And right on cue Wantwit is there to support the flailing Stupex. But he has no arguments, just affirms we won the WC because they found a a loophole to get winner Pollard on the field.
ROFL again!
Flailing??? Bwahaaaahaaaaa
This from the guy that thinks he knows better than Schalk and Jean???
As for the selection policy - it makes perfect sense to any knowledgeable rugby follower
You can’t replace a player who is carrying an injury into the WC you can only replace players injured during the WC
That’s your justification for leaving out Pollard?
Obviously
Well it’s just blown up in your face….this from ChatGTP:
Yes, if Handré Pollard had been selected in South Africa’s original 33-man squad despite carrying an injury and then needed to be replaced after the 2023 Rugby World Cup had started, that would have been allowed under World Rugby’s rules.
However, the key condition is that his injury would have needed to be deemed serious enough to rule him out of the tournament, with medical confirmation provided to World Rugby. Once replaced, he would not have been able to return later in the tournament.
That is bullshit
No it’s not, it’s a comprehensive search by Chat of the whole body of information. And if you think about it, it’s logical….otherwise every player would need to be tested for full fitness and what that level should be would keep the lawyers busy for years.
Besides which the sides are announced way before the WC …so fitness at that time doesn’t guarantee fitness when the WC starts and vice versa.
There was no impediment to selecting Pollard and then declaring him unfit after the WC started.
Your reason for leaving out Pollard never existed. Wantwit time to help?
Chat has been wrong on numerous occasions and I can’t find the rule regarding the selection of players carrying an injury and being replaced if that injury resurfaces during the WC
Im basing my call on what Neinaber said, I think it was in Chasing the Sun
Pollard and Am had played no rugby leading up to the selection of the squad. Pollard was not even in SA so could not be properly monitored by the SA camp.
It’s well documented what the SA selection policy is and the criteria the players have to pass in order to be eligible for selection. Having not played a game in months would certainly see that player fail to meet that criteria.
If you have a selection policy in place you can’t then just bend the rules - that completely undermines the policy as a whole
Regardless of all this - the obvious fact is - had Pollard, Am and Lood been fit at the time of selection, they all would have walked the squad
Chat only reflects what is out there….there is no practical way to police a rule of which doesn’t allow injured players who don’t recover to be excluded from replacement.
And there is no need for such a rule. A team that selects a player who can’t play is not advantaging itself in any way….in fact it’s disadvantaging itself, because the replacing player has less time to settle into the team.
Pollard should have been selected and it was only the Marx injury and Scottish match kicking debacle that saved Rasmus from his blunder
Disagree Pollard should not have been selected as he was not match fit at the time of selection. There had been no opportunity to test him before the selection
Injuries always occur so it’s part of the process - players exit and match fit players replace them
Rassie was spot on, guided by the teams selection policy
"Wantwit time to help?"
Pfffffffffffffffhahahahahaha!
Saffex has never needed my help to hand you your stupid head on a plate, Moffie.
Just because you're not intelligent enough to realize you're getting a beating doesn't mean it's not happening.
LMAO!
So just a dishonest assertion… Ah well Wantwit by name Wantwit by nature
Nothing dishonest about it, Moffie. I'll repeat, if you're too stupid to recognize that you've been owned by Saffex for about a decade on this board now, that doesn;t mean it's not happening.
He doesn't need my help. Hope that clears it up for you.
So Dave you wouldn’t select Pollard, but you do accept you were wrong and Pollard could have been selected and replaced
Do You accept Pollard could have been selected and replaced Wantwit??
No I don’t accept that I’m wrong because I recall Neinaber saying you could not replace a player carrying an injury into the WC that got injured during the WC.
It’s why no sides select players carrying injuries
Ah so your recollections of a casual comment are more valid than Chat’s survey of all the literature. Straws Dave
Wantwit did you hear the same comment?
