Heyneke Meyer
’n Basiese kontrak van R 5 miljoen per jaar, aansporingsbonusse uitgesluit.
Dís glo die vergoeding waartoe die Suid-Afrikaanse Rugbyunie (SARU) ingestem het in die nuwe kontrak met Heyneke Meyer, die Springbok-afrigter.
Volgens bronne het Meyer al voor die Wêreldbeker-toernooi ’n kontrak onderteken om die span vir nog 4 seisoene, tot in 2019, af te rig.
Oregan Hoskins, SARU se president en voorsitter van die uitvoerende raad, het Vrydag benadruk dat die finale besluit by die Algemene Raad sal lê. Elke provinsiale rugbyunie word in die Algemene Raad verteenwoordig.
Die kwessie gaan na verwagting vroeg in Desember ter tafel gelê word.
Uit verskillende oorde is verneem Meyer kry aansporingsbonusse vir die verowering van die Wêreldbeker, ’n wenpersentasie van meer as 60% en ’n 2de plek op die wêreldranglys.
Die kontrakkwessie hang al weke lank soos ’n wolk oor Suid-Afrikaanse rugby, met SARU wat dit nog nie onomwonde in die openbaar ontken het nie.
Selfs indien die Algemene Raad Meyer se heraanstelling afkeur, bly die vraag waarom ’n kontrak nog voor die afskop van die toernooi met hom gesluit is.
Daar is ook sprake dat elke lid van die Uitvoerende Raad nie daarin geken is nie.
Dis veral pertinent, gegewe die Springbokke se vertoning die afgelope jaar. Hulle het teen onder meer Ierland, Wallis, Argentinië en die aspoestertjie-span, Japan, verloor.
Meyer was boonop in die transformasie-spervuur met sy besluit om Jesse Kriel voor die verloortoets teen Argentinië bo Lwazi Mvovo op vleuel te kies. Die beperkte geleenthede wat spelers soos Siya Kolisi, Rudy Paige en Lwazi Mvovo in die toernooi gekry het, sal daardie slapende honde opnuut wakker maak.
Daar was egter die afgelope week uit spelersgeledere steun vir Meyer. Fourie du Preez het gesê ’n Springbok-afrigter se termyn behoort van 2 jaar voor tot 2 jaar ná die toernooi te strek. Dáárom, meen hy, moet Meyer in die tuig bly.
John Mitchell, gewese breier van die All Blacks en Goue Leeus, se (waarskynlik omstrede) voorstel is dat Meyer nie afgedank word nie, maar eerder ’n mede-hoofafrigter gegee word.
Só kan Meyer se ervaring en kennis doeltreffend benut word, sê hy.
“Daar word gegons oor die moontlikheid van ’n buitelandse kandidaat as afrigter, maar ek was nog nooit werklik ’n voorstander daarvan nie.
“’n Land soos Suid-Afrika het ’n unieke rugbykultuur en ek dink ’n plaaslike afrigter verstaan dit net baie beter.”
Die Springbokke sal wel kan baat vind by ’n buitelandse invloed, sê Mitchell.
Alan Zondagh, gewese afrigter van die Westelike Provinsie en direkteur van rugby van die Engelse rugbyreus Saracens, sê so iets moedig ’n hoofafrigter dalk aan om minder af te rig.
“Deesdae word spesialisafrigters so gereeld betrek dat hulle die meeste van die afrigting doen. Spesialiste moet gebruik word om ’n spesifieke haakplek te hanteer.”
Sport24 (Stephen Nell & Heinz Schenk)
Lion4ever wrote:
Yes all good and well
Then the coach should add a clause to it stating the performance clauses are only binding when a South African franchise or franchises reach the Super Rugby final, or heaven behold wins it
Like in 1995
Or in 2007
@ grootblousmile:
Yeah mate…that about sums everything up….. I’m also of the same line of thought regarding an outsider coming into coach the Bok, will never happen, or should never happen for a Super Power Rugby Nation…… Dr Craven would roll in his grave…
@ Te Rangatira: Oom Danie would resurrect from the grave and klap the okes who appointed a ‘veraaier’ (read spy) to oversee his beloved Boks. Can’t happen. I fancy Brendon Venter myself. Now there is a deep thinker of the game. Gert Small could do the job I reckon. Ditto Rassie Erasmus. So there are a few lurking down there in the bottom of a fairly bleek looking cupboard. Reckon Gert could look after himself but the others might need bietjie protection detail to cover their flanks.
32 @ Te Rangatira:
33 @ Tassies:
Then it seems the 3 of us are of exactly the same opinion… which makes us all GENIUSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSESSSS!
