• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Rugby World Cup 2011

Forums Unread posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
How did SA not win that game?

Cooper looked awful today. If the Aussies are going to have any chance in the semi, then he's going to have to really improve on what we've seen so far from him.

Pocock was simply fantastic, 24 tackles and he won so much turnover ball as well. If Pocock hadn't played today Australia would have lost this game.
 
[quote author=Kenny4PM link=topic=45879.msg1410266#msg1410266 date=1318162087]
How did SA not win that game?

[/quote]

Dunno really ... It was there for the taking ... Oh well, it's a pity as I thought we really could win this tourney. I'm pulling for your lads now.
 
Maybe the Kiwi's arranged for the bok's tpo get food poisoning....

... and the English.....

.... and the French....
 
[quote author=StevieM link=topic=45879.msg1410288#msg1410288 date=1318166021]
Maybe the Kiwi's arranged for the bok's tpo get food poisoning....

... and the English.....

.... and the French....
[/quote]

Ha ha ... Only the Boks do that! 😉
 
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=45879.msg1410269#msg1410269 date=1318163816]
[quote author=Kenny4PM link=topic=45879.msg1410266#msg1410266 date=1318162087]
How did SA not win that game?

[/quote]

Dunno really ... It was there for the taking ... Oh well, it's a pity as I thought we really could win this tourney. I'm pulling for your lads now.
[/quote]

I might be wrong here Wiz but apart from maybe a couple of mins, it seemed the entire 2nd 40 was played in the Aussie half. I lost count of the amount of times i thought your boys were going to score.

Aussies seemed to get away with a fare bit as well!
 
[quote author=Kenny4PM link=topic=45879.msg1410300#msg1410300 date=1318167174]
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=45879.msg1410269#msg1410269 date=1318163816]
[quote author=Kenny4PM link=topic=45879.msg1410266#msg1410266 date=1318162087]
How did SA not win that game?

[/quote]

Dunno really ... It was there for the taking ... Oh well, it's a pity as I thought we really could win this tourney. I'm pulling for your lads now.
[/quote]

I might be wrong here Wiz but apart from maybe a couple of mins, it seemed the entire 2nd 40 was played in the Aussie half. I lost count of the amount of times i thought your boys were going to score.

Aussies seemed to get away with a fare bit as well!
[/quote]

I dunno what to say mate ... The 2nd half was brilliant rugby by the Boks - and as you said, I thought every few minutes a try was coming. We just couldn't get it done ... What scares me is this is still the team White built, so we may not be able to compete (like I thought we would do in this tourney) for a while.

Oh well, credit to Australia.
 
An Englishman, irishman and scotsman walk into a bar. The englishman orders a round and they all sit tje watching wthe Welsh in the semi's

Just not right is it
 
[quote author=Rouge Penguin link=topic=45879.msg1410435#msg1410435 date=1318231317]
An Englishman, irishman and scotsman walk into a bar. The englishman orders a round and they all sit tje watching wthe Welsh in the semi's

Just not right is it
[/quote]


It's not right at all. Plus, who would have picked them to be in the semi's - I think most thought they'd be doing well to make the quarters. They're the surprise packet; strong pack and a great centre/wing combination plus the worlds biggest half. I'm liking them.


Australia played as poorly as they're capable of doing and still won. For all the praise of the Bok's domination they will never "dominate" world rugby while they use the same, boring, monotone, one-dimensional tactics. The Kiwi's, in contrast, while winning only one world cup (should have been two :-X) have dominated world rugby many times. They're the mancs or the Barca of rugby while the Boks remind me of us or even City last season. I have little sympathy for them - they're still trying to play the rugby they were playing in the early 70's; the games moved on guys.


Can't see Australia getting past Kiwi's with the one x-factor being if New Zealand can actually find a fit 5/8th. Slade looks gone and, while he looked good against Argentina, I don't think their third choice will be enough to steer them through. Sonny Bill, though, looks like the guy who can win it for them at any stage.

A Wales / New Zealand final would be pretty interesting.
 
