Bokke Tri Nation Squad/Camp

[PaarlBok]

At least you admit it's wrong, which is a rare perspective among saffer fans from what I've seen. They all seem to be taking the "RWC comes first" and "SUCKIT JON, WATCHA GONNA DO ABOUT IT??" view.

The fact is though that the tv rights deal they shook hands on specifically sought and received assurances they'd never again send an intentionally weakened side to a 3N. They agreed to to that, took the money, and have now gone back on their agreement, thereby showing that their word means shit. Not only is that something that will probably hurt the takings for their away matches -- it will probably hurt SANZAR in future negotiations.

And again it's worth pointing out that they took no such risk with their home games.

The same lot complaining about the top Bokke not on form in the S100. Myself think its important to give your form lot a change to try and get into the WC sqaud. TriNations is about winning your home games and try and bag some bonuspoints along the way. TV rights and kak my arse, this Bok team have a lot of S15 form players included and if they win you will probably sing a total other song.

 

[JJJ]

The same lot complaining about the top Bokke not on form in the S100. Myself think its important to give your form lot a change to try and get into the WC sqaud. TriNations is about winning your home games and try and bag some bonuspoints along the way. TV rights and kak my arse, this Bok team have a lot of S15 form players included and if they win you will probably sing a total other song.

Tell me the away leg features close to PdV's best side. That's what they promised they would send. That's what they signed on. This means that the 3N, CONTRACTUALLY, is not a place for experimental B sides, unlike any other test matches.

 

[Mank]

At least you admit it's wrong, which is a rare perspective among saffer fans from what I've seen.

You start from the premise that it is wrong and argue from there.

They all seem to be taking the "RWC comes first" and "SUCKIT JON, WATCHA GONNA DO ABOUT IT??" view.

The fact is though that the tv rights deal they shook hands on specifically sought and received assurances they'd never again send an intentionally weakened side to a 3N. They agreed to to that, took the money, and have now gone back on their agreement, thereby showing that their word means shit. Not only is that something that will probably hurt the takings for their away matches -- it will probably hurt SANZAR in future negotiations.

And again it's worth pointing out that they took no such risk with their home games.

The part that is wrong is what you've stated above, that they agreed to the deal in the first place. We should not be seeing this situation in a RWC year, it doesn't make sense when the rugby worlds biggest show piece is months away. SARU is filled with terrible businessmen, cannot compete at that level with you guys.

However a few points.

1) The injuries have been investigated and cleared. So basically anything said on the matter is speculation.

"South Africa’s announcement last week that 21 top players were injured and unable to tour prompted the Australian Rugby Union to seek assurances from southern hemisphere rugby body SANZAR that the injuries were legitimate. SANZAR said it was satisfied that the injury list was genuine, clearing the defending world champions to take a largely second-string group to Australia and New Zealand."

2) Virtually all the squad are capped Springboks. Many of them are arguably the form players, picked in super xv teams by overseas pundits. If they were good enough previously why not now?

3) It's RWC year. I don't like the perception that the RWC is all that counts, since it is now impacting the between years too. But since we are in this position, my preference in this year is to see every nation arrive with the strongest squad possible, so we get the best tournament possible.

I agree with you regarding going back on a deal, but see point 1.

 

[PaarlBok]

Vok every Aussie jump up and down and love this marathon S100 forced on us. SA have a unique contracting system where the national coach have no hold on national players. We saw the Stormers keep on picking Jean/Fourie while he had youngsters like JdJ and Sadie, the Brutes used Matfield/Bakkies while they have Kruger/vdMerwe, the Sharks had an all Bok frontrow and havent used the Bok captain. Anyone can see the franchises coaches havent did the national any vokken favours by rotating at S100 level, so he obvious have to give himself a change to win the accolade of modern day rugby, the WC by try and do repair work with his old age home. Bet you Deans will have to rotate and wont play his Red stars against Samoa. Thats the reason why I hate the WC tournament, the be all of modern day rugby. Get rid of it and change rugby to the days when test rugby was the accolade.

