ELVs to favour SA scrums
The new law keeping backline defenders five metres beyond the scrum will allow South African franchises significant momentum in the Super 14.
The Stormers played Boland in a warm-up game last Saturday and predictably cruised to a comfortable victory. Of their 12 tries, two were scored from first phase off the scrum with Robbie Diack and Peter Grant utilising the extra space to beat defenders. While defensive lines will be tougher to breach in the Super 14, Stormers assistant coach Gary Gold expects this law to favour a team with a solid scrum.
“I think the Aussie thinking behind this ruling is that it would help them, as it does provide more space,” Gold told keo.co.za. “But teams that can dominate in the scrums will have a big advantage and it will be quite difficult to defend.”
While the Bulls, Cheetahs, Sharks and Lions are all traditionally powerful up front, the Stormers’ scrum is perennially criticised. Despite the 72-10 scoreline in Wellington, the Stormers were asked some serious questions by Andries Human and company. Gold admitted there is still some work to be done up front.
“I think if you had to find a word for our first outing, ’satisfactory’ would be it. We did reasonably well in the set-pieces and did well to disrupt some of their line-outs. There is room for improvement, but we are still a month away from our first match [against the Bulls]. We need to work a bit harder on our mauls and drives, but after our first outing, I’d say we are pretty much where we want to be.”
The Stormers pack will receive a massive boost when prop Brian Mujati and lock Ross Skeate return from injury. Mujati is arguably the most important acquisition made by Erasmus in the off-season. If the tighthead can replicate the form displayed for the Lions in 2007, the Stormers may finally silence their critics at scrum time.
Gold agreed with Erasmus’s post-match statement concerning the breakdown. The Cavaliers provided a good contest at the tackle point but the Stormers loose forwards showed few signs of rust in this area, World Cup-winner Schalk Burger emerging as the stand out.
“We will always look to improve in what is such a fundamental part of the game, but I agree, it did go well at the breakdown. Xolani Mofu put us under a lot of pressure but I thought our guys handled it well,” Gold said.
By Jon Cardinelli
January 22nd, 2008 at 9:55 am
Ag man,
As jy teen die blinde skool speel…dan moet jy goed lyk…so die se nog niks…ons wag tot hulle teen n beter span speel…..dan praat ons weer.
Jy kan regtig nie iets uit n game soos die lees nie.
Jy kan se die nuwe laws gaan help…maar kyk teen wie jy gespeel het…al die groot spanne sal n manier he om die goed te counter…onthou net dit….en dit geld vir al die SA spanne en ja die bulle ook
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:04 am
Do the stormers have a scrum?
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:09 am
#2 LOL
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:12 am
finally an article about the scrum
#2 you are right, I know three women from work who could scrum better then those CT mellowpuffs.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:13 am
gerber put a sock in it.
You are getting soooo blooming boring now.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:14 am
g13g, to be fair you work in NZ where most woman are bigger than a brick sh1thouse.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:20 am
Is that where he is.
Jeez no wonder he’s such a crabby old man.
Moan moan moan all day long.
I would go batty within 50 feet of him.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:22 am
He and Tackler share an office.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:27 am
THE office.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:36 am
guys
what’s the exact ruling of the offside line – does it remain static, ie. 5m from the point the scrum is set, or do they have to fall back should the scrum retreat?
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:41 am
Hackneyed as gr13g may sound, he does kind of have a point. Eddie Andrews is worth at least 12 points in penalties when he is being scrummed.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:42 am
So, when the entire plot assumes the usual pear-shape as usual for the SA franchises (2007 excepted, thanks only to Henry’s “conditioning”), will it be that same old “travel handicap” excuse?
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:44 am
Tackler, the silver fern is actually the right website for you to post on.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:44 am
trupisero
I talk under correction, but as far as I know the line has to retreat if the scrum gets pushed back, unless you’re on your own tryline, of course.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:45 am
tackles, the travel bug was squashed last year! ho ho ho, a merry christmas to you you old grinch!
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:46 am
Tackler… :yawn:
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:47 am
WPTID
thought so, else a powerful scrum would actually result in less space for the attacking side.
tackler, I wish that Arg get inclusion into either S14 or 3N at some point so we can see how well you lot travel for an extended period
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:47 am
lol, tackler, arent you getting tired of the old “conditioning” excuse?
