All Blacks vs Springboks I
-
@steven-harris said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@mn5 I must admit , I could watch that over and over and over again because it pretty much sums up why the All Blacks have won 60 out of 100 contests against these imposters .
They really could have included footage of the entire 2nd half.
Far really is the most overrated footballer on the planet and I can understand if Pollard is unhappy playing outside him - he certainly looks it. Give Faf a decent haircut and he's dropped for next week.
-
-
@hooroo said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
That game was a disgrace and embarrassment to international rugby and the fault lies directly with South Africa.
Really? That's the worst I've seen the ABs play in a loooong time. Every fucking mother fucker out there made handling errors or stupid mistakes! It was absolutely infuriating and we almost validated their rugby. That's on us.
-
@mn5 said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@steven-harris said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
This about some up the Springboks , could’nt organise a party in a liquor store .
All those wanking on about Quinn Tupaea and the impact he supposedly made should take a good look at the Andrew Mehrtens style defence at 0.14.
Was very weak
-
@barbarian said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@chimoaus Yes very obvious. I think it's impossible to stop, given there's a medic on the field the refs have to assume every injury is serious.
It's difficult to stop when on the the field, but it's easy to stop beforehand. It has to come from the top though.
We need to stop it the same way Aus did, by game plan. Keep those big boys running. Consistently. Then take your chances when they are shattered before half time and then again at the end.
SA are NOT going to stop something that works for them for the good of the game.
-
@chris said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@mn5 said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@steven-harris said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
This about some up the Springboks , could’nt organise a party in a liquor store .
All those wanking on about Quinn Tupaea and the impact he supposedly made should take a good look at the Andrew Mehrtens style defence at 0.14.
Was very weak
As was the tackle 2 seconds later. That’s the Havili miss some people talked about earlier in the thread. You said it was Quinn, but it was just people referencing different shitty tackles
-
@barbarian said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@chimoaus Yes very obvious. I think it's impossible to stop, given there's a medic on the field the refs have to assume every injury is serious.
The only way is to reduce the number of stoppages, keep the ball alive. Easier said than done when you can't control the breakdown and you have a ref blowing the whistle so he can get his breath back. First thing we need is to protect our tackled and ruck ball, the bokke were typically combative in that department, we can't depend on the ref to keep them away we have to do it ourselves
-
Haven't been on here in years, but somehow found my way back....thought I'd lurk, but either this or work on a Monday morning....:
Congrats to ABs. They continue to show that somehow, some way, they consistently have the minerals to edge these close encounters. It shows a deep mental resolve and an ability to do the right thing at the right time when it really counts, under huge pressure. It is this ability (basics under pressure at the crunch) that make them consistently such a good team. It is the defining feature often of any winning team/player in any sport. ABs have this in spades.
This can be sharply contrasted with SA in the final 10 or so minutes, who succumbed to extremely poor decision making coupled with even worse execution. It is one thing to take the wrong option (that happens), but it is another to then fuck it up even further and turn the mistake of a wrong option into a disaster of poor execution as well. We needed a cool head to take control at the end there recognize the game is opening up, recognize there is space everywhere and recognize that it is time to back yourself and try and strike. Sadly, the SA game runners have become so defensive that they are struggling to see the ball when it is there to be hit....
We needed Elton Jantjies on the field in the final 20. He is a controversial player in SA, but there is no Bok 10 that is better at taking the ball flat and to the line and actually creating some time and space for the players on the outside. Apparently v Staden was struggling with a shoulder, EJ was last man on the bench and they didn't want to risk finishing with 14 men.....fine.
Having said all that, I find some of the Clive Woodward level vitriol on here wrt. Bok game plan a bit much. The kick chase worked. The mauling worked. The rush worked. By 'worked' I mean the ABs were clearly feeling the pressure and the Boks got into a position to win the game. What they failed to do, once the poison started taking effect, is switch to a more attacking mode. They were getting in behind and the space was starting to present itself. Personally, I have no problem with the Bok game up to that point. That is how we play. But we over did it here. They aren't recognizing when they are in the strike zone and things are potentially on. The team is under pressure, coming off two frankly horrific losses to Aus, and they've gone into their shells. Nienaber's mettle as coach is going to be tested here and whether he can get them to play with the freedom and confidence needed to take advantage of the opportunities that they do create with pressure. They are scared of losing now and it shows. I enjoy the contrast in styles (I'd rather we were able to play like ABs, but we can't, it has been the graveyard of many Bok coaches) and there have been some very watchable games between these two teams in recent years. Claiming everything is shit and the Boks are ruining the game (as some do) is really saying "we don't look pretty and fun when you guys play like that and we don't like it much". If I was an AB I'd rather celebrate the fact that you guys can manage to do both (scrap and dance) depending on the occasion. This was an old school street fight and it wasn't pretty. But that isn't because of the styles imho. It was because of the mistakes made on both sides. Neither team played particularly well and I think the pressure and occasion got to both teams. Boks desperate to win and ABs tantalizingly close to another RC and 100th test. The pressure showed.
