Is it over for the Neanderthals?

So, the chiefs win SXV as I fail to predict with emphatic win over the Sharks, the most thoughtful and creative SA team who sweep aside the "Old School" SA strong teams of Bulls and Stormers.

But after they go behind, was some comedy to watch SA rugby players attempt to give up route one rugby and try to play more expansive. Despite best intents they are not programmed for this rugby. And their strong international pack were just impotent in the face of expansive creative intelligent and pacey combinator.

Is now some years since the Chiefs get wiped out by the Bulls playing the Old School kick and chase and mauling and cause the penalty on counter attack and NZ have found a way to be too creative for this style, along with timely rule changing. Is some kind of book end that the chiefs go down to this style, and now come back and smash it in similar styling.

Now NZ and Wales look like the teams to beat in both hemisphere, and guess what? They both play "total rugby" and not the negative cynical style that typify the early and mid 2000's.

Can SA adapting under Meyer for the new way? (Old Wales will say "old way" our "our way" or NZ will say "rugby") or will SA become the England of the Southern Hemisphere?

No,I predict Japan will be the next rugby superpower.They will convert sumo wrestlers into rugby players and will have an impregnable defense because their players will be so fat that there won't be enough space for a player to get between them.

Again ASLS you bring valuable and thoughtful insight! thankyou for contribute.

Thank you I try to follow your example

AWOP earlier this week wrote a thread on the Super tournament formatt. Over 80 people read it None could be bothered to reply to it.Today the Sharks were the better team for the first 20 minutes.They needed to have built a good lead by then before fatigue set in.Conditions were difficult for BOTH sides early on kicking by both sides was indifferent then.The Chiefs first try took the steam out of them.A Wild Card side especially an SA reaching an away Final is a very big disadvantage.That the Chiefs were likely to win was fairly obvious,only one side has won away offshore.The Chiefs were one of the two best sides in Tournament the other it seems can`t win home Semi`s[Stormers].Chiefs were also lucky not to have conceded one Head high tackle on Kankowski at least maybe to [SBW shoulder Charge].They won by being patient and varying tactics the Sharks by half time were physically done.To many times lying up flat passes in many cases hospital passes or just dropping ball s and knocking on.
The Sharks lost to 3 of the 4 SA Conference teams on the road even the Lions.
The Chiefs thoroughly deserved there win and a Williams was indeed one of the best players Nanai not SBW.SBW incidentally did have good game but Nanai-Williams before subbed was out standing.

Yes, varying tactics. Thinking rugby! Makes you think...

Sorry I missed your thread. I am out of the country for a while and not logging in. But I always follow your thoughtful posts in normal situation!

Did not AWOP start a similar thread a few weeks ago about how RSA forward based rugby is losing its dominance? do we really need another?

As many as it takes dallym, as many as it takes...

In two weeks time we will know a strong Setpiece ,solid backs,the goal kicking of Peter Lambie.They won`t be any push overs.

AWOP is correct, neanderthal rugby will only see us compete for top two or three, as it has proven over the last 16 years, we need neanderthals that can read, write and throw a spear to be number one.

Neanderthal only beat the All Blacks on average 30% of the time, the 5/11 of the past four years was just an anomoly, like the ice age, it happens once every million or so years.

Neanderthal rugby still scares the rest though. i guess them running with rocks in their hands grunting like warthogs is still intimidating enough for the rest of civilisation.

neanderthal rugby wins world cups

Wales play total rugby?

I suppose we will soon find out if HM wants to be top dog and evolve.

We don't know yet whether he can make fire.

Maybe fire not necessary BB.

Just dig big hole and cover loosely with some sticks and leaf litter... then wait for clumsy Wallaby to fall in.

(they did actually discover a giant one which fell into a lava pit - tens of thousands of years ago - up in Qld a few weeks ago... so the precedent has already been set)

That requires lateral thinking mate, Meyer first needs to prove he is capable of that, currently it seems a huge paradigm shift is necessary.

If Biltong can changing his mind and accept this truth, then it is possible! Actually could be some bad thing for the rest of the world if SA start moving the ball outside 13 in the organised way.

I have accepted that truth a long time ago mate, I just do it in a realistic and mature way.

and very funny humourous and good nature! You are like a role model for 606v2 posters Biltong. No wonder you make the moderator!

I see AWOP's English is veering wildly between good and badly filtered again.

Wales' recent success has been down to grunt (not total) rugby. Big backs and fairly route one. The Aussies have dealt with this pretty well.

sugarNspikes wrote:I see AWOP's English is veering wildly between good and badly filtered again.

Wales' recent success has been down to grunt (not total) rugby. Big backs and fairly route one. The Aussies have dealt with this pretty well.

Depends which way you look at it though, doesn't it Squirrel? Seeing as you like to highlight our grunt and the Aussies' injuries, then you can't ignore how key Dr Roberts is to our grunt rugby. Scott Williams (as good as he is at dislodging a ball from a cocky, wannabe tough guy in Lawes) and Ashley Beck can't match that. So when you decide to rattle on about a weakened Aus side again, try to remember whose game plan was most affected (if we are the grunt merchants you suggest).