 

[PaarlBok]

Tell me the away leg features close to PdV's best side. That's what they promised they would send. That's what they signed on. This means that the 3N, CONTRACTUALLY, is not a place for experimental B sides, unlike any other test matches.

Sign se moer man, test rugby is test rugby and should always have the best side.

 

[JJJ]

Mank, it may be speculation, but I don't think anyone on the planet believes all those players are genuinely injured to the point where they wouldnt be playing in a non-RWC year. As for SANZAR proclaiming themselves satisfied that all the injuries are legit, I'm pretty sure that's them realizing there's nothing they can do about it and entering damage-control mode. Trying to preserve the perceived integrity of the brand, trying not to damage the SANZAR alliance itself, trying to avoid angry fans who paid for a springbok away ticket from demanding their money back. So we're back to a broken deal.

Even if the side puts 100 points on the ABs and Wallabies they've still defaulted. They didn't promise to send a bloody good team; they promised to send their best possible team.

 

[Mank]

JJJ, I agree with you for the most part. RWC final next week, most of those players would be on the field. However, it's not next week, the injuries are (most likely) genuine, and as PB says they played through them in the marathon S15. Now PapDiv wants to give them the best chance to recover for the big event this year.

I like the RWC, it's the tournament when everyone (except host) could be on even footing if some allowances were made, for eg. this current situation. However, I really don't like that it affects test rugby to the extent it currently does. Especially in non RWC years.

For me the more interesting part of the situation is the reactions by Australians. If I recall correctly the NZRU complained but it was the ARU that made the most noise last time (please correct if wrong). And from the reactions I've seen elsewhere on various blogs many fans are very angry about this, to a kind of personal level. When the NH have sent weak squads to the SH I did not see much fuss being made in SA. Certainly I just shrugged and thought if they wanted a flogging SA would be glad to oblige. Record books don't show "B" next to the side name. Why do you think it is that Australian fans react more so? Is that even true or just my imagination?

 

[JJJ]

For me the more interesting part of the situation is the reactions by Australians. If I recall correctly the NZRU complained but it was the ARU that made the most noise last time (please correct if wrong). And from the reactions I've seen elsewhere on various blogs many fans are very angry about this, to a kind of personal level. When the NH have sent weak squads to the SH I did not see much fuss being made in SA. Certainly I just shrugged and thought if they wanted a flogging SA would be glad to oblige. Record books don't show "B" next to the side name. Why do you think it is that Australian fans react more so? Is that even true or just my imagination?

It's probably true. I reckon the main reason is because the game is in such a parlous state financially in both oz and nz. Australia especially simply cannot afford their premier spectacle to be compromised if they want to compete with the other codes. SA doesn't have this problem, as weakened touring sides are unlikely to put them in the red. Plus, and I may be wrong in this perception, for the majority of Bok supporters the fact of winning greatly trumps the quality of the contest. So they'd much rather see their Springboks wallop a depleted and mismatched side than see them lose closely in a higher quality match. I've seen a number of different saffer fans at different times and different places say that they wouldn't mind seeing ARU and NZRU fold as it'd leave the Springboks the undisputed top side in the world.

 

[JJJ]

As for why the ARU make more noise than the NZRU, I think that's partly because their game is a bit safer than oz's, but mostly because they're content to let O'Neil play bad cop on their behalf.

 

[Mank]

It's probably true. I reckon the main reason is because the game is in such a parlous state financially in both oz and nz. Australia especially simply cannot afford their premier spectacle to be compromised if they want to compete with the other codes. SA doesn't have this problem, as weakened touring sides are unlikely to put them in the red. Plus, and I may be wrong in this perception, for the majority of Bok supporters the fact of winning greatly trumps the quality of the contest. So they'd much rather see their Springboks wallop a depleted and mismatched side than see them lose closely in a higher quality match. I've seen a number of different saffer fans at different times and different places say that they wouldn't mind seeing ARU and NZRU fold as it'd leave the Springboks the undisputed top side in the world.

