James Schrader's sensational try saver

Alesana Tuilagi crunches big winger!

Sonny Bill Williams warned for big hit

Andrew Trimble big hit leads to try

Get 2 Months Free Professional Rugby S&C

France convincing winners over England

Sensational Stepper Nehe Milner-Skudder

Horrell hit hard by Malakai Fekitoa

Brilliant Richie McCaw lineout move try

Sunday, August 24, 2014

Springboks survive Salta scare after excellent Argentina performance

Argentina came within two points of recording their first ever victory over South Africa, but couldn't quite close out a game that they dominated for the most part. It took some substitutions and renewed vigour for the Boks to claim a tense 33-31 victory in Salta.

Everything went right for the home side for about 60 minutes of the game, including a mammoth scrum perforance, before the visiting Springboks found some form and claimed the win, keeping them top of the Rugby Championship table after two rounds. 

Going into the match Argentina were ranked a quite hard to believe 12th in the world. A win against the 2nd ranked Springboks would have helped to improve on that significantly.

"I've said it before, but I really think Argentina is a much better team than what their world-ranking shows, and they showed it again today," said captain Jean De Villiers after the match. "We're happy that we could pull it through, but it could've gone either way."

The Springboks led 16-13 at halftime thanks to a Bryan Habana opportunistic try, but it wasn't really a reflection of what went on in the first half. Later in the game, with 20 minutes to go, Argentina led 28-16 with history beckoning, before the visitors went up a gear thanks to a few replacements.

A late penalty from Morne Steyn, on for young Handre Pollard, gave them the lead and the win.

"All credit to Argentina – they've been together for a month and you could see that today as they played some great rugby," said Bok coach Heyneke Meyer, who praised his sides ability to get out of a tricky situation.

"We don't want to say every week that we've shown great character, but we've now won nine out of our last 10 away games and I think the guys have shown that they know how to win. At one stage, we were down and out and the team came back.

"We know there are a lot of areas we have to work on, but we’re still in this competition."

South Africa top the Rugby Championship on eight points from two games, while New Zealand are in second place with seven, following their big win over Australia. The next round of matches takes place in two week's time, with Australia hosting South Africa, and New Zealand hosting Argentina.

Better quality highlights will replace these when possible

Posted by Rugbydump at 12:15 pm | View Comments (31)

Posted in The Rugby Championship

Viewing 31 comments

dave August 24, 2014 2:38 pm

Poor Pumas
I have a feeling this will be another championship without a win.

· · Reply · Report

Guy August 24, 2014 3:30 pm

The Pumas are getting there...just a matter of time. Excellent performance!!!

· Reply · Report

DrG August 24, 2014 4:07 pm

I know this sounds very harsh and I apologise for the offence it will no doubt cause, BUT, are Argentina playing a lot better or do teams that tend to play them play worse than usual?

Of course, the Pumas are getting better, there is no doubt about that, but I wonder whether their style of play squashes other teams game plans or perhaps the naivety of teams facing the Pumas gets the better of them.

I know we can never do the old, 'we beat them, they beat you, therefore we would beat you' thing.. but I just mean when you consider the score here is 33-31 and then Argentina lost to Scotland 19-21.. I just have my doubts about whether the scoreline is as straightforward as it seems.. Also taking into consideration boks are number 2 in the world and Argentina are 12th...

Congratulations to the boks, commiserations to the pumas. Best of luck to you both in the upcoming games.

· · Reply · Report

Computer says No August 24, 2014 5:54 pm

You are onto something. First off, let me say that South Africa did play badly. But, there were numerous factors that made a bad performance even worse.

You might have noticed the field in Argentina is not regulation size. On numerous occasions the SA kickers fluffed by kicking the ball too long or too short. It's a shorter pitch, and also looks more narrow.