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:48 am
trupisero
The new ELVs are actually quite exciting from a forward’s point of view. It simplifies things immensely.
Under the full new laws being trialled at Vodacom Cup level etc., a forward only needs to remember the following:
1) come in through the gate only (well, this is nothing new)
2) stay on your feet if you are contesting the ball (I think allowing hands in the ruck is awesome, as long as it’s properly enforced and the guys stay on their feet)
3) no rucking unless you want a yellow card
4) any time the opposition have a rolling maul going, try and pull it down
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:50 am
14, 17-which is why there is still a need for big beef like Bakkies, Barend Pieterse, etc. mixed in with faster, mobile guys like Kankowski, Spies etc.. or Bok team might actually have had the mix right without realising it..
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:53 am
guys
what’s the exact ruling of the offside line – does it remain static, ie. 5m from the point the scrum is set, or do they have to fall back should the scrum retreat?
it stands to reason that if the scrum is going backwards the offside line moves backwards…common sence really! otherwise you push a scrum back 5 meters and you would have the defending backline standing amongst attacking backs….
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:55 am
Tackler
Well, it seems like you travelled poorly – straight outta Ruiterwacht…
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:55 am
WPtid, the law actually states that being on your feet means just that, not like Mccaw lying around like a vaalie at the beach sticking his grubby mitts all over the ruck. on your feet should mean just that. not kneeling on your mates etc..
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:56 am
bluebarb
I think you’re quite right – our current Bok squad has a nice mix. Scrums will still be very important under the new rules.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:57 am
the oz/nz teams hardly won in SA this year, and their record last year wasnt that great either..
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:57 am
Agreed, bluebarb.
It’s actually very, very easy to referee. And the rule also says on your FEET, not FOOT – so none of that kneeling on one knee ****.
I guess it’ll be up to the refs to enforce though.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:58 am
by this year i mean 2007..
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:59 am
morning BB
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:00 am
the boks scored some great 1st phase tries from rucks in the 3N last year, they have been gearing up for that, and the extra space afforded them will make them more dangerous.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:00 am
Hey Trupi!
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:01 am
again, by Rucks i mean scrums..
doing three things at once.. not clever.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:05 am
Bluebarb
Difficult to ref this on you knee on your feet stuff. Standing and playing makes so much sense. Keeps the ball alive and you will have so much more game time per 80 mins. I’m afraid the bigger not so mobile guys will suffer here.
Strong mobile props like BJ and Jannie will be a huge asset. Locks like say Skeate will also become more of value where they were really not suited for the old rules. Pitty Van den berg is at the end of his career. The new laws would suit him greatly!
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:14 am
I have yet to see a South African team “dominate” in the scrums – in the S14 or against the other top 5 international nations. We create this illusion of ourselves that is quite flattering yet misleading. I particularly remember the French pulverising us at home (was it in Durban 2006?). I’ve never seen us go forward like we went backwards that day.
So all this talk of a “strength” that isn’t.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:23 am
Hope our coaches have really studied these rules, and are not caught out when the S14 starts.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:24 am
Jissss.. bulls getting nervous I suspect…
If Fester was coach we would probably have won something in the line of 32 – 25….. Then everybody would have said… Ohhh almost lost against Boland….
So Id rather have us thrash them and say: OK so it was only boland… confidence get built… etc etc…
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:38 am
wooden spoon
the bulls pack have a reputation for a reason. Most of their games the opposition forwards started fading in the last quarter. Not so obvious in scrums but in tight loose.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:41 am
(i posted this yesterday afternoon, but maybe i did so a bit too late to get any comments)
guys
i honestly believe that the new rules will have a huge impact on the game, in fact i believe it will have as big an impact (as the rule change in ‘96 that forced the loosies to stay bound to the scrum. remember the impact kronfeldt had on the game in that time? and this impact wasnt just for a while … think mccaw, burger etc etc etc.
it will be interesting to see from which position the new breed will emerge!! i would love to hear your thoughts on this one.
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Hallo Trup and other boggers
Spoke to a body of mine in Stell. He ref’d the new laws at university past 2 years already.
He reckons the biggest impact will be negative play by kicking a lot.
Apparently the players are scared of loosing the ball in contact and therefor kicked before being trapped in position.
He also said that Andre W last Friday asked them to implement the sevens kick-offs method where the team that scores, kicks off.
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Every saffa team is now jumping on the band wagon about how their team is gonna benefit from the ELV’s.
