So how did that running rugby work out for Oz

Not so well it seems. Counter attack on mistakes...same old, same old. Dan Carter, Nonu, McCaw...still the best. Why are these guys retiring?

 Mozart 
Who played the running rugby in this case?  Are you dim or something?   The AB's played the running rugby and the Australians were not good enough to contain them - there forwards were too weak.  

 You fu.cking ridiculously stupid plank. The All Blacks played the territorial game. If Carter was South African he would have been crucified for "kicking too much". He totally controlled the game and most of the control came from his boot.

Old Tokkie sees zippo. Where was Scotland when we needed some real opposition.  

 Mozart I reckon those blokes have at least till the Lions tour in them but well done to them to go out at the pinnacle .So much for too OLD and too SLOW eh ?Dan Carter MOM ? A truly magnificent ending !

 Oh and as Mr Moz well knows theres kicking and theres Dan Carter controlling the match ,with kicking of course .Thers always something worthwhile in a bit of experience isnt there ?

Dan Carter has to be the MOM in my view. He was flawless part from that one missed touch off a penalty, reminded me a bit of Morne there, and we all know how he was crucified for that.

My ranking would be Carter, Rettallik, Nonu, MCaw....in that order, but they were all magnificent.  

 Wardad
 
Status: Senior player 
Posts: 2956RE: So how did that running rugby work out for Oz
October 31, 2015, 20:08:40

 Oh and as Mr Moz well knows theres kicking and theres Dan Carter controlling the match ,with kicking of course .

Thers always something worthwhile in a bit of experience isnt there ?
Experience is over rated. There are quite a few Saffa posters on here who would be able to explain to you why that is a FACT. 

Lots of interviews here on US Tv. Carter coming across like a humble, nice guy. What a great team to represent rugby to the World and US audience.....great stuff. Richie by the way sounding like retirement isn't exactly what he wants. Maybe he can do a Matfield...hahaha.

 sadly gents there was no massive amount of running rugby but 10 times a game than the snor fest that was the sa nz game

 NZ played Bok rugby like it's supposed to be played. Telling that a drop goal was the final nail.

 bok rugby has always been a mix of brutal forwards mixed with a potent backline.
we are in a mire of at moment

Disagree..far more tension in the South African game. This one was over until the Smith yellow gave the Aussies a life vest. Moment Smith came back the game was over.  

 Still hate the new triangle  Haka.

 sorry the quality of the game for me from a purist perspective was a massive difference
for me nz was not 100% on song while we were throwing everything at them

 We need a gamebreaker . Without & we remain neville nobodies .

 we have the game breakers but they are pigeonholed in a style of play that is as toxic as a nuclear wasteland.
nothing wrong with our players people our problem is our mindset

 Name them please .

 everyone in our backline has the skillsets to be great and have shown it at junior levels and super rugby levels......

 Mopzart missed the plit copmpletely as per normal.  He was the one who claimed that scoring of tries in teh WC us not necessary - but the ABs proved his theory totally wrong.  According to him 90% of the requirements  a flyhalf is his ability to kick - especially on the WC where ham,es ar ewon not by scoring tries but by kicking at goal.  That was his motivation for the retention of the Steyns at flyhalf and center.

scoring a try in a final just compounds the pressure....well there was 5 odd tries in final just shows the intent and shows that we as south africans need to change our mindset... the rules of engagement has changed but we are far far far behind

"Mopzart missed the plit"...are you boozing again Tokkie? 

 Carter also had a masterful day with the book, both from hand & for the posts. Still we needed the ties.

 "With the book"....the good book no doubt, help from a higher source.

Carter is the best 10 of all time, and has annually kicked more than our 10s. He can also fluff may shots at goal at times; can be a bit like Monty in that way. If he was Saffer, he would have lasted maybe three years before being replaced by a flub like Lam bie or Goosen. You know, players who feel things more than others.

