Wallabies vs Springboks I
-
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@mariner4life it's really weird - like Aus is the SA kryptonite. For such a physical team, they just seem to struggle with the Australian style in Australia.
Big win for World Rugby though. SA suddenly don't look the behemoth they were over the last few years not playing
To be fair that lable only really relates to one game. Yes it was a RWC final and that was a great performance but it's not like they were dishing it out before that. We beat them comfortably in the group game and they just scraped by Wales in the Semi. The argument can also be made that England seriously blew their load in the other semifinal.
Not saying that aren't a very good side but the way people have been fapping on about them you'd think they'd been this unstoppable dominant force. That is simply not true.
-
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@mariner4life it's really weird - like Aus is the SA kryptonite. For such a physical team, they just seem to struggle with the Australian style in Australia.
Big win for World Rugby though. SA suddenly don't look the behemoth they were over the last few years not playing
To be fair that lable only really relates to one game. Yes it was a RWC final and that was a great performance but it's not like they were dishing it out before that. We beat them comfortably in the group game and they just scraped by Wales in the Semi. The argument can also be made that England seriously blew their load in the other semifinal.
Not saying that aren't a very good side but the way people have been fapping on about them you'd think they'd been this unstoppable dominant force. That is simply not true.
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@mariner4life it's really weird - like Aus is the SA kryptonite. For such a physical team, they just seem to struggle with the Australian style in Australia.
Big win for World Rugby though. SA suddenly don't look the behemoth they were over the last few years not playing
To be fair that lable only really relates to one game. Yes it was a RWC final and that was a great performance but it's not like they were dishing it out before that. We beat them comfortably in the group game and they just scraped by Wales in the Semi. The argument can also be made that England seriously blew their load in the other semifinal.
Not saying that aren't a very good side but the way people have been fapping on about them you'd think they'd been this unstoppable dominant force. That is simply not true.
They won the game that counted and good on them but so did England in 2003. How did they go when they toured here in 2004 again ?
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Not saying that aren't a very good side but the way people have been fapping on about them you'd think they'd been this unstoppable dominant force. That is simply not true.
I phrased my words poorly - I meant they got perceived as more of a behemoth by not playing.
They were very good though. Saying we beat them easily in group play is a bit of a simplification - we had 5 minutes of magic (thanks Sevu), and that was enough to hold them off. They played really well in the Final in particular.
But, they were a good side, and beating the Lions was a good effort. But again - they haven't played since 2019, so you can look better and better as the flaws in other game plans get exposed.
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Not saying that aren't a very good side but the way people have been fapping on about them you'd think they'd been this unstoppable dominant force. That is simply not true.
I phrased my words poorly - I meant they got perceived as more of a behemoth by not playing.
They were very good though. Saying we beat them easily in group play is a bit of a simplification - we had 5 minutes of magic (thanks Sevu), and that was enough to hold them off. They played really well in the Final in particular.
But, they were a good side, and beating the Lions was a good effort. But again - they haven't played since 2019, so you can look better and better as the flaws in other game plans get exposed.
Agreed. But point of order, I said comfortably not easily.
-
Last two years couldn't have gone much worse for Gatland eh?
Assume the Chiefs will stick with Clayton McMillan?
@tim said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Last two years couldn't have gone much worse for Gatland eh?
Assume the Chiefs will stick with Clayton McMillan?
What's his record with the Chiefs again? Has completely slipped my mind......
-
@tim said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Last two years couldn't have gone much worse for Gatland eh?
Assume the Chiefs will stick with Clayton McMillan?
What's his record with the Chiefs again? Has completely slipped my mind......
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@tim said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Last two years couldn't have gone much worse for Gatland eh?
Assume the Chiefs will stick with Clayton McMillan?
What's his record with the Chiefs again? Has completely slipped my mind......
Gah! You made me look. I had somehow completely forgotten about his awfulness
-
@tim said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Last two years couldn't have gone much worse for Gatland eh?
Assume the Chiefs will stick with Clayton McMillan?
What's his record with the Chiefs again? Has completely slipped my mind......
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@tim said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Last two years couldn't have gone much worse for Gatland eh?
Assume the Chiefs will stick with Clayton McMillan?
What's his record with the Chiefs again? Has completely slipped my mind......
The Chiefs came last I think. You are welcome.
-
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Not saying that aren't a very good side but the way people have been fapping on about them you'd think they'd been this unstoppable dominant force. That is simply not true.
