South Africa vs Samoa - Match preview and match thread.

[Biltong]

First topic message reminder :

Date:30 September 2011
Stadium: North Harbour Stadium, Auckland
Referee: Nigel Owens (Wales)

South Africa
15 Pat Lambie – 9 caps, 2 RWC caps
14 JP Pietersen – 40, 9, RWC tries 4
13 Jaque Fourie – 67, 13, RWC tries 9
12 Frans Steyn – 46, 10, RWC tries 4
11 Bryan Habana – 72, 9, RWC tries 9
10 Morné Steyn – 32, 3, RWC tries 2
9 Fourie du Preez – 60, 9, RWC tries 2
8 Pierre Spies – 45, 3
7 Schalk Burger – 66, 11, RWC tries 2
6 Heinrich Brüssow – 18, 3
5 Victor Matfield – 108, 12
4 Danie Rossouw – 61, 13, RWC tries 6
3 Jannie du Plessis – 28, 4
2 Bismarck du Plessis – 40, 7
1 Tendai Mtawarira – 31, 3, RWC tries 1

Replacements
16 John Smit – 109, 15, RWC tries 1
17 Gurthrö Steenkamp – 36, 5, RWC tries 1
18 CJ van der Linde – 73, 7, RWC tries 1
19 Willem Alberts – 7, 3
20 Francois Louw – 9, 2
21 Francois Hougaard – 13, 3, RWC tries 3
22 Jean de Villiers – 70, 2

Samoa.
15 Paul Williams – 10, 3, RWC tries 1
14 David Lemi – 29, 4
13 Seilala Mapusua – 29, 6
12 Eliota Fuimaono Sapolu – 22, 6
11 Alesana Tuilagi – 26, 7, RWC tries 4
10 Tusi Pisi - 8, 2
9 Kahn Fotuali’i – 8, 3, RWC tries 2
8 George Stowers – 23, 3, RWC tries 1
7 Maurie Faasavalu – 13, 3, RWC tries 2
6 Taiasina Tuifua – 5, 2
5 Kane Thompson – 21, 7, RWC tries 1
4 Daniel Leo – 32, 6
3 Census Johnston – 36, 7
2 Mahonri Schwalger (c) - 41, 10
1 Sakaria Taulafo – 13, 3

Replacements:
16 Ole Avei - 2
17 Anthony Perenise – 13, 3, RWC tries 1
18 Logovi’i Mulipola - 5
19 Ofisa Treviranus – 18, 2
20 Filipo Lavea Levi – 30, 1
21 Junior Poluleuligaga – 21, 5, RWC tries 1
22 George Pisi – 10, 3

Head to head.
Test Caps match day 22: South Africa 1040 – Samoa 413
World cup Caps match day 22: South Africa 148 – Samoa 86
Squad RWC tries: South Africa 45 – Samoa 13
Total tests played wins: South Africa 6 - Samoa 0
Tries scored: South Africa 44 – Samoa 9
Points for: South Africa 316 –Samoa 65
Average score per match: South Africa 53 – Samoa 11

This world cup.
Points scored: South Africa 153 – Samoa 86
Tries scored: South Africa 20 – Samoa 9
Points conceded: south Africa 19 - Samoa 36
Tries conceded: South Africa 1 – Samoa 4
Penalties conceded: South Africa 23 – Samoa 33
Yellow cards: South Africa 0 – Samoa 1

South Africa
South Africa will go into the match as the favourites wanting to ensure they keep dominating the tight exchanges and the breakdown area, they will basically try to ensure execution is as near to perfect as possible and use the as preparation for Australia, expect them to kick for territory and once in control with some points on the board to unleash their backs.

Samoa
Well they will be up for the challenge no doubt, I am concerned with the fact that they have seemed to lose some flair which is akin to the way they play the game. Their performance against Fiji seemed much better structured but less passionate than usual. Tough task ahead of them.

My prediction South Africa by 25 points.

[GavinDragon]

If european clubs had a problem with releasing their samoan players annually couldnt/wouldnt samoan players go and play in the s15?

[rodders]

Wales may still have to beat Ireland rodders

I think they Will Billy, if we get past Italy. There's a composure and confidence around the Welsh camp that we don't have. No provincial nonsence or odd selection descisions. No egos or reputations. They are on an upward curve and we aren't.

They've more depth in the front row than we do as well and I think that will be key if we get past Italy.

I think they'll beat us and either England or France in the SF. Certainly on current form I've no doubt they are the best side in our side of the draw and by a distance too.

[chewed_mintie]

Gavin – in NZ there are limits. It’s a pretty stupid law but even if you are born in NZ as soon as you declare for another country you are deemed foreign and there are limits on foreign players playing for NZ franchises. Think it is capped at 2 foreigners per team from 2011 onwards (though I don’t think anyone took this up – apart from Crusaders and Fotu’ali)

Having the 15 NZ born players back in NZ would mean 15 less spots for NZ qualified players. In terms of the club v central control argument of yesterday’s discussion, it is definitely one thing we have over the club-centric system of the NH.

[Islingtonv2]

I too think samoa should be given a crack in an extended 5 nations, they have a lot of players in their squad from NZ, 15 in total, that is almost a B team, and they will give Argentina some serious go.

Samoa also have probably one of the top 5 halfbacks in the world, and I expect him to be the No 1 in the next couple of years - staggering in fact that as a NZ born player, he chose Samoa over NZ but there we go....

Simple truth is that Samoa would need to pull together it’s top players together for a SH tournie whilst the back leg of the NH season is still going on. And they wouldn’t be available until well into the next season.

On another thread I pointed out the growing trend of NH clubs to turn around and say, “go to the WC, but don’t expect us to renew when your contract is up”. The result, a fair few players have put club ahead of country this time around. This scenario pops up every four years, imagine what the clubs would do when faced with this every year, there’d only be 1 yr contracts I bet.

