RWC Final: England v Springboks
-
-
I don't mind most of that article - the headline is a bit misleading. The bit that seems weird to me is this bit:
"The All Blacks knew that too, and perhaps that set them on the path to their calamitous semifinal no-show against England. Their coach Steve Hansen had said during the week that the All Blacks' main threat was the Boks. It was the line being peddled by the Kiwi media. It was the wrong thing to say and the wrong thing to think."
The only thing I heard Hansen saying was you've got to play well this week and if you play well enough to win you earn the right to play the following week. And if you don't you go home. Looking ahead to the Boks being the biggest threat would have been completely the opposite to anything I heard him saying (and I'm sure would have been widely reported in NZ media). I daresay there were some media people who thought the Boks would be the biggest threat. There were a lot more who thought we'd meet them in the final if we got there. Which would've been true.
-
-
@Machpants said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
@booboo said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
Meh. We'll never know.
Boks didn't play the All Blacks.
Yes they did, All Blacks won.
Oh poor naive @Machpants , it was down to the ref . The boks were clearly the better team
-
@jegga said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
@Machpants said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
@booboo said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
Meh. We'll never know.
Boks didn't play the All Blacks.
Yes they did, All Blacks won.
Oh poor naive @Machpants , it was down to the ref . The boks were clearly the better team
Correct. But we still won, evvn if it was a World Rugby fix!
-
@Machpants said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
@jegga said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
@Machpants said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
@booboo said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
Meh. We'll never know.
Boks didn't play the All Blacks.
Yes they did, All Blacks won.
Oh poor naive @Machpants , it was down to the ref . The boks were clearly the better team
Correct. But we still won, evvn if it was a World Rugby fix!
If fucking Jaco Peyper had just gone back to his hotel....
-
@jegga said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
Is Gavin Rich respected or the South African Stephen Jones?
Ugh.
It's this sort of revisionist, clever after the fact crap I was really hoping we wouldn't see.Stick with Rassie's post match press conference. We prepared well, we played well, but we also had our slice of luck.
While it is amazing to have won the title, the top 4 or 5 teams were all pretty close.
We could so easily have been playing for bronze and Wales competing for the title... -
@Billy-Webb said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
Ugh.
It's this sort of revisionist, clever after the fact crap I was really hoping we wouldn't see.Stick with Rassie's post match press conference. We prepared well, we played well, but we also had our slice of luck.
While it is amazing to have won the title, the top 4 or 5 teams were all pretty close.
We could so easily have been playing for bronze and Wales competing for the title...Don't stress. The headline is worse than the article, which one line aside, is a fairly balanced and decent one.
Twitter aside, the SA reaction to winning has been rather impressive and softened my stance of supporting England.
-
My impression has always been that the Boks are always pretty humble. Thugs on the field, gentlemen off it. They have the same problem with idiot fans and media as NZ does though.....
-
@Old-Samurai-Jack As everyone does old chap. As everyone does, we are none of us immune to the twat factor.
-
@Catogrande said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
@Old-Samurai-Jack As everyone does old chap. As everyone does, we are none of us immune to the twat factor.
England is. They are "rugby men", after all ...
-
@TeWaio said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
My favourite moment was Am recovering Mapimipi's kick then throwing a no-look pass back to him, then not even looking at him dot it down. Ice cold.
My favourite:
-
A coach with a strategy hidden all 2019, reinforcing old patterns of defense only and essentially a 9-man game, weighing on opposition decisions and options at the final; And showing some real steel in the SF to not show his hand;
-
A defensive effort second to? Well... none;
-
A forward battle to keep all forward fans smiling for a while yet;
-
An accurate kicking game on both sides;
-
Two tries by two wings planted on both sides of the posts;
-
No too-iffy ref decisions and a final margin that leaves no doubt as to the correct result;
-
A host nation where common people could sing all the national anthems on a whim in the streets - enough said;
A proud rugby nation building a proud WC record of no WC final ever lost, nor any tries leaked in a WC final and a win ratio of 3 from 7; Handing in the process the SH 8 from 9 WCs;
The only controversy really: how the Boks ever got labelled underdogs beforehand? They had 2 from 2 WC finals in the bag and hail from, and manage to end on top in 2019, the SH? England 2019 was a worthy adversary, but objectively, how do they really compare against the oiled machine that was WC winners, England 2003? Imho, and even though we'll never know, I think they do not. What we do have is stats of the games leading up to the WC for each though. Before the WC Eng2003 played 10, lost by 1 point to France in France and gave everyone else a hiding during 2003, which included playing AB (ok, 2 points not a hiding!) and OZ in their own backyards. In contrast, Eng2019 played just 9, lost to Wales twice and drew the Scots in 2019 before WC and stayed clear of the SH and opted to play touch rugby with the Barbarians instead;
Handing the Boks even a 50:50 shot would have been, and will always be, illogical - they are even more ruthless in a WC Final than the ABs are normally in every game.