I phrased my words poorly - I meant they got perceived as more of a behemoth by not playing.
They were very good though. Saying we beat them easily in group play is a bit of a simplification - we had 5 minutes of magic (thanks Sevu), and that was enough to hold them off. They played really well in the Final in particular.
But, they were a good side, and beating the Lions was a good effort. But again - they haven't played since 2019, so you can look better and better as the flaws in other game plans get exposed.
Agreed. But point of order, I said comfortably not easily.
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Not saying that aren't a very good side but the way people have been fapping on about them you'd think they'd been this unstoppable dominant force. That is simply not true.
I phrased my words poorly - I meant they got perceived as more of a behemoth by not playing.
They were very good though. Saying we beat them easily in group play is a bit of a simplification - we had 5 minutes of magic (thanks Sevu), and that was enough to hold them off. They played really well in the Final in particular.
But, they were a good side, and beating the Lions was a good effort. But again - they haven't played since 2019, so you can look better and better as the flaws in other game plans get exposed.
Agreed. But point of order, I said comfortably not easily.
their forwards did some damage to us, same as in 2015. They are strong up front - but we pick smaller, more athletic ball players who can go 80 and help break games open
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@mariner4life it's really weird - like Aus is the SA kryptonite. For such a physical team, they just seem to struggle with the Australian style in Australia.
Big win for World Rugby though. SA suddenly don't look the behemoth they were over the last few years not playing
To be fair that lable only really relates to one game. Yes it was a RWC final and that was a great performance but it's not like they were dishing it out before that. We beat them comfortably in the group game and they just scraped by Wales in the Semi. The argument can also be made that England seriously blew their load in the other semifinal.
Not saying that aren't a very good side but the way people have been fapping on about them you'd think they'd been this unstoppable dominant force. That is simply not true.
They won the game that counted and good on them but so did England in 2003. How did they go when they toured here in 2004 again ?
@mn5 said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@mariner4life it's really weird - like Aus is the SA kryptonite. For such a physical team, they just seem to struggle with the Australian style in Australia.
Big win for World Rugby though. SA suddenly don't look the behemoth they were over the last few years not playing
To be fair that lable only really relates to one game. Yes it was a RWC final and that was a great performance but it's not like they were dishing it out before that. We beat them comfortably in the group game and they just scraped by Wales in the Semi. The argument can also be made that England seriously blew their load in the other semifinal.
Not saying that aren't a very good side but the way people have been fapping on about them you'd think they'd been this unstoppable dominant force. That is simply not true.
They won the game that counted and good on them but so did England in 2003. How did they go when they toured here in 2004 again?
Dad’s Army had got even older…
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Not saying that aren't a very good side but the way people have been fapping on about them you'd think they'd been this unstoppable dominant force. That is simply not true.
I phrased my words poorly - I meant they got perceived as more of a behemoth by not playing.
They were very good though. Saying we beat them easily in group play is a bit of a simplification - we had 5 minutes of magic (thanks Sevu), and that was enough to hold them off. They played really well in the Final in particular.
But, they were a good side, and beating the Lions was a good effort. But again - they haven't played since 2019, so you can look better and better as the flaws in other game plans get exposed.
Agreed. But point of order, I said comfortably not easily.
their forwards did some damage to us, same as in 2015. They are strong up front - but we pick smaller, more athletic ball players who can go 80 and help break games open
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Not saying that aren't a very good side but the way people have been fapping on about them you'd think they'd been this unstoppable dominant force. That is simply not true.
I phrased my words poorly - I meant they got perceived as more of a behemoth by not playing.
They were very good though. Saying we beat them easily in group play is a bit of a simplification - we had 5 minutes of magic (thanks Sevu), and that was enough to hold them off. They played really well in the Final in particular.
But, they were a good side, and beating the Lions was a good effort. But again - they haven't played since 2019, so you can look better and better as the flaws in other game plans get exposed.
Agreed. But point of order, I said comfortably not easily.
their forwards did some damage to us, same as in 2015. They are strong up front - but we pick smaller, more athletic ball players who can go 80 and help break games open
All good and well smacking us around up front but they only scored 13 points and I don't remember them looking particularly threatening. It was a comfortable win in the end, 13 points is never going to be enough in the modern game.
I expect they will seriously challenge us when we play them though, they are not the kind of team that can be easily blown away. We'll need to be accurate as they feed off teams mistakes (penalties and knock ons) and apply pressure through set piece.
