England v Sth Africa EOYT 24 Nov 2012

[Beefcake]

Such an interesting game on many levels. Thoughts..

But kicking for 3points with 2mins yet 4points go sure must reflect an enormous lack of leadership @ the top of English rugby

 

[bfc]

And if you're going to do that, your kicker needs get up there and take it quickly. It was too indecisive, as well as being the wrong call.

 

[bfc]

I felt South Africa was too uptight and conservative at the end and it almost cost them.

 

[GaffaCHinO]

Robshaw fucks up again when the pressure is on. Why the hell with 2 mins on the clock when your 4 points down would you go for the pen instead of the corner. Under 12 stuff right there. And he the best captain they have? The dude has played 11 test and captain 10 wtf???

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk 2

 

[ChargerWA]

I just rewound to see the try. The pommy commentators were going on like a cruel twist of fate stole their rightful win. Bullcrap. Just a standard ricochet.

 

[Beefcake]

The refereeing in this instance was so biased, you'd think he too was vying for a spot on the Lions tour...lol

But seriously... laughing sideways as commentators rationalize Robshaw decision...

Perhaps there is a sore loser in all of us, but we wont tell ourselves that.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Contrary to the recently published opinion from the Journo who called the Wallabies as the "New England", England are the "New England".

As much as I like seeing Saffa's on the wrong side of the scoreboard, particularly against us, I think the ABE rule trumps that.
A one point victory to the Saffa's is probably a good outcome.

So things I liked about this game:
1. Soap Dodgers have now lost two in a row at home.
2. Soap Dodgers had enough pill to win both games.
3. Ashton did not score, again.
4. Soap Dodgers score was divisible by 3.
5. Soap Dodgers will miss out on a top 4 slot for RWC 2015. Hope that end up in the same pool as The Darkness.

Normal service has resumed.

 

[Beefcake]

The whole game lacked any shaped. And shame on the saffers who like mum, did not look like constructing anything with purpose that would result in a try.... it was a sizeable contest and not much more

And for all the potential mum has as a nation with superior playing numbers and resources (arguable) to match...

they select two unimaginative 10s... a key to unleashing some of the hidden talents (if any) in their squad

saffer coach could well be out of his depths... quick someone Peter...lol

 

[en_force_er]

Am I wrong in thinking that Robshaw's decision made perfect sense?

Reasoning:

• SA were SO dominant in the lineout; took plenty against the head and actually never lost one of their own throw all tour (insane!).
• England's kicking for touch had not been that solid, they would of much more likely to be plonked on the 15-20 mark than the 5.
• England's mauling has been poor for quite a while. Years in fact.
• They should have gotten the ball back from the kickoff and would have been in the position to win it from there. Forget that they could have had a scrum on half way because SA put it out on the full (but it was touched). Even though Botha should have let it go 9 times out of 10 he at least would have secured it and they would have gone from there.
• The game was not a free flowing affair, the odds were against them to score a try.

Thoughts?

 

[en_force_er]

Robshaw fucks up again when the pressure is on. Why the hell with 2 mins on the clock when your 4 points down would you go for the pen instead of the corner. Under 12 stuff right there. And he the best captain they have? The dude has played 11 test and captain 10 wtf???

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk 2

I want you to have a read of my post above. At very least it was a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

 

[GaffaCHinO]

I want you to have a read of my post above. At very least it was a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

All good points but Robshaw himself all but admitted he make the wrong choice 5 secs after he pointed for the posts when he asked if he could go for the line and Owens said no you have to have a shot.

If as you said he chose to take the shot because the lineout want working all that good to me is bad captaining as it shows the lack of faith he has in his team mates to get the job done. It’s almost like saying "our line outs shit lets go for the points”. I would have a guess that if the wobs were centre field 10 out and 4 point behind sharpe would back his scrum to get the job done even with the way it has been going.

 

[en_force_er]

All good points but Robshaw himself all but admitted he make the wrong choice 5 secs after he pointed for the posts when he asked if he could go for the line and Owens said no you have to have a shot.

If as you said he chose to take the shot because the lineout want working all that good to me is bad captaining as it shows the lack of faith he has in his team mates to get the job done. It’s almost like saying "our line outs shit lets go for the points”. I would have a guess that if the wobs were centre field 10 out and 4 point behind sharpe would back his scrum to get the job done even with the way it has been going.

Yeah, doubting your own decision is not good captaining but backing your team to get into a scoring position again (which they may well have if Botha didn't colossally fuck up) isn't showing a lack of faith, it's showing faith in the right areas.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

.../snip/.... if the wobs were centre field 10 out and 4 point behind sharpe would back his scrum to get the job done even with the way it has been going.

Unless Matt Dunning was still playing for them. Look out for a perfectly executed 45 m droppie. Another infamous day in the life of Mr Dunning.

 

[Lee Grant]

Am I wrong in thinking that Robshaw's decision made perfect sense?

• England's mauling has been poor for quite a while. Years in fact.

Maybe.

Their maul is not they same as that of Jonno's great Dodger team, is it? I was watching an English rugby show and they mentioned that England had not succeeded with a maul drive from a lineout since 2007.

That backs you up; however at the time I thought it was the wrong decision. There are more ways to score a try from a lineout close-in than driving over.

They had two minutes left and were 4 points down. They could have executed some phases - not one out from the ruck because that is just meat for the Boks - but two men out, with the likelihood of another penalty and a quick tap which they are good at.

The chances of that looked better than the chances of slotting the 3 points, then having only one possession - because everybody knew the Boks (or any other team in that situation) would dawdle - then getting back into goal kicking range and getting a penalty and slotting it.

The chances of going for the try with one two minute possession looked better to me at the time than jagging another penalty after the restart, with one possession, starting from 70 metres out.
,

 

[aeneas]

I thought the Saffers looked tired more than anything else. Seemed to me, just like the Argies, that it was one game too many. At least they held on to win it.

Hopefully the same thing doesn't happen to NZ or Aus this weekend.

 

[qwerty51]

So Saffers are tried after we've played 7 more Tests than them since meeting the RWC... what should we be.