a) The English loss in the Rugby World Cup final. I still have friends that insist they were cheated out of that game. The only point of contention was a “try” that was not a try, the foot was clearly in touch from replays. And even if that had been (wrongly) given, the Boks would most likely have upped a gear as they were cruising the last 20 minutes on a healthy lead. We were clearly the better side, and deserved our victory. The rest of the world would have lamented the “lucky” defensive minded English if they had won it.

b) The English loss to the West Indies in the Wolrd Twenty20. In the post match interview Nasser did not even mention the West Indies, not even a fleeting mention, never mind a congratualtion.

c) And now this Lions tour, which the British Press seem to somehow think was stolen away from them. Yes, Schalk’s actions were a disgrace, but he was sin-binned during which the Lions scored 10 points. Not enough of a punishment? What about the 4 high tackles we suffered, for which the last was going to be yellow carded until the linesman intervened. Or the offside, head high shoulder charge of O’Driscoll which took our player off the park. Or the punch in the balls by Sheridan?
I really enjoyed this Lions tour and the Test in Durban, hanging out with Lions supporters who were genuinely magnanimous in defeat. But all this whinging and whining has brought a seriously bad taste to the mouth and I really hope we take the series 3-0.

Nibble, nibble…

Nah – It’s too late at night. I’ll send you a history book instead. What’s your address?

Not meant to sound patronising.

Steady on, old fruit. One doesn’t expect a Boer to be up to speed with the latest developments in the English language. It’s rather off to expect as much.

Let’s play fair, old bean. I know plenty of chaps from Harrow who don’t know their “their” from their “they’re” – let’s not be too harsh on the poor brutes.

As a rugby fan you would also know that it’s far, far harder to tour as a Lion than it is to tour with a single nation. Hence a different xv featured in every single tour game. I guess you’re not aware of that simple and very obvious fact. Although it probably does rub you up the wrong way for a team that’s never played together to manhandle the great world champions at altitude. Imagine that.

Oh… I see, fleeting, so you’ve gone from stating that I offered ‘no credit whatsoever’ to only ‘fleeting’, and yet you would also believe that for you to respond childishly to this alleged and misguided slight is anything but ‘petulant’? You wouldn’t last long in a Court, Darryl, that’s for sure. That’s confirmed from your ability to recognise the genesis of the ‘low-IQ’ comment. Is English not your first language, btw?

Knives Out:
I think you’ll find that you were *fleetingly* congratulatory and then went on a tirade about luck and all the rest of your boring and tired excuses and accusations. Petulance? See there you go again drawing your own misguided conclusions again. Weren’t you paying attention? It was because of your one eyed, ungraciousness. I think my reaction was fair dinkum. As for the low-IQ part-time Saffer comment – I don’t quite follow your point there but if you’re referring to me in that comment, *yawn*. If not then *yawn*.

That’s correct. I gave no credit, specifically to you, because you were doing the same to the Boks. Fire with fire. Why should I be so kind to the Lions in the face of your ungraciousness? Fortunately there are others from your side of the fence on this forum who are more moderate and reasonable, so they bring balance to your exaggerations, false accusations and extremes. You will see I am more tempered and open with them as a result. As to calling you all sorts of things, I think we established back then that I did no such thing, and it was as a direct result of that, that I appended “SA” to my name on this forum to prevent any confusion with another Darryl, who’s name I have seen but cannot currently recall his affiliation, allegiance not general tone.

Well put. You illustrate nicely just how ludicrously overblown are the South African claims of “exceptional” rugger depth.

“Ian [McGeechan] twice congratulated the Springbok coach after the match,” Thomas said, adding” “The first time was when the two coaches had passed one another in the corridor on the way to their post-match TV interviews, and the second time was while they again passed each other outside the hall where the post-match media conferences were held. The second time they even had a brief conversation and Ian shook De Villiers’ hand.”

Pretty definitive and typical of Geech, true gent!!

This is going to cause issues at the Wallabies because the rumor is he was sacked by email, that is completley unproffesional in my opinion. If true it shows Jon’s castrated.

There will be a player management divide if this has been handled in the way it feels.

Lote is already suing, how much is that going to cost the ARU in legals

Sounds like a shemozlle hope Deans can focus the boys

It wasn’t legal, but then again I don’t think he deserved to be banned, but you could also argue a similar case for Hines. Swings and roundabouts.

I’m so tired of your assertions of fact that are actually somewhat unsurprisingly just your opinion. That one I just quoted is one example. Please give me some proof of this claim? The only journalist who I have read who has not had respect for the Lions is Keohane, and we don’t really take him that seriously here either although occassionally he does make a good point or two. But generally speaking the media here have been quite worried about the Boks performance pre the tests specifically because they had respect for the quality of the opposition headed our way. They questioned the wisdom of bubble wrapping them, questioned the makeup of our front row compared to the experience and talent of the Lions front row (or who we thought would be initially), questioned the wisdom of our centre pairing out of respect for the destructiveness of O Driscoll and Roberts. In our television studio and on Boots And All, a popular rugby show here, they have included Jeremy Guscott in the panel of presenters. That’s a sign of the respect we have for somebody like Guscott. British tourists continue to flock here in their droves, the Confederations Cup wasa success. Why? Because South Africans are generally speaking warm and friendly people who appreciate that tourism is an important part of our revenue and we appreciate the value of sport in our lives.

But it seems you live in a parallel universe rather out of touch with this one, and I’m used to you now so I just dismiss your missives with the irrelevance they deserve.

Stephen Jones’ objectivity is irrelevant because he is making a statement based upon personal observation, not an analysis of a player or anything open to public scrutiny. In any case, he has long been an advocate of SA rugby and has labelled them great and supreme when their results and performance have in no way merited that label.

As for your point, so called, regarding Martin Johnson, what point are you making? He is one of the greatest rugby players of all time. I’m not sure many people would dispute that.

I also don’t know quite what you’re getting at with your reference to the 2003 WC final. Very few Australians suggested that England were fortunate to win, hence that is why the often anti-England Australian media was generally so graceful in defeat.

Brian O’Driscoll was referring to the management of the tour, btw. In the context of hosts the SA media and public have by and large been incredibly disrespectful of the Lions. The only measured comments seem to have come from Gary Gold and a few of the mid-week coaches.

–

Photon,

Wow.

Stephen Jones eh? That most objective of all UK scribes. Rugger is not life. That’s funny. When the England team won the World Cup, if you read Stephen Jones you’d have thought Martin Johnson had just been ordained as King and that Brittania ruled the waves yet again. You never heard the end of it, never mind that any Aussie who suggested they were lucky to win by a drop goal, when the Wallabies were by far the ‘better team’ was met with a succinct “look at the scoreboard”. Funny how the importance of the Lions series win gets played down the moment the series is lost. So, personally, I don’t care much for Stephen Jones’ pot kettle comments. As for whether the South Africans have been sufficiently welcoming, it was interesting to read O’Driscoll saying that this has been the most fun Lions tour he’s been on. The *only* thing that you can claim that has sullied this tour is the Burger incident and I’ve said so much about that now, it’s grown tiresome, so I won’t repeat myself anymore. Other than that, the Lions have been well looked after, and by and large greatly respected on this tour. As Photon said, Willie John McBride, and Martin Johnson are in fact legends in this country – they were (are) hard men who took no nonsense from anybody, and that’s respected here. But this is Africa, so that’s not entirely surprising. Africa is not for sissies.

But thanks, your ignorance and denial are amusing.

Quite a pearler. I can see you saying that standing in front of the Great Hearth in the main Drawing Room at Crouchback Castle.

You have gone up in my estimation by a point or two. Not much mind, but your epithets do improve one’s age.

The South Africans need to re-assess their relationship with rugger. As Stephen Jones noted in his most recent missal, the English do not mistake rugger for life itself. Rugger is merely part of the rich tapestry of a chap’s existence. Is the same true for the South Africans? I fear not. I fear their obsession with rugger borders on the insane. And when a chap takes his rugger too seriously, he tends to become quite obnoxious.

When a guest of mine acts sourly, I question whether I am being sufficiently welcoming as a host. Perhaps the South Africans should do likewise.

Do you realise that these are the same excuses that you are criticising the Lions for? Pot, kettle, black springs to mind.

If that is the case, why are you using that term with reference to the British and Irish Lions, where English players only make up less than a third of the squad?

When you consider, with the exception of Edwards, most of the voices of ‘ungracious losers’ have been the likes of Phillips, Flitzgerald and O’Driscoll, who are not ‘poms,’ why are they being labelled with this term?

Most fans can be ungracious in both winning and losing. Australia in the Rugby League world cup and in the 2005 Ashes (more refering to Ricky Pointing and him blaming the use of the substitute fielders), England in the 1998 World Cup and 2004 European Championships, New Zealand in 2007 World Cup. The thing these have in common, with the exception of the Ashes, is bad refereeing decisions, or at least perceived by the fans, coaches and press etc.