Who would you select?

I just watched Re-Union from NZ and they selected their form Super XV team from the pool rounds.


1.Tendai Mtawarira
2. Bismarck du Plessis
3. Owen Franks
4. Eben Etzebeth
5. Sam Whitelock
6. Marcell Coetzee
7. David Pocock
8. Kieran Reid
9. Will Genia
10. Dan Carter
11. Bjorn Basson
12. Sonny Bill Williams
13. Conrad Smith
14. JJ Pietersen
15. Andre Taylor

They were joking afterwards and suggested they would like to see this team play the British and Irish Lions.

Which team would you select to play against them if an imprompto three test series could be scheduled in 30 days time?

Not sure how they can select Carter over Cruden to be honest. Likewise Pocock has been hit and miss when I've seen him. The Stormers topped the log and only have 1 representative in there which is nuts.

Sharks late run has clouded whoever picked that teams mind and they have not taken into account performance in the early rounds.

Isnt that what "form" is ozzy?

Form over the pool rounds should mean from round one to the last round, not just the last six or seven rounds.

Who should play that 15 or what SH 15 would face the Lions?

Yes I saw that...

Gotta admit thats a pretty awesome side. Full of running, size and promise. Couldnt see the NH staying with that.

I'd probably have Dagg and wouldnt mind the SBW Cruden combo because its not likely that pack is going to go backwards fast. Pocock for McCaw...hmmm...perhaps.

Agree with the SA players. Seeing them in that list seems to add another coat of armour over it!

Ozzy3213 wrote:Form over the pool rounds should mean from round one to the last round, not just the last six or seven rounds.

It doesn't make a sense Ozzy. If you are in form in round one three month ago and not in form now you are not in form and don't deserve in the team. Like if you get injury, you can't get pick just because you weren't injury in round one. You seem to be talk about pick a team on potential and past form which is different combinator.

Ozzy3213 wrote:Not sure how they can select Carter over Cruden to be honest. Likewise Pocock has been hit and miss when I've seen him. The Stormers topped the log and only have 1 representative in there which is nuts.

Sharks late run has clouded whoever picked that teams mind and they have not taken into account performance in the early rounds.

I am a Stormers supporter, but I can't see anyone that outright overshadow someone on that list. I think Habana played better than Basson and Joe Pieterson and Kolisi might be on the reserve bank but that about it. And if they don't make the the reserves, I couldn't really argue with that either.

anotherworldofpain wrote:

Ozzy3213 wrote:Form over the pool rounds should mean from round one to the last round, not just the last six or seven rounds.

It doesn't make a sense Ozzy. If you are in form in round one three month ago and not in form now you are not in form and don't deserve in the team. Like if you get injury, you can't get pick just because you weren't injury in round one. You seem to be talk about pick a team on potential and past form which is different combinator.

The OP says form over the pool rounds. That means all of them. Not current form, which you could argue could be the last 3 rounds or so, but form over the whole of the pool rounds.

Carter missed the early rounds, then played 12 and then 10, yet is in over Cruden who has been consistently excellent from the first to last round.

To counter your argument of it being most recent form, if that is the case what is Etzebeth doing in there? He's not played any Super Rugby this side of the test series.

Yeah but the fact still remains that if Carter was playing well (tick) and available for the team (tick) I would always pick him because he has this aura of calm that makes you think he won't let his team lose. If you had to pick a 10 to play with your life on the line, are you saying it wouldn't be Carter? He is a big game player and given that his form in the latter rounds has also been good it is valid to pick him over Cruden on that basis

Ozzy, they did make special mention of Cruden and Goosen, but then fell back to the standard "awe inspired" praise of Dan the man.

You do have to give them kudo's though, they actually selected a non New Zealander at 7.

ChequeredJersey wrote:Yeah but the fact still remains that if Carter was playing well (tick) and available for the team (tick) I would always pick him because he has this aura of calm that makes you think he won't let his team lose. If you had to pick a 10 to play with your life on the line, are you saying it wouldn't be Carter? He is a big game player and given that his form in the latter rounds has also been good it is valid to pick him over Cruden on that basis

No CJ, that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is that it is billed as a team of players who displayed the best 'form' over the course of the Super Rugby pool stages, yet it patently is not that, it's a who do we think is best in each position regardless of how they've played this year, with a few who have played well towards the tail end of the competition thrown in.

biltongbek wrote:Ozzy, they did make special mention of Cruden and Goosen, but then fell back to the standard "awe inspired" praise of Dan the man.

You do have to give them kudo's though, they actually selected a non New Zealander at 7.

They hear that Bryce Lawrence was select as the virtual referee for the virtual game and think Pocock at 7 tip the scales to his interpretation based on recent form Biltong.

Yes AWOP.

Whilst not a traditional 'fetcher', the best openside over the course of the campaign has been Kolisi. Others have had strong performances here and there, but Kolisi has been consistently very good and really stepped up in a back row ravaged by injuries and suspensions.

Bilt, found this article online, thought you'd like it

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/5674670/Lions-2009-Bryce-Lawrence-not-fit-to-officiate.html

"Brian Moore criticises NZ ref after Lions lose"

Gosh! Why wasn't this on the front page!

