Skip to content
  • Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

  • Tipping
  • Team Sheets
  • Highlights
  • Results
    • All Blacks

      Search every All Blacks Test. Filter results by year, opposition, location, venue, city and RWC stage

    • Super Rugby

      Search every Super Rugby since match 1996

    • NPC

      Search NPC results. Only first division matches from 1976-2005. All results from the 14 team competition (2006-present) are included

All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Rugby Matches
allblacksspringboks
1.6k Posts 96 Posters 140.3k Views 3 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • F Frank

    @sparky said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

    Jeff Wilson’s assertions about the second Scott Barrett card were slapped down by the video footage in front of him which showed what has been judged as a Yellow Card in Rugby around the world for some time now.

    Then at the end lots of half-witted crowing at the England national team’s current misfortunes. Jeff Wilson and the journalist they had on looked really smug about it all.

    Jeff Wilson seems to believe that if he doesn't promote "the brand", he's toast. I hate the cliched way in which he talks, as if he is making original points. He's really just an overachieving careerist.

    One of the best commentators in terms of analysis that I have seen (in his brief time he did it) was Ma'a Nonu. No cliches, original points and fair.

    sparkyS Offline
    sparkyS Offline
    sparky
    wrote on last edited by
    #1417

    @Frank I thought Grant Fox was an outstanding pundit who was always thoughtful and insightful, using expertise to say exactly what he thought. It didn’t stop him becoming an All Black selector later on for more than a decade.

    Similar in the UK at the moment are Martin Johnson and Sam Warburton, but the RWC won’t be on the channel they work for.

    1 Reply Last reply
    3
    • sparkyS Offline
      sparkyS Offline
      sparky
      wrote on last edited by
      #1418

      Bravo, Marc Hinton, this piece is absolutely spot on.

      https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby-world-cup-2023/300959379/rugby-world-cup-record-boks-defeat-does-not-change-the-stark-recipe-for-all-blacks

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • MN5M MN5

        @DaGrubster said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

        Christ, the doom and gloom on here is actually beyond comprehension.

        It’s pretty clear that we weren’t prepared for a fired up bok team and we essentially played most of the match with 14 players.

        Nothing has changed for the ABs apart from them getting a huge wake up call and that they need to be at their best to win the World Cup or even have a decent showing.

        We have 7 weeks to get ourselves in the best shape we possibly can for the 1/4 final.

        That was true before the saffa match and it is still true today.

        The France game doesn’t really have any bearing on the 1/4 final as there is no real reward for winning that game as we are going to face either SA or Ireland.

        7 weeks to get Into the best shape possible and then go into that game with full noise.

        Win that one and then you’ve got 6 days etc….

        It’s pretty simple really - that’s why the saffa’s are so good at RWC’s - it’s a simple formula and one they can understand.

        Scotland say hi

        D Offline
        D Offline
        DaGrubster
        wrote on last edited by DaGrubster
        #1419

        @MN5

        Thanks, I’ll pass it on

        1 Reply Last reply
        1
        • NTAN NTA

          @pakman said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

          @NTA About nine minutes of official time.

          The scrum a minute later looked to me to be textbook.

          Let's watch a few eh?

          06:25 - solid from both sides. Malherbe has superb control and balance, with his knee nearly on the deck but driving EdG's mass up a tick, while bending his neck down.

          09:20 - post-hit:
          EdG isn't in great position, arched in the upper back a little.
          Lomax's side of the scrum is very low - by the time the camera zooms in, you can already see his knee on the deck through the tunnel.
          The call was black THP going to knee. There's no replay angle from that side but you can see it from the open side, and by Coles and EdG having to reset their feet as the motion goes sideways.

          10:38 - Boks take scrum from that penalty. Whatever Lomax did wrong in the previous scrum, he corrected it. Good scrum. Good contest. Boks called to use it.

          12:00 - Boks win the hit. Fucking quick heel from Coles and Ardie is away i.e.
          12:02 set called
          12:05 ball fed
          12:06 Ardie detaches

          P Offline
          P Offline
          pakman
          wrote on last edited by pakman
          #1420

          @NTA said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

          @pakman said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

          @NTA About nine minutes of official time.

          The scrum a minute later looked to me to be textbook.

