Bokke v Engerland Test 3
-
Fair play great vision from Cipriani.
Excellent finishing from May.
Surely England can't lose it from here
-
Robshaw obviously needed a rest last week.
He's been v good in these conditions
-
Brilliant England try.
Game. Set. Match.
-
-
-
@crucial said in Bokke v Engerland Test 3:
That was like England had spent two weeks teaching SA to play like a bag of shit and SA put all the learnings into practice. Awful display by the Boks and, until the late stages just not quite as awful by engerland.
More a case of SA are building well but certainly don't have depth.
Pollard and Le Roux have to start
-
From a mate
'This win will cause England issues because Cipriani is never going to be their number 1. They aren’t as bad as they were made out to be but then again they weren’t as good as they were meant to be 2 years ago.'
-
@mikethesnow said in Bokke v Engerland Test 3:
From a mate
'This win will cause England issues because Cipriani is never going to be their number 1. They aren’t as bad as they were made out to be but then again they weren’t as good as they were meant to be 2 years ago.'
It will certainly cause some thinking at 10. Ford does not operate well inside Farrell.
Having a captain at 12 is not good for a 10 that isn’t super confident -
@mikethesnow said in Bokke v Engerland Test 3:
From a mate
'This win will cause England issues because Cipriani is never going to be their number 1. They aren’t as bad as they were made out to be but then again they weren’t as good as they were meant to be 2 years ago.'
Yeah, but on the positive side, the win takes a wee bit of pressure off Comical Eddie and increases his chances of taking England thru to RWC2019.....
-
Things we learned; Jantjies can't play at this level.
-
@antipodean I don't think we learned that as much as had it confirmed
-
Well, it was a win. Moving on...
-
Aach! No, I can't leave it there. What was the difference between what happened in Test Nos1&2 to what happened in 3?
First and foremost the England pack produced a much more committed performance. Did the SA pack lack a bit of impetus in comparison to the firs two tests? I'm not sure, but England were much more committed. Also England were a lot better at the breakdown.
However whilst much improved in both areas the real difference for me was the mental discipline. In the first two tests, time after time we would build pressure or territory and then release that pressure with some stupid ill discipline or an unforced error. Seemingly we cut that out and transferred that particular bugbear on to SA. They were the ones this week that were compounding silly errors and ill discipline to relieve the pressure. Step forward as No1 perpetrator Mr Jantjies (honourable mention to Mr Galant).
Small margins I think between determining who won and who lost. Not enough class in either team to be definitive.
-
England won the Third Test for the same reason Wales beat SA in DC
It was a far weaker SA 15
-
@mikethesnow I dunno so much Mike, for sure there was a big drop off between Pollard and Jantjies and Le Roux was missed also. The main guys that were so dominant in the first two tests in Vermeulen and De Klerk were still there, the front row were not noticeably weaker and they still had the two bloody great lumps locking the scrum. Back row the same. One change on the wing and it certainly wasn't lost there. Centres? Meh.
As for the bench, well I'll just lay this quote here from earlier in the thread:-
"Finishers may well determine this match, and if that's the case then SA by a ball hair"
-
@mikethesnow Really??? How much weaker. Exact same pack bar for the hooker and some changes in the backs. Stop this myth of South Africa being screwed. They are a mid level team on par with Scotland
-
@catogrande said in Bokke v Engerland Test 3:
@mikethesnow I dunno so much Mike, for sure there was a big drop off between Pollard and Jantjies and Le Roux was missed also. The main guys that were so dominant in the first two tests in Vermeulen and De Klerk were still there, the front row were not noticeably weaker and they still had the two bloody great lumps locking the scrum. Back row the same. One change on the wing and it certainly wasn't lost there. Centres? Meh.
As for the bench, well I'll just lay this quote here from earlier in the thread:-
"Finishers may well determine this match, and if that's the case then SA by a ball hair"
Nail on head, Pollard and Le Roux.
Hindsight is 20 20 vision and Erasmus should have started both.
The outcome may have been different.
England without Farrell are an entirely different proposition for example.
