"He will forever be remembered as the comeback liability who lost us the semi"
Only by those with a short attention span like you and ou S opdoos.
Pro9,374 posts
02 Nov 2015, 22:42
#41
02 Nov 2015, 22:42#41
Fiitingly Lomp gives away the try
Started by Mozart70 REPLIES1,759 VIEWS· 31 Oct 2015, 00:01
Captain10,129 posts
02 Nov 2015, 22:58
#42
02 Nov 2015, 22:58#42
This from the ouDawie who ranks the AB locks, 'bog ordinary' but Eben & Loop undoubtedly the world's top locking duo .
Captain30,741 posts
02 Nov 2015, 23:13
#43
02 Nov 2015, 23:13#43
Blobtwat.....so I see you are still beating that drum you lying fuckwit......provide evidence of me saying the AB locks are bog ordinary.....if you dont have the balls to deal in the truth.....do us a favour and fuck off from this board you scum
Captain30,741 posts
02 Nov 2015, 23:15
#44
02 Nov 2015, 23:15#44
Look here Pakie you stupid prick.....in rugby are you allowed to make contact with a players neck? Are you saying there is no law against this you idiot, that it is allowed in the game huh?
Captain30,741 posts
02 Nov 2015, 23:17
#45
02 Nov 2015, 23:17#45
D U T C H I E kindly inform us what attention span has to do with anything you stupid dutchman......maybe a Taal translation might be a good start boerseun?
Captain49,914 posts
02 Nov 2015, 23:29
#46
02 Nov 2015, 23:29#46
Well Porker you said Lomp outplayed Whitelock.
Pro9,374 posts
03 Nov 2015, 00:03
#47
03 Nov 2015, 00:03#47
Saffex
Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 14239RE: Fiitingly Lomp gives away the try
November 02, 2015, 23:17:11
Well it is clear that you do not have the ability to assess the entire game in total now, do you? Clearly a matter of a short attention span. Added to that you suffer from a bad dose of Tou rette's as well. You need help, mate. Time for Dr Phil perhaps?
Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 14239RE: Fiitingly Lomp gives away the try
November 02, 2015, 23:17:11
[removed] I E kindly inform us what attention span has to do with anything you stupid [removed]......maybe a Taal translation might be a good start boerseun?
Well it is clear that you do not have the ability to assess the entire game in total now, do you? Clearly a matter of a short attention span. Added to that you suffer from a bad dose of Tou rette's as well. You need help, mate. Time for Dr Phil perhaps?
Captain30,741 posts
03 Nov 2015, 00:03
#48
03 Nov 2015, 00:03#48
Coffin dodger......yes he did.....unless gaining ZERO metres all game somehow ticks your fucking ignorant box - fucking loser
Captain30,741 posts
03 Nov 2015, 00:06
#49
03 Nov 2015, 00:06#49
I dont need to assess the whole game you dumbass....I just need to look at a passage of play where a player through plain stupidity gave away 3 points.....we lost by 2......stupidity I cant excuse.....get it D U T C H I E.....or should I repeat that in your pathetic taal?
Pro9,374 posts
03 Nov 2015, 01:22
#50
03 Nov 2015, 01:22#50
I dare you to try that without Google translate.
Coach57,555 posts
03 Nov 2015, 01:42
#51
03 Nov 2015, 01:42#51
Mozart
Taking your constant campaign against De Jager from the beginning of the RC this year - starting of with a lie about line calling which was badly exposed and carrying on ever since entirely based on the fact that he was a thread to your hero Matfield's inclusion in the Springbok team - is hardly a norm for determination of the performance quality of De Jager.
The one thing that really is a blessing for the team in future is that Matfield - to be remembered as the worst failure by an experienced player ever in his their final test - is not ever to be playing for the Springboks again.
Taking your constant campaign against De Jager from the beginning of the RC this year - starting of with a lie about line calling which was badly exposed and carrying on ever since entirely based on the fact that he was a thread to your hero Matfield's inclusion in the Springbok team - is hardly a norm for determination of the performance quality of De Jager.
The one thing that really is a blessing for the team in future is that Matfield - to be remembered as the worst failure by an experienced player ever in his their final test - is not ever to be playing for the Springboks again.
