RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland
-
@reprobate said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
Not having a kicker, then opting to take long shots at goal instead of touch is an, interesting, option.
Understand your point.
But their replacement hooker is a part timer. Lineouts optional.
A 50/50 shot at goal by Faf from 50m+ is not the worst option. Those go over they're a bonus.
The missed shots by Libbok cost them.
-
@chimoaus said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
It is very odd choice not to have a kicker behind a forward orientated game plan. It’s obvious to all these right games are won with the boot.
Which makes it a relatively easy fix - I would be feeling very motivated right now if I was in the Boks squad.
-
@Mattasaurus said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
Foster must be watching this and wondering why these two teams kick so much ball away from their own 22s.... just amazing innnovation
Watching this? Do they even show these games on InsideFostersRectumTV?
-
@junior said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
@chimoaus said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
It is very odd choice not to have a kicker behind a forward orientated game plan. It’s obvious to all these right games are won with the boot.
Which makes it a relatively easy fix - I would be feeling very motivated right now if I was in the Boks squad.
Really?
You squeeze the Irish lineout to the point of malfunction, you get plenty of territory, you avoid any back injuries so your 7-1 split works, you get your bomb squad on, and you slow down Irish ball massively.
You still lose.
And in doing so, butcher the confidence of your chosen out half.
South Africa are coached like a kids team, they have a coach who doesn't even trust them to choose whether to kick for the corner or posts and is Eddie Jones like in his need for attention with 'innovations'. The lack of a kicking option and the lack of a back up hooker was a choice not something imposed randomly or the result of injury.
They might turn it after this or they might implode. Sometimes when your too smart, you don't know where to put your feet.
-
@stodders said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
@Smuts they were hash because the Boks competed brilliantly
While the Bok did spoil one lineout in the second half, the Irish throwing seemed to be the issue - I thought the stats were that the Irish lost their first 5 throws and the first 3 were thrown directly to the Bok jumpers.
With overall stats of 12 from 18 for Ireland and 8 from 10 for South Africa.
-
@ACT-Crusader said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
Is that fans? Because if it is, it has absolutely zero bearing on how the actual players perform.
Well, the fans see the end result. The complacency is from the top, I think.
-
@akan004 said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
Can't see us beating Ireland, but we have a better chance of beating them than SA. We would have had no chance against SA imo.
If re-discover our forward mojo a la the Rugby Championship we'd be OK. Hopefully the big fall off we've seen in the last two big games are temporary.
-
@semper nothing to stop their home unions picking them? You sure about that? Very different to what I remember, but I didn’t take huge interest so I could well be wrong.
Get used to the tiresome. We dealt with the same crap, a lot from from Irish (and still do, see itv commentary or Samoa / Tonga games), yet I don’t remember us offering contracts to established players at professional level with zero allegiance to NZ.
Ireland gave / gives us colossal shit. And are now the worst of the lot. Great team, amazing …. But “Ireland” for me.
-
@MajorRage said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
@semper nothing to stop their home unions picking them? You sure about that? Very different to what I remember, but I didn’t take huge interest so I could well be wrong.
You are wrong.
If the All Blacks wanted to call up a player with the Irish provinces, there was nothing to stop them. The provinces wouldn't have tried to stop them and the players would hardly have said no. The issue is your own internal system of rules and essentially telling anyone who leaves the NZ system that they are thereafter dead to you.
Look at the case of Jean Kleyn was picked for the South African World Cup squad or Ben Healy for the Scottish one. Both playing with Irish provinces on standard Irish provincial contracts and choosing to play for other countries.
Get used to the tiresome. We dealt with the same crap, a lot from from Irish (and still do, see itv commentary or Samoa / Tonga games), yet I don’t remember us offering contracts to established players at professional level with zero allegiance to NZ.
As I understand it, there were three players in the RWC NZ squad qualifiying by way of residency as adults.
