Springboks v British & Irish Lions III
-
@sparky said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions III:
Lions blame games for this one are going to be going on for a very long time.
For me, it was always a tour too far for Warren Gatland.
100%
Garland 2.0 was needed
-
@mikethesnow The problem is Watson was ragdolled when he came on in the 1st test so am not sure who they could have replaced Curry with. Curry was incredibly disappointing though which was a surprise, normally he's a match winner. Have to question a few of Gatland's selections even prior to the tour and his tactics of playing Bok style rugby for most of the series was a wrong one. They looked so good in the 1st half when they decided to play a bit.
-
@akan004 said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions III:
@mikethesnow The problem is Watson was ragdolled when he came on in the 1st test so am not sure who they could have replaced Curry with. Curry was incredibly disappointing though which was a surprise, normally he's a match winner. Have to question a few of Gatland's selections even prior to the tour and his tactics of playing Bok style rugby for most of the series was a wrong one. They looked so good in the 1st half when they decided to play a bit.
1 million %
-
@sparky said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions III:
@tordah said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions III:
It's probably just the cynic in me, but I've got the feeling the quality of the whole of international rugby has fallen down a cliff compared to the mid 2010's.
It depends what you are looking for. That was high drama.
The physicality, discipline and steel of the Springboks is frankly amazing. You might not like how they play. But I doubt they and their supporters care one iota.
That is absolutely true, especially regarding discipline. Compared to what the ABs dished up against the Wobs, this was a masterclass. But still, the Lions series vs Australia in 2013 was way more entertaining and - in my mind - way more high quality. Might just be me getting older and more ignorant.
-
@oompb said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions III:
Bok bevok.
Well done mate
Thoroughly deserved
-
The Boks are a impressive side in a number of ways but I disagree with the discipline comment.
They gave up a host of penalties and were illdisciplined just to spoil the lions play towards the end of the game. Blatant disregard for the offside law. A bit like the lions on ‘17.
They are street smart and play the game at their own pace and have huge physicality and strong set piece.
Once again they show that the best way for them to win a high stakes game of rugby is to play as little rugby as possible.
You are right, they or their supporters won’t care less about Any criticism or how they are perceived.
I can’t see how the All Blacks will be able to handle this aspect of their play. They will suffocate us and if we do get on top, they will just slow the game down to take any momentum away from us and let them get their breath back.
The stupid thing is every one continues to fall for their antics. Water carriers on at every stoppage, injuries all over the park.
This series against the Lions should be a watershed moment for rugby for a number of reasons but world rugby will not change anything and it will only be another nail in the coffin or rugby as a spectacle.
-
@mikethesnow said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions III:
@mattasaurus said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions III:
@tordah I was sitting here thinking the same thing
We’ll see when NZ play SA
We are still more likely than not to lose but that series has given me more hope that we may be able to beat them if they’re a little bit off and we do our usual thing of turning arsey half chances into five pointers
-
@victor-meldrew said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions III:
@tordah said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions III:
It's probably just the cynic in me, but I've got the feeling the quality of the whole of international rugby has fallen down a cliff compared to the mid 2010's.
It's the constantly nagging the Ref, more medics on the field than in the local hospital, cynical attempts to get penalties, stoppages, coaches playing stupid mind-games which is ruining the game for me.
Yes the playing for penalties is particularly galling - I can understand when you’re 2 points down in the final 5 mins but too many teams are playing for 3s from the first minute
-
@sparky said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions III:
Lions blame games for this one are going to be going on for a very long time.
For me, it was always a tour too far for Warren Gatland.
Hardly - he was one dodgy penalty away from another “victorious” drawn series
-
That used to be SA’s thing - intercepts, doing nothing then running in a try from a mistake.
Actually come to think of it, it still is.
We need to play them at their strongest, at their most negative and their most cynical this year. Just to get exposure to how they operate so we can benchmark ourselves, improve individually and as a side and hopefully beat them (they are hardly unbeatable or one of the great rugby sides).
As I mentioned, I feel as if the ABs are playing like a sixth SRA franchise and need to evolve into a proper AB test side. Playing the boks will help us do that.
-
@dagrubster this is why our rivalry is critical for rugby. The boks cannot simply grind the ABs into submission. And the ABs cannot easily run the boks off their feet.
-
@tordah said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions III:
It's probably just the cynic in me, but I've got the feeling the quality of the whole of international rugby has fallen down a cliff compared to the mid 2010's.
Yeah someone commentated on the AB/Oz thread that neither would get past the quarter finals…..but where exactly are all these amazing teams that would knock them out ?