Should have heard the same people before…bad case of fake oragasmic moans in an orchestra!!!
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:10 pm
38#
body=buddy
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Howzit Walla
Your point is?
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:15 pm
The same people who are shouting from the roof tops that the ELVs are great…2 months ago they were a bad australian idea to suit weak teams.
Maybe true if one considers saffa team to be weak.
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:20 pm
Now jokes aside
Sharks and Stormers are traditionally the teams that travel the best but ………..
Tackler remember the Kiwi teams also have to travel for an extra week or 2 and that has shown how useless they can be at travelling
Blues got klapped by an out of sorts Stormers
The Reds got snotted by 92 points in Steve Hofmeyrs back yard
Blues were beaten 40 points to 19
The Wharatas lost in SA and the beloved Crusaders were lo and behold beaten 3 times in SA-Sharks, Lions and the Bulls sorted them out
Now argue travel
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:27 pm
isigidi @ 38
yeah, i also noticed on saturday that taking contact is a huge risk cause you’re almost sure to lose the ball.
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Hey Wallabie -FOUR MORE YEARS!!!!
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:48 pm
More JL
Bro-in-law has just ordered a DBS in metallic bkack while my sister has to put up with the hand me down … she feels lighted
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:49 pm
JL1,#43.
On behalf of TT, I will just say….. “Reconditioning is off the program for 2008.”
So this year you Okes get the Real Deal Kiwi Teams.(you lucky devils).
You Saffas whining about travel is an insult to your Great Teams of the past who took 4 weeks to get here by ship, travelled around NZ by Coastal Shipping/Ferries or Trains and still managed to make themselves the most respected Teams to Tour here.
Last time I checked the distance between Bloemfontein and Wellington (NZ or SA)was exactly the same in reverse.
The longer you are away, the more you should have acclimatised to the time zones and recovered from jet lag.
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:50 pm
oops a typo … she feels “slighted” !
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:54 pm
RP,
Hi Babe.
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Hey Cane
Was reading about Ed’s funeral today – very sad, but what a nice tribute to him.
Getting ready for S14 & 3N ?
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Howzit all.
Cane the William Web Ellis Trophy has no problem getting aclimatised here,thought I just let you know.
Cane I need some travel advice,whats good to do in NZ whislt on holiday,adventure sport wise none of this namby pamby yuppie scum tourist things.
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:02 pm
“the Stormers were asked some serious questions by Andries Human and company”…. Then why don’t the Stormers pick Andries Human and company to help solve their scrumming problems?
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Hello
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:05 pm
basjan,
exactly, human is surely just what they want, spend some money entice the oke.
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:05 pm
52 – because we have raided the Loins of Majarti!
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:09 pm
RP,
No not sad at all. He had a wonderful life. And he lived every minute of it to the full. 88 is not a bad innings
My local Newspaper called him, “Our Abraham Lincoln”.
That sort of headline would have embarrassed Ed.
We were lucky to have him.
Goodnight Princess,
Cane.
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Cane post#51.dont go,i need aome advice
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Cane
True, but I wish he was still here … Oohh dinner & movie time – Room Service have arrived
Fern
You need more than that
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:14 pm
well rp start with the touring/things to do advice
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Fern
You always go out of yr way to bag NZ – why visit ?
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:18 pm
why not RP?I havent seen much of the south island and i have never seen snow in my life.
i fully enjoy nz as holiday spot but could not life there,its just not africa.africa is in my blood.
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Must have Super 14…..must…have……
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:23 pm
I find it interesting that you bag us one minute & want to visit the next. Perhaps I should put you on a watch list with my friends the Feds …
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Londonshark – You must have been eavesdropping on a Crusaders team meeting !
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Just ribbing you lot RP.
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Yeah sure
you say that now that you want a holiday ! I for one am not convinved !!
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Or convinced … damn, I must be still affected by those Martinis at lunch !
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:28 pm
RP if you arent convinced then so be it.
I have been from Chch to Auckl would like to do the lower part of the South Island.
No worries,I’ll just go to the “Magic Bus” website.
Stop being a egg
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:29 pm
those who think the SA team/s will reach the S14 finals…put your hands up.
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Fern
Yep, that is me !