Shannon Frizzel who moved to NZ to play rugby after playing for Tongan at the U20 Rugby World Cup and Taukei'aho & Narawa who both came to New Zeland on rugby scholarships aged 17.
Not sure what allegiance they had to New Zealand before they arrived to play rugby was, but maybe it's more ethical to attract lots of teenagers over on rugby scholarships with the big dream rather than doing the same with adults.
Anyway, I'd get rid of the residency qualification in the morning if I had my way. Its open to abuse, obviously not in the case of NZ where what is done is ethical and fair, but by other nefarious countries like Ireland.
Ireland gave / gives us colossal shit. And are now the worst of the lot. Great team, amazing …. But “Ireland” for me.
Ireland gave you collasal shit. Yes, I imagine we did. And that hurt a lot, but hey, ye won stuff so I doubt ye cared.
I find this debate tiresome because nobody ever recognises their own sides failings. I don't like it, but what can I do? And I'll still cheer on Ireland. What annoys me is giving out about Ireland and pretending that residency rules aren't exploited by others. The only people with pure hands in this are the Argentinians, and only they can actually give other shit about residency rules abuse.
-
The 3 residency players in the squad is probably the last of the bunch as IRFU have shifted to their IQ Rugby programme since 2017. In short, they want already Irish qualified players picked for the provinces.
-
@semper said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
You are wrong.
If the All Blacks wanted to call up a player with the Irish provinces, there was nothing to stop them. The provinces wouldn't have tried to stop them and the players would hardly have said no.
Frankly, I don't believe this. Interviews with Aki when he left it was pretty open that he was leaving to qualify and play for Ireland. He wouldn't have held this point of view if he wasn't given the word in his ear about expectations.
The issue is your own internal system of rules and essentially telling anyone who leaves the NZ system that they are thereafter dead to you.
If we didn't have this system, we wouldn't have any players left in NZ. That is just the reality because the budgets available to other countries teams, more now France / Japan (than UK / Ireland), dwarf what is available to all bar the best players.
Look at the case of Jean Kleyn was picked for the South African World Cup squad or Ben Healy for the Scottish one. Both playing with Irish provinces on standard Irish provincial contracts and choosing to play for other countries.
Did the IRFU refer to these guys as their "project players"?
As I understand it, there were three players in the RWC NZ squad qualifiying by way of residency as adults.
Shannon Frizzel who moved to NZ to play rugby after playing for Tongan at the U20 Rugby World Cup and Taukei'aho & Narawa who both came to New Zeland on rugby scholarships aged 17.
Not sure what allegiance they had to New Zealand before they arrived to play rugby was, but maybe it's more ethical to attract lots of teenagers over on rugby scholarships with the big dream rather than doing the same with adults.
I'm not going to speak on behalf of them for their reasons - I know all of them have deep rooted family connections in NZ, not to mention coming from places with long political ties to NZ. If schools offer children from the island schools scholarships to come play for them, in my view it's a win for all. They don't have to go, and they don't have to agree to play to NZ. Alot of them do, with many only doing it to get their value up on the transfer market abroad. I don't blame them. Rightly or wrongly, I generally see Polynesian / NZ sport mixing similar to England / Ireland / Scotland / Wales. When the countries are so closely aligned, it's only natural.
I've been uncomfortable with a lot of the situations for people who play for NZ. The latest being Pita Gus. But again, I'm not going to speak for him.
Anyway, I'd get rid of the residency qualification in the morning if I had my way. Its open to abuse, obviously not in the case of NZ where what is done is ethical and fair, but by other nefarious countries like Ireland.
Fair enough if you wish to hold this point of view. As Derm says below, I do think Ireland is looking to phase the residency thing out of their rugby anyway.
Ireland gave you collasal shit. Yes, I imagine we did. And that hurt a lot, but hey, ye won stuff so I doubt ye cared.
