Rugby videos of tackles, tries, funny incidents and more: The Chiefs and Lions try fest at Ellis Park

Sunday, February 21, 2010

The Chiefs and Lions try fest at Ellis Park

By now you’ve probably heard about the bizarre game of rugby that took place in the Super 14 on Friday night at Ellis Park. If you haven’t, the Lions lost to the Chiefs 72-65. Yes, it was indeed a record breaking night.

A week ago the Chiefs pipped the Sharks in a tight and wet match in Durban, but on Friday night in Johannesburg, the floodgates opened in a freakish match as they showed their attacking intent from the start, literally.

From a deep kick-off they ran the ball, resulting in them catching the Lions off guard and working their way down field, eventually scoring a try through Callum Bruce after just two minutes. It pretty much set the tempo for the match.

It looked like it would be a long night for the Lions, and in some regards it was, but they rallied well to stay in the match following two yellow cards to the Chiefs, and at half time the visitors led 27-25.

The dangerous runners from Waikato started the second half as they did the first though, scoring within the first minute and going on to score nine tries in total, with flyhalf Stephen Donald kicking an incredible 12 out of 12 kicks at goal. He scored 32 points in total, with nine conversions and three penalties.

The Lions fell to pieces somewhat, and the Chiefs ran riot as the hosts fell off tackles and were outstripped for pace and superb handling on many occasions. Richard Kahui got himself a hat trick on return from injury, and the Lions were somewhat embarrassed as the Chiefs coasted through gaps regularly.

They reached a 65-25 lead before the Lions showed great heart, somehow scoring five tries in 20 minutes as the visitors looked laboured in their defence, allowing the team from Joburg to get to a 40-7 lead in the second half.

Incredibly they had the opportunity to gain a losing bonus point from the match, to add to the point they got for scoring four tries. They achieved that in added time, as the game looked more like Sevens in the final minutes, with players strewn all over the place from exhaustion.

In the end it was a record points haul for an away team, and a record for a combined score. Eighteen tries in a match is also a record for Super Rugby.

The tackling was almost non-existent at times, but it was an enjoyable game of rugby that had moments of superb skill and handling, the likes of which the Chiefs are well known for.

It was certainly not a match for the purists, but great to watch as a neutral.

Lets hear you opinion:
As a neutral rugby fan, would you rather watch a 9-6 snorefest, or a 72-65 scorefest?

Time: 09:32
Note: Now updated with better quality, longer highlights.

What a weird game of rugby! Watched till the end though, and it really was like Sevens or touch at one stage. Almost as though both teams made an unspoken rule of just getting out there and playing. Good to watch, but a little much lol

By Laz, at February 21, 2010 5:40 pm
Im not sure what to make of that.

In a way it was monstrous. Whilst entertaining, that was not rugby. If this is the direction the SH want rugby to go, I might just switch to football...

By Max, at February 21, 2010 5:47 pm
this shows the typical s14 style; only attack and very poor defence

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 5:49 pm
love running rugby..

defense here was really awfull, but hey, I'll take a running game over a static kicking (pingpong) game any day!!

By Cheis, at February 21, 2010 5:52 pm
@ anonymous

mate, you shouldve watched the Stormers - Tahs game was great defense (specially by the stormers)

By Cheis, at February 21, 2010 5:53 pm
I think this was too extreme. 9-6 would be a boring game, but 65-72 isn't that good, cz there's no defencive rigor. I think there should be a balance, I think that results between 20 and 30 points for each team are much better.

By Carlos da Costa, at February 21, 2010 5:56 pm
agree with carlos, 20-30s is decent

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 6:11 pm
do they tackle in the southern hemisphere?

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 6:34 pm
agree with max,that wasnt real rugby.

running rugby is fine up to a point,but big hits and strong defense are just as much a part of the game,and neither were on show in this game.
that isnt to say it wasnt entertaining,but one of these every few months is enough!!

By thats what she, at February 21, 2010 6:43 pm
I am absolutely baffled.

Before I say a word, Im from the NH, so anyways, here I go.

That was ridiculous. Nobody wants a 9-6, but 72-65? No thanks. Some of the tackling was atrocious. Crusaders - Reds was a better match, 41-20, that's the type of result you want to see.

I watched the highlights of the entire round on Sky's very good Super 14 Show, and they kept referring to this "new rule" which meant higher scoring matches but they never said what it was. Anyone care to enlighten me?

After watching all the matches, I just don't get it. Two players who I highly rate, Wynand Olivier and Richard Kahui, were breaking tackles for fun, but neither of them are particularly impressive specimens size-wise, as compared to a Ma'a Nonu, so why are they breaking so many tackles? It looked like shoddy tackling and maybe a lack of commitment to me.

And finally, why do the SH always come up here and (generally) beat us when we always say their defence is awful. Shouldnt we be running tries for fun? Except we can't attack. If we could mix the two, NH defence, cos we produce the snoozefests, and SH attack, with results like this, that's the kind of rugby we all want to see.

By Brick Shithouse, at February 21, 2010 6:54 pm
is there anyway to get regular super 14 highlights every week RD?
thanks

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 6:57 pm
funny to watch, but actually poor rugby...

By 3/4 centre, at February 21, 2010 7:30 pm
Good rugby. Defence was nothing to write home about but clearly better than NH defence.

The facts speak for themself. NH teams can never put points on the SH teams. Surprising, considering they supposedly can't defend.

LOL, I'm English but you xenophobes are funny. S14 is clearly the superior product.

The Guinness Premiership, Magners and Heineken are shit. That's why they all get blown out of the water by crappy rugby league competition Super League.

Rather eat my own eyes before watching British domestic rugby.

S14 and Top 14 >>> Britain

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 7:32 pm
There's more to the quality of a match than the final scoreline. A match can end 9-6 and still be an intensely contested and highly engaging match just as easily as it could be boring and static. The same can't be said of high scoring matches as easily. To score this many points in a match defense has to be practically non-existent throughout. Frankly, this looked like a gigantic game of sevens rather than true rugby.

Frankly, this match seemed incredibly foreign to me, but if big scores and heaps of tries are what you want to see, then I can understand how this could be exciting. Personally, however, this style of play just doesn't do it for me. One of my favorite parts of rugby is watching a competent defense as it reacts to the attacking team and watching how the attackers attempt to breach that defensive line. The tactics, teamwork, and on-the-spot decision making on both sides of the ball interest and engage me in a match, both as a spectator and as a player on the pitch.

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 7:49 pm
Hey all I've got to say is that it's more exciting than the last RWC final...

By Luke, at February 21, 2010 7:59 pm
Ummmmm Kahui and Oliver are both physically pretty impressive specimens both over 100kg and extremely explosive and (particularly in Kahui's case) elusive runners.

That said, it did seem like people were being paid not to tackle!

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 8:00 pm
Lack of intensity leads to a lack of interest for me.

By Canadian Content, at February 21, 2010 8:10 pm
shows how shit defence is in super 14. number 11 for the lions has a bloody step on him

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 8:21 pm
^^^ yeah our defence is so shit, you guys always seem to break it when we travel over there, come to think of it even the B&i lions ( 4 nations) against NZ, OZ or SA always seem to beat us....yip SH rugby is on the decline, GIVE ME A BREAK - you only wish you could have half as entertaining matches as in the S14!!!!

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 8:34 pm
Touch Rugby is professional in the SH ?

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 8:34 pm
If there's going to be a million tries in each match I feel that's a lot of the tension lost. Sure watching teams score tries is great, but watching a team make that turnover on their own line is just as good. That entire aspect of rugby is just missing here.

