Hey guys,
The Rugby Championship is almost due -- so I thought I could spice things up with a brief analysis of NZ, SA and AUS in terms of their gameplan, specific tactics, technical patterns, flaws, and such, as well as a swift preview of the new players that could become protagonists for their respective teams.
Anyway, stay tuned for the first analysis -- the Boks. Later!
NZ
SA
Aus
Argies
@spiiny,
LMFAO, :oD
i like the pumas game plan, very simple and im surprised they havent racked up more wins, :o)
Spoony. That is an hilarious post.
It's exactly what we can expect as well.
Hilarious post spoony!
Cruz we look really forward to your analysis. I would also like to see who you pick as a Bok 22.
Here is some more see if you can connect names to them
Alright, leaving all the blatant irrelevancies aside, this is what I managed to magic up in a couple hours:
1) In modern Rugby, kick-offs have become just as important – if not more – than traditional set pieces. And the Boks are excellent when it comes to applying pressure on their rivals come kick-off time. They make good use of Morné Steyn’s cannon-like boot and the speed and mobility of some of their players.
Under Meyer’s tenure, the main kick off chasers are Bjorn Basson and Juandre Kruger, both highly mobile and good in the air.
Against Scotland and Italy, they managed to exert extreme pressure on the opposite receivers:
Here Kruger almost managed to regain possession.
Here Basson regained possession and almost scored a try. Both situations ended up with lineouts in extreme defense.
2) The Rolling Maul. A traditional strength of South African teams, under Johan van Graan’s tutelage, the Boks have polished certain technical aspects of their mauling game. The “frontmen” spend quite some energy trying to work their way into the weak angles of their opposites, while the second line focuses mainly on pushing forward. The key for the defending teams here will be to exert pressure from both sides, so as to erode the frontmen’s leverage. Work hard to force them to stand up, or alternate the intensity so as to keep them off balance. Usually the Boks manage to “peel off” their opposite frontmen at maul time, thus leaving the second line with a change to push unopposed into the tryline. This is achieved by a constant alternation of angles and pushing techniques (the main operators here are the frontrowers).
(IMG 3)
sube imagenes
(IMG 4)
imagen
Here the Scot player comes in laterally, forcing a penalty try.
(IMG 5)
subefotos
The ball carriers are invariably Adrian Strauss or Francois Louw (used to be Bismarck du Plessis and Heinrich Brussöw years ago). Both are quite mobile and often break out for a quick pushing pod, or to meet up with another ball carrier running an inward angle (mainly Willem Alberts or Jean de Villiers). From there they recycle with “truck and trailer” pods, until there is a blatant numeric advantage outwide.
(IMG 6)
subir imagenes gratis
(IMG 7)
subir fotos online
(IMG 8)
subir fotos
(IMG 21)
subefotos
3) Line-outs: Often another critical weapon in the Bok arsenal, under Meyer’s tenure the Boks have developed a simple, yet effective pattern than worked against their opponents. For this all they need was a second playmaker in the team, namedly the talented Willie le Roux.
Clean line-out ball, Pienaar throws a flat pass to the entire Bok backrow:
(IMG 9)
sube imagenes
The variations here are scarce, however with carriers like Louw, Coetzee, Kolisi, Alberts et all running hard at the gainline, it is pretty effective.
A variation of the set move features a pivot mixed up among the aforementioned pod, namedly Jean de Villiers. Here Pienaar can skip pass to JDV, or pass to one of the loosies, who in turn will pop back a pass for JDV, who will either run a different angle ball in hand, or pass to his outside man. The key to dismantling the dynamic of this movement is to effect a dual defensive pattern, a good mixture of rush defense and drift defense.
(IMG 13)
subirimagenes
Now, if the first pod manages to make good yards, the ball is quickly cleaned out and taken back into the very side the lineout was executed from (catching the defensive line off guard). Here is where the electric talent of le Roux comes into play. The Boks send out a dummy forward pod (usually consisting of 3 players), and Pienaar launches le Roux into the line, running hard. His speed and distribution have the potential to generate plenty of space for his outside backs.
(img 12)
share image
(IMG 14)
subir fotos a internet
(IMG 15)
subir fotos
4) Set piece first phase gainline ascendency: Critical in modern Rugby. Here the Boks have plenty of first phase ball carriers in the backs: JDV, JJ Engelbrecht, Jan Serfontein, and maybe even Habana.
