Springboks v British & Irish Lions II
-
@nta said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
I'm not a BOK fan but think he did alright
16 of them on the field!
@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@nta said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
I'm not a BOK fan but think he did alright
16 of them on the field!
At least. Don't forget Rassie.
-
@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@nta said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
I'm not a BOK fan but think he did alright
16 of them on the field!
At least. Don't forget Rassie.
@nta said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@nta said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
I'm not a BOK fan but think he did alright
16 of them on the field!
At least. Don't forget Rassie.
17!
-
Sunday Times has Lions tight five outplaying Boks. Walrus gives Etzebeth ‘4K’ and call him overrated.
Only ratings which seem half decent are Rugby Pass.
@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Sunday Times has Lions tight five outplaying Boks. Walrus gives Etzebeth ‘4K’ and call him overrated.
Only ratings which seem half decent are Rugby Pass.
Firstly, what does '4K' mean?
Secondly, Elizabeth is playing scary good rugby IMO.
-
@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Sunday Times has Lions tight five outplaying Boks. Walrus gives Etzebeth ‘4K’ and call him overrated.
Only ratings which seem half decent are Rugby Pass.
Firstly, what does '4K' mean?
Secondly, Elizabeth is playing scary good rugby IMO.
@booboo said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Sunday Times has Lions tight five outplaying Boks. Walrus gives Etzebeth ‘4K’ and call him overrated.
Only ratings which seem half decent are Rugby Pass.
Firstly, what does '4K' mean?
Secondly, Elizabeth is playing scary good rugby IMO.
Fat fingers: 4 out of 10.
-
@bovidae said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@catogrande said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
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.
I thought Henshaw was OK but the Harris inclusion didn't work.
Gatland and co needs to decide how they want to play and select accordingly.
As you were then
No Plan B for Gats
@mikethesnow said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@bovidae said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@catogrande said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
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.
I thought Henshaw was OK but the Harris inclusion didn't work.
Gatland and co needs to decide how they want to play and select accordingly.
As you were then
No Plan B for Gats
It is Plan B, Warrenball Reloaded
-
-
Sinckler cited for biting.
@antipodean said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Sinckler cited for biting.
If they've got anything like half decent footage, he's totally fucked.
-
This series is horrible as an advertisement for rugby.
Aerial bombardments and blokes running in to each other. Long games. Endless whinging about the refs. Professional rugby at its absolute worst.
-
This series is horrible as an advertisement for rugby.
Aerial bombardments and blokes running in to each other. Long games. Endless whinging about the refs. Professional rugby at its absolute worst.
@mariner4life said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
This series is horrible as an advertisement for rugby.
Aerial bombardments and blokes running in to each other. Long games. Endless whinging about the refs. Professional rugby at its absolute worst.
Hopefully this makes WR sit up and take notice that the preeminent fixture in the calendar outside the RWC looks like this: The best players from Home Nations and the World Champions are playing this way, with these officials bringing the game into disrepute.
-
@mariner4life said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
This series is horrible as an advertisement for rugby.
Aerial bombardments and blokes running in to each other. Long games. Endless whinging about the refs. Professional rugby at its absolute worst.
Hopefully this makes WR sit up and take notice that the preeminent fixture in the calendar outside the RWC looks like this: The best players from Home Nations and the World Champions are playing this way, with these officials bringing the game into disrepute.
@antipodean said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@mariner4life said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
This series is horrible as an advertisement for rugby.
Aerial bombardments and blokes running in to each other. Long games. Endless whinging about the refs. Professional rugby at its absolute worst.
Hopefully this makes WR sit up and take notice that the preeminent fixture in the calendar outside the RWC looks like this: The best players from Home Nations and the World Champions are playing this way, with these officials bringing the game into disrepute.
i am not holding my breath
although online chat seems to suggest even the home union supporters think its garbage.
-
@oompb said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@sidbarret glad to see van Staden on the bench at least. He should started.
Duanne was waterboy for the Bulls on sunday.
Actually carrying water? :astonished_face:
@catogrande Duanne joined the Springbok squad yesterday. Might play on Saturday. Hendrikse from the Sharks also called up as substitute for Faf.
-
@catogrande Duanne joined the Springbok squad yesterday. Might play on Saturday. Hendrikse from the Sharks also called up as substitute for Faf.
