkies
5. Victor
16. Strauss or Wepener
17. Beast
18. Muller
@robdylan (Comment 6) :
Lawrence did okay so far on his return, but he seems to lose concentration here and there and then gets monstered..
What our guys are doing though is making sure that the tightheads that are under contract and not playing, are on strength buidling programmes, and they will be better when they get a chance…look how Geldenhuys impressed when he made his CC debut for us on Friday.
@walter van transvaal.co.za (Comment 8) : must say – I’m VERY excited about Geldenhuys. Reckon he’s going to be a great.
@robdylan (Comment 9) :
I certainly hope so..he seems to have ball playing skills as well
1. Heinke van der Merwe
2. John Smit
3. Jannie du Plessis
4. Danie Rossouw
5. Johann Muller
16. Bismarck du Plessis
17. Beast Mtawarira
18. Victor Matfield
HORSES for COURSES, hey?
Doesn’t look pretty…but might be effective …based on the valid points you mentioned in the article. Secure/protect.
Beast’s game at the moment is far too loose and one can only assume he is following the example set by the rest of the tight forwards in this regard
and with Captain Fantastic on his side…he’d probably follow a good example…so Beast over Heinke…thank you.
BJ is definitely the missing piece in this puzzle…why didn’t they take Jannie instead? 😥
Andries started well…but lately he seems to be shying away from the “ruff-stuff”…so I understand why you might want Rossouw there in the absence of Bakkies.
All in all…I’m still willing to give the current bunch a chance (coaching staff and players). The key mistake at breakdown is OBVIOUS…surely they can’t keep turning a blind eye.
Any changes with the loose-forwards Robbo or is that the next edition of
“PIMP THE SPRINGBOKS” ?
@robdylan (Comment 4) : Read a magazine article not too long ago on Heinke in which PdV harps on and on and on about Heinke, this was before he was Bok coach, so howcome Heinke doen’t get a show?
@walter van transvaal.co.za (Comment 7) : Believe it or not, I was merrily typing away at more or less the same team here, then clicked on a wrong place!!! 😮
I would still like to look at John Smit at tighthead, if only in the second half, for he does still have a lot to contribute.
No Strauss, John and Bismarck to cover tighthead and hooker. Wepener a very valid stand-in.
Beast to start. Heinke very able.
1. Beast
2. John ( till halftime )
3. BJ ( If still applicable )
4 Bakkies ( if fit )
5 Bekker
6. Bismarck ( at Halftime )
7. Johann Muller
8. Heinke ( Can he cover both sides? )
Perhaps they can teach Beast to play TH?
@walter van transvaal.co.za (Comment 15) : he actually started there, when converting from flank. I saw him play an u21 game at tighthead against the Bulls. He was replaced after 10 minutes.
@blackshark (Comment 11) : I would play Baywatch at 6, Schalk at 7 and Kanko at 8.
@robdylan (Comment 3) :
You can only put jannie in your team if Bismarck is also there (not only on the bench)….we all saw what “heimwee” for his little bro did to his game… 😈
@robdylan (Comment 17) : That’s well chosen. 🙂
BTW Beast at tighthead can relieve a lot of headaches.
@robdylan (Comment 17) :
Sounds good..I mean, how will we ever know what Baywatch can offer the Boks if we don’t give him at least one chance?
@walter van transvaal.co.za (Comment 20) : We should just ask Jake what he thinks. He’s probably too small.
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 18) : heimwee?
@molly (Comment 21) : maybe he can’t carry enough beers
@robdylan (Comment 22) :
Thought I’d get your pommyass with that one.. 😉 missing / longing…
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 24) : thanks. Never too old to learn new stuff
You need to look at the loosies, halfbacks, and forward technique more than anything else.
Its a complete fallacy that a fetcher will win us turnovers – effective tackling, rucking and cleaning wins you turnovers, not the efforts of a single guy. This is not Hollywood, where one guy can beat 8 on his own.
Your structure in the backs comes from good phase ball and good halfback direction – do you think its a coincidence that the Sharks played like the Boks are now when we had Daniels, Botes and AN Other as loosies, and Dumond and Mathie as halfback?
Also, dropping a guy like Beast makes no sense as other than a few slips, Beast has been one of our best ruckers and cleaners, as well as a great tackler.
Heinke might be a tad better in the scrum, although even that notion has been turned on its ear with recent performances, however, its beyond doubt that Heinke’s tackling, rucking and general work-rate are below par.
