Sorry, this story is unavailable
Some of the comments and 'opinions' on here are positively childish - not sensible rugby folk sharing some banter. Might I suggest, as this may well allay the prejudice towards the writer, that posters put their ages in brackets at the end of their piece (9).
Like other punters on here - I can't see Fiji getting near SA. Samoa, though....
Posted 17:13 16th September 2011
The tackle laws are there for a reason basically the safty and well being of the players with out them everyone would tackle with the shoulder only and thats dangerous .Every rugby club in the world would have masses of injury law suits and the game would die .So please stop your crap about tackles .We loads of good hard hits/tackles now without making the game nearly unplayable .As to the rolling maul in 99% of cases its brought down without penalty and isnt used much now because of that also its hard to start because you have tobe in contact with the defence b4 it starts moving.Teams these days stand off so when the wall forms its automatic offside
Posted 17:01 16th September 2011
You might be passionate about rugby and Fijian rugby but you are waaay over your head. The rolling maul IS playing the ball (which is contestable through the counter-maul) and is an art form that not many teams get right. And it's because they don't bother to get it right. The Fijians are such strong players, why don't they spend more time on getting set piece and maul plays tactically better. Sure, they are fast and exciting but that isn't what rugby is ALL about. Its also about multi-dimensionality, about being able to leverage one strength against another to make up for a weakness. If you want to remove aspects of the game that your team are not good at... well then only fast players will be competitive and that will surely shrink the game.
I like the entertainment and excitement that the Islanders bring to the game but I also like to see rugby teams win by physical and set piece domination- like how a python would crush its prey.
Agree with you man.
Posted 16:12 16th September 2011
I am baffled by your view-In clearing out a tackler, you put yourself between the ball carrier and the opponents.In most rucks the ball is at the back and ready to be passed on by the scrumhalf. Should we call this hiding the ball as well ?
As to deling with the maul legally-this is something we coach mini players from when they are pre-teens and some players become good at this and others not.
Any team that cannot deal with rolling mauls need to review their choice of forwards coach.
I am also bemused by you deffinition of " real talent ". Being a big scrummaging prop and wise in the dark arts is something that maybe some "real talent" would be better off with.In fact I can remember matches that we lost but we annialated the oppositions scrum and we as forwards felt that we had won the match.Maybe different people find different things exciting. Other forms of rugby have a bigger emphasis on open and running rugby.
As to supposedly high tackles-yes, some spectators dont know rugby and would see this as high.Unfortunately some Island teams have a history of high tackles.I personally thinks that this is a thing of the past and I love their style of play.I also think they have great forwards, but they lack the time together as teams and also team coaching.
Posted 15:35 16th September 2011
Remove the rolling maul it's unfair. The ball was made to be played not to be hidden. The fact that it's used by top teams and even by your team doesn't warrant it safe from being critiqued. I never said anything about other stuff such as scrums or lineouts because they are okay. But the rolling maul in my opinion is unfair because the ball is hidden. Further, the opposition comes into direct contact with a wall of players while at the same time we blow the whistle whenever a player seems to be playing american football (obstructing the would be defenders). My stance is, when this hiding your balls I mean rolling mall is removed, many of your teams in the north and some in the south will have a hardtime winning matches because your false security is removed. You know it's a bit like the eligibility rule, once you let go of it or reduce the stand down period from 4years to 1 or 2 years, you will have no more false security and you will start standing up like some real men against some real rugby talents such as the fijians. Rucks, basic mauls, lineouts, scrums etc are okay, but the product has to be enhanced by removing your false security known as the hide your b.... or rolling maul.
The game has to be enhanced by removing the unnecessary stuff and bring excitement in. As I am in this, another area that needs to be looked at is the "tackle".
When a tackle is on the chest, I hear commentators playing ref. The reason is, the tackle to you people is to have a real love embrace but to the islanders and a minority of players, the tackle is done according to the situation. Sometimes with your love embrace, and sometimes with a hard hit with the purpose of removing the ball from its carrier. I suggest a new rule should be made for the tackle to accomodate your false security mentality. E.g. love embrace and a kiss on the cheek. How's that?
Posted 13:19 16th September 2011
In repy to rugbylover11s comment re stopping mauling as part of union-I can only say that it is an amazing tactical weapon when practiced and perfected.Why do all the top teams in the world use it? Maybe we should stop scrummaging as well and only have fast players on the field. As a coach of mini rugby I can say that it gives boys( and the occ. girl ) of a different shape a chance to shine and play rugby.
If that is not the type of rugby you like-there are other variants of the came you can play or watch.
Long may propper forwards play and power be vallued.
Posted 10:57 16th September 2011
@IslandPower, you are absolutely right. Fiji is an awesome team with excellent players that have a natural flair for exciting and open rugby. they have some great ball carriers among the fowards and the wings can be deadly. It would be wrong for anyone to underestimate their threat in this pool, and indeed they have an excellent chance of going to the next round.
You have to concede that if South Africa pull of this unlikely victory, then possibly they may be able to claim that they are a slightly better team that deserve all the aforementioned accolades, plus some.
Heres to a great game on Saturday.
Posted 08:30 16th September 2011
Fiji should be wary of going all out on attack. That wouldn't be the preferred way of beating the Boks. Instead, play a varied game where you draw in their fowards, play around the fringes, get fast ball and force gaps. Their (the Springboks') defense is looking pretty solid from set-play so you can't just run at them all day, because they will tackle you all day.
This sounds simple of course but from what I understand from Domoni is that they are going to attempt to play a very expansive game. If they can't do this successfully they will play right into the hands of the Boks, who, to be fair, lives off the scraps of the opposition.
Posted 08:09 16th September 2011
What an appalling headline. There is not a word in this story that justifies it. Shame on you.
Posted 07:29 16th September 2011
No need to be in pain JayStarr, no need at all. With all these talk, what happens on the day counts. The irb should remove "hide the ball" maul (rolling maul) and ban it forever from rugby, then teams like the Bok will for sure have no chance against the flying fijians.
Refs try to define the so called obstruction, but when a player hides behind other players in a maul, isn't that funny?
Posted 06:50 16th September 2011
Posted 03:14 16th September 2011
Could very well be 'THE' match of the RWC to watch. Let's hope for a clean, free flowing game. May the best team win!
Posted 01:58 16th September 2011
Saw a few weakness there you can expose..? Do you really think for one moment the Springboks are going to play you the same way they did against Wales? Just with Lambie at the back, Steyn moving to 12 and Bakkies amongst the pack they are already going to be a very different team from last week..!
But besides that, unlike 2007 where Fiji was basically a surprise opponent (SA planned for Wales), this time around the Boks have known about playing Fiji for well over a year... You can be sure Rassie has seen every one of their games and knows every one of their players inside out by now - the element of surprise won't help them this time. And neither can the ball bounce as favourably as it did on that hot day in Marseilles... I was there - it was fantastic, but it was a freak-show. It ain't going to happen again.
Fiji will be competitive, no doubt... especially since it looks like good weather in Wellington for Sat. But the Boks will teach them a rugby lesson this time around. They'll be out of it by half time.
Posted 23:50 15th September 2011