Rugby World Cup Final 2019 Eng vs S Africa

Squidgy Black

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

Rassie has done unreal stuff with the saffers and previously at Munster. His leaving on a massive high

He's not leaving, he's just stepping down from head coach and going back to his director of rugby role which he originally took up/was doing alongside head coach. He only stepped in as head coach after Coetzee was sacked

c.p.w.g.w

Squidgy Black wrote: »

He's not leaving, he's just stepping down from head coach and going back to his director of rugby role which he originally took up/was doing alongside head coach. He only stepped in as head coach after Coetzee was sacked

Oh yeah I know, his stepped down as coach

Naggdefy

RoversCeltic wrote: »

GAA is a minority sport in Ireland though, more people play soccer than rugby hurling and gaelic football combined,

Not anymore, ahead of soccer.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.joe.ie/amp/sport/gaa-most-popular-652397

Prior to this hurling and football had a combined male percentage player rate of 13%, same as soccer.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.balls.ie/amp/rugby/rugby-irelands-most-popular-sport-384546

I think rugby would pick up more players from GAA, look at Hayes, O'Brien, Furlong, Shane Horgan etc.

The Lost Sheep

Naggdefy wrote: »

Looking at the strength of the SA pack substitutes and of the big 3 it's obvious our strength in depth is holding us back a fair bit. Wales do a bit better with what they have, at WCs anyway.

I think rugby in Ireland needs to grab a large percentage of the GAA share. I think it's starting to happen a bit in rural Ireland. Take a town like Portlaoise, 22,000 pop with one GAA club. A lot of kids won't get first team games there. Potential to exploit in such areas. Rugby is a very appealing sport to a lot of GAA players. Would love to have had the opportunity in my prime.

Take Dublin, Jack McCaffrey (wing etc) MD McCauley back row, James McCarthy suberb athlete etc. Michael Murphy of Donegal impressed in the AIB toughest trade in Clermont, with his kicking ability especially.

for rugby to get more playing you dont necessarily have to take from gaa but get more development officers into schools and get more clubs fielding club teams especially in some areas of the country. Number of clubs fielding underage in Dublin should be far higher. If you cant afford to attend fee school then you are restricted a bit from playing in Dublin.

Dog Murphy wrote: »

I wonder if there will ever be a day when there is a failure by an Irish international sportsperson/team and the GAA doesn't get blamed for it.

nobody is blaming gaa at all.

RoversCeltic wrote: »

GAA is a minority sport in Ireland though, more people play soccer than rugby hurling and gaelic football combined,

gaa isnt minority. Is there any figures to prove that as its really not true.

Naggdefy wrote: »

Not anymore, ahead of soccer.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.joe.ie/amp/sport/gaa-most-popular-652397

Prior to this hurling and football had a combined male percentage player rate of 13%, same as soccer.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.balls.ie/amp/rugby/rugby-irelands-most-popular-sport-384546

I think rugby would pick up more players from GAA, look at Hayes, O'Brien, Furlong, Shane Horgan etc.

none of those really were picked from gaa. Furlong, o brien and horgan all played rugby from young age and hayes was 20 when played first rugby game.

c.p.w.g.w

People keep talking about we need more people playing etc, but our key players actually play very little, his seems to be our issue. ROG spoke about game time for peak performance and most of Ireland's players were nowhere the required minutes. Somewhere around 600 minutes.

Sure Sexton is a guest player for Leinster for Pro14

Naggdefy

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

none of those really were picked from gaa. Furlong, o brien and horgan all played rugby from young age and hayes was 20 when played first rugby game.

I know what you mean. I suppose coming from outside the Dublin schools framework in Leinster.

Yes an increase in the level of clubs but that eventually probably will mean taking players from other sports to increase rugby playing numbers.

tototoe

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

People keep talking about we need more people playing etc, but our key players actually play very little, his seems to be our issue. ROG spoke about game time for peak performance and most of Ireland's players were nowhere the required minutes. Somewhere around 600 minutes.

Sure Sexton is a guest player for Leinster for Pro14

This. Wrapping players up in bubble wrap and managing their playing minutes to the extent that has gone on recently is definitely part of the issue,. Sexton a case in point. Hes only our best player if hes actually on the field.

This nonsense of not risking players against lower ranked teams is also horse manure. If players are that fragile, then move on and find someone else who isnt made of glass to play routinely. The approach we have taken recently with some players does absolutely nothing for consistency in a team.

There should be active pushes into the eastern European and African communities, TBH.

Ash.J.Williams

Faugheen wrote: »

They’re led by arrogance and their biggest player shouldn’t be playing international rugby because of his backwards views.