By Box, at February 21, 2010 8:37 pm
Im a NH fan, and come on - even we have to admitt that S14 is much better than anything we have over here. Can't believe no one has mentioned it yet - but this years S14 they are playing under differen't rules, which actually favour the attacking team. When the boks came out here and kicked (and still won) we moaned and moaned about how boring their rugby is, however when the same players score 9+tries we moan and moan again - will we ever be happy??? Nope guess only when we start to beat the BIG THREE' consistently and in their own back yard ( as they do us) then we will be happy and if the score is 72-65 then, we will be happy - GROW UP! I love rugby as much as the next guy, so lets ALL love ALL rugby!

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 8:37 pm
NZ, OZ AND SA are just in a fitter, bigger league and they adapt to the rules which keep changing and changing, shows their class. As a NH fan - I do love the S14, it is above all other comps - everyone knows it is but only the mature % of rugby supporters will admitt it!!

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 8:40 pm
RD pls post more of the S14 what about the bulls v brumbies???heard that was a good one...

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 8:43 pm
As a very wise person mentioned before - THEY ARE PLAYING UNDER NEW RULES WHICH FAVOUR THE ATTACKING SIDE!!!!!

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 9:01 pm
They're not playing under new rules - they're playing old rules with a stricter interpretation by the refs. In other words now, the attacking team gets more leeway and it PAYS to have the ball, whereas last year it was more beneficial to not have the ball.

So at the breakdown, the attacking team will always get the benefit of the doubt, which leads to faster, more entertaining rugby.

BUT, that said, take this match with a pinch of salt. All the other games this weekend were 'normal' results.

At the end of the day, the Chiefs gave the Lions a 65-25 thrashing.. game over, but nobody told the Lions. That's all it was really. The Chiefs stopped playing, and the Lions didnt do what they were expected to do - give up.

Disappointing defence at times, yes, but the reason for that is that they were out on their feet at altitude, and because of the attacking nature of the game. There was very little kicking for territory.

No need for NH/SH debates here. As someone mentioned, people moan regardless of what happens.

By FrankyH, at February 21, 2010 9:30 pm
Absolutely dreadful- what a waste of time. It was like watching sevens for 85 minutes- I HATE sevens.

By bah, at February 21, 2010 9:34 pm
Congratulations to the Anus Puncher for getting on the board for the second time in his Super rugby career! It's not on the highlights, but he almost got a double after a fantastic run down the right hand side in the first half.

This ended up as a pretty exciting game as the Lions rallied to close the gap and threaten a tie in the closing minutes.

As a neutral this was a great (if crazy and ridiculous) game, mercifully free of ping-pong. But regardless, you can't generalise about SH rugby from these teams. The Lions are perennial cellar dwellers trying to find a style that can win them games and focusing on the running attack at the moment, and the Chiefs have always been a team who will win by scoring more points than the other team. That's why they were never going to beat the Bulls in the final last year. Until they learn to tackle for 84 minutes they'll always struggle to win the trophy.

By Anarchangel, at February 21, 2010 9:35 pm
@Brick Shithouse:

Kahui is a pretty big guy. 8cm taller than Nonu, only 5kg lighter.

@everyone talking about new rules:

The rules changed this year because last year the S14 was playing under the ELVs. Because half of those were rejected by the British unions, the S14 is not playing under the same rules as everyone else.

The difference is they are cracking down on defenders not releasing the tackled player before they go for the ball, just as the IRB rulebooks says.

In other words, there is no "new rule favouring the attacking team".

By Anarchangel, at February 21, 2010 9:44 pm
this was obviously a great example of how entertaining rugby could be if teams dropped the whole aerial pingpong attitude!

and on snore-fest or score-fest, you answered you're own question, i would take a massive scoreline like this over a boring, penalty kicking game.

the exception would be perhaps an international test where each team are playing extremely well just to get those penalty kicks.

Super 14- more of the same please!

By Anonymous, at February 21, 2010 10:07 pm
I'd prefer to watch two teams that can tackle and make the other team work for their tries even if it keeps the score down

By mfsa7, at February 21, 2010 10:37 pm
try try try! Scorefest!

By Isana Rugby Club, at February 21, 2010 11:26 pm
haha all these people sayin SH teams have no defence.

how many tries did France, England, Italy & Wales combined score against the All Blacks..

so who were you saying has bad defence again?

By wakarua, at February 21, 2010 11:33 pm
I got even sick from just watching the highlights. Thats not rugby, thats 7s or whatever. Extremely boring.

By WhoCares?, at February 21, 2010 11:35 pm
This ain't no bloody rugby. When we invented the game up here we were thinking in tight defence and on tries and free runs based on ability and speed rather than guys who don't tackle. Disgusting.

By Stephen Whright - Phillips, at February 21, 2010 11:42 pm
OK pretty entertaining but defense was non existant....To be honest I'd of rathered watched a 9-6 game with agressive defenses rather than two teams who looked like they were playing tip rugby...

And also to people debating SH vs NH just grow up will ya's....

By themull, at February 21, 2010 11:42 pm
It's so obvious that most of these NH supporters who claim that NH rugby is bad are actually just SH people pretending to be from the NH. Pathetic.

And I think I'd rather watch two good teams play good rugby for 80 mins, rather than a bunch of turnstile tacklers missing everything that came near them. If this is how these teams normally play, the Blues or the Crusaders will just wipe the floor with them.

By Kearney for tests, at February 21, 2010 11:56 pm
Uuuuummmm, the answer is in who is no1,2,3 in WORLD RUGBY at the mo????

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 12:16 am
Personally if its a good quality game i'd be happy with the snorefest, settle for no tries but intense. SOme of the defense there from both sides was shocking. scoring 65points in a game and losing is pretty bizarre, wouldnt mind see the whole game to see if there was anyone tackling lol

By bluuup, at February 22, 2010 12:20 am
Laughable S14 defense! LOL.

Frankly it's just embarassing.

By JPM, at February 22, 2010 1:19 am
ha ha all these little Hemisphere anonymous comments about our defence are funny...

I'm guessing thats why you all mostly (Southen Hemisphere Teams and Countries)get destroyed when we tour or you come down here.

Also, 19 for the Lions is a twat... Why push Messams head down after the dude had scored? I get sick of South Africas little cheap shots designed to fire up the other teams.

By Jamiee, at February 22, 2010 1:37 am
Jamie.. I think you mean the Northern Hemisphere teams get destroyed when they tour or host us? Correct? ha ha

And I agree, I wish Messam belted that number 19... That sorta stuff is unnecessary and always comes from the South Africans... Its like they get over excited when they score a try and need to take that bit too far..

By Tui, at February 22, 2010 1:41 am
Most exciting game I have ever watched?

1995 World Cup Final, I was a neutral, but watching heavyweights SA and NZ slug it out for 80 mins and extra time was incredible. And guess what? There were no tries the entire game! But it didn't matter because the game was a fantastic spectacle of attack, defense and commitment.

Same with a couple of other world cup games:
England beating France in Paris 1991 World Cup: 19-10, scoring 2 tries to one.

And France beating Australia in the 1987 World Cup.

Both games has great attacking play and brutal defense and 100% commitment.

By Dave Dees, at February 22, 2010 1:57 am
RIP Rugby, hello Rugby League without the tackling.

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 2:25 am
The kind of game that will keep people who know nothing about rugby (and of course children with a non existent attention span) happy.