 And he got a 10 despite missing touch with a penalty....Morne got hell and damnation for the same mistake. Thing is NZ players know the fans have their backs....Bok heroes have a knife at their backs.
It is not surprising NZ doesn't panic when things go wrong...as Richie said they simply look to reassert cont rol.

 This is the standard BS from the two Village Idiots.   The BS about Carter is tuypical and allusion is made to Morne - because of the replacement rubbish by DF and direct reference by Mozart.   
There is a gigantic difference between Carter and Morne.  Carter is a clever player able to read games and even when he kicks it has a purpose.  His strategic game is top class.  Morne is a stodgy robot who cannot read games and whose execution is poor at the best of times.  Morne's only asset ever was his ability to kick at goal - the rest of his game was always poor.   
There can never be an comparison between these two players - Carter was always a champion - Morne always a loser. 
How wonderful about Mozart to refer to SA fans.   Most fans appreciate performance and praise players if they perform,  However, the knife in their back refers to non-performers who have a few adherents,  The knife in the back story applies in full to a large part of their efforts to stab performing players in the back - mostly because of prejudice.
So Mozart and DF - how many players have the two of you stabbed in the back often enough using misrepresentations to justify your stabbing efforts?                         

 Morne always  a loser....tell that to the Lions. Tokkie always a liar....that has the ring of truth. 

Mozart
The list of losses exceed the wins by a large margin.   The win against the lions was by kicks at goal/  The losses against NZ and Australia because of total lack of ability = other than kicking at goal.
Anybody comparing Carter to Morne urgently needs a shrink.   Morne can be compared to the 2nd team flyhalf of Witgatwortelfontein and he may come sho rt there too.         

 
Dan Carter is the best 10 to ever play the game.

To think we have one who still thinks he plays second fiddle to Morne Steyn!!

Haaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahaaha!!!

@CleanCut: And who would that one be? We did have Dave who said Cooper was the best 10 in the world, and many fans who for a time - probably yourself included - said Lambie was the best 10 in world rugby. These are a lot more foolish than backing a player who holds world and Bok records; who has broken several Carter records! Who is the most productive 10 in Boks history. 

 ASnotherr piece of utter BS from DF.  If Carter played in SA - he would have been an all-time great in the eyes of the locals.    Morrne is a sub-par player who cannot ead games and whose execution at the best of times is BS - a Kicker at goal - with NOTHING else offered in the rest of the game.   To name Morne as a flyhalf n the same sentence as Carter is a crime against rugby.
The White fans is not the worst you have ever seen - because they are knowledgeable and can see when players you adore and write fairy tales about dish up BS and would not accept it.  That is  the difference - they would boo Morne because he is piss-poor at the best of times.   So was a number of others of your heroes.   Because when the fans see how poor players are and you insist on fairy tales about the same routine und er-performers, they are realistic and right in their attitude.          

How would Carter have been an all time great? New Zealand give him options. He has had world class centres and outside backs his entire career! Umaga, Nonu, Mauger, McCallister, Smith, Sonny Bill... the list goes on. Who would Carter have had that was world class? Frans for a few test, Fourie and the plain Jean. 

 You were talking about Morne remember - Morne is poor comparative to both Pollard and Lambi - so stick to your initial story.  Matter of fact Morne is no flyhalf - he is a kicking dummy.  

 Yet, yesterday, Carter had the balls and the skill to put the final nail in the Aus coffin with a drop goal and Morne could not do the same in 2011...with much better average field position and possession...and we lost by a drop goal. Nah, Morne might have the skills,  but not the same vision.

 df's verbal diarea marathon continues without any end in sight..
mate i am not sure which meds your taking but maybe double dose and leave the rugby to those that actually knows the game.
watching you flip flop is rather comical to say the very least
on to the serious stuff if a crime against humanity to mention carter and morne "turnstile steyn in the same sentence.
steyn is a product of the meyer game and its clear as daylight that meyer himself destroyed morne. when he started out he had potential but that quickly retreated quicker than stephen moore's hairline
carter is the complete player. no weaknesses at all....for me pollard is very much the next global super star and if sa rugby is smart they would invest more time and money in his development.
that kid is the next big thing and with lambie and jantjies waiting in the wings we are for the first time in about 20 odd years very well spread at 10 in turns fo talent.
which means nothing if burger gets more ball at first receiver than pollard but thats a topic of another discussion

