RugbyRebels

Same pack that Japan faced wasn’t it? Joseph did his homework and their half backs managed to create plenty

And tbf he stifled some of our forwards running onto the ball last week like he did this week. I didn't think he was all that last week anyway. I don't want to bang on about him but I'm hoping we can move on from him now the WC's over. We didn't lose that today because of him, as poor as he was.

16th man wrote:

Beasties wrote:How did we produce a performance like last week's and then a performance like this?

Without wanting to scapegoat, I can't remember ever seeing a better illustration of "reversion to the mean" than Ben Youngs' performances from last week to this.

Youngs can be good, but damn when he is off form he is awful. Under pressure today and it showed badly. What a better 9 could have done, I'm not sure in terms of reversing the scoreline, but passing to people not the floor might have helped.

Also Daly isn't a 15. That showed.

Not many people emerge with credit today and it's such a beating, in style if not score, that I would only really look at Itoje, Billy V and maybe Watson as really performing well. You can add May too if you like.


Having said that... Farrell missed the kick that would have made it 15-12. There's the big choke from the so called "Iceman". In fact I'm glad he was so publicly made the face of this team this week, on the front of papers etc, so people might realise he can't walk on water (That's Jonny's job).. any biters?

Digby wrote:

16th man wrote:

Beasties wrote:How did we produce a performance like last week's and then a performance like this?

Without wanting to scapegoat, I can't remember ever seeing a better illustration of "reversion to the mean" than Ben Youngs' performances from last week to this.

I really don't think I'd start with a halfback when looking at where that game went wrong. Albeit yes even with the scraps possession we were afforded we made bad decisions, panicked and both exited and executed badly.

Digby, the snag is that it was the same pack. Sinckler's injury was disruptive. Neither Mako nor George were at their best. Itoje scrapped for 80 minutes. Collectively, Lawes and Kruis let nobody down. Overall, the set-piece was below par and found no way to adjust apart from one scrum penalty. The back row as a unit was found wanting and SA ruled the loose, in the main.

So, was it in selection, preparation or an inability to adjust in the 80 minutes?

In my eyes, there was a nervous jitteriness about our forwards right from the start. It cried out for a forward captain. It was the sort of game where the team is at a disadvantage just because the captain was a back.

Maybe, the kick to make it a 3 point game wasn't easy and he made a good contact. But he wasn't especially useful today, as a player or leader, if Daly is to be marked down as not a 15 then, Farrell, should be marked down as not a 12, given neither is an obvious candidate to make the next WC perhaps we could just drop both and be done with it

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:

16th man wrote:
Without wanting to scapegoat, I can't remember ever seeing a better illustration of "reversion to the mean" than Ben Youngs' performances from last week to this.

I really don't think I'd start with a halfback when looking at where that game went wrong. Albeit yes even with the scraps possession we were afforded we made bad decisions, panicked and both exited and executed badly.

Digby, the snag is that it was the same pack. Sinckler's injury was disruptive. Neither Mako nor George were at their best. Itoje scrapped for 80 minutes. Collectively, Lawes and Kruis let nobody down. Overall, the set-piece was below par and found no way to adjust apart from one scrum penalty. The back row as a unit was found wanting and SA ruled the loose, in the main.

So, was it in selection, preparation or an inability to adjust in the 80 minutes?

In my eyes, there was a nervous jitteriness about our forwards right from the start. It cried out for a forward captain. It was the sort of game where the team is at a disadvantage just because the captain was a back.

All that suggests the initial and bigger problem was in the forwards, which I agree with, but that's not on the halfback(s)

I don't know changing a captain changes that much, feels like those aboard the B ark arguing what colour the square wheel should be.

We don't have many obvious selection changes that could have swung the game for us, perhaps Launchbury in maul and scrum, we could have done better, but it would have taken some outstanding performances from 8, 9 and 10 to cover us losing so much set piece and contact work, and we were a long way from getting average performances at 8, 9 and 10 once we were under such pressure

Still, like the semi-final when NZ couldn't get going I'm tempted to think for the game to have gone this badly is just a combination of things going wrong over and over which we will not often see replicate in one 80 minute game

Starting Marler, Kruis, Wilson and Spencer would have made a difference.

I think we're just at a glorious point in rugby where (other than Wales NZ) any game between the top 5-6 is a 50:50. That should make for some interesting tournaments

Buggaluggs wrote:I think we're just at a glorious point in rugby where (other than Wales NZ) any game between the top 5-6 is a 50:50. That should make for some interesting tournaments

I think we might have been more competitive if we had been able to put out a first choice team against the Blacks.

In the front row we had third choice LH, second choice TH and so it went on through the 23.

