FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Chiefs and Lions show how the game should be played

Chiefs and Lions show how the game should be played

Started by Saffolk 30 REPLIES366 VIEWS· 26 May 2015, 10:36
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
26 May 2015, 10:36
#1
26 May 2015, 10:36#1

Both sides are hardly stacked with stars but they keep producing the results thanks to the brand of rugby they play. They have attacking minded 9's & 10's and players across the park who look to attack space and keep the ball alive.


Its so refreshing to watch, compared to the conservative crap the likes of the Sharks and Bulls dish out.



RO
RooinekCaptain18,117 posts
26 May 2015, 12:45
#2
26 May 2015, 12:45#2
I agree that the Chiefs and the Lions play attractive attacking rugby but I question whether the Chiefs can be described as a team with few stars.

In Brodie Retallick they have the World Player of the Year and in Sonny Bill Williams they have the World's most talked about player. I know Sam Cane is spoken about in hushed tones in New Zealand as the next Richie McCaw; Aaron Cruden has a claim to being the world's most overrated player while Liam Messam and Tim Nanai-Williams would be stars in pretty much any team in the world.
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
26 May 2015, 13:09
#3
26 May 2015, 13:09#3

Am with you on Retallick and SBW but neither are playing right now


Nor is Cruden for that matter.


Imagine how good both sides would be is they were dominated by test players, playing that brand of rugby

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 May 2015, 15:02
#4
26 May 2015, 15:02#4

The mistake the Bools made was trying to play the Chiefs game. Which is exactly the mistake the Boks made at Ellis Park in 2013. If that was the way to go the Blitz Bokke would have won a few trophies in the last 10 years.

BL
bluebokPro3,977 posts
26 May 2015, 15:14
#5
26 May 2015, 15:14#5
Moz, in 2013 the Boks had no choice but to play 100% attacking rugby, they had to get the bonus point victory in order to win the tournament. Caution to the wind and all! So that game is to be viewed in context. 

SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
26 May 2015, 15:20
#6
26 May 2015, 15:20#6

Nope the Bulls never tried to play the Chiefs game they just played boring unimaginative rugby much like the Boks do.


If the Boks had a worthy coach that gave them the freedom to play the brand of rugby that the Lions and Chiefs do, the Boks would be number 1 right now.


The Boks should be playing to their strengths which is dominance up front, with plenty of physicality, mixed with the free spirited stuff we see from the Chiefs and Lions....its that simple really  

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 May 2015, 15:24
#7
26 May 2015, 15:24#7
Sure Bloo but how did it work out for us....JJ lost the ball at the half and then got run over by wee Barrett. We can't stay with NZ playing this type of game....it's in their rugby DNA.  
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 May 2015, 15:28
#8
26 May 2015, 15:28#8

Davey, Davey still in cloud cuckow land? The Bools ran 100 times, the Chiefs 158 times. Here's what happened. The Chiefs were way bettter at beating the first tackle, which unleashed their back up runners for a massive 3.75 as many offloads. It wasn't a question of intent, the Bools couldn't execute along with the Chiefs.

 

20Clean breaks635Defenders beaten1730Offloads8
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
26 May 2015, 15:32
#9
26 May 2015, 15:32#9

Oh boy the usual bullshit from Moz......you will find Blue that JJ had the ball passed down the line from Morne and then his captain Jean on the stroke of halftime, with the clear expectation that the Boks run the ball.......unless in Moz's eyes, it was down to JJ to make a clearance kick.......for a fleeting moment, maybe Morne decided JJ was better equipped to kick!!!!.......what a joke. JJ ran because his skipper passed him the ball.....it wa in fact a good run, beating Cruden with a great step.


And oh we just cant move away from the lies relating to the Barrett try....first we had Jean completely cock up the charge out of the line pathetically missing Barrett and throwing the defensive line in the process. We then had Morne the inside defender going high on Barrett missing him completely, leaving JJ to try and adjust from covering wide in order to clean up the messes Jean and Morne had left him.


