The Final

The final game of what has been a great tournament for rugby, and an entertaining spectacle, will unexpectedly see current champions England take on South Africa, Stade de France, Paris 8pm kick-off – streaming video coverage online.. or an alternative view. They may have already met, and the Springboks demolished England in that game, but don’t expect a similar 36-0 scoreline. South Africa – who have won 4 of the last 5 games between the sides – haven’t been properly tested, but have creaked at times even when winning comfortably, while England have already produced two outstanding performances to progress to this final. From the official preview report – “Springboks captain John Smit best summed up the feeling in both camps when he said: “We haven’t come all this way for nothing.”” 1st Half 7mins in. And the first error. 12mins in. And Wilkinson equalises with a difficult penalty. 16mins in. A duel of the kickers so far as SA go ahead again. Half-time England 3 – 9 South Africa. Desperate defence from England holds out the Springboks. But they do come away with another penalty. 2nd Half 42mins in. Great break by England brings claims for a try. Video ref rules it out though. Penalty instead. 50mins in. Another penalty, for the Springboks. 61mins in. After sustained English pressure, Springboks get a penalty. England 6 – 15 South Africa Full-time It wasn’t a great game, or even a beautifully ugly game. In the end England lacked the ability to unlock the Springboks defence, with the possible exception of that disallowed try, but South Africa were content to soak up the pressure throughout the second half and, with their dominance in the line-out, they didn’t take any risks at opening the game up. Final Score: England 6 – 15 South Africa.

,

  • ahg

    For me it’s been a tournament of 2 halves. In the group stages we saw some wonderful running rugby, a couple of upsets and the game generally played and supported in the best possible sense.

    The knock out stages or the business end as I like to call has been slightly different. I think all the top sides have allowed the pressure to influence their games. This has resulted in almost every knock out game being an edgy, forward dominated, percentage game. Consequently, we have had a series of extremely close encounters, with games only being won by a handful of points. This is not necessarily a bad thing – all to often rugby matches are won with 20 mins to go. In particular, the 4 quarter finals were just nail biting!!

    I guess the exception have been the Boks, who apart from a 10 min dodgy spell Vs Fiji have looked reasonably comfortable in the knock out stages (although in my opinion the pumas failed to turn up for their SF).

    If SA can manage to establish a significant early lead they could well run out comfortable winners – say 8-15 points. However, if England can keep in touch, surely their confidence will grow, and more importantly, doubts will creep into the S African mindset.

    At this level, pressure is a great equaliser. S. AFrica are the better team by 20 points, but can they handle this situation? England have been here before, they are under less pressure and they have the match winners to do it. Maybe, just maybe…

  • It was Sammy Mc Nally what done it

    Roll Models

    With a report this week complaining that nearly a quarter of adults were now classed as clinically obese in Britain ( see link below – with pictured English supporter) the English rugby team have struck a blow for fatties everywhere with the plumpest XV in the world wrestling their way to a world final.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/dietfitness.html?in_article_id=301419&in_page_id=1798

    Overcoming various opponents blessed with far more skill and flair than themselves a spokesman for England explained their tactics by stating “they can’t score a try when one of our boys is lying on top of them”. Commenting on the semi final he argued that it was a tremendous game with the ball only visible for 10 of the 80 minutes – and claiming “I am confident we can reduce that still further”. He added that it was fitting for the English team to be playing so well in the Food Capital of the world and that the impact of England’s victory on the young back home could be seen already with the school canteens in England reporting stodge sales increasing dramatically.

    C’mon the BOK

  • Ben Levy

    Sammy, do you get a disability allowance with those chips on your shoulders?

    More importantly…

    Whoever wins, I can’t see either team going home humiliated. My heart says England by 2, my head says SA by 2.

    C’mon the heart!

  • Rory

    “England” take on “South Africa”? Hardly. Teams representing bourgeois public school England taking on representatives of rich white South Africa (albeit with support from elements of sell-out rich black South Africa) more like.

    Never mind, Sky TV are showing a good Rugby League game for the rest of England and the mighty Gunners unassailably stroll on in real England. While in real South Africa no one gives a hoot.

  • ahg

    Ben, I think if Sammy ate all those chips he’d have a chance of getting in the English front row!!

