Rugby union?

CHokKA said:
What? For the entire game? Are you serious? England made loads of mistakes, they were sloppy and they didn't properly come together until later during the second half where they managed to win a scrum, but that was one out of perhaps two or three times where it looked like they were threatening. The rest of the game they looked un-coordinated and full of handling errors, and their game was played poorly. I'm sorry, but I don't think you can blame the refs. England looked nervous and worried for the entire game. Just look at the posts in here from people posting after the kickoff. They were saying things like "settle down" and "England look nervy", as well as highlighting that there were too many mistakes. Blaming the ref is just an excuse at this point.
Click to expand...

Seems constructive debate is now lost in here...

I'm not saying that SA weren't the better team on the day or blaming the ref for the result, so calm yourself down.

I'm questioning why there appeared to be such a gross mis-match in the scrum. England might not be the best scrum in world rugby, but it was like an international scrum against a national league 2 pack... The difference on Saturday was huge, yet the Welsh and Japanese packs held the previous 2 weeks... I refuse to accept that the England scrum is significantly inferior to Wales and Japan.

There was talk on the pitch of SA pushing before the ball was in, but I assume England should have had a counter by doing the same if it wasn't being picked up.

A weak scrum will always make life hard for the backs, but that was not enough to justify the lack of accuracy of passing and running lines. Youngs was particularly poor, and Ford often struggles behind a weak pack (though he is much better than he used to be, probably from experience at Leicester over the last season).
 
As far as I could see, The Beast was in at an angle on Dan Cole at every scrum. This was very evident when, midway through the first half the SA hooker popped up first as DC was being forced inwards. Somehow the penalty went against England despite the SA hooker popping up first. Now, you could argue that Cole was squeezing the hooker, but with the angle that The Beast was at all game I don't think there was anywhere to go. This was not picked up by the officials and SA took advantage. As a loose head prop myself (and playing a bit on the tight head) I know very well that if you've got an angle on the tight head it's very hard to scrummage against and if the referee isn't calling it, you take that advantage. It's almost impossible to put your power in a forward direction and the scrum starts to wheel. If the tight head is deliberately squeezing the hooker against a powerful loose head, the scrum is likely to collapse inwards as you're not propping up the scrum. The opposition hooker is very uncomfortable, and the scrum moves laterally and downwards and it's usually very obvious. When playing on the tight head, most of your job is to try to keep the loose head straight and make sure they don't get under you. I've never seen Cole dominated like that before, but SA played the referee very well. Mako has never been the best scrummager, but he's more than competent and I think most of the issues were on the England tight head side. The loss of Sinckler early on was a huge blow and meant that there was less gas in the tank for the scrums for the game.

However, scrums are usually the result of errors. To put it into context, I don't think the first scrum in the NZ game was until about 15-20 minutes. I think there were probably as many scrums in the first 20 minutes of the SA game as the whole of the NZ game. The handling was terrible and the moves didn't work as well.

The SA defence didn't allow England to play their game (field position, Ford kicks and plays in the opposition half) and the only time that England did, it resulted in sustained pressure in the SA red zone. However, England failed to capitalise on this pressure and only came away with a penalty. It was a masterclass by SA and I imagine the NZ fans feel the same way as the England fans right now.
 
Stu said:
Seems constructive debate is now lost in here...

I'm not saying that SA weren't the better team on the day or blaming the ref for the result, so calm yourself down.
Click to expand...

Where has the constructive debate been lost? I also don't feel I need to be told to calm down. My post wasn't inflammatory at all. I'm just tired of all the posts in here that are questioning why it all went so wrong when the facts are plain and simple enough. England just didn't show up like they did against NZ and they got taken apart by the better team.

SA are known for their power in the scrum. Debate before the game went through this and suggested that England might struggle. It's like questioning why the defence was so good during the 26 phase push for a try by England. The stronger team held it together and stopped the momentum in its tracks everytime a push was made.

England played brilliantly against NZ. It was amazing match and they deserved the win. I couldn't say what happened against SA, whether it be pressure, tactics, a combination of both, but they just couldn't hold it together and that lost them the match.
 