The number of variations in this first phase are bound to at least make the defenders stand flat on their heels, which greatly reduces their ability to react, and even execute aggressive tackles. The Boks of 2009 loved to send out a big carrier upfront just to skip pass the ball into Habana, who would then run unopposed to the tryline. The Wallabies often executed the very same move with Digby Ioane and Pat McCabe.
(IMG 16)
imagen
(IMG 20)
hosting imagenes
The key to defending such a situation is down to communication. The All Blacks excel at this, often having the defenders shout out the number of the man they will be marking one on one. The Samoans here executed a good rush defense but failed to communicate with each other.
5) Box-kicking: Absolutely KEY aspect in the Bok gameplan. This is why I believe Ruan Pienaar must be the starting 9 in every game. His kicking game can be deadly. He must focus on executing contestable box kicks, taking advantage of the technical prowess of certain Bok wingers (Habana, Basson, Ndungane), combined with the mobility of their forwards (Oosthuizen, Strauss, Mtawarira, etc). Failure to execute contestable kicks might turn out to be horribly counterproductive against natural counter-attackers like Folau, Dagg, Smith, Savea, Barrett, etc.
(IMG 17)
imag
(IMG 18)
subir imagen
Box kicking creates panic among defenders. They will often neglect their defensive pattern and rush back to regain possession and / or secure the ball. If the Boks manage to get the ball back, they will quickly ship it wide where guys like le Roux, Basson, Habana, JJ and such can break havoc. The Samoans suffered the exquisite execution of this pattern on several occasions.
(IMG 19)
subir fotos online
Overall, the Bok gameplan is quite simple in its conception. It does rely on the technical executions of certain key players (Strauss, Louw, Pienaar and JDV). These are players I believe cannot miss a game.
While the execution against Samoa was outstanding during extensive periods of the game, I doubt the Boks will be allowed to rack up their moves so freely against Argentina, NZ, and Australia. For example, I think Pienaar will have a VERY hard time distributing the ball against Argentina and NZ, both teams known for their breakdown prowess. Players like Mtawarira, du Plessis and Etzebeth will have to put up a hand to get heavily involved in the tight.
Another interesting aspect is the Boks centre pairing. JDV is in great form and has traditionally proved to be a very sound defender, but JJ Engelbrecht is a different story. He does have a good tackling technique, and he did defend well against Italy, Scotland and Samoa – however – his defensive nous will be heavily tested by the likes of Ma’a Nonu, Conrad & Ben Smith, Julian Savea, Adam Ashley Cooper, etc. I noticed he is still trying to master his pre-tackle biomechanics, which results on him missing some otherwise easy tackles. The same goes for Willie le Roux.
As for the flyhalf issue – I’d stick with M. Steyn for now. The inclusion of le Roux gives the Boks a different attacking prowess. He runs hard, times well his passes, and often lures in defenders before putting his team mates into space. This is exactly what the Boks need in channel 2, given JDV’s slight distribution deficiencies.
One player I am not happy about is Willem Alberts. True, he is a devastating carrier, and puts in some bone-jarring tackles. But his general skillset is poor compared to guys like Louw, Kolisi or Coetzee. His predictability in open play was horribly exposed by Argentina in Mendoza.
I’d much rather have somebody else like Lappies Labuschagne, whose immense workrate and lineout prowess would really aid the Boks gameplan. In reality, there are plenty of other guys I’d love to see in the Bok loose trio set up, if a proper rotation policy were to be embraced.
As for my Bok 22, well – it’d be vastly different to what Meyer would select, but that’s because I would embrace a different gameplan. My Bok 22 (provided everyone was injury-free) would feature players like Pieter-Steph du Toit, Deon Fourie, Lappies Labuschagne, Duane Vermeulen, Piet van Zyl, Johan Goosen, Jan Serfontein, Paul Jordaan, etc.
I hope the analysis came out half-decent in your view. I did not have as much time as I would have wanted, but I will try to be much more extensive in my analysis of the All Blacks and Wallabies.
Later guys!
Good stuff Cruz. Many thanks
Thanks Cruz and yes your analysis of how the Boks play is accurate - its actually fairly easy to outline how the Boks play and that is a big problem for us as we are predictable.We need to be a bit more creative and have nore arrows in the quiver. I do not agree however that Jean has distribution weaknesses -its a strength of his - witness that very nice pass to Habana against the bulle.