Oops! Sorry forgot this is the English board.

p/d wrote:Starting Marler, Kruis, Wilson and Spencer would have made a difference.

Maybe, also not playing SA after having to beat Oz and Nz would have helped

Digby wrote:

p/d wrote:Starting Marler, Kruis, Wilson and Spencer would have made a difference.

Maybe, also not playing SA after having to beat Oz and Nz would have helped

Fucking cry baby!

Buggaluggs wrote:

Digby wrote:

p/d wrote:Starting Marler, Kruis, Wilson and Spencer would have made a difference.

Maybe, also not playing SA after having to beat Oz and Nz would have helped

Fucking cry baby!

Indeed. Hardly a mountain to climb v a poor Oz side.

p/d wrote:

Buggaluggs wrote:

Digby wrote:
Maybe, also not playing SA after having to beat Oz and Nz would have helped

Fucking cry baby!

Indeed. Hardly a mountain to climb v a poor Oz side.

Simply a massive physical effort against Oz to hold that attack and then again against Nz, SA had it easy against Japan and Wales, Wales could have been physical but merely joined SA in kicking the ball in the air, I've seen more physical games of balloon tennis

Steady. Y'all did get a week off that the Bok didn't.

I've no idea how many SA players featured on repeat basis in their group games, we might not be miles apart on minutes, I've no idea, but we did have much more physical games in the quarters and semis, against which we had an extra day to recover. I would say the fixtures are what they are, and we simply didn't deal with it, and we've got to take that on the chin.

Buggaluggs wrote:Steady. Y'all did get a week off that the Bok didn't.

And clearly that was what cost us the final - we were robbed of the match fitness and chance to test combinations that the Bokke got against Italy. #devalued #moralvictory

Puja

Puja wrote:

Buggaluggs wrote:Steady. Y'all did get a week off that the Bok didn't.

And clearly that was what cost us the final - we were robbed of the match fitness and chance to test combinations that the Bokke got against Italy. #devalued #moralvictory

Puja

No question about it. Moral victory, all the way.

Buggaluggs wrote:

Puja wrote:

Buggaluggs wrote:Steady. Y'all did get a week off that the Bok didn't.

And clearly that was what cost us the final - we were robbed of the match fitness and chance to test combinations that the Bokke got against Italy. #devalued #moralvictory

Puja

No question about it. Moral victory, all the way.

It was a moral victory from the moment we agreed to let the rest of the world play us. It’s the rugby version of the Royal garden party.

Digby wrote:

p/d wrote:

Buggaluggs wrote:
Fucking cry baby!

Indeed. Hardly a mountain to climb v a poor Oz side.

Simply a massive physical effort against Oz to hold that attack and then again against Nz, SA had it easy against Japan and Wales, Wales could have been physical but merely joined SA in kicking the ball in the air, I've seen more physical games of balloon tennis

After one of the easiest groups in World Cup history, two easy games, an Argentinian team that self destructed and a cancelled game against France and your moaning about being knackered. With a bonus week off I’m not sure you can use that excuse.

You lost today because your power game got taken away from you and when under pressure many of your players did stupid things.

This has happened before on a few occasions. If your coach needs to develop something, it’s your ability to react to pressure.

Sandydragon wrote:

Digby wrote:

p/d wrote:
Indeed. Hardly a mountain to climb v a poor Oz side.

Simply a massive physical effort against Oz to hold that attack and then again against Nz, SA had it easy against Japan and Wales, Wales could have been physical but merely joined SA in kicking the ball in the air, I've seen more physical games of balloon tennis

After one of the easiest groups in World Cup history, two easy games, an Argentinian team that self destructed and a cancelled game against France and your moaning about being knackered. With a bonus week off I’m not sure you can use that excuse.

You lost today because your power game got taken away from you and when under pressure many of your players did stupid things.

This has happened before on a few occasions. If your coach needs to develop something, it’s your ability to react to pressure.

I always thought SA were a bad match up for us as we haven't tended to do well when not the dominant physical team, and I don't bemoan the fixture list we had to reach the final, nonetheless to go Oz, NZ and then SA on 3 weekends is a big ask, especially when, as before, SA didn't have that physical a run in the knock out stages. But it was on us to have a place to address such concerns, and we didn't, so we lost, and actually we lost well, losing being the only thing we did well today

Wales might have pushed SA physically, but the game of to you to me kick tennis reduced the number of collisions in marked fashion, and Ireland and France who might have pushed SA physically didn't even get that far.

The big three (Aus, NZ, RSA). To beat them three on the trot - that's double tough. I doubt 2003 England could even do that. But, It's nice that you're disappointed and not resigned.