[quote author=Wizardry link=topic=45879.msg1410481#msg1410481 date=1318244053]

A Wales / New Zealand final would be pretty interesting.
[/quote]

.... sheep everywhere are getting nervous....
 
I was glad a team that failed to get over the try line finally lost a big game. Possession and soft territory is too easily rewarded, Sport should be about taking your chances, most other Sports are. The sooner the drop goal is reduced in value, the better the game will be for it.
This WC is not getting much love in the Aussie press, despite Australia somehow finding themselves in the semis. The Wallabies have been heavily criticised, as has the general standard. Only Wales, Ireland, NZ and a couple of less renowned Countries have escaped criticism.
I also think the refs have been told to blow up less. There are less penalties and less dead-time in games down here than there is in European Rugby. I'm sure this has been communicated to the refs on behalf of the paying punters. There was a passage of play yesterday where there were 3 potential penalties against SA, then 2 against the Aussies that were all let go, in the space of about 2 minutes.

I fancy Wales v NZ too. Isn't this the same last 4 as was in the 87 WC, also in NZ?
 
If the South African style of rugby is so out of date, then how come they've won 3 tri nations, 2 World cup's and been ranked 1st twice since 2007 in the IRB rankings?

It might not be every rugby fans cup of tea, but it's bloody effective when played well.
 
[quote author=LarryHagman link=topic=45879.msg1410485#msg1410485 date=1318245700]
I was glad a team that failed to get over the try line finally lost a big game. Possession and soft territory is too easily rewarded, Sport should be about taking your chances, most other Sports are. The sooner the drop goal is reduced in value, the better the game will be for it.
This WC is not getting much love in the Aussie press, despite Australia somehow finding themselves in the semis. The Wallabies have been heavily criticised, as has the general standard. Only Wales, Ireland, NZ and a couple of less renowned Countries have escaped criticism.
I also think the refs have been told to blow up less. There are less penalties and less dead-time in games down here than there is in European Rugby. I'm sure this has been communicated to the refs on behalf of the paying punters. There was a passage of play yesterday where there were 3 potential penalties against SA, then 2 against the Aussies that were all let go, in the space of about 2 minutes.

I fancy Wales v NZ too. Isn't this the same last 4 as was in the 87 WC, also in NZ?
[/quote]

Yes it is mate.

Regarding your point about the refs i was thinking the same, it seems to me we've seen hardly any yellow cards dished out as well.
 
[quote author=Kenny4PM link=topic=45879.msg1410488#msg1410488 date=1318245999]
If the South African style of rugby is so out of date, then how come they've won 3 tri nations, 2 World cup's and been ranked 1st twice since 2007 in the IRB rankings?

It might not be every rugby fans cup of tea, but it's bloody effective when played well.
[/quote]

Morne and Francois Steyn.

Get in the oppo half and its guaranteed points.

Re the refs and pens mate, its a cert they're being more lenient.
 
Semi's predictions:

France v Wales - France

I would of been quite confident of getting to the final if we'd been playing England, but this french side have the backs to break us down if they get the ball (which they will). I know they haven't been very impressive so far but they have a smashing front five and a well balanced back row, add to that an exciting backline and you've got yourself a tasty side capable of beating anyone. I guess it depends on if they turn up or not.

One quick question though, would you stick with a winning side or be tempted to bring back Hook now that he's fully fit?

Aussies v New Zealand - NZ

Anyone else getting the feeling that the Aussies just might win this? Carter out and Richie McCaw being held together with sticky tape certainly gives them a lot more hope than they might of had. I'm going for the Kiwi's but only just.

As a Welshman i'm hoping the Aussies win, we'd have no chance against the Kiwi's.
 
[quote author=Kenny4PM link=topic=45879.msg1410488#msg1410488 date=1318245999]
If the South African style of rugby is so out of date, then how come they've won 3 tri nations, 2 World cup's and been ranked 1st twice since 2007 in the IRB rankings?

