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.
For what it's worth I don't know anyone on this side of the country who thinks reducing the number of teams is good for the game in this country. And most I talk with have a deep sympathy for the players, their families and the loyal supporters. Having been through this ourselves I understand...
Good game, good crowd. Both teams showed something and also had some work-ons (as the say). Appreciated the Brumbies players hanging around after to chat. Slipper was loving the heat.
I'm disappointed but not surprised (I predicted 25-7). And I'll avoid personal criticism of coaches, players and fellow supporters. But can anyone give me an example of when changing coaches, players and tactics 6 months out from a world cup has actually worked?
It was a good win, I thought it would be closer. The Wallabies played to their strengths and negated the Georgian strengths. Whether they are good enough to progress remains to be seen, but they did what they had to do in this one.
It is clear that 15 Super Rugby games and no second tier competition isn't a formula for successfully developing players to international standard. So I am pleased to see that many of you recognise that any extra competitive matches Is a good thing, be it the Force or Reds or whomever...
For a few games now I’ve noticed he’s tackled higher and from the side, which doesn’t work against big, fast runners. Perhaps that’s because the guys inside and in front of him haven’t done their job. I’m not sure.
In fairness, we don't know if he was pressing the button and BOK decided he'd seen it and it was OK. It's not as if the Assistant Referees are allowed to put up their flag for forward passes.
Both teams had plenty of opportunity to lose that game, the Rebels just took their chances. That being said, I really object to the game being decided in the manner it was.