• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Lions-Springbok combined XV

B

bristol-iain

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 8 2009, 11:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bristol-iain @ Jul 8 2009, 11:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Macado @ Jul 8 2009, 11:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
My combined XV:

1.Genkins: solid in the scum, excellent tackler and good in the loose
2:Du Plessis: can be an airhead but his throws are awesome and makes serious yards in broken play.
3:Jones: Apologies to the beast lovers but he is just not ready YET!! Jones is abetter all round player.
4:Botha:Man eats lead for breakfast dinner and supper, must be a desendant from russel crowe in gladiator
5:Matfield:Im picking him because of the platform in the lineout, is a better jumper than O'Connell
6:Brussow:As previously stated, he is Kryptonite in the breakdown, PLAGUE!
7:Williams:I love this guy..Footballing genius, although i should be picking Wallace for ball carrying!!
8:Heaslip:Spies just did nothing for me, even with all that potential:Heaslip got his hands dirty
9:Du Preez: Destroyed the lions in the 2nd test, close to best player in the game
10:Jones:solid all through and linked well with the midfield, great game management
11:Habanna:World class winger, some afterburner for the try in 2nd test!
12:Roberts:Cut South Africa to shreds all tour
13:O'Driscoll: the great man had a massive tour, world player of the year contender
14:pieterson:His game has improved astronomically in 2yrs
15:Kearney:My player of the tournament, killed the boks kicking game:best FB in world rugby at the moment.

This is my combined 15 from the tour.
there is questionable decisions at 7 and 8. Williams is too good to be left off and Smith doesnt produce that kind of magic for me to pick him, i didnt see him link backs and forward although he is awesome at the tail of the lineout, while Wallaces ball carrying is magestic at times.. i am probably lacking a lethal ball carrier from the back row. Spies to me is abit of a showboat and needs to improve his all-round game to become the best no:8 in world rugby..he has the tools but for me Heaslip is a more honest player and isnt bad in broken play either as shown in the 3rd test.[/b]


Oh you've hit one of my pet hates.

Really irks me when rugby "experts" refer to them as footballers. WRONG GAME YOU NUMPTIES. We are Rugby Players not footballers.

NB- This isnt aimed directley at you Macado
[/b][/quote]

Wrong. Football is a generic term used for several sports; Assosciation Football (Soccer), Rugby Football, Gaelic Football etc. It's the general concensus however that the most popular form of the game played in which ever country is referred to as "Football" as a slang term.

Fact of the day: "Soccer" was actually coined by the FA not long after the official rulebook of Association Football was drawn up. It's not an Americanism.
[/b][/quote]


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Macado @ Jul 8 2009, 12:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bristol-iain @ Jul 8 2009, 11:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Macado @ Jul 8 2009, 11:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
My combined XV:

1.Genkins: solid in the scum, excellent tackler and good in the loose
2:Du Plessis: can be an airhead but his throws are awesome and makes serious yards in broken play.
3:Jones: Apologies to the beast lovers but he is just not ready YET!! Jones is abetter all round player.
4:Botha:Man eats lead for breakfast dinner and supper, must be a desendant from russel crowe in gladiator
5:Matfield:Im picking him because of the platform in the lineout, is a better jumper than O'Connell
6:Brussow:As previously stated, he is Kryptonite in the breakdown, PLAGUE!
7:Williams:I love this guy..Footballing genius, although i should be picking Wallace for ball carrying!!
8:Heaslip:Spies just did nothing for me, even with all that potential:Heaslip got his hands dirty
9:Du Preez: Destroyed the lions in the 2nd test, close to best player in the game
10:Jones:solid all through and linked well with the midfield, great game management
11:Habanna:World class winger, some afterburner for the try in 2nd test!
12:Roberts:Cut South Africa to shreds all tour
13:O'Driscoll: the great man had a massive tour, world player of the year contender
14:pieterson:His game has improved astronomically in 2yrs
15:Kearney:My player of the tournament, killed the boks kicking game:best FB in world rugby at the moment.