Dropping Beast would be cutting off your nose to spite your face.
@robdylan (Comment 25) :
Ahhh – so you are living proof that you can teach and Old dog , new tricks!!
@Big Fish (Comment 26) :
What you doing here?? aren’y you suppose to earn a decent wage??? 😎
Baywatch is overrated imo.
According to my stats Heinke missed 2 tackles in 5 matches…if that’s below par I guess Clark Kent is playing in your team…LOL!
@Big Fish (Comment 26) : ok… you know how highly I rate Beast. I just picked Heinke to start to avoid the inevitable accusations of bias if I pick a tight 5 containing 4 Sharks 😉
@walter van transvaal.co.za (Comment 29) : how many did he make, though? 😉
@walter van transvaal.co.za (Comment 29) :
This is CC level we are talking about.
Where was Heinke during the S14???
He can scrum of that there is no doubt. His work rate has always been poor.
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 27) :
Sitting in another log meeting.
Typing very softly during the talking.
@walter van transvaal.co.za (Comment 29) :
How many did he make?
And how many gain-line metres did he gain?
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 27) : 🙂
Later peeps… I need to earn my under-the-breadline wage.. 😈
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 35) : good luck with that 😉
Play luke at tight head 😯 at least then he be closer to the rucks
In addition to have a tight 5 that actually plays tight, one of our major problems are the balance of our loosies.
General thoughts go along the lines of we have similar athletes in the all three roled hence we are ineffective.
I agree and disagree to some extent.
I believe your number 8 should revert more to the tradition, game-reading type of 8 of old with the ‘ball players’ that are making their names at 8 these days shifting to 7 or blindside doing or playing the more ‘linking’ type of role a 13 should in the backline.
The guys that straightens and puts people into gaps/creates gaps.
I get so irritated with the comments of how great Spies carries the ball and how he bashes into everyone where his job should be yes to try and get over the advantage line (like any good 13 should) but primarily put people around him into space.
So I would like to see an 8 which operates (on attack) closer in (channels 1 and 2) with ball in hand and for that I will keep on saying Juan Smith should pack down at 8, not 7 – he cannot play the linking role for shit.
In addition with the NH tour coming up I would like to see an Alberts and Vermeulen brought in as back ups to 8.
Joe, Kanko, Spies at 7, with Schalk and God knows how at 6 (now that Wikus is gone) but preferrably someone with a similar work rate.
I do not subscribe to the traditional fetcher theory because every time a guy buries his head in the ground or lies at the bottom of the ruck he takes himself out of the game, which means you play with one player less.
The ‘fetchers’ are everyone on the field and it comes down to technique more than ‘fetching’ skills where ball is secured, rucks are cleaned properly and tackled players are taught to PRESENT the ball properly (cannot believe these guys still cant do it at this level).
Your opensider is the guy that harass the oppo into submission, not the guy taking himself out of the game.
He will have the highest tackle count normally and the reason your forwards are on the front foot with the help of his other loosies primarily and also the tight 5.
I cannot believe that people still put stock in so-called ‘fetchers’ when the average figures for ‘fetcher turn-overs’ per match is less than 5.
So you telling me a guy that makes 5 contributions on the field is important? Kak he is a waste of time.
Okay rant over.
@walter van transvaal.co.za (Comment 29) :
Only if he missed 2 out of 3 attempts – kak conversion rate! 😈
@MorneN (Comment 38) : so who would you pick as your fetcher?
@robdylan (Comment 40) :
Grapgat! 😀
@MorneN (Comment 38) : but we do rather enjoy your rants
@MorneN (Comment 41) : it’s a good argument, though… The Sharks suddenly started looking better when they got Deysel into the loose trio. Up to that point, they’d had two fetchers in the mix, neither of whom were able to accomplish a bloody thing thanks to the pack as a whole going backwards
here is the team i would suggest with power and 2 fetchers and ball carriers
but also fensivly sound
15 steyn
14 jpp
13 fourie
12 jdv
11 habs
10 butch
09 ruan 👿
08 vermeulen
07 deysel
06 schalk
05 matfield
04 bakkies
03 bj has a clause in his contract that if the boks or sharks needs him he is able to play , this was due to his early release
02 smitty
01 heinke
16 bismark
17 beast as in 2nd half smitty can move to TH when bissy comes on
18 kanko
19 juan
20 adi
21 dupreez
22 morne steyn
😯 damn i only put 10 sharks in that squad
@sharks_lover (Comment 44) : no Grant?