    ‘Gunners unassailably stroll on in real England. ‘ And how many real englishmen play for Arsenal? Not quite sure what you are on about Rory. As for Rugby league – are england not represented by Great Britain? Not sure if England even have a national rugby league side… League is a crackin game, but unfortunately restricted to GB, NZ and Oz. I’m sure you would agree, one of the greatest sporting spectacles must be State of Origin?
    Anyway, back to the burning question – can England do it????

  • patrique

    Argentina dominated S.Africa up front, created a lot, and played a lot better than last night, but got well beaten. Mind you, they were trying to score tries which led to interceptions and mistakes. England do not do tries, so should not suffer that fate.

    And I note Argentina are still classed as “Dagoes” and ignored. Agh says Ireland didn’t turn up to the finals. Losing to France and Argentina was always a cert, so I imagine Ireland did as well as expected. I said it six months ago after the Six Nations. Ireland would go out in the pool stage, and given a favourable draw, England would make the semis, despite being useless.

    They made the final, but I wasn’t counting on Barnes the referee.

  • dewi

    Don’t tempt fate Sammy. One thing guaranteed – an intense physical confrontation between big people. Next time can we play touch rugby? And where is Donnacha?

  • ahg

    ‘Losing to France and Argentina was always a cert, so I imagine Ireland did as well as expected.’

    you must be kidding me? Forget the french and puma games – did you watch the other two? Bloody hell mate, I’ve watched a fair bit of rugby, but never have I seen such pityful performances. I agree, losing against a mediocre french side and a very good argy side is no disgrace, but the performances against the group minnows has absolutely shocking!! Never seen anything like it… don’t start me….

    enjoy the final lads – see you in 2 hours!! I’ll stick me neck out and say SA by 8 points – but hope i’m wrong… enjoy!!

  • patrique

    Obviously you didn’t see the USA and England?

    The Boks have scored over 30 points in every match. Does anyone fancy Johnny kicking 11 penalties to overhaul that? He has a 60.07% success rate, so he would need 20 attempts to do so.

  • Frank Sinistra

    God, England know how to finish a great competition by killing the game. Is the final destined to be the most boring match of the tournament?

  • GavBelfast

    Southern Hemisphere Rules, OK.

    Not a great game so far, but incredibly tense, and tempo maybe upped a bit now, crowd has been quietish too – until now hopefully.

  • dewi

    Would have given that english try to be honest

  • ahg

    bit of a damp squib overall – once SA went 9 ahead it was all over. Not sure about the try dewi – very very hard one to call. If it had been given I think we would have seen a very exciting end to the game.
    Don’t think we can blame england for killing the game. Out of the 2 teams I would say, england played the more expansive rugby, but lacked any really quality to make an impact.
    Overall summary, best team won on the night, but a disapointing finish to a tremendous tournament.

  • Dewi

    Dissapointing right – like the soccer always is in the final. I think there are too many players on the pitch. when Rugby went professional in the North of England at the start of the last century they reduced the players. We should do that now.

  • Dewi

    disappointing sorry

  • Frank Sinistra

    No problem with the game itself and no need to radically alter the rules. This match was killed as a spectacle by the only tactics England could use in the hope of a win – killing the ball.

    It was a great competition, just a pity two of the least entertaining teams found a route to the final. Every single Argentinian running match was more enjoyable to watch than that yawn fest.

    Those Kiwis were right to sell their tickets and do something else.

  • patrique

    Yet another team decided to play England at their own game. Was it just to show they could?

    Pity Cueto, as all agreed in the end, just has a toe in touch before he lifts his foot. Stupid rule. The pity is S.Africa were playing with 14 men, as Tait’s great run showed that Montgomery was nobbled. If the non try had stood, Pienaar, who tortured England in Summer, would have come on, and S.Africa might have started to play their own game.

    At the end of the day England scored 32 points in their last three games, so S.Africa probably started the game thinking 12 points should win this. Overall, S.Africa scored 33 tries to England’s 12, and 278 points to England’s 140, so the better team undoubtedly won.Jonny Wilkinson miskicked away England’s only threatening move in the first half. It is somewhat ironic that S.Africa scored 6 points the first two times they got in to English territory, and another 3 with their first attack of the second half.

    And while arguing about Cueto, do not forget that England deliberately fouled the ball at the end of the first half to stop a certain try, and Moody should have been sin binned for his trip.

