Too good.

Back to what everyone else is talking about…. Down with New Zealand at the World cup….. Because its so much fun for everyone else!!!

its friggin cold!

“our crowds may throw bottles, but I remember reports of stabbings at local SA club games, I know which is worse, do you?”

Yep these ‘clubs’ are the Cape Crusaders and All Black supporters… probably says something eh?

Hows this weather eh Pops?

No, it’s not the mighty Springboks, the reigning World champions.

It’s France. (Or deep down it’s Australia).

For me it says everything.

what is, my disdain for Saffas latching on to another teams victory and triumphing it as their own?

yep, thats me exposed alright…

as for france, your nations record against them isnt so flash either… I know you won the last test played between the 2 of you, but before that it was something like 3 wins for SA out of 10 attempts? lets not mention the French 100% win record at a SA ground either aye..

but yep, thats me exposed…. typical Saffa arrogance, you seem to have it in bucket loads…

Post 23 validated, totally.

again, was NZ favourite to win every world cup? I think not….

but continue to expect NZ to choke at this years WC… really does highl;ight the fact youre scared of the ABs at this world cup, like you have been at every opther one..

thats why Saffas delight so much when A.N. OTHER team knocks NZ out of the cup… because they dont have faith in their OWN team to be able to complete the task..

says it all… but hey, perhaps Skop aan Jaag may win you another WC, would be a shame if it did though and would explain why Rugby will never be a truly global sport when teams such as SA and Eng revert to the “up the jumper” style of rugby… its really conducive to luring more people to the game that style… it actually reminds me of AFl that style and why the game will never grow with that mindset..

ah well, at least you guys have success every 12 years or so huh?

its funny, Ive seen many Saffas this year latch onto Aussie rugby “experts” just to vindicate their point… now youre countering by posting a UK Bloggers opinion?

bwahahah

you must have been on the SA All Schools debating team with those skills..

perhaps that “sense of entitlement” for kiwis and rugby comes from the countries proud rugby history…. Im sure many Saffas feel that sense of entitlement when it comes to rugby nowadays, and that with your fellas cr@p winnng percentage…. eish, pot kettle anyone?

not like the sense of entitlement apartheid gave you guys which still carries over today in the fine specimens such as yourself

2. Lack of Leadership … when it counts
[on- and off- the field]

The 2007 team looked like it was chocked full of leaders

Dan Carter, Crusaders & All Blacks

Anton Oliver
Jerry Collins
Keith Robinson
Karl Hayman
Rodney So’oialo
Byron Kelleher
Dan Carter
Mils Muliaina
But when it really mattered, leadership was missing.

The bottom line was that Ritchie McCaw wasn’t up to it at that time and it remains to be seen whether he will have what it takes on the day this time around.

The New Zealand Rugby Union’s ‘Independent Review’ document noted that “leadership support to the captain was not optimal” (p30). They are referring to the absence on the field of 6 of the 10 ‘leadership group’

Neither Rueben Thorne nor Aaron Mauger were on the field
Jerry Collins & Dan Carter were injured
Mealamu was not available through injury
Anton Oliver had been substituted
But that left 4 leaders on the field – how many does it take to order a drop-kick?

We consider that on-field leadership and decision making was a factor in the loss in the quarter final. Arguably, the team and its leadership group has only occasionally been tested to the same degree over the last four years. The trend, as witnessed in Melbourne earlier in 2007, was for the leaders to revert to type and let McCaw make the calls.

The coaches did, however, send a message out to the team with 10 minutes to go, to set up for a drop goal. The on-field decision was made to continue with the tactic of attempting to score a try or to get a penalty. When making this decision the players were unaware of a vital piece of information – that the All Blacks had not been given a penalty in the entire second half and were therefore probably unlikely to get one, notwithstanding their pressure, possession and territory.

In the dying minutes of that critical game, the leadership model failed to deliver what was its most important objective – decisions which give the best chance of winning the game. With the benefit of hindsight, the team failed to ensure that the right decisions were taken. As with the philosophy underpinning the leadership model, the players, coaches and management must take responsibility for that.

This time around, there are guys like Kevin Mealamu, Andrew Hoare, Dan Carter and Conrad Smith who understand the game. They will be supported by Chris Jack, Ali Williams, Jerome Kaino and Brad Thorne but it remains to be seen whether any will stand up to support – or overrule – Richie McCaw when it really counts.

Coaching

Of the above list, the omission of Mauger was down to a coaching decision – and it was a mistake. It remains to be seen whether we are safeguarded by these kinds of errors this time around.

In the 2003 World Cup in Australia, coach John Mitchell left Tana Umaga on the bench when the team lacked leadership when it counted most.

Mitchell had the option of choosing from a great number of highly experienced players that included Jeff Wilson, Andrew Merhtens, Taine Randell and Anton Oliver.