Thanks, interesting stuff. I would guess you're correct about the Springbok fans, we certainly have a large proportion of dimwits (to be generous). I wonder to what extent we'd see similar feelings in other countries with a stable rugby base. I think NZ and SA at least have sent weakened touring sides to the NH. I recall some grumblings but not a massive reaction.

 

[PaarlBok]

Thanks, interesting stuff. I would guess you're correct about the Springbok fans, we certainly have a large proportion of dimwits (to be generous). I wonder to what extent we'd see similar feelings in other countries with a stable rugby base. I think NZ and SA at least have sent weakened touring sides to the NH. I recall some grumblings but not a massive reaction.

The Aussie have more then their fair share of arrogant twats to be honest.

This their team against Samoa:
Wallabies -15 Mark Gerrard, 14 James O’Connor, 13 Adam Ashley-Cooper, 12 Pat McCabe, 11 Digby Ioane, 10 Matt Giteau, 9 Nick Phipps, 8 Ben McCalman, 7 Matt Hodgson, 6 Rocky Elsom (c), 5 Nathan Sharpe, 4 Sitaleki Timani, 3 Ben Alexander, 2 Stephen Moore, 1 Sekope Kepu.
Subs: 16 James Hanson, 17 Dan Vickerman, 18 Scott Higginbotham, 19 Beau Robinson, 20 Will Genia, 21 Kurtley Beale, 22 TBC

B team and no respect shown to Samoa or test level rugby. These lot moan and groan about the SA teams show wipe their own floor before sweeping ours. You'll see more of these kind of B Wallabie teams and these moaner will disappear as soon as they see it make no sense not to look at player management. Deans will end with a burnt out sqaud when the WC starts if he dont follow suit. Elsom has been put in cotton wool the whole S100 season. They just do it behind the back like the Cartell with McAwe.

 

[JJJ]

B team and no respect shown to Samoa or test level rugby. These lot moan and groan about the SA teams show wipe their own floor before sweeping ours. You'll see more of these kind of B Wallabie teams and these moaner will disappear as soon as they see it make no sense not to look at player management. Deans will end with a burnt out sqaud when the WC starts if he dont follow suit. Elsom has been put in cotton wool the whole S100 season. They just do it behind the back like the Cartell with McAwe.

The key difference here is that the ARU is under no obligation to play their best side against Samoa. Experimenting is the main point of these sorts of minnow games. In fact as far as I know the 3N is the ONLY set of tests where all three boards have undertaken a legal obligation to provide their best possible sides.

 

[tigerland12]

The Aussie have more then their fair share of arrogant twats to be honest.

B team and no respect shown to Samoa or test level rugby. These lot moan and groan about the SA teams show wipe their own floor before sweeping ours. You'll see more of these kind of B Wallabie teams and these moaner will disappear as soon as they see it make no sense not to look at player management. Deans will end with a burnt out sqaud when the WC starts if he dont follow suit. Elsom has been put in cotton wool the whole S100 season. They just do it behind the back like the Cartell with McAwe.

Mate, the Reds just played an intense finals series, Robinson is injured, Polota-Nau is injured, Pocock has a mild injury (why risk him).
The only non-reds player being rested is Kurtley Beale.

 

[Blue]

I've seen a number of different saffer fans at different times and different places say that they wouldn't mind seeing ARU and NZRU fold as it'd leave the Springboks the undisputed top side in the world.

Jeez JJJ you seem very bitter about SA Rugby. Not sure why.

I am yet to meet an SA fan that wishes Aus and NZ Unions to go bankrupt. That's a bit far fetched don't you think? In fact it's a bit nutty to be frank.

Can we be so sure that a weakened team will result in smaller crowds? No. In fact, quite far from it.

Rugby spirits are quite high in Aus. I reckon it makes no difference, people will want to see the Wallabies regardless. And the World Cup down the line adds an extra dimension.

All a bit of an over reaction.

