nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Rugby World Cup Final 2019 Eng vs S Africa

ednwireland

here it is let's go

Clive Woodward on ITV commentary we've all been here (well brian o'Driscoll hasn't but let's not mention that )

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

There should be active pushes into the eastern European and African communities, TBH.

Ash.J.Williams

Faugheen wrote: »

They’re led by arrogance and their biggest player shouldn’t be playing international rugby because of his backwards views.

Not to mention Joe Marler who was so horrified by Folau’s comments but clearly doesn’t give a **** about Vunipola playing alongside him.

Kyle Sinckler one of the most arrogant players in the game.

Maro Itoje one of the biggest cheats.

So yes. Plenty to dislike about them.

I don’t take my morals from rugby players therefore I don’t believe any of them should be excluded for their views

sydthebeat

Naggdefy wrote: »

I know what you mean. I suppose coming from outside the Dublin schools framework in Leinster.

Yes an increase in the level of clubs but that eventually probably will mean taking players from other sports to increase rugby playing numbers.

Any player from u13 upwards in gaa that's at county level is pretty much training all year round. Players as young as that are simply being told its gaa or nothing.

Even some club gaa teams are carrying on "winter training" for underage teams which removes them from availability in rugby

A lot of senior teams in the junior leagues are finding it very difficult to continue to field due to the dearth of gaa players that used to come across and play from the winter months. There is a very real and open threat from gaa management that players won't get picked for parish, Town, and most certainly county, if players play rugby. Those years are well behind us at this stage.

is_that_so

tototoe wrote: »

This. Wrapping players up in bubble wrap and managing their playing minutes to the extent that has gone on recently is definitely part of the issue,. Sexton a case in point. Hes only our best player if hes actually on the field.

This nonsense of not risking players against lower ranked teams is also horse manure. If players are that fragile, then move on and find someone else who isnt made of glass to play routinely. The approach we have taken recently with some players does absolutely nothing for consistency in a team.

It's not really fragility but a player can be put out of commission with the most innocuous of challenges. While the time management may be extreme, clubs are also managing player health, the development of other players and their overall squad. No amount of training time can compete with match minutes.

Henry Ford III

gooch2k9 wrote: »

Sinckler pulls the medal off straight away!

Lack of respect.

Probably still a bit woozy. In fairness he was knocked out hook line and Sinckler.

twinytwo

Squidgy Black wrote: »

None of what you've quoted is 'rubbish' though. Some people really don't like the brand of rugby that South Africa play (and arguably to an extent that Ireland do to), compared to New Zealand or even England in the semi.

The Wales game was a disaster for most fans to watch, because it was just sheer box kicking and rucking. Neutral fans generally don't want to watch that kind of contest.

Anyone that uses the term "brand of rugby" should be banned from here.

Naggdefy

sydthebeat wrote: »

Any player from u13 upwards in gaa that's at county level is pretty much training all year round. Players as young as that are simply being told its gaa or nothing.

Even some club gaa teams are carrying on "winter training" for underage teams which removes them from availability in rugby

A lot of senior teams in the junior leagues are finding it very difficult to continue to field due to the dearth of gaa players that used to come across and play from the winter months. There is a very real and open threat from gaa management that players won't get picked for parish, Town, and most certainly county, if players play rugby. Those years are well behind us at this stage.

Not in my experience.

sydthebeat

Naggdefy wrote: »

WNot in my experience.

Certainly is in mine.

I know plenty of youths players who stopped playing rugby the moment they were making County panels, and the above is the off the record reason given.

I also know that clubs are running winter training programmes for youths age grades at times that directly preclude them from playing rugby.

There isn't a cooperative relationship any more like used to exist say 20-30 years ago. It's very much combative now, as all sports are struggling for numbers against the trend of rising obesity, passive lifestyles etc.

[Deleted User]

This worth watching, have time this afternoon but highlights suggest a poor enough fare.

Squidgy Black

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This worth watching, have time this afternoon but highlights suggest a poor enough fare.

Watch the last 30 minutes maybe

irishbucsfan

sydthebeat wrote: »

Certainly is in mine.

I know plenty of youths players who stopped playing rugby the moment they were making County panels, and the above is the off the record reason given.

I also know that clubs are running winter training programmes for youths age grades at times that directly preclude them from playing rugby.

There isn't a cooperative relationship any more like used to exist say 20-30 years ago. It's very much combative now, as all sports are struggling for numbers against the trend of rising obesity, passive lifestyles etc.

The standards are much higher now as well. There's a much bigger barrier to entry to get involved at a club who are competitive at u16/u18 and there's also then a much bigger commitment involved. We're not a dependent on lads showing up who never train but would walk out onto the pitch as the best player (which was pretty common when I was underage!)

