Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

2023 RWC Buildup, Squads, Fixtures 'etc'

1300301302303305

Comments

  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 32,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    It hardly won them the world cup, they just got away with it. It was an insane risk.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭Augme



    They never would have won the World Cup without Handre Pollard.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,538 ✭✭✭ersatz


    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.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 32,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Handre Pollard was not a utility player playing in a specialised position.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭Augme



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



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,007 ✭✭✭TheRona


    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.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 13,942 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    I very much disagree with this assessment. If you compare them to France, NZ or ourselves, they were far less effective at generating scores against the other top teams. That speaks to a system that isn't as capable or innovative. Their defense is excellent, but so is ours and others. In the final, they didn't look like scoring a try at all imo, whereas NZ created multiple chances.

    They're peak Gatland Wales with better players.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 32,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    I assumed so as well. So why did you bring up Pollard?

    The Fourie situation was a ridiculous, ridiculous risk that happened to not cost them. Granted, I suspect they had a higher internal estimate of Fourie's ability to play hooker and it seemed to pay off.

    Things like having no scrum half cover on the bench are just stupid though. Particularly when the 7-1 split doesn't even do you much good.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭Augme



    Pollard was brought in as the replacement for the injured Malcolm Marx who SA's second hooker. That's the reason why the ended up with a utility player as a hioker, they felt having Pollard in the squad was more important than a specialist second hooker so they were willing to go with Fourie.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 32,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    I'm aware of the background.

    Travelling with only one fly-half and four scrum halves was an equally bizarre move.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭Augme



    Are you still confused as to why I mentioned Pollard?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,538 ✭✭✭ersatz


    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.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,819 ✭✭✭Dubinusa


    If Arendse had of held onto the ball, that try would have been spectacular.

    I reckon S.A play similar to England, when England were good, 4 years ago.

    Rassie is amazing. Not a fan of him but the results speak volumes.



  • Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 36,368 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    Barcelona rugby would be like Ireland in 2018. Very effective but utterly unwatchable for a neutral.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 32,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    I assume you mean they had to bring in Pollard for Marx and thus were forced to rely on Fourie.

    But it was all crap planning.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,384 ✭✭✭Jump_In_Jack


    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.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,538 ✭✭✭ersatz


    Not many will disagree with you, except that that sort of rugby wold kill off interest in the game because its always been part of rugby and here we are. Preferences are one thing, but 5 of 7 of SAs games in this tournament were fascinating, dramatic and exciting encounters and I can't imagine that many neutrals were turned away by it. They are capable of playing in different ways and did that throughout the tournament which is another reason to be impressed by them. Literally a different game plan for almost every opponent, or at least significant tactical adjustments. But the major point here is that a lot of posters seem to enjoy a particular brand of rugby and don't enjoy other kinds of rugby. It's people who sometimes like rugby, not really fans. 😁

    You raise Joe and that reminds me of something. With Joe we had a successful game plan but ran out of road once teams copped on how to counter it in the 2019 6N. With AF the mantra has been, 'everyone knows what Ireland are going to do, the problem is how to counter it'. I think we are in the same position again now as in 2019. Team now have a blueprint of how to play us provided by France, SA and NZ with NZ getting over the line this year and SA coming close but certainly showing the way.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 32,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Despite what Foster thinks, I can't imagine any neutral spectator, or indeed any curious interlopers, would find the NZ-Italy game more entertaining than a single one of SA's matches.

    One of the key points of sport is the drama, and that is what close matches bring in spades.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 32,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Ah here, we are nowhere near 2019. WWe got beaten out the gate multiple times but different teams in 2019. We lost one match to NZ by 4 points this year...



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,007 ✭✭✭TheRona


    That comment was taken completely out of context. Sure, he was saying that people like to see tries scored, but his main point was all the messing around in that game with waterboys on the pitch, players down for injuries, general time wasting.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,384 ✭✭✭Jump_In_Jack


    One thing about rugby, with the way the laws change from year to year there always seems to be innovations in game play.

    The 50:22 and the goal line drop out for example.

    If we had a situation where all teams came to the same conclusion that the most rewarding style was low risk predictable stuff, I think it would be a problem for the future of the sport.

    I don't think it will happen however, Ireland and New Zealand and formerly Japan have showed there is a way to play winning rugby with expansive passing movements and variety of attack. I honestly think Ireland are THE BEST team to watch since they've adopted Catt's attacking game plan in recent years. I'd dread the thought of going back to a game plan like trying to get an early score and then hold out with defence and simple pick and goes and garryowens for the rest of the match.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 32,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    That was part of his point, but I saw the interview - I'm not taking it out of context. The NZ-Italy game was a crap spectacle and talking about ball in play time being higher in it as if that's what people want more was silly.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,007 ✭✭✭TheRona


    Personally, I enjoyed the NZ-Italy game. I can appreciate some of the amazing skills that were on show. Everyone jumped on this whole thing about him saying one thing, when it was really part of a bigger point he was making.

    Yes, low scoring games can be exciting, but all the ridiculous time wasting needs to be stopped. Rugby should be a game where scoring tries is the main objective, and fitness should be a factor. A lot of South Africans genuinely believe they were the most exciting team at the World Cup. Just because they were involved in 4 close games that are by nature exciting, doesn't make them an exciting team.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 32,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Oh I think SA are an awful team to watch for the most part and the time-wasting drives me mad.

    I still think Foster is just a pretty bitter person and his inability to deal with how the game is played as opposed to how he wants it to be played is part of the reason for his lack of success.

    Post edited by Podge_irl on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,542 ✭✭✭Yeah_Right


    Agreed. I think Foster was out of his depth as an international head coach and it was only when other coaches were added last year that we saw improvements and changes in the ABs style. I don't think Foster knew how to have his team impose their style on good teams. I also don't think the ABs had a strong enough captain to get in the ref's ear about the slowing down of the game.

    The SA time wasting and water carriers annoy me as well. In couple of games you could hear the ref saying "water off" several times because they were running on for every break in play. Would love to see a ref just start penalizing that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,692 ✭✭✭swiwi_


    IMG_5357.jpeg

    Just for you Yeah_Right



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,465 ✭✭✭T-Maxx


    Well trying to headbutt Etzebeth's forearm is never going to end well.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,940 ✭✭✭RichieRich_89




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,293 ✭✭✭Jacovs


    I only see someone making fun of the referee, making it out that he is blind/cant see whats right infront of him. I dont see anyone making fun of blind people. Blind people cant see, they know that.


    In other news, Duane Vermeulen retired from test rugby, which was expected.

    And certain SA politicians taking a very positive thing and trying to make it very negative. This is why we cant have anything nice.



Advertisement
Advertisement