Even though every minute of the game will no doubt not be to everyone's taste, the final was as perfect, complete and well balanced game of rugby (thanks to both teams' spirit on the day) as all fans together could have ever ordered beforehand and hope to materialize.
-
-
@MajorRage said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
@Catogrande said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
@Old-Samurai-Jack As everyone does old chap. As everyone does, we are none of us immune to the twat factor.
England is. They are "rugby men", after all ...
We ought to be immune but, you know, the immigrant factor.
-
@Catogrande said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
@MajorRage said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
@Catogrande said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
@Old-Samurai-Jack As everyone does old chap. As everyone does, we are none of us immune to the twat factor.
England is. They are "rugby men", after all ...
We ought to be immune but, you know, the immigrant factor.
Fair enough old son.
-
Is it worth a watch? Only watched 10 minutes of the 2007 final after I knew the result. Is this better?
-
@ACT-Crusader tough to say....certainly watching England get shut out reminded me too much of the ABs the week prior...
-
@ACT-Crusader said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
Is it worth a watch? Only watched 10 minutes of the 2007 final after I knew the result. Is this better?
Depends.
Depends on whether, knowing the end result, you want to see how SA got to be in a position of ascendancy by the time of the final quarter.
If you want the action bits only - fast forward to circa 60 minute mark and watch the final 20.
-
@Greener said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
@TeWaio said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
My favourite moment was Am recovering Mapimipi's kick then throwing a no-look pass back to him, then not even looking at him dot it down. Ice cold.
My favourite:
-
A coach with a strategy hidden all 2019, reinforcing old patterns of defense only and essentially a 9-man game, weighing on opposition decisions and options at the final; And showing some real steel in the SF to not show his hand;
-
A defensive effort second to? Well... none;
-
A forward battle to keep all forward fans smiling for a while yet;
-
An accurate kicking game on both sides;
-
Two tries by two wings planted on both sides of the posts;
-
No too-iffy ref decisions and a final margin that leaves no doubt as to the correct result;
-
A host nation where common people could sing all the national anthems on a whim in the streets - enough said;
A proud rugby nation building a proud WC record of no WC final ever lost, nor any tries leaked in a WC final and a win ratio of 3 from 7; Handing in the process the SH 8 from 9 WCs;
The only controversy really: how the Boks ever got labelled underdogs beforehand? They had 2 from 2 WC finals in the bag and hail from, and manage to end on top in 2019, the SH? England 2019 was a worthy adversary, but objectively, how do they really compare against the oiled machine that was WC winners, England 2003? Imho, and even though we'll never know, I think they do not. What we do have is stats of the games leading up to the WC for each though. Before the WC Eng2003 played 10, lost by 1 point to France in France and gave everyone else a hiding during 2003, which included playing AB (ok, 2 points not a hiding!) and OZ in their own backyards. In contrast, Eng2019 played just 9, lost to Wales twice and drew the Scots in 2019 before WC and stayed clear of the SH and opted to play touch rugby with the Barbarians instead;
Handing the Boks even a 50:50 shot would have been, and will always be, illogical - they are even more ruthless in a WC Final than the ABs are normally in every game.
Even though every minute of the game will no doubt not be to everyone's taste, the final was as perfect, complete and well balanced game of rugby (thanks to both teams' spirit on the day) as all fans together could have ever ordered beforehand and hope to materialize.
Hear hear
-
-
@ACT-Crusader said in RWC Final: England v Springboks:
Is it worth a watch? Only watched 10 minutes of the 2007 final after I knew the result. Is this better?
It's absolutely worth watching.
