As a proud South African supporter, but even prouder cricket supporter, this has really hit hard. No real words to describe these events.

Thoughts are with his family, poor young Abbot, his friends and team-mates, and the greater-cricketing fraternity.
May he be blessed in the World Hereafter.

I’d love to hear more Etienne?

Fitness is a catch-all phrase – but you don’t exactly go into specifics about how that should not be applicable? If you’re (more) physically exhausted than the other team, be it for whatever reason, you make poor/less-good decisions? Your concentration drops?

Our approach, for whatever reason, appeared to be markedly different in the initial stages of the 2nd half, than the 1st. The ABs stepped up intensity, and we battled. The whole body-language/demeanour of the team changed. It changed to us absorbing, and barely holding on, from the initial dictating-play…

Obviously it is complex – and presumably, you have experience in this field – but surely even you must concede that much of the ABs ability to come back, from the edge – to win games they shouldn’t – is grounded on a combination of mental toughness, and physical conditioning? If the Bok players (due to our contracting system etc.) are not spending much time in the Bok camp, with the latter being reliant on the conditioning coaches etc. of the Provinces, then why can it be (equally) as easy for you to assume that they *are* in fact, at a similar conditioning level, as the ABs?

HM himself has come close to suggesting, since he took over, that conditioning is something they need/are looking at addressing? RSA’s gameplan appears to be changing – would it not also require an adjustment to their conditioning regime, and (again) who’s to say they had sufficient time to implement?

The AB’s had no right or reason to come back so strongly in the 2nd half, but they did. Which just proves how brilliant they are as a unit. I was fully prepared for us losing another one, after the ABs took the lead. Quite frankly, an honest assessment is that we were lucky to win this one.

But you know what, one could possibly argue we were unlucky to lose the previous match. I eventually managed to catch a replay of that final lineout, with Reid interfering with Matfield, mid-air. If he hadn’t, we might have been able to set the maul, and we might have scored… Who knows.

I’m not complaining, I’m just making the point that these things happen.

Arguments about McCaw rather taking those penalties, are surely negated by Lambie missing his drop-kick? No point in living in the if’s and but’s…

That being said – our fitness/conditioning remains the biggest difference btw us and the ABs at the moment, imo. De Villiers and HM both said they weren’t happy with the 2nd half performance, and need to work out what went wrong. I honestly don’t know what the great mystery is. The ABs stepped up the intensity, and we started running out of puff. Simple. Our boys are still not fit enough. It would be quite easy to dismiss my point as being an oversimplification – but watch the game again, with what I’m saying in mind. Take note of the RSA commentators making the point of how the ABs are jogging to the lineouts in our half – with us trundling back. We were virtually out on our feet at stages… The momentum switched after half-time, and with that pressure, came more intensity that caught us on the backfoot. We made poor decisions/players said “we lost concentration” for a few minutes. Yes, we did. Because we were sucking air. The fitter you are, the better you are able to think under the intense pressure of intense physical exertion. It’s not rocket-science. And that’s precisely why I believe it is being too easily overlooked. Because the natural inclination is “there must be something else”/”they must be fit, they are professional sportsmen”. Yes. The Bokke are fit. But the ABs are (still) fitter.

We’re finally getting to the point where we are starting to believe in our own ability to play an expansive game. But it similarly appears that whereas, mentally, we’ve made the step-up, we’re still needing the same to happen physically… If anything, our 1st half display suggests we have the ability and skills to go toe-to-toe with the ABs. We’re still not 100% there yet, because our fitness is not at the level of the ABs.

Mallett made the point that the Bok coaches have too little time to sort out conditioning, needing all the time with the squad to plan/implement. That, and you cannot very well run your charges into the ground in between Test matches. So the problem sits back with the provinces…

Obviously the good news is that fitness and conditioning can be sorted out, relatively easy. And I’m pretty sure HM is going to be put things in place to try and see to that, especially in light of the fact that the contract Boks are apparently not going to playing CC this year, which should afford a space to get things worked at. And if we are able to get this done – my goodness, can you only imagine the quality of rugby we will start seeing between these two teams going forward? Imagine for a moment that the Bok intensity had not dropped in the 2nd half – but *with* the ABs stepping theirs up? Can you imagine what might have transpired?

