Wilco is twice the player lomax dreams of being...so Scalla and co better catch a makeup!!!
Wilco is twice the player lomax dreams of being...so Scalla and co better catch a makeup!!!
Lomax is pretty handy but yes Wilco is something else - they could not select 15 Saffa’s :)
Please….the same old experts pick em so they have to be great. Tell me these things.
1 In how many tests has Dud Allende broken the line and offloaded for a try.
2 When had Dud Allende ever shown any vision.
3 Can you remember Dud Allende ever making a great open field tackle. Who did Mo’Unga bamboozle for a try that was called back
4 Dud Toit has probably run with the ball 1000 times for the Boks, can you name one great run.
5 Who was over the Irish ball in position to fetch and bottled out….resulting in the drop that squared the Irish series.
6 What is Dud Toit great at except number of tackles.
These are two blunt weapons who are best suited to Rasmus ball …..in that sense they have a function. This team was selected to do that, witness Pollard at 10 and Dud at 12.
That would be a very boring “Lions” series
"Please….the same old experts pick em so they have to be great."
Wehe . . . so here we have Moffie - the rugby noob who thinks back-to-back RWC winner Rassie is a crap coach and two time World Rugby Player of the Year PSdT is a crap player - this same ignorant and self-important old fool now wants us to believe that he knows more about rugby than Schalk Burger, Jean de Villiers and Hanyani Shimange!
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!
Ian Foster will be picking a combined NZ/Aussie team to play the British Lions
https://www.bbc.com/sport/rugby-union/articles/c30myjj4j48o
Image source, Getty
Image caption,
Ian Foster - here shaking hands with then-Lions boss Warren Gatland in 2017 - is still unsatisfied by the way that drawn series ended
Mike Henson
BBC Sport rugby union news reporter
Former New Zealand boss Ian Foster says "unfinished business" from the All Blacks' drawn series with the British and Irish Lions in 2017 motivated him to take the coaching reins of a combined Australia/New Zealand team which will face the tourists this summer.
The Lions will play the invitational side on 12 July in Adelaide in their final match before the opening Test against Australia in Brisbane a week later.
Foster was an assistant to Steve Hansen in 2017 when a controversial 15-15 draw in the third Test at Eden Park led to the spoils being shared from the Lions' trip to New Zealand.
French referee Romain Poite subsequently said that he got a crucial 78th-minute call wrong,, external after he awarded the hosts a scrum, rather than a penalty, for Lions hooker Ken Owens being offside.
His call denied the All Blacks a potentially match-winning, series-deciding kick at goal.
"Yeah, there is unfinished business. I think if you look back to the last minute of that Lions series - the third Test at Eden Park and the drama of it, referee decisions that obviously we disagreed with and probably most people did," said Foster.
"One-one and a draw. It didn't leave any of us very satisfied."
Image source, Getty Images
Image caption,
New Zealand captain Kieran Read attempted in vain to get Romain Poite to stick with his original decision to award the All Blacks a penalty, rather than a scrum
Foster took over from Hansen after New Zealand's 2019 Rugby World Cup campaign ended in semi-final defeat by England.
He won four straight Rugby Championship titles and led the side to the 2023 Rugby World Cup final where they were defeated by South Africa, before being replaced by Scott Robertson.
The 59-year-old now coaches Japanese side Toyota Verblitz.
Richie Mo'unga, Shannon Frizell and Ngani Laumape are among the former New Zealand internationals also in Japan, outside of eligibility for the All Blacks, who might potentially turn out for the invitational side.
"Maybe put a few younger, up-and-coming Australian players with some older heads, maybe some ex-All Blacks and then maybe try to find a few older Wallaby heads," said Foster, who said he hoped the side would be split 60:40 between Australians and New Zealanders.
"That combination between the young and old, I think, is more important."
It has also been confirmed that the Lions will take on a First Nations and Pasifika XV on 22 July in Melbourne.
The fixture replaces a match against the Melbourne Rebels, who went into administration after the initial itinerary was announced in July 2023.