Captain49,914 posts
03 Nov 2015, 02:02
#52
03 Nov 2015, 02:02#52
Actually ou Tokkie this is embarrassing....Matfield got the MOM in his final test.
Coach57,555 posts
03 Nov 2015, 02:10
#53
03 Nov 2015, 02:10#53
As did De Jager in the test against Scotland. It is embarrassing indeed - at least Scotland fielded their strongest side - Argentina their "B" side. Only you would be foolish enough to post the latest comment. Show some brains for a change - you are an embarrassment to this site.
Pro9,374 posts
03 Nov 2015, 02:21
#54
03 Nov 2015, 02:21#54
"The one thing that really is a blessing for the team in future is that Matfield - to be remembered as the worst failure by an experienced player ever in his their final test - is not ever to be playing for the Springboks again. "
Wrong. This is what is thought of him and it is not going to change:
Bryan Habana: 'Victor Matfield is a colossus of the game' Read more at: https://tr.im/Y3DZ8
(But hey, who cares what a stupid idiot like Bryan Habana think.)
What does a stupid qunt like John Mallinder know when he says this:
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-3297563/South-Africa-24-13-Argentina-Victor-Matfield-rides-sunset-win-Springboks-claim-bronze-medal-match.html#ixzz3qNncZu3P
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-3297563/South-Africa-24-13-Argentina-Victor-Matfield-rides-sunset-win-Springboks-claim-bronze-medal-match.html#ixzz3qNnuWeuy
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Wrong. This is what is thought of him and it is not going to change:
Bryan Habana: 'Victor Matfield is a colossus of the game' Read more at: https://tr.im/Y3DZ8
(But hey, who cares what a stupid idiot like Bryan Habana think.)
What does a stupid qunt like John Mallinder know when he says this:
"Victor is one of the outstanding forwards in world rugby," said Saints director of rugby Jim Mallinder.
"We're very much looking forward to Victor joining up with the squad and believe he has a lot to offer the club, not only on the field, but also off it in terms of his leadership qualities and experience."
Victor Matfield and Bakkes Botha were a force of nature for the Saffers for a decade. They were one of the best ever 2nd row pairings and as with O'Connell they have left the 2nd row game in a better condition than they found it, with De Jager and Etzebeth ready to take the baton on for the next decade. Happy retirement Victor, you were a fantastic opponent.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-3297563/South-Africa-24-13-Argentina-Victor-Matfield-rides-sunset-win-Springboks-claim-bronze-medal-match.html#ixzz3qNncZu3P
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
dev1976, Guildford, United Kingdom, 3 days ago
One of the best locks ever...Thanks Victor
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-3297563/South-Africa-24-13-Argentina-Victor-Matfield-rides-sunset-win-Springboks-claim-bronze-medal-match.html#ixzz3qNnuWeuy
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Captain49,914 posts
03 Nov 2015, 02:23
#55
03 Nov 2015, 02:23#55
Actually Matfield played against first choice Lavanini....you know the guy you swore was Ole Cruz, when he got his MOM. Lomp played against the 4 inch shorter Gray brother, second choice Johnny Gray, when he got this MOM you speak of. So by your own rules Victor's is much more legitimate.....down goes the poor Pervert again.
Coach57,555 posts
03 Nov 2015, 02:42
#56
03 Nov 2015, 02:42#56
BS
Captain49,914 posts
03 Nov 2015, 03:19
#57
03 Nov 2015, 03:19#57
BS translates to ....I have no response. It's game, set and match here as well.
Coach57,555 posts
03 Nov 2015, 03:27
#58
03 Nov 2015, 03:27#58
BS translate to the quality of the posting made by the previous poster - nothing more, nothing less.
Captain49,914 posts
03 Nov 2015, 07:13
#59
03 Nov 2015, 07:13#59
It's pretty obvious Lomp is a flat track bully....but uniformly dominated by the better teams.