You are sure a pouty sook ! In Asia an egg means a foreginer but one has lived there so long they have gone native
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Ok, time to kick back & watch a movie – later
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:39 pm
dont give me lip,dont call me sook
you mookface
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:59 pm
The 5 metre rule will disapear. After a season of absurdity, the original rules will return. This aussie attempt to Leaguerise union will fail. The League boys opened up the tackling distance to huge fanfare and hype. Rugby Union is a different game.
Watch for more back row moves this year and a greater number of passes from scrums.
I also predict a greater number of tackle incured injuries as the momentum is greater over a greater distance between players.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:06 pm
rugby princess @ 46
ok, so brother-in-law can afford a DBS
… please inform us what sister consider a “hand-me-down”?
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Cane and all the other Kiwi`s:
As much respect as I have for Edmund Hilary`s achievements, I still can`t help feeling that there must have been sherpa`s and other indiginous peoples that must have scaled Everest prior to Hilary. Please correct me if I`m wrong.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:24 pm
must have scaled should read might have scaled.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:28 pm
72
“mookface” LOL
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:38 pm
sondebok @ 75
of cause there were. they did act as his guides, did they not?
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:43 pm
AH a happy new year to our Wallabie and TheTackler old foes.
2 words for you – World Champions
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:44 pm
78. It just pisses me off that the westerner gets all the fame and plaudits. Tenzing Norgay spent the rest of his life in comparitive obscurity. History will remember Edmund Hilary as being the first man on top of Everest and that is false. History is just a winners account of what happened, and not the truth.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:01 pm
80
they say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder meaning that when you’re drunk, even the ugliest **** will look beautiful to you.
same happens to history.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:10 pm
#80
you need to do some research young one. Edmund WAS THE FIRST to step on that mountain BUT he never publically acknowledged so until Tenzing Norgay passed away in 1986.
There was no issue between the two pertaining to who was first. As for all the fame and plaudits. Both men never wanted it.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:14 pm
80.How many famous people, that shaped the course of history, were drunks or at least dependant on some kind of narcotic? Winston Churchill, Keith Richards, JFK, Hitler, Pik Botha, Boris Yeltsin, Andrew Mehrtens, the Australian Rugby team, Yuri Gargarin, Nkosazana Zuma…. this could become quite a long list.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:16 pm
83
sondebok???
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:20 pm
82. You are my research Gerber.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:22 pm
#85 more like archive
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:28 pm
what was Andrew Mehrtens dependent on – other than Justin Marshal?
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Edmund WAS THE FIRST to step on that mountain BUT he never publically acknowledged so until Tenzing Norgay passed away in 1986 – greatest13gerber.
Conspiracy afoot.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:33 pm
87. Mehrtens was treated (or received counselling) for a drinking problem.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Ricky Ponting was also ‘lief’for the bottle
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Jason Robinson was also an alko
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Zimmer Dallaglio was a cokehead.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Ian botham
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Trevor Quirk!! Mines a double!
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:40 pm
any South Africans on pisscats anon.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:41 pm
#88 No Conspiracy ..the truth and you can’t seem to handle it
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:42 pm
95. No, they`re all at the pub.
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:43 pm
George Best of Man U
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:46 pm
96. I have trouble dealing with reality, and seek solace in the bottle. I`m a Province supporter after all! How can you really blame me? hehehe
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:46 pm
frank sinatra
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:51 pm
the whole protea team , except for Amla
January 22nd, 2008 at 4:04 pm
#98 Geen sokker op di website ni asb.
January 22nd, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Sherpa Tenzing Norgay and Edmund Hilary were the first people to conclusively reach the summit of Everest.
People kept asking who was first to set foot at the top, Hilary or Norgay. Hunt, the expedition leader, kept insisting they “did it as a team”. Tenzing Norgay insisted, until his death “If it is a shame to be the second man on Mount Everest, then I will have to live with this shame”.
People also asked why there were only photos of Tenzing on the summit. Simple enough reason – Tenzing did not know how to operate the camera, and as Edmund Hilary put it “the top of Mount Everest was no place to start teaching him how to use it”.
“It has been a long road … From a mountain coolie, a bearer of loads, to a wearer of a coat with rows of medals who is carried about in planes and worries about income tax.” – Tenzing Norgay
January 22nd, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Back to the 5m offside law. Great concept – would have loved to attack around the fringes in the old days with that law in place. Biggest problem, though, is going to be the policing of that imaginary 5m “line.” Very subjective, estimating whether a centre is creeping into the 5m space, whether he is 5m, or 4,5m from the last line of feet. The players also. They couldn’t get it right when the last line of feet was the offside line. How are they going to estimate it now? Short of getting a hawk-eye type of cyclops technology, I can see huge frustration arising out of marginal, yet crucial offside calls.