Saturday 28 June: v Western Force, Optus Stadium, Perth
Wednesday 2 July: v Queensland Reds, Suncorp Stadium, Brisbane
Saturday 5 July: v New South Wales Waratahs, Allianz Stadium, Sydney
Wednesday 9 July: v ACT Brumbies, GIO Stadium, Canberra
Saturday 12 July: v Invitational Australia & NZ XV, Adelaide Oval
Saturday 19 July: First Test, Suncorp Stadium, Brisbane
Tuesday 22 July: v First Nations and Pasifika XV, Marvel Stadium, Melbourne
Saturday 26 July: Second Test, Melbourne Cricket Ground
Saturday 2 August: Third Test, Accor Stadium, Sydney
Ah Moz so let me get this straight - Jean, Schalk and Shimmie have no idea what they are talking about and you are right when it comes to DA and PSDT?
Fuck me that is the funniest take ever
Ever considered the fact that you are utterly clueless and that your takes are embarrassing
What the fuck do legends like Jean and Schalk know hey?
I see in a Jim Hamilton interview with Keith Earl, that he reckons if Rassie took over Tonga or Samoa they would win a WC under him. How dare he rate Rassie so highly hey
Dave the usual bombast, but no points rebutted. Actually this is a perfect string to prove another point. Let’s say the experts are all dead on and this is the best SH team. That team has 9 Boks, 5 ABs and 1 Bargie.
A historically more normal squad might have been 6 ABs, 5 Boks, 3 Wallabies and 1 Bargie.
Sooooo Rasmus is playing with a much stronger hand than any other Bok coach since readmission. The Wallabies are gone, the ABs massively reduced and the Bargies much the same.
it’s not genius it’s luck and better players.
Thanks for teeing that up.
Moz nice attempt at deflection - the point here is you are saying legends of the game in Jean, a 12 himself (he might know a thing about the position) and Schalk don’t know what they are talking about selecting DA and PSDT.
What this confirms to me not that I really needed confirmation is that you are utterly clueless
Now to your Rassie point - we are the best side in the game thanks to Rassie so given this fact our players are going occupy the top spots. It’s logic that the top side has the most players in the SH side.
The coach makes the side not the players - evidenced by the absence of Andy Farrell for Ireland this 6N - same players different coach
Glad to be of service - but remember this is about your rugby ignorance unless of course you are saying Jean and Schalk have no idea what they are talking about on the subject of rugby
Wrong…..Rasmus inherited most of his team, which according to the ‘experts’ is way better than anything NZ has to offer. Yet we could beat 14 of them by a point but only because our kicker, who the genius didn’t select, was better than theirs.
My position is rather secure.
I poor Mozzietard taking his customary beatung.
Imagine how daft you have to be to take the positions he does on Rassie, DuTout and Allende.
Bwahahahahaha.
On Beeno'sTrumpet we have poor Blobbie and the very dense Denise providing comic relief. Other clowns are also putting in some effort.
On the Rugby board we have Mozzie! The guy has gone off the rails rugby wise and is getting it wrong time and again politically and with things like Covid etc.
Can Mozzie regain some credibility. Can he learn from his mistakes?
Moz let’s steer back to the topic as you are unable to comprehend the impact not having a specialist hooker has on a side or the fact that Pollard had not played a game of rugby at the time the WC squad was announced. Even if Rassie was the worst coach ever he would not leave out a fit Pollard - fuck me my dog even knows that
Yes Rassie inherited a side ranked 7th he turned them into double WC champs, double RC champs, a Lions series and number 1 in the game - you are such easy pickings
But back to the topic at hand - are you saying Jean and Schalk do not know what they are talking about selecting DA and PSDT and that you know better? Answer that question
Every dog knows he could have picked Pollard and then if he wasn’t’ fit replaced him….hell with a fifth scrumhalf if needed. You don’t leave a WC match winner at home when he played the next week and had 4 more weeks to get match fit before the knockouts. Stop defending the indefensible Dave.
Jean and Schalk as part of the Bok establishment were never going to leave out Dud Toit. Dud Allende they had more flexibility…but I clearly remember Dud Allende coming over to commiserate with Jean as he was carried off the field against Wales in 2014. They were team mates. For Jean to leave out Dud Allende would look like sour grapes.
Helpful or are you still not reading between the lines?
Jean, shimmie and Schalk is part of the puff piece….
Once you remove Saffex's appeals to authority there isn't much left.
Moz that has to be the most pathetic justification for the selection of a player ever
Geez that is pathetic
No Moz it’s a Springbok policy that non fit players are not eligible for selection. You break policy you undermine the squad. Pollard was not match fit at the time the squad was announced. But clearly you are not stupid enough to believe Rassie would have left a match fit Pollard out of his WC squad - hellooooooo
Plum by your dumb logic that would mean Jean and Schalk are fabricating what they see in DA because according to the world authority that is you - there isn’t much left
Im not sure who’s take is more pathetic here - yours or Moz
He played the next week….he was match fit. It was an incredibly stupid move by a coach who thought Libbok was going to do the business.
No he did not, he played the week before his call up - it was off the bench
But that’s beside the point, he was not match fit at the time of selection. The only place to test his match fitness was a match
The only stupid fool here is you believing the best coach the Boks have ever had would leave a fit Pollard out of his WC squad
That is what I call stupidity
Well let’s be honest here….if you were the Bok coach and you knew that your star Flyhalf was already training, and over his injury….
Ok he hasn’t played a match, but there was plenty of time to ease him in for match fitness, until the knockout phases , would you leave him at home??
If you say yes you lying thru your teeth. Truth is that Erasmus knew very well he made a huge fuck up leaving Pollie at home.
And just thru major luck Pollie came and won us the WC….Fact’s and no matter how much you huff and puff, or change your nappy, it will go down in history like that.
Precisely.
Well dumbfuck trust you to be the one to advocate that the coach breach the teams selection policy and select a player that has not met the returning to play protocol
No I would not have selected Pollard knowing he was not match fit - I would not be stupid enough to go against the teams selection policy thereby undermining the team in the process
Only a fucking idiot would declare that Pollard won us the WC ignoring the work of all the other squad members
"And just thru major luck Pollie came and won us the WC . . ."
giMp parroting the same ignorant and biased nonsense that his beloved master advocates.
"Rassie was just lucky."
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahaha!
Egg-faced fools trying to pretend they haven't got egg sliding down their stupid faces.
Team’s selection policy…..bureaucratic balls. He could have selected Pollard subject to being match ready by the time the WC started. Pollard played on September 15, five days after the Boks first match. He could have been on the bench for that first match.
As for his indispensable role….here’s Chat’s summary of the all opinions out there:
After being called up to the Springboks’ 2023 Rugby World Cup squad on September 17, 2023, Handré Pollard played a crucial role in South Africa’s journey to winning the tournament. Here’s a breakdown of his key performances:
Perhaps the stupidest selection decision in the history of Bok rugby rescued by an unfortunate, but for Erasmus reputation saving injury to Marx. Stupex and Wantwit in mid season form.
Trust you to be the type that would make a call that undermines the side as a whole
The only stupid fool here is you - I mean imagine being stupid enough to believe Rassie would leave out a match fit Pollard
Im not sure if that is more stupid than thinking you know better than Schalk and Jean
Both incredibly stupid - just not sure which is more stupid
And you call me Stupex - bwaaahaaaaa
What the fuck do Rassie, Schalk and Jean know hey?
He did leave a almost match fit, injury free pollard at home….
and thru major luck, pollard was able to join….Erasmus was a lucky son of a gun, for it ALL to end up the way it did.
If you guys can’t acknowledge and see that, then good luck is all I can say.
Almost match fit is not match fit you fucking idiot
Geez it’s tiresome dealing with such stupidity
Dumbest selection decision since readmission for sure.
Clowns
Yes Stupex the king of daftness….he was injury free FFS!!
You don’t leave your biggest weapon at home just for something trivial like not completely match fit…you abstract lunatic…
And yet again you revert to insults because you have no real answer on the fact that Pollard did join thru major luck….
Not because of Erasmus,s astuteness, No thru luck !
So dumbfuck are you saying that Rassie left a match fit Pollard out of his WC squad you fucking idiot?
A simple yes or no will do as we don’t need to hear anymore of your blubbering mumblings
Ai Jaai Jaai ….He was injury free, in training and there was plenty of time to get him completely match Fit.
So yes what Rassie did is exactly like leaving a completely match fit Pollard at home….not clever at all!
The irony is that exactly the player that HE left behind unnecessary, is the one that only thru a massive element of LUCK, was able to join and be the Catalyst for us to Win WC 23.
Saving Rassie from a huge embarrassment…..let’s be honest, would Libbok have pulled us thru with those clutch kick,s??
Not sure of that at all….
Get a grip Guy there is no ways in hell that you can always be correct and everyone else is always wrong…
Grow up…Oh and cover your Tail Pipe when Red Neck is around, clearly the guy is obsessed with slurping,s and what not :)
Yes he played 5 days after the WC started…..case closed.
Yes after the WC had started dumbass
That’s case closed
You profess to have managed companies - so at any point did you break company policy protocol knowing it would undermine the company as a whole? Just completely disrespecting the company policies?
No you did not for if you did you would have been a sad excuse for a manager
This was a dumb policy….just like the attempts to eliminate overseas players was a dumb policy, which your hero Erasmus abandoned without any qualms. Now suddenly he is wedded to the idiotic idea that you don’t take a proven match winner to the WC rather than a fourth scrumhalf because he has been injured….but is still ready to play at the start of the WC.
‘But apparently playing off the bench in a club match changed all that. Rasmus has always been willing to bend the rules, even come on as a water boy to provide illegal direct coaching. He does what he thinks is needed to win….if he thought he needed Pollard to be at the WC he would have been.
But I’m sure our 43% kick success ratio in the first WC match against Scotland had it’s effect and seven days later he swopped a hooker for a flyhalf.
It’s not a dumb policy - it’s one that ensures the players selected are fit to play
Being ready to play at the start of the WC is not the same as being ready to play when the squad was announced - that was weeks earlier
Rassie was clever enough to insist that SA rugby abandon their stupid policy of not selecting foreign based players - another great Rassie move
Bottom line is, Rassie would never have left a fit to play Pollard out of his squad - even your dog knows that
Dave
I gave up on discussing rugby players wth Mozart years ago when he openly stated he did not want to see anything positive of players he did not support. His hatred of both De Allende and Du Toit went back to 2014 and was always there since then. Wheneer a player he supports f ucks up royally he would invent some mythical tales on why either De Allende or Du Toit should be blamed for the fuck ups.
So what Mozart comes up with is based on his personal prejudices - nothing else. It is a waste ot time to argue with him about player performances,
.
.
Moffie and giMp can carry on squealing and squawking until the cows come home . . . back-to-back RWC wins says all that needs to be said.
Let the little clowns get all red-faced and indignant while they pretend they haven't got egg all over their faces. It's funny to watch.
Sure a policy which determined the WC winner should be left out of the WC he ultimately swung in the Boks favor is a smart policy. ROFL!
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
Because of Pollard who he didn’t select originally….and kicking failures by the French and AB kickers. If their kickers had equalled Pollard they both win by 5 points.
Dumb decisions bailed out by luck, Pollard excellence and failures by Ramos and Mo’unga/Barrett.
Genius.
Bullshit the game is won by 23 players not one
Plenty has to happen for the kicks to be made
The Boks were the best side at the WC - very worthy winners
Coached by the best coach in the business
Jake White’s take:
’So why is Pollard’s call-up so crucial? Well, look at the sharp end of World Cups. If you delve into the history books, there are not many tries scored in the semi-finals and finals, and therefore place kicking becomes a premium in those knockout games. Sure, you can mostly get away with a few miscues in the Pool stages, but in semi-finals and finals, drop-kicks and penalty kicks win you World Cups. It’s as simple as that.’