Then, Steve Walsh and his linemen didn't have the best day out. They called passes forward that were backward and they missed forward passes. Guys were constantly playing illegally on the ground. What contributed to this debacle is the technology support that was in shambles. The refs struggled to communicate with each other and the third umpire. At one point Walsh just gave up on a review because it took too long. Camera angles for review were not great.

Steve Walsh would call time off and the time would just keep running. Argentine players will go down injured, and there will be a 5min break waiting for them to get up instead of forcing a sub. One scrum took 5 min of resets. There were so many breaks in play it was horrible to watch.

It feels like different rules take effect when you play there. It the same when we play in France on those horrible pitches.

· Reply · Report

DrG August 24, 2014 8:13 pm

Thanks for the reply & information. I find that sometimes teams like SA struggle against others even though in theory they are a far stronger, more developed team.

I feel they don't often produce their best against Scotland, (and indeed Arg) when as I said, on paper/IRB rankings, they're a far more developed and successful team. It's almost as if their playing style meets it's match or gets closed down and they're quite often unable to adapt quickly. They're still the better team, so inevitably they eke out a win, but it's often nothing short of hard and close fought.

Interesting regarding the pitch size.. you'd expect International venues to have quite strict codes, I know some pitches have much smaller areas behind the posts, but surely the playing area of the pitch has to be a set size..

· Reply · Report

Juan Facundo August 24, 2014 7:55 pm

C´mon guys... enough with the waterworks.
Are Pumas getting better? Yeashure... but maybe the field is too short and the mics don´t works, so noooo.... Pumas suck big time.
All right let´s leave the clock issue, the field issue, and the whining issue... let´s see what happened in fixed formations and numbers? Did Argentinas scum rule? YEAH! Did the line game improved dramatically since the Pumas are playing the Rugby Championship? YEAH! Are tackles being made? YEAH! Are passes being thrown? YEAH! I you tell me Argentina is offering a poor show, go watch Crocket or Cricket or wathever bizarre sport you watch over there.
Yes maybe they are improving but the ranking says otherwise... maestro, f**k the ranking! Can you, as a rugby fan, say that Fiji, Japan, Tonga and Scotland are better than Argentina? No, so shut up with the ranking.
The day of the first win will come... we have to keep up the good and serious work.
If you think the world starts and ends with the Bledisloe Cup, one day we´ll come and snatch it before you realiza what happened.
Ok, so I got a little excited... sorry guys!
I just saw the match with a Spanish (from Spain) comentator and it drove me mad!
Facundo, obviously from Argentina!

· · Reply · Report

DrG August 24, 2014 11:08 pm

Well, to be fair when was the last time Argentina played Fiji, Japan, Tonga and as far as Scotland is concerned... well did you see the results of the last game? So no, I don't think I will shut up with the rankings.

Did I say Argentina didn't improve? No. I am aware, as is the rest of the world, how much more organised they've become as a team. This is not the point I was trying to make.

"If you think the world starts and ends with the Bledisloe Cup, one day we´ll come and snatch it before you realiza what happened."

Good luck doing that, you do realise you'll NEVER get the Bledisloe Cup, unless of course the layout of the competition gets drastically changed.

If you calm down a little and just read, no one is crying about anything, because SA won, so even if I felt all the decisions went against SA, I'd still be happy with the win wouldn't I?

The point I was indeed getting at is that Argentina, are NOT as good as the other nations, yet when they face SA they seem to close down the style that is so deadly to most other teams. Last year SA beat Australia by at least 20 points in both games, but they only beat Argentina by 5 points in one of their games.

As much as you must love them, Argentina are the underdogs of the Rugby Championship... They can play some great rugby, but all in all, they're not going to win it anytime soon. This is not an insult, this is a fact and lets face it Argentina's rugby is developing whereas the other nations rugby is already developed, so it's only natural they'd be behind.

So don't get defensive, "this is not soccer" - Nigel Owens. We can all talk to each other properly and without the need to go a little loopy.


