Springbok Nadir

nehe milner skudder

is this the worst springbok team since game turned professional?

Seems badly coached , poorly selected and lacking big personalities . Alleged positive discrimination with a view to a 50 percent black quota by 2019.

Rudderless at 9 and 10.
Back row not being picked on form and outside backs devoid of ideas .

A horrible injury to pollard hasn't helped , and the losses of matfield, Botha, the du plessis brothers burger and du preez makes them look easily bullied.

Combrinck looks game to be fair.


I think they will finish bottom of the rugby championship , be white washed by NZ and AUS and lose at least one to Argentina.

They will also lose to England in November at HQ.


Is springbok rugby in a crisis ?

Digifriendly

Wouldn't quite write them off yet. Lets wait for Saturday to see what they do but I do tend to agree they look a bit rudderless. You're absolutely right re their forwards as Ireland pack has more than stood up to them in both tests - I think playing at altitude cost Ireland the test last weekend.
The quota system I entirely disagree with - you pick the 23 best players eligible for your country based on the merit of their rugby ability not their colour. There are enough talented black/coloured players in SA at present to ensure a reasonable sprinkling through the squad.
As regards the RC they'll have to step up a few gears if they're going to trouble NZ and Australia who are both well coached.
Noticeable that their teams in Super rugby have generally failed to deliver this season especially away from home.

Shefwedfan

nehe milner skudder wrote: »

is this the worst springbok team since game turned professional?

Seems badly coached , poorly selected and lacking big personalities . Alleged positive discrimination with a view to a 50 percent black quota by 2019.

Rudderless at 9 and 10.
Back row not being picked on form and outside backs devoid of ideas .

A horrible injury to pollard hasn't helped , and the losses of matfield, Botha, the du plessis brothers burger and du preez makes them look easily bullied.

Combrinck looks game to be fair.


I think they will finish bottom of the rugby championship , be white washed by NZ and AUS and lose at least one to Argentina.

They will also lose to England in November at HQ.


Is springbok rugby in a crisis ?

One loss to Ireland and suddenly this is the worst team in history?

Are Ireland really that bad?

SA have lost some serious players and some of there most experienced players. Have a full management team change. Lost there 10 after 20 mins of first match so that threw out a lot of there preparation for these match's. What would happen if we lost Jackson after 20 mins? all the plays they had practised would have to be changed as Madigan is a different type of player.

I actually thought there 10, Jantjies, in the second half started to play well. Probably because his team was on the front foot.

In the records books they have won 1 lost 1. Not that bad really

I think you would better off starting a thread on Australia. They have the same management team etc since World cup. No major player retiring and they look a shambles.

Dog Botherer

Shefwedfan wrote: »

I think you would better off starting a thread on Australia. They have the same management team etc since World cup. No major player retiring and they look a shambles.

Giteau and Ashley-Cooper are massive losses for them, they were the backbone of the Oz backline and it shows.

nehe milner skudder

Dog Botherer wrote: »

Giteau and Ashley-Cooper are massive losses for them, they were the backbone of the Oz backline and it shows.

Ben Robinson also. Sad retirement due to protecting his remaining good eye.

pickarooney

Springbok Nadir sounds like a Moroccan version of Crocodile Dundee.

frostyjacks

If they picked players based on merit rather than skin colour, they would be in a much better place. Politicians shouldn't be getting involved in sport.

Digifriendly

frostyjacks wrote: »

If they picked players based on merit rather than skin colour, they would be in a much better place. Politicians shouldn't be getting involved in sport.

i wholeheartedly agree. Imagine if e.g. England adopted quota for white players then possibly no Vunipolas or Watson.

RedemptionZ

The quota system, like any other quota system is inherently discriminative. Despite any attempts to manipulate its intentions with emotive language as has been seen here in Ireland with gender quotas, it is discriminating against another group, no matter how you like to paint it. This will undoubtably come back to haunt South Africa and will probably cause ripples within the white population living there as they are overlooked and begin to feel like second class citizens(when have we seen that before?) Black South Africans deserve the same chance that any white South African has. They don't deserve more of a chance. Pick by merit not by race. People here are saying 'only one loss they're fine' but this will have a severe detrimental effect on South Africa if the 50% by 2019 rule is enforced.

errlloyd

I was gonna write some nice well constructed and insightful response.

