When somebody close to you dies, there are no comforting words. Time heals all wounds, at least he did not suffer, she’s in a better place.
People make such comments because they do not want to see you suffer. Well forgive me, but I need to suffer. I need to feel the hurt inside me.
Rugby is just a game. It is not a matter of life and death. Losing a rugby game can in no way be compared to losing a loved one.
That is not the reason I make the analogy. When New Zealand lose at rugby, it is not a time for mourning or grieving. The players cannot win all their games. You cannot, however, take away from me that numbing feeling of pain. Defeats hurt but I am okay with that hurt. You have to accept it is there.
As an All Black fan, I am in no doubt the players are hurting after that loss. They got themselves back into the match and retook the lead.
I offer my heartfelt congratulations to our greatest rivals and their fans. They are fulling deserving of their victory. There are no excuses. There never are. What might have been is irrelevant. New Zealand lost.
South Africa fans are fully entitled to their feelings of elation but I must not try to put a brave face on. I must accept defeat and take it on the chin but it is okay to feel its hollowing effects. I tip my hat to my vanquisher but I do not hide the fact that losing today hurts.
When you lose, it is always tempting to put a positive spin on defeat.
If we were going to lose a match, that was the opponent to do it against and the manner in which to do it. I can hear that comment being made as I write this. This game did not mean anything and South Africa wanted it more. It is good to get a loss leading up to the World Cup. Winning every game builds up too much pressure.
I fully anticipate such comments. I do not even doubt some of their validity. They do not take away the pain, though.
If Richie McCaw had taken three points when they were on offer, we would not be having this conversation now. We really missed Brodie Retallick. How did that replay of that ugly Messam tackle pop up on the big screen with no call from the ref or advice from the touch judges?
Those are more comments I can see being made. I argued in Wellington that South Africa should have taken the three points on offer in the 74th minute. At 11 points down, Richie’s insistence on going for a try could well be questioned and how that wonderfully taken penalty goal by Patrick Lambie came about needs to be clarified but it does not matter.
South Africa won and they are deserving winners. No excuses or comforting words can be found for me.
Positives as well as negatives need to be both evaluated and talked about for the upcoming match. You cannot put a positive spin on defeat though. You cannot explain away defeat. You can only work towards improving for the next match but in order to move on, you have to face up to the reality of what has happened. You have to feel a genuine, honest reaction.
New Zealand were simply not good enough in the first half. South Africa were bold and adventurous and it paid dividends.
When previously they would have kicked, they spun the ball wide looking for gaps. New Zealand were caught napping and the open spaces were found. A wonderful try to Hougaard was followed up by the young Pollard identifying slow runners in the defensive line.
By contrast we did not see Beauden Barrett, who tasted defeat for the first time, take on the line and look for those gaps. New Zealand came back with their own adventure through Savea (you can argue who is greater but both players do not know how to score against South Africa) and Fekitoa did what Pollard did and sniffed out weakness in the South African defensive line.
A fair reflection of how the first half went would happen after an attacking South African scrum saw Pollard take the line on and the gamble paid off.
South Africa were flooding the breakdown and disrupting New Zealand ball. Vermeulen is surely the player of the year putting in another man-of-the-match display. He was not alone with Bismarck Du Plessis and Teboho Mohoje examples of players who stole New Zealand ball and deprived them of continuity.
The second half saw New Zealand control territory and possession better. South Africa were tiring as the half went on and I think Richie McCaw sensed with two tries needed, going for three points was going for enough. I have no problem with people saying with so much time on the clock, you take the points and you aim to get the ball back and score more points. I have no problem with the idea that the decision was eventually vindicated and South Africa’s confidence took a beating when Ben Smith expertly finished off his chance cutting inside.
It certainly looked that way with the next score with New Zealand not needing to do much but let their man advantage speak for itself and they were in the corner. A difficult kick but it needed to be made by Barrett.
Lambie made a drop goal attempt but I was confident of New Zealand holding out South Africa like they did in Wellington. Liam Messam should feel the weight of responsibility as his careless tackle saw the South Africa retake the lead and New Zealand could not repeat their Ireland heroics.
I expect Aaron Cruden to come back for the Brisbane match and Beau Barrett to drop to the bench. I also expect Ryan Crotty to replace Malakai Fekitoa, Keven Mealamu to make way for Dane Coles and Thrush to drop to the bench with Brodie Retallick back. Perhaps harsh on Fekitoa but Crotty’s performance in Eden Park and his brief cameo justify a recall. It was pleasing for me to see Steven Luatua look hungry and sharp as well and Hansen will have a hard time deciding whether he picks Sam Cane or Steve Luatua.
There are things to work on and positives to take on for the match in Brisbane.