I’m actually beginning to hope that this is the start of something magical again. Of finally restoring the rivalry good and proper between these two teams. There were flashes here and there in the recent past, but this might be the beginning of something really good. [But then I remind myself that, unfortunately, no Bok coach has ever survived a RWC – so what will happen if HM is no more in 2016?]

Ah. Humbug. Too late to still be thinking. Great article Kia Kaha. Well done on your team. Well done to both teams.

Chan Wee – logged in just to find this post of yours… “I saw Pollard at this year U20. He was pathetic. looked very robotic.”

He didn’t do too badly tonight, eh?

Had a yap about this very thing this morning – wondering about what styles the two sides would bring. Think HM is SOOOO desperate for a win over the ABs, that he will take caution over valour, and aim for a grind… But who knows… I only hope they don’t play Duane unless he is 100% – and with the injury cloud, he cannot possibly be – so it really shouldn’t be an option. As much as I want to see him – this will be no place for the walking wounded…

I’m trying desperately hard not to get excited about Saturday – but don’t think I’ll manage. For once, I hope we see a Bok side where everything “clicks”… it’s happened a few times against the French/English/Wallabies – but sure would be nice if it could happen against the best! 🙂

That all being said – cannot agree with you more – the past games at home have seen results driven by RSA needing to go for a big win, and that played right into the hands of the ABs… Things are different this time round – so let’s see where that leaves us!

Don’t see too many comments here about how, in those final 12 minutes, Nigel Owens also started warning the Wallabies about slowing down the ball? Threatened a yellow, if memory serves. THAT, combined with the impact from the bench, played a significant part in things as well, imo. The Bokke suddenly started generating much quicker ball from contact, which (in conjunction with the defensive fatigue of the Wallabies) saw the gaps opening…

Regardless – I chose not to go to Newlands, since AUS/RSA always seem to conjure up a snooze-fest there… For the 1st 70 minutes, this appeared to be another case thereof… before the gates opened up… I must be one of the few Saffas that am not overly impressed at all with the Bok performance. Stringing phases together means zip if you’re going nowhere. Try that against the ABs – and they’ll simply absorb, absorb, absorb – effect the turnover and score, all night long.

I fear this was possibly THE worst type of result in a game before facing the ABs – and I have a *real* bad feeling about Saturday… Here’s hoping I’m wrong…

A few things… Pollard matriculated from Paarl Gymnasium, the same school that gave us Jean de Villiers and Schalk Burger. He was head-hunted to go play up north, by the Bulls. He has made a name for himself as an attacking #10, all the way from school-boy level.

You lable him “robotic” on the basis of how he was expected to play inside the Bok system, which doesn’t really allow for individuality. He has an eye for a gap, and is (up till now) not afraid to try and take it.

Your analysis of the ENG/RSA final is unusual. If any team played similarly to RSA, it was ENG – who also had a forwards orientated approach – and they executed better on the day. We came back strongly towards the end, and but for a crucial drop-goal miss, and excellent defence from ENG, could’ve pulled it off.

He is a large unit, no doubt – but classify him as robotic at your peril. Obviously he still needs to develop – but he is already head and shoulders better than Mornê Steyn, when it comes to running/distribution. He does not play in the pocket – and takes it to the line.

Thanks for wading in with the correction of those “facts”… Pretty damn one-sided… And with the “new World Order” in cricket, RSA is bound to end up playing less Test matches than the ‘big-three’, making it increasingly difficult to maintain their No.1 position… Joy.

As a South African, allow me to say that FB really doesn’t represent all, or even many, of us… Despite what you no doubt think, given the behaviour of many of our more loutish/boorish rugby “supporters”…

But that notwithstanding, I must agree with Robert Griffith. What happened today, was scandalous. And just how blatant it appears to have been, makes things worse. Not for a moment pointing fingers – you all will know more about the ‘conditions on the ground’, so to speak over there – but this was not a fair fight.

Well done to SBW for going the distance. Not saying he was involved, but I would be very careful in managing the fall-out of this , if I were him…

Pretty sure SBW would not opt for a re-match. But if he did – FB would no doubt come out in a better physical condition than tonight… Lots of room for improvement there… and then, who knows…

From another pure-bre(a)d Springbok supporter – ReyB, wake up and smell the coffee… DESPITE Lawrence’s bad calls, if we really were a champion team, deserving of a place in the Semis, we should have wiped the park with the Wallabies on Sunday morning (our time)… We didn’t. We should’ve, but we didn’t. Can’t but help think that the class of 2007 would have done so. We were close, but never got the cigar.

So please stop embarrassing the rest of use by throwing “cheating” before every description of any other team. Suck. It. Up.

[Apologies – popped my first comment (as below) up on another thread – should of placed it here to start off with…]

First off – congratulations to the Wallabies. Dare I say it, but yesterday, they played more like South Africa has in the past, winning a game that they lost on all counts but the scoreboard?

Defence wins World Cups – is an all-too-often-heard mantra that is echoed over here in South Africa, and is/was(?) usually scoffed at by flair/attacking-style sides such as the Wallabies – not so much anymore I suspect? Some of the responses seen here, about how it doesn’t matter how ugly the rugby was, it’s the scoreboard that matters, could have come straight out of the mouths of countless South African players, coaches and supporters over the past years – isn’t the irony in sport fantastic!

With this being said, and getting to why I feel compelled to pop up a comment – one thing to keep in mind about Byrce Lawrence blowing poorly BOTH ways, is that whereas such is undeniable, what remains highly debatable, is whether or not that favoured BOTH sides equally, as opposed to one in particular?

My argument is simply this – there is very little point in raising examples and counter-examples of both sides getting away with murder/not being blown up by Lawrence, without placing those examples in the context of the match – i.e., where was the incident on the pitch, when did it happen, and who had the momentum at the time? Surely it remains difficult to argue that if an infringement is missed – the side most unlucky in that situation, is the attacking side – the one with the momentum when it happens?

I’m not about to delve into details – it’s pointless. The Wallabies beat us – and now have the privilege to play a massive game against the Kiwis next week [more about that at the end].

What I will say though, is simply that, due to South Africa being so comprehensively dominant in both possession and territory, if Lawrence missed an Aussie infringement, it was more than likely to be within kicking distance, based purely on the fact that the Bokke were camping in the Aussie half/22 for large parts of the game. Similarly, if Bok infringements were missed, they were more than likely also in that part of the pitch, and would presumably have allowed a clearance kick, and an Aussie lineout (which – tongue-in-cheek – would probably have resulted in another Matfield steal)…

Therefore, arguments raised that Bok supporters cannot be aggrieved about Lawrence’s reffing, due to it being equally bad BOTH ways, is, imo, a rather incomplete argument unless it can be established that EACH side were robbed of an EQUAL amount of potential points? As I’ve slowly come to terms with our departure, I’m slowly putting the “if-only’s” away (if only Lambie’s DG had gone over – if only the two high tackles in the final minutes had been pinged, if only FdP/MS had settled on the pocket and drop approach, and THEN worried about scoring a try etc. etc.) – they don’t matter a jot anymore – we lost, you won, 4 more years etc…

With all of that being said – about next week’s game: Cooper was NOwhere. Whether that was from external pressure, or due to the Bok offence getting to him, if he ‘plays’ like that again next week, the Wallabies will have a mountain to climb. You may as well sub him, and play Barnes at 10. Apart from his involvement on the line to stop Fourie (I slowed-down that replay – Genia dislodged the ball, not Cooper), he had a couple of runs, and a few kicks – but otherwise did very little.

Pocock is a special talent, and is on fire at the moment. BUT – there is zero to no chance of the breakdown being the free-for-all that it was yesterday, in the Semis… If he is taken out of the equation – the rest of the team are going to have to come to the party in a BIG way…

To end off – if the way the breakdown was officiated by Lawrence can be seen as an anomaly, then what can be taken from this game with a view to gauging the Wallabies potential performance next week? Very little, it would seem… So despite my comments above about Cooper and Pocock, the Semi is going to be a completely different ball-game, against a AB side playing their 3rd best(?) #10…. What rational ‘neutral’ can possibly be confident of a prediction?

Flame away.

First off – congratulations to the Wallabies. Dare I say it, but yesterday, they played more like South Africa has in the past, winning a game that they lost on all counts but the scoreboard?

Defence wins World Cups – is an all-too-often-heard mantra that is echoed over here in South Africa, and is/was(?) usually scoffed at by flair/attacking-style sides such as the Wallabies – not so much anymore I suspect? Some of the responses seen here, about how it doesn’t matter how ugly the rugby was, it’s the scoreboard that matters, could have come straight out of the mouths of countless South African players, coaches and supporters over the past years – isn’t the irony in sport fantastic!

With this being said, and getting to why I feel compelled to pop up a comment – one thing to keep in mind about Byrce Lawrence blowing poorly BOTH ways, is that whereas such is undeniable, what remains highly debatable, is whether or not that favoured BOTH sides equally, as opposed to one in particular?

My argument is simply this – there is very little point in raising examples and counter-examples of both sides getting away with murder/not being blown up by Lawrence, without placing those examples in the context of the match – i.e., where was the incident on the pitch, when did it happen, and who had the momentum at the time? Surely it remains difficult to argue that if an infringement is missed – the side most unlucky in that situation, is the attacking side – the one with the momentum when it happens?

I’m not about to delve into details – it’s pointless. The Wallabies beat us – and now have the privilege to play a massive game against the Kiwis next week [more about that at the end].

What I will say though, is simply that, due to South Africa being so comprehensively dominant in both possession and territory, if Lawrence missed an Aussie infringement, it was more than likely to be within kicking distance, based purely on the fact that the Bokke were camping in the Aussie half/22 for large parts of the game. Similarly, if Bok infringements were missed, they were more than likely also in that part of the pitch, and would presumably have allowed a clearance kick, and an Aussie lineout (which – tongue-in-cheek – would probably have resulted in another Matfield steal)…

Therefore, arguments raised that Bok supporters cannot be aggrieved about Lawrence’s reffing, due to it being equally bad BOTH ways, is, imo, a rather incomplete argument unless it can be established that EACH side were robbed of an EQUAL amount of potential points? As I’ve slowly come to terms with our departure, I’m slowly putting the “if-only’s” away (if only Lambie’s DG had gone over – if only the two high tackles in the final minutes had been pinged, if only FdP/MS had settled on the pocket and drop approach, and THEN worried about scoring a try etc. etc.) – they don’t matter a jot anymore – we lost, you won, 4 more years etc…

With all of that being said – about next week’s game: Cooper was NOwhere. Whether that was from external pressure, or due to the Bok offence getting to him, if he ‘plays’ like that again next week, the Wallabies will have a mountain to climb. You may as well sub him, and play Barnes at 10. Apart from his involvement on the line to stop Fourie (I slowed-down that replay – Genia dislodged the ball, not Cooper), he had a couple of runs, and a few kicks – but otherwise did very little.

Pocock is a special talent, and is on fire at the moment. BUT – there is zero to no chance of the breakdown being the free-for-all that it was yesterday, in the Semis… If he is taken out of the equation – the rest of the team are going to have to come to the party in a BIG way…

To end off – if the way the breakdown was officiated by Lawrence can be seen as an anomaly, then what can be taken from this game with a view to gauging the Wallabies potential performance next week? Very little, it would seem… So despite my comments above about Cooper and Pocock, the Semi is going to be a completely different ball-game, against a AB side playing their 3rd best(?) #10…. What rational ‘neutral’ can possibly be confident of a prediction?

Flame away. 🙂