This is my combined 15 from the tour.
there is questionable decisions at 7 and 8. Williams is too good to be left off and Smith doesnt produce that kind of magic for me to pick him, i didnt see him link backs and forward although he is awesome at the tail of the lineout, while Wallaces ball carrying is magestic at times.. i am probably lacking a lethal ball carrier from the back row. Spies to me is abit of a showboat and needs to improve his all-round game to become the best no:8 in world rugby..he has the tools but for me Heaslip is a more honest player and isnt bad in broken play either as shown in the 3rd test.[/b]


Oh you've hit one of my pet hates.

Really irks me when rugby "experts" refer to them as footballers. WRONG GAME YOU NUMPTIES. We are Rugby Players not footballers.

NB- This isnt aimed directley at you Macado
[/b][/quote]

Apologies, my good man.. I suppose i am one of those who has bought into the media slang and terminology. Although in saying that what are the alternatives:

Rugby genius:abit broad
Rugbyball genius:abit weird/sounds like he is the best at making rugbyballs
Handling genius:abit like he is about to lay 200 blocks in a day!!!
genius: at what??

there is a lack of an adjective for the Martyn Williams of this world..
[/b][/quote]

I know it's rugby football but you say Ronaldo is a good footballer, there does need to be a distinguisher or people are going to think Martin Williams plays for Cardiff City and not the blues.

All I'd say you could call MW is that he is a great rugby payer.
 
B

Bullitt

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cymro @ Jul 8 2009, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 8 2009, 08:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 8 2009, 08:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well watch any of the tests again and look at the scrum - specifically the angle he engages at. Just because Vickery is useless and couldn't counter it doesn't mean "The Beast" is any good. Had that suck up tosser Gerald Davies not been rattling the sabre over the photoshoot during the warm-up games, Murray would have ahnialated him in all three tests (case point being the AI's when he, despite having a frankly useless Scotch pack backing him up, still got the job done). As it happened, Jenkins and Hayes did a good job of themselves.[/b]

Aaah........ another IF and would have blah blah. I certainly dont agree with you that he bored in on every scrum, was he perfectly legal on every scrum? Certainly not. I guess Jenkins, Hayes, Jones etc were all perfect and never walked round Beast in the scrum or dropped their binding when the Boks got the hit on etc. Your one eyed take on everything the Lions do is quiet entertaining really.

Beast did not dominate in the scrum but hell for a 23 year old prop to play as well as he did against very experienced good front row forwards he did very well. Is he special yes? Cause in a couple of years time at the mature age of 25 he will be a very good loosehead.
[/b][/quote]

Right fed up of this debate about the Beast at scrum time.

When he decided to turn inwards illegally he won. Namely against Vickery. Its up to the ref to see this so the Beast was well in his right to do so until he was penalised. When the ref watched him closely and had to watch him carefully he was not that effective. In the second test Adam Jones did tame him, no matter what any SA fan says he was tamed. He was only effective when Jones went off because he was not getting a hammering at scrum time.

In the future the Beast will be an awesome player.
[/b][/quote]

It took a while, but I found them;

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/P2Fl0X3g-TQ&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/P2Fl0X3g-TQ&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>
<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/49MgySfDC6Q&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/49MgySfDC6Q&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

Look at the angle going in, seriously. If that ain't boring in agast weak-asshole Vickery, I dunno what is.
 
T

TheBokke

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 10 2009, 07:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cymro @ Jul 8 2009, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 8 2009, 08:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 8 2009, 08:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well watch any of the tests again and look at the scrum - specifically the angle he engages at. Just because Vickery is useless and couldn't counter it doesn't mean "The Beast" is any good. Had that suck up tosser Gerald Davies not been rattling the sabre over the photoshoot during the warm-up games, Murray would have ahnialated him in all three tests (case point being the AI's when he, despite having a frankly useless Scotch pack backing him up, still got the job done). As it happened, Jenkins and Hayes did a good job of themselves.[/b]

Aaah........ another IF and would have blah blah. I certainly dont agree with you that he bored in on every scrum, was he perfectly legal on every scrum? Certainly not. I guess Jenkins, Hayes, Jones etc were all perfect and never walked round Beast in the scrum or dropped their binding when the Boks got the hit on etc. Your one eyed take on everything the Lions do is quiet entertaining really.

