Springboks v British & Irish Lions II
-
Congrats to the Boks, much better performance.
Lions got the yips a bit in attack.
-
Good result. I think the best team on the day won and as to the refereeing, I think the team were superb, Ben O'Keefe in particular.
-
Springbok bench forwards are all over the Lions, particularly at scrum and maul time. Can't help but think Gatland has missed the boat on some selections.
Is Sutherland really the 2nd best LHP in this squad?
@nta said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Springbok bench forwards are all over the Lions, particularly at scrum and maul time. Can't help but think Gatland has missed the boat on some selections.
Is Sutherland really the 2nd best LHP in this squad?
Nope, that's Mako Vunipola. Unfortunately the best LH is still injured.
-
Springbok bench forwards are all over the Lions, particularly at scrum and maul time. Can't help but think Gatland has missed the boat on some selections.
Is Sutherland really the 2nd best LHP in this squad?
@nta said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Springbok bench forwards are all over the Lions, particularly at scrum and maul time. Can't help but think Gatland has missed the boat on some selections.
Is Sutherland really the 2nd best LHP in this squad?
No
-
@kiwiinmelb @nta I get that perspective, but disagree. It's not flair filled, as the offense and defense are so fast to teh breakdown and supporting; technique is top tier. It is a massive tussle, decided by fine margins and occasional brain farts. I've really enjoyed it, love the intensity and the passion. But it's not one to draw in new viewers, that's for sure
@nzzp said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@kiwiinmelb @nta I get that perspective, but disagree. It's not flair filled, as the offense and defense are so fast to teh breakdown and supporting; technique is top tier. It is a massive tussle, decided by fine margins and occasional brain farts. I've really enjoyed it, love the intensity and the passion. But it's not one to draw in new viewers, that's for sure
If you think that was a good game of rugby you’re a one man band. First half was utterly dreadful. Stop start like gridiron with technical penalties and I hate the tmo protocols now so slow (“back to you on the screen. So just to summarise we have seen…). See soccer and VAR - game flows.
-
@nzzp said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@kiwiinmelb @nta I get that perspective, but disagree. It's not flair filled, as the offense and defense are so fast to teh breakdown and supporting; technique is top tier. It is a massive tussle, decided by fine margins and occasional brain farts. I've really enjoyed it, love the intensity and the passion. But it's not one to draw in new viewers, that's for sure
If you think that was a good game of rugby you’re a one man band. First half was utterly dreadful. Stop start like gridiron with technical penalties and I hate the tmo protocols now so slow (“back to you on the screen. So just to summarise we have seen…). See soccer and VAR - game flows.
@billy-tell said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@nzzp said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@kiwiinmelb @nta I get that perspective, but disagree. It's not flair filled, as the offense and defense are so fast to teh breakdown and supporting; technique is top tier. It is a massive tussle, decided by fine margins and occasional brain farts. I've really enjoyed it, love the intensity and the passion. But it's not one to draw in new viewers, that's for sure
If you think that was a good game of rugby you’re a one man band. First half was utterly dreadful. Stop start like gridiron with technical penalties and I hate the tmo protocols now so slow (“back to you on the screen. So just to summarise we have seen…). See soccer and VAR - game flows.
I loved it, but I think that was out of pure stubbornness. The Lions only comes around once every four years, and I'll be damned if I'll let a dull match cursed with hopelessly unambitious gameplans, shoddy refereeing and riddled with basic errors spoil my enjoyment.
-
Rightio, so a few thoughts.
Firstly, it was a match of two halves. Neither half will please the Lions fans.
Half one was every single thing that is wrong with modern rugby. It took 65 minutes, there was pretty much so no action, it was an absolute drudge fest. Fair play to the Lions for at least trying something here 'n there. Boks did nothing. It was 65 minutes of boof bash big guys into each other with a smattering of technical penalties in place. Utter utter dog shit. My children watched 4 matches of woman's sevens in the morning and I couldn't drag them away. They both lasted less than 3 minutes of the the biggest match of the last couple of years.
Lots of criticism of Ben O'Keefe and most of it is deserved, although I'm not sure it's his way. Yes, he could have kept things moving a bit more, yes he could have kicked off the stream, the literal fucking stream, of trainers running up and down and then on the second there was a break in play. He could have followed up on his earlier threats, he could have carded more etc etc. But what the fuck is he supposed to do? World Rugby is his boss, and I think he ref'd it almost exactly the way they want the game to be ref'd. The shit ness of the first 40 belongs with the players / coaches, not the refs. Pretty much so no skilll on offer.
Cards. I've watched little rugby the last 18 months, but I cannot for the life of me why Kolbe should have been a red. Is the law now that you MIUST jump to catch it? Or if you jump, then you have ALL the rights? Thats completely absurd. Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time, just because Conor jumped two feet in the air, why should Kolbe then be SENT OFF? Ridiculous.
Right, the second half. Much much better all around. SA were on top and used their strength advantage to great effect. A couple of very well taken tries and a real dominance. I'm sure Itoje's line out steal though will ensure that UK writers still give him MOTM and use words like colossus to describe him. No doubt, the Bok's brain trust spent the week watching him & Lawes and they had their number. Neither achieved anything in this match, other than looking like boys against the men of SA. Very reminiscent of the 2nd half of the 2019 WC Final. This Bok team is really something when they play their game. IT's just a shame it takes 40 minutes of boredom before it comes to the party. Although I guess if you are a supporter, you are probably ok with it ....