I thought we weren't allowed to hound AWOP either?

Such a farce.....

I don't see how the Sharks are evidence of neanderthal-ness. If they had been fresh it would have been a different game (although the Chiefs, on Saturday's form, would probably still have won, because they were darn good), but you can't really call JP Pietersen, Ludik, Lambie, Jordaan, Whitehead, Mvovo, Daniels, Kankowski, 'neanderthals' who are 'comically un-able to play anything other than route-one rugby'. Even Bismark, the Beast, Alberts and Coetzee have been displying some wonderful offloading, and creative vision from time to time!

Although I agree that it remains to be seen whether Heyneke Meyer will utilise any of the 'Homo-Sapien' skills that his Sharks-based players have been displaying.

Risca Rev wrote:

sugarNspikes wrote:I see AWOP's English is veering wildly between good and badly filtered again.

Wales' recent success has been down to grunt (not total) rugby. Big backs and fairly route one. The Aussies have dealt with this pretty well.

Depends which way you look at it though, doesn't it Squirrel? Seeing as you like to highlight our grunt and the Aussies' injuries, then you can't ignore how key Dr Roberts is to our grunt rugby. Scott Williams (as good as he is at dislodging a ball from a cocky, wannabe tough guy in Lawes) and Ashley Beck can't match that. So when you decide to rattle on about a weakened Aus side again, try to remember whose game plan was most affected (if we are the grunt merchants you suggest).

I thought we weren't allowed to hound AWOP either?

It's not an insult. Wales have been effective at what they've done against 6 Nations sides. It just doesn't work so well against the very best. Many Welsh fans bemoan the lack of inspiration and plan B.

Still, if you want to use this have a pop at Lawes then fill your boots. Well done.

Not sure there's any hounding of AWOP. It's just he has a most odd posting style that's schizophrenic to say the least. Puzzling.

Sorry my English is sometime veering. I try very hard to make good grammar and spelling especially to make a strong point. But sometime I am tired or have a beer and then is making going down quickly! Is some struggle but I keep it up to fitting in England properly!

Oh, it's gone again

anotherworldofpain wrote:Sorry my English is sometime veering. I try very hard to make good grammar and spelling especially to make a strong point. But sometime I am tired or have a beer and then is making going down quickly! Is some struggle but I keep it up to fitting in England properly!

Beer, poor spelling and atrocious grammar....you should fit into the UK nicely

take some GCSEs, you'll get A* across the board

mowgli wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:Sorry my English is sometime veering. I try very hard to make good grammar and spelling especially to make a strong point. But sometime I am tired or have a beer and then is making going down quickly! Is some struggle but I keep it up to fitting in England properly!

Beer, poor spelling and atrocious grammar....you should fit into the UK nicely

take some GCSEs, you'll get A* across the board

He's already fitted in nicely - from Richmond to Mayfair. How much more can one fit in?

dallym wrote:neanderthal rugby wins world cups

But Aus have won 2 WC and no one ever accuses them of Neanderthal rugby. (cause they can't)

nganboy wrote:

dallym wrote:neanderthal rugby wins world cups

But Aus have won 2 WC and no one ever accuses them of Neanderthal rugby. (cause they can't)

Have you seen them the last year or so. They are starting to take a more South African approach, which I don't think can be good for world rugby.

FerN wrote:

nganboy wrote:

dallym wrote:neanderthal rugby wins world cups

But Aus have won 2 WC and no one ever accuses them of Neanderthal rugby. (cause they can't)

Have you seen them the last year or so. They are starting to take a more South African approach, which I don't think can be good for world rugby.

Really? With the talent the Aussies have in the backs, and the lack of talent in the front five (particularly now that Sharpe has retired), I really can't see Australia making a fist of "neanderthal rugby".

A fully fit Aussie backline looks something like this (granted Horne, McCabe and Mitchell provide some alternatives):

9.Genia 10.Cooper 11.Ioane 12.Barnes 13.AAC 14.JOC 15.Beale

That is an outstanding backline, with pace, strength and footballing ability all over the shop. It would not take much for the Aussies to once again be an outstanding outfit (being Tri-Nations champions and having just whitewashed Wales suggests that they are hardly a poor side), and becoming a more limited side is not the way to go.

Between 2004 - 2010 rugby went to a dark place, with big set pieces and the kick and chase style of play dominating world rugby. Thankfully that seems to be over now. France, Ireland, Wales and Australia are all good footballing sides, with NZ, the current World Champions, leading the try scoring charts and developing a very efficient and effective attacking style of play. England also are trying to turn that corner, and Lancaster seems to be trying to encourage the England backs to be more creative and take more risks. Scotland certainly are, as for the first time in over a decade Robinson is selecting both a 10 and a 12 that can pass and run at the same time.