    Just a pity that 5 ref errors lost us New Zealand, and we might have had a great final.

  • It was Sammy Mc Nally what done it

    That was a shocker of a game, I have never seen so many Garryowens – I dont understand why neither team kicked to the corners – particulalry SA who had edge in lineout – any non rugby enthusiast watching that would probably not last the whole game – but thanks be to Jaysus for that result.

  • patrique

    BBC news Front Page has a great photo of the non try, clearly showing his foot on touch before grounding the ball.

    Not that the photo stopped some from complaining in the blog that goes with the photo.

  • George

    Disappointing final in that South Africa played the percentages. They knew England couldn’t beat them if they didn’t make any stupid mistakes so as long as they avoided an expansive game, the Cup was theirs. Hey, who can blame them.

    Patrique,
    “Stupid rule.”

    It’s as basic a rule as handball in soccer. If your foot is in touch, you are in touch.

    Or are you suggesting we instigate new rules which state that the rugby pitch isn’t the size we mark it out to be. Pray tell what would be the purpose of such a rule change?

  • patrique

    The important thing in all of the “football” sports should be the ball. If the ball is in play, I believe the game should continue.

    As the rule stands every line out is illegal as the player is in touch when he throws the ball. So rugby, once the ball goes out the first time, the rest of the game should be an endless repeat of the first line out. Until half time anyway. Repeat the procedure in the second half.

    That’s what I mean by a stupid rule.

  • George

    Patrique,
    “If the ball is in play, I believe the game should continue.”

    That’s a lot easier to figure out when you are playing the ball with your foot rather than holding it in your hands.

    Ask the NFL for example, who also use the same rules as rugby on this issue.

    “As the rule stands every line out is illegal as the player is in touch when he throws the ball.”

    Not so as evidenced by the tens of thousands of rugby games that took place around the globe this weekend.

    Unless of course you happen to live in another universe, somewhere where rugby isn’t played.

  • George

    Also, Patrique, on a line-out the ball is only in play if it travels five metres from the touch line. In other words, it is only in play when it crosses this point.

  • Mick Fealty

    Rory, you should get out of London more often.

  • patrique

    It doesn’t matter if the ball travels 50 metres from the line out throw, the hooker is in touch. The ball doesn’t matter remember.

    And I do not know much about NFL but in Gaelic football, where hands are used, the ball is what counts, as to whether it is in touch or not.

    So, I still think it is a stupid rule.

  • ahg

    well patrique, with all that gash you’ve spouted I’m not sure we really care about ur take on the rules. If we take your argument, New Zealand should have won the RWC. They scored over 300 points and by your logic are the worthy winners of the competition!!

    George: u have it spot on. SA played England pretty much at their own game: low risk, forward dominated percentage rugby. Ultimately they won for 3 reasons:
    – when under pressure SA could clear their lines with the big boots of James, Stein and Percy. Wilko struggled to gain territory for england.
    – SAs lineout reigned supreme – hugely impressive
    – England gave away penalties in key areas, whilst SA maintained discipline and had confidence in their defence.

    In my opinion, the try or no try, was a 50-50 call, could be argued either way. Correct me if I am wrong but I THINK the benefit is meant to be given to the attacking team? It’s a shame the try had not been given – it would have made for an epic second half, however, I’m confident SA would still have edged it.

    As it was, I don’t think it will be a final that will be remembered for long. What will the competition be remembered for?

    – Ireland’s failure to turn up
    – Fiji’s majestic performance over Wales (sorry dewi)
    – France, yet again overturning the All Blacks
    – Argentina arriving at the world stage and claiming a place at the table of the world’s elite
    – England coming from nowhere to reach the final
    – The full stadiums and tremendous atmosphere instilled by the french nation?

  • ahg

    one other point – have SA actually beaten anyone of note in this RWC? Fair enough they can only play what is in front of them, but they managed to avoid France, NZ and Oz!!

  • Rory

    “Rory, you should get out of London more often.”

    Mick,

    “He who tires of London tires of life.” – Dr Johnson

  • Ossa

    Talksport have a Rugby programme in their troublesome 8 to 10 pm slot tonight.

    Might be worth a listen.

  • dewi

    Therapy has worked – Jake White next Welsh coach ?

  • patrique

    Yet another team decided to play England at their own game. Was it just to show they could?