3 other loose forwards to look at that are not in the squad
brussouw , alberts and grobler
also i was joking about ruan in the staring 15 , i would swtich him and dupreez
molly i feel that morne steyn has been on better form and is more experienced
other then that he wouldnt be outa place if you did play him instead on morne
morne does have a huge boot though and accurate goal kicker
and thus yes id still play morne steyn first
and to me he should be taking over from butch
does that make sense??
@sharks_lover (Comment 50) : It does, but I still prefer Grant. But Morne is playing some good rugger.
To all you supporters of PDVs mysterious “gameplan”, read and weep…
http://www.rugby365.com/all_news/sa/news/1107180.htm
@klempie (Comment 52) :
I think this was posted as an article a day or so ago.. 😎
@klempie (Comment 52) : My favourite bit:
“”I know people are angry and rightfully so.” But [PDV] also claimed the Boks were the better side at Absa Stadium.”
HAHAHAHAHA
FDP doesn’t deserve to start and neither does Butch (is he injured?)
sharkslover
And I thought Rob showed bias… 😯
@klempie (Comment 54) : Eddie Jones is nothing but a walking mouth anyway. Who cares what he thinks?
@robdylan (Comment 56) : He’s a walking mouth that managed to do what PDV couldn’t. Take a forwards-dominated Bok side and ADD attacking play…
@robdylan (Comment 56) :
Jones?
The guy that lead Aus to their worst losing streak in decades?
Saviour of the Bok WC campaign?
That Jones?
@klempie (Comment 57) :
I have always found this fascinating.
I would love to know, how a guy who had a terrible record as Aus coach, with arguably more talented, skillfull players got his ass fired for his poor results managed to turn a century (according to some) of Bok rugby playing style around in a matter of 3 months as a consultant?
I like old Eddie but hell some guys give him way too much credit.
I think this whole conversation is in vain. 2weeks ago everybody was saying that we picked the best 15 available and even though I might have changed 1 or 2 players that wouldn’t change anything is the coaching doesn’t change. All the players in the current team are able to ‘fetch’ and clean out, but if they are told to be in the backline ala Matfied nothing is going to change if the coaches gameplan doesn’t change. We have the talent , now we need the correct plan and execution….and yes I would give Morne Steyn a go a no 10
@MorneN (Comment 58) :
Yeah the one and only and the one that assisted SA in the cup in 2007.. 😉
My 15
15 Steyn
14 JPP
13 Adi
12 JdV
11 Habs
10 Steyn
9 Fourie
8 Kanko/Big Joe
7 Schalk
6 Baywatch
5 Matfield/Bekker
4 Bakkies
3 Beast
2 Bismarck
1 Jannie
@Pokkel (Comment 62) : 10 Morne Steyn
@klempie (Comment 52) : Mysterious gameplan?? I thought we all knew what his gameplan was?
@klempie (Comment 57) : As you rightly point out, Jones had a chance, we merely say give PDV the same chance.
@MorneN (Comment 58) : I think he means the Reds coach Jones.
@MorneN (Comment 59) : Look at the results man. Everyone said during the WC that the Boks were more incisive on attack than before Jones. His Aussie track record doesn’t mean anything. I’m not saying he was the reason we won the WC, but he certainly had an effect.
@Pokkel (Comment 62) :
Beast is not a tight head.
@klempie (Comment 66) :
Of course he had an effect, the point is what makes his opinion different from every other rugby guru out there (which seems to be quite a lot lately if you read the papers)?
@klempie (Comment 66) :
So becos everyone said so that makes it a FACT???
@wpw (Comment 69) :
Jones pointed out our weaknesses they used to attack – I mean hell that will always help. They worked on that and looked better because of it.
@wpw (Comment 69) : yup
@MorneN (Comment 70) : Exactly. Why can’t PDV do the same instead of throwing the baby out with the bath water?
@klempie (Comment 72) :
Because of some issues as mentioned above, selections being one.
Also, he needs a systematic approach, he is currently wanting to achieve results or see his plan in action too quickly – this approach takes time and is a building process.
He is getting it wrong there imo.
@MorneN (Comment 68) : hell, even Piet Pienaar are one!