33 @ Tassies:
Oom Danie would say “BLIKSEM !!” and his dead dog, Bliksem, would also be raised from the grave… to go bite the ankles and vreet the verraaiers!
@ grootblousmile: reckon you’re not wrong there GB. Bliksem would definitely not be biting off more than he could chew. Dead dog or not.
36 @ Tassies:
You’re making far too much sense for a Stormers supporter… you’ll make me send you a Bulls jersey!!
Hehehe
Some might not remember, but in the ‘old days’ only a former Springbok was eligible to be appointed Bok coach.
Kabouters didn’t pass muster …
Tassies wrote:
Hi Tassies, that same deep thinker who got himself suspended for THAT game that we came so close to winning in 1999, I still remember him on the pitch throwing his toys out of the cot as he has sent off. Enjoyed the way he gave the media the run around for a bit when he was coaching in England and what he tried to instill in his players at Saracens but not really sure he is a steady reliable type that you want as head national coach, how long would he stick around, he may be more of a valuable consultant type person that could be asked for input as and when necessary if it was in an area he could add his knowledge.
@ Angostura:
Hi Angostura how are you doing?
Hi Bullscot
Doing fine, thx
And you?
88
The same deep thinker who as pre season caretaker coach of the Sharks (by own admission) forgot to give defence any attention …
Denk die denker …
BrumbiesBoy wrote:
Haha pull the over Brumby
You were taking a beating in the scrum so may have conceded yet another penalty. And that is without mentioning getting the 50/50 in your favour with the Maitland yellow card (actually am being generous it wasn’t even a 50/50 call, but a clear attempt at interception no deliberate slap down) let alone the knock on by Beale around 8th/9th min in the build up to first try. It was picked up in real time by the commentator and looked to me to have gone a little bit further forward than the one Joubert correctly called later in the game. That was 12 points gifted to you guys . 
41 @ Angostura:
That’s good, yes he did well at Saracens but certainly strikes me as very impulsive and that is why I say would not think he would be good leading a nation’s coaching team but he must be very intelligent so sure consult him if you think there is anything he can add value on.
Thanks to Wiki (must say enjoyed the ‘bizarre interview), you can see he is a bit of a maverick so doubt he would last long as SA coach :
“On 13 May 2010 Venter was charged with misconduct by the RFU for allegedly pushing a Leicester Tigers supporter who had asked him to sit down as he was blocking the view of the paying fans as well as making inappropriate comments and gestures to spectators. In his defence, Venter has described the incident as a bit of fun and the chief executive and the club owner of Saracens have defended Venter, claiming they considered it out of character for him. He has an existing four-week suspended ban from an incident earlier in the season. Venter eventually received a 10-week ban from rugby.
In November he was found guilty of misconduct due to being “inappropriately critical of ERC, the tournament, the match officials and the sport of rugby union” by ERC after he complained about the referee following his side losing at home in a key match when he considered them to be the better side, comments from neutral fans have expressed surprise at his opinions as his side were seen as out played and out thought by the opposing team. He was fined £21,850, but £13,100 was suspended until 30 June 2012.
In December, Venter was warned by the ERC after giving a bizarre post-match interview following the Saracens defeat to Racing Métro 92 in the Heineken cup. Venter gave extremely short answers to every question posed to him, and afterwards admitted that he was inspired from a comedy sketch from the film Mike Bassett”
@ Bullscot: maybe? I don’t know the man personally but he has balls, no doubt, and he’s very far removed from being conservative and doing the predictable. But, as I said, our cupboard is bare and we’re scratching around because there is no obvious choice right now.
If Meyer genuinely the national coach, there will be considerable disgruntlement amongst the masses(including me I must add) but I sincerely hope he’s learnt some lessons and watches the tapes of those two RC Tests we narrowly lost to the ABies and Wallies earlier in the year. He made mistakes in those too but the style of rugga played was what our rugby needs to pursue. Not stampkar rugby as Nortie rightly points out. We’re sick of it.
I found this very interesting. Would anyone like to comment?
Statistics point the way to an interesting analysis of South Africa’s road in this year’s Rugby World Cup, pointing out the parts that failed them as well.
With the tournament now over, the soul-searching has begun in earnest to see where it all went wrong, and how to improve it before the Green and Gold take the field again for a new season and a deeper look at the way the Boks conducted themselves over the course of their seven matches makes some interesting reading.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect – and this tells a story in itself – is the fact that Handre Pollard topped the penalty log and Dan Carter the conversions for the tournament at 23 apiece. The Boks low-risk approach and pressurizing the scoreboard was apparent as they played within their own set boundaries to take as many points on offer, while the All Blacks ability to suffocate an opposition, play off their mistakes and take the opportunities where it counts certainly played a massive part in them winning the World Cup back-to-back.