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 2:27 am
This game was an anomaly.
It happens from time to time.
Look at the circumstances. You've got a game played at altitude (meaning players get tired much quicker and the game opens up more).
The Chiefs are a team that always tries to run the other team off the pitch. This often leaves them exposed and they are often involved in high scoring game.
The Lions are perennial cellar-dwellers, who've tried a new approach this season, which is basically to run the ball at every opportunity.
So you get this crazy game.
The thing is, the score was 65-25 at one point and the Chiefs stopped playing really, so the Lions got back into it.
And yes the defending in this one game was not good.
But if ou look at the other games this week, while there are some high scoring games, none of them ended like this one.
The Stormers vs Waratahs was a classic forward battle, which NSW lost. Lot's of big hits and not much expansive play.
You see both types of games from time to time.
Right now offensive teams do have the advantage, because defenders are having to release the ball carrier after tackling him, and are getting pinged for not doing so.
Defenses have yet to properly adjust to this in some cases.
In regard to the whole "SH teams can't tackle" argument, of course this is ridiculous.
It's a little pathetic to see those kinds of opinions, considering the distinct edge SH teams display in defense when they take on NH teams.
The S14 is a higher level than European club rugby. That's why it produces the three best national teams in the world.

By Jon, at February 22, 2010 3:43 am
The s14 teams are great in attack and have a real hunger for quick running rugby, to say that they are all attack and no defence is bullshit however the defence in this game was pretty poor. As a fan I would rather watch this than a stagnant low scoring game, but I would rather see an epic battle with few tries than this. This is a basketball score...

By Bonzai, at February 22, 2010 3:46 am
It was fun to watch, a bit like bubblegum, nice but you need meat.

A feircly contested contest is the best to watch no matter the score but a few tries from spectatcular play will always makes the game more respectable.

The 99 or 98 Bledisloe in Melbourne(?) called the greatest game ever had 30+pts a side and some of the greatest defense. It was when the balance of the laws was right and positive rugby was played.

I think the game is listed in the old videos

By ned2or3, at February 22, 2010 4:22 am
ok, really there are different types of games within this 9-6 and 72-65.....

i mean, you look at the scotland australia game in the autumn (ok, wasnt 9-6 but yeh....)

That was possibly one of the best games i have seen in a while and the try count was miniscule.

it showed great defence and vigor, and you have the underdogs proving to the world they arent right offs yet!

then yes you have the 9-6 game where its fullback kicks to fullback.....knock on somewhere, scrum, scrum goes funny so its a penalty, kick and score, then repeat.....which i will admit is boring as hell, and as of late seemed to be the england tactic.

but this is awful...defence was appalling and really it was more like one team was playing touch when the other had the ball!

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 4:28 am
Without going into the NH Rugby vs SHrugby, that game looked like some amateur friendly!

By alasdair, at February 22, 2010 5:14 am
While the defense was poor the passing was excellent.
Watch the speed of the passing.

By Tom, at February 22, 2010 5:26 am
great game to watch, equivalent of trading punches with no guard until someone copes a kinghit!

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 5:56 am
The fat pseudo-athletes in the NH hate the direction Rugby Union is going in.

They're not fit enough to play the game how it should be. CAn only run it up the middle at 2 mile per hour. A bunch of pasty fat cunts with no athletic ability.

That's why the SH always bullies the NH at rugby. Even when the NH turn it into a forward battle they get their arse kicked by the superior athletes.

British people are just miserable moeaning pricks. The toffs and elitists of the rugby world. A collection of absolute wankers.

They speak on this game as if it were the norm in S14 rugby.

It's no wonder Union has a limited fan base in Britain. THe working class man over here absolutely hates the snobbery and sheer twatness of these upperclass Union fans.

If Britain had a product like the S14 it'd easily be competing with soccer.

The Guinness prem and magners can't even compete with coop rugby league for tv ratings lmao

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 7:52 am
that was an extreme game. better to see a SH try fest then a a NH game of ping pong. I hope neither become a regular occurrence.

By Game 3, at February 22, 2010 8:06 am
Kearney for tests
You obviously don't watch the super 14 coz the chiefs played like that last year and reached the final (even though they got smashed by a superb bulls team) and also the blues are pretty crap and so are the crusaders this year so far so I think the lions and bulls could possibly beat them both. The bulls and the canes/chiefs will be the finalists

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 8:32 am
Absolute rubbish, just watch rugby league if you like this toss.

By Fortitude Valley, at February 22, 2010 9:01 am
One word...
AMATEUR.

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 9:03 am
Re: the rules change (I couldn't be less interested in yet another SH vs NH debate)

I played at the weekend and got pinged for not releasing the ball carrier, even though he'd gone to ground, I was on my feet and I had hold of the ball rather than him. If this really is how the RFU want the game to be played I reckon we'll end up with loads more scorelines like this.

Having said that, I don't really see how that rule interpretation/change would affect the tackling which in this game was pretty poor at times.

By Ted, at February 22, 2010 9:29 am
How can you morons compare this to Rugby League? That's such an ignorant thing to say. League is packed with good defence.

I think what you mean is touch rugby, or sevens. Or just.. wait for it... an open game of union that's played at a super fast tempo and both sides refuse to kick? nah.. surely not.

By Out the box, at February 22, 2010 10:41 am
Just because a match can end 9-6 doesn't mean that it was brilliant defence - it could just as easily mean too much kicking, lack of ambition, and poorly executed attack. Bear that in mind when comparing the two.

This match was ridiculous, but it's good harmless thrills. Chiefs = attacking rugby and Lions = attempting to be expansive this season.

Certainly 2 hours of rugby worth watching, rather than what I described above.

By Benson, at February 22, 2010 10:49 am
Heineken Cup>S14>Top14>Magners league>Guiness Premiership.

But i'm pretty sure top NH clubs could beat top SH clubs. Something like that should be set up. Would be interesting.

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 10:53 am
That looked much more like a basketball game rather than rugby.

No sense in keeping 2 different sports with the same name, just introduce a new 15 code and be done with it.

By SPI, at February 22, 2010 11:03 am
That defence was a joke, and there were only about 3 decent tries out of all of them. Give me NH intensity over that any day. I can't believe with that many tries how boring a game it was..

By M, at February 22, 2010 11:26 am
Interesting highlights, the players look knackered after 10 mins and the defence seems to go down the sink after that. Some of the defensive holes were huge!

I wonder what Monday's training session will be about?

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 11:36 am
It's interesting the NH viewpoint.
There have been several low scoring games in the S14 this season, and then this one, which was an aberration, remarkable because it is so rare.
It honestly just comes across as bitter.
It's crazy that NH fans think European club rugby could be as good as the S14. The big three consistently prove the NH theories about soft defense wrong, time and again.
But it never sinks in.
Instead of focusing on improving their basic skill set (passing, stepping, kicking, general attacking play), they just embrace the slower, less dynamic play they are used to.
No wonder there rugby remains second best.
No ambition to improve, only bitter attacks on a better standard of rugby.
To be honest everyone in the SH would be worried about the day that the NH cottons on and starts playing more expansively.
The French are the most respected team south of the equator and the only one anyone currently fears, because they at least try to play attacking, dynamic rugby.

By Jon, at February 22, 2010 12:14 pm
anonymous said

"The fat pseudo-athletes in the NH hate the direction Rugby Union is going in.

They're not fit enough to play the game how it should be. CAn only run it up the middle at 2 mile per hour. A bunch of pasty fat cunts with no athletic ability.

That's why the SH always bullies the NH at rugby. "

An AB's second row (I think it's Ross) declared after the test lost against France in june that it was the most physical match he has ever played. After that, G.Henry said that S14 was inappropriate to prepare to a big physical and intense international test.

