• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[2018 Rugby Championship] Round 6: South Africa v New Zealand (06/10/2018)

Did they? According to these live comms they didn't (while South Africa did actually concede 5 in a row which included a slapped down attempted intercept), using only one eye is limiting.

Actually. If Gardner had penalised PSDT for his lazy running under the posts on the 29th minute the Boks could have conceded 5 in a row twice, both sequences including try killing offences.

https://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/RugbyChampionship/live-springboks-v-all-blacks-20181006-4

Anyway, '5 in a row' is just paint by numbers bullshit. Fortunately for the match we had a decent ref.
Those were Gardner's words to Keiran when he warned him, anyway.
 
It's what I teach my kids. Step past the ball and fight for it over the advantage line. Fighting over the top of the ball lessens the margin of error

Totally legit for the past few seasons I been coaching kids
I think they walk to line between cleaning past the ruck and off the ruck nicely. As always, the ABs are the best at pushing the line.
 
cheers, i just guessed it was there because in the past we've played Aus there a few times

does make a bit of difference, any less travel is good for the boys


just another note, how much we missed Brodie and value his qualities was on full display in the two Bok tests, he's probably the best lock ever
Let's not forget samWhitelock. He's just as vital as guzzler and would leave a hole just as big. Etzbeth retallick and whitelock would be the top 3 locks in the world
 
so Brodie had a healthy baby girl which is great news for him and his wife, im guessing this is why he hasn't played as much lately as well and the injury he picked up wasnt as serious as made out to be and Hansen probs gave him more time off after what happened last year with his baby boy sadly passing away - wonder if he will be on the EotYT squad or Hansen will let him spend more time with the fam, either way really happy for them
 
Did they? According to these live comms they didn't (while South Africa did actually concede 5 in a row which included a slapped down attempted intercept), using only one eye is limiting.

Actually. If Gardner had penalised PSDT for his lazy running under the posts on the 29th minute the Boks could have conceded 5 in a row twice, both sequences including try killing offences.

https://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/RugbyChampionship/live-springboks-v-all-blacks-20181006-4

Anyway, '5 in a row' is just paint by numbers bullshit. Fortunately for the match we had a decent ref.

The 5 in a row was what Gardner said to Kieran Read after they conceded 5 penalties in a row in the red zone.

As for PSDT's "lazy running", I think Gardner did the right thing, PSDT just made the tackle, and Aaron Smith on purpose delayed picking up the ball and then deliberately threw the ball into PSDT. Which IMHO is very bad sportsmanship to milk out a penalty.

There is also a difference as to what penalty is conceded, and where on the park it happened. I don't think the referee will easily dish out a card if a team concedes 5 penalties in a row for being offside while they are in the opposition's half.
 
Yes, I think that's what Mallet was saying that the ABs were cleaning past the ball at the point of contact at the ruck then taking out the Springbok player, who was in the breakdown at the same time; and the support player was immediately picking the ball to go around the corner. So it was very difficult to call obstruction.
Whereas the Boks were just cleaning out over the ball and not taking out AB players.

Unless you're saying ABs were clearing out illegally.;)

Video of Mallet's point from around 5mins and 25secs in below video.




Yep, that's a fair call, although if you listen a bit further, Naas Botha makes the key point that they stay on their feet when they do that. As long as you don't flop over the ball or seal off, the referee is going to allow you the latitude to do this. Going off his feet is what the Springbok player did that got him penalised, which led to Mo'unga's bounce kick to touch on the Springbok 5m line; a position from which they scored the winning try - if he had stayed on his feet, or at least made an attempt to roll away, he probably would not have been penalised.

Keep in mind also, that the optics are a lot like a counter ruck. You don't see referees pinging teams that drive over opposition ball, so long as they stay on their feet and don't kick the ball through, out or ahead.
 
As for PSDT's "lazy running", I think Gardner did the right thing, PSDT just made the tackle, and Aaron Smith on purpose delayed picking up the ball and then deliberately threw the ball into PSDT. Which IMHO is very bad sportsmanship to milk out a penalty.

There is also a difference as to what penalty is conceded, and where on the park it happened. I don't think the referee will easily dish out a card if a team concedes 5 penalties in a row for being offside while they are in the opposition's half.

That's a very generous description of PSDT's actions and very unfavourable description of Smith's, I wonder why.

I agree that Smith probably did pass it directly into PSDT, but only after PSDT ran directly between Smith and the first receiver and made him hesitate or interfered with his first option, his 'exit play' was to try to milk the penalty.
I don't care that Gardner called that way, fair enough, it's always going to be a subjective decision anyway, get on with the game.

But in the post game refereeing micro-scope that always occurs on social media. You can't let people get protractors out on lineouts and let PSDTs lazy running resulting in a turnover one metre from his posts go uncommented on in the ledger. If that was an All Black ..... sheesh.

Compare PSDT's retiring line and timing with Sam Whitelock's actions in the Kriel try. if you want an example of how it should be done. All Blacks. bastions of fair play since ages ago.
 
Last edited:
That's a very generous description of PSDT's actions and very unfavourable description of Smith's, I wonder why.