PS. I reckon most SA fans know that at least ten of those players on the list are not injured (the rest I reckon are for real) and are critical of them not being in the touring party.

In fact I reckon there are four or five on the list that are a blessing in disguise. Like Spies and Habana.

 

[PaarlBok]

The key difference here is that the ARU is under no obligation to play their best side against Samoa. Experimenting is the main point of these sorts of minnow games. In fact as far as I know the 3N is the ONLY set of tests where all three boards have undertaken a legal obligation to provide their best possible sides.

Yu obvious have no feel for test level rugby. All this point to the WC later to follow. Think there will be less people in the crowd now, Those wanted to see their S100 heroes like Genia and Cooper starting and will stay at home.

 

[JJJ]

Yu obvious have no feel for test level rugby. All this point to the WC later to follow. Think there will be less people in the crowd now, Those wanted to see their S100 heroes like Genia and Cooper starting and will stay at home.

PB, I admire your loyalty but you seem to be missing my point. My point being that SARU specifically promised they wouldnt conduct EXACTLY this kind of resting under EXACTLY these kinds of circumstances. They entered into a binding deal. They've now broken that deal and know it -- hence the "injuries" window dressing. They've broken faith with their broadcaster and broken faith with their partners. Maybe it won't affect gate-takings or tv viewing figures, but that's unlikely. Certainly SARU haven't taken that risk with their own gate-takings -- preferring to take it with those of its partners.

Do you really consider this honourable behaviour? How can they be trusted now?

As for the Samoan match, Samoa knew what sort of team they'd be facing. ARU hasn't misled or broken faith with them as far as I know. I don't own a "respecting test rugby" hobby horse. The ARU would've promised them a match and nothing more.

 

[Mank]

PB, I admire your loyalty but you seem to be missing my point. My point being that SARU specifically promised they wouldnt conduct EXACTLY this kind of resting under EXACTLY these kinds of circumstances. They entered into a binding deal. They've now broken that deal and know it -- hence the "injuries" window dressing. They've broken faith with their broadcaster and broken faith with their partners. Maybe it won't affect gate-takings or tv viewing figures, but that's unlikely. Certainly SARU haven't taken that risk with their own gate-takings -- preferring to take it with those of its partners.

Do you really consider this honourable behaviour? How can they be trusted now?

Yes, this seems to be the the crux of the issue for most upset Australian fans, or at least what they put forward as the issue. I think a lot of us understand this. As I said above, what's interesting to me is that in this professional / businesslike rugby world how personally fans take the issue. There seems to be a lot of anger around. I guess that's also understandable because people identify with their team and the management, perhaps personifying the (alleged) breach of contract.

Another thing is that, again if I recall correctly, fans were similarly upset in 2007. Though the difference is that there was no formal agreement in place at that time. Or was there?

 

[JJJ]

Mank I guess I take it personally because I gre up in WA, which is an AFL stronghold. I didn't even know there were 2 codes to "rugby" until I watched my first game at the age of 20 with kind people who took me in and freed me from the bondage of my ignorance. Now I live in Darwin where people are talking about league when they're talking about rugby. I want to see Union dominate the country. I watch AFL and NRL matched every now and then and can only shake my head sadly at all those wasted athletes.

So here is Aussie rugby: languishing in popularity and financially at damn near the bottom of the heap. Time and again we send our best teams north of the equator to play the best teams of the NH and fill their coffers. Time and again they send us crap back and expect us not to feel cheated. They protect their bottom line and fuck with ours. Now SARU is doing the same.

It's terrible for the sport in Australia, which is terrible for me. I reckon my quality of life would be hugely improved if I could frequently talk rugby with people who gave a fuck about it, but to do that I have to come here.

 

[Mank]

Again, interesting insights, thanks JJJ.

 

[PaarlBok]

Look like Brussouw is also doubtfull for the tour. He and Muller will have a fitness test on friday. Coenie Oosthuizen take part in the practising. Hope he'll get stuck in, really rate him.