So OK S14 has great attackers (probably the best) and very talented players, but the physical intensity and the defenses are poor. And defending, tackling are basics of this game. If one of these two teams was good at defense, the score would be 72/15 and not 72/65... here is the difference.

To say that NZ, SA and AUS are the better teams in the world is right. Their players are great defenders. It's other S14 players (not all of them but some) who are bad defenders. And guess what? they will never be internationals because of... their bad defense.

At last I have to say that I love watching s14 (as it seems I'm french so my reference is the top14) , with these wonderful actions.. even if they happen because of too many missed tackles. But too many missed tackles leads too boredom.

PS : _please RD, can we have Steyn's try against Castres this WE?
_sorry for my language mistakes...

By 3/4 centre, at February 22, 2010 12:18 pm
Jamie Roberts came out after the Australia Wales game and when asked what the difference was, he said the physicality.
He said that they simply don't hit as hard in European rugby.

By Tom, at February 22, 2010 12:20 pm
The S14 is tougher, faster and more skilled.
It's obvious from just watching.
So many SH players have commented on it, even NH players do from time to time, like Jamie Roberts.
Of course that must be hard to come to terms with if you love Euro rugby.

By Bill, at February 22, 2010 12:22 pm
Certainly not going to win the super 14 with defence like that... would love to know what someone like shawn edwards would've made of it had he been on either coaching staff. Not to be too rude but at times the defending was gutless. However got to feel this is a one off and in general Super 14 combines best attack in the world with some thundering tackles.

I think the key difference may lie in the fact that NH rugby is a bit slower and defensive systems are better executed hence why NH teams can live with the tri-nations at times. Either way fun to see a huge score every once in a while and this certainly won't be a weekly occurance!

By Michael, at February 22, 2010 12:35 pm
I think the most concerning thing about thi game, regarding SH rugby is the fact the stadium was basically empty...

There was one shot at one the the try line stands and I couldnt see one person there...Now that is pretty shocking....

By themull, at February 22, 2010 12:49 pm
What a load of frothy rubbish that was. Rugby for the internet generation who can't concentrate for more than 5 seconds at a time

Whilst there was good passing, the defense was so poor as to be almost non-existent

I'd love to see what Munster, Clermont, Leicester or the Ospreys would manage to do to a team with a defense as poor as either of these

If you want to watch sevens - go watch sevens

PS - crowd for this game - 7000
- crowd to watch Quins beat Northampton 13-6 - 12500

We seem to be doing something right up here, despite the occasional boring match

By Paolo, at February 22, 2010 1:03 pm
it looklikes a sevens game.
i didn't know that tackling was fordbidden in SH :)

SH rugby play an entertaining rugby but this performance is difficult to judge. On the 3/4 of the tries, the players didn't even try to tackle the opponent, incredible!

well, let say a good "amical" match which wasn't amical...

By Flooz, at February 22, 2010 1:33 pm
Someone earlier mentioned Scotland-Australia as being a far better game of rugby, and I agree. Fair enough, a lot of the tries show great attacking flair that I'd love to see more of in the NH... but then you look at the tackling. As an example, look at the Lions' no. 11 when he steps the last man and you think 'wow, he's good!'. But then look at the guy he beats - he's drifting back towards his own tryline, at no pace, and not balanced - he's up against a two on one, he should be getting up as early as possible, trying to put the guy with the ball under pressure so he stuffs up the scoring pass. Instead he just gives up ground until the attacker doesn't even need support to beat him. Awful.

Granted, some 9-6 matches are boring ping-pong, but more often than not it's about two teams who'd rather die than give up an inch of muddy ground. I'd rather see a game full of heart and soul and stubbornness than this empty try-fest. I mean seriously, who lets a 40-odd point lead leak away like that? Have some pride in your tryline, for God's sake.

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 2:15 pm
As most people agree, a game is a good one as long as it's hard fought regardless of the scoreline.
This game managed to do something most thought was impossible: scoring tries gets boring. Still it's better than a kick fest.
Re: tighter refereeing in the tackle area, this is what the IRB should have done instead of tweaking the rules. The ELV is a jokes: from it's implementation, the experiment and cherry picking which rules THEY THINK are good with little objectivity.

By vinniechan, at February 22, 2010 2:39 pm
There is very little between the top players in either hemisphere as the Lions tour and the recent tests between Ireland and Aus/Sa and France v. SA and NZ show.

That's the bottom line.

By jpm, at February 22, 2010 2:45 pm
On second thought in terms of points on the league table this game is not very efficient for the winning team. At most it gets only 5 points, and only +7 on point difference after all that effort.

By vinniechan, at February 22, 2010 2:52 pm
PS - crowd for this game - 7000
- crowd to watch Quins beat Northampton 13-6 - 12500

We seem to be doing something right up here, despite the occasional boring match

.........

Union fans in Britain are upperclass toffs. They can afford to waste money on rubbish games.

Why not compare TV ratings?

Union in TV ratings is below rugby league, soccer and cricken. Its even below division 2 rugby league lmao.

HAHAHA. The s14 have great tv audiences.

Britain is crap.

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 3:11 pm
You're right, Britain is crap and just to prove it, thousands upon thousands of young SH people can be found throughout the country, trying out how crap the whole things is. Go back to your toys young one and learn some manners.

The actual adults who use this site seem to agree - you can't tell how good a game of rugby is from the scoreline alone.

By Kev, at February 22, 2010 4:11 pm
"HAHAHA. The s14 have great tv audiences.

Britain is crap."

Funniest comment in RugbyDump history, basing popularity on TV ratings?

The majority of popular sport in the UK is protected from 100% TV coverage hence the high attendances in its most popular event (football).

The Premier League leads attendances and "The Championship" (the 2nd division/tier) is the 4th highest attended league in Europe (behind the Premier League, La Liga and the Bundesliga).

Aside from that I think you'll find the Heineken Cup (the Super 14 equivalent) has greater attendances AND TV ratings.

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 5:02 pm
Martin_Corry

#rugby I know we haven't got the breakdown law right in NH but the Super 14 is wrong. A bastardised version of league and baketball 10 minutes ago from web

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 5:04 pm
defenses were not the bests (and thats a euphimism; but id take that any time compared to all the pingpong rugby you get in the NH
thats the typical S14 style of play!!!

By luxi, at February 22, 2010 7:30 pm
what an absolute joke of a game, you'd have thought it was an exhibition/charity game and even then you'd be gutted having to sit through that dross for 80 minutes.

Thank god the other games were actually competitive.

By goodNumber10, at February 22, 2010 7:54 pm
Aside from that I think you'll find the Heineken Cup (the Super 14 equivalent) has greater attendances AND TV ratings.

......

Nope. SL, the shit rugby league competition gets better TV ratings than Heineken Cup. That's laughable.

Union in Britain is just a sport for rich folk.

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 8:05 pm
The S14 has the highest average attendance of any non-international rugby tournament in the world.
It's average last year was just under 20,000, and it has consistently been around 20,000 for many years.
The HC's average is about 14,500.
This game, ponce again, was a fluke.
It happens every now and again at altitude. Defences fall to pieces as players get tired, you've got two teams that always run the ball, viola, ridiculous scoreline.
At the end of the day the S14 produces the best players in the world. It is the best non-international rugby in the world.
Teams built for European success would get ripped apart, because the style is different here and players know how to run the ball.
The conditions are also different, we don't have to contend with the mud and slop of a Euro winter.

