Springboks v Wallabies, Loftus Versfeld, Sun 9th Jul 1.05am AEST

[liquor box]

Can someone explain the issue with Skelton and altitude?

I admit that I am pretty stupid but wouldn't a big mans heart and lungs be proportionately bigger than a smaller players heart and lungs?

Wouldn't a bigger player be able to take in more oxygen than a smaller player because he has bigger lungs, but this oxygen would be used to fuel a larger body so it would even out to the same as a smaller player?

It seems to me that excuses are being made for a lack of fitness, SA have some pretty large men who can play without the same issue.

 

[Dctarget]

Can someone explain the issue with Skelton and altitude?

I admit that I am pretty stupid but wouldn't a big mans heart and lungs be proportionately bigger than a smaller players heart and lungs?

Wouldn't a bigger player be able to take in more oxygen than a smaller player because he has bigger lungs, but this oxygen would be used to fuel a larger body so it would even out to the same as a smaller player?

It seems to me that excuses are being made for a lack of fitness, SA have some pretty large men who can play without the same issue.

I actually thought Springboks were masters at managing their fitness, they slowed the game down constantly when they needed it.

They also had so many lazy runners and more than a few times I thought could've been called for obstruction.

 

[Equalizer]

Can someone explain the issue with Skelton and altitude?

I admit that I am pretty stupid but wouldn't a big mans heart and lungs be proportionately bigger than a smaller players heart and lungs?

Wouldn't a bigger player be able to take in more oxygen than a smaller player because he has bigger lungs, but this oxygen would be used to fuel a larger body so it would even out to the same as a smaller player?

It seems to me that excuses are being made for a lack of fitness, SA have some pretty large men who can play without the same issue.

The Boks can train and acclimatise to the altitude. You need a good couple of weeks. Plus the South Africans are a hard race of people. We define hard as assembling an IKEA cabinet while sipping a luke warm cappuccino.

 

[stillmissit]

Can someone explain the issue with Skelton and altitude?

I admit that I am pretty stupid but wouldn't a big mans heart and lungs be proportionately bigger than a smaller players heart and lungs?

Wouldn't a bigger player be able to take in more oxygen than a smaller player because he has bigger lungs, but this oxygen would be used to fuel a larger body so it would even out to the same as a smaller player?

It seems to me that excuses are being made for a lack of fitness, SA have some pretty large men who can play without the same issue.

If you have ever been at altitude then you'd find it is very debilitating. The reason it affects big guys more is due to the weight they carry but some are better at altitude than others as any climber will point out. The boks have several players from this altitude and others play there a lot and acclimatise easier. The thinner atmosphere is most probably the reason they attempted long range kicks (foolishly to my mind) as the ball travels further.

 

[Shiggins]

[

There was nothing 50/50 about it. That has been refed like this for a while…which is why no-one made an issue about even in the all-Australian commentary team or analysis after the game.

Almost everything you have called 50/50 was not 50/50 at all. Hodge was offside from QCs chip and Samu knocked on from restart late in the game.

Okeef is so inconsistent. I disagree, the 50/50 calls all went one way. I agree Hodge was offside. This means absolutely nothing anyway. We played like a teir 2 nation who doesn't care about their jersey. We kicked everything away and didn't play any rugby.

Maybe it's a Eddie Jones mind game. So the abz are expecting something completely different. I honestly can't see how we would use that game plan and not change it all game while it's clearly not working.

Discipline though. Can't be getting 11 to 3 penalties and win anything anyway.

 

[PhilClinton]

It seems to me that excuses are being made for a lack of fitness, SA have some pretty large men who can play without the same issue.

Training and competing at altitude more often would be helping though (although I know many of their top players are in overseas competitions).

I’m also not overly smart but I’m not sure if there is any benefit from being born and raised in a higher altitude environment and the long term effects that has. I have always been pretty amazed at the size of their players and fitness.

That and one of my co-workers is South African and really big but regularly smashes triathlons and marathons which I find so weird.

 

[Shiggins]

We lost due to a terrible game plan (or at least one that we couldn't execute) and fitness at altitude.

 

[cyclopath]

Having not watched the match (and I don't really intend to now), reading the last 10-15 pages of this thread have left me none the wiser as to who was really good, bad, execrable or otherwise.

 

[kiap]

who was really good

South Africa

bad, execrable or otherwise

Australia

 

[dru]

Can someone explain the issue with Skelton and altitude?

I admit that I am pretty stupid but wouldn't a big mans heart and lungs be proportionately bigger than a smaller players heart and lungs?

Wouldn't a bigger player be able to take in more oxygen than a smaller player because he has bigger lungs, but this oxygen would be used to fuel a larger body so it would even out to the same as a smaller player?