Not to mention Joe Marler who was so horrified by Folau’s comments but clearly doesn’t give a **** about Vunipola playing alongside him.

Kyle Sinckler one of the most arrogant players in the game.

Maro Itoje one of the biggest cheats.

So yes. Plenty to dislike about them.

I don’t take my morals from rugby players therefore I don’t believe any of them should be excluded for their views

sydthebeat

Naggdefy wrote: »

I know what you mean. I suppose coming from outside the Dublin schools framework in Leinster.

Yes an increase in the level of clubs but that eventually probably will mean taking players from other sports to increase rugby playing numbers.

Any player from u13 upwards in gaa that's at county level is pretty much training all year round. Players as young as that are simply being told its gaa or nothing.

Even some club gaa teams are carrying on "winter training" for underage teams which removes them from availability in rugby

A lot of senior teams in the junior leagues are finding it very difficult to continue to field due to the dearth of gaa players that used to come across and play from the winter months. There is a very real and open threat from gaa management that players won't get picked for parish, Town, and most certainly county, if players play rugby. Those years are well behind us at this stage.

is_that_so

tototoe wrote: »

This. Wrapping players up in bubble wrap and managing their playing minutes to the extent that has gone on recently is definitely part of the issue,. Sexton a case in point. Hes only our best player if hes actually on the field.

This nonsense of not risking players against lower ranked teams is also horse manure. If players are that fragile, then move on and find someone else who isnt made of glass to play routinely. The approach we have taken recently with some players does absolutely nothing for consistency in a team.

It's not really fragility but a player can be put out of commission with the most innocuous of challenges. While the time management may be extreme, clubs are also managing player health, the development of other players and their overall squad. No amount of training time can compete with match minutes.

Henry Ford III

gooch2k9 wrote: »

Sinckler pulls the medal off straight away!

Lack of respect.

Probably still a bit woozy. In fairness he was knocked out hook line and Sinckler.

twinytwo

Squidgy Black wrote: »

None of what you've quoted is 'rubbish' though. Some people really don't like the brand of rugby that South Africa play (and arguably to an extent that Ireland do to), compared to New Zealand or even England in the semi.

The Wales game was a disaster for most fans to watch, because it was just sheer box kicking and rucking. Neutral fans generally don't want to watch that kind of contest.

Anyone that uses the term "brand of rugby" should be banned from here.

Naggdefy

sydthebeat wrote: »

Any player from u13 upwards in gaa that's at county level is pretty much training all year round. Players as young as that are simply being told its gaa or nothing.

Even some club gaa teams are carrying on "winter training" for underage teams which removes them from availability in rugby

A lot of senior teams in the junior leagues are finding it very difficult to continue to field due to the dearth of gaa players that used to come across and play from the winter months. There is a very real and open threat from gaa management that players won't get picked for parish, Town, and most certainly county, if players play rugby. Those years are well behind us at this stage.

Not in my experience.

sydthebeat

Naggdefy wrote: »

WNot in my experience.

Certainly is in mine.

I know plenty of youths players who stopped playing rugby the moment they were making County panels, and the above is the off the record reason given.

I also know that clubs are running winter training programmes for youths age grades at times that directly preclude them from playing rugby.

There isn't a cooperative relationship any more like used to exist say 20-30 years ago. It's very much combative now, as all sports are struggling for numbers against the trend of rising obesity, passive lifestyles etc.

This worth watching, have time this afternoon but highlights suggest a poor enough fare.

Squidgy Black

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This worth watching, have time this afternoon but highlights suggest a poor enough fare.

Watch the last 30 minutes maybe

irishbucsfan

sydthebeat wrote: »

Certainly is in mine.

I know plenty of youths players who stopped playing rugby the moment they were making County panels, and the above is the off the record reason given.

I also know that clubs are running winter training programmes for youths age grades at times that directly preclude them from playing rugby.

There isn't a cooperative relationship any more like used to exist say 20-30 years ago. It's very much combative now, as all sports are struggling for numbers against the trend of rising obesity, passive lifestyles etc.

The standards are much higher now as well. There's a much bigger barrier to entry to get involved at a club who are competitive at u16/u18 and there's also then a much bigger commitment involved. We're not a dependent on lads showing up who never train but would walk out onto the pitch as the best player (which was pretty common when I was underage!)

It's a good thing imo, it's a side-effect of the higher standards of rugby at junior and underage level in the country imo. We have a very good relationship with a couple of local GAA clubs and we'd go along and support them in the championship.

OldRio

Deleted User wrote: »

This worth watching, have time this afternoon but highlights suggest a poor enough fare.

IMHO It was a good game. Great play by the Bok forwards. Proper rugby.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

This worth watching, have time this afternoon but highlights suggest a poor enough fare.