At NO point and I'll say it again at NO point did wee Barrett run over JJ - that is a blatant lie......but Moz seems to think lies carry weight on here.

 

BL
bluebokPro3,977 posts
26 May 2015, 15:44
#10
26 May 2015, 15:44#10
I take your point Moz, but you can't indoctrinate a team to play a certain style of rugby for 20+ years, and then change the entire philosophy of play for one game. They did well under the circrumstances, but to suddenly adopt a new style of attacking rugby, and expect positive results against the best team in the world was always a bit of a pipe dream!  
Given time I am sure the Boks could be a top attacking team. Better than the All Blacks? Not so sure!
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
26 May 2015, 15:47
#11
26 May 2015, 15:47#11
Blue that will never happen with Meyer as their coach - impossible  
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 May 2015, 16:09
#12
26 May 2015, 16:09#12
If we have the capacity to take on the ABs in wide open rugby, it will show up at S15 level first. With any SA team that takes on the top NZ team being creamed in open games....only a foolish Bok coach would take on Dave's fantasy.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
26 May 2015, 16:21
#13
26 May 2015, 16:21#13
 Mozart conveniently forgot about the real issue iro the second try scored by Messam in the 2013 test.  Seconds before halftime the witless Morne Steyn 15 meters inside the Bok 22 passed the ball instead of making a relieving kick.  The ball went to JJ and he tried to run out of trouble - which was virtually impossible.   This was another example of impaired decisionmaking by the poorest flyhalf we had in 20 years in this country.
When Morne made foul ups Mozart blames everybody else for what happened.   The list is virtually endless - a further example being the failure to find touch with a penalty kick - something Mozart never mentioned in what he wrote about the game.   Initially Morne's performance in that game was praised by Mozart - and when it was pointed out to him what happened  the deceit and lies took over.   

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 May 2015, 17:11
#14
26 May 2015, 17:11#14

Liar mike at it again. The JJ incident that occurred at the half was as follows. The Boks won a lineout a few metres outside their 22. They passed the ball back to Morne who was 5 metres inside his 22.....who then passed to Jean, who offloaded to JJ on the inside. JJ beat one defender but when tackled he placed the ball immediately.

 

 

So Morne was not 15 metres inside our 22....Liarmike.

 

 

JJ made several mistakes.....having taken the offload he isolated himself by running away from all his support.....he failed to maintain his feet for even an instant when tackled.....he placed the ball to close to himself and again could have delayed just that little bit  to deny the fetcher. In effect he created the perfect fetch for Reid.

 

 

To make things worse he then missed Nonu in the lead up to the AB try.

 

Was Morne's decision justified? Well the Boks had just scored two long range tries from just outside their 22. In one case Louw made the perfect offload, in the other case Vermeulen. Chasing the championship Jean obviously felt it was worth taking the chance. But JJ running a way from his support, instead of linking like Louw and Vermeulen, turned the move into a catastrophe.

SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
26 May 2015, 17:12
#15
26 May 2015, 17:12#15

Oh yeah and what exactly have the current Bok coaches achieved against the AB's exactly?


Last I checked we kept coming second to the Kiwi's so whatever current plan is being employed is NOT working.....you work the maths out.  

