we will just see what happens when they play australia. Wallabies have one good game and everyone thinks their back,boks second stringers will give them a tough contest they are fighting for 10 spots to france.
Printable View
we will just see what happens when they play australia. Wallabies have one good game and everyone thinks their back,boks second stringers will give them a tough contest they are fighting for 10 spots to france.
Kelv, playing their 2nd string may give Aust a chance in Sydney.
The point is - this it the build up point.
white should have rested his player before now, and not whinned about other countries doing what he (apparently) intended to do all along.
and we still have to travel to NZ. Wonder if we take "the best" available?
Shaun your talking thru ya hat! If the Boks were the real deal they would of beaten the All Blacks in Durban. They didnt, and are exposed as pretenders.
Rick Boyd summed up SA rugby at the moment in a thread here.The Boks are now panicking by having a last minute rest period. Tri Nations rugby is the best comp in the world and i thought by competing with your best players would give you confidence, ie you cant beat winning form, especially against quality teams.
Boks are only doing what everyone else has done. The only solution is to ban the RWC competition forever (after the Boks have won it in 2007).
Extend the RWC out to every 100 years, then it won't interfere with regular rugby as much .. this whole resting players might be tactfully advantageous but it makes a fingers up "bird" to the fans who have to watch a second rate game!!
Only difference being the other teams had planned it that way. I don't agree that any international side should send a second string side to a test match, even a friendly. The deplorable thing about the SA situation is that the match tickets have been sold based on a full strength side being sent to Australia and NZ. It is unfair to the rugby supporting public to carry on like this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldmember
The IRB, SANZAR and the Super 14 franchises need to sort this BS out. These are professional teams, with professional players and management and should be expected to conduct themselves as such. If there are too many games for the players to play in a year then somethng needs to be done about it, however I think that that is nonsense. They can't expect the public to support a sport where you are not getting 100% all of the time.
yeah but how do you force a team to go ?? You can easily make up a fitness excuse not to release players - happens all the time for Australian soccer players not getting released for Australian matches from their Europe clubs!!
RWC is becoming a bohemoth! How long before we see players rested for 6 months prior, then 12, then 18 ???
Resting individual players for whatever reason is always going to happen but when you send out a team with only a few of the top players in it then it is pretty obvious what is going on. It wouldn't be hard to police. The soccer argument doesn't work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy
Unfortunately i feel that the RWC is actually detrimental to test match rugby, and as also shown this year, super14 as well...I don't know about the European leagues, but the pursuit of "Bill" is now being put before all else and is really starting to become a bore....France, england,All Blacks(through super 14), South Africa,Wales all have sent out or used sub standard teams to represent thier country( or super14 team), and this is definately having a negative impact on some fans....Sure RWC is gonna benefit from this with everyone fielding relatively fresh teams and perhaps have fewer injuries leading into it, but what is the cost!!!!
I don't agree FR, that RWC is detrimental to test rugby. It should be thought of as concentrated test, with countries playing 6 or 7 test in 5 weeks.
"Resting" players in professional sport is a farce - it mearly emphasises the lack of depth (and therfore forward planning). example - KIWIs, the only nation able to rotate from about 50 world class players,with no percievable drop in standard.
England has the largest registered player pool, and lacks depth. Partly, thats because they set up their clubs system above their national system.
SA - should have heaps of depth, but some of it is not at top level (yet)
France - Quare, don't they have huge numbers of forigners in their club comps? ... self destruction I think.
Aust. - we've all watch Connolys tinkering instead of developing.
The APC and ARS comps will help, just not in this year.
RWC and tests, at the best level, can coincide.
Player depth is the answer.
OK, point taken, and having re read what i said i should have probably been a little more specific in that RWC is more detrimental in the year prior than at any other time...
Question, if say a second string All Blacks played a second string South Africa, or Australia, should it still be classed as a test, in the true sense of "Ye Olde Test Match"...This may well happen in the next RWC year if any of these methods employed currently help a side make the final...
That would depend on how "2nd" they were.
The traditional concept, from school boys up, is for a first XV. so a national 2nd XV should still contain player in the countries top 30 best players.
I have no doubt that a 2nd's team from NZ & RSA would be a great display, and if the other players were genuiniely injured, I have no issue with it being a test. Even the Wales, England and France teams that toured were true TEST matches, albeit no very high standard ones.
My point is, if you build depth AND roll players in and out you can have very strong test teams using the best 40 to 50 players in any country and still get high grade performances. The Kiwis (blast their eyes) were the first to show this and still do it best.
BTW - I'm not cocky about the RSA 2nd's being and 'easy' game for the Wallabies either. They'll still be hard to beat.
If the Boks selectors are now saying 20 of their first choice selections have health, injury or strain issues less than 100 days out - then they only have themselves to blame.
That level of intensity should be expected, in the professional era, from all players week in and week out. I also laugh and the AFL needing a 'rest week' after playing 11 games. The training and development is good and only real injuries shoudl exclude a player. After that, rotating players in and out of main spots is all thats needed. Each S14 team rolls through abotu 25 to 30 players during a season. Test rugby is not that different, just higher level.
I don't think the Boks are resting anyone, Jake is running out of options 'cause they are looking pretty average at the moment if you judge by the 1st 2 games in the Tri-nations. He is trying different options and doesn't want to admit it. It's an old trick with SA rugby, when they loose they make desperate changes to the team. They don't look like winning the RWC and neither does the AB's. The AB's are the top team for the last 20years, but they crack under pressure (RWC). They won it in '87 and never again, allthough they are fav's every RWC, this year is no different.
BS - the soccer arguement does work and it has been happening for years, look at the last team to represent Australia - list how many Europe/UK ozzie players were missing!!Quote:
Originally Posted by The EnForcer