Very hard to be objective on this one currently. There will be a massive roadshow here now, and there is the slight matter of a new coach and some player exodus to deal with but the signs of a dominant legacy similar to ABs in the early 2010s building are there.
Last november the springboks lost close games to Ireland in Ireland, and France in France - would easily have been world #1 with those victories (so maybe some false confidence from up north?) Boks most definitely did not get the rub of the green there, and Rassie put very mild tweets about this on twitter - and got banned*. They seem to have worked out a better way to deal with referees going forward, so maybe it wasn't not a conspiracy after all. Kolisi has matured into an incredible captain, he appears to have
Innovation seems to be a key. 4 scrumhalves in the WC squad and 7-1 bench come from bizzaroland but it's hard to pick an issue when you get the trophy.
Crucial injuries to Pollard meant working with Libbok at a very late stage in the 4 yr cycle, and the gameplan could shift.
Crucial injury to Marx during the tournament meant a bizarre high risk strategy with only one recognised hooker in the squad. They pulled it off somehow, Fourie managed a full game at hooker in a WC final (having last played the position in 2017) was a huge risk.
Back to the original topic.
QTR final - B O'k gets critiscised by DuPont in the official press conference. No real issue that he can bring up though. No ban or even talk of repercussions for the king? Are captains allowed to complain about the ref now?
Semi - B O'K gets torn apart by uk media, pundits and fans for one crucial decision. Genge knee was on the ground first, why is this even a debate?
Final - the Cane/Kolisi RC/YC debate will be polarised till kingdom come, but the bunker made the big call there. Not sure what other big ref calls cost the game, so I think WB will not get anything like the 2007 treatment from the Kiwis (or the 2022 from the boks).
Cause and effect - what does having a hooker bring to the game?
With the total acceptance of the blatant squint throw in to the scrum, the hooker is not a hooker.
So Fourie was in effect the 4th back row and produced a game around the park that matched that observation.
After nearly 50 years of watching, playing, refereeing rugby union I have never seen such an unispiring set of matches as some of those turned out in this year's RWC. I found the final contrary to all perceived comments to be dour and wholly lacking in anything close to the principles of the game:
Object
The game’s objective is to score as many points as possible against an opposing team by carrying, passing, kicking and grounding the ball, according to the laws of the game, its sporting spirit and fair play.
Teams persistently kicking possession away because they want the opponents to make a mistake rather than trusting in their own skills and abilities. Those same skills and abilities eroded by continuously ignoring the laws of the game. The most exciting players within the world game being ignored by playing to game plans that demonstrate only fear of failure not the joy of ambition or desire to entertain.
And when this occurs the few crucial decisions, that might allow or disallow critical scores, are viewed at best as injustice and at worst referee
bias.
Rassie discussed taking ownership, keeping the referees on side and not allowing those marginal decisions to affect the outcome, did that happen? No. But the PR campaign worked and we see yet again SA deliberately killing the games through negative play that then forces other teams to a negative game as well.
I don't really have any thought generally about Sexton but feel his appeal to BOK was an observation could be applied to the subsequent games with BOK and others,
coaching SA out of penalties.
All coupled with the totally unbelievable lack of a red card and subsequent sanction for any significant player that would have lead to modified behaviours. The 2 ends of the spectrum being Curry Red for player landing on him, Kriel not even looked at!
Perhaps that perspective of protecting the product has gone too far!
To paraphrase: for me, it's just not rugby!