-
@bones said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Imagine what Australia would do to the All Blacks.
Ahem. Let me clear my throat.
Shove that up your fucking pipe all you "oh but South Africa and England" fluffybunnies!
Good shit Oz.
We better beat them after this sort of post
@kirwan said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@bones said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Imagine what Australia would do to the All Blacks.
Ahem. Let me clear my throat.
Shove that up your fucking pipe all you "oh but South Africa and England" fluffybunnies!
Good shit Oz.
We better beat them after this sort of post
I forgot to add my disclaimer. I reserve the right to delete that post in two weeks.
-
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Not saying that aren't a very good side but the way people have been fapping on about them you'd think they'd been this unstoppable dominant force. That is simply not true.
I phrased my words poorly - I meant they got perceived as more of a behemoth by not playing.
They were very good though. Saying we beat them easily in group play is a bit of a simplification - we had 5 minutes of magic (thanks Sevu), and that was enough to hold them off. They played really well in the Final in particular.
But, they were a good side, and beating the Lions was a good effort. But again - they haven't played since 2019, so you can look better and better as the flaws in other game plans get exposed.
Agreed. But point of order, I said comfortably not easily.
their forwards did some damage to us, same as in 2015. They are strong up front - but we pick smaller, more athletic ball players who can go 80 and help break games open
All good and well smacking us around up front but they only scored 13 points and I don't remember them looking particularly threatening. It was a comfortable win in the end, 13 points is never going to be enough in the modern game.
I expect they will seriously challenge us when we play them though, they are not the kind of team that can be easily blown away. We'll need to be accurate as they feed off teams mistakes (penalties and knock ons) and apply pressure through set piece.
@no-quarter said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Not saying that aren't a very good side but the way people have been fapping on about them you'd think they'd been this unstoppable dominant force. That is simply not true.
I phrased my words poorly - I meant they got perceived as more of a behemoth by not playing.
They were very good though. Saying we beat them easily in group play is a bit of a simplification - we had 5 minutes of magic (thanks Sevu), and that was enough to hold them off. They played really well in the Final in particular.
But, they were a good side, and beating the Lions was a good effort. But again - they haven't played since 2019, so you can look better and better as the flaws in other game plans get exposed.
Agreed. But point of order, I said comfortably not easily.
their forwards did some damage to us, same as in 2015. They are strong up front - but we pick smaller, more athletic ball players who can go 80 and help break games open
All good and well smacking us around up front but they only scored 13 points and I don't remember them looking particularly threatening. It was a comfortable win in the end, 13 points is never going to be enough in the modern game.
I expect they will seriously challenge us when we play them though, they are not the kind of team that can be easily blown away. We'll need to be accurate as they feed off teams mistakes (penalties and knock ons) and apply pressure through set piece.
Both teams are happy without the ball (Boks signficantly more so). There will be a lot of kicking in the first quarter to sound each other out, and it'll be a question of how early the ABs want to launch a counter to see if the Bok defence can handle the player movement off the ball.
The Boks ate the Pumas easily because their attack lacked subtlety. Same with the Lions IMHO. Simply not enough men in motion around the ball carrier. Last night the Wallaby try showed the difference - fifth phase after a lineout 40m out from the line. Some subtletly off the first phase, then a couple of simple hitups pulling the Boks wide and then back to midfield. At the last ruck, the Wallabies have 8 on 6 in the line with Pollard in the pocket. By the time Kellaway runs onto the pass, he has 4 Wallabies inside supporting while the Boks are still turning around.
It'll be interesting. Set piece could be massive - Boks fell asleep in a couple of scrums so the ABs simply can't.
-
@no-quarter said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@nzzp said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Not saying that aren't a very good side but the way people have been fapping on about them you'd think they'd been this unstoppable dominant force. That is simply not true.
I phrased my words poorly - I meant they got perceived as more of a behemoth by not playing.
They were very good though. Saying we beat them easily in group play is a bit of a simplification - we had 5 minutes of magic (thanks Sevu), and that was enough to hold them off. They played really well in the Final in particular.
But, they were a good side, and beating the Lions was a good effort. But again - they haven't played since 2019, so you can look better and better as the flaws in other game plans get exposed.
Agreed. But point of order, I said comfortably not easily.
their forwards did some damage to us, same as in 2015. They are strong up front - but we pick smaller, more athletic ball players who can go 80 and help break games open
All good and well smacking us around up front but they only scored 13 points and I don't remember them looking particularly threatening. It was a comfortable win in the end, 13 points is never going to be enough in the modern game.
