Jump to content

Lions...Saturday

Mick Mac

By Mick Mac
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

matthew123

matthew123

Posted
Posted

Got to be in with a big shout after the Boks have overhauled their team with 10 changes!


South Africa: Kirchner (Bulls); Ndungane (Sharks), Fourie (Lions), Olivier (Bulls), Nokwe (Cheetahs); M Steyn (Bulls), Du Preez (Bulls); Mtawarira (Sharks), Ralepelle (Bulls), Smit (Sharks), Muller (Sharks), Matfield (Bulls), Brussow (Cheetahs), Smith (Cheetahs), Kankowski (Sharks).


Replacements: B du Plessis (Sharks), Steenkamp (Bulls), Carstens (Sharks), Sykes (Sharks), Spies (Bulls), R Pienaar (Sharks), F Steyn (Sharks).


Their coach has criticised the Lions media over their coverage of the Burger incident.


"We had negative media from Britain in 1974 and 1980 and now I've allowed it again in 2009, I've learnt that if they can't win on the field then they will try to win anywhere else they can."

Narnia

Narnia

Posted
Posted
Hope Vickery has more of a chance this time. No expert on forward play but presume Shaw's bulk will help. See they've changed to a 5/2 split on the bench. Would have liked for Earls to have had a chance. I'm not convinced by either of our wings. What happened to Fitzgerald? Is he injured or dropped?
Brendan

Brendan

Posted
Posted

This De Villiers character is a bit of a joke, he?s that drunk guy you meet in the pub who thinks he?s an expert on everything but just ends up embarrassing himself. Apparently he isn?t even involved in the training that much. I suspect his appointment is more political than anything else.


He does have a point about the British press though. Their sense for, often ill-informed, sporting melodrama is second to none. All the press has to say about rugby at the moment is, eye-gouging this and eye-gouging that when the IRB has been quite clear that no eye-gouging occurred. Then there is the, ferocious test this and brutal match that. Have these journalists ever watched a match between the Springboks and the All Blacks and seen how ferocious proper rugby is?

matthew123

matthew123

Posted
Posted

I have to admit I always thought eye gouging meant sticking the finger(s) into and under the eye ball - but from the reaction assumed this had by Rugby Law now been extended to cover stroking finger on face beneath eye socket.. or was Burger yellow carded more for intent?


Who is right and who is wrong?

Mick Mac

Mick Mac

Posted
  • Author
Posted

IMO whether he actually got his fingers in Fitzgerald's eyes or not, it seems clear that is what he intended/hoped to do. He deliberatley went for Fitzgerald with his fingers in the eye area and the ball was nowhere near them. It looked like a nasty move, whether he was successful in actually gouging or not.


I have never seen such an obvious attempt at gouging on television before. Bad advert for rugby. As O Driscoll says if parents are considering whether or not to encourage their kids to play rugby, they would have their minds made up for them right there.

Narnia

Narnia

Posted
Posted
Maybe he was just helping Fitzgerald re-adjust a contact lense? I see they SA's have now accused O'Gara of gouging. I can only presume they are being sarcastic give his contribution of missing a tackle and giving away the winning penalty which surely wouldn't have happened if there wasn't some self abuse of the eyes involved.
bignumber5

bignumber5

Posted
Posted
as much as you're all just joshing, i got gouged on the field years back (well, attempted - I still have my eye). It's fecking painful and extremely dangerous. If i was playing now and felt finger "stroke cheek under eye" i'd instantly let go of the ball and protect my face, even if he "didn't really mean it", and using that to your advantage even if you don't actually intend to scoop out someones eye is a professional foul and unsportsmanlike. Burger was pretty obviously aiming for the eye. he is, therefore, a c&nt, and deserves to be cited.
Narnia

Narnia

Posted
Posted

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No - apparently he was found guilty of a lesser

> charge, not guilty of gouging.

>

> Cleared


Interesting the press here still refer to it as gouging. I think Quinlin got a longer ban for possibly a lesser offence!

Mick Mac

Mick Mac

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I'm at a BBQ today Matt - so not around in ED - but I will be watching it - I lost interest after last week but have regained my enthusiasm today - would be good to win one.


I have worked out that they have 54 points so far and we have 46 - so a >8 point win for the Lions and we can take a minor moral victory home with us. However unlikely that may be.


But in truth today I think we will get beten confortable today, too many big players have gone from the Lions team.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • malumbu
      The Telegraph and the other right wing media, do they hate Britain?

      By malumbu · Posted

      The BBC is one of the finest, if not the finest, broadcasters in the world.  They have been admired by many across the world for their journalism.  There have been numerous arrests since their recent expose on convenience shops that cover ups for criminals - money laundering, contraband,  illegal workers and the like. By no means perfect and some of what they have done in the modern world is questionable - the website often comes across as tabloid or sensationalist, as do some of their documentaries, and at times it is full of low grade game shows, fly on the wall etc which bring the punters and money, including overseas, in but is not quality TV.  In their desperation for 'balance' they've given too much air time and credibility to some more extreme views, which contributed to Brexit and some of the rise in right wing parties.  I wish they'd say 'the convicted criminal' every time they talk about Yaxley Lenon. The programme was clumsy, why it didn't go through proper clearance including the lawyers, I don't know.  But it created zero stir at the time. Zero.  And had no impact on the election, so Trump has no case.  I hope they don't cave in like many of the US corporations and media.  Oh and well done to South Park using the small p*nis defence in ridiculing him. What I expect is as the Beeb is pretty centrist in it;s reporting in riles some of those who thrive on the toxic populism we have seen since Trump mark 1 and Brexit.  How sad.
    • Zak
      Chern Re-opening Soon…….

      By Zak · Posted

      I understand from Pao that they are taking a short break but will be re-opening on Tuesday 25th November and also that there will be a sign in the window tomorrow, by way of confirmation. Meanwhile, greatly  missed! 
    • Sephiroth
      Missing pound signs

      By Sephiroth · Posted

      He is bummed he missed last forum drinks 
    • ctovey
      Dulwich Leisure Centre - cold showers today

      By ctovey · Posted

      They get one thing running and another goes down!

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...