· · Reply · Report

Facundo August 25, 2014 1:42 am

DrG, I didn´t want to sound defensive... I was not aware that this wasn´t Rugby DUMP forum anylonger, but the Royal Academy for Proper Rugby Blogging. And please, I don´t know what "going loopy" means, but I just went loopy once in my life, and I was young, and I had tons to drink... and I won´t do it again, not that there is anything wrong with it.

Anyways, I love Argentina as THE underdog. We are the best in the continent, no contest there... and we are so cocky, that we feel that our true rivals are the French!! (that we love and hate just like everybody else). We plainly don´t give a crap about England, Wales or Scotland, but we loooove beating every once and again the Irish. ARGHHHH how I´d love to throw and ice bucket, bucket first, to that nasty Ronan O´Gara. We love the Brian O´Driscoll. Italy doesn´t count, half of the team is argentinian.

Entering the Tri Nations is the best thing that happened to Rugby in Argentina, and when we get the possibility to have professional players in Argentina, oh boy that is going to be beautiful.
So I´m coming to the point that bothers me in your analysis. Of course we are not better than the first 3 of the IRB, but we often give more than a headache, and seldom a booming victory to numbers 4, 5, 6 and 7!
So why do you say we merely squash SA´s game, close down the style... maybe I´m not understanding, and this is a cross cultural mistake, but when I read it sounds so patronizing. Almost as if argentinian sweat or blood isn´t worth the same as the Big Teams´. Do you feel our style is just bringing down the other teams level, and that´s why we seem to play well, but we really are not?
That for me is waterworks... The numbers are there: passes, tackles, lines won/lost, etc... Hey we don´t have a Campese in our team to do the fancy step and slip away from the tackler; we don´t have a Zinzan Brooke... ok, but to imply that our style is just like a leech that prevents the big ones to shine their due shineness.

· Reply · Report

DrG August 25, 2014 10:42 am

RUGBYdump, would probably be a more appropriate way of putting that...

Are you sure that the Argentinian rugby team doesn't give a crap about England, Wales and Scotland?... I'm not sure I've heard about many teams that would simply turn up onto a pitch and say, "ah it's these guys again, who cares...". Last time I checked the Arg teams have fought pretty hard against all three.. Whether they've been able to produce their top teams or not is another matter, I suspect that they would produce higher player if club commitments etc didn't take priority. Italy don't count? I wish the rest of us could take attitudes like that with our teams.."We don't care about NZ, or Aus, most of them have UK ancestry anyway, they're mostly just brits"... That is clearly not the case. Otherwise one could ignore who ACTUALLY holds the RWC and just proclaim that it's Brits in disguise...

You like Arg as the underdog? That is fine, I can't say I like it or dislike it, they are the underdog, so it's a case of accepting it. That in itself is not a bad thing as it makes the games all the more exciting when they have a near victory against one of the top 3 teams in the world.

To address your final paragraph, what I have written is not patronising, nor intended to be insulting. What I am trying to say is that each team in the world, goes into the game with a plan, on appearance one could say:
Aus, traditionally requires fast play, quick open and loose rugby with a lot of 'back orientated play'.
NZ is more tight and well drilled, still focussing on fast, quick play, but the forwards will get involved hard.
SA is MORE forward orientated, the backs are fast and deadly, but they appear to need the forwards to get them in place.

So focussing on SA style, I'm saying that the Arg team seems to know how SA play and seem to know how to kill their style of play. This is not a negative (only for SA), they can get under the SA style, which stops SA doing what they do to 99% of the world.

· · Reply · Report

Computer says No August 25, 2014 6:06 am

Juan you read way more into that, but not all that surprised as it sounds like you had a few too many red bulls :)

No one said the Pumas suck. The unfamiliar environment there can cause other teams / and referees to have a bad day a the office though.

P.S there's a maximum pitch size, but not a minimum. I really think in today's age there should be a standard size.