I thought that it was a great game, closed out in the last 20 alright.


Saying that it was a great game to watch, while still in the balance.
The tries were the highlights and other than that it was just 2 very good teams going at it.

Clegg

I've seen some criticism of England for their conduct at the medal presentation. Personally, I don't think their players taking off their runners up medals, or in some cases refusing to have them put around their neck, is in any way disrespectful to the winners or the tournament itself. A lot of these guys, Itoje, Vunipola etc are hugely competitive and it's been drilled into them to win. Anything less isn't acceptable.

It's all about psychology afaik. Don't allow yourself to get comfortable with the loss. Pretty sure half of Leinsters players took off their Champions Cup runners up medals as soon as they got them.

TheCitizen

Clegg wrote: »

I've seen some criticism of England for their conduct at the medal presentation. Personally, I don't think their players taking off their runners up medals, or in some cases refusing to have them put around their neck, is in any way disrespectful to the winners or the tournament itself. A lot of these guys, Itoje, Vunipola etc are hugely competitive and it's been drilled into them to win. Anything less isn't acceptable.

It's all about psychology afaik. Don't allow yourself to get comfortable with the loss. Pretty sure half of Leinsters players took off their Champions Cup runners up medals as soon as they got them.

Pretty sure? Did they or not, pretty sure is neither here nor there.

England routinely are bad losers and even worse winners, at least we were spared that. Thanks South Africa.

RugbyLover123

TheCitizen wrote: »

Pretty sure? Did they or not, pretty sure is neither here nor there.

England routinely are bad losers and even worse winners, at least we were spared that. Thanks South Africa.

Ah stop trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. They’re perfectly entitled to do what they want with the medal. They just lost a WC final, if they don’t want to put on them that’s completely fine and I can see where they are coming from.

And I’d actually challenge your point on the English being bad losers, this time around anyway. Anything I’ve seen or heard has been gracious in defeat.

TheCitizen

RugbyLover123 wrote: »

Ah stop trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. They’re perfectly entitled to do what they want with the medal. They just lost a WC final, if they don’t want to put on them that’s completely fine and I can see where they are coming from.

Sweep Sweep, nothing to see here eh:pac:

RugbyLover123 wrote: »

And I’d actually challenge your point on the English being bad losers, this time around anyway. Anything I’ve seen or heard has been gracious in defeat.

Challenge all you like I disagree and they're even worse when they win. I'm delighted they didn't win for that reason.

nacho libre

walshb wrote: »

Personally I think the Aussies of 1991 were the strongest team of all the world cups, at that time..they were so strong in 1991..

I think New Zealand back in 1987 with the likes of Jones, Brooke, Shelford, Fitzpatrick, and Kirwan, were...

nacho libre

TheCitizen wrote: »

I think that' a bit unfair. Our team peaked in 2018. We don't have the resources to maintain that level for long periods. The timing didn't work in our favour but we were very impressive with that Grand Slam in 2018 and the wins over Australia and New Zealand. We beat south Africa 19 points to 3 in Lansdowne road in November 2017.

Maybe a tad harsh, as in the past we would have lost those games regardless, but i still think the South African side that day was not a patch on the South African side we saw yesterday. We lose to the top teams if they play at their best

pickarooney

Clegg wrote: »

Best stat about SA winning the World Cup is Francois Steyn becoming a double World Cup winner. How is he just 32? He won his first in 2007 when he was 20. A bloody baby!

And he beat an England squad featuring Owen Farrell's father.

fryup

TheCitizen wrote: »

Pretty sure? Did they or not, pretty sure is neither here nor there.

England routinely are bad losers and even worse winners, at least we were spared that. Thanks South Africa.

give over with your anti-english nonsense..

this pic was taken after the match, the actions of a sore loser?

Bridge93

So the last and only side to beat New Zealand in a World Cup game and then win a knockout game the following week is Australia in 1991? The mental, physical and emotional drain of doing it really must be something:

France 99, 07
England 19
Australia 03 have all beaten them in a semi or quarter and failed to win the next game I think? South Africa obviously didn’t have to play again in 95

jr86

Bridge93 wrote: »

So the last and only side to beat New Zealand in a World Cup game and then win a knockout game the following week is Australia in 1991? The mental, physical and emotional drain of doing it really must be something:

France 99, 07
England 19
Australia 03 have all beaten them in a semi or quarter and failed to win the next game I think? South Africa obviously didn’t have to play again in 95

As far as I recall France in 99/07 and obviously England in 19 were not just beaten but comprehensively beaten in their next matches after the ABs

Australia obviously pushed England all the way in 03, but they were at home