They did it in 2002, sort of, NZ weren't a full strength and SA had a player sent off, and it was at Twickers

The below by Bismarck du Plessis puts everything else about the game into perspective:

Personal stories highlight worth of Rugby World Cup triumph to South Africa

bismarck du plessis


Fifteen years ago, on another November day, Tendai Mtawarira turned up in Durban at the Sharks training ground. I would come to know this man as ‘Beast’. He was 19 then and as far as I could see all his possessions were in a small kit bag. His boots were worn and torn.

For his first two years he walked to training. Then he got himself a bike. For someone who has to walk to work, a bike is a massive upgrade. We trained all day in those days, seeing rugby as our chance to take us beyond where we’d come from. I can still smell the perspiration, Durban is nearly always hot.

When I was a boy on the family farm in Bethlehem, Seun was my best friend. He was the son of one of the farm workers and when he got older and interested in rugby, Beast was the player he loved.

Beast is a gentle and caring man, a big hearted warrior. Who can forget that first test against the Lions in 2009. Phil Vickery, a World Cup winner with England, being pushed into the air? Not many ever did that to Phil. I can explain why it happened. Beast’s family had come from Zimbabwe to watch him play for the first time and they arrived with a special present — a girl he never met before.

Kuziva is now his wife and knowing she was in the crowd that day, he just had to put on a show. That’s where I think the power came from.


What he delivered over 45 minutes yesterday matched that performance against the Lions. Beast was my man of the match, closely followed by Makazole Mapimpi. Makazole is the only surviving member of his family. To lose your mother, sister and brother before you are 30 and find yourself alone in the world, that’s not easy. He caught the high balls against Elliot Daly, scored our first try ever in a World Cup final and was incredible. Who will he celebrate with? He will celebrate with his Springbok family. It gives me goosebumps just thinking about it.

Then there is Siya Kolisi. The South Africa captain comes froma township called Zwide. When my teammates at Montpellier complain I tell them to come with me to Africa and into Zwide or any other township, then they will never complain again.

Kolisi’s mother was 16 when he was born. He was raised by his grandmother but that is normal in African culture as young kids can perform domestic tasks for the elderly. It was not until he was a young man that he got to know his father. Other young men might have been wary of letting an absentee father back into their lives. That is not who Kolisi is.

Yesterday his dad, making his first trip outside South Africa, was there to embrace him. Siya said his dad didn’t know what to say but that he wanted to speak and thank the other players in the team.

I mention these three not just because of their starring roles in the final but to give context to what has been achieved. It wasn’t easy for these players to come through. They’ve done it against the odds.

It’s impossible to discuss this victory without remembering Nelson Mandela, 27 years in prison and afterwards not wanting revenge on those who wronged him. He was the man who brought people together, offered a vision of what South Africa could be. There is something of Mandela in Siya Kolisi; the same humility, the same love of South Africa. As Mandela once did, Kolisi gives us hope that things can get better for the country.

Yesterday’s outstanding performance set me thinking about how influential coach Rassie Erasmus’s season and a half with Munster had been in shaping him. That was a time when Irish rugby — at club and international level — was on the rise and Rassie immersed himself in that and learned from it.

He returned to South Africa a better coach. He needed to be because the Springboks had fallen on hard times. As a Bok that cut me deep.

Bringing overseas players back into the fold was an important step. Frans Steyn could not get into our match-day 23 at Montpellier for the final three months of last season but Rassie knew what he could do. As he left Montpellier to link up with the Springbok squad, I thought of how easily I would swap places with him. South Africa’s strategy of packing the bench with six forwards wouldn’t have worked if they didn’t have one back versatile enough to cover every position beyond scrum-half. That’s what Frans — a World Cup winner for the second time — gave them and I’m not sure he’s been given enough credit for that.

It’s hard for people who haven’t lived there to understand what this victory will mean to South Africa. It is a country where billions of rand has been mismanaged and millions of lives mismanaged too. Have you ever gone to bed not having eaten for two days? Sadly that is common where I come from. I hope that Siya Kolisi’s face on all the TVs and newspapers around the world and inside South Africa can give hope to those who need it. I know Siya watched the 2007 final in a shebeen in Zwide. Chances are he wouldn’t have eaten that day.

Rich white boy feels sorry for starving blacks, it's inspiring stuff to see how much SA has changed

Sandydragon wrote:[
After one of the easiest groups in World Cup history, two easy games, an Argentinian team that self destructed and a cancelled game against France and your moaning about being knackered. With a bonus week off I’m not sure you can use that excuse.

You lost today because your power game got taken away from you and when under pressure many of your players did stupid things.

This has happened before on a few occasions. If your coach needs to develop something, it’s your ability to react to pressure.

Sorry are you saying having 3 Tier 1 sides in the same group is easier than only having 2? Can't quite get the logic of that!