But instead of chocking his bench full of experience, he chose to use new players – and failed.

3. Sheer weight of expectation
Added to the psychological effects of 1. and 2. above is the fact that the NZ public demand victory every time the All Black jersey comes out.

Winning is a relief when it comes – which it often does for New Zealand in rugby but just not when it counts in world cups.

World Cup expectation has been hanging over the heads of the Kiwis for 24 years.

Many seem to forget when coming up with the favourites for each tournament that New Zealand have only won it one time in 6 outings.

Many treat them like they are the Brazil of world football when in reality, their results align them with the England of football – won it once and think they should win it every time …

Nothing short of victory will be enough for the New Zealand public.

Added to 1. and 2. above, this will affect the psyche of the NZ camp.

The sheer devastation of another world cup loss, the inevitable exodus of players, the public post-mortem and then a Super 15 starting in the height of the 2011-2012 summer will be too much to bare for NZ’ers.

Watch the rugby ratings (and revenues) in 2012!

You think 2008 was bad …

4. New Zealand don’t play well as a team any more
The only Kiwi team to do so are the Crusaders but that culture has not made its way into the All Blacks.

One of the architects – perhaps the leading force – Robbie Deans, is now coaching Australia.

The All Blacks had a great team in 1995 but it’s fair to say that they have struggled to come up with the same 80 minute, 18-man performance that plays with consistency.

They cheat because they feel they own the game and they’re such a chippy little bunch of sheep lovers that they feel the world owes them. ’twas ever thus sadly, they do the game and themselves no credit, they can win easily without doing it but it’s totally ingrained in their psyche. A well balanced nation with a chip on both shoulders.

I’ve befriended dozens of kiwis over the years, they’re great people until you mention the ABs then suddenly that sense of entitlement to world rugby domination comes out. Small minds? Small horizons? Who knows but it’s deeply sad that they feel the need to nick the game’s hubcaps all the time.

eish…

at least he admitted his mistakes, and tried to get clarity on the situation straight after…

nothing worse then a Joubert, Jonker, peyper decision or 5 huh?

last year when the Bulls were winning some very dubious decisions under SA refs for 90% of the tourney nothing was said, this year its suddenly different?

man, the persecution complex continues to be entrenched in the very fragile Saffe psyche…

guess its Karma for those 60 odd years or so huh?

Tappe Henning (Gallo Images)
Related Links
Grant returns for Stormers
Changes aplenty for Lions
Bulls bench Matfield

Stephen Nell

Cape Town – Dewaldt Duvenage’s “try” that was not awarded early on in Saturday’s Super Rugby match between the Stormers and Crusaders should have been awarded.

That was the word on Wednesday from SANZAR referees selector Tappe Henning when he was asked about the incident in the match at Newlands.

Henning has subsequently discussed the incident with referee Chris Pollock and the error has been pointed out to him.

“It was a try. The referee made the wrong call and was supposed to play advantage. The assistant referee told him that he could play advantage and he incorrectly awarded a lineout to the Crusaders,” said Henning.

Duvenage intercepted the ball after a quick throw-in by Crusaders captain Kieran Read. Read had one foot in play when he took the throw-in, but the fact that the illegal throw-in had been intercepted should have brought the advantage law into play.

Pollock’s uncertainty was a result of the word “disallowed” which appears in the laws of the game – in other words, he thought that the throw-in should not have been allowed as it had been incorrectly executed by the Crusaders.

Advantage should have been applied in the Stormers’ favour.

The incident apparently bothered Pollock after the game and he already phoned Henning from his dressing room at Newlands to ask whether he had made the right decision.

There was some debate in local refereeing circles and a quick call to the International Rugby Board (IRB) eradicated any uncertainty.

Pollock is handling Saturday’s match between the Bulls and the Melbourne Rebels at Loftus Versfeld. The incident has been discussed with him so that the mistake is not repeated.

“The whole world now knows that advantage applies in such a situation,” said Henning.

The former Test referee is not of the view that the incident cost the Stormers the game.

“It happened after four minutes and it will be unfair to say that it was responsible for changing the outcome of the game. You could also point to a situation where the Stormers flyhalf missed a kick at goal,” said Henning.

Another talking point is that Pollock did not act more decisively when the Crusaders illegally stopped the Stormers’ lineout mauls.

“We asked him about that and he was not of the view that a try would have been scored from either incident,” said Henning.

Oh BP, makes you proud to be a Kiwi, was he on the sauce like Walsh?

lets see…

they won a test in 2009, correct?

and before that the last time they won a test was in 1994..

so 15 years inbetween test wins is “Beware these French. They play well in NZ”

bwahahaha deperado, already hoping the french upset NZs tourny… that confident in your own team huh?