@oompb said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@catogrande Duanne joined the Springbok squad yesterday. Might play on Saturday. Hendrikse from the Sharks also called up as substitute for Faf.
Why are they calling up a 4th scrummy? Seems a bit excessive. Also can you imagine the level of inane chatter from having 4 scrum halves in the same group? Unbearable
Could really do without Vermeulen being passed fit, last test was bad enough without him there
-
This series is horrible as an advertisement for rugby.
Aerial bombardments and blokes running in to each other. Long games. Endless whinging about the refs. Professional rugby at its absolute worst.
@mariner4life said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
This series is horrible as an advertisement for rugby.
Aerial bombardments and blokes running in to each other. Long games. Endless whinging about the refs. Professional rugby at its absolute worst.
South Africa have always played this way.
And the Lions under Gatland the same. -
@oompb said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@catogrande Duanne joined the Springbok squad yesterday. Might play on Saturday. Hendrikse from the Sharks also called up as substitute for Faf.
Why are they calling up a 4th scrummy? Seems a bit excessive. Also can you imagine the level of inane chatter from having 4 scrum halves in the same group? Unbearable
Could really do without Vermeulen being passed fit, last test was bad enough without him there
@gibbonrib it is his first call up. Boks season only started and one long fixture list ahead. Covid also requires an aggressive bubble of isolation. Two Puma tests to follow the last BILs test.
-
@mariner4life said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
This series is horrible as an advertisement for rugby.
Aerial bombardments and blokes running in to each other. Long games. Endless whinging about the refs. Professional rugby at its absolute worst.
South Africa have always played this way.
And the Lions under Gatland the same.@frank said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@mariner4life said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
This series is horrible as an advertisement for rugby.
Aerial bombardments and blokes running in to each other. Long games. Endless whinging about the refs. Professional rugby at its absolute worst.
South Africa have always played this way.
And the Lions under Gatland the same.SA have been involved in some of the best games in history by playing a similar game. Difference is they took a risk when the opportunity arose.
On Saturday it took until the 44th minute, and it worked too!
-
The Springboks approach to the refereeing in this game interesting. Firstly, for better or worse, Rassie's pressure on the referee worked and O'Keefe was much stricter (on both teams) than Berry in the first game. But the players also put far more pressure on him. It has been a theme of this tour that the Lions have been "bullying" opposition teams with little hold backs and shit tons of chat. In this game, every time there was a bit of a push the Springboks would rush in and force the ref to deal with it. It made for a terrible spectical, but at least the lions were not allowed to set the narrative the way they have been allowed to on tour.
In the first half it felt like South Africa was playing a bit more of the rugby, but inaccuracies led to consecutive penalties that kept the lions in the game.
I am actually a little more worried about the Boks attack now than I was before the game. Whereas the Lions didn't try to attack, the Boks in patches did, but the passing and alignment was so bad that they couldnt get anything going. A grinding, trench war is good enough to win this week but based on this performance I am worried that we will fall flat on our face if we decide pull the trigger.
And my god was this a stop start affair. For example, in the first 10 minutes of the second half there were about 10 phases of rugby played. Mapimpi scored in the 44th minute, after the conversion and kick off there was a scrum that collapsed three times, leading to free kick to the lions. One or two phases and then a penalty in 50th minute. That's just dreadful.
There's a lot of talk about South Africa winning the aerial battle in the second half, neither team was any good. The lions knocked on a couple balls, but the South African back three were not a lot better. South Africa were just a bit better at recovering loose balls after the kick were miss-fielded.
And can supporters please shut up about cards all the time. Social media is full of calls for five or six citings to be dished out against both sides. It was nasty unpleasant game, but a hundred miles from being truly dirty. It feels like everyone is just looking for drama for drama sake.
-
The Springboks approach to the refereeing in this game interesting. Firstly, for better or worse, Rassie's pressure on the referee worked and O'Keefe was much stricter (on both teams) than Berry in the first game. But the players also put far more pressure on him. It has been a theme of this tour that the Lions have been "bullying" opposition teams with little hold backs and shit tons of chat. In this game, every time there was a bit of a push the Springboks would rush in and force the ref to deal with it. It made for a terrible spectical, but at least the lions were not allowed to set the narrative the way they have been allowed to on tour.
