Where are the barking dogs....Dave, Rooibandy, The Tokster and Carbuncle

Are you a simpleton? The match commentators after announcing De Jäger was the MOM said they would have chosen Pollard. I'm beginning to believe those Neanderthal rumors.  

•  0 Likes

So they keep a disenfranchised coach on Board to save double payment on what 5% of their cost  budget, and in the process put their whole revenue stream at risk. I have seen this Neanderthall logic before in rugby arguments. No trained businessman would even consider leaving a demotivated man in charge for 8 months.

Well bluebok I think you should assume something has made RooiAAS very angry with you. Could it be the references to him on this string? Nope even the AAS couldn't be that petty. The references to becs.....nope you have apologized after hearing about her medical difficulties.

Nope it has to be something else, because he is clearly angry....most often that has to do with me. So I'm guessing,  when you took the wind out of his holier than thou attack on me for using the term, "mong", might have something to do with it.

That exposed a decade of his calling me "moffie"....which clearly says nothing about me, but a lot about him. And having been caught with his pants down, he is now in the uncomfortable position of continuing this practice, but looking like a neanderthal as he does so.

Just a guess, but I'd put money on it.

•  0 Likes 

Moz can you make that a slack jawed neanderthal. Wehe!

Their mong outrage is one of the more absurd moments we have had.

"I only watched the game yesterday, as I was at a tournament with my own team on Saturday. It stays interesting to watch a match, knowing what the result is, because you have no worry about an attack that you know will give no points to the opposition. This is why my analysis may be a little skewed in favour of the Boks. While I know many others may have been close to a nervous breakdown, I could watch it without any emotional influences...

I was also able to read the reports in the press before watching the game and it is amazing how the reports differ from what I saw and experienced. This is probably the biggest problem we have in SA. Our rugby journalists have absolutely no clue about the game. The comments of the facebook users under those articles basically parrot the bullshit the journalists dish up. Maybe two out of 10 comments make some (a little) sense...

Now for the game.

The overall impression I got from the match was that it was a very controlled performance. More so than the journalist would make us believe. The Boks were pretty much in control despite the lack of field position and the lack of possession. The one Aussie try was scored after a clear forward pass. The forward pass was allowed quite often during the match (specifically from Cooper) and it made the Aussie team look better during a number of plays.

People all over also criticise the Boks for not scoring tries, but the Aussie defence was better than people give them credit for. Interestingly, for the first time in a few years, we saw a number of full back-line moves that also gained a lot of ground. We were however poor in the following phases with the protection of the ball, which means we lost the advantage of the original play. This is a result of us not being used to full back-line moves and the players don't really have a clue how to support in the phases that follow. Knock-ons and turnovers will become less once we get used to playing like that. The problem is that we will probably fall back on the crash-balling flyhalf and inside centre soon and we will not learn to support properly during multiple phases...

The main thing however, was that the decision making was so much better than before, from both flyhalf and fullback. People might think that you want an exciting running fullback, but Lambie was never in the position to counter-atack, due to very good kick chases. What he did also settled the nerves and the team never lost focus. It was a low risk game, but it is exactly what is needed to begin building confidence again. What is amazing for me however, is that Morne Steyn is still ended up at the starting berth, after so many other were touted to be so much better than him. It just goes to show that most of the other pretenders weren't what they were hyped to be... Which is also sad, because Morne would definitely have been a has-been in most other teams... Where is our Barrett (or Cruden). The fact is that we don't produce them because we once again think about "running" or "kicking" flyhalves, but we are too stupid to realise that we need a flyhalf that is able to do both things well. But that player should be able to know whento kick and when to run...Morne is not the full package, but he is in fact still the best we have... Sad indeed!!!

Getting back to the start of this opinion: And this is mainly because not only the supporters are influenced by the opinions of the idiot journalists, but our coaches just like the fans, also fall for the crap the journalists write. If you want to coach, stay away from popular or media opinions and study the game. You are not going to learn more about the game by implementing the nonsense fan-girl journalists propose...

Just as a side-note... My team scored 209 points and conceded only 5 points in 5 matches on Saturday..."

Fact is, if Elton was there, we would have lost

No debate........  

Mike is just too bias to even acknowledge decent play

And Strauss...... I thought for a sec we had a new wing, he was out there so often