Captain17,321 posts
03 Nov 2015, 07:20
#60
03 Nov 2015, 07:20#60
"at least Scotland fielded their strongest side"
Really? That's not how I recall it, and this from the Telegraph confirms it:
Scotland, no doubt stung by accusations that they had fielded an under-strength side, ran into the Springboks defensive wall with an almost reckless determination to physically confront the men in white.
Really? That's not how I recall it, and this from the Telegraph confirms it:
Scotland, no doubt stung by accusations that they had fielded an under-strength side, ran into the Springboks defensive wall with an almost reckless determination to physically confront the men in white.
And this from News24:
Scotland coach Vern Cotter announced a "strange" line-up for the clash against the Boks, with many pundits considering it an under-strength side. Some Scottish journalists have suggested that Cotter picked his team with one eye on Samoa next week.
Captain49,914 posts
03 Nov 2015, 07:27
#61
03 Nov 2015, 07:27#61
Ou Tokkie does rather lead with his chin....or should I say chins.
Coach57,555 posts
03 Nov 2015, 10:31
#62
03 Nov 2015, 10:31#62
Pakie
In this case you are talking utter BS and so is the quotation - that waas NOT an under-strength side the Scots fielded - the allegat5ion ws all over the appers because theyu made changes to the team. What the dolts - especially you and the top idiot Mozart - did not realize was that the changes were made to strengthen the team - noit to field a under-strength "B" team
Stupid to come up with that kind of BS after it was clear it was not the case.
In this case you are talking utter BS and so is the quotation - that waas NOT an under-strength side the Scots fielded - the allegat5ion ws all over the appers because theyu made changes to the team. What the dolts - especially you and the top idiot Mozart - did not realize was that the changes were made to strengthen the team - noit to field a under-strength "B" team
Stupid to come up with that kind of BS after it was clear it was not the case.
Captain17,321 posts
03 Nov 2015, 10:38
#63
03 Nov 2015, 10:38#63
"The Scotland management produced a major shock on Thursday when they announced what the local media consider a significantly under-strength team for Saturday’s Rugby World Pool B clash with South Africa at St James Park here in Newcastle.
There was a bit of tense atmosphere as the taciturn Scotland coach Vern Cotter faced the media and explained his decision to select a team that features eight players that are considered second stringers.
“We have never seen this match against South Africa as a match on it’s own. We had three matches in the space of 10 days to prepare for, following a week off before we play Samoa, so we planned around that,” said Cotter.
Scottish media sources said that the mix and match team, which can’t quite be described as a second string combination because there are seven first team regulars in it, including some more on the bench, had been planned long before the tournament.
While Scotland haven’t quite opted to throw the game against the Boks, they do see Samoa, who they play in their final Pool match, as easier opponents and the islanders were always going to be the biggest challengers to their quest to join the Boks in the play-off phase."
But whatever you say Mike. We all know you're never wrong.
Coach57,555 posts
03 Nov 2015, 10:51
#64
03 Nov 2015, 10:51#64
Balls as per normal Quoting a newspaper report from before the match is no proof - what happened during the match is what counts.
Yes we all know what this is about on your part - a deliberate attempt to discredit De Jager and thus divert attention away from the poor displays by Matfield.
Failed effort I am afraid to say.
Yes we all know what this is about on your part - a deliberate attempt to discredit De Jager and thus divert attention away from the poor displays by Matfield.
Failed effort I am afraid to say.
Captain17,321 posts
03 Nov 2015, 11:12
#65
03 Nov 2015, 11:12#65
"Yes we all know what this is about on your part - a deliberate attempt to discredit De Jager"
No, this is a deliberate attempt to discredit you because you are lying again. Even the Scotland coach admits they were compensating for the World Cup schedule and focusing on the Samoa game as their passage to the quarters. The team that faced the Boks even had a prop on debut in the starting lineup, for a total of 4 players taking the field for the first time in the World Cup.
The Scotland team that faced Australia in the quarter-finals - quite obviously their strongest unit available - featured 7 different players than the one that faced the Boks, as well as two positional switches.
But keep trying to convince us you're right. It's quite funny.
No, this is a deliberate attempt to discredit you because you are lying again. Even the Scotland coach admits they were compensating for the World Cup schedule and focusing on the Samoa game as their passage to the quarters. The team that faced the Boks even had a prop on debut in the starting lineup, for a total of 4 players taking the field for the first time in the World Cup.