Beast did not dominate in the scrum but hell for a 23 year old prop to play as well as he did against very experienced good front row forwards he did very well. Is he special yes? Cause in a couple of years time at the mature age of 25 he will be a very good loosehead.
[/b][/quote]

Right fed up of this debate about the Beast at scrum time.

When he decided to turn inwards illegally he won. Namely against Vickery. Its up to the ref to see this so the Beast was well in his right to do so until he was penalised. When the ref watched him closely and had to watch him carefully he was not that effective. In the second test Adam Jones did tame him, no matter what any SA fan says he was tamed. He was only effective when Jones went off because he was not getting a hammering at scrum time.

In the future the Beast will be an awesome player.
[/b][/quote]

It took a while, but I found them;




Look at the angle going in, seriously. If that ain't boring in agast weak-asshole Vickery, I dunno what is.
[/b][/quote]

As I have stated already he was not legal on all his engages but there are alot of those were Phil, Mears and Jenkins did not get the hit on and Phil dropped the shoulder or turned inwards etc. Alot of the calls were 50/50 and on the day the ref felt SA were the dominant scrum and made the call. In the second half it is clear that Lions had a little talk in the shed and sorted out there scrum resulting in a more stability in the second half.

That is the problem with Refs is it is their own interpretation on the day and always will be. The same applies to the breakdown which is even more of a Lottery.

You and I are both fans therefore it is ovious we will swing a little in favour of our own team in certain situations, but the reality is the series is over and there is one winner and one loser unfortunatley this time a very good Lions team lost.
 
D

dullonien

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 10 2009, 07:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
As I have stated already he was not legal on all his engages but there are alot of those were Phil, Mears and Jenkins did not get the hit on and Phil dropped the shoulder or turned inwards etc. Alot of the calls were 50/50 and on the day the ref felt SA were the dominant scrum and made the call. In the second half it is clear that Lions had a little talk in the shed and sorted out there scrum resulting in a more stability in the second half.[/b]

Gotta agree here. Some of the time 'Beast' was boring in, and ending up sideways when the scrum collapsed, but on others it was Vickery trying to do the same thing. The long and the short of it is that Vickery wasn't good enough that day to counter the tactics used by Mtawira (sp). Adam Jones showed that he could not only handle them, but bat them aside and demolish his opposite number. Vickery learn't some valuable lessons in that test and I was very happy to see him put in a fine performance in the third. The Lions management were to blame for not substituting Vickery earlier (not sure who's decision it would have been, McGeegan surely?). I was screaming at the screen for him to be replaced after the 15min mark!
 
S

shtove

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 10 2009, 06:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cymro @ Jul 8 2009, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 8 2009, 08:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 8 2009, 08:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well watch any of the tests again and look at the scrum - specifically the angle he engages at. Just because Vickery is useless and couldn't counter it doesn't mean "The Beast" is any good. Had that suck up tosser Gerald Davies not been rattling the sabre over the photoshoot during the warm-up games, Murray would have ahnialated him in all three tests (case point being the AI's when he, despite having a frankly useless Scotch pack backing him up, still got the job done). As it happened, Jenkins and Hayes did a good job of themselves.[/b]

Aaah........ another IF and would have blah blah. I certainly dont agree with you that he bored in on every scrum, was he perfectly legal on every scrum? Certainly not. I guess Jenkins, Hayes, Jones etc were all perfect and never walked round Beast in the scrum or dropped their binding when the Boks got the hit on etc. Your one eyed take on everything the Lions do is quiet entertaining really.

Beast did not dominate in the scrum but hell for a 23 year old prop to play as well as he did against very experienced good front row forwards he did very well. Is he special yes? Cause in a couple of years time at the mature age of 25 he will be a very good loosehead.
[/b][/quote]

Right fed up of this debate about the Beast at scrum time.

