Roos will attend mine and Hollie's wedding in his 12 jersey.
I don't recall doing those, but certainly recall yourself and Moz doing them.
I wish I could retire already and just do stuff I find fun. Would be cool to pick one URC player and one Bok and the commit to doing a play by play for their games for a season. That's a good three or four hours per game though.
Roos will attend mine and Hollie's wedding in his 12 jersey.
Of course he will, Plummie. You just have your glass of warm milk and rest your weary head now, okay?
That's a good three or four hours per game though.
It doesn't take that long if you ID the players you want to check out, you can do two in one go and fast forward through most of the game to the bits where they are involved. I think it takes me about 30 minutes or so to do something like that for the whole game. Of course the more players you do the longer it takes. I'll do it again come test season maybe, can't be arsed to do it for this bumbling provincial nonsense.
Oh yeah Augenoffer, the Desert Fox, die mak Duitser, the man of a 1000 names also did that kind of stuff.
Thing is, one has to check their involvements and then describe the incidents with enough clarity that people can't say "Oh but no mention of the tighthead that was 20m behind play and could possibly have caught up to Jooste on that break."
FYI - EggChasers did a Jooste video today. In it he shows Jooste's 100m time...10.74
Ana;sis of this nature is normally cceptable if the circumstances leading to and during incidents are actually true 0 what Mzart used to do was describing incidents in a way t never h appened to get at specific playes he disliked, What he describd as happening was based on B S he invented to discredit players he hated and was not based on truth,
In te h above case there was one incdent t hat was smewhat distorted - but was not really correct - for the rest wha was written was accurate and not aimed a distortion of what happened durin the match and was not aimed at discrediting of Willemse as a player as Mozart used to do.
Objective anaysis of what players contribute is what should count and I think the above description of Wilemse's was not aimed at discrediting him - but close to real contributions he made - such an analysis is always welcome,
There are advanced computer programs used by exoerts to really analyse player contributions of each player durin g matches and if is clear the above descrition of what actually happened came rom that service analysis, We as embers have no access to that system - and the above is clearly absed on that system. I would like to see more factual reports of that nature on site,
, ,
Mike's you complain about accuracy where you have just run away from a thread where your opening statement was that 2025/26 stats show SA 12s to be in a particular order.
When simply asked to provide the stats you ran and didn't look back.
Should you really be commenting on accuracy and ethics?
Bec iase i look a actual performnces and not day dreams. What O wrote above is real - I lik the report as submitted as near to 100% accurate, I like that very much and wold like to see similar reports - especially on contriversial players,
Well Pakie you may also recall I was accused of lying by some posters. When invited to comment on the specifics I was told the accuser wasn’t going to waste his time debunking nonsense….but once we have AI analyzing games perhaps this sort of thing will be readily available.
Ou Maaik is still at it, but who cares. But ja, the accusers haven't brought much to the party over the years, have they?
Laughs?
Pakie
My cmments relates t falsified versions of what happened in games and not base on prejudiced BS based on petty hatred - like Mozart used on site - and he th en claimed he saw thin gs on sthe field of play and is the best rugby analyst in the world is not eally wghat one wants on site,
Th e Willmse analysis was accurate - not hatespreading - and that is what is really needed on site,
Mike, honesty only appears as though it's biased when you don't like the facts being presented.
Then reason I tend to gravitate towards some posters more than others is because they deal in facts.
I dare you to find a rugby post of Pakie's where he intentionally misrepresented facts. And I double dare you to do the same for Moz.
...now, on this very thread I have pointed you to where you have tried to mislead stating things as fact when they are not factual at all.
So, I'll ask you again, should you be talking about misrepresentation by others?
If I'm wrong about any of this then point me to the error.
16,255 posts
See here.
Now, they had to have gotten this idea from Ruckersforum. As far as I can remember Moz was the first person here to do this kind of thing, many many years ago. I did numerous thereafter, I think Dave did one or two in his typical Dave way, not sure who else. Did Plummie do it too? Probably before he became infatuated with Hollie and obsessed with Roos at 12 (I admit to gently encouraging these futile pursuits).
But this is the first time I've seen a mainstream media rugby outlet do this kind of thing - of course I might have missed some.
We are nothing if not trendsetters here. Stick with Ruckers.