          Let's watch a few eh?

          06:25 - solid from both sides. Malherbe has superb control and balance, with his knee nearly on the deck but driving EdG's mass up a tick, while bending his neck down.

          09:20 - post-hit:
          EdG isn't in great position, arched in the upper back a little.
          Lomax's side of the scrum is very low - by the time the camera zooms in, you can already see his knee on the deck through the tunnel.
          The call was black THP going to knee. There's no replay angle from that side but you can see it from the open side, and by Coles and EdG having to reset their feet as the motion goes sideways.

          10:38 - Boks take scrum from that penalty. Whatever Lomax did wrong in the previous scrum, he corrected it. Good scrum. Good contest. Boks called to use it.

          12:00 - Boks win the hit. Fucking quick heel from Coles and Ardie is away i.e.
          12:02 set called
          12:05 ball fed
          12:06

          ecf31c1a-1c26-453e-a992-c21ab76d163f-image.jpeg

          a2a43ef7-26d6-4c31-b70f-01c53cef1cd0-image.jpeg

          1 Reply Last reply
          3
          • boobooB booboo

            @MN5 rankings 1, 3 & 5 in the same pool just fucking ridiculous.

            But the point is still relevant.

            There's no easy QF opponent in Pool B.

            MN5M Offline
            MN5M Offline
            MN5
            wrote on last edited by MN5
            #1421

            @booboo said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

            @MN5 rankings 1, 3 & 5 in the same pool just fucking ridiculous.

            But the point is still relevant.

            There's no easy QF opponent in Pool B.

            Exactly. Scotland in all probability won’t make it which is fucken ridiculous given some of the chumps on the other side of the draw who will.

            1 Reply Last reply
            1
            • Billy WebbB Billy Webb

              A good day out for the Boks, and a nice way to end the warm-ups before the big show starts.
              I thought the pluses for the Boks were increased accuracy, and Canaan Moodie not looking too shabby at 13.

              Beyond that, I'm not getting overexcited by the result. Yes, a win against the ABs is always good. But to read too much into the result for either team would be a mistake. It doesn't matter who you are, if you play the game with at least one man down for the majority of the match, you're always going to struggle. Well done to the Bokke for clinically capitalizing, but I wouldn't be all doom-and-gloom if I were an AB fan. It was simply a bad day at the office, compounded by cards. And every team has an off day somewhere along the lines. Maybe the ABs have gotten theirs out the way early? Better now than in the knock-out stages of the RWC.

              S Offline
              S Offline
              SidBarret
              wrote on last edited by
              #1422

              @Billy-Webb I don't think the boks' performance can be called clinical - by my count they left four clear scoring opportunities on the field* as well as a couple more half chances.

              I'd rather say the boks hit all their KPIs but didn't really exceed them.

              *that is not to say the boks should have had an extra twenty points - some like the two held up, Mapimpi getting pushed into touch or where Moodie was slow to fold round Mapimpi; were either under advantage or led to points soon after.

              I don't want to say it on this forum, but the ABs were very poor in this game. The number of errors they made meant they were invited pressure onto themselves and allowed SA to be a bit careless with opportunities they manufactured.

              canefanC 1 Reply Last reply
              9
              • S SidBarret

                @Billy-Webb I don't think the boks' performance can be called clinical - by my count they left four clear scoring opportunities on the field* as well as a couple more half chances.

                I'd rather say the boks hit all their KPIs but didn't really exceed them.

                *that is not to say the boks should have had an extra twenty points - some like the two held up, Mapimpi getting pushed into touch or where Moodie was slow to fold round Mapimpi; were either under advantage or led to points soon after.

                I don't want to say it on this forum, but the ABs were very poor in this game. The number of errors they made meant they were invited pressure onto themselves and allowed SA to be a bit careless with opportunities they manufactured.

                canefanC Offline
                canefanC Offline
                canefan
                wrote on last edited by canefan
                #1423

                @SidBarret said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                @Billy-Webb I don't think the boks' performance can be called clinical - by my count they left four clear scoring opportunities on the field* as well as a couple more half chances.

                I'd rather say the boks hit all their KPIs but didn't really exceed them.

