Springboks v British & Irish Lions I
-
@kiwiwomble said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
I feel like I’m missing something, there is loads of banter on the socials about the game being a bit of a hiding, felt to me like they limped over the line
Banter on socials is not known for being the most accurate reflection of reality. But any BIL fans who really think that was a hiding are deluded. They were in control at the end, and were unquestionably the better team for half the game. But it was a close game, a few moments of luck and a few decisions the other way would have made it a very different game.
@gibbonrib said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@kiwiwomble said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
I feel like I’m missing something, there is loads of banter on the socials about the game being a bit of a hiding, felt to me like they limped over the line
Banter on socials is not known for being the most accurate reflection of reality. But any BIL fans who really think that was a hiding are deluded. They were in control at the end, and were unquestionably the better team for half the game. But it was a close game, a few moments of luck and a few decisions the other way would have made it a very different game.
Agreed
Curry and Watson in the bin would have resulted in a SA win IMHO
-
@act-crusader said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@billy-webb it would be nice to see the ball get past your 9 and 10 a bit more!
Yeah - I hear you.
But it just isn't really the Bok game plan to spread it wide too often.
They tend to play it very structured and will only shift wider when play is broken.
The plan has produced results (not on Saturday mind you) so I guess they'll stick with it.@billy-webb said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@act-crusader said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@billy-webb it would be nice to see the ball get past your 9 and 10 a bit more!
Yeah - I hear you.
But it just isn't really the Bok game plan to spread it wide too often.
They tend to play it very structured and will only shift wider when play is broken.
The plan has produced results (not on Saturday mind you) so I guess they'll stick with it.It was like watching Wales with Shane on the wing.
Kolbe must be the most dangerous and underutilised player in World rugby.
Criminal.
-
@gibbonrib said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@kiwiwomble said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
I feel like I’m missing something, there is loads of banter on the socials about the game being a bit of a hiding, felt to me like they limped over the line
Banter on socials is not known for being the most accurate reflection of reality. But any BIL fans who really think that was a hiding are deluded. They were in control at the end, and were unquestionably the better team for half the game. But it was a close game, a few moments of luck and a few decisions the other way would have made it a very different game.
Agreed
Curry and Watson in the bin would have resulted in a SA win IMHO
@mikethesnow said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@gibbonrib said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@kiwiwomble said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
I feel like I’m missing something, there is loads of banter on the socials about the game being a bit of a hiding, felt to me like they limped over the line
Banter on socials is not known for being the most accurate reflection of reality. But any BIL fans who really think that was a hiding are deluded. They were in control at the end, and were unquestionably the better team for half the game. But it was a close game, a few moments of luck and a few decisions the other way would have made it a very different game.
Agreed
Curry and Watson in the bin would have resulted in a SA win IMHO
This is interesting: https://mobile.twitter.com/thenosyone987/status/1419377262512771081
-
@mikethesnow said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@gibbonrib said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@kiwiwomble said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
I feel like I’m missing something, there is loads of banter on the socials about the game being a bit of a hiding, felt to me like they limped over the line
Banter on socials is not known for being the most accurate reflection of reality. But any BIL fans who really think that was a hiding are deluded. They were in control at the end, and were unquestionably the better team for half the game. But it was a close game, a few moments of luck and a few decisions the other way would have made it a very different game.
Agreed
Curry and Watson in the bin would have resulted in a SA win IMHO
This is interesting: https://mobile.twitter.com/thenosyone987/status/1419377262512771081
@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@mikethesnow said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@gibbonrib said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@kiwiwomble said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
I feel like I’m missing something, there is loads of banter on the socials about the game being a bit of a hiding, felt to me like they limped over the line
Banter on socials is not known for being the most accurate reflection of reality. But any BIL fans who really think that was a hiding are deluded. They were in control at the end, and were unquestionably the better team for half the game. But it was a close game, a few moments of luck and a few decisions the other way would have made it a very different game.
Agreed
Curry and Watson in the bin would have resulted in a SA win IMHO
This is interesting: https://mobile.twitter.com/thenosyone987/status/1419377262512771081
What's more interesting is that "Jaco Johan" is clearly Rassie's alias account being used to spread high quality video footage and put pressure on the refs
-
@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
Watched at pub, and banter made commentators hard to hear. But stat flashed up of penalty count of 8 -1 in second half. Without a rewatch, that seems unlikely to have been a fair reflection.
17 - 10 at 50, and I had a feeling missed conversion could be important, which it was.
A bit like a boxing bout in the old days where ref’s call was the decider.