Brian Moore criticise the ref for 80 minutes in the commentary every time, not sure why he needs to whinge into a paper too.

ChequeredJersey wrote:Bilt, found this article online, thought you'd like it

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/5674670/Lions-2009-Bryce-Lawrence-not-fit-to-officiate.html

Cj, after the last two weeks of the Super XV I have come to the realisation Bruce must be the referee that rightfully have copped the most crticism of any referee I know.

Only when you surf the web, it is only the south africans that aren't allowed to do it. Go figure.

Interesting that they've selected two opensides in their team.....Pocock and Coetzee. Could be lethal, though surely their must be a blindside putting their name up for selection?!

Bluestone, Coetzee isn't really an out an out fetcher though. His general play is what made him a stand out, but I also agree with Ozzy, Kolisi was absolutely brilliant especially on defence.

Ah, my apologise Biltong, I thought he was. Only seen limited amount of Siyamthanda Kolisi, but what I have seen, he's destined for big big things. It's unbelievable how much of an impact youngs players tend to have in Super XV, especially in the forwards.

Yes, we have been lucky this year a good number of youngsters really showed some promise.

The Stormers had.

Kolisi
Etzebeth
Kitshoff

Cheetahs had

Goosen
Willie le Roux
Coenie Oosthuizen
Trevor Nyakane (he only played the last few games, but he has really impressed me.)

Sharks had
Marcell Coetzee

Lions had
Paul Willemse
Elton Jantjies
Jaco Taute

So yes these youngsters are certain to have very successful careers.

One SA player who I was expecting more of this season was Elstadt. Thought he was very good for he Stormers last year, but hasn't quite hit the heights this time around.

Ozzy, I think the problem for him was Etzebeth coming in, so Allistair Coetzee decided to employ him as a Flanker after all the injuries they had in the back row, now he reminds me a lot of Pierre Spies , his body position in the tight exchanges are wrong and hence he has no effect.

Also he got injured and only recently came back, so yes, he seems to struggle to adapt and perhaps his confidence have taken a knock with his form.

Injuries to him and to others definitely didn't help as he is a better lock than flanker for me. Would a change of franchise be of benefit to him?

Well Ozzy, as you are aware the Cheetahs are losing two of their locks, Izak v d Westhuizen and George Earle, so I would suspect Naka Drotske might whisper an offer in his ear.

Question is would the Stormers let him go though, especially as they are already losing one lock in Quinn Roux, and Bekker seems to pick up an injury that keeps him out for a bit every season.

Some good young locks coming through in South Africa, I like the Lions pair Willemse and Botha.

Be interesting to see if any of the young talent in the engine room can go on to form an international partnership to rival Bakkies and Victor.

I think Willemse has the potential, he did very well in the u20 junior world cup for SA, he is a big young man and sure to grow some more.

I think Genia is a bit lucky also to be there for some reason like Ozzy said aready.

He miss a lot of SXV and then was not good on form and only recent coming back to the standard.

There are better 9's on form over all SXV.

anotherworldofpain wrote:I think Genia is a bit lucky also to be there for some reason like Ozzy said aready.

He miss a lot of SXV and then was not good on form and only recent coming back to the standard.

There are better 9's on form over all SXV.

Genia's played most of the Red's games this season. And his form was pretty good through, especially while he was having to cover for all those fly-halves being injured

I'm sure I heard the commentators say that he'd played every minute of every game...

Genia has played all season. he started slowly but to be fair to him he was behind a pack that got beat up the first few rounds. He has improved as the competition has gone on and I am sure it's no coincidence that he has played his best rugby since Quade returned to the 10 jersey.

If I had to choose which 9's had been best through the whole competition I'd have Genia in 3rd place, with Kerr-Barlow top and Duvenage 2nd.

I would pay good money to see NH (Lions & FRA & ITA) vs. SANZAR side. Three test tour once every so often would be mouth wateringly good!

I really don't know enough about SXV to suggest a team, but it would be a great event!

Ozzy3213 wrote:

Sharks late run has clouded whoever picked that teams mind and they have not taken into account performance in the early rounds.

They didn't have a particularly bad run! The only shocking game they had was against the lions and if they'd won this with bonus point as they should have, they'd have been second overall. In the early rounds, they lost to the Bulls and Stormers away (both of whom are ranked in the top six) by only a couple of points, and had the rub-of-the-green etc gone their way, they may well have won those matches and then topped the log by some distance.

I never said that they had a particularly bad run, just that their most recent form has clouded the selection.

Lot of if's and may's in there Fishpaste, but the bottom line is they didn't win those games, because the other teams were better on the day.

Agreed: lots of if's and maybe's - but my point was more that they were playing well and competing very closely with teams that turned out to be topping the table, so I don't think their early form was bad...but I'd agree that it has been getting better and better. (I seem to recall that they did the same last year!)

...And I agree, that the other teams were better on the day, but only by a few points and at those teams home-grounds...the advantage of the Bulls and Stormers playing at home may have accounted for those few points.