StunTheMullet says...

@ Stellenbosched2 - I think the Europeans would be far better placed to provide the alcohol rather than the distilled rats urine that passes for beer in Convictland.

It could be a best of breed allocation with wine to France and beer and spirits to eastern block countries (i.e. Romania, Georgia and Russia).

It needs to be kept simple for the Convicts where they can just provide the BBQ facilities in the car park and hand out the esky's.

Posted 01:19 22nd June 2012

objetive says...

Boks took their foot off the peddle. There was always only one winner.

Posted 14:17 21st June 2012

melkdave says...

@BigRugbyBalls

LOL waited till now to congraulate you lol,ill have to be faster next time wont i lol.

Posted 16:42 20th June 2012

sandal says...

@BokkeJ

Further to what Dr Death said, and in support of magic_dragon (whom I rather admire in taking on the Bok and English nations), 2011 was not the Boks' worst World Cup. That would be 2003, when South Africa lost 25-6 to England in pool play and 29-9 to New Zealand in the quarterfinals. All that after freezing their nuts off in some boot camp. I'm sure you remember that now.

You might also pay Wales greater deference in recognition of the Boks' special relationship with referee Derek Bevan.

And acknowledge that neither the Boks nor anyone else got food poisoning before meeting Wales on their home soil.

Oh dear. Now I'm simply being puerile.

Posted 06:57 20th June 2012

magic_dragon says...

@BokkeJ,try reading back through the comments,all I said was I had an equal dislike of the English and SA rugby teams (no mention of any hate),whats wrong with that? That's hasn't got anything to do with the country or the people,in fact supporters of those teams should take it as a compliment as my dislike stems from being beaten from them so often. It was your compatriot who started with the insults and the cheap shots. And I didn't try claiming any rugby superiority over the Boks,I stated a simple fact,Wales got further than the Bok in the last world cup,FACT. I didn't realise the mighty Bok were so sensitive! Anyway,good luck on Sat.

Posted 16:59 19th June 2012

JayStarr says...

@ Stellenbosched: I think the biggest difference between SH teams/players and NH teams/players is not their ability (talent, depth, etc.), but their attitude (self-belief, approach to the game, etc.)...

For example, you see the NH teams thinking they can win these games with a penalty kick - because that's what happens in the 6-Nations - so they kick their 3 points... and then NZ takes the ball and goes score a try..! Or when they're 10 points ahead, like Ireland was, they take their foot off the pedal because they're used to that meaning you're halfway to having the game won... while in the SH 10 points is nothing!

Ireland and Wales lost on the weekend because of a lack of attitude - they made stupid mistakes during the game that you won't see from top teams in Super Rugby, and they didn't have the self-belief and attitude to finish NZ and AUS off when they had them on the ropes. I think England played with more attitude than the other two - not a lot of teams would've picked themselves up and come back after what the Boks did to them in the first 30 minutes. Even though the Boks were clearly going to win, England actually believed they could come back - and it's that attitude that will make them a really good team once their young players get some more experience, etc. If Wales played with the attitude they had at the WC, they would've won both games against Australia.

But the problem for the NH is that they don't play against SH opposition enough - so they only get a taste of this level and type of rugby every now and again, instead of being measured against it consistently and being forced to raise their standards, skills, intensity, mentality, etc., such as Super Rugby teams and the tri-nations are consistently forced to do.

So if they're smart, they'll let more of their players come play Super Rugby!

Posted 16:01 19th June 2012

magic_dragon says...

@Celtictenor,who's being prejudiced? My dislike of a sporting team is no reflection on how I feel about it's supporters or anybody associated with it. I dislike the English rugby team,yet I've met hundreds of english people and got on well with most,if not all of them. Sport is all about rivalries and banter etc. Now,Zambokke referring to the welsh as 'whinging hill hobbits',that sounds a bit more like prejudice to me.

Posted 14:52 19th June 2012

magic_dragon says...

Due to some sensitive Bok reaction,can I just clarify that I used the word 'dislike' and not 'hate'. I certainly don't hate the Boks,and in fact when they actually concentrate on playing rugby and are in full flow I even admire them.If it's any consolation I dislike all the Tri Nations rugby teams,and yes,it's because I'm sick of losing to them!

Posted 13:02 19th June 2012

bokbokbok says...

Not a big fan of all the NH fans + journalists complaining about the referees over the weekend. Also, I though England were well outplayed in the 2nd match. Finally, I know it was great that Ireland got within three points of the ABs, but if you have a look at the match stats, NZ dominated almost all facets of play. They had ~60% of possesion and territory! I definately think there is a bit of wishful thinking from NH fans that they are even within spitting distance of NZ + SA. Aussie are maybe another story though(?)

Posted 09:28 19th June 2012

Stellenbosched2 says...

Hi JayStarr,

Ja, Anderson was trying to annoy South Africans. It's his claim to fame.

As a rugby fan I think too much time is spent on the NH vs SH topic. We all love the same game at the end of the day. Having said that my 2 cents worth on the differences between the hemispheres is that at their best the NH sides are equal to the SH ones. However at their best the SH sides are better than the NH teams. I hope that makes sense.

Posted 06:31 19th June 2012