· · Reply · Report

Pablo August 24, 2014 10:46 pm

Pumas dont play their starters in june or november anymore. That's why scores against scotland and then springboks look strange. They save the starters for rugby championship, and play most of the pampas squad in june and novembre to make the team deeper, depth wise. So don't compare june/november with championship, there's your mistake. (Also the reason why argentina is 12th in the ranking, we are playing substitutes against winneable teams, and starters against SA, NZ, AUS. Its all about getting better, not rankings or wins. I like that).

· · Reply · Report

DrG August 24, 2014 11:16 pm

Regarding players, ok, I see that, there are only a few names that are the same in the Scotland games.

Of course there is more to just rankings and of course it is important not to just put wins ahead of overall development. But there is also a good correlation between a teams standard and their rankings... NZ aren't hovering around number 1 just because it looks cool...

At some point Argentina has to pull out wins in order to improve. Perhaps playing just subs against 'winnable' teams isn't overly bright,

Anyway, as I've said, my point was not to insult or undersell the Argentine side.. I think we can all agree that they are not as good as NZ, SA, or Aus.. at least YET!!! Of course the future is bright I'm sure. My point was indeed to highlight how a team that can be seen to struggle against some, can smother the South Africans.. as if their style is a direct contradiction to the SA style.

· Reply · Report

Pablo August 25, 2014 1:14 am

Oh nono, i don't think you were insulting at all, i just thought i tell you what's the idea here, that maybe you just can't know. It's okey man jaja.
About what you said "playing subs against winnable teams isn't overly bright", well, here there was a big discussion regarding that subject. Loffreda, argentina¡s coach in 2007 when we finished 3rd, thinks it's not right to "not put your best team on the field whenever representing your country". So sure Loffreda backs you up. Not bad jaja. The problem for me, is DEPTH. Depth wise pumas historically have problems, we have 20 good players, but then, substitutes or 3rd team is much much poor. That's why, i think, it's tough but necessary doing this: playing substitutes on june and november, it's the only way, as i said before to make the team deeper depth wise. And in the future, have 50 players in the same level, instead of 20. Only then, we will be able to compete, june, november and championship. But sure, in the mean time, you lose, and thats unfortunate, and tough. So it's cuestionable, it's not that your wrong, i'm right, or viceversa. Its debatible. We can only see in the future. But of course right now Sa NZ and AUS are just better plain simple. (i do think in the first have, one of the reasons argentina didn't show the dominance in the scoreboard was the ref only in the first half. I saw off the ball tackle on creevy by smith before habanna's try, cuestionable forward pass on a big try chance at the beggining for argentina, and clear penalty on landajo just after he kick it that resulted in a penalty for SA. But of course, besides the ref, you need to be more effective on the posts, and take better care of the ball). Cheers! Good debate

· · Reply · Report

Pablo August 25, 2014 1:18 am

*first half, i meant, sorry bout that.

· Reply · Report

DrG August 25, 2014 10:23 am

I think wins are very important, but they must not gained at the expense of the team, but of course continual losses are not good for a team either, however as you've mentioned the contracts and commitments etc I see where you're coming from.

I know exactly what you mean about player depth. Everything is fine if you have just 20 players who are all fit and healthy, but when your start fly half/scrum half/prop etc gets injured you need to replace them with someone else who is equally as good and not a fresh face baby.

NZ is the key to this at the moment. It seems like they have the best players in the world in 1-15, but if one of them gets injured they can bring in someone who is almost BETTER as a replacement...

Good luck with the Argentinian future!

· Reply · Report

tj August 24, 2014 7:19 pm

Drg, argentina's team in the last june was composed by players one step down of this players levels. That's because there are many factors like contracts in europe of many important mens that they must be participating in trc, and those matchs in june are useful in most part for those that want to show theira skills and level to win a place in this championship. Sorry for my bad english.(i'm argentinian)

· · Reply · Report

ruckinmaul August 25, 2014 5:33 am

Argentina has a new coach. And it is certainly improves them.