But I can't be arsed. Quotas work. Rugby selectors in South Africa are still a little bit racist, and voters in Ireland are still a little bit sexist, and pretty much every major academic study by every major economic, social and political research organization or university shows quotas work.

nehe milner skudder

errlloyd wrote: »

I was gonna write some nice well constructed and insightful response.

But I can't be arsed. Quotas work. Rugby selectors in South Africa are still a little bit racist, and voters in Ireland are still a little bit sexist, and pretty much every major academic study by every major economic, social and political research organization or university shows quotas work.

I wouldn't have mapoe, kolisi, mvovo or pietersen in the team on form . I just don't get how quotas work in sport. It's should be a meritocracy

molloyjh

errlloyd wrote: »

I was gonna write some nice well constructed and insightful response.

But I can't be arsed. Quotas work. Rugby selectors in South Africa are still a little bit racist, and voters in Ireland are still a little bit sexist, and pretty much every major academic study by every major economic, social and political research organization or university shows quotas work.

I used to be very wary about quotas myself as I thought that they had real potential to encourage discrimination as much as anything. "Ah look at so and so, only got the job cos they're black/a woman/whatever".

Had a very detailed and interesting conversation with a couple of solicitors on it though and they convinced me of the logic of the thing. It essentially normalises the use of the relevant minority. And while some people (particularly younger generations) aren't as affected by the bigotry, others (particularly older generations) tend to be stuck in their ways and harder to change. By making the minority a regular part of things (and making them human faces they have to deal with) people become less and less inclined to have issues with them.

It's not a magic fix that removes bigotry at the flick of a switch, but there's plenty of evidence to show that it works over time. And what's more important? The result of a few rugby matches or dealing with bigotry in a country with a very strong record of racial discrimination?

nehe milner skudder

molloyjh wrote: »

I used to be very wary about quotas myself as I thought that they had real potential to encourage discrimination as much as anything. "Ah look at so and so, only got the job cos they're black/a woman/whatever".

Had a very detailed and interesting conversation with a couple of solicitors on it though and they convinced me of the logic of the thing. It essentially normalises the use of the relevant minority. And while some people (particularly younger generations) aren't as affected by the bigotry, others (particularly older generations) tend to be stuck in their ways and harder to change. By making the minority a regular part of things (and making them human faces they have to deal with) people become less and less inclined to have issues with them.

It's not a magic fix that removes bigotry at the flick of a switch, but there's plenty of evidence to show that it works over time. And what's more important? The result of a few rugby matches or dealing with bigotry in a country with a very strong record of racial discrimination?

the results

nehe milner skudder

molloyjh wrote: »

I used to be very wary about quotas myself as I thought that they had real potential to encourage discrimination as much as anything. "Ah look at so and so, only got the job cos they're black/a woman/whatever".

Had a very detailed and interesting conversation with a couple of solicitors on it though and they convinced me of the logic of the thing. It essentially normalises the use of the relevant minority. And while some people (particularly younger generations) aren't as affected by the bigotry, others (particularly older generations) tend to be stuck in their ways and harder to change. By making the minority a regular part of things (and making them human faces they have to deal with) people become less and less inclined to have issues with them.

It's not a magic fix that removes bigotry at the flick of a switch, but there's plenty of evidence to show that it works over time. And what's more important? The result of a few rugby matches or dealing with bigotry in a country with a very strong record of racial discrimination?

it isn't a factory, a law firm or politics.

they have already been treated equally by having a super rugby contract. now you are in the shop window. if you are good enough you get to play for your country. its not an entitlement. its supposed to be the ultimate honour.

imagine if every province in ireland had to have x amount of players in squad to be fair and non discriminatory. its ridiculous. sport should be the ultimate meritocracy. its about human feats of endurance and athleticism. mental nous and skill.

you don't leave a guy at home who is faster , more talented and can kick a ball further than a guy who is in the team just because his skin pigment ticks a box.

i can't believe you are endorsing it.

errlloyd

nehe milner skudder wrote: »

I wouldn't have mapoe, kolisi, mvovo or pietersen in the team on form . I just don't get how quotas work in sport. It's should be a meritocracy

You're right in the short term. The idea behind the quota is that the National coach puts pressure on the super rugby coaches to select black players for games, so he puts pressure on the currie cup coaches to select more black people, so they begin to recruit harder from black schools they traditionally ignore.

