• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

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

liquor box

liquor box

Greg Davis (50)
stillmissit said:
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.
Click to expand...
I understand how altitude works on the body, I just assumed that lung size would be proportional to body size, eg a small guy has smaller lung capacity than a bigger guy so they would access the same number of litres of oxygen per kg of body weight.
 
Lorenzo

Lorenzo

Colin Windon (37)
They don't get any experience at altitude either, now that SA teams aren't in Super. Not that a match or two a year was going to make you an altitude old hand but at least you knew what you were in for.
 
Bullrush

Bullrush

John Hipwell (52)
Brumby Runner said:
I reckon you're are completely mistaken Bull. Players smack the ball in every game, to keep it from finding touch, to try to control possession when loose on the ground, even to get it out of a maul that's going nowhere. Slapping the ball is not an offence that I'm aware of and if a slapped ball goes backwards then it's play on.
Click to expand...
Maybe but we have seen cards handed out for what Vuni did for a while now. The emphasis always seems to be on how realistic or how authentic the attempt at catching the ball is. From what I’ve seen, defenders who make a play at intercepting the ball must have a realistic chance of catching it, not just knocking it down.

You can’t catch a ball that is loose in the ground.
 
Highlander35

Highlander35

Andrew Slack (58)
Re: The Vunivalu card: Rules been in place for a long time that one hand out ball down is deliberate.

Sometimes you win e.g. Maitland in the '15 quarter, sometimes you lose.
 
qwerty51

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Does anyone know why Quade wasn't kicking the short goals? Pretty concerning. We might need Foley.
 
Wallaby Man

Wallaby Man

Trevor Allan (34)
Hodge didn’t have any real impact on the game and happy for him to make way outside the starting side but jeez you’d think he missed some easy kicks in front.

He missed one from the sideline and 2 from 50m (one which was from 60m). Not sure who in the team is expected to provide better?
 
KOB1987

KOB1987

Rod McCall (65)
Wallaby Man said:
Hodge didn’t have any real impact on the game and happy for him to make way outside the starting side but jeez you’d think he missed some easy kicks in front.

He missed one from the sideline and 2 from 50m (one which was from 60m). Not sure who in the team is expected to provide better?
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is claiming they were easy kicks but the question was why Quade wasn't kicking the conversions, Hodge is usually confined solely to the long range ones that no-one else has a chance in hell of getting.
 
The Ghost of Raelene

The Ghost of Raelene

Andrew Slack (58)
Yeah he has. It’s the position he was in to get noticed by the Tahs at first. Once with the Tahs he had Hooper and Gamble who are specialist 7s and he has the ability to play all 3.
 
Wallaby Man

Wallaby Man

Trevor Allan (34)
KOB1987 said:
I don't think anyone is claiming they were easy kicks but the question was why Quade wasn't kicking the conversions, Hodge is usually confined solely to the long range ones that no-one else has a chance in hell of getting.
Click to expand...
If they were not easy, then why bother making comment at all? Hodge is a very good kicker at Super Rugby level and Quade has just returned from an ACL. Quade wouldn’t have taken the 50m shots, so technically he missed out of trying to convert 1 conversion from the sideline.
 
Eyes and Ears

Eyes and Ears

Bob Davidson (42)
stillmissit said:
It's different on an intercept.
Click to expand...
It's not different if you knock it backwards. The Law is for a deliberate knock-on. If you deliberately knock it backwards, it's play on. If you deliberately knock it forward, then all the other permutations come into play.
 
Mr Pilfer

Mr Pilfer

Bob Loudon (25)
I just think the coaches should pick and stick with Harry Wilson at 8 for awhile and back him in rather than looking for the next overnight superstar at 6.

I actually think they should pick valentini/McReight/Wilson/McDermott and build the team around that and that’s not coming from a QLD fan.

But at the end of the day we have 3 out of 4 super rugby teams getting flogged most weeks but then we expect Eddie to somehow pull it all together and be world beaters
 
stillmissit

stillmissit

Chilla Wilson (44)
Eyes and Ears said:
It's not different if you knock it backwards. The Law is for a deliberate knock-on. If you deliberately knock it backwards, it's play on. If you deliberately knock it forward, then all the other permutations come into play.
Click to expand...
If you are correct, why don't coaches train players to knock the ball backwards when you are out numbered and the opp will score if you don't?
It has always been regarded as negative play. Mind you, I have never seen an attempt at intercept knocked backwards as players are running into a gap. I would always give a penalty for it as being not in the spirit of the game if it was deliberate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top