Finally, re slowing the game down: clearly that was the Bok intent. They were walking to lineouts and other set pieces etc. Controlling the tempo of the game is part of sport. ABs want it quick, we want it slow. That is part of the tactical battle. Everyone knows this is part of the Bok game. However, because everyone knows this, in my humble opinion, there is text book confirmation bias all over this thread now. The Boks want a slow game, therefore every injury is a fake. There is an alternative explanation that is no less plausible: in rugby you sometimes have injury stoppages. Shit happens. Need to watch the game again and look at stoppages that aren't for blood, but my sense here is this line fits a narrative now. The fact is there is no proof that any of these injuries are faked. None. What I would say is that the ref was poor at controlling the pace of the game outside of injuries. The lineout walk is an example. Pearce easily could have injected some tempo with a well placed free kick against Boks early on.
I expect next week to be a more free flowing game. I also expect the ABs to take it more comfortably as a result. For Boks I think the team is going to be largely unchanged (Kolbe back in though), but expect to see EJ on the field much earlier. There is an outside chance I think that he starts with Reinach at 9 and Faf is asked to go sit in the naughty corner and gets dropped out of the match day. I think it unlikely, but not impossible....
Anyway, bring it on. And well done again to ABs.
-
@duluth said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@chris said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@mn5 said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@steven-harris said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
This about some up the Springboks , could’nt organise a party in a liquor store .
All those wanking on about Quinn Tupaea and the impact he supposedly made should take a good look at the Andrew Mehrtens style defence at 0.14.
Was very weak
As was the tackle 2 seconds later. That’s the Havili miss some people talked about earlier in the thread. You said it was Quinn, but it was just people referencing different shitty tackles
No the one in mn5 video is the miss I was talking about as I mentioned was no.23.Was not referring to the latter tackle.
-
@chris said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@duluth said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@chris said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@mn5 said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@steven-harris said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
This about some up the Springboks , could’nt organise a party in a liquor store .
All those wanking on about Quinn Tupaea and the impact he supposedly made should take a good look at the Andrew Mehrtens style defence at 0.14.
Was very weak
As was the tackle 2 seconds later. That’s the Havili miss some people talked about earlier in the thread. You said it was Quinn, but it was just people referencing different shitty tackles
No the one in mn5 video is the miss I was talking about as I mentioned was no.23.Was not referring to the latter tackle.
I know what tackle you are talking about
When a couple of people mentioned the tackle immediately afterwards you told them they were wrong. They weren't. They were talking about a different shitty tackle.
-
-
@duluth said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@chris said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@duluth said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@chris said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@mn5 said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@steven-harris said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
This about some up the Springboks , could’nt organise a party in a liquor store .
All those wanking on about Quinn Tupaea and the impact he supposedly made should take a good look at the Andrew Mehrtens style defence at 0.14.
Was very weak
As was the tackle 2 seconds later. That’s the Havili miss some people talked about earlier in the thread. You said it was Quinn, but it was just people referencing different shitty tackles
No the one in mn5 video is the miss I was talking about as I mentioned was no.23.Was not referring to the latter tackle.
I know what tackle you are talking about
When a couple of people mentioned the tackle immediately afterwards you told them they were wrong. They weren't. They were talking about a different shitty tackle.
well I was talking about the other tackle as it was pretty close to the Havilli one thats what I was talking about.Thats the one I thought they were talking about.
-
@jr_ Ahoy. Good post to challenge the accepted narrative on here.
RE the slowing the game down though ...
The lions series was completely dire & this was one of the main factors.
The Wallabies complained about it.
NZ are complaining about it.No smoke without fire.
-
@jr_ said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
The fact is there is no proof that any of these injuries are faked. None.
How would you prove it anyway? That's impossible.
Of course we know faking injuries feeds into the Bok game plan of slowing the game down. In fact, faking an injury give them a LONGER breather than simply walking to a lineout.
What would be interesting is for someone to count how many times the Boks go down in games but the "injured" player then continues playing vs how many times this happens for other teams. Perhaps this was just a one-off, but I doubt it.
-
@jr_ Fantastic post. Just because we didn't enjoy the style that you guys bring doesn't mean we should sulk about like babies. We should be looking at finding a way to counter it.
I enjoyed the contrast in styles tbh, and as you said, it was an old school street fight which we found a way to come out on top.
Always play to your strengths, not play a style you aren't good at to please others.
-
@frank said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
@jr_ said in All Blacks vs Springboks I:
The fact is there is no proof that any of these injuries are faked. None.
How would you prove it anyway? That's impossible.
Of course we know faking injuries feeds into the Bok game plan of slowing the game down. In fact, faking an injury give them a LONGER breather than simply walking to a lineout.
What would be interesting is for someone to count how many times the Boks go down in games but the "injured" player then continues playing vs how many times this happens for other teams. Perhaps this was just a one-off, but I doubt it.
They sprayed the outside of Marx's boot. I'm no medical professional, but how does that fix anything? Maybe it was an aerosol shoe polish?