                *that is not to say the boks should have had an extra twenty points - some like the two held up, Mapimpi getting pushed into touch or where Moodie was slow to fold round Mapimpi; were either under advantage or led to points soon after.

                I don't want to say it on this forum, but the ABs were very poor in this game. The number of errors they made meant they were invited pressure onto themselves and allowed SA to be a bit careless with opportunities they manufactured.

                Why not? I think it was pretty clear to everyone that watched the game, the Boks played very well, the ABs didn't have a great outing

                antipodeanA 1 Reply Last reply
                3
                • D DaGrubster

                  Christ, the doom and gloom on here is actually beyond comprehension.

                  It’s pretty clear that we weren’t prepared for a fired up bok team and we essentially played most of the match with 14 players.

                  Nothing has changed for the ABs apart from them getting a huge wake up call and that they need to be at their best to win the World Cup or even have a decent showing.

                  We have 7 weeks to get ourselves in the best shape we possibly can for the 1/4 final.

                  That was true before the saffa match and it is still true today.

                  The France game doesn’t really have any bearing on the 1/4 final as there is no real reward for winning that game as we are going to face either SA or Ireland.

                  7 weeks to get Into the best shape possible and then go into that game with full noise.

                  Win that one and then you’ve got 6 days etc….

                  It’s pretty simple really - that’s why the saffa’s are so good at RWC’s - it’s a simple formula and one they can understand.

                  Joans Town JonesJ Offline
                  Joans Town JonesJ Offline
                  Joans Town Jones
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #1424

                  @DaGrubster they've also had 4 years of record setting and haven't they done well. All we need is a first ever pool loss and and to not make it out of our pool all which are possibilities under Foz.

                  D 1 Reply Last reply
                  2
                  • canefanC canefan

                    @SidBarret said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                    @Billy-Webb I don't think the boks' performance can be called clinical - by my count they left four clear scoring opportunities on the field* as well as a couple more half chances.

                    I'd rather say the boks hit all their KPIs but didn't really exceed them.

                    *that is not to say the boks should have had an extra twenty points - some like the two held up, Mapimpi getting pushed into touch or where Moodie was slow to fold round Mapimpi; were either under advantage or led to points soon after.

                    I don't want to say it on this forum, but the ABs were very poor in this game. The number of errors they made meant they were invited pressure onto themselves and allowed SA to be a bit careless with opportunities they manufactured.

                    Why not? I think it was pretty clear to everyone that watched the game, the Boks played very well, the ABs didn't have a great outing

                    antipodeanA Offline
                    antipodeanA Offline
                    antipodean
                    wrote on last edited by antipodean
                    #1425

                    @canefan said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                    @SidBarret said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                    @Billy-Webb I don't think the boks' performance can be called clinical - by my count they left four clear scoring opportunities on the field* as well as a couple more half chances.

                    I'd rather say the boks hit all their KPIs but didn't really exceed them.

                    *that is not to say the boks should have had an extra twenty points - some like the two held up, Mapimpi getting pushed into touch or where Moodie was slow to fold round Mapimpi; were either under advantage or led to points soon after.

                    I don't want to say it on this forum, but the ABs were very poor in this game. The number of errors they made meant they were invited pressure onto themselves and allowed SA to be a bit careless with opportunities they manufactured.

                    Why not? I think it was pretty clear to everyone that watched the game, the Boks played very well, the ABs didn't have a great outing

                    On review I think it was a perfect storm of overly officious and inaccurate refereeing with a very good performance by the Springboks forwards. Every time the All Blacks managed to negate one aspect, the other rose to the fore.

                    Does that mean the All Blacks are blameless, or don't have considerable work-ons to address over the next two weeks before France? Of course not, but I'd suggest the sky isn't falling as much as some chicken littles think.

                    Quite frankly I'd suggest that this was more akin to the 2007 quarter final. Some uncomfortable truths that good players and coaches learn from.

                    This may be a cliché, but which team would you rather be? The one for whom everything went swimmingly or the one exposed? I know which has some obvious "learnings" to apply.

                    TimT M 2 Replies Last reply
                    8
                    • antipodeanA antipodean

                      @canefan said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                      @SidBarret said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                      @Billy-Webb I don't think the boks' performance can be called clinical - by my count they left four clear scoring opportunities on the field* as well as a couple more half chances.