The players you mention are cause for optimism but Meyer is wisely phasing guys in. I trust you are not a youth maniac like snapster!
Like to hear how what you think are Bok weaknesses.
Go well.
On the rolling maul
The Scots had three tactics - get in among South Africa from the wide, pull players to ground and act as 'sleeping policemen'. You can see all of these being used at that maul, especially from behind the Scots in the replay.
The tactic of lying on the ground to make it hard for the ball-carrying team to advance is illegal.
@olecruz,
i like ur anaylisis, u hvae a very unique view no doubt a byproduct of being a professional player and the bases u need to cover.
i want to reply to some of those somments, but would like to see what u have to say about the All Blacks which i hope is next on ur to do list (hint hint), :oP
@spoony,
what do u mean by sleeping policemen???
crusaders vs stroemrs this year showed the best way to disrupt lineout based rolling mauls and starts by contesting the lineout, nothing more frustrating then watching a lineout and tthe defending team are positioning themselves to counter the maul, and not contesting the ball in the air. its a huge flaw i notice in most NZ teams bar the crusaders who IMO are the ebst team at defending rolling mauls originating from lineouts.
@Sasuke
The sleeping policeman is creating a pile of bodies or a single person laying on the ground for the maull to fall over. Its a clever tactic used that looks as if its accidental but that guy or bodies are there for sole purpose to bring down the maul which off course is illegal
As for Crusaders. I tthink you and I and most would agree that the Crusaders are more like a team from the Republic as a Kiwi team in terms of tactics. THey play a different style than a traditional Kiwi style. But they play a more perfected SA style by capatilizing on errors with their strong defense and their superior tactical kicking thanks to Dan Carter. That is why they aree one of the few teams that can topple the Bulls at Loftus.
The best way to defend the maul at the lineout is not contest the line out. Wait till they transfer the ball to the back then run against the maul. The ball carrying team will be penalized for obstruction then
Simple
I am waiting for the OP to finish his analyses as he uses a different approach,
Teams break up their tactics in 3 zones. The exit zone (area from their own try line out to the 22m). Your general play zone (the area between the two 22m lines) and the Red zone (the area inside the opposition’s 22m line).
They will use tactics for all 3 zones and the exit strategy is where NZ and Australia differ from SA. The picture I postd in my first post is actually a Kiwi strike play which they are using. You can fill in the numbers with Kiwi players and can go and have a look how they use it in every game. New Zealand used that 31 Pattern in every match during the World Cup. Often they would change the strike play to launch the pattern but it was their banker play in the General Play Zone and was effective throughout the tournament.
They use that pattern they would use to establish a foothold early in games or to get back on track if things had become a little messy. Just have a look for it.
@olecruz Great Analysis, especially bringing in each individual player to the dynamic of the game plan.
Like you have alluded to, and others have replied the bok game plan is not rocket science.
When executed properly it is effective enough to beat any team on the day.
The problems happens when the players do not execute the game plan to perfection like the box kicks(over kicks), lineouts (not allways won), rolling mauls(not enough metres gained or pull in enough defenders).
We have no plan B when Plan A is not working.
Hieneke Meyer cannot understand this, although it just seems to be the way that most of our teams play in South Africa.
We pressure the opposition to make mistakes and like to dominate the collisions.
When this happens we beat any team,
When does not happen we get into trouble with the likes of Scotland.
-
Bring on the All Black Analysis!!!!!
Can you explain how the wee All Black forwards get dominated and still manage to hold onto the ball.
You want to get out of the Exit Zone without turning the ball. Teams like South Africa will choose to kick and chase from the set piece in order to eliminate the risk of error. New Zealand don’t do this. If the All Blacks have set-piece possession in their Exit Zone they will invariably look to set a platform in midfield then decide to kick or run.
The decision will be based on the effectiveness of the first carry into midfield. If the ball carrier generates momentum and quick ball, the team
recognises there may be an opportunity to keep playing from deep.
If the first carrier is well tackled and New Zealand fail to get a quick ruck ball, they will launch their kick and chase team from this midfield position. Kicking from midfield is effective because it allows the team to use two kickers. And because there are two kickers, the defending full back is forced to defend in centre
field. The net effect gives both kickers plenty of space to aim for.