I agree “The Boks’ problem right now is that the tight five is not doing the necessary groundwork.”, but I don’t think we necessarily need another group of players to lay this ground work, sure a guy like BJ might be more effective and has done a brilliant job the past couple of years, but clearly Pdv has his favored group of players, the question is can they do the job. I believe the answer to that is yes.
We have to remember that cleaning out the ruck, playing a tighter game, laying the necessary groundwork is much more than just being there once a ruck forms. You can’t really expect a tight forward to be at every single ruck. In fact at most you can only expect them to climb into every ruck in their vicinity and this relies largely on how wide or how close to the ruck a team plays. That’s why fetching and cleaning the ruck is the responsibility of the entire team. 1 through to 15, if you’re the best guy for that particular ruck you can’t look at the number on your back and say it’s not your job.
So why have we been losing so much of our ball at the breakdown? Is it really because our tight five are players known for their more loose play? Or is it maybe because these players hasn’t yet adapted to our game plan?
Firstly when playing a more loose or expansive game one always stands the chance of having more turnover ball. Players run away from support and so it becomes impossible to retain possession, but I don’t think this is the problem we really have. If we could choose between 15 breaks in a game where possession is only 50% certain and 3 breaks in a game where possession is almost 100% certain I think most of us would choose option no1.
The thing is even if we get possession from half of those 15 breaks we can’t retain that possession for a sustained period of time. Once you’ve made the initial break and set up good possession in the oppositions half you need to adapt your gamelan to one that will ensure persistent possession. It doesn’t mean you can’t take the ball wide, it only means you need to know where your support is coming from. For every guy driving a ball up their needs to be at least two players cleaning out that ruck and another to give quick ball to the team, usually this means keeping the ball close to the ruck, pulling in the defense, until you create a gap out wide.
The problem is once the Boks get into the opposition 22 we loose all structure and therefore loose the ball. Our ball retention gets slow and our positional play is non existent, too many guys commit themselves to one ruck making that particular ruck a mess and the next ruck impossible to clean out since half our team is stuck in our previous mess of a ruck. The problem is so basic you would think our coaching staff would have sorted it out by now, but it almost seems like this is their plan and that must make every Bok supporter horrified.
The fact is if you want to play a more expansive game, you need to coach not only your backs, but even more specifically your forwards to this effect. Take Rory Cockett in the Sharks S14 campaign for an example. The coaching staff didn’t want to stifle him in telling him not to break too much, yet so many of his breaks resulted in turn over possession. Who is at fault, should Rory know when not to take the gap, or should his supportive players be more aware and ready to clean out the tackle or be there to take his pass? I believe when a player has the talent to spot a gap he should take it with the comfort that his team is sharp enough to support him.
The same rule applies to the Boks, they want to play an expansive game, they need to adapt to this expansive game in every area. The players we have there is fine, I’m not saying I would not prefer other players in a few position, but for this particular job any player Pdv chooses would suffice. As soon as he starts to coach these players positional play according to his game plan, the problem will be solved.
Sure some players are better playing loose and others thrive on playing a tight game, but if the coach tells you to play tight and you don’t do it, you would probably get dropped. It’s not like they’re not efficient at what they do, they’re just not doing what is necessary. Once they start playing a more tight game, I will comment on whether they are good at doing this or not. For now I just want these specific guys to start doing the right job.
@MorneN (Comment 70) :
Eddie was of great benefit to the Boks, but nobody is willing to give Coetzee and Jake credit for building that backline into bankers – they just didnt make mistakes.
@MorneN (Comment 73) : I agree. So get rid of him.
RD. If you’re around, what is the weather doing in Pomland atm?
@Big Fish (Comment 76) : Yeh and there’s another area PDV is missing out on.
@klempie (Comment 77) :
Yeah they said the same thing about White when he lost 6 in a row and 49-0.
@klempie (Comment 77) : In favour of? 😕
Off the boring subject of the losing SBs here is the match 22 for the Winning Sharks: Sharks Matchday 22:
15. Stefan Terblanche
14. Chris Jordaan
13. Riaan Swanepoel
12. Bradley Barritt (Captain)
11. Waylon Murray
10. Frederic Michalak
9. Charl McLeod
8. Keegan Daniel
7. Jean Deysel
6. Jacques Botes
5. Alistair Hargreaves
4. Albert van den Berg
3. Deon Carstens
2. Skipper Badenhorst
1. Patric Cilliers
Replacements:
16. Craig Burden
17. Melusi “Barra” Mthethwa
18. Steven Sykes
19. Skholiwe Ndlovu
20. Rory Kockott
21. Andries Strauss
22. Monty Dumond
Go Shaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarks!