It's a good thing imo, it's a side-effect of the higher standards of rugby at junior and underage level in the country imo. We have a very good relationship with a couple of local GAA clubs and we'd go along and support them in the championship.

OldRio

Deleted User wrote: »

This worth watching, have time this afternoon but highlights suggest a poor enough fare.

IMHO It was a good game. Great play by the Bok forwards. Proper rugby.

[Deleted User]

Deleted User wrote: »

This worth watching, have time this afternoon but highlights suggest a poor enough fare.

I thought that it was a great game, closed out in the last 20 alright.

Saying that it was a great game to watch, while still in the balance.
The tries were the highlights and other than that it was just 2 very good teams going at it.

Clegg

I've seen some criticism of England for their conduct at the medal presentation. Personally, I don't think their players taking off their runners up medals, or in some cases refusing to have them put around their neck, is in any way disrespectful to the winners or the tournament itself. A lot of these guys, Itoje, Vunipola etc are hugely competitive and it's been drilled into them to win. Anything less isn't acceptable.

It's all about psychology afaik. Don't allow yourself to get comfortable with the loss. Pretty sure half of Leinsters players took off their Champions Cup runners up medals as soon as they got them.

TheCitizen

Clegg wrote: »

I've seen some criticism of England for their conduct at the medal presentation. Personally, I don't think their players taking off their runners up medals, or in some cases refusing to have them put around their neck, is in any way disrespectful to the winners or the tournament itself. A lot of these guys, Itoje, Vunipola etc are hugely competitive and it's been drilled into them to win. Anything less isn't acceptable.

It's all about psychology afaik. Don't allow yourself to get comfortable with the loss. Pretty sure half of Leinsters players took off their Champions Cup runners up medals as soon as they got them.

Pretty sure? Did they or not, pretty sure is neither here nor there.

England routinely are bad losers and even worse winners, at least we were spared that. Thanks South Africa.

RugbyLover123

TheCitizen wrote: »

Pretty sure? Did they or not, pretty sure is neither here nor there.

England routinely are bad losers and even worse winners, at least we were spared that. Thanks South Africa.

Ah stop trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. They’re perfectly entitled to do what they want with the medal. They just lost a WC final, if they don’t want to put on them that’s completely fine and I can see where they are coming from.

And I’d actually challenge your point on the English being bad losers, this time around anyway. Anything I’ve seen or heard has been gracious in defeat.

TheCitizen

RugbyLover123 wrote: »

Ah stop trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. They’re perfectly entitled to do what they want with the medal. They just lost a WC final, if they don’t want to put on them that’s completely fine and I can see where they are coming from.

Sweep Sweep, nothing to see here eh:pac:

RugbyLover123 wrote: »

And I’d actually challenge your point on the English being bad losers, this time around anyway. Anything I’ve seen or heard has been gracious in defeat.

Challenge all you like I disagree and they're even worse when they win. I'm delighted they didn't win for that reason.

nacho libre

walshb wrote: »

Personally I think the Aussies of 1991 were the strongest team of all the world cups, at that time..they were so strong in 1991..

I think New Zealand back in 1987 with the likes of Jones, Brooke, Shelford, Fitzpatrick, and Kirwan, were...

nacho libre

TheCitizen wrote: »

I think that' a bit unfair. Our team peaked in 2018. We don't have the resources to maintain that level for long periods. The timing didn't work in our favour but we were very impressive with that Grand Slam in 2018 and the wins over Australia and New Zealand. We beat south Africa 19 points to 3 in Lansdowne road in November 2017.

Maybe a tad harsh, as in the past we would have lost those games regardless, but i still think the South African side that day was not a patch on the South African side we saw yesterday. We lose to the top teams if they play at their best

pickarooney

Clegg wrote: »

Best stat about SA winning the World Cup is Francois Steyn becoming a double World Cup winner. How is he just 32? He won his first in 2007 when he was 20. A bloody baby!

And he beat an England squad featuring Owen Farrell's father.

fryup

TheCitizen wrote: »

Pretty sure? Did they or not, pretty sure is neither here nor there.

England routinely are bad losers and even worse winners, at least we were spared that. Thanks South Africa.

give over with your anti-english nonsense..

this pic was taken after the match, the actions of a sore loser?