In fact, both kickers have a number of kicking options: First, they may choose to kick the ball out; second, they may pump the ball long into the corner; third, they might slide a grubber kick through; fourth, they might put the ball high into the air to contest. The type of kick used will depend on the opposing full back and other tactical considerations. For example, when New Zealand play Australia they know Quade Cooper will defend at full back.
Because they feel Quade might struggle with the high ball that is the type of kick they’ll select. If they were playing against a team whose 15 plays very deep, they may choose to use a grubber kick into space.
In essence, New Zealand’s Exit Zone philosophy is to set a platform in midfield then decide to kick or run. If they decide to kick they’ll kick to isolate the opposing
full back with contestable kicks.
The 2nd picture of my first post is one of their General Zone plays. Its a momentum pattern was designed to exhaust the defence and create kick and run options to exploit space.
New Zealand use these tactics to tire out the defense before handing the ball over. Vey effective against bigger packs like SA.
That is why they play the way they do and the way we do as we cannot go taking it up from all over the park for 80 minutes with a bigger pack. We will tire out our own players and run out of puff inside 60 minutes,
Sharkbok I fully agree he Bok way of playing although limited can beat any side if the right team is picked. But does that mean one cant supplement it with more skills and creativity.
ou maaaike please. Morne has been the best flyhalf in SA this year. Your comments re jean though are spot on. Arno alos looks like the Bok number 8. I rather fancy a trio of Louw Botha and vermulen at 7. If you want to speed up chooese say Lappies at 7?
Cruz I talk to the trees when saying if you are playing England at Twicks you may need a different loose trio to when playing the abs at Loftus. Would you agree one size doesnt fit all?
Great to see this thread has sparked some debate!
oimatey -- Thanks mate!
Saffex -- Mine is merely an analysis of what the Boks do on the pitch, it does not reflect on any way, shape or form my personal selections regarding the team, or what I would envision as the ideal Bok gameplan.
Sasuke -- thanks mate. I'm already watching some AB video footage. Quite interesting thus far.
Spoony -- Indeed mate, that tactic has to be sanctioned. It's everywhere these days. Premiership, Top 14, even in my country's League. I play as a lock and often had to deal with the "sleeping policemen" when I was part of a rolling maul. Worst part is that if I accidentally stepped on one of them, it'd be deemed as stamping. As for your explanation on the way the ABs get out of their 22, and progress to their opponents' try zone -- I believe it is spot on. The ABs kick a lot, but they judge every situation with extreme detail and trust their system. The Bok gameplan consists more of gambling away possession of the ball, which can be quite dangerous.
Sharkbok -- Will do mate. My experience in NZ is helping me understand why NZ forwards so often lose the physical battle but still manage to outperform their rivals. Again it's all down to individual skills that go unnoticed by most people, but that make a difference.
Clevermike -- Thanks mate. I hope Meyer will develop some more moves and patterns come RC. As for your take on the Bok forwards, I agree. I think the main problem is the tight five, ironic as it may sound. Neither Mtawarira nor J du Plessis have made a clear impact in tight play, or contributed with high workrate. Strauss is in my view one of the finest hookers around, with tremendous workrate, good hands, and an attacking mindset. However, his DNA somehow steers away from the more traditional hooker, the one that gets more involved in the tight (like Bismarck du Plessis would). I don't consider this a flaw in his game -- but the void becomes apparent when the coaching Staff fails to accompany such a player with others that complement him.
The lock situation is a complex one. I really rate Eben Etzebeth. He has an all round game and plenty of time to continue improving. Flip van der Merwe is a hard nosed lock, but lacks some of the mobility and attacking game that would be required against teams like NZ and Australia. I would rather have Pieter-Steph du Toit. Immense workrate, increased mobility, good lineout executions, and solid defense. I've known PSDT for quite some time now, and he's one of the toughest scrummagers I've played with (and against). Not only does he put in a great first hit, his great technique helps him absorb the first shove and keeps the frontrowers steady and balanced. He would be IMO a great addition to the Bok setup. Another player I'd love to see involved in the future is JD Schickerling.
As for the loosies, here SA has a nice list to pick from. The loose trio has to be balanced and befitting of the gameplan. Notice how I don't speak of specialists here. I don't support the trend of having a specialist fetcher, a specialist runner, etc. I prefer to have a look at each player's skillset and develop a trio in which all bases are covered, without neglecting any detail. I do however understand the differences between each member of said trio. Duane Vermeulen, for example, is a blindside flanker in my book. There is a trend among European clubs nowadays, in which they label players like Chris Robshaw, Tom Wood or Francois Louw as "6.5s". Hybrids. Meyer will have to be VERY careful with regards to his loose forward combination(s) -- this is where his whole gameplan can be rendered toothless by more balanced opponents.