Nigel Owens. Unequivocally the best ref of the last 20 years. But he doesn't belong in a commentary box. He was so biased, and quite often, just so wrong. Did he ever make a call in SA favour? Even once? It was just terrible. A real shame. It's a shame Warburton is such a boring sounding guy (very monotone, not much x-factor) as everything he says is astute, smart and makes a lot of sense. Hopefully he'll grow into the role. Comes across as one of the game's great brains.
So in summary, don't bother catching a replay. Or if you must, start at half time. Next week is going to be interesting. Personally I think the Boys dealt a huge mental blow and the Lions won't get within 10 points.
-
Well played the Bokke. Well deserved winners and in truth the scoreboard was kind to us as the second half could have seen more points given the domination SA showed. A few calls went against us but last week we got the rub, so no real complaints there. Our limited game plan and poor execution coupled with the Bok intensity were the reasons we suffered. We lost the aerial game convincingly and given that WAS pretty much the game, it’s kind of QED. It was not just our poor kicking and chasing, not even the inability of our back 3 to catch a cold but where was our defence for the catcher? SA showed how to marshal a kick chase defence with good, legal screening and the catcher not going past that screen. No complaints about O’Keefe’ officiating but plenty about the use of the TMO and the constant pitch invasions and the continued allowing of the Hydrator in chief coaching his team from the centre of the pitch.
-
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time
Jesus Christ
️THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT OK!! THATS THE FUCKEN PROBLEM!!@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time
Jesus Christ
️THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT OK!! THATS THE FUCKEN PROBLEM!!Why not?
-
BILs changes for next week - apart from a whole new game plan. Wyn Jones if fit with Vunipola on the bench. George to the bench in place of Owens. If Alan-Wyn has anything left in the tank then he starts again with Itoje. Beirne at 6 with Lawes on the bench. Simmonds at 8. Navidi to the bench in place of Faletau. Otherwise no changes. In the backs, we have issues at 9 & 10 and I think the choice of 10 would dictate who plays at 9. I’d like to see Smith with Price but we won’t. Aki for Henshaw. Adams for Watson, Williams for Hogg. VDM stays by the skin of his teeth.
-
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time
Jesus Christ
️THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT OK!! THATS THE FUCKEN PROBLEM!!Why not?
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time
Jesus Christ
️THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT OK!! THATS THE FUCKEN PROBLEM!!Why not?
It's ludicrously reckless, not to mention bullshit. You can't disregard everyone else's safety just because you want to pretend you can only see the ball. Would certainly make for an interesting lineout as you don't even bother to compete and just get the guy at the front to run through the legs of the jumpers as he can't see them.
-
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time
Jesus Christ
️THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT OK!! THATS THE FUCKEN PROBLEM!!Why not?
It's ludicrously reckless, not to mention bullshit. You can't disregard everyone else's safety just because you want to pretend you can only see the ball. Would certainly make for an interesting lineout as you don't even bother to compete and just get the guy at the front to run through the legs of the jumpers as he can't see them.
@bones
People saying "he never took his eyes off the ball", as if that's a defence.That just confirms it wasn't malicious, but nobody's suggesting that it was.
Not looking where you're running in that kind of situation is reckless.
-
@bones
People saying "he never took his eyes off the ball", as if that's a defence.That just confirms it wasn't malicious, but nobody's suggesting that it was.
Not looking where you're running in that kind of situation is reckless.
@gibbonrib said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
That just confirms it wasn't malicious
Does it though? The only reason why you would pretend to only be looking at the ball in that situation, is if you think there's a risk of taking someone out.
Maliciously reckless?
-
@gibbonrib said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
That just confirms it wasn't malicious
Does it though? The only reason why you would pretend to only be looking at the ball in that situation, is if you think there's a risk of taking someone out.
Maliciously reckless?
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Does it though?
For me, yes.
The counter argument is that you should be looking at whether anyone else might be in the zone. But then are you looking to line them up?
-
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Does it though?
For me, yes.
The counter argument is that you should be looking at whether anyone else might be in the zone. But then are you looking to line them up?
-
@gibbonrib said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
That just confirms it wasn't malicious
Does it though? The only reason why you would pretend to only be looking at the ball in that situation, is if you think there's a risk of taking someone out.
Maliciously reckless?
-
@bones
People saying "he never took his eyes off the ball", as if that's a defence.That just confirms it wasn't malicious, but nobody's suggesting that it was.
Not looking where you're running in that kind of situation is reckless.
@gibbonrib said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@bones
People saying "he never took his eyes off the ball", as if that's a defence.That just confirms it wasn't malicious, but nobody's suggesting that it was.
Not looking where you're running in that kind of situation is wreckless.
More likely wreckful!
-
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Does it though?
For me, yes.
The counter argument is that you should be looking at whether anyone else might be in the zone. But then are you looking to line them up?
@nta said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Does it though?
For me, yes.
The counter argument is that you should be looking at whether anyone else might be in the zone. But then are you looking to line them up?
Absurd example maybe, but in circumstance where ball was going to land on player with back to it, does approaching player have right to leap on top of him in order to catch ball?
I’d say yes.
If said approaching player tips and lands on his shoulder can unsighted player be penalised.
I’d say no.
The problem with all this is if someone wants to catch a high ball kicked to where they are they need to have all eyes on ball, not be looking away to scan who might be jumping into them.
I’d say if a player is standing still and looking to catch it is illogical for it to be a red card.
-
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@nta if you glance at the Speedo when you drive, does that mean you're trying to speed?
Hardly comparable.
Intent is the thing you want to try and judge. Not always easy, which is why we have Laws and frameworks, not Rules.
