2007 and 2015 RWC 's when Springboks lost their mojo...against Tier 2 sides.

All this spouting off about how great the Boks were in these years is a bit of a fallacy.

In 2007, what would have happened in pool A game if Tonga got an extra try...look at the scores...

Pierre Hola, all deft chips and shimmies, sent a cross-kick over to the left, where Suka Hufanga beat Percy Montgomery for a supposedly consolation try on 70 minutes. That was 27-15, but then Hola was at it again. Another cross-kick, this from inside his own 22, sent Tevita Tu'ifua off into Springbok territory. Another little dink into space and suddenly Viliami Vaki, part of a brilliant Tonga back-row, was winning the race for a try under the posts. 27-22.

In 2015 we were not so lucky against Japan...ol Maaikie has never forgotten this. 

Both these WC's we lived dangerously...never convincing but 2019 was a huge difference.

The 2007 Tonga Team:

1. Steenkamp
2. Botha
3. van der Linde
4. Botha
5. van den Bergh
6. ven Heerden
7. Rossouw
8. Skinstad
9. Januarie
10. Pretorius
11. Willemse
12. Julies
13. Olivier
14. Pietersen
15. Pienaar

I'm fully aware that they were primary, a second side (bar a few), nevertheless they had a strong bench which they called up when things got dicey. But what would have happened if they had lost? If my memory serves me right it was one hell of a scare. To be fair the Tongan side was not that bad either that year. What would have happened if they had lost? Who knows.

Has NZ for example,had a close call with tier 2 sides? We are far more vulnerable it seems. The loss to Japan is proof.

The only iffy calls in 2007s final was the trip on Butch outside the 22 which could have been a red card and shoving Monty into a camera. The 2007 side had no weakness. The 2019 side had holes all over the place, playing one good game all tournament. This is not an argument you can win Chabal. 

"Go tell it to the Marines" ...the Final scores speak for themselves.

Kindergarten Imbecile

I was at the  Tonga game and it was a shambles  of  the first order - a lousy second-class performance by the Springboks and all 8 replacements came on early and the lousy game continued until the last ten minutes.      Tp to then the crowd was convinced that the Springboks would lose.

The 2007 side had enough  weaknesses to fill a book.     The re was ion the first instance a game plan used for the final that fits the English team perfectly,   Un the final -

*      in scrums the Springboks were not superior - fact they were pushed back slowly by the English forwards. '

*     their ball protection and recovery was seriously defective and the English team was  avke to make at least three turnovers at breakdowns;

*     The Springboks tried in line=outs to get the ball on English  execution was si poor that oit put Du Preez under serious pressure

*     Defense was spotty and ineffective.- some players mussed tackles like Frans Steym with his three misses;

*     Attacks were totally  ineffective - the only time  they threaten the English tryline it was a shambles and eventually they lost ball possession.

The real fact is that the English was in some respects better than the Springboks, but they contravened  disciplinary rules too often and that was the only reason for the Springboks win. 

If I  have to use a combined team  from the three WC finals won by SA the only 2007 player that would be considered would be Habana/    In the final his contribution was near to zero,  but that was because of the game plan used by White,   As a result he  would only be considered as a bench player.    

After watching the game many times  and especially when in December they showed  the three finals one after the other,  I became disappointed in what the Springboks of 2007  as to performance produced compared to performances in 1995 - but totally ineffective when compared to the 2019 final.     

            .        

Lügnerin, you've been taken to the cleaners your entire life, go fine someone new to bore.

Chabal, you could save us all the trouble and just wave a white flag. You start by an supposedly making an assessment and then throw that out the window with your final comment. As I've said before, you cannot defend your position. Nobody on this forum has been able to do so and none ever will. Do you really want to be the next Lügnerin, waffling mindlessly? Never thought I'd see you join the dark side 

Our lineouts were  poor according to Tokkie....which of course is why Matfield was the MOM in the final. This Oom will say anything to try and prove his point.

This was a remarkably stupid argument by Chabal.....focusing on our second team running into trouble in 2007 trying to beat Tonga at their own game ....vs losing what everybody thought at the time was a crucial match in 2019 against NZ. But we were saved in another stroke of luck when Japan beat a pathetic Irish team. Which set up the chain of events that made us the winners.

Can you read English  at all?    I never said the line-outs in the final was poor.   I said that on opposition throw-ins  the ball was clapped back to Du Preez and he was under extreme pressure as a result.   The benefit of a lion-out turn-overs were thus nullified,    

Every example bat one  I gave above happened at least three time ins the final.   Once was fine - repeats were not,   

Is there to be a "second team"  in any WC squad?    There are slight differences in performance levels in some cases  - but Erasmus eliminated that by using of the famous "Bomb squad"  concept,  That did not reduce the  team performances at all - in fact it enhanced the performances of the team in crucial matches,    The only player that was not up to standard  in the bomb squad was Mostert - demoted because he was the flop that caused the AB win you referred to,                

The problem is that you refer to the Tonga game and stated that the Springboks tried to play  Tonga at their own game.   I wish that would have been the case then they would not have been the shambles it was.   There were no game plan at all during that match  - the same  as  was  the disaster against the Japanese in 2015.   The shambles continued  in the rest of the game despite  bringing on all replacements in the time before minute 60  the shambles continued until the Springboks somehow got the upper hand in the last ten minute of the game.     

".vs losing what everybody thought at the time was a crucial match in 2019 against NZ".

You may have thought it - nobody else did.    The only competitor left that could have set the  Springboks out of the play-offs - a team against which under Coetzee the Springboks lost - and they were beaten  46-3 by the Springboks.   You "everybody"  obviously refer probably to only the idiots on site that is totally rugby ignorant.   

To refer to the All Blacks in the same breath as Japan and Tonga is the most ridiculous statement ever made on this site - even by your ridiculously low  standards it was the lowest point ever in your comments on site,  

The fact is that the rest of the players were so substandard on both sides that the tackle om Tait preventing a try was the only reason for the MOM  in the final  being given to Matfield,    The only other potential candidate was Montgomery for his kicking at goal or one of the English players.         

The fact is your constant attacks on Erasmus  the moment you heard about his appointment  started off the serious attack of idiocy by you and that moron the Kindergarten Imbecile.   instead of  not appreciating the fact that Erasmus saved  Springbok rugby from the mess started by Meyer and perfected by Coetzee that  made the Springboks being degraded and a joke in the rugby world.     The fact is that you supported both the two idiot coaches  who discredited themselves so much that nobody would ever appoint them as coaches in future.

Keep it up  - stupidity on site is a lways funny.