By Jon, at February 22, 2010 9:55 pm
Thats what happens when the players don't tackle, I'd much rather watch a 9-6 Munster slog than that 7-a-side type rugby! I hope to God this is not the way out sport is going; like the Americans, they'll only watch sports with a score every 2 minutes!

The game is become so divided in style, even the refereeing style is obviously different from S.H. rugby (very rugby league!)

We need to get some uniformity back to the game....

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 10:05 pm
"The S14 has the highest average attendance of any non-international"

lol "non-international", so South Africa, New Zealand and Australia are one country?

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 10:56 pm
Oh my god. everyone take a deep breath. It was one game where both defences didn't show up to play. watch both weeks of the super 14; the tries have been more frequent but not all of the games have 70+ points per side. This new interpretation of the existing law has led to more exciting rugby. period. its safe to take the ball into the ruck now and teams are responding. how about this for a question for everyone, would you rather watch a 9-3 game or 25-35type game? because your average score for these two weeks would be right around there. -SAM

By Anonymous, at February 22, 2010 11:52 pm
By non-international I obviously meant involving sides that weren't representing nations.
That seemed obvious to me, given i then referenced the HC.
But if you want to be intentionally obtuse, I guess we can't have a discussion.
The point stands though, the S14 is the highest attended non-international side rugby competition in the world.
The average is about 5,000 than the next most attended rugby comp, the HC.
Further to that, the Air NZ cup and Currie Cup attendances are on par wih the Magners League and not far off the GP.
The S14 produces the world's best players and coaches, demonstrated by the success of the Tri-nations teams (every player in these sides learned their rugby in the S14) and the constant poaching of hundreds of players and coaches from this competition to European leagues.
The strength in depth of the S14 is confirmed by the fact that despite the constant poaching of SH players and coaches, there are still plenty of great players to fill the ranks of the provincial sides and the three best international sides in world rugby.
As an anecdotal example, Rocky Elsom was unstoppable in European rugby, but having come back to Aus, is noticably off the pace, and is struggling to make an impact.
He is not the player he was when he left, his standards have dropped.

By Jon, at February 23, 2010 12:24 am
Nutbrown did ok in New Zealand, and has been utter garbage in the UK. Sam Norton Knight was an ok (and regular starter) fullback in the Super 14 and has 2 international caps for Austrlia. He's been complete garbage in the UK at both flyhalf and fullback (dropped passes, aimless kicks, god awful tackling).

Why are you comparing New Zealands rugby comps (where the game is the national sport) to anything in England. You should be comparing it to its own national sport (football). How many sports teams in Oz/NZ and SA has a 3 year waiting list for season tickets, 76,000 average fans for every home game and billions of fans worldwide?

By Anonymous, at February 23, 2010 2:22 am
'NZ, OZ AND SA are just in a fitter, bigger league and they adapt to the rules which keep changing and changing, shows their class. As a NH fan - I do love the S14, it is above all other comps - everyone knows it is but only the mature % of rugby supporters will admitt it!!'

Sorry that is bullshit. Firstly its a personal opinion as to which competition is above others....for running backs maybe they love the try fest matches, for forward play i love the grudgey matches up north, where a second row does what a second row is supposed to do!

secondly without trying to start a riot, the rules appear to keep changing due to the game becoming more commercial.

people who dont understand the game want to see try, try, try......just like those who dont understand motorsports want to see crash after crash.....

they have no appreciation as to what goes into a game. im sorry but to me these try fest games are horrendously boring. give me the hard yard games any day!

someone else mentioned it, the quality of the game does not always reflect the scoreline.

This game as far as im concerned was shit! and the last very close match wales scotland, i thought was fantastic, (and unfortunate for scotland at the same time!)

but yeh, i suppose im not 'mature' because i disagree with you!

By I, at February 23, 2010 4:08 am
Its funny how SH fans never stop mouthing off when its clear as day that this game is bollocks!

and obviously you weedy sunbathing little girls know fuck all about how the game is played, hence you want to change the rules! (every fucking time it doesnt work for you!)

i mean ELV's, fuccccck, ok there are a couple good ones in there, but really!??! why bother changing the rules of the game anyway?!?!

'Chess is too slow and boring, I KNOW!!!, FUCK IT!!!, LETS MAKE ALL THE PAWNS MOVE THE SAME AS A QUEEN!'

i mean a game is as it is for a reason. yes i know it has changed from its original huge brawl....back when it was like 15 men in the scrum from each side or something like that, but this is boring......

Is there any use for forwards?! really?! i mean you could just chicken scratch the ball instead of a scrum....then if someones tackle get up and do it again......oh yeh, my mistake, thats called rugby league isnt it.....

my my.......who'd have thought!

By Anonymous, at February 23, 2010 4:16 am
Anonymous said...
Its funny how SH fans never stop mouthing off ...

A lot of the mouthing off on here seems to have come from the NH, including you. Ranting on about how crap SH rugby is when all recent history tells you that when they turn up at your grounds you find it near impossible to score tries against them and more often than not get your arse kicked big time, both forwards and backs. This was true under the old laws, the new laws, the new old laws, whatever laws.
I think it's a good thing that there are different styles of rugby around the world but the idea that one approach is the true deal even though it gets regularly whipped by the other is not a strong argument.
Jon's first post on here pretty much sums up this particular game, and a look at the other S14 games over the weekend shows the range of rugby that gets played and why SH footy is in good health.

By EvanB, at February 23, 2010 5:26 am
At the end of the day, as a SH supporter I can just point to the record.
When NH teams play the big three they lose almost all the time.
Case closed.

By Jon, at February 23, 2010 7:06 am
"Ranting on about how crap SH rugby is when all recent history tells you that when they turn up at your grounds you find it near impossible to score tries against them and more often than not get your arse kicked big time, both forwards and backs. "

Followed many of the Super teams pre-season tours to the NH?

None of them wallop premiership or top 14 teams, infact the majority of them lose.

International teams are a completely different animal, you can't asses the strength of a league on a national side, because there are many many people in a league who do not qualify for the national side.

Essentially The difference between NH Leagues and Super Rugby is the intensity through out the season.

Thats all, the GP, TOP 14 & Magners are competitive from the top team to the bottom team - Super rugby has a core of teams that play above the rest of the league - that's why you get silly games like this but when the top 6 or so teams of the S14 meet it's very very competitive.

Regardless this particular game was a complete joke, people basing the quality of either team or the competition on this are deluded, it's only early in the season so it needs to bed down and defences need to settle. Come April it'll be a different league to this completely.

By goodNumber10, at February 23, 2010 7:11 am
That's simply not true Goodnumber10.
The international players, while the best players in the comp, are not massivley better than their opponents at all.
Often they are worse or equal to their less illustrious counterparts.
And thy all start as nobodies working thir way thru the ranks of the S14.
Many have potential that takes many seasons in the S14 to develop.
It is the S14 that prepares them for the next step, international test match rugby.
That is of course a step up again, and a test match will always be at a higher intensity than a S14 match.
But if you compare the HC to the S14, and the preperation it provides the players for test rugby, S14 clearly gives the players a better platform to take the next step, as evidenced by the S14 players doing better at international level.
Of course there are many talented players in Europe (many of them signed from S14 sides). But they don't play at the same speed and intensity week in and week out, so they don't do as well at test level.
Tuqiri, Spencer, Jack, all have commented in recent years of the paucity of ambition in European rugby.
Elsom came out afterwards and said that everything in terms of preperation and training is provided with the ACT and Australia, but it simply isn't like that in Ireland, that the training and preperation isn't there.
Roberts came out and said that Wales wasn't used to the intensity of the defense shown by the SH sides, that they didn't get anything like it at European club level, and they couldn't live with it.
There's dozens more as well who have stated the obvious.
European rugby still has work to do, they aren't at the same standard.