New Zealand certainly dominated all aspects of this World Cup, scoring 39 tries in their tournament – some 11 ahead of fellow finalists Australia and 13 ahead of the fourth-placed Boks. However, the Boks scored one try in their quarterfinal and none in their semifinal, showing up their inability to finish off the chances they created.
Interestingly New Zealand only kicked 11 penalties in the entire tournament, compared to the 25 by South Africa, with the All Blacks ninth on the overall list.
The stats get more interesting when the key areas of the game are discussed.
The Boks carried the ball a lot – second only to Argentina and more than the All Blacks. Their power approach was accentuated by the fact they crossed the gainline more times (391 to 378), yet they scored less.
This points again to the lack of finishing that has plagued the team for the entire year now, not only the tournament and shows how the world champions are able to unlock space for their runners on the outside.
This is further underlined when you look at the Clean breaks statistic for the tournament. Much has been said about the Boks attack in the entire competition but it may be surprising to know they had more clean breaks than Australia (55 to 50), even though the Wallabies are seen as a much more attacking side.
Interestingly this underlines the lack of finishing again, as it does with Argentina, who are second in this list with 78 with the All Blacks topping the clean breaks with 80 once again. The Boks also made more metres upfield in the competition than Australia, even though the latter base their pay on building phases and breaking down opposition with this mantra.
Schalk Burger topped the carries and carries over the gainline stat for the tournament, while interestingly coming third for the amount of offloads in the World Cup, just four behind offload king Sonny Bill Williams.
The Boks featured well in the clean breaks department with both Bryan Habana and Jesse Kriel in the top list with 10 apiece, but from there the finishing has to be questioned, as many a time the support simply wasn’t on their shoulder or the ball was spilled when the Boks got through. Predictably, World breakout player of the year Nehe Milner-Skudder was top of the clean break poll with 15.
The lineout may be a big part of the Bok game plan, and while the duo of Eben Etzebeth and Lood de Jager both did an exceptional amount of work around the park, they simply didn’t dominate the setpiece as the Boks normally do.
While the Boks won the most lineout balls in the competition, they were only seventh on the lineouts stolen list, showing just how far they have regressed since Victor Matfield stopped dominating the lineouts. The All Blacks, second on the most lineout balls won, topped the steals, with Kieran Reid and Brodie Retallick both stealing the most ball during the tournament.
The one area that the Boks did manage to get their moneys worth, is the breakdown. They matched New Zealand with turnovers made in the tournament, showing the worth of Scottish breakdown consultant Richie Gray. And while David Pocock was predictably the player of the tournament in terms of turning ball over, Francois Louw wasn’t far behind him with 13 turnovers in the competition.
That may be good and well, but an honest self-assessment will ask what was done after those turnovers, and here a stark lack of finishing often comes into focus when compared to other sides in the competition.
The other stat that the Boks can be proud of is their tackling. They made more tackles than any other side and their tackle completion rate was exceptional under defence coach John McFarland.
Defence is often an attitude thing, and here they can stand proud. Both Louw and Lood de Jager top the tackles made department and the Boks commitment in this regard says even more when player three and four are Eben Etzebeth and Schalk Burger respectively.
But then again, if you are tackling so much, it means you don’t have the ball or are defending too much. The more ball in hand, the less you tackle.
And that is again a telling sign of the lack of attack during the tournament.
© supersport.com
@ Tassies:
Hi Tassies… stats can be interesting but sometimes don’t tell the full story
For example Sbw leads the off loads and most of his off loads were ones where hed take it to the line and create line breaks and try scoring opportunities whilst the off loads from Schalk were to a player who was static and created less momentum to Sbw’s touches…so for me it is the quality of the off load that is more important…
Coming from a bit of an accounting background I look at things in a balance sheet format..with debits and credits…for example Pocock leads the turnover stats at the breakdown on the debit side but as a no8 there are deficiencies in his game that need recording on the credit side…lack of carries…little link play…covering…
A big part of the Ab success in the playoffs was controlling territory and possession…be interesting the dominance they had in those stats…like the Stat of only making two tackles in their own 22 v Bok…there’s the winning of the game right there…
42 @ Bullscot:
Hiya Bully, I’ve just been back to the game thread and found some interesting posts on the last two pages I read; especially #222…
“…regardless of the officiating it was in our hands at that lineout & poor decision making cost us, wonder who called that one?…”
I also found this; originally posted by bos_otter:
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/sport/rugby/is-scotland-s-exit-out-of-the-rwc-karma-q16371
Users Online
Total 242 users including 0 member, 242 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 41,360,834 Page Impressions
_