It might not be every rugby fans cup of tea, but it's bloody effective when played well.
[/quote]

Yah I can't honestly believe that comment by Wizadry. I hope we continue to be this 'dominant' in the next 4-8 years (where I think we'll be below the 'big dogs' as we build the next group of young Bokkies).

Larry - Morne and Frans Steyn are rather recent additions to the squad. They did this with Montgomery and Stransky too. They just didn't have it yesterday when it counted (well, a few inches away on that drop kick and they win - and that's sports for ya!).

Smit and Matfield retired. Two great servants ... Very very hard to replace those lads.
 
[quote author=Kenny4PM link=topic=45879.msg1410497#msg1410497 date=1318247704]
Semi's predictions:

France v Wales - France

I would of been quite confident of getting to the final if we'd been playing England, but this french side have the backs to break us down if they get the ball (which they will). I know they haven't been very impressive so far but they have a smashing front five and a well balanced back row, add to that an exciting backline and you've got yourself a tasty side capable of beating anyone. I guess it depends on if they turn up or not.

One quick question though, would you stick with a winning side or be tempted to bring back Hook now that he's fully fit?

Aussies v New Zealand - NZ

Anyone else getting the feeling that the Aussies just might win this? Carter out and Richie McCaw being held together with sticky tape certainly gives them a lot more hope than they might of had. I'm going for the Kiwi's but only just.

As a Welshman i'm hoping the Aussies win, we'd have no chance against the Kiwi's.
[/quote]

I think you've got the beating of them in the front row if your lads bring their A game on the day. Servat's an excellent hooker but Bennett did well against the Irish, while your props are definitely the better pairing IMO which could (a) deny the French a lot of ball and (b) set your own backs free to wreak their own havoc. You'll need to try and minimise the number of lineouts, as I can see the French cleaning up in that area of the game if their second row maintains the form they finally found against England. As for Hook, I'm a big fan of his but no, I wouldn't change a winning team on this occasion. Hook could be a great impact sub in the second half though. Overall I've got to say I think the French are running into form at exactly the right time, but Wales have definite chances. Put a gun to my head and I'd tip France, but only just.

I also agree with your prediction for the other semi. Given the way the Aussies snaffled the last game out from under the Springboks' noses I guess anything's possible, and Pocock on that form is probably the best forward on either side, but I think the Blacks will have too much for them overall.

If it does turn out to be a NZ/France final the whole of New Zealand will be sh!tting itself, but I still reckon they'll do it this time.
 
Yeah i think you're right about what you say about the French mate.

It would be oh so typical of the French to suffer such lows as losing against tonga, yet go on to lift the trophy.

"If" McCaw is not fit to play in the final (if they make it), then i'd make it a 50/50 call were they to play France.
 
As it was in the beginning, the only team that can beat the All Blacks in New Zealand are... the All Blacks.

I think unless you've actually spent some time in NZ it's impossible to understand just how important rugby is to them and the pressure to succeed is immense.

Maybe too much - particularly if they blink after a few, albeit key, injuries - no-one else will, because no-one else has anything to loose now.
 
[quote author=Kenny4PM link=topic=45879.msg1410497#msg1410497 date=1318247704]
Semi's predictions:

France v Wales - France

I would of been quite confident of getting to the final if we'd been playing England, but this french side have the backs to break us down if they get the ball (which they will). I know they haven't been very impressive so far but they have a smashing front five and a well balanced back row, add to that an exciting backline and you've got yourself a tasty side capable of beating anyone. I guess it depends on if they turn up or not.

One quick question though, would you stick with a winning side or be tempted to bring back Hook now that he's fully fit?

Aussies v New Zealand - NZ

Anyone else getting the feeling that the Aussies just might win this? Carter out and Richie McCaw being held together with sticky tape certainly gives them a lot more hope than they might of had. I'm going for the Kiwi's but only just.

As a Welshman i'm hoping the Aussies win, we'd have no chance against the Kiwi's.
[/quote]

I think the French are gone - they've played their big match, regained some respect and I fully expect them to implode under the pressure of being favourites against an underrated Welsh outfit.