New Zealand lost today though and no comforting words are going to make me feel any better. New Zealand will regroup and look for big gains in improvement.
Until that match in Brisbane occurs, it is not a question of wallowing in despair or self pity. It is owning up to the loss and recognising the sting of defeat. In order for it not to become a habit, you have to be honest with your feelings. New Zealand do not need to put a brave face on to the world. The world needs to know that they are hurting by what happened today.
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
Thanks for the post Old Bugger. The title is not my own. The point of my article was to point out there would be a temptation to put a positive spin on this defeat. To downplay the defeat. I concede that I am being too harsh on Messam. I wrote that right after the match and I felt we were containing SA well and holding them out. I believe, like you, the first half was the real issue and the players need to look at that free from the consoling ideas that it was South Africa at home, the game didn't mean anything and we came back stronger in the first half. We need to look at why South Africa was disrupting our ball so much in that first half, how we struggled for continuity and were pressured into mistakes. It doesn't matter that it was South Africa at Ellis Park. I'm well aware of the calibre of the opposition and the intimidating venue. The fact that they achieved something similar in Wellington, albeit in different facets, needs to be examined. Our cleanout wasn't operating well. SA bodies got between the ball and Aaron Smith and he looked like a deer frozen in headlights on quite a few occasions. You can bet that our northern opponents will be examining the tapes and looking to replicate what SA achieved. Easier said than done with not every team having at their disposal immense players like Vermeulen but the basic premise is there. I salute SA for how they played. It was great to see them playing with adventure and utilising their strengths as I alluded to in another article. They don't play like NZ does but they are capable of breakout tries like Hougaard's try. We were always going to lose one against the might of SA but strangely we shouldn't accept defeat as inevitable against such quality opposition. The standards they have achieved should compel them to do a little soul searching, to feel that sting of defeat. Don't dismiss it as they simply played better than us. Examine the reasons why just as they examine the things that did not go well when they win.
Old Bugger
Guest
But variation and imagination is what keeps the opposition guessing....if you call shovelling the ball on 99times out of a 100 as being solid, then I'll also offer another description - definitely consistent, so cant argue about that. So, was consistency about good solid plays......that the opposition could see coming throughout or do you think Barrett could've had them guessing more with variation and imagination??
Old Bugger
Guest
KK I dont quite understand what your article is about and whether you're angry we lost, whether there are positives from this loss, whether we don't mind losing as long as to this opponent until....you come and say... "Liam Messam should feel the weight of responsibility as his careless tackle saw the South Africa retake the lead..." Mate, granted we lost on the scoreboard, but to come out and state that Messam should feel the weight of responsibility is somewhat mind-boggling. Yes, it was IMO, an unwanted penalty which has been covered in comments below but Messam's error was not making a tackle, but not raising his arms to perform the tackle. For goodness sake, Burger ran the ball in 2 more plays after that tackle, the SBs made advances on each of 4 breakdowns after that tackle until 2 things happened - the ball was dropped hence a scrum and for some reason or other, the big screen started to show that tackle. The crowd voice their opinion, JdV comes forward and the ref is asked the question...So, to suggest he feels the weight of responsibility IMO is so further from the truth that I could really laugh at your insinuation. Have at look at the stats - the ABs did very well in most stats across the paddock. We won the lineouts, we had parity in the scrums, but we lost the breakdown and hence turnovers. We scored 3 tries like the SBs and yet, Barrett just looked too casual in that last conversion. Since you voiced a blame game on Messam, then how about Coles running himself between Savea and Read (I think) for the last try?? IMO, Coles should have stayed out of that last pass and let the ball go to Savea. I think he dreamed an Ireland match repeat on got in on the act. The chances are, I suggest Savea may have cut back and made every effort to score closer to the posts for an easier conversion. The ABs deserved to lose because they lost their structure in the first half - the SBs breakdown attack was just magnificent especially when first up tackles were being made on the AB gainline or worse, behind the ABs gain-line - it was the significant difference between flat ball or front foot ball. The SBs defence was again to the fore in this respect and Thor along with Coetzee, were just dynamic. Curbing the ABs ability to play off front foot ball gave Pollard all the time and space that this talented young player needed and boy, didn't he take full advantage of what his team provided. Let me tell you, 10mins in the 2nd half, I really was concerned that we would not be able to generate any go forward ball until I saw RM call a scrum instead kicking a penalty, until I saw him kick for touch twice, instead of a penalty kick - then I realized, the AB leadership must've noticed the SBs were starting to fall off tackles, breakdown wins were becoming more frequent and the SB body language looked to be heading into those aerobically challenging moments. I applauded RM for his courageous calls because the benefits were 2 tries and the lead with 8mins to go. The ABs lost their structure on the kick-off, TKB suffers his injury and we fight to get out of our half. The discipline in those frantic last minutes was unbelievable from both sides and but for a delayed replay approx 5 breakdowns after the incident, the most important result favoured the SBs - the ABs had the match but at the death, the team wasn't good enough to insert their structures - they weren't composed enough to make correct decisions - the team lost this match because their opponent played better structures and were more composed at the death. Congrats to the SBs and their many, many supporters.
Old Bugger
Guest
1stXV Thank you - I thought I was the only one who saw that Barrett stood too deep on virtually all plays and passed it on without really looking at challenging the SB defence line. His play just meant the SB defence moved laterally rather then been made to come forward. If Barrett has intentions of cementing the FH position, then he needs to learn to mix his game with passes and runs at the defence line - mix it up and keep the defence guessing. IMO, he didn't do that at all. And, Pollards second try was not suppose to be RMs tackle. BB and AS both misread that defence bigtime. Pollards run should've been a BB tackle first before an AS cover tackle - Barret didn't move fast enough, AS moved too fast and in the end, they both missed.
Buk
Guest
Mark no doubt you have had to put up with a lot of ill-informed rubbish - but the name Skinner, to my uncle in NZ and his rugby contemporaries - stood for honour and someone worthy of great respect.
Buk
Guest
Good point Colin - showing replays to the home crowd is about getting people to the ground and stirring up interest. Even better if the crowd feel they can influence the result of a match in their home team's favour - all the more incentive for the fans to get along (and raise gate sales). To be honest, from a purely business perspective, if I was CFO I would instruct the cameramen to work that way; would make no difference to me whether I was working for an Australian, SA or NZ broadcasting company.
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
Haha it's not a tragedy. But a loss is a loss and you never want to lose a match. It's great that SA is in the ascendancy after a disappointing start to the year but it just goes to show how things can quickly change. Look at the confidence of Australia and how quickly that fell apart. Look at the spring in the step, excusing the pun, of the Springboks now. Never take losses lightly is my attitude just as never take a previous win as a guarantor of success. Good on you for being confident in the next encounter and rightly so. Looking forward to it already.
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
Thanks a lot. Will give that a read for sure.
etienne marais
Guest
Ahh, thank you for the "unbanning" KH. I will be sure to use "Type IIa & IIb Myocytes", if I ever need to refer to the very suspect Roald Dahl title again. ;-) Yes, I am quite an acolyte of the more classical Noakes scholarship. He is a very well known "public scientist" in South Africa, but currently involved in a media controversy regarding his recently developed views on low-carb-high-fat vs high-carb-low-fat nutritional advice. I fully subscribe to your view here that, the primary set of constraints remain the physiological, but that the boundaries of that constraining ring can be moved about by the secondary mental and other psychological constraints and enablers. The point that I tried to illustrate was just that the term "fitness", as it relates to rugby, belongs in the world of 1970s school rugby, not in the modern professional game, where every player that makes a national side is, almost by definition, a "super-fit" athlete. You might find this site interesting: http://sportsscientists.com/ Dr Ross Tucker. Also UCT, and I think he studied under Dr Noakes. His PhD was entitled: The regulation of exercise performance by a complex anticipatory system. Very interesting reading, and if I remember correctly, it sits somewhere on the site as well.
ChanWee
Guest
I think it will be very difficult for authorities to prescribe to audio visual teams what they can, and cannot show. wrong! watch cricket plz. how often do u ee a out/not out being shown after the ump made a wrong call. ??? i think never.
etienne marais
Guest
Point taken. Pieter Hendriks. Now there's a blast from the past. And yes, what a tackler ! Actually heard (and saw) him doing Afrikaans commentary yesterday on SABC TV2. (My first rewatch is usually the delayed broadcast on TV2, just to get that perspective.) After the Messam shoulder charge was put on screen for a referee decision, Pieter went: "Alla magtig man, daai skurk moet af". Not sure how good your Afrikaans is but it was comical in its old-world Afrikaans preciseness. Made me think back to Gerhard Viviers ("Spiekeries") and the "good old days" of rugby on radio.
ChanWee
Guest
the issue in "saders V Chiefs match was that while the ref saw both , Bird hit on Squire was very "sightable" the arm on Read was more like a stray shot. i believe Read got the worse of it as he was out for a month with concussion. in general, it seems rugger needs to have a protocol about the replays, especially where a decision is affected. cricket never does it even when it is crystal clrear the ump got it wrong. that is undermining the decision maker and does not help later on. also in cricket they dont show the instances where there is a definite out / not out but a team did not review it. also in cricket there are replays available to home viewers but not shown at the ground. there are also visyuals available to the 3rd ump but not available to public at home. rugger seriously needs to learn from other games, else it is going to be "X FACTOR" - reality tv scripted and rigged to get ratings and viewer numbers :P
Harry Jones
Expert
Yes, but I felt instantly safer w JPP tackling. He brings attitude on D. We need to meld the two into JP Hendricks.
etienne marais
Guest
Yes, but don't judge him only on his Savea action. There's not a winger in the world that would have looked comfortable against Savea yesterday.
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
Your excellent post has been moderated etienne marais. Apparently it contained a word that was a Roald Dahl book The T.... Essentially, he was giving a reason for why NZ looked stronger in the second half and claims that SA are not as fit are too simplistic. Theories like peaking and conditioning can explain differences. Rugby is a physical game. The modern game has seen even more physically imposing athletes face up against one another. The collisions hurt and it takes a physical toll on the players. Yet it seems there are certain players and teams who are able to perform better at crucial stages of the match. They cut out silly errors or find a way to make those tackles. There is a fitness scientist from SA, Dr Tim Noakes, who has come up with the central governor theory. His hypothesis is that the brain acts as a central governor, limiting our ability to push through the pain barrier in the interests of self-preservation. That limit manifests itself in the feeling of pain. For those of you familiar with Ironman racing, there was a famous rivalry between Ironman legends Mark Allen and Dave Scott. Dave Scott was the older athlete and he had an iron will, which intimidated his rivals. Mark Allen, who was more like a Zen warrior, learned over time to channel that intimidation into positive energy. There was a point in the race with 6 miles to go to the finish line, where Mark Allen decided to lay everything on the line and attack Dave Scott. He put in a burst of energy and Dave Scott would later say every pace he made he gained 6 inches on Scott. The moment when Dave Scott thought in his mind 'this guy's going to beat me' is when it really started to hurt. Noakes believes that was the central governor kicking in saying don't do anything stupid because you're really going to hurt yourself otherwise. But you might say there are real physiological limits. If you want to run like an Olympic marathon runner, you would have to average 20km an hour over the 26 miles and do not far off the Roger Bannister mile for all 26 miles. The next time you're on a gym treadmill, set it to 20 and see how long you last. You might make a couple of minutes but then fall in a crumpled heap contemplating you have to maintain that pace for a little over 2 hours. No need for a central governor theory there. Common sense will take over very soon. However, there are instances of mind winning over matter. How can you explain players playing through pain. Adrenaline can only hide so much. When your mind says stop, something other than adrenaline has to keep you going. The mental aspect of rugby or indeed any sport should never be underestimated.
etienne marais
Guest
"make the best out of the situation" (as if it was a tragedy) What situation is that KH? Your undisputed number one ranking ? Or your status of being undefeated in 22 of your last 23 matches ? As a Springbok supporter who, the Sunday morning after you guys were cheated out of RWC2007, listened to Aotearoa on loop repeadedly, whilst weeping, for hours, I can only tell you that you are over-reacting. I don't mean that in a mean-spirited way, please. Just to say that, as a life-and-death Bok supporter, I understand that you will understand. Nothing changed yesterday. If you truly expected never to be beaten again, ever again, then well, maybe it did. But the ABs are still by far the best side in contemporary times. And it will remain so for quite a while still. The only thing that might have changed yesterday (actually, already in the Wellington game) is the strategic focus of the Bok game. We hope this is for good. If that is the case, then it is conceivable that the nature of the rivalry might be up for changing too. The All Black might have to work harder in future for their Bok scalps. And we know what that means: Spectacles galore. So, take heart. ABs easily still the best in the world. Having said that, we are going to win the next one too. This time though, by three points. ;-)
Harry Jones
Expert
Great article in NZ Herald: http://m.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11337452
Harry Jones
Expert
Also love it that our 9 and 10 were the track-back tacklers on the NZ wing who broke through. I love speed and defensive commitment in the entire backline; nobody shirking tough stuff. Now, we need to improve Hendricks' defence ASAP!
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
This is what Hansen had to say. "We gave them too much of a head start. In the first-half when we did get the ball from set piece is wasn't great quality. That's a tribute to the pressure that was on. We couldn't build any pressure at all because we didn't maintain the ball. "It came down to a 55-metre penalty and under pressure Lambie stepped up and kicked it so full credit to them. This team hates losing. It sucks really. Every now and then you've got to do it. We'll learn some things from it, as we do whether we win or lose." McCaw added. "The boys are hurting and rightly so," he said. "They're hugely disappointed because even though we didn't play well early we gave ourselves a chance and we didn't get there." Good to see the right comments from the coach and captain. What's happened has happened so now they must make the best out of the situation. I know where you're coming from OJ but nothing can make defeat more palatable for me and that's how I suspect it is for the players. Now they must pick themselves up and prepare for Brisbane.
Brilliant Harry, a couple of years ago we wouldn't even have recognised the space to attack, or the guts to do it.