@MorneN (Comment 80) : Except some people understood what he was trying to accomplish. I was one of those who backed him when everyone else was calling for his head. No one’s got a clue what PDV is trying do.
I still would like to know what Bodmer did wrong that he has never again been selected? 😡
@klempie (Comment 77) : I can get you SARU’s account details to deposit the R5 mil.
Why so negative? Give the guy a chance.
@Silver Fox (Comment 81) : What about SARU going back to Heyneke cap in hand and footing the bill for buying him out of his Tigers contract…I would LOOOOOVE to see that!
@molly (Comment 85) : I’d tell you why I’m so negative, but I’d get kicked off the site for getting political…
@klempie (Comment 78) : the usual. Pissing with rain 😉
@klempie (Comment 86) : oh please. Meyer is a one-dimensional Jake wannabe. We need to move forward in our thinking.
@klempie (Comment 86) : Actually now that I think about it, I am up in Leicestershire on Friday! Maybe I’ll swing around there and have a word!
@Sharksmad – The Blog’s Dudette (Comment 84) : simple, really… he doesn’t have a contract
@Sharksmad – The Blog’s Dudette (Comment 84) :
yeah – I liked him… 😀
@robdylan (Comment 88) : Heyneke-DM Double team…formidable as!
i dont think coach for boks should just be changed now
but i pray he wakes up and sees he is wrong and goes back to bok strengths
@robdylan (Comment 90) : oh okai! 😥
@klempie (Comment 86) : Heyneke 😆
WPW broer lol thats not bias just common sense lmao
i have no doubt dupreez will regain form
and butch was one of our better players on saturday alond with jdv adi beast schalk and bissy
to me those were the only players to come out of it with some form of credit
but the problem isnt with the players so much as the fact that the coach has taken them in the tri nations and tried to play lets run at all costs
gold as forwards coach has done nothing to change our ball hunting skills
and i dont believe cj should be Th as i never have
boks should have the strongest possible scrum there and they dont
if we haad this powerful scrum and played it more tight you would force youre opponents to play tighter
thats what the kiwi’s did in beating the aussies 3 weeks ago
and that is also what bok stregnth is aboout
its about strength and structure
you go back to playing that and butch and fourie dup and all will be the stars we know they are
and as mutch as i hate to do it i have , i put heinke before beast purely for scrumming strength
smitty does the basics better then bissy thus saturday we again lost lineouts
also the bok team is headless without smit
an aussie team can function without a great capt
sadly the boks cannot
helloooooooooooooooo tannie ysblokkie
@sharks_lover (Comment 97) :
JA SL….how goes?? 😆
lol fine and you hun??
@sharks_lover (Comment 99) :
Taking it one baby step at a time… 😉
gold as forwards coach has done nothing to change our ball hunting skills
and i dont believe cj should be Th as i never have
Comment 96, posted at 27.08.08 14:12:30 by sharks_lover
OH MY GOD 😯 Club member #2
lol pjld
and who is member #1 lol
RD….weather update please! 👿
@klempie (Comment 104) :
He said ist RAINING – where your fricken glasses, Klemp??? 😈
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 105) : Whoooops! Sorry RD! 😛
I’ve packed my Drimac…hopefully that does the trick…oh…and my sexy long johns!
@klempie (Comment 107) : You off to the “muddy island” again?
@Me2 (Comment 108) : Ongelukkig ja…
@klempie (Comment 107) :
O jinne – what a site THAT must be!!
@Me2 (Comment 108) :
Did you see my new pics on FB? ‘Golden oldy stuff’
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 110) : Keep dreaming…
sight.. 😳
@klempie (Comment 83) :
I also backed him, as I also knew what he wanted to ultimately achieve but he also made mistakes on the way there – my support did not fade because of it.
Same as with Peter, he is making some mistakes now but no-one can say he will not succeed. That is pure speculation.
@klempie (Comment 111) :
BWAAAHHHHHAHAAAA
@MorneN (Comment 113) : I prefer when things make sense…PDV just doesn’t.