    Pity Cueto, as all agreed in the end, just has a toe in touch before he lifts his foot. Stupid rule. The pity is S.Africa were playing with 14 men, as Tait’s great run showed that Montgomery was nobbled. If the non try had stood, Pienaar, who tortured England in Summer, would have come on, and S.Africa might have started to play their own game.

    The above was my original post, recently plagarised by Agh who claims to disagree with me, despite saying the exact same thing.

    And yes, New Zealand are the best team in the world, by the proverbial mile.

    And S./Africa beat Argentina, who are a far better team that Australia. If England can beat Australia by destroying their non existent scrum, imagine what Argentina would do.

    However all of your posts Agh, simply suggest that Argentina are “Dagoes” and therefore should be ignored, despite twice destroying the European champions, who are the best side in Europe, and who were playing at home. If it is not racism which colours your judgement, it must be ultra conservatism.

  • patrique

    And never forget, that the Australian Rugby League team, a real sport, would beat the pick of the union sides by about 40 points, 50 if they played their first team.

  • patrique

    By the way Agh, the non try was not 50/50. the BBC news photo clearly shows his wee toe on the touch line before the ball is grounded, so it is 100% not a try.

    I blame the manager. If he had picked a winger with size 5 feet it would have been a try.And you have convinced me, any rule which encourages wingers with small feet is to encouraged.

  • dewi

    Jonathan in Indie says play with thirteen on each side….remind you of anything?

  • ahg

    Oh dear, somehow has thrown his rattle out of the pram…

    Where do I start?
    – all this about team x beating team y, means x s better that z is a load of twat. N Ireland have recently beaten England, Sweden and Spain – by your strategy, N Ireland would be ranked amongst Europe’s finest!! Perhaps you are Nigel Worthington in disguise?
    – ‘However all of your posts Agh, simply suggest that Argentina are “Dagoes” and therefore should be ignored,’
    Have you read any of my argentina related posts? I think not… I merely stated that the pumas underperformed massively by their own high standards in the semi finals. Consequently SA had a relatively easy route to the final. Not sure how that constitutes racism? Enlighten me please. In fact if you took the bother to read y post you would know that 1 of my personal highlights was:
    ‘Argentina arriving at the world stage and claiming a place at the table of the world’s elite ‘

    – ‘And never forget, that the Australian Rugby League team, a real sport, would beat the pick of the union sides by about 40 points, 50 if they played their first team. ‘
    I think this sums up not only your knowledge of rugby union but also sport in general. It is a laughable post to say the least. i would love to know what ur definition of a ‘real sport’ is???? You should share it with the rest of us?

    – ‘By the way Agh, the non try was not 50/50. the BBC news photo clearly shows his wee toe on the touch line before the ball is grounded, so it is 100% not a try. ‘

    Fair enough. I qualified by statement by saying that in my opinion I thought it was a 50-50 call. I have not seen the still frame and I dobt the ref did last night. Ultimately, it sounds as though the ref got the decision right.

  • British

    Fairly tense game. Well done to RSA, I think they were the best team throughout, and are worthy winners.
    2nd place went to the most tenacious team, and I’m content it didnt turn into another hammering.

  • patrique

    Hurling. That is a real sport.

    As for “Argentina arriving” at the top table, they were ranked number 5 in the World before the tournament. So could anyone explain how England,, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, maybe Italy, were seeded above them in the draw? You see, the beauty of “knowing little about sport” is that it gives you a tremendous advantage over know alls in that you actually follow the sports. New Zealand Rugby League team is regarded as a better side thatn the All Blacks. Their last game? New Zealand 0 – 58 Australia.Take a look at the great Number 10s in current union, Larkham, Hernandez, Carter, and even Hook, (Wilkinson if you are into attrition but the others if you like football) and compare them to say Wally Lewis. Even Carter pales in comparison, and bar Barry John, he is as good as I have seen in union.

    And Agh, you said S.Africa had avoided all the big teams. To quote “No All Blacks, France or Oz”. That ignores Argentina. You may have addressed Argentina later, but you do not regard them as a “big” team.That is either racist or stupid. Take your choice.

  • patrique

    N Ireland have recently beaten England, Sweden and Spain – by your strategy, N Ireland would be ranked amongst Europe’s finest!! posted by Agh.