· Reply · Report

10stonenumber10 August 25, 2014 9:27 am

Playing in Argentina is like Football in Italy.

From the moment the gates open until the last person leaves, the crowd is absolutely deafening. The support is fanatical... and it might just be me, but I find crowds a bit more intimidating when I don't speak the language. The fans are behind chicken wire and barriers... it is an intimidating atmosphere.

The stadium design also messes with perspective, the pitch feels smalle because it is enclosed by the fan barriers, and being an ex footie stadium, the pitch is maybe 5% smaller anyway.

Twickenham is no different though, sometimes the width is changed

· · Reply · Report

katman August 25, 2014 9:44 am

This was the best performance by Argentina I've ever seen. Every area of the game was polished and intense. Their entire pack of forwards were huge on the day - Fernandez-Lobbe and Leguizamon are world class loose forwards. And in Sanchez they have a flyhalf who makes great decisions, and is very threatening with ball in hand. I feel really sorry for them - we could have easily lost this game.

As far as the Boks go, I wish Henyeke Meyer will finally realise Jannie Du Plessis is not a scrummaging tighthead prop. This is not the first game he's battled in, and it won't be the last. Bismarck had his worst Bok game in years, our locks struggled to dominate and for two thirds of the game we got bullied at the breakdown. Ruan Pienaar should never have started at 9, De Allende is not a long term solution in the midfield and neither Habana nor Hendricks looked remotely interested in the game.

Hopefully we won't get much worse.

· · Reply · Report

Eddie-g August 25, 2014 1:31 pm

Great comments, katman.

Argentina had a huge day, their top players were outstanding. They are a team that does a lot of things well, and always scrum extremely well. 9 times out of 10, they'd have won that game. The Bokke were very lucky.

As for Meyer's to-do list, I think you highlighted three of the four positions where he has had a concern for a while. We are light at tighthead, Dr Jannie might still be our best #3, but he's had some rough games recently. The #5 lock is still a worry (Matfield the best option right now?). The back-up to Fourie du Preez is a worry - Ruan is useful on the bench covering multiple positions, but he's not been good as a starting 9. And #13 is a big worry. I guess Jaque Fourie is first choice, but as with scrumhalf, the depth in the squad does not look great.

Add to the mix that flyhalf is not entirely settled either, and that's a long list of issues to resolve. The big question perhaps is if Meyer's back to the future strategy pays off. He has not tried as many younger players as he could have, preferring instead to plug holes with veterans now playing abroad, and he's almost out of time before the next world cup to give opportunities to new faces.

Anyway, the next four games are huge. And there's a number of guys who are playing for their international futures.

· Reply · Report

katman August 25, 2014 2:32 pm

I actually agree with his decision to stick with Pollard. Flyhalf is a position where you need to cultivate the necessary BMT - a bit like an opening batsman - and no one really hits the ground running. I think between Pollard and Goosen we could have had the no. 10 jersey sewn up for the next 10 years.

Ruan Pienaar is the selection that baffles me most. He had one great season for Ulster, but has never looked the part for the Boks. I know it's not a popular suggestion (and I've never been the biggest fan in the past) but on pure form, I wish Meyer would look to Rory Kockott right now.

At lock, I think Etzebeth just needs another game or two. He's been out for a long time. The no.5 jersey will eventually belong to Peter-Steph du Toit, and until he's back, we'll have to use Matfield and the babyface Cheetah.

And then we have tighthead prop. And here I really don't have a suggestion. The last tough scrummager we (almost) had was Brian Mujati, but that ship has sailed. Perhaps we should go and poach the next big bad-ass Argie prop, like the Aussies did with Noriega.

· · Reply · Report

Eddie-g August 25, 2014 2:54 pm

I agreed with the decision to stick with Pollard for now, no problems with him being tested in this tournament, but there's still a decision to be made if he'll be ready for the next world cup. I'm sceptical though how much Goosen is in the frame, think it would be a choice of Morne or Lambie if Pollard isn't ready.