TELEMMGLPICT000214906033_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqMG9jYnib85FJIfCc-bQYcVmMjgcHY9JCZjNakWUpMcc.jpeg?imwidth=450

TELEMMGLPICT000214906033_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqMG9jYnib85FJIfCc-bQYcVmMjgcHY9JCZjNakWUpMcc.jpeg?imwidth=450

Bridge93

So the last and only side to beat New Zealand in a World Cup game and then win a knockout game the following week is Australia in 1991? The mental, physical and emotional drain of doing it really must be something:

France 99, 07
England 19
Australia 03 have all beaten them in a semi or quarter and failed to win the next game I think? South Africa obviously didn’t have to play again in 95

jr86

Bridge93 wrote: »

So the last and only side to beat New Zealand in a World Cup game and then win a knockout game the following week is Australia in 1991? The mental, physical and emotional drain of doing it really must be something:

France 99, 07
England 19
Australia 03 have all beaten them in a semi or quarter and failed to win the next game I think? South Africa obviously didn’t have to play again in 95

As far as I recall France in 99/07 and obviously England in 19 were not just beaten but comprehensively beaten in their next matches after the ABs

Australia obviously pushed England all the way in 03, but they were at home

hahashake

Bridge93 wrote: »

So the last and only side to beat New Zealand in a World Cup game and then win a knockout game the following week is Australia in 1991? The mental, physical and emotional drain of doing it really must be something:

France 99, 07
England 19
Australia 03 have all beaten them in a semi or quarter and failed to win the next game I think? South Africa obviously didn’t have to play again in 95

I reckon backing up big performances is much harder than us laymen realise, physically and emotionally.

Gatland's and others comments were dismissed by some as gamesmanship or even bitterness but it's pretty clear from results that they are right.

TheCitizen

fryup wrote: »

give over with your anti-english nonsense..

this pic was taken after the match, the actions of a sore loser?

Of course they shook hands at the end why wouldn't they.

When the English win though they're unbearable, that's a fact. They were unbearable when they beat New Zealand, their press crowned them World Champions totally disrespecting Wales and South Africa before they even played their semi final.

If you make a point about that on here (an Irish rugby forum) though, you get this "anti English" vibe thing, what's that about exactly?

This was said in the English press after the Semi Final;

"Can England play that well again? Even if not, then even at 70% that could be enough to beat either Wales or South Africa."

It was printed in The Guardian just after the win over New Zealand. I think the article has been removed since but it was said in print.

Don't like the truth? Suck it up. Quit your sycophantic pro-English gibberish.

Yeah_Right

TheCitizen wrote: »

This was said in the English press after the Semi Final;

"Can England play that well again? Even if not, then even at 70% that could be enough to beat either Wales or South Africa."

It was printed in The Guardian just after the win over New Zealand. I think the article has been removed since but it was said in print.

Don't like the truth? Suck it up. Quit your sycophantic pro-English gibberish.

That is unbelievable!! I am shocked :eek: I can't believe a pundit/columnist would ever say such a thing. It is unheard of. It would certainly never, ever happen in any other country. I can't think of a single occasion where an Irish, Welsh, NZ or Australian rugby pundit has uttered something as ridiculous as that :rolleyes:

fryup

TheCitizen wrote: »

Of course they shook hands at the end why wouldn't they.

but Tom Currie didn't have to, but he graciously did.. hardly the behaviour of a sore loser now is it

TheCitizen wrote: »

When the English win though they're unbearable, that's a fact. They were unbearable when they beat New Zealand, their press crowned them World Champions totally disrespecting Wales and South Africa before they even played their semi final.

and are we any better?? we always talk up the irish team before every WC with talk of our "first ever semi's" dismissing who we meet in the pool stages...but Japan put paid to that this time around

TheCitizen

Yeah_Right wrote: »

That is unbelievable!! I am shocked :eek: I can't believe a pundit/columnist would ever say such a thing. It is unheard of. It would certainly never, ever happen in any other country. I can't think of a single occasion where an Irish, Welsh, NZ or Australian rugby pundit has uttered something as ridiculous as that :rolleyes:

It's not unbelievable at all, that's the way the English routinely go on. I doubt very much if an Ireland team beat NZ in a semi final that you'd have anyone foolish enough to make a comment like that re potential Final opponents.

You're trying way too hard mate.

TheCitizen

fryup wrote: »

but Tom Currie didn't have to, but he graciously did.. hardly the behaviour of a sore loser now is it

At the end of a game everyone (or most everyone) shakes hands

fryup wrote: »

and are we any better?? we always talk up the irish team before every WC with talk of our "first ever semi's" dismissing who we meet in the pool stages...but Japan put paid to that this time around

We're never as bad as the English like that, don't be ridiculous.

Yeah_Right

TheCitizen wrote: »

It's not unbelievable at all, that's the way the English routinely go on. I doubt very much if an Ireland team beat NZ in a semi final that you'd have anyone foolish enough to make a comment like that re potential Final opponents.

You're trying way too hard mate.

I am guessing that you didn't read any Irish newspapers or websites in the year or 2 before the RWC. And that you didn't listen to any Irish rugby pundits or watch any Irish rugby shows. There were numerous occasions where the Irish team was talked up as potential world champions. Before the QF, Heaslip said that he wouldn't take any of the AB players over their Irish counterparts. I think BOD said something similar before the English match in the 6N this year.