    I grant you that Spain have won the European championship, beating N.Ireland on the way by 1-0 at Windsor in the pouring rain, but that was back in 1964. The Windsor game was late 1963. Spain haven’t done much since. What have Sweden and England ever done in said championship? England, under the superb management of Sven managed to get to a couple of quarter finals, an over achievement. So beating mediocre teams with little pedigree does not make N.Ireland great. Bit like beating Georgia and Namibia at rugby.

  • George

    Patrique,
    “It doesn’t matter if the ball travels 50 metres from the line out throw, the hooker is in touch. The ball doesn’t matter remember.”

    Actually it does. The ball has to be in play. It might as well be in the dressing room as in the hooker’s hands as it is not in play. It is only in play once it travels the requisite five metres.

  • patrique

    But Agh says if your foot is in touch, the ball is out.

  • againstthehead

    ‘New Zealand Rugby League team is regarded as a better side thatn the All Blacks.’

    By who? Please provide some evidence apart from your own rantings!! As yet u have not defined a real sport – perhaps you should sit on the london olympic commitee and sort those ‘games’ out!!

    So could anyone explain how England,, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, maybe Italy, were seeded above them in the draw?

    The draw was made months if not years ago, probably based on the results from the last RWC. Unlike you the organisers did not posess a crystal ball and weren’t able to predict the superb performances by the pumas.

    ‘But Agh says if your foot is in touch, the ball is out.’
    Depends in the context. For example, if you are not holding the ball, then you’re not in touch, and also in the case of the lineouts…

    Unfortunately when a major tournament comes along we always get a few half wits pontificating about something they know little or nothing about. I look forward to hear more wonderful stories of league… I see Andy Farrell is yet to make his mark on union? Oh, he’s not australian… Sailor – now he is one of the great union players… lol

  • Gréagóir O’ Frainclín

    Hard luck on old England the past few days regarding sport. They were self assured of victories in the Euro soccer and F1 Grand Prix and held off SA well for long enough in the rugby. A few more drop kick attempts from Wilkinson toward the end of the game, as they do, and had the disputed ‘try’ been given the outcome may have been different. Horrble rugby to watch, when compared to the skill and flair of the Argies, but I suppose a win is a win and if it gets you to a final, you can’t complain. Italy won the last soccer world cup with such negative defensive football.

  • Dewi

    Excellent coverage on Slugger. Well done to all….Patrique, the only species of human more admirable than a geek is a pedant ! Love it…Did you know that you can score a try by touching the ball at the base of a post ?

  • patrique

    Mein Gott, never in the history of mankind has so little intelligence been held by so few.

    There are actually people who are arguing about my ridiculous nonsense about line outs and being in touch. I thought only Septic Tanks were that gullable.

    As for those with trouble reading, if you look up about or 5 posts, you will note I have defined “real sport”. I repeat, Hurling, much better than these wimpish rugby types, especially union.

    Andy Farrell, probably the best English player now that Robinson (Wigan) has retired, has been injured for two years, and no-one in union was wise enough to know where to play him. Better however to take a look at the backs coaches at the world cup, you will note most of them are ex league players, that’s why the tackling and defences have got better.

    As for overlooking Argentina because the draw was made years ago, it must be many years, obviously before 1999 when said Argentina beat Ireland.

    But as someone once said when explaining the difference between league and union “two less idiots”.

  • patrique

    Just noticed someone attacking my beloved Italian soccer team, must have scored all those goals in the world cup from their own penalty area, although it must have been the keeper, because most of the rest were displaying attacking football at its best, especially against Germany, and France, until the French began to head butt them.

    Sailor? League reject, and cocaine and union do not appear to mix. Mind you, he still managed to appear in a world cup final at that sport.

  • agh

    sums my points up quite nicely:
    http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugbyworldcup/article3088122.ece

    ‘As for those with trouble reading, if you look up about or 5 posts, you will note I have defined “real sport”. I repeat, Hurling, much better than these wimpish rugby types, especially union.’
    I think you need to define the word define!!! An example is not a definition!!! DOH!!!!!!!!

    ‘Andy Farrell, probably the best English player now that Robinson (Wigan) has retired,’
    Based on what exactly? Amount of time lying on his ass as people run past him? Robinson was good, I grant you that, but no better than O’Driscol and Mortlock.