Beeno -- What I meant with my personal observation on JDV is that he is not what you'd call a second playmaker in the strictest sense of the word. He does have good vision and knows what to do when there is no space.
I agree with you regarding the combination of loose forwards in a team's setup. There has to be a broad base to pick from, to suit a certain team's style, weather conditions, and to give the loosies some rest and recovery time (wish Allister Coetzee had rotated Vermeulen and Elstadt around...!). For example, look at the Chiefs' rotation policy.
As for your question regarding England and the ABs, I'd say the situation is evolving a bit. England took an extremely balanced back-row to tour Argentina in June. Tom Wood as blindside, the impressive Matt Kvesic as openside, and Ben Morgan as eightman. Tackling, rucking, fetching, short range carrying, open plan carrying, distribution, lineout options, speed, size, endurance.... all bases covered nicely. I hope Stuart Lancaster took notice of the way this combination performed in said tests. Swap Tom Wood with Chris Robshaw and you have a backrow with immense potential (if it continues to develop as it did thus far).
As for the ABs, whatever backrow they choose, it's going to be balanced. I believe in this case, the Boks should focus more on totally dominating their tight-five, as they did in 2009. That was a sight to behold. Argentina used to do the same with their opponents in 2007.
Ole, what's your opinion if Dries Swanepoel? Kind of gunning for him to become something!
@spoony,
some top shelf posting right there, :o) and regarding some of ur comments,,,
"The sleeping policeman is creating a pile of bodies or a single person laying on the ground for the maull to fall over. Its a clever tactic used that looks as if its accidental but that guy or bodies are there for sole purpose to bring down the maul which off course is illegal"
ok thanks for that and i agree the sleeping pig tactic is illegal, but from the comfort of my armchair, ive found that most refs pick up on this tactic and correctly award a penalty, in my guesstimation, i would say round about over 95% of these infringments are caught by the ref.
"As for Crusaders. I tthink you and I and most would agree that the Crusaders are more like a team from the Republic as a Kiwi team in terms of tactics. THey play a different style than a traditional Kiwi style. But they play a more perfected SA style by capatilizing on errors with their strong defense and their superior tactical kicking thanks to Dan Carter."
i half agree, they definately dont play like other NZ teams, but IMO that style is the more universal stlye around the world, with teams looking to capitalize with what u mentioned.
IMO the standard SA style is one that basically involves big forwards outmuscling their counterparts and then relying on the saffa kicker who is normally world class to kick them into a better position for them to score points which 99.9999999999999999% of the time comes from the boot.
carters always superiror tactical kicking has always been world class, but whats freaky is his current form suggest that its gotten better, not just thatm but his all round game, o_O
"The best way to defend the maul at the lineout is not contest the line out. Wait till they transfer the ball to the back then run against the maul. The ball carrying team will be penalized for obstruction then"
i see what ur saying here, but thats going to require a syncronised consciousness and flawless execution, cos if one player dosent get out of the way in time, the ref will call a play on and the natural reflexes of the modern day rugby player will force them to get involved with the maul.
the other drawback is if ur defending 5 meters from ur tryline, theres no way u would apply that tacitc, instead u will get stuck in straight away and rightly so.
IMO, stopping rolling mauls that originate from the lineout starts with the throw in, every team has the usual suspects for possible lineout targets, so players need to identify the most likely target and contest the ball the hooker throws in the airm at the very least it could put of the recipeint of the ball and force him to either lose possesion or be forced to ground. the crusaders did this against the stormers and it was amazingly effective how a lineout which is a saffa specialty and the stormers who are usually very sound were competely schooled, bekkers lineouts that day were so bad that frodo wouldnt have done any worse.
i do remember watching the hurricanes v force game where the force did a rolling maul from a lineout 10 meters from the hurricanes line and all but one hurricane tried to drive through in the standard scrum look a like defending formation but ended up driving through on the one side and missing main rolling maul all together. the one hurricane left (thrush i think it was) was blown away the bulk of western forces forwards and ended up bringing the rolling maul down after he fell to the ground and dragged the player in front of him down with him.
the referee awarded cant remeber what it was i thinka scrum in favour of the hurricanes and the commentator siad that because thrush was by himself in that rolling maul, he was legally allowed to bring the rolling maul down.
dont know if this is legal or not, but if it is, that could also be one way to counter the rolling mauls effectiveness.