                      I'd rather say the boks hit all their KPIs but didn't really exceed them.

                      *that is not to say the boks should have had an extra twenty points - some like the two held up, Mapimpi getting pushed into touch or where Moodie was slow to fold round Mapimpi; were either under advantage or led to points soon after.

                      I don't want to say it on this forum, but the ABs were very poor in this game. The number of errors they made meant they were invited pressure onto themselves and allowed SA to be a bit careless with opportunities they manufactured.

                      Why not? I think it was pretty clear to everyone that watched the game, the Boks played very well, the ABs didn't have a great outing

                      On review I think it was a perfect storm of overly officious and inaccurate refereeing with a very good performance by the Springboks forwards. Every time the All Blacks managed to negate one aspect, the other rose to the fore.

                      Does that mean the All Blacks are blameless, or don't have considerable work-ons to address over the next two weeks before France? Of course not, but I'd suggest the sky isn't falling as much as some chicken littles think.

                      Quite frankly I'd suggest that this was more akin to the 2007 quarter final. Some uncomfortable truths that good players and coaches learn from.

                      This may be a cliché, but which team would you rather be? The one for whom everything went swimmingly or the one exposed? I know which has some obvious "learnings" to apply.

                      TimT Away
                      TimT Away
                      Tim
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #1426

                      @antipodean said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                      This may be a cliché, but which team would you rather be?

                      I would much rather be backing South Africa.

                      antipodeanA 1 Reply Last reply
                      12
                      • TimT Tim

                        @antipodean said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                        This may be a cliché, but which team would you rather be?

                        I would much rather be backing South Africa.

                        antipodeanA Offline
                        antipodeanA Offline
                        antipodean
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #1427

                        @Tim said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                        @antipodean said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                        This may be a cliché, but which team would you rather be?

                        I would much rather be backing South Africa.

                        I too would back a team with such depth they elect to go with an additional forward pack on their bench. With the current state of the game, who wouldn't play that way?

                        kiwiinmelbK BovidaeB 2 Replies Last reply
                        2
                        • antipodeanA antipodean

                          @canefan said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                          @SidBarret said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                          @Billy-Webb I don't think the boks' performance can be called clinical - by my count they left four clear scoring opportunities on the field* as well as a couple more half chances.

                          I'd rather say the boks hit all their KPIs but didn't really exceed them.

                          *that is not to say the boks should have had an extra twenty points - some like the two held up, Mapimpi getting pushed into touch or where Moodie was slow to fold round Mapimpi; were either under advantage or led to points soon after.

                          I don't want to say it on this forum, but the ABs were very poor in this game. The number of errors they made meant they were invited pressure onto themselves and allowed SA to be a bit careless with opportunities they manufactured.

                          Why not? I think it was pretty clear to everyone that watched the game, the Boks played very well, the ABs didn't have a great outing

                          On review I think it was a perfect storm of overly officious and inaccurate refereeing with a very good performance by the Springboks forwards. Every time the All Blacks managed to negate one aspect, the other rose to the fore.

                          Does that mean the All Blacks are blameless, or don't have considerable work-ons to address over the next two weeks before France? Of course not, but I'd suggest the sky isn't falling as much as some chicken littles think.

                          Quite frankly I'd suggest that this was more akin to the 2007 quarter final. Some uncomfortable truths that good players and coaches learn from.

                          This may be a cliché, but which team would you rather be? The one for whom everything went swimmingly or the one exposed? I know which has some obvious "learnings" to apply.

                          M Offline
                          M Offline
                          Machpants
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #1428

                          @antipodean said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                          Does that mean the All Blacks are blameless, or don't have considerable work-ons to address over the next two weeks before France? Of course not, but I'd suggest the sky isn't falling as much as some chicken littles think.

                          Quite frankly I'd suggest that this was more akin to the 2007 quarter final. Some uncomfortable truths that good players and coaches learn from.

                          This may be a cliché, but which team would you rather be? The one for whom everything went swimmingly or the one exposed? I know which has some obvious "learnings" to apply.