We won lots because we had the best systems & people in place. It's that simple. Yet, you would rarely read that up here. IT was all about the islander poaching, that was pretty much so it. In truth, the truths spoke hurt a bit, as they had good points. However, it was the constant writing of NZ born Polynesians that actually hurt, and continues to hurt. The clear view was that only white people could play for NZ, and in a lot of places continues to be so.
Whilst anybody holding anything even remotely close to that sort of view in the British Isles is almost immediately cancelled / castrated / labelled bigoted.
I find this debate tiresome because nobody ever recognises their own sides failings. I don't like it, but what can I do? And I'll still cheer on Ireland. What annoys me is giving out about Ireland and pretending that residency rules aren't exploited by others. The only people with pure hands in this are the Argentinians, and only they can actually give other shit about residency rules abuse.
They're exploited by near everybody. But only those at the top take most of the flak. It was our turn for years, it's now the turn of the IRFU.
Comes with the territory. Will you care if you win the WC?
-
@Derm-McCrum said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
The 3 residency players in the squad is probably the last of the bunch as IRFU have shifted to their IQ Rugby programme since 2017. In short, they want already Irish qualified players picked for the provinces.
Let’s be honest. The move from 3 to 5 years forced their hand.
-
@semper said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
@junior said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
@chimoaus said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
It is very odd choice not to have a kicker behind a forward orientated game plan. It’s obvious to all these right games are won with the boot.
Which makes it a relatively easy fix - I would be feeling very motivated right now if I was in the Boks squad.
Really?
You squeeze the Irish lineout to the point of malfunction, you get plenty of territory, you avoid any back injuries so your 7-1 split works, you get your bomb squad on, and you slow down Irish ball massively.
You still lose.
And in doing so, butcher the confidence of your chosen out half.
South Africa are coached like a kids team, they have a coach who doesn't even trust them to choose whether to kick for the corner or posts and is Eddie Jones like in his need for attention with 'innovations'. The lack of a kicking option and the lack of a back up hooker was a choice not something imposed randomly or the result of injury.
They might turn it after this or they might implode. Sometimes when your too smart, you don't know where to put your feet.
Perhaps Boks didn't mind losing?
-
@Billy-Tell said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
@Derm-McCrum said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
The 3 residency players in the squad is probably the last of the bunch as IRFU have shifted to their IQ Rugby programme since 2017. In short, they want already Irish qualified players picked for the provinces.
Let’s be honest. The move from 3 to 5 years forced their hand.
In part yes. They announced IQ Rugby a couple of weeks after WR made their announcement but had been planning it for a number of months. The writing was on the wall anyway - there were too many duds and too many NIQ players filling up the squads within the provincial quotas. They're now at 94% Irish qualified, with only 10-11 players who are ineligible to play due to being capped elsewhere.
-
@semper said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
If the All Blacks wanted to call up a player with the Irish provinces, there was nothing to stop them. The provinces wouldn't have tried to stop them and the players would hardly have said no.
For matches in window. There's no way they'd release for RC.
-
@booboo said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
@semper said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
If the All Blacks wanted to call up a player with the Irish provinces, there was nothing to stop them. The provinces wouldn't have tried to stop them and the players would hardly have said no.
For matches in window. There's no way they'd release for RC.
The RC is in a test window set by World Rugby. Aki's colleagues at Connacht have been released for any test matches when required. Equally, Snyman and de Allende at Munster for SA and Alaalatoa at Leinster for Samoa.
-
@Derm-McCrum said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
@booboo said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
@semper said in RWC Week 3: Springboks v Ireland:
If the All Blacks wanted to call up a player with the Irish provinces, there was nothing to stop them. The provinces wouldn't have tried to stop them and the players would hardly have said no.
For matches in window. There's no way they'd release for RC.
The RC is in a test window set by World Rugby. Aki's colleagues at Connacht have been released for any test matches when required. Equally, Snyman and de Allende at Munster for SA and Alaalatoa at Leinster for Samoa.
Really? My apologies.