 CM
It is clear from their comments that Mozart and DF still does not understand what happened in the WC games.   From the first game the game plan of Meyer was clear - the first receiver would be  aforward not the flyhalf.   Matter of fact the only time Pollard really received the ball from either Pollard and Lambie or even Le Roux got as first receiver was when the Springboks were under pressure and relieving kicks were required.  For the rest the balls from the scrummies went virtually totally to forwards.
The end result of this demonic game plan was that Pollard, De Allende and Kriel got fewer than they should have mostly crap balls - most  of  those being when they were already in traffic.  That does not stop the two from going all out on the lack of attacking ability shown by the two centers.   
One cannot discuss rugby with those two.  Anybody mentioning Carter and Morne Steyn in the same sentence and effectively compare those two players as good flyhalfs must really be nut cases.   I just laugh at what those two writes and it ave me great pleasure to laugh at their silliness.   The funniest one is when DF claims he has debunked what was written by him in the form of another does of verbal diarrhea When he is told what he wrote is crap,  he keeps on claiming debunking of the issue raised previously.  I like it a lot to have him around - he is a comic.   Mozart is just not funny anymore  - he has exceeded the level of silliness by too far a distance  already and it is consequently just not as funny anymore, 
This thread was too much for them to comprehend.                

Oh I understand what happened. I predicted it. The most experienced team, playing conservative rugby....won the WC. They never had one player under 24, they executed the basics well....they took no chances. More or less like Jake's WC winners.  

 Mozart
You predicted nothing ever correctly.  You predicted that the WC played in NH conditions will be won by the side kicking best at goal - that the scoring of tries is not going to be important.   You preached for all on this site why Fransie should be the flyhalf and in the alternative Morne Steyn.  That kicking is to be 90% what is required from the flyhalf.  That ball protection and recovery is not important and that Alberts will just assist in pushing players over and the balls will be recovered that way.  
You carried on by pushing for the selection of the experienced non-performers and was delighted by the selection of the most experienced side ever to represent the Springboks against Japan.  When the Springboks lost against Japan you close your eyes to the BS produced by the most experienced team players as a whole and blamed Kriel for the loss because of a missed tackle.   Nothing about the string of ball possession losses by Burger in tackle situation - nothing about the string of penalties given away by Mozart - nothing about the failures of De Villiers, Matfield and Jannie du Plessis in that game.  NOTHING about the real reasons for the loss at all.
You fail to realise that the constant poor performances of some players forced Meyer to make changes to the team and the playing of an ultimately doomed game plan was the reason for departure of the Springboks from the RC.  That the performance of players not their age is the key to winning the WC.   You fail to realize that the difference is between the performance of NZ players and especially the older ones were the key to success and fail to realize that the older SA players were not performing as test players.   When Matfield failed in the semi-final and was the ultimate reason for the loss against the AB's you wrote a book about why Matfield was not at fault in having a penalty reversed that could have made a difference to the outcome - while he in fact put in a BS performance in that game even oputside of the penalty reversal.   You carried on about everything else about Jannie du Plessis and claimed he was a roaring success in scrumming when the opposite was true.
You also failed in not realizing that the game plan adopted - the constant passing of the ball back to forwards was a problem that cost us the game against the Japanese and was totally ineffective against the Welsh and that it neutralized our backline totally. 
Your claiming any credit that the BS you spread on this site was correct is the funniest thing imaginable.                               

Kriel didn't miss "a tackle" against Japan Tokkie ....he missed "the tackle" against Japan.
Fox I think this disdain for the older players by SA fans is a very strange and I have seen no parallel situation. It's almost a disdain, an antipathy for their father's generations. HM is a fool and totally manipulated by his loyalty to older players...weird. I wonder if political events and exile for many,  play a role in this very particular sickness.