When he decided to turn inwards illegally he won. Namely against Vickery. Its up to the ref to see this so the Beast was well in his right to do so until he was penalised. When the ref watched him closely and had to watch him carefully he was not that effective. In the second test Adam Jones did tame him, no matter what any SA fan says he was tamed. He was only effective when Jones went off because he was not getting a hammering at scrum time.

In the future the Beast will be an awesome player.
[/b][/quote]

It took a while, but I found them;




Look at the angle going in, seriously. If that ain't boring in agast weak-asshole Vickery, I dunno what is.
[/b][/quote]
Excellent work, Mr Mite.

In a nutshell, that was the winning and losing of the series.

There was a lot of talk about Shaw coming in to beef up the scrum and give Vickery the support he needed. Balls. Jones came on in the first test and turned the scrum right around without any change in the second row.

Then there was a lot of talk about Vickery redeeming himself in the third test. Balls. In one scrum he collapsed and disappeared like he'd been sucked in to a black hole, with his little booties kicking in the air.
 
B

bristol-iain

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (shtove @ Jul 10 2009, 08:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 10 2009, 06:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cymro @ Jul 8 2009, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 8 2009, 08:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 8 2009, 08:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well watch any of the tests again and look at the scrum - specifically the angle he engages at. Just because Vickery is useless and couldn't counter it doesn't mean "The Beast" is any good. Had that suck up tosser Gerald Davies not been rattling the sabre over the photoshoot during the warm-up games, Murray would have ahnialated him in all three tests (case point being the AI's when he, despite having a frankly useless Scotch pack backing him up, still got the job done). As it happened, Jenkins and Hayes did a good job of themselves.[/b]

Aaah........ another IF and would have blah blah. I certainly dont agree with you that he bored in on every scrum, was he perfectly legal on every scrum? Certainly not. I guess Jenkins, Hayes, Jones etc were all perfect and never walked round Beast in the scrum or dropped their binding when the Boks got the hit on etc. Your one eyed take on everything the Lions do is quiet entertaining really.

Beast did not dominate in the scrum but hell for a 23 year old prop to play as well as he did against very experienced good front row forwards he did very well. Is he special yes? Cause in a couple of years time at the mature age of 25 he will be a very good loosehead.
[/b][/quote]

Right fed up of this debate about the Beast at scrum time.

When he decided to turn inwards illegally he won. Namely against Vickery. Its up to the ref to see this so the Beast was well in his right to do so until he was penalised. When the ref watched him closely and had to watch him carefully he was not that effective. In the second test Adam Jones did tame him, no matter what any SA fan says he was tamed. He was only effective when Jones went off because he was not getting a hammering at scrum time.

In the future the Beast will be an awesome player.
[/b][/quote]

It took a while, but I found them;




Look at the angle going in, seriously. If that ain't boring in agast weak-asshole Vickery, I dunno what is.
[/b][/quote]
Excellent work, Mr Mite.

In a nutshell, that was the winning and losing of the series.

There was a lot of talk about Shaw coming in to beef up the scrum and give Vickery the support he needed. Balls. Jones came on in the first test and turned the scrum right around without any change in the second row.

Then there was a lot of talk about Vickery redeeming himself in the third test. Balls. In one scrum he collapsed and disappeared like he'd been sucked in to a black hole, with his little booties kicking in the air.
[/b][/quote]


So true, with Vickery priding himself on srumming ability, I do wonder how his thrashing at the hands of the SA front row will affect him in the future. Could that be the last we see of Phil Vickery in an International match.
 
J

jim lewis

Guest
[/quote]


So true, with Vickery priding himself on srumming ability, I do wonder how his thrashing at the hands of the SA front row will affect him in the future. Could that be the last we see of Phil Vickery in an International match.
[/quote]


God, I hope so.

By the way, the use of the word 'footballer' is not a media invention, just as 'soccer' is not an American invention. I started playing in 1969 and rugby players were often referred to as gifted footballers then. You'll still hear the likes of Gareth Edwards and Gerald Davies use the term.
 