CHokKA said:
Where has the constructive debate been lost? I also don't feel I need to be told to calm down. My post wasn't inflammatory at all. I'm just tired of all the posts in here that are questioning why it all went so wrong when the facts are plain and simple enough. England just didn't show up like they did against NZ and they got taken apart by the better team.

SA are known for their power in the scrum. Debate before the game went through this and suggested that England might struggle. Its like questioning why the defence was so good during the 26 phase push for a try by England. The stronger team held it together and stopped the momentum in its tracks everytime a push was made.
Click to expand...

Almost all of your posts in this thread have been abrasive or counter to someone else's comments, and you are very short sighted to think that sportsmen simply accept they were beaten and move on without reflection and analysis of what happened.

You are right to say SA are known for their power in the scrum, but to blindly accept that they made (arguably) the second best team in the world look like a bunch of amateurs without even questioning it is very narrow minded.

I am intrigued to know which team you support, because you appear to be very anti-England.
 
Stu said:
Almost all of your posts in this thread have been abrasive or counter to someone else's comments, and you are very short sighted to think that sportsmen simply accept they were beaten and move on without reflection and analysis of what happened.

You are right to say SA are known for their power in the scrum, but to blindly accept that they made (arguably) the second best team in the world look like a bunch of amateurs without even questioning it is very narrow minded.

I am intrigued to know which team you support, because you appear to be very anti-England.
Click to expand...

I'm a South African living in the UK, so I support SA when they play. I also supported England when they played New Zealand and have said a few times that they played very well against them and for the rest of the tournament. I don't see how that's anti-England to be honest. I suppose because I'm being truthful by saying they made mistakes that it's anti-England.

If me asking people why they think it was ref fault or something else that caused the game to be lost by England is me being abrasive, then so be it. It's how a discussion goes. Someone says something or gives their opinion, I offer mine or ask why they think what they think. I've not been offensive or called people names, nor do I see how that's abrasive when having a constructive discussion. Just because you don't agree with me doesn't make my argument or comments abrasive. There have been many posts here that have been questioning just how the game was lost and incinuating that some sort of foul play must have been responsible, souring the win (which was by quite a large margin). I thought SA played very well yesterday and have looked strong all tournament, with the exception of their NZ match but NZ are our kryptonite. Up until the start of the match the comments in here were all about how England were going to walk all over SA and that the win was pretty much guaranteed after the NZ match. It didn't go that way and as soon as that happened, the comments about decisions and foul play started in here. Not many. Some people were accepting and realistic about how England played, making mistakes and looking sloppy until they eventually pulled it together for a bit. But it was too late by then.

And just to clarify, none of these comments are from the sportsmen's viewpoint. They're from posters in here, so I'm not sure why you've said it's shortsighted of me to think they should accept it and move on. I've never questioned the team or said they should accept the loss and move on. But they'll know they made mistakes and we're sloppy. They'll know what they could have done better. And they'll no doubt be gutted and rightly so. They worked hard and have carried the nation's hopes and beliefs for the last few weeks, and that's no doubt exhausting enough as it is. To come home after a defeat is difficult, but it's their job to move on from this and rebuild for the next time.
 
You have to look at it from some English fans perspective: Wales and SA suffer from "international small man syndrome" and every time a result doesn't go England's way it's because of bad reffing.

O, and if you disagree then you're just being anti-English. :D
 
Last edited:
Yadda said:
You have to look at it from some English fans perspective: Wales and SA suffer from "international small man syndrome" and every time a result doesn't go England's their way it's because of bad reffing.

O, and if you disagree then you're just being anti-English. :D
Click to expand...

Exactly. I've got to put up with comments like that but I'm being abrasive when I question things said that explain why SA won and England lost? Yep, seems fair!
 
Matawera (sp?) has always angled in on the tight head. If the refs allow it he is the best prop in the world, if they don’t he’s just very good.
Going back to the Lions tour Vickery was stuffed by boring in but the ref didn’t acknowledge it, Adam Jones comes on and it can’t be Vickery’s fault so the boring in is called. The beast plays the ref like all good props. But it does explain the dominance. Once the ref has formed an idea of blame they normally stick with it.
 