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 May 2015, 17:14
#16
26 May 2015, 17:14#16
 We beat the ABs in 2014 using my tactics and lost in 2013 using your tactics....learn from history.
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
26 May 2015, 18:20
#17
26 May 2015, 18:20#17
 Mozart
JUst a second here.  The tries scored in 2014 was a long-distance one started in the AB's 22 and two cases of Pollard attacking the gain line and scoring twice.   That never happened before - since your super-hero Morne never attacked the gain line - so how come that was playing your style of rugby?   
Then your forgot to add that the game was nearly lost because of a ridiculously poor line out play late in the match by Matfield - he is another hero of yours - thzt was a huge negative.   
Then Lambie kicked a brilliant penalty from 55 meters out.  Another player constantly maligned by you and not using "your tactics" at all.
Matter of fact the whole game in 2014 was played contra to your tactics and your claim in that regard is ridiculous.         
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
26 May 2015, 18:27
#18
26 May 2015, 18:27#18
Bullshit we never played open attacking rugby in 2013  
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
26 May 2015, 18:37
#19
26 May 2015, 18:37#19
 Wish I can get the full video on the 2013 All Black test against the Springboks in 2013 - I want to check that claim of Mozart about the line out story - since I smell a rat.  I got the highlight package only and Messams attack - after Engelbrecht carried the ball for about 30 meters - started halfway between the Springbok 22 and half line.  
There are two other issues - Morne got the ball inside the 22 near the goal posts - that would have been a weird position taken up by him after a line - out - and passed it to his right to De Villiers and hence to JJ who received the ball  about 15 meters from the touchline and started his run.
The other issue here is that Naas Botha nearly had a fit about it - during halftime he spoke about five minutes non-stop about Morne's failure to kick for touch and that would not have happened  if the ball was passed back into the 22 and Morne could not kick for touch.
I have a different recollection of the incident.  As far as I can remember the AB's were attacking and carried the ball into the Springboks 22 - where I think it was Bismarck - caused a possession turnover and from that maul the ball went out to Morne - the latter being all within the Springboks 25.
I may be wrong - hence my request for help in finding the full match video to check it out.      
         
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
26 May 2015, 19:34
#20
26 May 2015, 19:34#20
If sides like the Lions and Cheetahs can play attacking rugby with their limited resources why cant the Bulls, Stormers and Sharks. Even more so why cant the Boks!!!!
The Lions have shown what a side decently coached can achieve. Its the mindset and poor coaching that is the problem.
Forward dominance plus decent attacking skills has been the Boks traditional trade mark. The 3 major Super 15 franchises need decent coaches and a change to start using skills and being creative. This is hardly rocket science after all.  You dont even have to invent anything!!!!
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 May 2015, 20:31
#21
26 May 2015, 20:31#21
Not bull in 2013 we played open attacking rugby at Elllis Park and lost.  This was NZ rugby, trying to attack from deep, eschewing the boot. In 2014 we played a more traditional Bok game, relying on turnovers and good field position. When the opportunities came Pollard took them. Nothing was forced. Thats how we have to play it.Try to play like Chiefs and we will be slaughtered by NZ and Oz who have better outside backs.

Try to use your noggin Sapp.
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
26 May 2015, 22:26
#22
26 May 2015, 22:26#22
 Yes Beeno, follow the Kiwi example & all will be well
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
27 May 2015, 10:07
#23
27 May 2015, 10:07#23

Um that was a one off at Ellis Park as explained previously - we were chasing a bonus point......a one off test does not define a years worth of boring rugby played by the Boks.


Fact is we were the better side on the day and had it not been for Jean pathetic miss on Barrett and useless Morne's fumble over the line after JJ brilliant beating of Savea, we would have walked that test.


That test showed exactly how we should have played all year and how we should be playing right now.


The way the Chiefs and Lions play is exactly how the game should be played by the Boks with an added emphasis on dominating up front without the likes of useless Matfield and the likes on board.


So a question for you Moz, was it wrong that JJ ran the ball after receiving it from Morne and Jean on the halftime whistle or do you think it was his job to say kick it out?  

DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
27 May 2015, 12:05
#24
27 May 2015, 12:05#24
We were the worst side on the day. We turned the game into a series of 1v1 situations completely giving up any line integrity whatsoever and made no attempt to win the territorial battle. It was a reckless and naive gameplan.  
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
27 May 2015, 12:44
#25
27 May 2015, 12:44#25
 The real farce that day was Morne Steyn.  He cost us the Ellis Park game in 2013.  He was directly involved in missing two tackles during attacks by the AB's leading to two tries.
The non-thinking abortion he made seconds before halftime cast us dearly and was the reason for scoring of the third AQB try.   Don't believe what I say on the latter incident - rather believe Naas Botha, who was outraged and minced no words on the issue during halftime of that match.
That stupidity by Morne matched the farce he made of a penalty line kick in the Perth test last year.    In the first case - Engelbrecht got the blame for the original foul up by Morne in the case of the Ellis Park test - in the case of the Perth test Lambie was blamed.  Can we ever believe anything Mozart and Letsal write?????
Morne Steyn was the worst flop we had during the past two decades - and that is a fact.        
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
27 May 2015, 12:46
#26
27 May 2015, 12:46#26

Lestat, instead of lying why not back your pathetic assertion re JJ's defence with actual stats, thereby exposing you for the useless liar you are.