I think rugby is moving into a new phase of tactics and style of play. An effective kick and chase is still a weapon, but with sides starting to nullify that with better counter-attacking capabilities, when it goes wrong (as Wales proved time and time again against Australia in the summer), the net effect is that you just give the ball away and hand an attacking opportunity to the opposition.

Thanks FES. I was going to say... but you said it pretty well.

We have a more sophisticated approach to backline play which stems from the influences from our other rugby code. It's our natural way. Nothing limited or neanderthalic about it.

Yes, nothing Neanderthal about Wallaby rugby. And thank goodness the Reds have been vanquished before that took hold! No, I would put Wallaby rugby strictly in the avoid-the-set-piece and fling-it-about and close-your-eyes-and-pretend-it's-league camp! As someone said the retirement of Sharp pretty much ends it for the Australian tight 5. Wallabies showed against Wales that they are smart enough to play a new style of 10-man rugby that starts at no. 6. and be successful!

Aussie derbies in super rugby though are usually pretty stodgy ironically, probably because they really don't want to lose to each other, a lot like Welsh derbies!

Linebreaker wrote:Thanks FES. I was going to say... but you said it pretty well.

We have a more sophisticated approach to backline play which stems from the influences from our other rugby code. It's our natural way. Nothing limited or neanderthalic about it.

No I know your backline is more sophisticated than ours, but the last few games from mid 2011 onwards look very much forward based or maybe it is just because they started to dominate us upfront as well.

By "Welsh derbies" you presumably mean two French clubs playing each other?

True FerN, our forwards incrementally improving and getting slightly more smarter with the newer laws which have helped us significantly.

AWOP, it's worked a few times to our benefit. I'm actually surprised you guys feel so threatened by it when you do the same yourselves.

As for Sharpe - he's served us well but not in the class of NZ/SA locks and as you know we have more aggressive and steadily improving combinators vying for his spot when he retires. He did very well to come back after his first retirement and replace Horwill when he got injured and ironically his work ethic probably lifted the rest of the pack when it was needed and at a time when experienced locks were thin on the ground.

gowales wrote:Aussie derbies in super rugby though are usually pretty stodgy ironically, probably because they really don't want to lose to each other, a lot like Welsh derbies!

The real reason they are 'stodgy' as you describe is that due to the small player base in australia and wales, the majority of provincial/regional players will have trained together over the years during the international season and as a result will know how to negate each others main threats.

gowales wrote:Wales play total rugby?

With a passion!

The Wallabies set piece is very underated,and they can be physical[Dirty?] too.See 3Ns 2011 4th test when Thomson and Read were injured.They nearly always have Backs who can find ways to out think the Neanderthals some of the time.They`ve lost more matches due to poor goalkicking in the past 3 years than enough.Cost them at least 3 test wins 2009 one each versus Nz,Sa,and England.

Thought the title said the netherlands...


Never mind

Since we are talking about Aus, IMO they play this 'neanderthal rugby' away from home on just SOME occassions. Mostly, against England and South Africa; they've beaten SA what 4 or 5 times in a row now? Clearly it can be effective. I do not doubt Australia's ability to play the other type of rugby whatever AWOP is calling it (jeez remember these guys putting 59 points on France not too long ago?).

Wasn't that great to watch? France did seem to give up though.

I've always thought we were behind the 8-ball when it came to dirty play.
NZ, England & France (of old) and to some extent Wales and Ireland were masters of that cheap shot style of play.

As I've said a few times before on here - the rule changes have benefited Oz the most and also cleaned it up for everyone. We still see some players do reckless things every now and then but they are taking huge risks given the penalties meted out for that kind of 'play'.

maestegmafia wrote:Thought the title said the netherlands...


Never mind

Maes I am pretty sure it used to!

thats what i thought an all.


it clearly has been changed

mystiroakey wrote:thats what i thought an all.


it clearly has been changed

Yeah another thread by AWOP has had a name change too.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:thats what i thought an all.


it clearly has been changed

Yeah another thread by AWOP has had a name change too.

Spooky!

Linebreaker wrote:Wasn't that great to watch? France did seem to give up though.

I've always thought we were behind the 8-ball when it came to dirty play.
NZ, England & France (of old) and to some extent Wales and Ireland were masters of that cheap shot style of play.

As I've said a few times before on here - the rule changes have benefited Oz the most and also cleaned it up for everyone. We still see some players do reckless things every now and then but they are taking huge risks given the penalties meted out for that kind of 'play'.

I only seen the highlights, unfortunately I live outside of France. It looked pretty even in the first half but in the second the Wallabies just went into overkill! Yep, it was great to watch. I think France were the 6 Nations champs at the time. Another outing under Mad Marc.

so spooky

Someone is hacking into my posts somehow I think to causing mischief, I ask the moderator about it. I am sorry if any upset caused by anything that is changed by someone who isn't the real me!