Mank
Ted Thorn (20)
Not entirely, but you were wrong that it would favour the Boks.
RWC 2011 - Quarter final 3 : Springbokke v. Wallabies CLOSED
- Thread starter PaarlBok
- Start date
- Status
Not entirely, but you were wrong that it would favour the Boks.
Lee Grant
John Eales (66)
Lawrence didn't make Aus lose vs Ireland, however if Aus had won, then both SA and Aus might still be in the tournament!
I thought before the QF that I would prefer the Wobs to play the Boks rather than Wales, the way Wales were playing. The Boks were playing OK but we knew how to beat them and their style of rugby - though being able to do it was another matter.
That Wales team, I didn't know, because we hadn't played a good game against a good team since we beat the All Blacks in Brisbane at the end of August, and the team in red looked as good as any Wales teams since their great days and even better than their Slam team a few years ago. But we could find a way to beat the Boks, thought I.
The QF didn't conform to what I thought would happen. It was like watching something from the "Twilight Zone", you know: those stories where everything in the show is back to front; where, for example, people we consider beautiful or handsome are the outcast ugly ones and the rest of the actors are made to look repulsive by the makeup people.
In this Twilight Zone game the Boks tried to be what the weren't. We saw a team that had thrived on 10-man laager rugby, going away from their strengths and, with 76% territory stats, trying to score tries instead of points. For them it was madness, rugby madness. It was like the 1991 England team changing their tactics for the Final.
We couldn't believe our luck - as though we were watching Tendulkar playing a straight bat instead of flicking his wrists and dispatching leg-side balls to the boundary.
Now I am not glad we are playing the Kiwis instead of the French who we also know how to beat. Mind you, we have won 2 of the last 3 against the Blacks, and it should have been 3 out of 4 IMO but for, yes, an error in Sydney by a referee called Lawrence.
Swings and roundabouts; fans of all teams think they are dudded from time to time.
Swat
Chilla Wilson (44)
I believe the wallabies came first...
Lee Grant
John Eales (66)
From your remarks it seems that you want to equate every infringement.
Schalk has eye gouged before, against the Lions, so he no longer gets the benefit of the doubt; not from me. Even if we go along with you and say it was just a raking and not an eye gouging, you don't rake a fellows face in order to get the ball. You do it to make him fear for his eyesight so that he is distracted from what he is doing.
And if you want to add up a list of infringements add two more in that one incident, for Burger being on the ground when he raked/eye gouged and another for not going back to last feet when he released Pocock's face to do another. How Lawrence missed those other two things are as mysterious as the things you come up with.
And before the eye gouge/raking Pocock did nothing more or less than the admirable Brussouw would have done had he not been injured.
But that is not why I started this post. I digressed.
Many fair minded SAffers using this board have deplored the actions of Schalk and mentioned, correctly, that he doesn't need to do those things as he is otherwise a great player.
By reading your suggestion for a timeline of infractions I think that you and some other Saffers on other forums don't get what we Aussies think about some of the stuff individual Bok players have done: the eye gouging by Burger and the head butting by Botha.
We aren't angels and you could point our some stupid stuff that Cooper has done with McCaw, and some Butch James specials from the Wobs: shoulder charging then grabbing and sometimes missing the grab.
But eye gouging and head-butting? We won't cop that. If any Wallaby does that I hope he never wears the gold jersey again and I don't care what his name is.
.
Lee Grant
John Eales (66)
I know it's a bad example for the youngsters but I don't mind a punch up so long as there are no king hits from behind.
But that's just me I suppose, and my generation - the one before TV replays and the touchies talking to the refs on their radios.
Well before actually.
But that's just me I suppose, and my generation - the one before TV replays and the touchies talking to the refs on their radios.
Well before actually.
PaarlBok
Rod McCall (65)
Can we close this thread now, its getting tiredsome and go to
http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/forum/threads/9615-Congrats-Aussies!
and move on to the semis.
Look like some get their bad memories back from sunday, to much drinking/sex/worryed about semi syndrome?
http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/forum/threads/9615-Congrats-Aussies!
and move on to the semis.
Look like some get their bad memories back from sunday, to much drinking/sex/worryed about semi syndrome?
PaarlBok
Rod McCall (65)
Vokket Boet, have you ever thrown a punch in a rugby match? You dont care vokol about Plan A,B or C when you lose your nuts.
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
Agree 100%
Can we add kneeing an opponent to the head to that list? Otherwise referred to as "niggle" when an Australian does it. :fishing
I
International Badboy
Guest
trolololol
no.
I
Ilie Tabua's Shadow
Guest
Or rip the head from David's shoulders, thank you Mr Burger.
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
Discuss.
Again? I'm pretty sure we had a very long thread on that. Please, no.
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
No because someone who may or may not have purposely tapped someone in the head with his knee is nothing compared to deliberately and repeatedly raking your fingers across someone's eyes.
Sent using Tapatalk
I
Ilie Tabua's Shadow
Guest
I like the theme to your comment.
- Status