Just want to clear up some perceptions. No where have I said I disagree with the OP's analysis or said its wrong. I said he uses a different approach. He shows what SA do in certain situations and the roles each does at times.
The one I explained is where the field is devided into 3 zones which shows the style of a team wand what they do in those zones
Thank you
@Sasuke When I said the Crusaders plays a perfected style of SA I meant they capatilize on mistakes by applying pressure just like SA. BUT they play what the SA was intended for when JW was in charge. Not the PdV one where he just ran the tactic to death every game.
That is why the Crusaders have such a good record playing in SA and are one of the few teams to topple the BUlls at Loftus. They can beat them at their won game.
For the maul here is a good example
Because refereees look at this
Players sealing off the ball
carrier, especially at kick-offs and
lineouts
• The ball carrier must be available to
the opposition
• Allow a contest so that opposition
players can get to the ball carrier
legally
See the ball going to the back means the ball is not available. And a maul is only formed when opposition is bind to it
Spoony
I concur 100% mate. Your opinion was top notch as well.
As for the tactic you show in that .GIF file, the Pampas XV used it extensively in their first Vodacom Cup stints. Worked pretty well most of the time. Not anymore though.
Sorry for the delay guys -- been quite busy lately. I'll begin writing my AB analysis in Friday.
@spoony,
that clip does look like a good tactic, im wondering though if the crusaders tactics was by design or due to a sereis of fortunate events, cos i cant recall seeing that tactic too many times before.
a few things though,
- IMO thats one tactic u wouldnt do when defending 5 meteres out from ur own tryline
- a smart player can easily negate that by holding onto the ball until he feels contact before sending it back
- another thing is technicall the ball carrier is just a ball carrier meaning the defenders can try to tackle him from the side and purposely crash into the (usually props) players on the side which would then be obstruction.
any which way something that the crusaders or chiefs should be made aware of.
didnt know about ur reply until olecruz commented, cos ur original reply didnt have the second part addressed, but where did u get that video clip from, did u edit urself before posting or get it from somewhere online???
I used a vid to gif converter. Got thousands of youtube stuff on my pc.
I even revamped that shitty WC winning video of you guys by removing the faggy music have a look here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jD08AowWz0Q
Sasuke I can see you have a Kiwi mentality considering the maul. Its one area NZ are not really to bother to teach the kids and they are more looking for sneaky ways to bring it down than to teach their kids and seniors on the correct and best technique to start a maul. NZ use to do the wonderful legdrive maul where they made yards with it but it dissapeared after Fitzpatricks team.
The concept is not to see how many guys you can commit and go forward by sheer numbers. First you need to make a arrow shape. There is a reason why smacking a sheet of metal against a wall won’t do anything, but when that same metal is forged into a nail it can puncture the wall easily.
When force is concentrated it is powerful and that is exactly what your mauls need to be.
No more than 2 men wide. Effective mauls start quickly and target a weakness in the opposition’s armor
look at this
Let me show you a trade secret. People talk about transfering the ball to the back. They pass it to the back player once the opposition have binded to form that maul. By then you have no mementum and the defense got behind their maul to defend.
What Bulls and SA teams do is the ball carrier himself slips to the back. Two players will form behind him where he just slips back and they shif forward. THus keeping momentum. Not many teams have picked this up and Lions even still mauls old school. Aus as well. That is why SA have employed the maul so effectively this year and kiwi coaches moaning about it but they don't even know why it has become so effective suddenly.
Have a look
Sorry guys -- my laptop got stolen sometime during my flight back to Argentina. This means I will have to start my analysis from scratch -- Darn! Oh well. Stuff happens.
Been quite busy as of late with some massive personal developments, but I promise I will lay out a better analysis this time!
@olecruz,
it was quade cooper who stole ur laptop, stealing laptops of foreigners is his M O.
it also helps prove to the world just how aussie he really is by acting like so many of the convicts that founded the aussie nation, similar to how redsnecks is a saffa wannabe, LMAO, :oD
This is absolutely hilarious. This is how the board was fooled! Man, I wish I knew this when I first joined, would have made the trolling even funnier! Amazing!