T

TheBokke

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (shtove @ Jul 11 2009, 08:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 10 2009, 06:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cymro @ Jul 8 2009, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 8 2009, 08:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 8 2009, 08:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well watch any of the tests again and look at the scrum - specifically the angle he engages at. Just because Vickery is useless and couldn't counter it doesn't mean "The Beast" is any good. Had that suck up tosser Gerald Davies not been rattling the sabre over the photoshoot during the warm-up games, Murray would have ahnialated him in all three tests (case point being the AI's when he, despite having a frankly useless Scotch pack backing him up, still got the job done). As it happened, Jenkins and Hayes did a good job of themselves.[/b]

Aaah........ another IF and would have blah blah. I certainly dont agree with you that he bored in on every scrum, was he perfectly legal on every scrum? Certainly not. I guess Jenkins, Hayes, Jones etc were all perfect and never walked round Beast in the scrum or dropped their binding when the Boks got the hit on etc. Your one eyed take on everything the Lions do is quiet entertaining really.

Beast did not dominate in the scrum but hell for a 23 year old prop to play as well as he did against very experienced good front row forwards he did very well. Is he special yes? Cause in a couple of years time at the mature age of 25 he will be a very good loosehead.
[/b][/quote]

Right fed up of this debate about the Beast at scrum time.

When he decided to turn inwards illegally he won. Namely against Vickery. Its up to the ref to see this so the Beast was well in his right to do so until he was penalised. When the ref watched him closely and had to watch him carefully he was not that effective. In the second test Adam Jones did tame him, no matter what any SA fan says he was tamed. He was only effective when Jones went off because he was not getting a hammering at scrum time.

In the future the Beast will be an awesome player.
[/b][/quote]

It took a while, but I found them;




Look at the angle going in, seriously. If that ain't boring in agast weak-asshole Vickery, I dunno what is.
[/b][/quote]
Excellent work, Mr Mite.

In a nutshell, that was the winning and losing of the series.

There was a lot of talk about Shaw coming in to beef up the scrum and give Vickery the support he needed. Balls. Jones came on in the first test and turned the scrum right around without any change in the second row.

Then there was a lot of talk about Vickery redeeming himself in the third test. Balls. In one scrum he collapsed and disappeared like he'd been sucked in to a black hole, with his little booties kicking in the air.
[/b][/quote]

Yeah dame Bryce the bloody Kiwi!!! He cost us the whole series with a couple of 50/50 calls.
 
J

jim lewis

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 11 2009, 12:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (shtove @ Jul 11 2009, 08:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 10 2009, 06:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cymro @ Jul 8 2009, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 8 2009, 08:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 8 2009, 08:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well watch any of the tests again and look at the scrum - specifically the angle he engages at. Just because Vickery is useless and couldn't counter it doesn't mean "The Beast" is any good. Had that suck up tosser Gerald Davies not been rattling the sabre over the photoshoot during the warm-up games, Murray would have ahnialated him in all three tests (case point being the AI's when he, despite having a frankly useless Scotch pack backing him up, still got the job done). As it happened, Jenkins and Hayes did a good job of themselves.[/b]

Aaah........ another IF and would have blah blah. I certainly dont agree with you that he bored in on every scrum, was he perfectly legal on every scrum? Certainly not. I guess Jenkins, Hayes, Jones etc were all perfect and never walked round Beast in the scrum or dropped their binding when the Boks got the hit on etc. Your one eyed take on everything the Lions do is quiet entertaining really.

Beast did not dominate in the scrum but hell for a 23 year old prop to play as well as he did against very experienced good front row forwards he did very well. Is he special yes? Cause in a couple of years time at the mature age of 25 he will be a very good loosehead.
[/b][/quote]

Right fed up of this debate about the Beast at scrum time.

When he decided to turn inwards illegally he won. Namely against Vickery. Its up to the ref to see this so the Beast was well in his right to do so until he was penalised. When the ref watched him closely and had to watch him carefully he was not that effective. In the second test Adam Jones did tame him, no matter what any SA fan says he was tamed. He was only effective when Jones went off because he was not getting a hammering at scrum time.