Australia won't win this IMO for the simple fact that they don't have enough punch in the backline. There's no Sterling Mortlock, Horan, Campese, Little etc. New Zealand have to find a way of getting better quality ball than they did in the quarters but if they work that out I don't see any of the remaining teams handling their cetnres or wingers. Throw in Sonny Bill and there's just too much for anyone else to combat. The problem is, as mentioned elsewhere, McCaw's health and the 5/8th. If they can just keep that alive the rest will work itself out for them.
 
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=45879.msg1410498#msg1410498 date=1318247704]
[quote author=Kenny4PM link=topic=45879.msg1410488#msg1410488 date=1318245999]
If the South African style of rugby is so out of date, then how come they've won 3 tri nations, 2 World cup's and been ranked 1st twice since 2007 in the IRB rankings?

It might not be every rugby fans cup of tea, but it's bloody effective when played well.
[/quote]

Yah I can't honestly believe that comment by Wizadry. I hope we continue to be this 'dominant' in the next 4-8 years (where I think we'll be below the 'big dogs' as we build the next group of young Bokkies).

Larry - Morne and Frans Steyn are rather recent additions to the squad. They did this with Montgomery and Stransky too. They just didn't have it yesterday when it counted (well, a few inches away on that drop kick and they win - and that's sports for ya!).

Smit and Matfield retired. Two great servants ... Very very hard to replace those lads.
[/quote]

To be honest they've won one world cup and were handed the second. They wouldn't even have made the final had it been played anywhere else but South Africa. The emotion, the upheval in the country at the time, the world watching and almost willing a fairy tale etc was too much for the ref in the semi's. He should have given a penalty try to the French which would have won them the game as South Africa kept collapsing the scrum. According to a number of people on the sideline he clearly informed his touch judge he would not be awarding a penalty try against South Africa no matter what. Then the entire NZ camp gets poisoned a couple of nights before the final. Let's be honest, everyone knew it was going to go to South Africa for lots of very good reasons - just none of them were sporting in nature.

Noone's saying that the rugby they play isn't effective - so's putting 9 players behind the ball and having one tall one and one fast one up front. It will rarely win you anything major - South Africa got a little lucky IMO at the last WC; France had an incredible 18 minutes against NZ, Australia were in turmoil back home and England were older than Dad's Army. That said, they won it and good luck to them but they won't win the last WC to be staged - I think that'll go to NZ or Wales.
 
Ok - now I get it mate. The Boks are lucky, and if they do win, they don't deserve it. At least we're on the same page now.

Though I agree with your last sentence, Wales or NZ. It would be great, on many levels, to see Wales win.
 
LIMITING THE POWER OF THE WHISTLE

There are no doubt a lot of Australian rugby supporters celebrating our victory over the Springboks yesterday. There are also a number of us that are wondering how on earth we managed to pull it off against a side that dominated possession and territory and lineouts. Now, I don’t want to take anything away from the Australian victory – our boys did perform superbly but on the day the Springboks were, we have to admit, the better side. The boks, as always were magnanimous in defeat with a somewhat pragmatic approach to the result. I wonder what our boys would have said faced with the same situation of blatant incompetence by Mr Bryce Lawrence.

I support Australia and always will but for those of us that believe in fair play this was a hollow victory. This was very much like fighting a worthy opponent with one arm strapped behind his back – it leaves a bad taste. There were rumours about Mr Lawrence’s impartiality before kick-off from a lot of ex pat South Africans now living in Australia but we tend to dismiss these conspiracy theories with a grin. Certainly, Mr Lawrence’s performance on the field did nothing to dispel those theories. His performance was nothing short of abysmal. He did not award the bok try because of a dubious forward pass. I have looked and looked and to me, anyway, it did not look forward. Minutes later when the boks once again breached our defences and were well on the way to scoring another try, he called them back for a forward pass. If the first call was contentious, there certainly was nothing wrong with the second one. Here, I must ask – why not use the “eye in the sky”? An impressive expensive piece of equipment that should be used for such decisions.

