Boks call up replacements

[Sker]

- From SARugby.com

Peter de Villiers on Thursday called up three replacements to his Springbok squad for the final two matches of the team’s end-of-year tour against England and the Barbarians.

Experienced wing Odwa Ndungane, hooker Bandise Maku and uncapped scrumhalf Charl McLeod will join the squad in London on Sunday.

They will serve as vital replacements for injured wings Bryan Habana and Bjorn Basson as well as hooker Chiliboy Ralepelle, who has been suspended from all rugby activities following a positive test for a banned stimulant.

24-year old Maku and Ndungane, 29, have both made one appearance for the Springboks this season, while McLeod is included in a Springbok squad for the first time.

“I called the players to let them know the good news and they’re all really excited to be joining us,†said de Villiers.

“I considered calling them in this week but with all the other disruptions I thought it’d be better to focus as much as we could on what is a very important Test against Scotland.

“They can start with us fresh on Monday morning at the beginning of a new Test week.â€

The three inclusions mean the Springbok squad will return to its original compliment of 30.


---

Glad about Macleod, Odwa looked pretty awesome during the last few Sharks games. Maku? #### don't get me started...

 

[Jansi_555]

-

Glad about Macleod, Odwa looked pretty awesome during the last few Sharks games. Maku? #### don't get me started...

I agree. But have to say don't know if Macleod is going to get time on the field. Even if he does, what is the future for him in Green and Gold? Next year Du Preez will be back in action. Either way, psyched about another pair of the worlds best club joining the worlds best team.

 

[Teh Mite]

Begs the question whether they should be allowed replacements for banned players. Where's the punishment in that?

 

[Jansi_555]

Begs the question whether they should be allowed replacements for banned players. Where's the punishment in that?

Makes sense, but I don't know if the team needs to be punished for what two individuals did?

 

[Teh Mite]

Certainly would drum home the importance of earning your spot in the team - You **** up and you let your team down even more, regardless if it's a ban for thuggery or a ban for being a drug taking shithead.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I agree, but then it could cause problems with the tour down the line.
i.e What if it was three props that got banned, and they aren't able to field a full team etc.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

Well Bullitt, good point. But like Olyy says, why should the team suffer for something an individual did? Apart from the fact if it was intentional I don't think a whole Union should be blamed. If a player gets a red card and a 8 week suspension (for instance Bakkies earlier this year), should the team play with 14 players for those 8 weeks that one player is suspended?

 

[Teh Mite]

Not "14 players on the pitch" (although that would quickly sort out poorly disciplined players), but more like "29 squad players left".

My take on it. The vilification of the players' misdemeanour's would be as more a deterrent for breaking the laws (either of the game or in those 2 idiots cases, the land) then any ban would be.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

I see your point but I don't see the use in punishing the team or teammates of a player who, individually, decides to enhance his performance with illegal substances. This is not because it's the Springboks now, I would say the same thing about the All Blacks

I do understand your point of view about not calling up a replacement but what if your team has lost a hooker because of an injury already and the second hooker is suspended? Maybe replace one of the 29 players who are left with a replacement hooker? For instance:

Ralepelle is suspended for this, we only have Bismarck and Strauss left. In your line of thought, would it be okay to replace one of the wingers in the squad (let's say Habana) for a hooker?

 

[Teh Mite]

That'd be fair, after all an injury is an unavoidable accident without any sort of blame attached.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

I mean even if Habana isn't injured. Some teams have more depth in the backline than in the forwardpack. We have Aplon for instance who can play winger with Steyn, Kirchner and Lambie who can play fullback. In that case we would send Habana home (what a great idea) and call up Liebenberg as a hooker so we have a stand-in for Ralepelle. We will still go through with the 29 man squad (so 1 less due to the suspension)

Big question is still...

Punish the player?
or
Punish the player and the union?

 

[Teh Mite]

That's half the point; The additional pressure applied on the squad should act as a deterrent for players to let discipline slip. An injured player hasn't let the team down, but the thug or *otherwise* certainly has. Also a timely reminder that selfish behaviour will not be tolerated amongst the squads. These players were given one of 'X' squad places, and that's how they repay the faith put in them. It makes the shirt more valuable then the player, as it should be.

It's academic anyway as it's not the case.

 

[munstermuffin]

Bullitt not every team brings 30 on tour though. Some bring 35/36 players

 

[Teh Mite]

That was an example figure, not an absolute.

 

[munstermuffin]

I know that but the counter point I'm making is if your suggestion came in won't squads just pick enough incase of that happening and defeat the purpose

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

So there isn't a limit to the number of players in a squad to tour?