I think with Ruan, because of his versatility, they like him on the bench, and so he becomes almost by default the back-up scrumhalf. But Kockott has been very good for Castres, and any of Vermaak or Sarel Pretorius or Mcleod might be better than Ruan. Hougaard isn't the answer, but like you, I don't think Ruan is either. He had one good game for the Bokke last year, but that was the exception.

I think Dr Jannie gets the tighthead jersey because there's sense in keeping the Sharks front row together. But no question, we need to be looking for a better scrummager there, and I have no idea who that might be.

· Reply · Report

Rukhage August 25, 2014 4:57 pm

My two cents as an argentine and ardent Pumas fan:

The issue with the general populace here in Argentina is that casual viewers tend to look at a rugby match with the same lens they watch a soccer match, meaning they expect the Pumas to win, because you know, Argentina is great at everything. Though we are improving we do have some things going against us that make growth a bit more difficult than with the big three: first and foremost our players don't play together most of the year; that's a luxury SA, NZ and Aus have as most of their national team players tend to be fairly divided amongst two or three teams in the S15. Secondly, though there has been an improvement in local quality, the local clubs at top level are still amateur and the governing boards are still skittish about going professional. Hopefully with the upcoming inclusion project for a S15 side here on our home-soil that might change perspectives a little bit. As a final point we have this nationalist/jingoistic tendency to only have Argentine coaches as our head coaches; we could not even fathom nowadays having a foreign coach as our head coach. Graham Henry has been an unused commodity in our coaching staff and I for one are extremely pissed off that he hasn't been used to his fullest capacity. Hopefully all of this will change and we will be a better side for it with the RWC next year.

· · Reply · Report

DrG August 28, 2014 6:03 pm

Seems vastly narrow minded from the powers that be. Probably one of those things that will fix itself through time, but I can imagine it's frustrating as an open eyed fan!

One thing the rest of the world might actually hope for, is that the Argentines DON'T get their rugby in order...

I mean they've shown the power they possess.. At the moment it isn't translating into straight wins, but they're damn close against some of the toughest oppositions out there...

They're doing all of this with half their players up in the NH clubs, the rest are elsewhere somewhere... Could be quite scary if they actually got on the same regimes as some of the 'big' teams.

· Reply · Report

Bautista August 25, 2014 10:04 pm

i like your Sprinbok analysis, but i would like to know why isnt Morné Steyn the default flyhalf? I've rarely seen him have a bad match (im from Argentina we can't catch many South African rugby games though), his kicking is always clinical, and he's isn't old yet if i recall correctly.

· Reply · Report

Eddie-g August 26, 2014 3:20 pm

Katman covered most of the reasons, the other way of thinking about it is that Dan Carter is the gold standard for fly-half, and that's the type of player Meyer is trying to find.

Ironically, Morne Steyn got his inital break at the Bulls because he was a more attacking 10 than Deryck Hougaard. He played nearer the gain-line, and was better at releasing outside backs. And he was always a great kicker. Over time, he became a more conventional Bok flyhalf - still a good player, but more conservative than the ideal.

In 2012, his kicking suddenly went off, and his form generally suffered. Without his boot functioning, there was no other reason to select him. He then signed to play in France, and we all thought he was done. We also thought Johan Goosen might then be the man. But he's suffered horribly with injury (and he now is in France too), Morne has since rediscovered his form, and no other player has really come through (though to be fair to Pat Lambie, he's never let the team down when he's played at 10).

Anyway, long story short, Meyer is hoping Handre Pollard might be the complete 10. A guy who can light it up in the right circumstances. It's a big ask, having both the skill-set and the judgement to put it all to use...

· Reply · Report

katman August 26, 2014 7:19 am

Morne Steyn is a safe flyhalf. His kicking stats are very good, he kicks well out of hand, he's reasonably solid on defence and he has plenty of experience. He's even scored a few decent tries by creating line breaks.