    Sailor? League reject, and cocaine and union do not appear to mix. Mind you, he still managed to appear in a world cup final at that sport.
    Jimmy Treore (spelt wrong i know…) won a champions league medal – doesn’t mean he was\is a decent footballer!!

  • patrique

    O’Driscoll and Mortlock are not English, to the best of my apparent limited knowledge of rugby.

  • agh

    ‘O’Driscoll and Mortlock are not English, to the best of my apparent limited knowledge of rugby. ‘

    did I say they were? I merely highlighted them as examples of world class players, who in my opinion, are considerably better all round players than Jason Robinson.

    ‘But as someone once said when explaining the difference between league and union “two less idiots”.’
    but you said league was a real sport? How can the teams contain 13 idiots?

    In terms of excitement these is a lot to be said for league. From the games I’ve watched would say there are less ‘boring’ league games than union. Not because the players are anymore skillful, but rather the nature of the game itself lends itself to regular scores and it is much less field position orientated. Union is significantly more varied, with specialised positions, set pieces, more planned moves etc etc. I guess it is down to ones own preferences, but to suggest that union is not a ‘real game’ is idiotic to say the least. In fact you seem quite engrossed by Rugby Union considering the number of posts you have submitted to this thread!!

  • patrique

    I can think of hundreds of better union players than Robinson, and better than O’Driscoll and Mortlock. I mentioned that Robinson has been hailed as England’s star player, and you came back with the other two.Now Robinson may have been a hero and star with England, but was a run of the mill with Wigan, a club side, when compared to Farrell, Shaun Edwards (Wasps coach) and the immortal Brett Kenny.

    RU is beginning to resemble league before the six man tackle rule was introduced, if you watch a good side. I mean New Zealand can get to phase 12 or 13 ball, just like the league restart. Ireland don’t seem to be able to get past 2nd phase. God knows how come it is years since they lost to England.

    I tend to know an awful lot about most sports, from Baseball to Hurling, badminton to crown green bowls. The exception being horse racing.

  • agh

    ‘I can think of hundreds of better union players than Robinson, and better than O’Driscoll and Mortlock.’
    hundreds better than BOD and mortlock? go for it? In fact, name 10? It’s very hard to compare different generations though – particuarly since the game went pro.

    ‘Ireland don’t seem to be able to get past 2nd phase. ‘
    in fairness this is a recent phenomena. Ireland beat Oz and SA around this time last year. We just had a MASSIVE dip in form/confidence at the worst possible time.

    ‘I tend to know an awful lot about most sports, from Baseball to Hurling, badminton to crown green bowls. The exception being horse racing. ‘
    I know evrything about everyting…

  • Dewi

    Now about Green bowls……

  • patrique

    Blanc, Williams, Gibson, John, Carter, Hernandez, Ward, Davies, Larkham, Farrell………….

  • dewi

    Farrell? Surely not.

  • againstthehead

    Is that Andy Ward? lol. Naw, i wouldn’t put any of those players above Mortlock and BOD. As well as talking ability on the ball, take account of defence and counter rucking.

  • agh

    I forgot about this prediction of yours:
    ‘South Africa to win a close game tomorrow, something like 44-3.

    They are 10/11 seven points down, 7/4 for England not to score a try (a banker), 9/1 for Montgomery to be man of the match, and 9/4 for less than 38 points. All good bets, or how about 100/1 for a repeat 36-0?

    Posted by patrique on Oct 20, 2007 @ 02:18 AM’

    well I guess u were correct about no try for england, although at least they crossed it (kind of…).

  • patrique

    They are 10/11 seven points down, 7/4 for England not to score a try (a banker), 9/1 for Montgomery to be man of the match, and 9/4 for less than 38 points.

    The first one came up. As did the second, an absolute banker. Montgomery only played 35 minutes, then got injured, and there were less than 38 points. Three out of four is reasonable, in a £5 yankee.

    Obviously Dewi, the “Farrell” was tongue in cheek. Have you Americans no sense of humour?

  • Dewi

    Americans ? – no worries – just let me know your 6 nations forecast closer to the time……

  • patrique

    France to win it, Ireland 2nd. England as dark horses if they start to use the youngsters, and start to play rugby. As the bloke wrote in the paper yesterday “Only RU could have turned a great attacking runner with the ball, into another aimless kicker” He was talking about Robinson.