I expect they will seriously challenge us when we play them though, they are not the kind of team that can be easily blown away. We'll need to be accurate as they feed off teams mistakes (penalties and knock ons) and apply pressure through set piece.
Both teams are happy without the ball (Boks signficantly more so). There will be a lot of kicking in the first quarter to sound each other out, and it'll be a question of how early the ABs want to launch a counter to see if the Bok defence can handle the player movement off the ball.
The Boks ate the Pumas easily because their attack lacked subtlety. Same with the Lions IMHO. Simply not enough men in motion around the ball carrier. Last night the Wallaby try showed the difference - fifth phase after a lineout 40m out from the line. Some subtletly off the first phase, then a couple of simple hitups pulling the Boks wide and then back to midfield. At the last ruck, the Wallabies have 8 on 6 in the line with Pollard in the pocket. By the time Kellaway runs onto the pass, he has 4 Wallabies inside supporting while the Boks are still turning around.
It'll be interesting. Set piece could be massive - Boks fell asleep in a couple of scrums so the ABs simply can't.
-
@barbarian said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Folau Faingaa's YC was among the stupidest I've seen.
Only a matter of time. I said it was stupid on Twitter when he did it in SRAu and even Laurie Fisher was defending him.
@nta said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@barbarian said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Folau Faingaa's YC was among the stupidest I've seen.
Only a matter of time. I said it was stupid on Twitter when he did it in SRAu and even Laurie Fisher was defending him.
He made two unpenalised no arms tackles in the 5-10 minutes before.
-
@nta said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@barbarian said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Folau Faingaa's YC was among the stupidest I've seen.
Only a matter of time. I said it was stupid on Twitter when he did it in SRAu and even Laurie Fisher was defending him.
He made two unpenalised no arms tackles in the 5-10 minutes before.
@pakman said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@nta said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@barbarian said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Folau Faingaa's YC was among the stupidest I've seen.
Only a matter of time. I said it was stupid on Twitter when he did it in SRAu and even Laurie Fisher was defending him.
He made two unpenalised no arms tackles in the 5-10 minutes before.
Yup even the Ozzie commentators mentioned it.
Swinton did 2 no arms before he was caught too
-
@nta you right. Boks left a lot of points on the floor yesterday. Can't afford it against the mighty All Blacks. Our defense also did not shoot up quick enough like against England or Lions.
@oompb said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@nta you right. Boks left a lot of points on the floor yesterday. Can't afford it against the mighty All Blacks. Our defense also did not shoot up quick enough like against England or Lions.
England and the Lions didn't play the rush defense well at all - Gatland has to cop some stick for just trying to play 6N rugby with his selections and game plan.
Wallabies played against the rush defense a little better with a couple of second-man plays and short balls out the back. Combined with Cooper's short kicks early, it held the defense up a little.
-
@oompb said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@nta you right. Boks left a lot of points on the floor yesterday. Can't afford it against the mighty All Blacks. Our defense also did not shoot up quick enough like against England or Lions.
England and the Lions didn't play the rush defense well at all - Gatland has to cop some stick for just trying to play 6N rugby with his selections and game plan.
Wallabies played against the rush defense a little better with a couple of second-man plays and short balls out the back. Combined with Cooper's short kicks early, it held the defense up a little.
-
@rancid-schnitzel that's exactly why I was worried about this test. The Springboks never play well going in a test as the favourites. The same happened against the Lions. Now they are in the perfect position to hit back as underdogs.
@oompb said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel that's exactly why I was worried about this test. The Springboks never play well going in a test as the favourites. The same happened against the Lions. Now they are in the perfect position to hit back as underdogs.
World number 1 underdogs?!
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@tim said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Last two years couldn't have gone much worse for Gatland eh?
Assume the Chiefs will stick with Clayton McMillan?
What's his record with the Chiefs again? Has completely slipped my mind......
Gah! You made me look. I had somehow completely forgotten about his awfulness
@hooroo said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
@tim said in Wallabies vs Springboks I:
Last two years couldn't have gone much worse for Gatland eh?
Assume the Chiefs will stick with Clayton McMillan?
What's his record with the Chiefs again? Has completely slipped my mind......
Gah! You made me look. I had somehow completely forgotten about his awfulness
Then he'd be perfect! It's a Chief's tradition! That and ensuring their few good coaches retire or go coach overseas!