                          The same considerable work ons they've had since circa 2017, if they've not been fixed by the current regime in almost 7 years, I'm doubtful they will be fixed in almost 7 weeks. This game has put me back to my view that I've always had under foster, that admittedly the previous 2022 games had caused me to doubt. That we only have a chance at the cup relying on luck, as any top team has, I have absolutely no confidence in winning.

                          antipodeanA 1 Reply Last reply
                          6
                          • canefanC Offline
                            canefanC Offline
                            canefan
                            wrote on last edited by canefan
                            #1429

                            When we play direct and with pace we can beat anyone. I just hope they were trying different things and refused to show their hand. Keeping the powder dry so to speak....

                            M MartyM 2 Replies Last reply
                            2
                            • canefanC canefan

                              When we play direct and with pace we can beat anyone. I just hope they were trying different things and refused to show their hand. Keeping the powder dry so to speak....

                              M Offline
                              M Offline
                              Machpants
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #1430

                              @canefan said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                              When we play direct we can beat anyone. I just hope they were trying different things and refused to show their hand. Keeping the powder dry so to speak....

                              It's like déjà vu all over again

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              3
                              • M Machpants

                                @antipodean said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                                Does that mean the All Blacks are blameless, or don't have considerable work-ons to address over the next two weeks before France? Of course not, but I'd suggest the sky isn't falling as much as some chicken littles think.

                                Quite frankly I'd suggest that this was more akin to the 2007 quarter final. Some uncomfortable truths that good players and coaches learn from.

                                This may be a cliché, but which team would you rather be? The one for whom everything went swimmingly or the one exposed? I know which has some obvious "learnings" to apply.

                                The same considerable work ons they've had since circa 2017, if they've not been fixed by the current regime in almost 7 years, I'm doubtful they will be fixed in almost 7 weeks. This game has put me back to my view that I've always had under foster, that admittedly the previous 2022 games had caused me to doubt. That we only have a chance at the cup relying on luck, as any top team has, I have absolutely no confidence in winning.

                                antipodeanA Offline
                                antipodeanA Offline
                                antipodean
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #1431

                                @Machpants said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                                @antipodean said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                                Does that mean the All Blacks are blameless, or don't have considerable work-ons to address over the next two weeks before France? Of course not, but I'd suggest the sky isn't falling as much as some chicken littles think.

                                Quite frankly I'd suggest that this was more akin to the 2007 quarter final. Some uncomfortable truths that good players and coaches learn from.

                                This may be a cliché, but which team would you rather be? The one for whom everything went swimmingly or the one exposed? I know which has some obvious "learnings" to apply.

                                The same considerable work ons they've had since circa 2017, if they've not been fixed by the current regime in almost 7 years, I'm doubtful they will be fixed in almost 7 weeks. This game has put me back to my view that I've always had under foster, that admittedly the previous 2022 games had caused me to doubt. That we only have a chance at the cup relying on luck, as any top team has, I have absolutely no confidence in winning.

                                Most RWC winners rely on luck at some point. As much as people (including me occasionally) love taking a giant shit on the coaches, at some point I think you need to accept the blindingly obvious - this isn't the 2015 team running out. If the best players still have brain farts, what coaching solves that? If they're physically and intellectually capable of reaching only to a certain level, then what?

                                M 1 Reply Last reply
                                1
                                • DuluthD Duluth

                                  @sparky said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                                  and the journalist they had on looked really smug about it all.

                                  The show reached a new low by having Paddy Gower on

                                  As far as Sky shows go 'Aotearoa rugby pod' is far far better than the Breakdown. Parsons drops his Chris Handy act and does some decent analysis. Hall is ok too, but doesn't criticise players enough (too many are recent teammates)

                                  kiwiinmelbK Offline
                                  kiwiinmelbK Offline
                                  kiwiinmelb
                                  wrote on last edited by kiwiinmelb
                                  #1432

                                  @Duluth said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                                  @sparky said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                                  and the journalist they had on looked really smug about it all.

                                  The show reached a new low by having Paddy Gower on

                                  As far as Sky shows go 'Aotearoa rugby pod' is far far better than the Breakdown. Parsons drops his Chris Handy act and does some decent analysis. Hall is ok too, but doesn't criticise players enough (too many are recent teammates)

                                  The breakdown is like watching CNN or something, feels like propaganda to get everyone onside . 🤣

                                  Everyone hold hands and sing Kumbaya.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  5
                                  • antipodeanA antipodean

                                    @Machpants said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                                    @antipodean said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                                    Does that mean the All Blacks are blameless, or don't have considerable work-ons to address over the next two weeks before France? Of course not, but I'd suggest the sky isn't falling as much as some chicken littles think.