Mark my words.
January 22nd, 2008 at 4:27 pm
102. Gaan skree bietjie vir die Welpies hulle het dit nodig.
January 22nd, 2008 at 5:10 pm
#103
thank you for that
January 22nd, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Edmund Hilary and Tenzing Norgay remained good friends until Norgay’s death in 1986.
I wonder how Hilary must have felt, constantly seeing his face on the New Zealand five-dollar note.
January 22nd, 2008 at 5:50 pm
#107
he never liked any of it. Some great stories told at his service. How, he would sit down and sign stacks of $5 notes for charity and the fact he build his own home in Auckland and lived in it for most of his life. His name and address was even in the White pages. A truley modest and approachible man.
truley up there with Mandela.
January 22nd, 2008 at 6:08 pm
Naand Kerels,
Wat gaan hier aan???
January 22nd, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Is it just a coincidence that there’s a significant rule change each time after the boks win the RWC, in ‘96 there were also a lot of rule changes, the one in particular was to stop a player from kicking the ball dead in his opponent’s in-goal area. The boks did this to good effect in the ‘95 final to keep the AB’s pinned in their half for long periods and I agree with this rule change to prevent negative play.
Now the rolling mauls, a Bulls and Sharks weapon, can be collapsed again and there’s the new 5 metre rule to negate the rush defence?
Nah, it’s probably just a coincidence, why would they try and change the rules just to counteract SA teams strengths.
January 22nd, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Ek sien julle donners is maar stil vanaand…
Dan loop ek maar weer!!!
January 22nd, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Flyhalves will have less responsibility on defence. The confrontational ‘Honibal type’ that White so eulogised will become less prevalent. I say this because it would appear the rule encourages ball movement to go wider from scrums.
Rucks/mauls and lineouts don’t change though.
January 22nd, 2008 at 6:39 pm
Perasonally I can’t see that there will be any change in the actual set-scrums. The law states that the backlines have to be 5 metres behind the last feet therefore if the scrum moves, so does the 5 metre line. The Sideline Refs are required to move as the scrum moves north or south.
Rucking is still allowed….but most modern day players have no idea what rucking is because they have it totally confuse with stomping. To ruck a rugby ball means you have to have your body in front of the ball, not on top of it. Rucking is a backwards movement, not an up and down movement.
And hands are not allowed in the ruck, that particular law was left out. The breakdown rule will not change from last year because the reffs continue to allow players to flop over the ball on the ground, just as they allow the ball to be placed under the hookers feet, or behing them if possible. The Reffs are still the greatest blight on our game.
Patrick.
January 22nd, 2008 at 6:45 pm
#110 thanks Agent Mulder
January 22nd, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Modawg,
You’re a bit up yourself if you think the new rules were devised to counter-act the SA game. How long has it been since the SA game dominated rugby…….this RWC blip aside…..one helluva long time. You keep on about your Bok pack, but the AB’s in recent years have done yours like a dinner, but your lineout has been a power of strength. The new rules are designed to improve rugby for the spectaors and are nothing at all designed to curb any perceived SA strength in the game,
Patrick.
January 22nd, 2008 at 8:40 pm
BEST COMMENT BY A FOREIGN PLAYER PLAYING IN THE NH
“But that’s why they brought us here and why they pay us the money they do. We are signed to do our job and if we don’t, they should send us home.”
- PAUL TITO, ex Taranki lock.
January 22nd, 2008 at 8:40 pm
All this talk about set scrum dominance is pure hogwash. There is ABSOLUTELY NO SCRUM DOMINANCE any more, as the team that puts the ball in (99.99% of the time) gets the ball back because the Reffs allow the ball to be put under the scrummies feet……no contest at all !
Forward dominance now has been transferred to control at the breakdown stage, and the team that gets the most players to the breakdown first, invariably gets the loose ball…..again this is partly stifled because the Reffs still players allow players flopping over, thus killing the loose ball,
Patrick.
January 22nd, 2008 at 8:42 pm
#115 valid point Patrick
would be interesting to see how strong the kiwi scrums are this year without Hayman there.