@sharks_lover (Comment 103) : 🙄
Klempie, you off to support the Proteas (terrible name for such a mighty ccricket team) in their quest to get trebble figures before they return home?
@PJLD(RIP Bernie Mac) (Comment 116) :
Ag toe nou! Ek wil ok weet.. 😀
well atleast someone agree’s with me pjld boet lol
ME ME ME ME ME ME
I can’t and have never viewed Christoffel and a tighthead prop!
and = as
@PJLD(RIP Bernie Mac) (Comment 121) : Piet?
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 110) : Saw them but have not looked @ them…will catch up at home tonight!
@klempie (Comment 109) : Poor Mary will be back in LOndon after 4 weeks of golden Greek (Skiathos) sunshine 🙄
@PJLD(RIP Bernie Mac) (Comment 120) :
Sorrrryyyyyyyyyy for aaaskkkinnngggg……
@Me2 (Comment 123) : London 😳
@Salmonoid (Comment 117) : HAHAHAHA, you’ll never understand the irony of that statement…One might say that I’ve contributed to the Proteas spectacular fall from grace…
@Me2 (Comment 123) : Unlucky!
actually, I lied. It’s not raining. I just need to perpetuate the fallacy that the weather here is always shit, otherwise we’d be overrun with Saffas.
Oh, wait… too late 😉
@klempie (Comment 126) :
From the Sharks site I seem to recall thet you had something to do with writing or installing some software for the England and Wales Cricket Board.
@robdylan (Comment 128) : 3 Saffas playing for England confirms that. 😉
@robdylan (Comment 128) :
No worries ’bout me…I have No intention of visiting you soon….
Hey – where’s my smiley’s gone???
@Salmonoid (Comment 129) : Damnit Salmonoid! 👿 You’re ruining my international man of mystery mystique!
@Salmonoid (Comment 129) :
That’s why the scoreboard seems to me malfunctioning if I am looking at the current score!!
@robdylan (Comment 128) : Hehehehehehe!!!
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 133) : Hilaaaarious! 😕
@klempie (Comment 135) :
**sticks out tongue** (for lack of appropriate smiley) 😉
I don’t rate CJ either!
And neither does Guy Kebble or John Allen (Allan)
How do you spell his surname dammit??? 👿
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 136) : That’s what 😛 is for… 😉
@klempie (Comment 132) :
You do seem to get around.
If you see Kevin Pietersen give him a whack on the back of the head with the heaviest bat you can find and at the same time say WELL DONE.
@klempie (Comment 138) :
I that what that smiley is?? Short tongue, hey? 🙄 😉
@Salmonoid (Comment 139) : I won’t be going to the ODIs. Mercifully, I’m restricted to county games.
And no way you’ll ever catch me saying well done to KP.
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 140) :
Ice we must be getting old, I never saw that tongue before. I wonder how many people I gave a raspberry to when actually intended a smile.
Time for a Skinstad makeover for that one.
@Salmonoid (Comment 142) :
I say – I thought it was a nice wide lady smile where the lipsticjk was smeared on the teeth..
Bob for Tongue Smiley!!
hey – and a bietjie minder van daai “we” whe you’re talking about ‘Old”.. 😉
@Salmonoid (Comment 142) : 😳 like u Sal 😳
@klempie (Comment 141) :
Thats why you hit him with the bat as well – but lets face it, all things aside, the guy has done bloody well for himself and for the Poms.
@Salmonoid (Comment 145) : Doesn’t mean I can’t hate him!
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 143) :
Ok, so whats your excuse for the bad eyesight. Whisky?
@Salmonoid (Comment 147) :
Thats way better than age…agree??
Aged whisky is the best.
@Salmonoid (Comment 149) :
say you… 😉
@Salmonoid (Comment 149) : As is aged steak
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 150) :
Aye, with ice of course.
@PJLD(RIP Bernie Mac) (Comment 151) :
Man, when last did I have a really good steak.
@Salmonoid (Comment 152) :
Goes without saying!
SARU dismisses Jake’s return:
http://www.news24.com/News24/Sport/Rugby/0,,2-9-838_2383563,00.html
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 154) :
Na Zdrowie
@Salmonoid (Comment 156) :
WHAT??? 😯
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 157) :
Prost! 😀
Cheers,(as in a good health salute before drinking your whisky on ice)in Polish / Russian.
@I’ce (Rebel With a Cause) (Comment 158) : I love the Dutch 😉