Did Ramos or France win that game?

Forum » Rugby » Did Ramos or France win that game?

Mar 17, 2024, 06:48

Given how fresh the game is in our minds is abundantly clear France the team won that game not Ramos himself

WC and Pollard

Mar 17, 2024, 07:22


Mar 17, 2024, 12:53

The Ref did. 

Mar 17, 2024, 13:05

The ref and Ramos

Ramos my arse

Mar 17, 2024, 13:25


Mar 17, 2024, 14:08

How piss poor is Ramos at defending - I know they try hide him as much as possible but fuck me he is pathetic - he is literally shit scared of fronting up

Great attacking player but don’t put him in any line of defence

Mar 17, 2024, 14:52

Actually Ramos missed his kick 8minutes earlier which could have been crucial. If Pollard had done the same thing his final kick would have been meaningless.

By making every kick, Pollard won the WC, if he missed one we don’t win. Can you spot the difference Dave?

Mar 17, 2024, 20:37

No Moz the difference is that no one is stupid enough to conclude that an individual wins a game for you unless you have some pathetic ulterior motive

Having just watched that match unfold telling me Ramos won the game and not the team is nothing short of insulting and completely rugby ignorant

But your motivation is as misplaced as ever

Mar 17, 2024, 22:42

Both teams matched each other so closely, that neither could get ascendancy and eventually it did come down to the Penalty Kick.

Mar 17, 2024, 23:08


Mar 17, 2024, 23:10

Look in the mirror and you will see the Biggest one ….very easy to see : )

Mar 17, 2024, 23:25

It’s like trying to teach a pig

Mar 18, 2024, 02:16

Without Pollard, we lose the last three matches. So I conclude he is won the WC. The logic is fairly simple.

Mar 18, 2024, 08:15

I suppose it would be difficult to teach a pig, if you a pig yourself : )

Mar 18, 2024, 11:47

Bullshit Moz the Boks as a whole won the last 3 games, it was certainly not an individual that won it. The logic is fairly simple - the team created the penalty not Pollard, without the penalty there is no kick

Fuck if you don’t get that throw in the towel

Same applies to Ramos and his kick

Mar 18, 2024, 13:36

And the French team and the NZ team created exactly similar penalties..which their kickers missed. Our kicker made those penalties. Ergo Pollard won the WC.

The teams were deadlocked….the difference was the kicker. If you can’t grasp that throw in the towel.

Mar 18, 2024, 13:49

No teams win rugby matches not individuals. Regardless of having a Pollard on board, if Pollard was playing for the pub 3rd team against NZ the score would be 100-0 at halftime

You see that in a game of rugby, to clarify - a team sport, it is the team that executes the scrums, line outs, rucks, mauls, running, passing, tackling, kicking, catching, try scoring etc etc etc - not the individual.

Without the above there is zero an individual can do in a team sport. So in order to get to the point of kicking at poles all the above by the team has to take place - even if the opposition miss their kicks, that last kick by Pollard is of no consequence if his team did not score tries or create penalties in order to ensure points accumulate on the board.

It’s the team that wins or losses the game not the individual. If the team had not performed adequately up to the point Pollard took his kicks and thereafter, then the team loses.

So if at the point Pollard took that kick, the Boks had had no points the Boks lose comfortably. It’s not Pollard that loses us the game it’s the team. Kicking for goal is a tiny part of the team performance as a whole

Pollard never won us the WC, our might team did - it’s a fucking team sport - it’s not golf

Mar 18, 2024, 14:04

Bok team + Bok kicker> NZ team + NZ kicker

But Bok team=New Zealand team….each team created potential match winning penalties in the last 10 minutes.

Therefore Bok kicker> NZ kicker. And that’s the distinguishing factor,

Yes Dave we all agree with you the team won the game. That’s a tautology. Because the individual that won the game is part of the team.

But both the French and NZ kickers were given similar opportunities and they failed 

Your point is Eluckmiss is a genius and he worked his magic on the team.

My point is he played bog ordinary rugby, relying on our superior forward talent. In the end our opponents countered which made all the WC knockouts crap shoots. It came down to the kickers.

And incredibly our kicker who came through in the crunch wasn’t even selected by the genius…but only because Marx got hurt. 

That’s a realists view of what happened. Believe the fairy tale if you wish. 

Mar 18, 2024, 14:59

No fairytale at all rugby is a team sport without the contribution of the team there are no kicks at goal.

It’s a game of rugby not a game of kicking shootouts

The team and not Pollard won the games - that is a fact. You can’t dissect the whole it’s the whole that wins or loses a game of rugby. Without the whole there is no game at all

Mar 18, 2024, 16:17

I’m not saying there is no team, nor am I say there weren’t other huge contributions eg from Etzebeth. All I’m saying is NZ also had huge team contributions, eg from Savea. And that the net of all that activity were stalemated games that came down to Barrett, Ramos and Pollard. That’s when Pollard, landing every kick he attempted created a difference and won the WC.

Mar 18, 2024, 16:51

You acknowledge all that yet you still say Pollard won us those games - bullshit - without all that he does not even get to kick, regardless of what the opposition do.

Post his kicks we still had to defend those leads, defending the lead as a team wins us those games just like applying the pressure wins us penalties or has us scoring tries

It’s the collective over 80+ minutes that wins or losses you games it’s never the individual. Using your theory it would be no different saying RG won us the game against England and DA and Eben won us the game against France because they scored tries

Mar 18, 2024, 19:37


Mar 18, 2024, 19:41

Ceteris Paribus….standard analysis. You hold all other variables constant and allow one variable to fluctuate. In this case goal kicking. And using CP in this case is even more justifiable than usual because each team was presented the potential to win the game with a kick. Pollard steps up in minute 78 and misses from 50 meters out and Eluckmiss is eating boerewors in Moddersfontein  the  next Saturday.

Mar 18, 2024, 19:47

My word

If Pollard wasn't flawless three times in a row the Boks don't win the Cup.

I can believe this can be that difficult to understand.

Mar 18, 2024, 19:49

None of the other variables are ever constant in a game of rugby

Post the kick in minute 78 we could have conceded a penalty or a try - what prevented that, Pollard or the team?

Mar 18, 2024, 20:14

Yes and a asteroid could have struck earth.

Mar 18, 2024, 20:23

We can’t defend for two minutes starting at the halfway….hahaha….grasping at and missing the straws.

Mar 18, 2024, 20:24

Damn I never thought about the asteroid thing but I’m sure Rassie had it covered.

Mar 18, 2024, 20:52

Plum why don’t you go shove a plum up your arse

Mar 18, 2024, 20:54

Ah so once Pollard made the kick there was no pressure from NZ that we had to defend - WOW

Not sure what game you were watching

Mar 18, 2024, 21:58

The 78 minute kick was in the Pom game. I was watching that game. What game were you watching?

Mar 18, 2024, 22:27

Well Pom game and NZ game the kicks were at similar times so my question stands for both

You need to Log in to reply.
Back to top