-
Timely (and good) piece by Wayne Barnes in The Times:
In 2007 I was the referee of the World Cup quarter-final between France and New Zealand. Between myself and the officials I was in charge of, we missed the forward pass from Damien Traille to Frédéric Michalak for the match-winning try. Chris White, the television match official, knew that the ball had gone forward but he couldn’t intervene. At that time, you could only turn to the TMO for the grounding of the ball. That meant Chris had to sit there, inert, and accept the decision. But New Zealand were knocked out, and the forward pass is central to many people’s memories of that match. As a referee and as a rugby fan, that’s the last thing I want. I was criticised heavily for that decision; but at that time, we had one look at it in real speed and that was it. I was less experienced then but even now, several times a game, I see something on screen and realise I’ve made an incorrect decision and so I say to the players: “I’m sorry, I didn’t see it like that.” Thankfully, for the games and decisions that matter most, the TMO is there and they now have a much wider remit. For all the suggestions of overreliance on the TMO last week we have to accept that safety net as progress. Think back to the 2011 World Cup semi-final, France against Wales. Sam Warburton was shown a red card for a tip-tackle. Alain Rolland, the referee, got one look at it — in real speed — and had to make a match-altering decision because at that point, you couldn’t use the TMO to review foul play. Or in 2013, when Manu Tuilagi punched Chris Ashton off the ball in the Premiership semi-final; it was a big hit, which the assistant referee only half-saw. He recommended a yellow card for both because they were both involved. Dave Pearson, the TMO, couldn’t intervene. Scotland were heartbroken in 2015 when a penalty was awarded against Jon Welsh; a penalty that cost them a place in the World Cup semi-finals. At first glance, Welsh looked offside; on rewatching, it clearly came off an Australian player and did not warrant a penalty. Scotland were incensed with the referee — there was even a petition to ban him from Scotland! — but the point is, he didn’t have a back-up. At that point, he could have referred the decision to the TMO only in the build-up to a try. So again, you have to accept that the present state of affairs represents progress. Though we try to, it is impossible to get every decision right. In an average game, there are more than 200 breakdowns, 25 lineouts and a dozen scrums, meaning I have to make hundreds of decisions and non-decisions each match, with players running in front of me, the ball being passed behind me and kicked 50 metres away from me. But we should always strive to get the big ones right. Euro 2020 was a fine template for that. Uefa was roundly applauded for its use of VAR. When the magnitude was greatest, VAR stepped in and the correct decision was reached. Otherwise, the match flowed. Now rugby has more grey than football. So for this to work, everyone has a role to play — fans, players, pundits, journalists, referees. There needs to be an acceptance that no match will be perfect, allow that there will be a knock-on missed, a marginal offside unseen, but that when the stakes are highest, the TMO will help to reach the correct decision. Then we can strike the right balance between flow and fairness, instinct and intervention. But if we expect perfection for every call, however small, then expect more stoppages. There have been numerous recent comments about the TMO interrupting the flow of a game and we know, as match officials, that we play an important role in getting a game to flow and adding momentum to it. First, a referral to the TMO should occur in the background as far as possible. Ideally, if I see something that I am doubtful over, I can ask the TMO: “Should I be checking that?”, and we will check it only if necessary. Then there is the issue of chivvying players along. Let’s take the drawn-out process of getting blockers in before a box-kick; the referee should call “use it” as soon as the contest for possession is over, giving the scrum half five seconds to play. And when players huddle up before a lineout, we should reiterate that they must make their calls on their way to the line of touch, to keep the game moving. So too at the scrum, where referees can be more efficient at a reset — particularly important today, given the pitch at Cape Town, which tore up badly in the second Test. The scrum is also an area that demonstrates the strict limits to referees’ powers. I always say to a captain before the match that if a player is down and it is neither serious nor affecting a restart, I will ask for the game to carry on. And yet, if there is a scrum about to take place and one of the props is down injured, no referee should or would tell that player to get up and pack down to speed up a game. Their safety has to be paramount. If observers, coaches and fans think that people are abusing that priority, then it is a game-wide issue, not one to be solved by a single referee on the field of play. That was exemplified in the match between France and Wales in the 2017 Six Nations, which stretched to 100 minutes. I was the referee for that game. There was the suggestion that Uini Atonio had faked a head injury to get Rabah Slimani back on to the field to give them an advantage. But in my position, there was only one thing to do — if a doctor tells me that the prop needs an HIA, he goes off for an HIA. All of this adds to the time on the clock, but sometimes, a referee’s hands are tied. -
Just finished watching it ,
The best of the three tests , enjoyed this one , found the other 2 harder work,
Not sure how we will go against them , like to think we could give them plenty of problems,
Bok supporters will probably think we have flaky areas they can exploit as well though , and it’s hard to argue that
-
-
This post is deleted!