Nothing in it, and both sides will be better next week. Selection will be very interesting!Now watched third quarter.
Penalty against Kwagga for strip was bogus. Yes, it was similar to Daly one in first, but Nic Berry NOT the same. Ball had been ripped before call of tackle. No doubt, Berry felt he was being consistent, but that was three that shouldn’t have been added.
Le Roux non-try was correct result for me, but call wrong. Allowing for the angle he was behind boot. But previous pass clearly forward.
Not seen commented on, but Price’s left foot clearances against left touch were solid gold in Q3.
Not only completely relieved territory pressure, but also led promptly to Lions try and also one of the penalties.
Kwagga kept getting sacked. Three or four times!@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
Watched at pub, and banter made commentators hard to hear. But stat flashed up of penalty count of 8 -1 in second half. Without a rewatch, that seems unlikely to have been a fair reflection.
17 - 10 at 50, and I had a feeling missed conversion could be important, which it was.
A bit like a boxing bout in the old days where ref’s call was the decider.
Nothing in it, and both sides will be better next week. Selection will be very interesting!Now watched third quarter.
Penalty against Kwagga for strip was bogus. Yes, it was similar to Daly one in first, but Nic Berry NOT the same. Ball had been ripped before call of tackle. No doubt, Berry felt he was being consistent, but that was three that shouldn’t have been added.
Le Roux non-try was correct result for me, but call wrong. Allowing for the angle he was behind boot. But previous pass clearly forward.
Not seen commented on, but Price’s left foot clearances against left touch were solid gold in Q3.
Not only completely relieved territory pressure, but also led promptly to Lions try and also one of the penalties.
Kwagga kept getting sacked. Three or four times!
-
Yeah that Curry one could have been yellow couldn't it? I didn't realise it was pure shoulder when I saw it live
@gibbonrib nah, penalty on only - just a bump to remind the halfback that you are there.
But... That clear out on Mapimpi is a shocker. VDM comes in from completely the wrong side, lifts the legs almost vertically. I am tempted to say he could have doid.
-
@gibbonrib nah, penalty on only - just a bump to remind the halfback that you are there.
But... That clear out on Mapimpi is a shocker. VDM comes in from completely the wrong side, lifts the legs almost vertically. I am tempted to say he could have doid.
@sidbarret this ref thing is to much for me. Won't change the scoreline and make me more depressing. Let's move to test 2.
-
@sidbarret this ref thing is to much for me. Won't change the scoreline and make me more depressing. Let's move to test 2.
@oompb I don't blame the refs for missing it, I've watched the game twice and watched the highlights (on which that sequence featured) and missed it every time. But that is dangerous af.
It's a problem with the current review system that a brush with the head on ducking opponent is a red, but something like that can be completely missed.
-
@oompb I don't blame the refs for missing it, I've watched the game twice and watched the highlights (on which that sequence featured) and missed it every time. But that is dangerous af.
It's a problem with the current review system that a brush with the head on ducking opponent is a red, but something like that can be completely missed.
Where on the match timeline was that Sid? I can’t remember seeing anything and nothing on the highlights that I’ve seen.
-
Where on the match timeline was that Sid? I can’t remember seeing anything and nothing on the highlights that I’ve seen.
@catogrande it's the ruck following Am's big tackle on Daly. It's on the clip shared by some Johan Jaco Twitter account (22 sec in)
-
@catogrande it's the ruck following Am's big tackle on Daly. It's on the clip shared by some Johan Jaco Twitter account (22 sec in)
Thanks, I’ll check it out.
-
@catogrande it's the ruck following Am's big tackle on Daly. It's on the clip shared by some Johan Jaco Twitter account (22 sec in)
@sidbarret said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@catogrande it's the ruck following Am's big tackle on Daly. It's on the clip shared by some Johan Jaco Twitter account (22 sec in)
Hmm. Not a good look was it?
-
@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
Point being that Boks being 5 behind at end was unlucky, and allowed Lions to close it out. If 2 points different ball game!
5 points means you need to manufacture a try rather than earn a penalty - given that all of SA's try scoring opportunities in the game after the 5 minute mark (when Itoje got his hads on the ball in questionable circumstances) came from mistakes that created opportunities from broken play rather than genuine pressure and broken play was just as likely to result in Lions points as Springbok points.
Your analysis of the reffing is right around Hamish Watson (definite card for tip tackle) but ignores SA having the penalty count going 8 v 1 against them in the second half without losing anyone for deliberate infringing. Of the three TMO incidents for tries, one was clearly correct (knock on by Kolbe), one benefitted the Boks (Fafs try) and the third appears to be correct from the front on angle which wasn't shown during the game but I assume was seen by the TMO.
