• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

RWC: Japan v South Africa (QF 4)

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Rugby Matches
rwcjapanspringboks
495 Posts 62 Posters 23.0k Views
RWC: Japan v South Africa (QF 4)
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • boobooB Online
    boobooB Online
    booboo
    wrote on last edited by
    #378

    That. Is. Gorgeous.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • KirwanK Offline
    KirwanK Offline
    Kirwan
    wrote on last edited by
    #379

    What a massive maul. That’s a good note for me to bow out. Boks finally did something good.

    Great effort Japan.

    1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT Crusader
    wrote on last edited by
    #380

    Mauls are a blight on the game when players join in front of the ball carrier.

    antipodeanA 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • Magpie_in_ausM Offline
    Magpie_in_ausM Offline
    Magpie_in_aus
    wrote on last edited by
    #381

    Is that not obstruction when you roll the maul into no one?

    R canefanC ACT CrusaderA 3 Replies Last reply
    0
  • R Offline
    R Offline
    Rebound
    replied to Magpie_in_aus on last edited by
    #382

    @Magpie_in_aus exactly should be a penalty to Japan

    J 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    wrote on last edited by
    #383

    Final score? I reckon about 31 -3.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • antipodeanA Offline
    antipodeanA Offline
    antipodean
    replied to ACT Crusader on last edited by
    #384

    @ACT-Crusader said in RWC: Japan v South Africa (QF 4):

    Mauls are a blight on the game when players join in front of the ball carrier.

    If only there was a law against that.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • canefanC Offline
    canefanC Offline
    canefan
    replied to Magpie_in_aus on last edited by
    #385

    @Magpie_in_aus said in RWC: Japan v South Africa (QF 4):

    Is that not obstruction when you roll the maul into no one?

    That's truck and trailer isn't it?

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • F Offline
    F Offline
    Frank
    wrote on last edited by
    #386

    Japan too tired and too small.

    canefanC 1 Reply Last reply
    4
  • ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT Crusader
    replied to Magpie_in_aus on last edited by
    #387

    @Magpie_in_aus said in RWC: Japan v South Africa (QF 4):

    Is that not obstruction when you roll the maul into no one?

    Two Bok players rush in and join the side of the maul to drive. Last time I checked the laws any player that joins a maul needs to do so from the back.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • J Offline
    J Offline
    junior
    replied to Rebound on last edited by
    #388

    @Rebound said in RWC: Japan v South Africa (QF 4):

    @Magpie_in_aus exactly should be a penalty to Japan

    Think it’s still the original maul so no obstruction

    R 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • R Offline
    R Offline
    Rebound
    replied to junior on last edited by
    #389

    @junior do you understand the definition of a mail in the laws of the game. Must be an opposition player attached

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • canefanC Offline
    canefanC Offline
    canefan
    replied to Frank on last edited by
    #390

    @Frank said in RWC: Japan v South Africa (QF 4):

    Japan too tired and too small.

    Its ending the way most of us expected. But the Japanese have done themselves proud, and saffaland was made to work hard

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • canefanC Offline
    canefanC Offline
    canefan
    wrote on last edited by
    #391

    Come on Japan, cross the line

    boobooB 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • boobooB Online
    boobooB Online
    booboo
    replied to canefan on last edited by
    #392

    @canefan said in RWC: Japan v South Africa (QF 4):

    Come on Japan, cross the line

    Nup.

    Bad guys finishing hard.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • antipodeanA Offline
    antipodeanA Offline
    antipodean
    wrote on last edited by
    #393

    How have they not worked out to throw to the front of the lineout?

    ACT CrusaderA 1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT Crusader
    replied to antipodean on last edited by
    #394

    @antipodean said in RWC: Japan v South Africa (QF 4):

    How have they not worked out to throw to the front of the lineout?

    Should’ve gone long I reckon.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • StargazerS Offline
    StargazerS Offline
    Stargazer
    wrote on last edited by
    #395

    This score is flattering SA big time. Doesn't reflect the great effort of Japan.

    1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • L Offline
    L Offline
    LABCAT
    wrote on last edited by
    #396

    Japan have lost a lot line outs, not tall enough?

    NTAN 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • DamoD Offline
    DamoD Offline
    Damo
    wrote on last edited by
    #397

    Oh well. Night all

    1 Reply Last reply
    0

RWC: Japan v South Africa (QF 4)
Rugby Matches
rwcjapanspringboks
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.