It seems to me that excuses are being made for a lack of fitness, SA have some pretty large men who can play without the same issue.

You don't see too many 130kg marathon runners or cross country skiers. It's the same thing - high aerobic requirements favour smaller bodies. The lungs get larger but proportionally I think you'll find that aerobics are tougher on a larger body. You don't see elephants, rhino, buffalo etc at altitude. Mammals get smaller on average the higher you go.

 

[upthereds#!]

V argentina

1. Slipper 2. Porecki 3. Ala'alatoa
4. Frost 5. Skelton
6. Holloway/LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto) 8. Valetini 7. Samu
9. White 10. Gordon 11. Koroibete 12. Kerevi 13. Ikitau 14. Markymark 15. Wright
16. Uelese 17. Bell 18. Tupou 19. Arnold 20. Hoops 21. Mcdermott 22. Quade 23. Hodge

Not sure apart from Bell/Tupou who would be available from team rehab

Apart from clear lack of communication and structure in the wider defensive channels, I think we lacked big bodies. Guys like Neville, Holloway, LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto) and Swinton hold their ground. Frost and Hooper have big engines and were very busy, but didn't play liek big men. Mainly because they are both young. Hoopers coach even said he needs more power. Well - shouldn't have gone against SA in SA under powered....

 

[cyclopath]

South Africa

Australia

Touché

 

[Linerunner2023]

I think that SA side although missing some played better without them, cut the play not to loose attitude to let’s use our backs and score tries to win
Was actually refreshing to see, the northern hemisphere has realised how to play southern hemisphere rugby

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Having not watched the match (and I don't really intend to now), reading the last 10-15 pages of this thread have left me none the wiser as to who was really good, bad, execrable or otherwise.

View attachment 16805

I'm the same Cyclo. This all unfolded while I was snoozing and I've decided that there were no redeeming features of the game from a Wallaby point of view.

 

[KiwiM]

I don't understand the obsession with playing Valetini at 8. To me his best position is 6. He's a power player who runs hard and hits hard - abrasive. By playing him at 8 you are short changing both him and the team.

Will get a better idea of the Wallabies under Eddie after next weekend.

As bad as it looked the 23 that the Wallabies are going to settle on later this year will look vastly different to that team.

 

[dusk]

I don't understand the obsession with playing Valetini at 8. To me his best position is 6. He's a power player who runs hard and hits hard - abrasive. By playing him at 8 you are short changing both him and the team.

Will get a better idea of the Wallabies under Eddie after next weekend.

As bad as it looked the 23 that the Wallabies are going to settle on later this year will look vastly different to that team.

Gleeson is the best 8 in Australia. He has to start.

 

[KOB1987]

I don't understand the obsession with playing Valetini at 8. To me his best position is 6. He's a power player who runs hard and hits hard - abrasive. By playing him at 8 you are short changing both him and the team.

Will get a better idea of the Wallabies under Eddie after next weekend.

As bad as it looked the 23 that the Wallabies are going to settle on later this year will look vastly different to that team.

Yeah look I'm not as down on it as I could be, it seems Eddie was giving the majority of Rennie's selections the benefit of the doubt with a bit of experimentation thrown in. He will now have a better idea which players will fit into his game plan and whatever the plan was at altitude last night is unlikely to be the one which he will use going forward. Different players, different combinations, all to be tested. I saw the inevitable 'the ABs would have put 80 on us' (or something like that) appear in another thread, that usually signals the low point.

 

[Lorenzo]

I'm the same Cyclo. This all unfolded while I was snoozing and I've decided that there were no redeeming features of the game from a Wallaby point of view.

Same here. Yesterday I was a lamenting this wasnt being shown on FTA but now i think it's probably good it wasn't.

 

[Dismal Pillock]

I don't understand the obsession with playing Valetini at 8. To me his best position is 6. He's a power player who runs hard and hits hard - abrasive. By playing him at 8 you are short changing both him and the team.

I dunno, I think his great handling skills (and ball control footwork) off the back of the scrum would be a bit wasted in the meat grinder position of 6

 

[Slim 293]

I don't understand the obsession with playing Valetini at 8. To me his best position is 6. He's a power player who runs hard and hits hard - abrasive. By playing him at 8 you are short changing both him and the team.

Will get a better idea of the Wallabies under Eddie after next weekend.

As bad as it looked the 23 that the Wallabies are going to settle on later this year will look vastly different to that team.

Because the manner in which both Rennie and Eddie play Valetini at 8 reflects closer to the way he plays for the Brumbies at 6… noting that both T Hooper and Samu spent a lot of time on the wings last night.