So whats the Springbok gameplan for the 2nd test? Pretend everything is OK, do the same again and hope they can benefit from TMO mistakes to get more tries?
@pecotrain said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
Point being that Boks being 5 behind at end was unlucky, and allowed Lions to close it out. If 2 points different ball game!
5 points means you need to manufacture a try rather than earn a penalty - given that all of SA's try scoring opportunities in the game after the 5 minute mark (when Itoje got his hads on the ball in questionable circumstances) came from mistakes that created opportunities from broken play rather than genuine pressure and broken play was just as likely to result in Lions points as Springbok points.
Your analysis of the reffing is right around Hamish Watson (definite card for tip tackle) but ignores SA having the penalty count going 8 v 1 against them in the second half without losing anyone for deliberate infringing. Of the three TMO incidents for tries, one was clearly correct (knock on by Kolbe), one benefitted the Boks (Fafs try) and the third appears to be correct from the front on angle which wasn't shown during the game but I assume was seen by the TMO.
So whats the Springbok gameplan for the 2nd test? Pretend everything is OK, do the same again and hope they can benefit from TMO mistakes to get more tries?
that's onside for me. Why? Because it looks onside.
WE really don't want rugby going down the football VAR route. You can be 100% sure that Le Roux was trying to keep onside and would have scored still if he'd been 6 inches back.
-
@pecotrain said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
Point being that Boks being 5 behind at end was unlucky, and allowed Lions to close it out. If 2 points different ball game!
5 points means you need to manufacture a try rather than earn a penalty - given that all of SA's try scoring opportunities in the game after the 5 minute mark (when Itoje got his hads on the ball in questionable circumstances) came from mistakes that created opportunities from broken play rather than genuine pressure and broken play was just as likely to result in Lions points as Springbok points.
Your analysis of the reffing is right around Hamish Watson (definite card for tip tackle) but ignores SA having the penalty count going 8 v 1 against them in the second half without losing anyone for deliberate infringing. Of the three TMO incidents for tries, one was clearly correct (knock on by Kolbe), one benefitted the Boks (Fafs try) and the third appears to be correct from the front on angle which wasn't shown during the game but I assume was seen by the TMO.
So whats the Springbok gameplan for the 2nd test? Pretend everything is OK, do the same again and hope they can benefit from TMO mistakes to get more tries?
that's onside for me. Why? Because it looks onside.
WE really don't want rugby going down the football VAR route. You can be 100% sure that Le Roux was trying to keep onside and would have scored still if he'd been 6 inches back.
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@pecotrain said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions 1:
Point being that Boks being 5 behind at end was unlucky, and allowed Lions to close it out. If 2 points different ball game!
5 points means you need to manufacture a try rather than earn a penalty - given that all of SA's try scoring opportunities in the game after the 5 minute mark (when Itoje got his hads on the ball in questionable circumstances) came from mistakes that created opportunities from broken play rather than genuine pressure and broken play was just as likely to result in Lions points as Springbok points.
Your analysis of the reffing is right around Hamish Watson (definite card for tip tackle) but ignores SA having the penalty count going 8 v 1 against them in the second half without losing anyone for deliberate infringing. Of the three TMO incidents for tries, one was clearly correct (knock on by Kolbe), one benefitted the Boks (Fafs try) and the third appears to be correct from the front on angle which wasn't shown during the game but I assume was seen by the TMO.
So whats the Springbok gameplan for the 2nd test? Pretend everything is OK, do the same again and hope they can benefit from TMO mistakes to get more tries?
that's onside for me. Why? Because it looks onside.
WE really don't want rugby going down the football VAR route. You can be 100% sure that Le Roux was trying to keep onside and would have scored still if he'd been 6 inches back.
I agree with your general thought on this but it also highlights a problem. That's offside for me. Why? Because it looks offside. However, you're right, we don't want to go down this route and I'd still stay with the ref's/assistants' decision on such matters.
As for Le Roux trying to be onside, you can argue that he should have tried a whole lot harder and taken any doubt out of the equation - easy in hindsight I know.
Mumble, mumble, should have gone back for the forward pass. Mumble.
-
@oompb I don't blame the refs for missing it, I've watched the game twice and watched the highlights (on which that sequence featured) and missed it every time. But that is dangerous af.
It's a problem with the current review system that a brush with the head on ducking opponent is a red, but something like that can be completely missed.
@sidbarret our refs are very strict on this on CC. My first thought was red.