He failed to penalise Pocock for slowing the ball down. If we had played like that against the All Blacks, they would not have been so quiet about it. – and rightly so. In the dying minutes of the game he was in full view of at least 2 high tackles by our boys that went unpunished. Any of these transgressions, if properly acted on, would have surely given the game to the Boks with their advantage over territory. To rub salt in the South African wounds, he awarded a high tackle to the Wallabies for a chest high tackle.

We won, but did we really? Our sport has always been regarded as a “hooligans game played by gentlemen” – If we do not want rugby union to degenerate into a farce that soccer can become we need to make sure that our refs are of suitable calibre. They need to be trustworthy gentlemen.

Mr Lawrence, I would advise against any planned holidays to South Africa for a couple of years.

Chris Davis

The Australian
 
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=45879.msg1410643#msg1410643 date=1318261078]
I thought the first forward pass was forward - was it not?

Habana's forward pass didn't look forward though.
[/quote]

Yep, I think that the first one was forward but the feed that I was watching, never showed an viewing angle that was conclusive...
 
Lawrence has been poor from day one. The fact that he's still getting games in the competition ahead of Wayne Barnes is a disgrace.
 
I still haven't forgiven him for only giving a yellow when he saw Shalk Burger eye gouge one of our Lions players
 
The pass for the disallowed try was well forward, its not even worth debating. The one that happened in general play later on was probably debatable.

I don't think the ref favoured one team or the other. As mentioned earlier, I just think refs have been told to be more lenient. The Aus v SA game is not the only example of that approach.
 
Side issue, Joel Tomkins is leaving Wigan RL to sign for Saracens RU. He's a good player, plays back row in RL but I suppose he'll be looking at centre in RU like they seem to do. His brother Sam, plays stand-off or full back & is the best young RL player in the Country, is also heading South, not sure where yet, that one's not confirmed. Sam will be a shoo-in for the England team. They both have the same agent as ex-Wiganer Ashton.
 
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=45879.msg1410643#msg1410643 date=1318261078]
I thought the first forward pass was forward - was it not?

Habana's forward pass didn't look forward though.
[/quote]

I didn't think either of them were forward. The ball went forward but it wasn't thrown forward which is all that matters. Why refs and touch judges consistently fall for the ball movement is beyond me. The only way to judge it (which is why the "eye in the sky" suggestion is so ridiculous) is the movement of the hands in releasing the ball.


As for the "Boks are lucky and, if they win, don't deserve it" comment - words fail me. Not sure where you were for that first WC win but if it was anywhere but in South Africa then there was no doubting what happened. The reason it didn't cause so much consternation (except in NZ) was because there was such universal good will for the SA rugby team to somehow unite the country after all it had been through. Facts are facts, however and the semi was a farce. Look it up - the last 20 minutes - and compare it to the quarter final matches. Anyone who couldn't hold their own in the scrum and constantly collapsed it were penalised or, depending on the location, copped a penalty try. The commentators were all on it and many said, at the time, this is the end of the dream cause a penalty try is the only solution. It simply never came.

Don't get me wrong, I was happy to see them beat the French and I hoped (without any confidence) that they'd beat the All Blacks and big Jonah. I really couldn't see how they'd do it - until the opposition were in hospital with food poisoning. After that it became kind of clear.
 
Wiz II,

You really think both passes weren't forward? That's surprising ...

My issues re: 95:

1) home field side always gives you advantage. England '66? SK in '02? France in '98? Be it the crowds, be it ref - it's why 'hosting' a big tourney helps so much.
2) the food poisoning - we've seen this used before Spurs/Gooners too. If the WHOLE squad got it, ok but a few? Dunno. The All-Blacks were a far better team that year, far better team than anyone. They just were flat in the final as a TEAM and the Boks held out and got what they needed to eek it out.

My issues re: 07:

The winners ALWAYS get the breaks, be it with how weaker teams upset the bigger teams (France vs NZ). SA were a very good team that year, and as Rafa alludes to, got even better later in the decade. I don't really mind if they go through the best, or through the worst - they won the games in front of them and that's what counts. No one will remember how or why in 30 years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom