Maties make it two in a row
30 Mar 2009
Maties clinched their second Varsity Cup title with a 11-6 win over Pukke in a scrappy final in Stellenbosch.
The defending champions struggled to get going in the first half, but some smart work at the breakdown and solid defence in the second stanza saw Chean Roux’s men hang on to claim their second title in two years.
The game was far from the showpiece the 18 000 strong at the Danie Craven Stadium had hoped for, but in the end the Maties fans were the ones singing after 80 minutes.
In a tight and disjointed first half it was Pukke who got off to a good start and took the lead in only the second minute through a Cecil Dumond penalty. The visitors were playing some good percentage rugby albeit without much penetration.
It was only a matter of time until the hosts found their rhythm and after a good period of sustained pressure, Maties launched an attack from a scrum deep in Pukke’s half. The ball went quickly through the hands before reaching Morné Jooste out on the wing who stumbled before finishing in the corner for the only try of the game.
While Pukke looked good at lineout time, it was at the breakdown where their hard work was undone as the Maties’ forwards dominated the tackle point.
The difference between the two sides was the speed at which Stellenbosch were able to attack, which was down to the efficient work of their loose trio and the crisp distribution of scrumhalf Donald Stevens.
Pukke were still enjoying the bulk of the possession but had little to show for it as Maties’ defence stood strong. With time running out in the half a good kick and chase led to an attacking scrum for Pukke deep in Maties territory.
From the scrum the visitors managed to set up an overlap on the left, but fullback Willem Barnard butchered the chance to give his side the lead and Maties went into the break with a slim advantage.
The game started to open up in the second half, but as the ball was given more air, the error count began to mount on both sides and Pukke finally regained the lead through the boot of Dumond in the 49th minute.
Stellenbosch edged in front again through a cheeky drop goal from flyhalf Johan Sadie. The score seemed to reinvigorate the defending champions and they extended their lead just three minutes later through a Stevens penalty.
Maties’ forwards were beginning to stamp their authority on the game, but in most instances their hard work was undone by some sloppy handling.
With less then 10 minutes left in the game Pukke threw everything they had left at the hosts, but Roux’s men were up to the challenge as they kept the visitors at bay to hold on for the win.
In the curtain-raiser Armentum of Shimlas beat Dromedaris of the University of Johannesburg 30-16 in the Koshuis final.
By Andrew Worling, in Stellenbosch
454 Comments
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 » Show All
30 Mar 2009, 23:54 pm
seriously….how long are these bans??
30 Mar 2009, 23:54 pm
#390 Robzim: No one killed or injured on my watch, however we did have a few hairy moments, and you should see my knots!!
30 Mar 2009, 23:55 pm
night all – i have a lot of work to get done tonight
30 Mar 2009, 23:55 pm
#396 JimT: Unruly hair would mark you out to be a communist in those days Jim!
30 Mar 2009, 23:56 pm
#402 carol: justrugby knocked over 1 of them lollipop ladies outside a school…not too much damage…thank heavens…but what a story!!LOL
30 Mar 2009, 23:56 pm
#403 Roy: So Roy, the SA rugby Magazine Party where, when? Keo has the cash!!
You are guest of honour!!
30 Mar 2009, 23:57 pm
#397 carol: Yes she is, no question. Dawn would be interesting too along with Ruck & Big G (or whatever her new nic is (Crikey it’s a Shark?). Let’s not forget StormerGirl either. What a team we have there
30 Mar 2009, 23:58 pm
#403 Roy: Seriously Roy…dont ban my man….give a firm warning to all…we all been guilty…then take from there…best route to follow
30 Mar 2009, 23:58 pm
#398 grant10: Oh my lucky night!!!
12 hours away though!! Mmmmmm !!!
30 Mar 2009, 23:58 pm
#398 grant10: Now cut that out Grant !!!
30 Mar 2009, 23:59 pm
#399 K9 the Lion: King of Beasts: You will get “King of Kippers” title if you keep Zzzzzzzzzzzzing
30 Mar 2009, 23:59 pm
#406 carol: let me know when you are in cape town…. sure we can arrange something
30 Mar 2009, 23:59 pm
#407 JimT: i saw springbok sarah on tv yesterday …won some rugby prize…her and a mate singing a song on national bloody tv!
31 Mar 2009, 00:00 am
#404 carol: Those hammer & sickle days. Long live the revolution comrade. Off with their heads
31 Mar 2009, 00:00 am
#410 JimT: irish blood….you know what i mean!! LOL
31 Mar 2009, 00:01 am
#408 grant10: warnings don’t work!
31 Mar 2009, 00:01 am
#412 Roy: Will do, with the Lions, promise I won’t bring all of them!
31 Mar 2009, 00:02 am
is it just me or is SA internet slowing down to a crawl??
31 Mar 2009, 00:02 am
#416 Roy: bannings dont either…i bet you will be banning the same people over and over…and you know what …in the main its pretty harmless stuff…
31 Mar 2009, 00:03 am
#413 grant10: Wonderful. We have a show biz personality amongst us. No doubt Hollywood bound next, reaching for the stars
31 Mar 2009, 00:03 am
#405 grant10: Poor Lollipop lady and poor Justrugby.
Our Lollipop lady is so tubby she would just bounce if hit! Actually the car would suffer I think!
31 Mar 2009, 00:03 am
#405 grant10:
I am not surprised, the little buggers are far to brave and would risk their limbs by jumping in front of a car.
I nearly knocked a few of them over in my time as well Thank god for abs technology.
31 Mar 2009, 00:04 am
#413 grant10: That girl will go far!!
31 Mar 2009, 00:04 am
#415 grant10: I believe in sharing the spoils
31 Mar 2009, 00:05 am
#423 carol: Wonder what she was singing?
31 Mar 2009, 00:05 am
#414 JimT: If we make revolution jokes someone somewhere will REMEMBER US!!
It is supposed to be very sinister here remember!!
31 Mar 2009, 00:05 am
been fun…blonde back from electioneering…seems like i am needed …mmm not banned where it counts…bloody naughty fotrties and all that…Princess …be cool and beautiful as always..xxxx .had fun and a good few laughs…outta here!nite all…
31 Mar 2009, 00:07 am
#410 JimT: Jim no one has told Grant and I to “get a room” for ages now, they must be getting used to us!!
I think spooner was the first to say it!!
31 Mar 2009, 00:08 am
#426 carol: Oh well, we’re probably on the list already, to be terminated with prejudice as they say
31 Mar 2009, 00:08 am
#407 JimT:
Is “Crikey it’s a Shark’ a girl?
I thought she/he is a surfer dude from Durban. I “treated” her/him as such when we “talked”.
Quite embarassing, my ignorance.
31 Mar 2009, 00:09 am
#427 grant10: Thanks for your great common sense as always.
Lets hope tomorrow is a better blogging day. Night Gorgeous XX
31 Mar 2009, 00:10 am
#428 carol: The prudes have left I suspect. We’ve all got used to your arrangement. Can’t wait to see what happens in June though, heh, heh
31 Mar 2009, 00:11 am
Robzim and Jim, getting late here I must go chaps ***
See you Roy, Spooner and Tomsta.
Live and let live say I……
31 Mar 2009, 00:12 am
#430 Robzim: Yes she is. admitted to me one day that she used to be Big G. A model by profession too. How truly embarrassing for you
31 Mar 2009, 00:13 am
#432 JimT: You are very tolerant….
Now June….Grant is getting nervous already!!
31 Mar 2009, 00:13 am
#433 carol: Bye , bye Cotswold lady.
31 Mar 2009, 00:14 am
Over and out…Stop distracting me boys…
31 Mar 2009, 00:14 am
#435 carol: Not nervous just on edge, the tension is building
31 Mar 2009, 00:15 am
#437 carol: Adieu.
31 Mar 2009, 00:16 am
I’ve got to go too. See y’all on the other side of the hill.
31 Mar 2009, 00:16 am
#434 JimT:
A model that surfs? Do you have her phone number?
Just joking, they might throw me out here as well for harassment before too long.
#433 carol:
Cheers Carol, take it easy.
31 Mar 2009, 00:18 am
#436 JimT: Sorry logged off earlier. I’m sure you not so bad at all either JimT. i’m tired now guys. Gotta get some sleep.#427 grant10: Have you ever been banned?#422 Robzim: You would be a cool moderator. You wouldn’t throw me in jail for nothing.
31 Mar 2009, 00:37 am
Boy oh boy, what have I walked into here. Is Apartheid still alive and well in SA.
It looks like Dawn started it if you ask me (saying “it’s a black/white thang” – the fact that Willemse announced his retirement, and calling Sheriff GBS’s and Pietmans’ “house n*gga”), ably backed up by WPTID. GBS and Pietman took the bait, and GBS overreacted in an inexcusable way. They are all to blame for being silly.
GBS and Dawn are a bad combo – they were both banned together the last time (if I remember correctly it was the day skopskiet officially got banned).
Sheriff? Well he and Dawn have had a simmering, bickering love hate relationship for some time now… About time they get a room.
31 Mar 2009, 02:04 am
Good to see that Roy is finally prepared to apply the rules governing racist, religious and personal abuse. It seems that grownup people do not understand that the concept of freedom of expression goes hand in hand with responsibility and respect for opposite opinions.
Usually, it is an irresponsible minority that causes rules to be applied affecting also the majority who acts and interacts in a civil fashion. This site is no different. Although most of us have political, cultural and even racial affiliations, the majority are tolerant of diverse affiliations and opinions, which would make a blog like this one an ideal platform for communication and cross pollination across different affiliations.
Once again however, it is a vociferous minority with an assortment of agendas who clearly cannot function in a free environment without subtly, or blatantly baiting people to respond and when the **** hits the fan, they are all of a sudden sooooo taken aback and even hurt!! I have read some scary racist comments aimed at all races from all sides – recently aimed at Afrikaans speaking bloggers who supported the player 23 campaign ad by Vodacom. This was an obvious next wave of attack against so called Dutchmen and was so misplaced in the first instance as the ad was telling the SA rugby supporters of ALL races, languages, and cultural affiliations that Vodacom was the biggest supporter of them…. But the vociferous haters of Dutchmen managed to twist poor old Jan into all kinds of political, cultural and other contortions which his body shape simply was not intended to accommodate! That is but one example…
Roy, you could do well to read quito carnivale’s posts for insight into the mentality of some of these extreme characters modus operandi of instigating division and even hatred amongst a group of bloggers who are busy debating rugby and enjoying each others company.
As you have now seen, there can never be harmony, respect and tolerance without clear and unambiguous rules displayed prominently, and enforced to the end. You will however need to find a plug for those that simply pop up under a new nick and continue their trouble making and hate speech with impunity…. Skopskiet comes to mind here – he was hit with a red card if I remember and he popped out under a variety of new nicks… Another one is cuito carnevale – previously DaOne (spelling?) who also was banned for racist conduct.
Finally BGS is one of the friendliest and kindest guys on the blog, always willing to share a joke, make people smile, extending a hand of friendship across affiliation divides eg Hater, hell the man even offered help to some people who had abused him. What you see is what you get with him, no pretenses, no agendas, just a friendly guy who likes to chat about rugby and make people smile. But he does see through the agendas and subtle stabs aimed at hurting and discrediting what is dear to him, and being a straight forward guy he reacts forcefully at times. I have NEVER read a post from him insulting other races, or groups. Do not hold the fact that he supports a certain team against him – that is called freedom of association.
Once again, I propose that you post the rules unambiguously and ACT when people go over the top.
That is my opinion
31 Mar 2009, 02:11 am
sorry “BGS = GBS
31 Mar 2009, 03:16 am
Reading some of the posts today a question came up………….
My thoughts went to the global financial crisis where markets are stumbling from one scandal to the next. Huge morally questionable bonuses, millions of desperate people losing their jobs, theft of billions of investment dollars, and the list goes on……….
On the issue of theft…….. is there a parallel to be drawn between a fund manager stealing someone’s investment dollars, and a full time employee who works for, say a financial services company or an oil company, and uses internet access provided by the employer for work related functions, and spends many hours of every working day blogging on what is supposed to be a rugby site?
The questions that come to mind are:
1.Are employers happy to remunerate employees for the hours spent blogging every day?
If employers are not aware of blogging activities during paid working hours on company equipment, can such activities be seen as theft?
Whether it qualifies as theft or not, what is the financial impact on the clients of such a company, the broader community and cumulatively on the local and global economies?
Is there any legal, and/or moral argument (civil duty) to be made for exposing such shameful and possibly illegal conduct?
As an investor, I am concerned to say the least!!
Interesting situation, isn’t it?
31 Mar 2009, 04:08 am
#446 SA Barbarians:
Wow, you make some interesting points, I have to say. But let me take a stab at your question about theft. As far as I can remember, theft as a criminal act (thus theft as a deed governed by the SA law), has many technicalities. It firstly states that one person (subject or legal person) must take from another person that which does not belong to him by right. Then it gets technical, like if you, the victim, had left your lawn mower outside for three days it could be said that you gave the idea that you have given it up. If you go to the person who took it, your neighbor for example, and he tries to keep it from you by force, it is theft. If he returns it under a misunderstanding, it is not. It goes on and on like that. Because of the technicalities and the way that the crim. law is very specifically set out and written, wasting time at work would be difficult to squeeze in this bracket.
You will have a hard time trying to prove that blogging is theft, for many reasons.
Civil law is maybe less and yet more technical. If one person takes from another and causes damages to the other person, the victim can make a civil case for renumeration, return ect.
I think this instance belongs more in the second bracket, since the bloggers does not take anything illegally, but through non-action at work, they may cause income and production flow damages to the company, org. or whatever. Furthermore, unlike in crim law, you do not have to prove that a certain rule has been broken, but only that you have suffered loss and or damages. This is where the more technical part comes in. The basis is more simple, but the proof much harder.
At best though, and clear from public charges, I would say that this is a case of labour law. The employer will have to ask the comp/org. HR to investigate if a person is blogging/slagging, ask them to do a performance check, attempt to rectify the problem WITH the input of the employee. If the employer continues to act in such a way that is harmful and non productive to the company, he or she could be discharged. Technicalities take over once again, but thats not needed here.
Short of it all. Criminal act, no, not likely. Civil law case , probably maybe, but hardly worth the cost and effort. Best scenario, employer should do a performance check, and sort stuff out within his own capacity. This will once again probably take more time and effort than its worth.
Now how many employers will catch you, thats the real question.
31 Mar 2009, 05:02 am
#447 Greenpoint-Gunner: Yes GG, I see what you mean.
I contemplated a few principles, and morals………. Not a criminal conviction
Fact remains is the conduct stinks, is not ethical, and someone is paying for it – you and me. I worked for a large corporate and although staff were allowed as a special privilege to send and receive a small number of e-mails, blogging and chatting was not permitted, and strict rules applied.
Some of these individuals spend many hours per day blogging at full pay, which is disgraceful by most standards.
31 Mar 2009, 08:13 am
#444 SA Barbarians: Okay. You can’t be a moderator. You already have a hit list.
31 Mar 2009, 09:13 am
Great win for Maties well done. The score should have been even bigger – by far the most dominant team in University rugby at the mo
Did you know – their scrumhalf – Donald Stevens went to Grey Bloem and was the scrummie to Frans Steyn ! Awesome hey.
He is a good talent lost that one. Nice clean pass, and a good boot.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.