                                    Quite frankly I'd suggest that this was more akin to the 2007 quarter final. Some uncomfortable truths that good players and coaches learn from.

                                    This may be a cliché, but which team would you rather be? The one for whom everything went swimmingly or the one exposed? I know which has some obvious "learnings" to apply.

                                    The same considerable work ons they've had since circa 2017, if they've not been fixed by the current regime in almost 7 years, I'm doubtful they will be fixed in almost 7 weeks. This game has put me back to my view that I've always had under foster, that admittedly the previous 2022 games had caused me to doubt. That we only have a chance at the cup relying on luck, as any top team has, I have absolutely no confidence in winning.

                                    Most RWC winners rely on luck at some point. As much as people (including me occasionally) love taking a giant shit on the coaches, at some point I think you need to accept the blindingly obvious - this isn't the 2015 team running out. If the best players still have brain farts, what coaching solves that? If they're physically and intellectually capable of reaching only to a certain level, then what?

                                    M Offline
                                    M Offline
                                    Machpants
                                    wrote on last edited by Machpants
                                    #1433

                                    @antipodean if foster just stopped his tactic fucking about in the 22 as default, even against set defences, I would feel much better. That is a killer, works versus minnows and a loose Australia. It worked beyond belief this year versus SA, but that realty is an anomaly. But it is dumb as fuck play, and I hope to never see it again as default. That's not brain fwrts, or poor execution by the players. It is a default 'exit strategy' under foster.

                                    antipodeanA 1 Reply Last reply
                                    13
                                    • P Offline
                                      P Offline
                                      ploughboy
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #1434

                                      6 and 2 or 7 and 1 benches come with risks. worked perfectly on saturday for the boks. wont always.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      7
                                      • M Machpants

                                        @antipodean if foster just stopped his tactic fucking about in the 22 as default, even against set defences, I would feel much better. That is a killer, works versus minnows and a loose Australia. It worked beyond belief this year versus SA, but that realty is an anomaly. But it is dumb as fuck play, and I hope to never see it again as default. That's not brain fwrts, or poor execution by the players. It is a default 'exit strategy' under foster.

                                        antipodeanA Offline
                                        antipodeanA Offline
                                        antipodean
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #1435

                                        @Machpants said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                                        @antipodean if foster just stopped his tactic fucking about in the 22 as default, even against set defences, I would feel much better. That is a killer, works versus minnows and a loose Australia. It worked beyond belief this year versus SA, but that realty is an anomaly. But it is dumb as fuck play, and I hope to never see it again as default. That's not brain fwrts, or poor execution by the players. It is a default 'exit strategy' under foster.

                                        Defences expect to have the ball kicked from the 22, so the further you kick it to them, the easier it is to carry the ball back and find space on the return. If you don't have an overly dominating lineout, you're often just giving the ball back to them around the 40 anyway. Contestable kicks are statistically a better option. That's why most teams do them, including the top five ranked nations.

                                        canefanC chimoausC 2 Replies Last reply
                                        1
                                        • antipodeanA antipodean

                                          @Tim said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                                          @antipodean said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                                          This may be a cliché, but which team would you rather be?

                                          I would much rather be backing South Africa.

                                          I too would back a team with such depth they elect to go with an additional forward pack on their bench. With the current state of the game, who wouldn't play that way?

                                          kiwiinmelbK Offline
                                          kiwiinmelbK Offline
                                          kiwiinmelb
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #1436

                                          @antipodean said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                                          @Tim said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                                          @antipodean said in All Blacks vs Springboks - Twickenham:

                                          This may be a cliché, but which team would you rather be?

                                          I would much rather be backing South Africa.

                                          I too would back a team with such depth they elect to go with an additional forward pack on their bench. With the current state of the game, who wouldn't play that way?

                                          Their game plan stands up well in high pressure games

                                          antipodeanA 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Search
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Search