Now imagine you're a black kid in a black school, suddenly your coach is telling you that you could be a springbok. You turn on the TV and you see people who look like you becoming springboks. The local currie cup teams sends more selectors to more of your games than ever before.

There was a PhD linked on here before on racism in South African rugby, that showed even the black kids who did make it onto pro teams at any level got significantly less than average gametime, and yes, white guys got significantly more. There were no exceptions.

In the short term you're right. South Africa are marginally less good becuase they're not selecting Combrinck (the rest are much of a muchness IMO). But in the long term South Africa has the chance to increase their playing pool to effectively 9 times larger than it was.

I'm terrified these quotas will succeed. If South Africa sorts out the race issue, and rugby becomes an all country sport, then they will be completely dominant very soon.

sydthebeat

Wasn't the main argument against the quota the fact that rugby, as a physical game, is suited towards those of a greater physical nature, and thus the emergence of white kids over black kids in South Africa? It's interesting to note that the position blacks have appeared mostly for the bok's is on the wing, where they have had the greater natural traits.

Zzippy

sydthebeat wrote: »

Wasn't the main argument against the quota the fact that rugby, as a physical game, is suited towards those of a greater physical nature, and thus the emergence of white kids over black kids in South Africa? It's interesting to note that the position blacks have appeared mostly for the bok's is on the wing, where they have had the greater natural traits.

Eh, last time I looked the Beast didn't exactly need much sunscreen...

irishbucsfan

Ah the ridiculousness of hard quotas at senior level has been pointed out enough times on here. It's a punitive measure against South African rugby from the current government more than anything constructive.

former total

It's also completely against the rules of rugby to impose quotas.

molloyjh

nehe milner skudder wrote: »

the results

The results of a few rugby games won't matter a damn in 10 years. The benefits of creating a truly equal environment for all potential rugby players in the entire country of SA will be of huge importance for the sport forevermore. Not just that, it will also be a pretty important social change. I know we all get into the games in a big way here, but they are just that at the end of the day. Games. They are not more important than social equality. That response is incredibly short-sighted and misses the bigger picture entirely.

nehe milner skudder wrote: »

it isn't a factory, a law firm or politics.

they have already been treated equally by having a super rugby contract. now you are in the shop window. if you are good enough you get to play for your country. its not an entitlement. its supposed to be the ultimate honour.

imagine if every province in ireland had to have x amount of players in squad to be fair and non discriminatory. its ridiculous. sport should be the ultimate meritocracy. its about human feats of endurance and athleticism. mental nous and skill.

you don't leave a guy at home who is faster , more talented and can kick a ball further than a guy who is in the team just because his skin pigment ticks a box.

i can't believe you are endorsing it.

You talk about Ireland like it's somehow comparable. It isn't. There is no history of discrimination in Ireland, let alone anything like the carry on in SA that existed within our lifetime.

Your logic that you don't leave a guy at home because of their skills is almost exactly the kind of thing that can and does happen because of their skin colour. It just happens at lower levels so it never comes to light at the higher levels. It's naivety in the extreme not to acknowledge that there is still a race issue in SA. If guys aren't getting the opportunities at lower levels (and AFAIK it's fairly well documented that they aren't) then can you really suggest that the more talented guys are not being left at home? Can you even know?

sydthebeat

Zzippy wrote: »

Eh, last time I looked the Beast didn't exactly need much sunscreen...

The exception that proves the rule?

pickarooney

Along with Nyakane, Rallepele, Mbonambi...

Fat Trev is out for Saturday. Coenie Oosthuizen in. Hard to see how Nyakane is the better player really.

RoundBox11

Zzippy wrote: »

Eh, last time I looked the Beast didn't exactly need much sunscreen...

Ah yeah but he's qualified by residency anyway sure

Bigbok

RoundBox11 wrote: »

Ah yeah but he's qualified by residency anyway sure

Beast came to craven week with his school team and got a contract with sharks academy.kitschoff still much better but lacks colour