As I pointed out at the time, backed by stats......JJ's defensive stats were better than Jean's in the RC that year.....so stop fucking lying, its pathetic.


The Boks were the better side on the day  

DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
27 May 2015, 12:54
#27
27 May 2015, 12:54#27
Actually, I did that last year after b oth Argentina tests. I ranked every 13 played under Meyer for tackle success and JJ was last. You called me a liar for saying he got bounced and I produced several videos. You need to keep up ol boy!
RC
Rassie Coach of the YearRookie31 posts
27 May 2015, 14:14
#28
27 May 2015, 14:14#28
 OK, I found the video that I was  looking for. Now where is that blimmen rat that I was smelling?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MPJNRLgEWQ
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
27 May 2015, 14:59
#29
27 May 2015, 14:59#29

You are lying you twat, go check the stats for the whole RC that year and come back and tell me that JJ was worse than Jean......blatant bloody lies.


Provide a video of JJ being bounced in test matches.....come on you liar  

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
27 May 2015, 17:18
#30
27 May 2015, 17:18#30
 There were two issues here.  Just after the injury of Alberts - there was a five meter scrum - and Morne kicked for touch and found touch on the 22.  The AB's threw in the ball and the Springboks won the ball in the line-out.  By then the play was in the Springboks 22 and a kick out of touch would have been enough to stop play for halftime.   Naas was 100% correct and what he said about the issue.
Both Mozart and I was incorrect as to what happened - Mozart said the lineout was "a few meters" outside the 22 - while I said the turnover came from a maul within the 22.   Sorry I was wrong.   However, there was indeed a turnover because the AB hooker made a mess of the throw-in.  
Now for the standard Mozart excuse to cover the balls-up by Morne:-
"Was Morne's decision justified? Well the Boks had just scored two long range tries from just outside their 22. In one case Louw made the perfect offload, in the other case Vermeulen. Chasing the championship Jean obviously felt it was worth taking the chance. But JJ running away from his support, instead of linking like Louw and Vermeulen, turned the move into a catastrophe."

Lets look at the following and see how true it is:-
"Well the Boks had just scored two long range tries from just outside their 22".
Neither of the attacks started "just outside their 22".  One of the attacks started halfway between the Boks halfway and 22 - the other less than 10 meters inside the Springbok half.
"Chasing the championship Jean obviously felt it was worth taking the chance".  This is ridiculous - it was not Jean's decision - it was Morne's and he took it knowing the end of the first half was imminent.  Lets face facts - the robotic Morne never took the decision.  He was told before the game to limit kicking and keep the ball in hand and the robot actually did just that.  
I have never read such garbage about justification in my life and that from a person who claims he knows something about rugby.  Lets face facts - Naas was correct in this case that it was a balls-up by Morne - and to blame JJ for that balls-up is ridiculous.      
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
27 May 2015, 17:26
#31
27 May 2015, 17:26#31

Your take on JJ not linking with slow coaches like Louw and Vermeulen is a load of shit......JJ made a great break and Kolisi came close to securing the ball after Read got a hand on JJ which threw him off balance......it was Read's swinging arm that had the ball fly out some distance for the AB's to counter......much happened after that incident before the AB's scored.


What should have happened on the stroke of half time, was Morne kicking the ball dead - failing which the Bok captain in Jean should have done just that. By passing to JJ, they obviously wanted to attack.......how fucking obvious is that......but we have some clowns telling us JJ is the guilty party......unbelievable  

— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news