By Jon, at February 23, 2010 8:01 am
You gotta admit that 3rd try by the Lions no. 11 would be hard to defend against by anyone.

By Anonymous, at February 23, 2010 9:40 am
As a SH fan, I take it up the rear end and pull my wire whilst looking at pictures of McCheat and Schalk Gouger.

By Anonymous, at February 23, 2010 11:03 am
I agree European rugby needs to get organised and a lot has to be done concerning the rhythm of the different comps. Everything's a mess for the players, the clubs, the neo supporters.
I've already posted about this before and I repeat it today: everything is done for the S14. There's a long training and prep time given to the teams AND all the teams stay in the comp whatever their result. The team finishing last still stays in the comp, it's not the case in France or England where this team would disappear in a lower national division.
In NH we're far from that. Concerning the French clubs, they have to struggle to stay in their home top comp, they have to struggle to qualify for a European comp (and struggle even more if they want to qualify for the HC) and they have to struggle during the 6N (because the home championship still goes on while their best players play for the national team - for example this weekend Toulouse missed 13 top players due to injuries but especially due to selected players). They have no rest or possibility to simply focus on one comp.
As for the test matches against southeners, most of the time the players are out of physical condition or the best players can't be selected. The summer tests are at the same time as the Top14 final and the clubs naturally won't let them go.
S14 is entertaining and pleasant for sure and you can almost feel that the players play because they are in good conditions. SH has to wait for us to organise properly.
If S14 offers a better rugby, well imo it's the least it can do given the conditions the players have. I still think it's more difficult for a top NH club to cope with everything and still offer decent rugby.

I also think that recently (these past 10 yrs) NH teams tend to win more matches against the big SH teams. And concerning the long neverending seasons, SH players are not very used to it: remember Carter playing for Perpignan (injured) and remember South Africa last year during their Nov NH Tour. Didn't they lose nearly all their matches, even against clubs?

By Maximus, at February 23, 2010 12:12 pm
"Tuqiri, Spencer, Jack, all have commented in recent years of the paucity of ambition in European rugby."

Jon, the thing you don't understand is that in the super 14 there is absolutely no risk for a team to play expensive rugby with "ambition"... Even the worse team can play like that because there is no risk to go back to the under-championship. It's an important thing.

In Europe, money interests are so bigger than in SH (sorry but it's true) : each rank won is very important, to be qualified for the play-offs (like in the s14) but to be qualified for the H cup too (which make many money), and the most important thing : not to retrograde a championship. All these things lead the clubs presidents/coachs to give safety instructions : no risk, strong defense, lot of kicks. It's even harder in the H cup because you have to be n°1 of your group if you want the play-offs. It's sad because it's too much sometimes but if you watch T14, H cup or else you will find some great games.

Btw, we will never know the result of crusaders/toulouse or munster/sharks because it will not happen. And I can find SH players words which says H cup is the most difficult competition in the world too.

"The international players, while the best players in the comp, are not massivley better than their opponents at all"
_ not right : Springboks "bis" loose against two NH clubs without their internationals this autumn. All blacks without 5 titular players loose against France this summer.

"The S14 produces the world's best players and coaches, demonstrated by the success of the Tri-nations teams "
_ the best exemple is the tri-nation winner who loose against Ireland and France, Australia against Scotland or even the small 6/20 ABs victory against Italia.

The fact is the SH nations are the better rugby nations (irb ranking). But sometimes you have to get back to the reality too. Chiefs scoring 70 points against Lions doesn't mean that they would perform the same against Munster for exemple.

By 3/4 centre, at February 23, 2010 1:03 pm
Ha Ha! 65-72 snoozefest!
I think that all rugby is good rugby, even snoozefests are there to define the real thing! Tis a game of balance, patterns and explosiveness and I think this game lacked a bit of these..
Reds look good, as does the new Lions winger..

By Anonymous, at February 23, 2010 1:13 pm
The Bulls would destroy Munster. My 2 cents worth....

By Anonymous, at February 23, 2010 1:39 pm
Munster would destroy the blues. My two pence worth.

By Jake, at February 23, 2010 1:51 pm
Did I say 'blues'?? I meant 'Bulls'. I need my 2 pence back.

By Jake, at February 23, 2010 1:52 pm
"Anonymous Jon said...

At the end of the day, as a SH supporter I can just point to the record.
When NH teams play the big three they lose almost all the time.
Case closed."

Club rugby isn't international rugby, how many times has Spain and England won the football World Cup yet they're both still the best/most watched and most profitable leagues in the world.

If the Super 14 was as great as people say, why do the southern hem players need to come up north for a proper payday (and it's not just the exchange rate).

By Anonymous, at February 23, 2010 2:09 pm
do not care for this, just wanna point out that the bulls are gonna rape everything in their path this season. last weekend an understrengthed bulls side smashed brumbies, which are essentially the wallabies. botha will be back soon, boys

By Big Blue Balls Buck, at February 23, 2010 2:54 pm
Mate, as an Australian, I have to say, this mate is a dream come true. Running rugby mate... running rugby all the time, it was like a dream come true mate. I have a real short attention span and struggle to sit through the union code mate but this mate this was kanga-delicious. Mate, I want more of this running rugby, love me some running rugby mate as it reminds me of the greatest code of all mate, rugby league. Mate in league they just run it, run it hard and fast and that's what this game was all about. blokes running mate, scoring tries. can you imagine if the game lasted another 10 minutes? Mate seeing top level players spreading their proverbial wings is something special. No spoiling tactics, just open spaces and running with ball in hand. Scoring tries, mate I love it when there are so many tries. Mate the more tries the better the game, mate.

By Bugger Me, at February 23, 2010 3:00 pm
"If the Super 14 was as great as people say, why do the southern hem players need to come up north for a proper payday (and it's not just the exchange rate)."

Because the teams can afford to pay higher salaries, as they probably gain lots more, seeing as the number of people watching rugby is a lot higher, because the total population of the three relevant southern hemisphere countries is a lot lower than that of the relevant northern hemisphere's, genius.

By Anonymous, at February 23, 2010 6:14 pm
"..because the total population of the three relevant southern hemisphere countries is a lot lower than that of the relevant northern hemisphere's, genius."

What a dumdum, the majority of England, Wales, Scotland, France and Italy couldn't give a crap about rugby. Not to mention Wales has a lower population than NZ, Australia and South Africa. Keep up the excuses though.

By Anonymous, at February 23, 2010 7:15 pm
God that is awful, i used to enjoy watching the super 14, but that wasnt even rugby, i dont know what it was, not a defensive line between either team. i for one do not favour the new rules

By Anonymous, at February 23, 2010 7:23 pm
"What a dumdum, the majority of England, Wales, Scotland, France and Italy couldn't give a crap about rugby. Not to mention Wales has a lower population than NZ, Australia and South Africa. Keep up the excuses though."

1. What do you think is the percentage in South Africa and Australia to care about Union?

2. do you really believe players moving to the NH is because there's a higher level of rugby?

3. do you think a northern hemisphere all stars would stand any chance vs a southern hemisphere all stars?

4. arguing because of a single game, which set a couple of records, that defence in the SH is weak, is incredibly naive.

By Anonymous, at February 23, 2010 10:53 pm
@Bugger Me
Hey that's kinda funny, but too based on ignorance to make a point, so you're already buggered.