January 22nd, 2008 at 8:48 pm
#117
Patrick, did you watch Heinkie vd Merwe? Woodcock? Hayman? last year?
No Scrum dominence?..yeah, I do know where you are coming come, But that statement does not hold water.
January 22nd, 2008 at 8:52 pm
I see that the backlin coach from the Bulls has left already. Citing differences … players expected one thing and received another, so cheers!!!
January 22nd, 2008 at 8:55 pm
#120 WTF?
January 22nd, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Sounds like the players weren’t 100% happy but that is reading between the lines so Bulls did a deal with him. Ricardo Loubser tipped to take over
January 22nd, 2008 at 9:09 pm
#115, Patrick x 2 . . .
Both the Sharks and Bulls packs were very strong in the rolling maul area in last year’s S14, and the Boks rush defence has been a thorn in the side of most teams under Jake, do you dispute this?
#117, You obviously didn’t watch the WC semi between OZ and England (were you still in mourning after the quarter finals?), do you think that there might have been a slight amount of scrum dominance in that game? Just asking . . .
#119 Add Sheridan to that list, he was pretty destructive in the WC.
January 23rd, 2008 at 1:29 am
Ricardo Loubser ?
NO, anyone but him.
January 23rd, 2008 at 2:55 am
Modawg,
You’re a bit confused on scrum dominance. By dominance I mean one scrum dominating the other, not both sides scrummaging all afternoon whilst the backs look on. If there has been any scrum dominance in the last 3 years it has to be the AB’s. Their from row cleaned out everything put in front of it.
Set scrum results are determined 99.9% of the time by the team putting the ball in. Loose ball dominance has been NZ’s for about 5 years simply because they have been fitter than other teams, amd they have been more mobile this gaining dominance at breakdowns. I repeat, there is no set-piece scrum dominance anymore because the contest is always decided by who has the ball to put in…..very occasionally a mistake is made which has allowed the odd scrum to backfire.
Patrick.
January 23rd, 2008 at 3:10 am
Modwag,
Since when has a rolling maul been described as a set piece. The rolling maul has never been more than just a ground winner. One side puts the ball in, and it is impossible to get at the ball, so it becomes a permanent fixture at the back of the maul, until such time as the maul collapses, or is dropped in some other way, or occasionally a try is scored from it.
I’m quite sure there will be more thought given to negate the rolling maul, so look forward to a change in a couple of years time. I understand the forwards enjoy the rolling maul even though not many tries have been scored from them,
There was a new rule suggested to allow the maul to be collapsed, thus making it an even contest, but when the chips got down it was decided that collapsing was too dangerous, and we’re back with the rolling maul, just the same as it was last year.
Patrick.
January 23rd, 2008 at 3:24 am
Modwag,
Sheridan has never been a problem for the AB’s front row…..he has always come off second best, in fact on a couple of occasions he’s been replaced, because he couldn’t cut the mustard against the AB’s from rowers.
The rush defense was Jake’s masterstroke and all NZers will remember the first time we encountered it. It was at Newlands and the Boks got 13 points up in 13 minutes, due entirely to the rush defence. NZ is excellent at playing rugby in the normal style….all it needs to beat NZ is to introduce something they’ve never seen before, and in come the CHOKES !
I don’t think you should get carried away with your RWC win……you didn’t play NZ, and they beat you 2 out of 3 in the Tri-Nations, even though they were only half-fit, and did not have enough matchplay up their sleeves. You’ve got a big shock coming if you think you’re got the AB’s measure on the basis of beating the slomo Poms,
Patrick.
January 23rd, 2008 at 9:20 am
Patrick x 2,
I’m not getting carried away with the WC win, but the fact is, we won.
Actually they beat the boks 2-0 in the 2007 3N, didn’t they?
Then that begs the question, if they were so friggin brilliant, why didn’t they beat France in the QF, and the “slomo poms” beat France?
January 23rd, 2008 at 11:07 am
Modwag,
Who said the AB’s were so brilliant…I didn’t
But you can bask in the RWC Glory until such time as you play further tests this season, when hopefully all the contestants come in on an even keel again,
Patrick.
January 23rd, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Patrick,
I’m looking forward to the 3N tests, it’s gonna be mud ‘n blood ‘n guts and hopefully glory.
Even Oz are going to be a whole lotta fun with Deans at the reins.
A mouth watering prospect . .