In the first half it felt like South Africa was playing a bit more of the rugby, but inaccuracies led to consecutive penalties that kept the lions in the game.
I am actually a little more worried about the Boks attack now than I was before the game. Whereas the Lions didn't try to attack, the Boks in patches did, but the passing and alignment was so bad that they couldnt get anything going. A grinding, trench war is good enough to win this week but based on this performance I am worried that we will fall flat on our face if we decide pull the trigger.
And my god was this a stop start affair. For example, in the first 10 minutes of the second half there were about 10 phases of rugby played. Mapimpi scored in the 44th minute, after the conversion and kick off there was a scrum that collapsed three times, leading to free kick to the lions. One or two phases and then a penalty in 50th minute. That's just dreadful.
There's a lot of talk about South Africa winning the aerial battle in the second half, neither team was any good. The lions knocked on a couple balls, but the South African back three were not a lot better. South Africa were just a bit better at recovering loose balls after the kick were miss-fielded.
And can supporters please shut up about cards all the time. Social media is full of calls for five or six citings to be dished out against both sides. It was nasty unpleasant game, but a hundred miles from being truly dirty. It feels like everyone is just looking for drama for drama sake.
I don't disagree, and I didn't watch the game (just the highlights) but if there was two incidents of biting (and there are two allegations, including one official citing), then it was dirty enough.
-
I don't disagree, and I didn't watch the game (just the highlights) but if there was two incidents of biting (and there are two allegations, including one official citing), then it was dirty enough.
@gt12 yeah maybe I didn't make my point very well.
Re Hogg, it looks weird/dodgy but without further evidence and if Springboks don't push the matter then I can accept that it is just that, weird.
Re Sinckler - there very little public about the incident. On the ref comms you can hear Kolisi raising something with O'Keefe, who responds that he sees it but that it will have to be dealt with after the game. The speculation is that Mostert showed O'Keefe a bite mark. We will have to wait for the hearing tomorrow to get any more information.
That is dirty incident, rather than a dirty game.
On the internet you are hearing call for citing for all sorts of rugby incidents -
Vunipolu for a high shot on Etsebeth in the first minute.
Kolbe for the head-clash with Curry.
Kolbe for the tackle in the air.
Itoje for his Chauvin inpersonation on DE Allende.
De Klerk for his tackle on Murray.
Mbonanbi for his shove on Biggar in a scuffle.It's just all a little rediculous.
-
@gt12 yeah maybe I didn't make my point very well.
Re Hogg, it looks weird/dodgy but without further evidence and if Springboks don't push the matter then I can accept that it is just that, weird.
Re Sinckler - there very little public about the incident. On the ref comms you can hear Kolisi raising something with O'Keefe, who responds that he sees it but that it will have to be dealt with after the game. The speculation is that Mostert showed O'Keefe a bite mark. We will have to wait for the hearing tomorrow to get any more information.
That is dirty incident, rather than a dirty game.
On the internet you are hearing call for citing for all sorts of rugby incidents -
Vunipolu for a high shot on Etsebeth in the first minute.
Kolbe for the head-clash with Curry.
Kolbe for the tackle in the air.
Itoje for his Chauvin inpersonation on DE Allende.
De Klerk for his tackle on Murray.
Mbonanbi for his shove on Biggar in a scuffle.It's just all a little rediculous.
@sidbarret said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@gt12 yeah maybe I didn't make my point very well.
Re Hogg, it looks weird/dodgy but without further evidence and if Springboks don't push the matter then I can accept that it is just that, weird.
Re Sinckler - there very little public about the incident. On the ref comms you can hear Kolisi raising something with O'Keefe, who responds that he sees it but that it will have to be dealt with after the game. The speculation is that Mostert showed O'Keefe a bite mark. We will have to wait for the hearing tomorrow to get any more information.
That is dirty incident, rather than a dirty game.
On the internet you are hearing call for citing for all sorts of rugby incidents -
Vunipolu for a high shot on Etsebeth in the first minute.
Kolbe for the head-clash with Curry.
Kolbe for the tackle in the air.
Itoje for his Chauvin inpersonation on DE Allende.
De Klerk for his tackle on Murray.
Mbonanbi for his shove on Biggar in a scuffle.It's just all a little rediculous.
Spot on!