The Scotland team that faced Australia in the quarter-finals - quite obviously their strongest unit available - featured 7 different players than the one that faced the Boks, as well as two positional switches.
But keep trying to convince us you're right. It's quite funny.
Coach57,555 posts
03 Nov 2015, 11:21
#66
03 Nov 2015, 11:21#66
I am talking about facts - you are taking about newspaper reports. You and Mozxart has been caught out lying before and badly so
So what happened with injuries to players in the Scottish team? There e\were reports of at least 3 changes made by the Scots in later games because of injuries to key players. That leaves four changes - which is minimal and not the weakened team you and your fellow idiot shouted about.
Why not come clean and say - Matfield was wonderful and De Jager sh!t as is your purpose in this case. Or are you and your idiot side kick afraid that will not wash even on this site?
So what happened with injuries to players in the Scottish team? There e\were reports of at least 3 changes made by the Scots in later games because of injuries to key players. That leaves four changes - which is minimal and not the weakened team you and your fellow idiot shouted about.
Why not come clean and say - Matfield was wonderful and De Jager sh!t as is your purpose in this case. Or are you and your idiot side kick afraid that will not wash even on this site?
Captain17,321 posts
03 Nov 2015, 11:39
#67
03 Nov 2015, 11:39#67
Who cares about injuries? There were two, Russell and Hardie. You're just diverting now.
You claimed Scotland fielded their strongest side. It clearly was not. Second choice center combination, second choice lock, second choice wing, debut prop, second choice flyhalf, second choice flanker. It was not the strongest Scottish side, not even the strongest available taking injuries into account.
You and your cohorts have moaned throughout this World Cup that the inclusion of just two players in Matfield and Jean is enough to sink our campaign, yet 5 to 7 first choice Scots not in the side now suddenly makes no dent in their ability?
Your claim is a lie. It was not the strongest Scotland side, confirmed by worldwide rugby media and, most tellingly, the Scottish coach himself. Discussion over.
You claimed Scotland fielded their strongest side. It clearly was not. Second choice center combination, second choice lock, second choice wing, debut prop, second choice flyhalf, second choice flanker. It was not the strongest Scottish side, not even the strongest available taking injuries into account.
You and your cohorts have moaned throughout this World Cup that the inclusion of just two players in Matfield and Jean is enough to sink our campaign, yet 5 to 7 first choice Scots not in the side now suddenly makes no dent in their ability?
Your claim is a lie. It was not the strongest Scotland side, confirmed by worldwide rugby media and, most tellingly, the Scottish coach himself. Discussion over.
Captain26,388 posts
03 Nov 2015, 11:42
#68
03 Nov 2015, 11:42#68
Aag Mike, give it a rest. Lood made some errors, as did Victor, Jannie, Habana...the whole team did. We did poorly in the line outs against NZ and even some of the other teams too. And like Moz noted, both Lood and Victor used Eben sparingly in the lineouts...fck knows why. Variation is key in most aspects of the game and throwing on 2 (your 4 lock in the front of the LO) is usually the safest bet when you struggle...yet both Lood and Victor just soldiered on. Clearly part of the rigid Meyer game plan.
Captain17,321 posts
03 Nov 2015, 11:46
#69
03 Nov 2015, 11:46#69
He doesn't have the intellectual honesty to give it a rest Draad.
So by the way Mike, where have I been caught lying?
So by the way Mike, where have I been caught lying?
Coach57,555 posts
03 Nov 2015, 12:27
#70
03 Nov 2015, 12:27#70
Just remember the tackle stats of De Allende in the Aussie game - where you reduced the number of tackles made by 2 and increase the missed tackles by 1. Remember - how you deliberately missed out the above and when pointed out you suddenly discovered 2 extra tackles. Nice one to forget about.
Captain17,321 posts
03 Nov 2015, 12:46
#71
03 Nov 2015, 12:46#71
Oh I see. The time where I admitted at the same time I posted my counts that I skimmed through the game and that there were likely to be errors. That "lie"?
— END OF THREAD —