I agree that Smith probably did pass it directly into PSDT, but only after PSDT ran directly between Smith and the first receiver and made him hesitate or interfered with his first option, his 'exit play' was to try to milk the penalty.
I don't care that Gardner called that way, fair enough, it's always going to be a subjective decision anyway, get on with the game.

But in the post game refereeing micro-scope that always occurs on social media. You can't let people get protractors out on lineouts and let PSDTs lazy running resulting in a turnover one metre from his posts go uncommented on in the ledger. If that was an All Black ..... sheesh.

Compare PSDT's retiring line and timing with Sam Whitelock's actions in the Kriel try. if you want an example of how it should be done. All Blacks. bastions of fair play since ages ago.

Well I don't know how to really respond to this post.

I guess Aaron Smith just rubs me the wrong way, and his antics on and off the field are just things that angers people.

But let's look at the PSDT incident. PSDT did everything in his power to roll away after making the tackle, then Smith actually waited for him to be in that position and then threw the ball into him on purpose. I think Gardner handled that situation very well.

As for your remark of bastions of fair play... Yeah sure buddy, keep telling yourself that. You're not fooling anyone.
 
Well I don't know how to really respond to this post.

I guess Aaron Smith just rubs me the wrong way, and his antics on and off the field are just things that angers people.

But let's look at the PSDT incident. PSDT did everything in his power to roll away after making the tackle, then Smith actually waited for him to be in that position and then threw the ball into him on purpose. I think Gardner handled that situation very well.

I've gone and had another look. Yeah, Smith lines him up as his first option. It was a good call from Angus.
 
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/opinion/1 ... by-history

Interesting that the Kiwi's seem the most against Transformation. I note that the 45% target has been missed this year so far (except one game). My gut feeling it that the SARU and ANC will tolerate some slippage so long as the team is winning and Kilosi is captain (I think he is the best captain regardless). It would be difficult for them to do anything anyway as that would reveal the targets (which are legal and acceptable) to be a racial quota (which is 100% illegal).

I don't want to turn this into another quota thread. However I wonder if this is an attempt by the Kiwi's to get under the Springbok's skin as they know they are gaining on them
 
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/opinion/1 ... by-history

Interesting that the Kiwi's seem the most against Transformation. I note that the 45% target has been missed this year so far (except one game). My gut feeling it that the SARU and ANC will tolerate some slippage so long as the team is winning and Kilosi is captain (I think he is the best captain regardless). It would be difficult for them to do anything anyway as that would reveal the targets (which are legal and acceptable) to be a racial quota (which is 100% illegal).

I don't want to turn this into another quota thread. However I wonder if this is an attempt by the Kiwi's to get under the Springbok's skin as they know they are gaining on them

I was expecting this link to be some kind of survey on international opinion on transformation/quotas in South African sport. Instead it's a Reason article. Clicker, beware.
 
I don't want to turn this into another quota thread. However I wonder if this is an attempt by the Kiwi's to get under the Springbok's skin as they know they are gaining on them
I hope this not a Mark Treason article about how the All Blacks paid for the RWC wins or something fantastical like that. I'll read it later...better not be Treason!
 
I hope this not a Mark Treason article about how the All Blacks paid for the RWC wins or something fantastical like that. I'll read it later...better not be Treason!
Don't read it. It's pretty disgustingly belittling of apartheid and Mandela
Please note that markReason is English and always undermining of ABs rugby and the kiwi spirit of fairness. This article discusses quotas that treason has the comfort of talking abou fro a distanc and in ignorance.
 
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/opinion/1 ... by-history

Interesting that the Kiwi's seem the most against Transformation. I note that the 45% target has been missed this year so far (except one game). My gut feeling it that the SARU and ANC will tolerate some slippage so long as the team is winning and Kilosi is captain (I think he is the best captain regardless). It would be difficult for them to do anything anyway as that would reveal the targets (which are legal and acceptable) to be a racial quota (which is 100% illegal).

I don't want to turn this into another quota thread. However I wonder if this is an attempt by the Kiwi's to get under the Springbok's skin as they know they are gaining on them
This author is English and hates NZ rugby
 
Read the article. Saying siya a rugby player will do more for unifying SA than mandela. Then talking about the quota system belittling transformation into what it means to rugby.
 
Is reason not a reliable source? I thought stuff.co.nz was a reliable source?
 
in general i dont mind Stuff but Mark Reason is a bit too sensationalist for me, better suited to an English tabloid
 
pretty gutted to hear Barnes will be reffing the Ireland game and Garces the England game

rugby is so relient on refs doing their job right that they become too big a part of the game, which means theres something wrong with the rules imo
 
Read the article. Saying siya a rugby player will do more for unifying SA than mandela. Then talking about the quota system belittling transformation into what it means to rugby.
You find this statement disgustingly belittling to Mandela?

Imagine what it would do for black rugby in the country if the Springboks won the World Cup under the leadership of Siya Kolisi. It would be a transformative moment akin to Nelson Mandela wearing the Springboks shirt

And I don't find where he belittles the system of apartheid?

Are you trying to virtue signal or do you just have an intense dislike of the author and you're not reading what he is actually saying?
 

Latest posts

Top