But the problem is, he doesn't excite. He doesn't spark any crazy stuff in the backline. You pretty much know what the backline's going to do the minute the ball passes through his hands. He mostly stands deep, giving him more time on the ball, but also signposting every move to the defence. The biggest criticism of the Bok game plan is always the predictability and the lack of spontaneous play in the backline. This won't change unless we have a flyhalf who is 1.) able; 2.) willing and 3.) allowed to try off-the-script things and create opportunities.

A guy like Pollard has shown this over and over again for the Junior Boks, which is why so many people put faith in him to do so for the senior team. Johan Goosen did the same when he was 19 and 20 years old. Unfortunately the problem might not be the players, but the mentality of the senior Bok team. In other words, the most creative flyhalfs are stifled and pressured into playing a safe, low-risk game plan because there is a culture of fear of losing.

Eventually they all become Morne Steyns or Derick Hougaards or Braam van Straatens or Naas Bothas.

· Reply · Report

10stonenumber10 August 26, 2014 1:11 pm

Nature vs Nurture.

Nature says go for the gap, Nurture says bang it into touch. Coach says clear the lines or you're dropped.

It depends who runs the line, there is a line between playing "what is in front of you" and sticking to the game plan. Top tier teams are there because of ruthless efficiency with their game plan, hence the selections of players like Wilkinson, Morne Steyn, Owen Farrell, Andy Goode etc.

They can Win Ugly, and Win Boring. The non SANZAR and top tier euro teams rely on flashes of genius and sparks to break deadlock, and to compensate for the lower standard of BATTLESTATIONS rugby. SA can rumble 3 phases of 20 stone forwards, and have a 60m boot behind it. Argentina rocked because Hernandez played 10 like no other fly half in the World Cup. If Boring Battlestations rugby isn't your game plan, you focus on changing the game and 'flicking switches'. They may not have had the set piece efficiency back in 07, but the Banana kick scared the life out of many opponents.

It goes back to the 7/10s who occasionally play 11/10 compared to the consistent 9s who might have an off day, and don't have the box of tricks to switch things up.

Hernandez is a magician, Sanchez is a ball player. SA have a big box of 'tricks', but no style. Thats the difference between Dynamo and David Copperfield. Copperfield has vegas, millions of dollars and a reputation to please crowds, but Dynamo will leave you awe struck on a street corner.

· Reply · Report

Mauricio August 27, 2014 10:53 pm

Guys, specially to the not argies, you "speak with out know" and your comments and critics are in vain, cause you don´t know how is the rugby here, the structure...more than the 80% of the players aren´t professionals, we have here almost a 100.000 players and 50 or 60 (with international class) are professionals so...but is not an excuse, Arg is really improving but the reality is that the other 3 are so much better not only against Arg, against all the world too. Los Pumas was invited by the SANZAR to play this tournament, they knew that their performance is not going to be "crushing" by LPs, we need time, is a process, and this process will take a few years...And at 2016 the Pampas xv will play in Super Rugby, so everybody have to wait, there is no other way to do things better, all of this players and the Union (with the IRB and SANZAR) are working so hard together...I would like to see any british national team or France playing this tournament, if they can win any match, Do you guys saw june tests???? no body won any match, any!!
So please be more patient, everybody, Args and not, enjoy the best Rugby...no body knows how logn this will last...Salut!!

· · Reply · Report

DrG August 28, 2014 11:17 pm

I don't see anyone criticising the Argies? Nobody expected Argentina to come onto the big stage and win all their games...

· Reply · Report

Rich_W August 28, 2014 9:03 am

So gutted Argentina lost that one! They played great, and the last time I saw an SA scrum blown away like that was... never!

One thing is for sure, when ARG finally win, it is going to go off, and we're all going to want to be at that party.

· Reply · Report

Commenting as Guest | Register or Login

All comments are moderated and will be removed immediately if offensive.