Yes for sure as there is no reference to the actual rules on this and I know for a fact Chat has got things wrong in the past - one has to ask what Chat’s source is as there is no reference to the actual rule
I’m trusting Neinaber would know what he was talking about
Moffie, I don't care what you think or what you say. Stop squeaking for my attention.
Thanks in anticipation.
The rule that’s never referenced anywhere in print is what you are clinging to like a man in a flood?
No I’m going by what Neinaber said
Can you give us a verbatim?
No
You're wasting your time Saffex.
So you have an unverified conversation and I have a full literature search. I need some sort of evidence.
I know Draad - the obvious answer to it all is that we all know Rassie would have selected a match fit Pollard in his WC squad
So the answer is pretty obvious
Well I don’t recall where I heard Neinaber saying it, I think it might have been Chasing the Sun
So if there is no reference to the rule where the fuck did Chat get its answer from? Full literature search my arse
A statement you can’t reproduce?
Its beginning to look like two flies with one swot.. wanna be the third Draadtjie?
Chat searched everything out there and found no reference that distinguishes between fit and unfit players at the time of squad selection. So players who were fit and those who were unfit but still selected are all eligible to be replaced.
The only restrictions are they can’t be selected again if sent home and there must be medical verification.
You can’t rebut a rule that exists nowhere but in your mind Dave. There is no distinction between fit and unfit players, in part because selecting and replacing an unfit player is a disadvantage not an advantage.
No mythical Nienaber comment changes that.
Moz wake the fuck up it was a video clip of Neinaber so no I don’t have a copy of it and nor am I going to trawl through every video to find it
Provide me with the definitive rule relating to the selection of players carrying an injury and not some pathetic Chat reference that has no supporting evidence to back its finding
Right back at you - swat my arse you really are delusional
As Rooi correctly points out - I’ve been kicking your arse for years - no more so than lately with your Schalk and Jean clanger - there has been no deeper dive than your opposing take on these two legends of the game - ouch, ouch, ouch
So no evidence, just another assertion. You claim there is such a rule, the burden is on you to prove it. In the meantime here is Google AI’s version:
AI Overview
Yes, Handre Pollard could have been replaced by another player if he was selected for the RWC 2023 squad while still injured, as long as the injury rendered him ineligible to participate and the replacement was approved by the relevant authorities.
Here's a more detailed explanation:
…….
That makes it even clearer and Google is accessing the original documents as you can see under Replacement Players.
Any player can be replaced up until the tournament starts and then any injured player regardless if they were injured before.
…..
Game, set and match,
Bullshit that references no rule at all it’s some made up crap
Are you claiming that as evidence???
Game set and match my arse - dream on
There is no rule to reference….there is no distinction between injured or non injured players as regards replacement. Once you are replaced you can’t come back….that rule which covers the same issue is very easy to find. But you can’t find something that has never been there.
Still you are welcome to try, find anything that backs up your fantasy.
ROFL!
If mine is a fantasy so is yours
Neinaber as a coach involved in the WC should know what he is talking about - I’m going with that
Just like I am with Jean and Schalk’s selection of DA and PSDT
My ‘fantasy’ is what two of the best search engines could find anywhere on the net…..your ‘fantasy’ is a voice you heard after too many beers or perhaps in a dream.
Nienaber and Rasmus were deep in with Libbok, he was their man. Even just before the final Nienaber was apologizing for dropping him.
In August they thought Libbok could take them all the way home and they thought selecting a returning Pollard would undermine the team’s commitment to their man.
Then Scotland happened and Rasmus caught a wake up.
Stupidest selection decision ever rescued by the Marx injury.
Bullshit Rassie is the best coach in the business, he knows exactly what he is doing
Pollard was not match fit at the time of selection so he was rightly not selected - bloody obvious
Libbok is a class act - I fully back their investment in him
And was the fourth scrumhalf obvious and likely to be a bigger potential factor than Pollard. Of course not….stupidest decision ever.
Well guess what Rassie won the toughest WC ever making those decisions
Case closed