By Forbes, at February 24, 2010 12:28 am
Do Australians even know what the word "bugger" means? It's highly offensive.

By Anonymous, at February 24, 2010 1:18 am
"do you think a northern hemisphere all stars would stand any chance vs a southern hemisphere all stars?"

the NH all stars would stand no chance only because french players would not understand their irish and british teammates... ahahaha

By Anonymous, at February 24, 2010 1:30 am
we dont care what bugger means to others, to australians its a simple slang term

By settledown, at February 24, 2010 2:14 am
Australians don't give a shit if you're offended, you posh idiot.

By Tom, at February 24, 2010 2:15 am
Go bugger your convict bastard of a brother, MAAAAATE. Australia's a redneck island in the middle of nowhere.

By Anonymous, at February 24, 2010 3:13 am
I just don't get how they couldn't make a tackle! What a bizarre match and outcome. Last time we saw a score like this the Chiefs were in the final...

By Gongshow, at February 24, 2010 5:46 am
'When NH teams play the big three they lose almost all the time.
Case closed.'

Cough.....scotland, australia SH lost...south africa france SH lost......ireland australia....draw..(not exacty a win!)....ireland south africa...SH lost....

im sorry, but recent statistics prove your theory wrong.....and as far as im concerned the only team that can mouth off is NZ!!!!

By Anonymous, at February 24, 2010 9:01 am
You mention four games.
Were you any good at maths.
Since 2003 the tri-nations teams have won more than 80% of games against 6 nations opposition, home and away.
You remember those wins exactly because they are so rare.

By Jon, at February 24, 2010 9:35 am
ok jon, so you have your THREE teams vs our SIX teams?!?

Yeh, so lets bump yours up to six shall we?! argentina soon to be joining the tri nations arent they? how did they get on? Fiji? Samoa? who else huh?

Jon you may comment on my maths, which i might add is a misplaced comment, because it appears your reading skills are somewhat lacking. What did i say? ah yes:

'im sorry, but recent statistics prove your theory wrong'

Recent
pronounced: rē′sənt

adjective

1.done, made, etc. just before the present time; modern; new
2.of a time just before the present

But hey lets pick and choose games that matter, notice i missed out midweek games of South Africa losing to leicester and saracens.....

By Anonymous, at February 24, 2010 12:26 pm
I can't wait for the June tours this year. Carnage.... (as usual)

By Anonymous, at February 24, 2010 1:13 pm
Andy Goode on the bench for the Sharks???

The Northern Hemisphere must be better if this is the case :D

By Anonymous, at February 24, 2010 1:15 pm
"Yeh, so lets bump yours up to six shall we?! argentina soon to be joining the tri nations arent they? how did they get on? Fiji? Samoa? who else huh?"

Haha, and what's that have to do with the strength of the Super14? Congratulations on disqualifying yourself.

By Anonymous, at February 24, 2010 3:39 pm
'The Northern Hemisphere must be better if this is the case :D'

Everyone knows goode isnt worth the ground he stands on....so thats just crap....

By Anonymous, at February 24, 2010 4:42 pm
1. What do you think is the percentage in South Africa and Australia to care about Union?

Far less than in England, as your fellow dumdums from down under keep pointing out the GP has low attendances apart from finals.

2. do you really believe players moving to the NH is because there's a higher level of rugby?

A mixture of living in a proper country with a proper economy and having the priveledge to play in the greatest club rugby tournament in the world (HEC).

3. do you think a northern hemisphere all stars would stand any chance vs a southern hemisphere all stars?

Who knows, start a petition to get the ball rolling. It happens in League and football already.

4. arguing because of a single game, which set a couple of records, that defence in the SH is weak, is incredibly naive.

It's not just one game, the more they change the rules down south to suit themselves the more these basketball style scores rattle up.

By Anonymous, at February 24, 2010 5:00 pm
Players go north for one reason. Money.
They then usually complain about the weather and the rugby being shit.
The S14 gets bigger attendances than the HC, has better players, the standard of rugby is higher, it's more entertaining and it is the onl comp that can get you picked for one of the three best teams in world rugby, ie Australia, South Africa and New Zealand.
Between them these three countries hold five of the six world cups played.
And since 2003 apparently isn't recent enough, in 2009 the 6 nations teams won 4 games against 3 nations opposition home and away, 5 if you count the Lions victory against a second string South Africa in the dead rubber third Lions test and drew 1.
The 3 nations teams won 14 and drew 1 against 6 nations opposition, including the South African victories over the Lions.
So even just last year the 3 nations won 14 out of 20, drawing 1.
That's about a 70-75% win ratio, more impressive when you consider the majority of those games were played away from home for the 3-nations teams.
There are other indicators. Australia for example hasn't lost a game at home to European opposition since the 2003 World Cup Final.

By Jon, at February 24, 2010 8:15 pm
In South Africa rugby is still mostly the domain of a small section of the population.
Like England, the majority of the people follow soccer religiously.
In Australia sports that are more popular than rugby union are Australian football, rugby league, cricket and arguably soccer (soccer is the highest participation sport and the A-League gets better tv ratings than the S14).
Only in NZ is rugby union the most popular, though even there it has to compete with league, soccer and cricket.

By Anonymous, at February 24, 2010 8:25 pm
an example of domination is this
THe BLUE BULLS could go up north and destroy our sissy little 6 nations teams. sad but TRUE and the only team that wouldnt lose by half a century in ur club system would be munster the might just lose by 25 - doont deny the truth~!

By A NORTHERN HEMISPHERIAN, at February 24, 2010 10:54 pm
allot of northern munkies commenting!!! - in africa we shoot munkeys and make biltong - In australia some indian cricketers just call them andrew symonds well anyways
simple fact of life

NH is P-A-T-H-E-T-I-C

i could send my 90yr old grammother on to pack agasinst one of ur sissy HEC or Magners etc ones -

At that i might just get a whole bunch of retirement homes to register teams and enter ur sissy comp - Ur GR8 teams would be destroyed

just wait i havemt even got to the early childcare centers!!!!!!!

By Professor Genious, at February 24, 2010 11:10 pm
Any game where you can lose count of points by that much, isn't a real rugby game in my mind. Maybe these guys should work on their 'super defence', rather than just having an un written rule of we won't tackle you if you dont tackle us. Some great hands and tries though

By Anonymous, at February 25, 2010 2:18 am
Professor genious. *sp. One day mate, one day.

How can you watch a game like this and say NH rugby is bad. Youre in a world of your own. I've always guessed it was shit tackling that made super 14 smooth flowing, this kinda proves that. I wouldnt make my local teams 1st team with that kind of defence. No word of a lie.
Also, 'a northern hemispherian', didn't the saracens. (hugely shit at the time) beat SA? Oh yeah, they did didnt they. funny that.

By Anonymous, at February 25, 2010 2:27 am
Wow, that's a convincing argument.
I can see now why slow, plodding Northern Hemisphere rugby is so great.
After all you said that everyone below the equator has aids, that's the kind of argument that'll get you in a debating team.
I can see now where all the SH teams have gone wrong all these years, winning all those games.
Maybe we should just do what Europeans do, and lose more often, maybe that'll help with the aids and the wind up laptops, whatever that means.

By Tom, at February 25, 2010 3:08 am
Aren't the Saracens full of South African players?
Players who weren't very good at S14 level?

By Anonymous, at February 25, 2010 3:10 am
9-0 is not a rugby score.
It's a hockey score.

By Anonymous, at February 25, 2010 3:12 am
When asked about this game Poluleuligaga said he prefers it to the Northern Hemisphere rugby he had been playing with first Toulon and then Harlequins.

