2023 RWC Buildup, Squads, Fixtures 'etc'

Sam Cane banned for 2 games on the back of the red card tackle.

Ya, I think so Jump_In_Jack. Red card for me as he always upright. As soon as you make direct contact there, you're asking for trouble.

What differentiated it from the Kolisi yellow, for example, is that Kolisi had a fairly clear attempt at hinging, which Cane didn't. For me, I think the refereeing team got both of those calls right.

Think you are. Although I didnt like that it happened in the final. And now his Japanese club is effectively getting punished, which I think is stupid. Ban him for 2 NZ games, the incident happened while playing for NZ.

Fair enough, but what makes me think not red is the force didn't particularly look that bad to me. I think if the force was bad the player would have needed a HIA. I'm normally very supportive of red cards for high tackles but I do have sympathy here as the change in direction probably surprised Cane, and he got caught not expecting it. He was high and made head contact, but I thought a yellow as the force wasn't dangerous enough to do harm. But as I said, I'm probably in a small minority.

This is people sticking their heads in the sand and pretending that what just happened didn't happen. They've won the last 2 world cups and if it was to be replayed again in 3 months they would likely at least get to the final, and win by less than a score. "Bringing value to the game" is in the eye of the beholder, for example taking a scrum off a mark to me was an excellent variation. You get a clearing kick further infield, you impose your will, take a break, reset your team, put doubt in the opposition and get to push your opponent back into their own half. SA were relentless in attacking their opponents line outs, while most other teams don't compete in their own 22, it ruined our game early on and destabilised the ABs. Their linespeed is second to none and again, forces mistakes. ABs zero handling errors against us, 8+ against SA. You may not enjoy seeing the ABs make mistakes but I enjoy teams who put a tactical squeeze on them to force errors. That is how you win! Their rotation was also exceptional. The equivalent of Pollard for Ireland might be Farrell leaving Connor Murray at home to begin with but then bringing him in and dropping JGP because his style didn't suit what we NEEDED to do. Irish teams would never do it...7/1 was theatre as much as tactics but it paid off. Most teams would start Kwagga but he is a monster coming off the bench. I never liked the bomb squad thing but the team has bought into there being no distinction between starters and subs. Hat tip to Rassie for building that culture.

I know, but I assume the poster was referring to Deon Fourie playing at hooker?

Who has their head in the sand? Just because they won doesn't mean they won because of the stunts they pulled.

Rush defence is neither here nor there. Many teams do it, SA execute it well. It does create mistakes, but it also allowed in 2 tries by NZ. NZ didn't allow any tries by SA. NZ's handling errors were a combination of the rush defence, the conditions, and trying to chase the game.

The scrum thing was a talking point, and it can exploit a weaker scrum and/or if your forwards are struggling for fitness. I doubt they would risk it against a strong scrum.

The Pollard thing was just theatre. I don't know one Saffa who didn't think he would be featuring at that World Cup.

Rush defense is not neither here nor there. NZ went in at half time and Schmidt (I assume) told them how to adjust to SAs tactics. SA had come out and played a game tailored to counter NZ, and it worked. They couldn't adjust on the fly, went behind and NEVER recovered. In the second half they adjusted their kicking game appropriate but then SA were in control and cruising, they relied on their defence and it worked. The theatre Rassie brings is part of his tactics, and winning 2 world cups in a row tells me he is doing something that other coaches and teams can't stay with. I haven't been a fan of his but the mentality of posters who just can't accept that he figured out how to beat everyone when it counted is unintelligible to me. the games were high stakes drama, we even had a score fest against France with lots of nice tries, and again excellent and appropriate tactics to beat them, like those 50/50 box kicks to trap France's defence.

Far less scores against top team do not matter if you win and prevent them from scoring. A system that is not innovative, what are you talking about, they just won back to back WCs! It's alright to prefer open running Rugby that classic French or NZ teams play and its thrilling when they win with it, but when that style loses to a territorial, possession, defensive system I can appreciate that rugby is dynamic and complex and there are more ways to play it than what is prettiest on they eye. That is why I like it. I do not get this kind of attitude that Barcelona rugby is somehow more valid than munster rugby. The important one is the one that wins on the day. If you don't approve there are other sports.

When rugby is played without risk it can be very boring. Joe Schmidt made Ireland incredibly boring to watch. Johan Van Graan made Munster almost impossible to watch. Whether they won or not didn’t change the spectacle for a good portion of spectators. When rugby is played with some invention it is the best sport to watch imho. If Munster or Ireland went back to playing those predictable boring approaches and won every match by a few points I’d still probably give up watching them. As much as I’d admire the dedication and hard work from the players I’d rather not watch it. Fair play if it’s winning rugby, unless it’s a good spectacle for a large proportion of spectators it would kill off the interest in the sport long term.