….
Flawless logic. The difference between the Boks and the Frogs/ABs who outgained the Boks by a total 250 yards and beat 80 tackles to our 26, was the man Rasmus thought he didn’t need.
Jake got it.
Well hellooo if Pollard had been match fit he would have been selected
What part of this obvious fact are you struggling with?
The fact that a 4th scrumhalf was preferred to the man who made the difference in the WC. Stupidest decision ever.. ..want to go with this?
The 4th scrumhalf has absolutely nothing to do with the match fitness of Pollard at the time the WC squad was announced
Moz are you not tired of me kicking your arse here?
You’re right Pollard should have been in the first 5 selected. But for those who didn’t fully understand his value, he could have been selected instead of the 4th scrumhalf. And then after the Scottish match, retained or the 4th scrummie could have been brought back.
It was a no lose proposition…
Pollard was not match fit so could not be selected
Helloooooooo
...as is verbrande hout...
Typical Draadtjie…trying to avoid the issue. The question is, is there any evidence players who are selected injured for the WC squad can’t be replaced after the first game. Obviously they can be replaced up to the start of the first game, any player can ….courtesy of Google AI.
So at a minimum Rasmus could have made the decision on Sept 9, giving him almost a month to asses Pollard and the 4th scrummie could have been in the extended squad.
But all available evidence shows Pollard could have been replaced right up to the final. There was no need to leave him out….it was stupid.
You claim to be fair minded, admit Rasmus just screwed up.
Screwed up sticking to the teams selection policy?
At the time the squad was announced Pollard had not played a game of rugby in months
Wake the fuck up
So you have given up on your lie about injured players not being replaceable….now you are back to the slavishly strict application of a rule that needs interpretation.
Stupidest Bok selection blunder since readmission.
Where did I give up on what Neinaber said huh?
Are you going senile in your advanced age?
Serious question
Get this into your stupid head - selection policy = match fit players - at time of squad selection Pollard had not played a game of rugby in months ie not match fit
What part of this basic equation is beyond you - fuck me you seriously need to wake the fuck up
Its like trying to debate with a 5 year old
That is the team selection policy
Right so you are now putting all your er weight on team selection policy, giving up on your stupid earlier claim that a player who was not fully fit when selected couldn’t be replaced.
Any selection policy that denies the critical Springbok a place for a competition starting more than a month later, and the knockout games more than 2 months later is foolish. And so it turned out. Pollard swung the WC
Stupidest selection decision ever.
I’ll repeat my question old man where did I give up on what Neinaber said huh?
When you suddenly dropped that lie and went back to team policy Fat Man.
Well trust a stupid old fuck like you to come to that conclusion - you fucking idiot
Try again and why not look up what a selection policy means you idiot
Produce from any source on the Planet the WC rule that says an injured player selected in the squad can’t be subbed. That was you claim.
"Produce from any source on the Planet the WC rule that says an injured player selected in the squad can’t be subbed. That was you claim."
Apparently it's not a WR regulation for the RWC, so it must be a internal SA Rugby selection policy...it's been propagated as set in stone sine 2015 when Jean had to make it back into HM's team...what a fckup that turnef out to be....
Yes we know about the stupid policy that eliminated the guy who ensured the WC….the decision to leave him out made August 10, almost 3 months before the WC final. A classical piece of overreaction to the Jean case.
Ja, ja, we know ...and still we won 2 in a row...lekker!!!
27,948 posts
Schalk, Jean and Shimmie
15 Mallia
14 Kolbe
13 Suaalii
12 de Allende
11 Jordan
10 Pollard
9 Williams
1 Ox
2 Marx
3 Lomax
4 Eben
5 RG
6 Situtu
7 PSDT
8 Savea
Oh look who is at 12 and 7 you rugby noobs. Shock, shock no powder puff at 5