Hi Cane…if you do a more in-depth analysis of the type of tackles, you will see that the SA players put in bigger hits. Its not really the tackle, but the type of tackle that makes it more of a ‘game of attrition’ (sorry for using those words..I faarking hate it when I hear it on tv.) It seems to be a South African thing whereby big boys try and show each other up by seeing who can put in the biggest tackle…I have seen a few in NZ as well, especially when Jerry Collins was around…Now THAT was a legend!!!!

you must be todays sacrifice as chosen by all the other whinging Yappies

What isn’t up for debate is that the Aussies have the vastly weaker conference.

Of course the keevies will say theirs is tougher. They see the Lions and Cheetahs as incredibly weak.

Of course the Saffas will say ours is tougher. We know the Lions and Cheetahs roar only against fellow Saffa teams but go all Lamb-e-e-e-e-rt against the keevies and ozzies.

I was just starting to enjoy Keo again, after Slack Panty, Waka and the other foot soldiers of the Kiwi-mafia had left or gone quiet.

Your nick must the the stupidest one devised yet. Interesting use of alliteration though in your post – so hints of a poetic soul maybe?

Welcome to the South African site about the Springboks and gauged towards South African rugby fans. I will make sure your time here is as uncomfortable as possible

Plumtree is just telling the Yappies what he knows they want to hear

knowing all along it’s all bullshtt

As ek lees dat die SA Spanne MEER punte buite hulle konferensies gekry het, en bo-op NZ spanne het MINDER punte as die SA spanne beruik – dan kan dit bewyse wees dat daar minder punte beskikbaar is in die SA konferensie juis is dit moeiliker?

Bolloks, Plum, and you know it.

The point is, Mr Blackadder and Mr Ellis, is that the SA teams will pound each other senseless and a 15-12 game between Sharks and Stormers is way harder than a 29-14 game between Chiefs v Blues.

Even the 51-19 Blues v Cheetahs game was more physical than the Landers v Saders game (IMO).

The history of the Currie Cup provides this motivation. You only have to read every Bok’s biography to see it – and especially most recently Big Vic’s book. The Bulls have a massive incentive to beat the Cheetahs and vice versa, one which I doubt the NZ teams have the historical legacy of

I put this comment on last week:

This site has been going on about which conference is the worst to be in and I said from the start the SA and NZ conference is the most difficult, while the Aussie conference is some way behind. Well here is some facts. (TP – Total Points, WC – Within Conference, OC – Outside Conference).
TP WC OC % OC/Tot
SA 197 91 106 53.81%
NZ 207 95 112 54.11%
Aus 177 96 81 45.76%
Some usefull observations. The Aussie teams picked up 177 points in total of which 81 was outside the conference. 33 of these were obtained by the Reds. The bottom 4 teams therefore picked up 48 points, therefore 12 on average.
In the SA conference the Sharks picked up 30 points outside the conference as they did not perform too well within their conference, while the Stormers (24), Cheetahs (22) and Bulls (20) all got more points from outside the conference than the bottom 4 Aussie teams.
The same applies for the NZ conference where all their teams, Crus (29), Blues (24), Hurricanes (20), Highlanders (20) and Chiefs (19) all got more points than the bottom 4 Aussie teams.
Another interesting observation is that the SA conference produced the least number of points within the conference, although teams such as the Sharks, Cheetahs and Lions were some of the most attacking teams. The conclusion must be that when the SA teams face each other the scores are lower and less bonus points are scored. This can be summarised by only looking at the Sharks results, where they only scored one 4 try bonus against the Lions in a 30-30 draw. They however scored 4 try bonuses against the Force, Rebels, Brumbies, Hurricanes and Crusaders. Again the Aussie teams feature in a negative way!

However, if you look at the conference with the best quality teams it is clearly New Zealand since they have less weaker teams in their conference than the SA/AUS conference. Therefore they have to play top quality opposition on a weekly basis in their own conference. They can’t be faulted for SA and AUS having weaker teams. If anything, the fault lies with SA/AUS for ‘gifting’ New Zealand teams easy five-pointers instead of strengthening their own conferences.

and are guaranteed any easy five pointers in oz/nz = and are not guaranteed any easy five pointers