"I've been out for a few years now and to get back to playing this level has been quite refreshing. It's great rugby to be playing and I'm enjoying it.

"The game is at a faster pace and its good rugby as well."

By Anonymous, at February 25, 2010 3:19 am
All those from the North can settle down, this game was a fluke nothing more.

And lets not forget that this is a rugby site. Go to youtube if you want to start mindless crappy discussions.

By Unknown, at February 25, 2010 7:15 am
SAME OLD RUGBYDUMP FANS. SAME OLD BITCHING. SAME OLD TEARS. SAME OLD JEERS. really, its the same old shit, just a different day.....

By Anonymous, at February 26, 2010 1:43 pm
"The S14 gets bigger attendances than the HC, has better players, the standard of rugby is higher, it's more entertaining and it is the onl comp that can get you picked for one of the three best teams in world rugby, ie Australia, South Africa and New Zealand."

I presume your excluding the South African players, such as butch james, who have been picked while playing tine the Premiership then?

And of course someone moving from NH rugby to SH rugby is going to say it's better, why would anyone admit to going to play a lower level of rugby.

That's just the most stupid argument I've ever heard, a player says so, so it must be better? So if you were paid by the guiness premiership would you say "na mate the rugby crap, I wish i was playing super14!"?

no you wouldn't.

the intensity of Super 14 is lower then HC etc... that's a fact.

and for the last time the domsetic league is not an indication of a nations strenght - Samoa, fiji, Italy, Aregntina Canade etc... etc... etc... all have very understrength league yet perform well above the level - it's the players in the International squad that make an international team and not the domestic league.

Super teams come to the NH for pre-season, most of them lose to GP and top 14 sides - your own SA A team packed with Super rugby players lost twice to GP midweek teams - so as I said it's not the league it's the combination and quality of players plucked from it.

Comparing international results to domestic league standards is just plan stupid, sorry but it is.

and as Reds said this game was just a fluke, there is plenty of great ahrd competitive rugby played in the super competition it's not better or worse it's just different - NH rugby is just a higher intensity, not standard, because of the style of competition it's played in that's all.

By goodNumber10, at February 26, 2010 11:29 pm
hahaha, higher intensity?
You really believe that don't you?
I guess you need something to hang on to.
Tuqiri, just as an example, is not going back to S14, inf act when he made his comments he was in England playing for Leicester.
He said it's not real rugby that England play and that they don't do enough skills work or training.
Elsom said immediately after leaving NH rugby, without prompting, and said the training and preparation simply isn't there in Ireland. While he was with them he said that they don't create much with their play and if he wanted to create something on the field he had to do it on his own, he couldn't rely on his teammates to create opportunities.
Spencer said that NH rugby was pedestrian and slow, lacked creativity and true skill. His coach said that NH rugby had restricted Spencers ability to read a game and create plays.
Jack called NH easy, and a joke.
Staniforth, while he was playing in Japan, said that NH rugby was good for the bank balance but having played there he could see why NH teams lost consistently at international level, that they lacked ambition and didn't focus enough on their skills.
Even Jamie Roberts came out after the Wales vs Australia game and stated that the intensity of the SH defense was what Wales couldn't handle because they never saw anything like it at European club level.
See the players know, S14 is on a different level.

By Jon, at February 27, 2010 1:03 am
and again you are quoting players, who have left NH rugby - one who was released from his contract at two clubs having failed to make any kind of impact in the Premiership, AND the first division - but of course he must be right.

So Elsom got in touch with the press to say it did he, or was it in the course of an interview after he'd left Leinster? Don't bother answering it's a rhetorical question.

But essentially quoting players on their way back to Super rugby is redundant.

Be interested to read tiquri's comments so a link would be appreciated.

But anyone can quote players, James, Carter, Kelleher, Marshall etc... have all stated the intentisty of weekly competition is far greater in the Top 14/Henieken cup etc... as i said that does not equate to skills or standards.

Skills are different - but skills does not = intensity - do you understand that?

You adapt your rugby to suit your environment, in the NH we don't play on hard grounds and in blazing sun, so of course the rugby style will be different and a is said when ever Super teams have toured the UK and France they have struggled to win.

Speed, Skills etc... does not equate to intensity. there is a difference, in the same way that standard does not always equate to intensity.

As for the attendance at super Rugby being more, unfortunately statistics do no back your claims - with half empty stadiums in SH and the GP alone producing an average attendance of around 6-7000 per game for a sustained period of time that dwarfs the super competition.

By goodNumber10, at February 27, 2010 9:14 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sports_attendance_figures

By Anonymous, at February 27, 2010 9:30 am
Carter simply said that the T14 was as intense as a S14 game. Very diplomatic.
What about Eddie Jones then, rejected by Australia, goes to England and at the start of his coaching career there comments on the incredible lack of ambition of clubs sides in Europe. Talks about how players like Sackey and Armitage lack basic skills.
Talks about the counter-productive safety first approach of European clubs.
Nick Mallet saying that NH rugby is still just as far behind SH rugby as ever even as he coaches a 6 nations side.
The average stadium size in the S14 is over 40,000.
As such if the crowd average is 20,000, which it is, the stadiums will often be half empty or even two-thirds empty, as the average will be enlarged by games that attract larger crowds, such as local derbies.
That clearly explains the fact the stadiums appear more empty, than the much smaller stadiums used for the majority of European club competitions.
It still stands that the HC average was about 14,800 or so last year and the S14 was just under 20,000.
It makes the S14 the highest attended. Sorry to burst your bubble.
If it makes you feel better, more people as a whole attend European rugby games, which would make sense as there are alot more teams and alot more people.
Oh, and Tuqiri is not going back to the S14, he's going to rugby league, and he made his comments soon after joining Leicester. He also complained about the weather.

By Jon, at February 27, 2010 10:39 am
I see you're as incapable creating a structured factual argument as you are of reading the wiki link I posted. (sorry that anoymous was me)

Back up your arguments with links and facts or please stop posting.

thanks

By goodNumber10, at February 27, 2010 2:27 pm
Go to Wikipedia, go to S14 2009, add up the attendance, divide them by the number of games played.
Do the same thing for the stadiums.
Thanks.

By Jon, at February 27, 2010 3:09 pm
http://www.rbs6nations.com/en/italy/15257.php

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/2334426/England-need-to-locate-ambition.html

http://www.theage.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/tuqiri-misses-blue-skies-and-the-ball-20091217-l00f.html

http://www.scrum.com/scrum/rugby/story/97628.html

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/columnists/peter-bills/peter-bills-spencerrsquos-northern-slight-comes-back-to-bite-14691358.html

http://www.supersport.com/rugby/article.aspx?id=333539

In this interview Elsom talks about how he doesn't get the opportunities in NH rugby he got down south. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5_UNsKEZuk

Here's Rob Andrew rubbishing all NH teams :
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/rugby_union/2755983/Andrew-Were-all-rubbish.html

Here's a new one from Elsom on how S14 is much, much faster due to the quicker rucks :
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/elsom-adjusting-to-frantic-step-up-in-pace-in-southern-series-20100227-pa47.html

By Jon, at February 27, 2010 3:32 pm
dear god have you actually quoted the scottish sun?

LOL

those other links are all players giving the big one on their way out.

Plus you've quoted Mick Cleary the worst rugby journalist in the NH.

jog on mate, you're officially a joke.

By goodNumber10, at February 27, 2010 9:23 pm
Fuck off douche bag.

By Jon, at March 01, 2010 12:15 am