In the future the Beast will be an awesome player.
[/b][/quote]

It took a while, but I found them;




Look at the angle going in, seriously. If that ain't boring in agast weak-asshole Vickery, I dunno what is.
[/b][/quote]
Excellent work, Mr Mite.

In a nutshell, that was the winning and losing of the series.

There was a lot of talk about Shaw coming in to beef up the scrum and give Vickery the support he needed. Balls. Jones came on in the first test and turned the scrum right around without any change in the second row.

Then there was a lot of talk about Vickery redeeming himself in the third test. Balls. In one scrum he collapsed and disappeared like he'd been sucked in to a black hole, with his little booties kicking in the air.
[/b][/quote]

Yeah dame Bryce the bloody Kiwi!!! He cost us the whole series with a couple of 50/50 calls.
[/b][/quote]

What I can't believe is that, right in front of the ref, the Beast dropped his binding twice and was amazingly awarded the penalty. Bokke, I'm not being inflammatory here, but my guess is you're not a front row player. There is no such thing in law as a penalty for not taking the hit, because technically the hit is illegal. As for Bryce, let's not rock the boat here. Beast was scrummaging illegally all day and being allowed to do it by the ref. Your team had more than its fair share of the decisions in that series.
 
T

TheBokke

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jim Lewis @ Jul 12 2009, 08:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 11 2009, 12:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (shtove @ Jul 11 2009, 08:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 10 2009, 06:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cymro @ Jul 8 2009, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 8 2009, 08:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 8 2009, 08:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well watch any of the tests again and look at the scrum - specifically the angle he engages at. Just because Vickery is useless and couldn't counter it doesn't mean "The Beast" is any good. Had that suck up tosser Gerald Davies not been rattling the sabre over the photoshoot during the warm-up games, Murray would have ahnialated him in all three tests (case point being the AI's when he, despite having a frankly useless Scotch pack backing him up, still got the job done). As it happened, Jenkins and Hayes did a good job of themselves.[/b]

Aaah........ another IF and would have blah blah. I certainly dont agree with you that he bored in on every scrum, was he perfectly legal on every scrum? Certainly not. I guess Jenkins, Hayes, Jones etc were all perfect and never walked round Beast in the scrum or dropped their binding when the Boks got the hit on etc. Your one eyed take on everything the Lions do is quiet entertaining really.

Beast did not dominate in the scrum but hell for a 23 year old prop to play as well as he did against very experienced good front row forwards he did very well. Is he special yes? Cause in a couple of years time at the mature age of 25 he will be a very good loosehead.
[/b][/quote]

Right fed up of this debate about the Beast at scrum time.

When he decided to turn inwards illegally he won. Namely against Vickery. Its up to the ref to see this so the Beast was well in his right to do so until he was penalised. When the ref watched him closely and had to watch him carefully he was not that effective. In the second test Adam Jones did tame him, no matter what any SA fan says he was tamed. He was only effective when Jones went off because he was not getting a hammering at scrum time.

In the future the Beast will be an awesome player.
[/b][/quote]

It took a while, but I found them;




Look at the angle going in, seriously. If that ain't boring in agast weak-asshole Vickery, I dunno what is.
[/b][/quote]
Excellent work, Mr Mite.

In a nutshell, that was the winning and losing of the series.

There was a lot of talk about Shaw coming in to beef up the scrum and give Vickery the support he needed. Balls. Jones came on in the first test and turned the scrum right around without any change in the second row.

Then there was a lot of talk about Vickery redeeming himself in the third test. Balls. In one scrum he collapsed and disappeared like he'd been sucked in to a black hole, with his little booties kicking in the air.
[/b][/quote]

Yeah dame Bryce the bloody Kiwi!!! He cost us the whole series with a couple of 50/50 calls.
[/b][/quote]

What I can't believe is that, right in front of the ref, the Beast dropped his binding twice and was amazingly awarded the penalty. Bokke, Your team had more than its fair share of the decisions in that series.
[/b][/quote]


Contradiction maybe? You seem to be misunderstanding me I said there were times when the Boks got the hit on and the Lions who could not take the pressure and either stood up on the push or dropped their binding, turned the shoulder to negate the push etc. Never knew you were such an expert Lewis will be sure to consult you in the future should I need any one eyed analysis.