PlacidCasual said:
Once the ref has formed an idea of blame they normally stick with it.
Click to expand...

This was absolutely the case yesterday. It just felt that there was no review of the situation at any point which was a shame. It’s the same with the breakdown refereeing, if you get on the wrong side or don’t play the way the referee sees it, you need to change your play. As a tight head getting bored into, you can’t change much!

EDIT: you’ve got to give De Klerk and Vermeulen massive credit too for the scrum penalties as they controlled the ball at the base really well, held the ball in and allowed the second shove. You wonder if DC had allowed the scrum to go go down a couple of times they might have had more difficulty calling it and forced the ball to be played earlier.
 
Yadda said:
You have to look at it from some English fans perspective: Wales and SA suffer from "international small man syndrome" and every time a result doesn't go England's their way it's because of bad reffing.

O, and if you disagree then you're just being anti-English. :D
Click to expand...

CHokKA said:
Exactly. I've got to put up with comments like that but I'm being abrasive when I question things said that explain why SA won and England lost? Yep, seems fair!
Click to expand...

You are just reinforcing the attitude of "England fans vs everyone else" or narrowing the discussion to being about excuses for England losing.

If the final was NZ v SA and the NZ pack was demolished in the same way then I would ask the same questions.

I've been a player for 30 years, and am now a level 2 coach and referee... Even though SA have a stronger pack, anyone with real experience will know that contest was more one sided than it should have been... As a referee I would be asking myself why it is so one sided. I'm being objective. If SA played the ref better, then fair play to them, that's part of the game, but don't mistake objective discussion for whining.

Also don't underestimate the impact the scrum dominance can have on the whole game... The forwards were battered and lacking confidence... When your forwards are getting battered, the backs feel like they have to save the day with heroics and normally end up over playing with stupid long passes and high risk play. England lost control and were rightly punished by SA, and a lot of that stemmed from the scrum. That said, I'm not denying that SA outplayed England in every aspect yesterday.
 
Stu said:
You are just reinforcing the attitude of "England fans vs everyone else" or narrowing the discussion to being about excuses for England losing.

If the final was NZ v SA and the NZ pack was demolished in the same way then I would ask the same questions.

I've been a player for 30 years, and am now a level 2 coach and referee... Even though SA have a stronger pack, anyone with real experience will know that contest was more one sided than it should have been... As a referee I would be asking myself why it is so one sided. I'm being objective. If SA played the ref better, then fair play to them, that's part of the game, but don't mistake objective discussion for whining.

Also don't underestimate the impact the scrum dominance can have on the whole game... The forwards were battered and lacking confidence... When your forwards are getting battered, the backs feel like they have to save the day with heroics and normally end up over playing with stupid long passes and high risk play. England lost control and were rightly punished by SA, and a lot of that stemmed from the scrum. That said, I'm not denying that SA outplayed England in every aspect yesterday.
Click to expand...

I was quoting actual England fans on this thread. You can't blame me for what they say.
 
Stu said:
You are just reinforcing the attitude of "England fans vs everyone else" or narrowing the discussion to being about excuses for England losing.
Click to expand...

Those were comments made by England fans in here about SA and Wales when they played.
 
Yadda said:
The best bit is when they accuse other teams of hubris before blaming the ref when their side loses. That gets me every time.
Click to expand...

I think hubris in sports is always risky and will often end in embarrassment!
 
Stu said:
You can never rule out NZ, but I think SA are looking very good right now. England have the ability, but a lot falls to temperament and leadership, which could be their downfall. Despite their recent run and #1 ranking, I don't reckon Wales will win the World Cup because their record versus top 6 teams away from home is not good (they haven't won a big game away from home since the last World Cup).
Click to expand...

Yadda said:
On that, we agree.

The bold claims and confident declarations are a hoot to read back though.
Click to expand...

I think my previous comments were fair!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom