The Lemon Fool

I think England peaked after the AB win. (Don't really know - I couldn't watch)
At least our Welsh and Scottish friends will be happy.

We were outplayed, the better team won on the day.

Sinkler was a big loss at minute 2.

John

Snorvey wrote:England lost?
I thought they had won it last week.

Naughty!

Shame NZ beat SA in the opening game.....they might have made the final...

Well done SA, totally crushed it.

But blimey, this type of rugby is unlikely to win over any new fans. Complete bore fest.

HYD

Snorvey wrote:England lost?

I thought they had won it last week.

Hmm ... we didn't lose ... we came second

The English team was outplayed by a vastly superior opposition. Well done Springboks.

And well done the Springboks Captain Siya Kolisi. The first black captain of South Africa. The challenges he has faced, would in my opinion, have been great, merely because of the colour of his skin. A wonderful and perhaps pivotal moment in sport. The papers are suggesting it's a Mandela moment. I'd like to disagree. It's a Kolisi moment. It's a moment for us all. England played well to get to the final. They were outplayed. Sport is cruel. But today it turned another corner.

AiY

Howyoudoin wrote:But blimey, this type of rugby is unlikely to win over any new fans. Complete bore fest.

HYD

Yes, it's always worthwhile judging a whole sport based on one game... Anyone that watches any sport knows that finals are rarely good games. Of course, it was a perfectly good game to anyone that loves international test match rugby.

The Boks were really excellent and deserved winners. No need for England fans to worry themselves with coulda woulda shoulda's. It's a simple fact you can't win a rugby match when your scrum is going backwards. Gatland was right. England played their final one game too early.

Si

AsleepInYorkshire wrote:It's a Kolisi moment. It's a moment for us all.
AiY

Yep, a moment of shame, and about 50 years too late, if not more.


GS

simoan wrote:[ Gatland was right. England played their final one game too early.

Si

sorry - that's just a trite ridiculous thing to say.

Did NZ play their semi final one game too early? Ditto Wales?

It is what it is. End of. SA did their homework, came up with a plan and delivered it to perfection.

And I thought the game was excellent. An object lesson in controlling a match.

didds

didds wrote:

simoan wrote:[ Gatland was right. England played their final one game too early.

Si

sorry - that's just a trite ridiculous thing to say.

Did NZ play their semi final one game too early? Ditto Wales?

It is what it is. End of. SA did their homework, came up with a plan and delivered it to perfection.

And I thought the game was excellent. An object lesson in controlling a match.

didds

I know you're right. South Africa took us apart from the outset. But I think "we" need to reflect upon our loss a little deeper and "perhaps" remain (see that I said "remain") knitted.

I know we lost. I know we lost resoundingly. But in our moment of grief please allow us to be trite. We need to reconcile. We need to recover. We need to make sense of our loss.

If we don't, we can't be human. We won't be able to absorb our losses together.

AiY

A self help group?

"My name is Didds. I am English. My national team lost."



Elsewhere possibly I saw a point made by somebody that England under Jones dont eak out wins in tight games and they crumble. I(m not sure how true that is as being fair England have tended when winning under EJ to win well. They do however have a propensity to crumble or at least not be able to halt a slide when it happens. Perhaps on saturday that slide occurred at minute zero...

Im thinking in particular here about the draw against Scotland in 2019 6N.

Then I look back at results over the last four years that ended as tight results
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_E ... sults_2010–19#2019

and the slight trend may be that England dont see out tight wins, niut its not obviously hugely slanted ... what the reuslts list doesnt show is crumbling from a tight position.

EJ has 2 (?) years left on his contract. We'll see. I suppose that from the 2003 Dad's Army that was attritional and had lots of "dog", England have a far less attrtitional style under EJ but maybe modern rugby doesn't breed mongrels?

didds

So - reflecting.

Sinkller - undoutably a severe blow, but that's the game. Losing sinkler so early didnt help the flow of England, but isnt the reason why England lost. However what it did do was expose Cole as a starter effectively - when he was taken as a finisher to see games out. He's dead meat now - short of a run run of injuries and suspensions he wont play for England again I doubt.


Selection - in retrospect starting with Laeers and not Kruis then exposed a weaker scrummaging unit. Not that lawes is pants at all, but the extra beef of Kruis may have shored up some of those early scrums and help prevent the penalty flow that started to happen, as much because French refs tend to let a river flow rather that see a dam/weir has been built. That'sd a known - that's part of SA's homework and strategy. PIN a similar vein starting with Marler - a harder scrummager IMO - and finishing with MV may have shored some of that up. MV is better these days but he still isnt a great scrummager - and to have improved there he has clearly sacrificed his fat flanker role to some degree.

SA - lets not ignore their immense effort last week. They really did their homework and sorted Emg;and out. Huge credit and a big up for Erasmus ... not bad for a stand in coach.

didds

didds wrote:

simoan wrote:[ Gatland was right. England played their final one game too early.

Si

sorry - that's just a trite ridiculous thing to say.

Did NZ play their semi final one game too early? Ditto Wales?
didds

It's not trite at all, let alone ridiculous (that's pretty rude to be honest) if you understand what Gatland meant. Sport is not just about physical effort it's also about mental effort, and England expended a lot in beating the ABs. Lets' face it, England only turnover the ABs once every 10 years on average and every game against them is like a final.

I don't see how anyone could watch the first 5 minutes of the final and not admit that mentally England looked shot right from the start, even before SA laid a glove on them. Stupid passes right near their own touchline when they should have taken the ball into contact, dropping kicks, poor tactical kicking, terrible decision making and generally running around like headless chickens when SA had the ball - so much so that one England player ends up taking out another. And this was all before the scrum had a chance to go into reverse...

NZ and Wales might have lost in the Semi's but it wasn't because of their mentality. That's the point I was making.

All the best, Si

simoan wrote:NZ and Wales might have lost in the Semi's but it wasn't because of their mentality. That's the point I was making.

why not?

why is it that NZ especially hadn't played their SF the week before?

didds

didds wrote:

simoan wrote:NZ and Wales might have lost in the Semi's but it wasn't because of their mentality. That's the point I was making.

why not?

why is it that NZ especially hadn't played their SF the week before?

didds

What? Against the current Ireland team!! You gotta be kidding me? That'll be the same Ireland team they put 46 points on and that England put 57 points on before the tournament.

Si

simoan wrote:What? Against the current Ireland team!! You gotta be kidding me? That'll be the same Ireland team they put 46 points on and that England put 57 points on before the tournament.

Si

versus and England teaj that allegedly played its final a week before against a side they put 19 poiunts on that woild have been unanswered but for a brain fart, and coupld have been the best part o0f 40 p[oints?

whatever...

didds wrote:

simoan wrote:What? Against the current Ireland team!! You gotta be kidding me? That'll be the same Ireland team they put 46 points on and that England put 57 points on before the tournament.

Si

versus and England teaj that allegedly played its final a week before against a side they put 19 poiunts on that woild have been unanswered but for a brain fart, and coupld have been the best part o0f 40 p[oints?

whatever...

Nice way to end a discussion. I don't understand why you can't discuss things without being so rude. Nice spelling, by the way!

Si

yeah. that's the problem with multiply broken fingers from a lifetime of front row... and wicket keeping...



didds