Just one question to check the level of objectivity on your part, do you think the Lions scrummed straight as an arrow and were perfectly legal in all their scrums?
 
S

shazbooger

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 13 2009, 08:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Contradiction maybe? You seem to be misunderstanding me I said there were times when the Boks got the hit on and the Lions who could not take the pressure and either stood up on the push or dropped their binding, turned the shoulder to negate the push etc. Never knew you were such an expert Lewis will be sure to consult you in the future should I need any one eyed analysis.

Just one question to check the level of objectivity on your part, do you think the Lions scrummed straight as an arrow and were perfectly legal in all their scrums?[/b]

Jesus was away for the weekend. Glad to see that we have all moved on and agreed to get along. :)

This horse has been well and truly flogged.
 
T

TheBokke

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Logorrhea @ Jul 13 2009, 11:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 13 2009, 08:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Contradiction maybe? You seem to be misunderstanding me I said there were times when the Boks got the hit on and the Lions who could not take the pressure and either stood up on the push or dropped their binding, turned the shoulder to negate the push etc. Never knew you were such an expert Lewis will be sure to consult you in the future should I need any one eyed analysis.

Just one question to check the level of objectivity on your part, do you think the Lions scrummed straight as an arrow and were perfectly legal in all their scrums?[/b]

Jesus was away for the weekend. Glad to see that we have all moved on and agreed to get along. :)

This horse has been well and truly flogged.

[/b][/quote]

:lol: yes just trying to milk every last drop.
 
S

shazbooger

Guest
Someone let me know when your re-hashing the "<insert team name> are bunch of cheating whores!" arguement. I've no useful input but i'd hate to miss it.

Incidently i know nothing about scrumaging but I know the boks are a bunch of cheating whores so quite obviously 6+19=476
 
J

jim lewis

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 13 2009, 08:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jim Lewis @ Jul 12 2009, 08:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 11 2009, 12:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (shtove @ Jul 11 2009, 08:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 10 2009, 06:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cymro @ Jul 8 2009, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBokke @ Jul 8 2009, 08:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite @ Jul 8 2009, 08:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well watch any of the tests again and look at the scrum - specifically the angle he engages at. Just because Vickery is useless and couldn't counter it doesn't mean "The Beast" is any good. Had that suck up tosser Gerald Davies not been rattling the sabre over the photoshoot during the warm-up games, Murray would have ahnialated him in all three tests (case point being the AI's when he, despite having a frankly useless Scotch pack backing him up, still got the job done). As it happened, Jenkins and Hayes did a good job of themselves.[/b]

Aaah........ another IF and would have blah blah. I certainly dont agree with you that he bored in on every scrum, was he perfectly legal on every scrum? Certainly not. I guess Jenkins, Hayes, Jones etc were all perfect and never walked round Beast in the scrum or dropped their binding when the Boks got the hit on etc. Your one eyed take on everything the Lions do is quiet entertaining really.

Beast did not dominate in the scrum but hell for a 23 year old prop to play as well as he did against very experienced good front row forwards he did very well. Is he special yes? Cause in a couple of years time at the mature age of 25 he will be a very good loosehead.
[/b][/quote]

Right fed up of this debate about the Beast at scrum time.

When he decided to turn inwards illegally he won. Namely against Vickery. Its up to the ref to see this so the Beast was well in his right to do so until he was penalised. When the ref watched him closely and had to watch him carefully he was not that effective. In the second test Adam Jones did tame him, no matter what any SA fan says he was tamed. He was only effective when Jones went off because he was not getting a hammering at scrum time.

In the future the Beast will be an awesome player.
[/b][/quote]

It took a while, but I found them;




Look at the angle going in, seriously. If that ain't boring in agast weak-asshole Vickery, I dunno what is.
[/b][/quote]
Excellent work, Mr Mite.

In a nutshell, that was the winning and losing of the series.

There was a lot of talk about Shaw coming in to beef up the scrum and give Vickery the support he needed. Balls. Jones came on in the first test and turned the scrum right around without any change in the second row.

Then there was a lot of talk about Vickery redeeming himself in the third test. Balls. In one scrum he collapsed and disappeared like he'd been sucked in to a black hole, with his little booties kicking in the air.
[/b][/quote]

Yeah dame Bryce the bloody Kiwi!!! He cost us the whole series with a couple of 50/50 calls.
[/b][/quote]

What I can't believe is that, right in front of the ref, the Beast dropped his binding twice and was amazingly awarded the penalty. Bokke, Your team had more than its fair share of the decisions in that series.
[/b][/quote]


Contradiction maybe? You seem to be misunderstanding me I said there were times when the Boks got the hit on and the Lions who could not take the pressure and either stood up on the push or dropped their binding, turned the shoulder to negate the push etc. Never knew you were such an expert Lewis will be sure to consult you in the future should I need any one eyed analysis.

Just one question to check the level of objectivity on your part, do you think the Lions scrummed straight as an arrow and were perfectly legal in all their scrums?
[/b][/quote]

Well, if 38 years at loosehead counts as experience, then I'm guilty. As to your question on objectivity, yes I believe I'm being quite objective and no I don't claim that the Lions front row scrummaged straight as a die, but I never made that claim. What I did say was that you have no room to complain about the ref not giving you a fair crack of the whip. I also pointed out that the ref watched Beast boring in at about a 70 degree angle and gave a penalty against the Lions. Twice. I find that unacceptable.

As for the moronic crack about whine, grow up, eejit. (not you, Bokke)
 
S

shazbooger

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jim Lewis @ Jul 13 2009, 07:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Well, if 38 years at loosehead counts as experience, then I'm guilty. As to your question on objectivity, yes I believe I'm being quite objective and no I don't claim that the Lions front row scrummaged straight as a die, but I never made that claim. What I did say was that you have no room to complain about the ref not giving you a fair crack of the whip. I also pointed out that the ref watched Beast boring in at about a 70 degree angle and gave a penalty against the Lions. Twice. I find that unacceptable.[/b]
As a once interested participant, but now a bored observer I feel I am in the perfect position to declare Jim Lewis the winner. For the clarity of his arguements, his experience, and the fact that while he could have called himself anything he likes he picked ............... eh ................. Jim Lewis.
 
T

TheBokke

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Logorrhea @ Jul 14 2009, 09:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jim Lewis @ Jul 13 2009, 07:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well, if 38 years at loosehead counts as experience, then I'm guilty. As to your question on objectivity, yes I believe I'm being quite objective and no I don't claim that the Lions front row scrummaged straight as a die, but I never made that claim. What I did say was that you have no room to complain about the ref not giving you a fair crack of the whip. I also pointed out that the ref watched Beast boring in at about a 70 degree angle and gave a penalty against the Lions. Twice. I find that unacceptable.[/b]
As a once interested participant, but now a bored observer I feel I am in the perfect position to declare Jim Lewis the winner. For the clarity of his arguements, his experience, and the fact that while he could have called himself anything he likes he picked ............... eh ................. Jim Lewis.
[/b][/quote]

I concede Jim Lewis is the clear winner.
 
K

Kobus Kitty

Guest
I wouldn't pick any of the Lions forwards. Kearney for the new to fullback Steyn, and BOD for Jacobs, however if we go for non-political selections, Jaque.

Btw, TheBokke - that is an amazing compilation of the Lions tour in your signature.
 
B

bristol-iain

Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kobus Kitty @ Jul 17 2009, 12:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
I wouldn't pick any of the Lions forwards. Kearney for the new to fullback Steyn, and BOD for Jacobs, however if we go for non-political selections, Jaque.

Btw, TheBokke - that is an amazing compilation of the Lions tour in your signature.[/b]

Humph I find it far to partisan...... :vampire:

Oh, is it supposed to be?

Fair do's
 

Latest posts

Top