Well if it wasn't for the NH clubs most of these players wouldn't be professionals at all getting paid to play a sport they love. Also if a player is good enough he's going to get a contract in the NH regardless of the fact that he may miss chunks of the season to play in an extended SH tournament. The terms may not be so lucrative but then that would be the players choice whether to accept less money and still play for his country.

[chewed_mintie]

I too think samoa should be given a crack in an extended 5 nations, they have a lot of players in their squad from NZ, 15 in total, that is almost a B team, and they will give Argentina some serious go.

Samoa also have probably one of the top 5 halfbacks in the world, and I expect him to be the No 1 in the next couple of years - staggering in fact that as a NZ born player, he chose Samoa over NZ but there we go....

Simple truth is that Samoa would need to pull together it’s top players together for a SH tournie whilst the back leg of the NH season is still going on. And they wouldn’t be available until well into the next season.

On another thread I pointed out the growing trend of NH clubs to turn around and say, “go to the WC, but don’t expect us to renew when your contract is up”. The result, a fair few players have put club ahead of country this time around. This scenario pops up every four years, imagine what the clubs would do when faced with this every year, there’d only be 1 yr contracts I bet.

Well if it wasn't for the NH clubs most of these players wouldn't be professionals at all getting paid to play a sport they love. Also if a player is good enough he's going to get a contract in the NH regardless of the fact that he may miss chunks of the season to play in an extended SH tournament. The terms may not be so lucrative but then that would be the players choice whether to accept less money and still play for his country.

Islington - I know, you can't deny the simple economics from the club's point of view. The players are club assets at the end of the day.

Looks like rugby is heading the way of football sadly....

[GavinDragon]

from what point in the year do the SH sides come together to prepare for the tri nations?

[Guest]

I too think samoa should be given a crack in an extended 5 nations, they have a lot of players in their squad from NZ, 15 in total, that is almost a B team, and they will give Argentina some serious go.

Samoa also have probably one of the top 5 halfbacks in the world, and I expect him to be the No 1 in the next couple of years - staggering in fact that as a NZ born player, he chose Samoa over NZ but there we go....

Simple truth is that Samoa would need to pull together it’s top players together for a SH tournie whilst the back leg of the NH season is still going on. And they wouldn’t be available until well into the next season.

On another thread I pointed out the growing trend of NH clubs to turn around and say, “go to the WC, but don’t expect us to renew when your contract is up”. The result, a fair few players have put club ahead of country this time around. This scenario pops up every four years, imagine what the clubs would do when faced with this every year, there’d only be 1 yr contracts I bet.

Well if it wasn't for the NH clubs most of these players wouldn't be professionals at all getting paid to play a sport they love. Also if a player is good enough he's going to get a contract in the NH regardless of the fact that he may miss chunks of the season to play in an extended SH tournament. The terms may not be so lucrative but then that would be the players choice whether to accept less money and still play for his country.

Islington - I know, you can't deny the simple economics from the club's point of view. The players are club assets at the end of the day.

Looks like rugby is heading the way of football sadly....

Really??? I haven't heard of this happening. In fact, all of the NH based Samoan players are returnign to their contracts aren't they? The only players I've heard turnign down the chance to play in the WC were Nacewa for Fiji and he said that was for family reasons, plus I think another Fiji player did the same for family reasons too.

Who has been told they would lose their contract???

[Biltong]

from what point in the year do the SH sides come together to prepare for the tri nations?

As early as June for the winter tours, but next year it all chnges, probaly late july

[Islingtonv2]

I too think samoa should be given a crack in an extended 5 nations, they have a lot of players in their squad from NZ, 15 in total, that is almost a B team, and they will give Argentina some serious go.

Samoa also have probably one of the top 5 halfbacks in the world, and I expect him to be the No 1 in the next couple of years - staggering in fact that as a NZ born player, he chose Samoa over NZ but there we go....

Simple truth is that Samoa would need to pull together it’s top players together for a SH tournie whilst the back leg of the NH season is still going on. And they wouldn’t be available until well into the next season.

On another thread I pointed out the growing trend of NH clubs to turn around and say, “go to the WC, but don’t expect us to renew when your contract is up”. The result, a fair few players have put club ahead of country this time around. This scenario pops up every four years, imagine what the clubs would do when faced with this every year, there’d only be 1 yr contracts I bet.

Well if it wasn't for the NH clubs most of these players wouldn't be professionals at all getting paid to play a sport they love. Also if a player is good enough he's going to get a contract in the NH regardless of the fact that he may miss chunks of the season to play in an extended SH tournament. The terms may not be so lucrative but then that would be the players choice whether to accept less money and still play for his country.

Islington - I know, you can't deny the simple economics from the club's point of view. The players are club assets at the end of the day.

Looks like rugby is heading the way of football sadly....

The problem in Football is that international football is not prestigous because it is of lower quality than the club game, that and the scheduling gives no prominence to international breaks and tournaments. Rugby suffers neither of those problems. Regarding players choosing club over country - i know of no high profile examples of this occuring. Also in England, the EPS agreement garantees English players are made available by the clubs to the national team and foreign players are protected by the IRB international windows which force clubs to make players available at certain times of the year.

The IRB has to be proactive in ensuring the International game remains the pinnacle and for sure professional rugby is still evolving since it is only 15 years old but i am maybe more optimistic than you are that a good balance will be found.

[Knowsit17]

Samoa will be gutted to have come away with nothing. The 2nd half belonged to them and a LBP is the least their efforts deserved. Still, the game is not won on merit.

[TheGreyGhost]

Samoa have really impressed in this RWC.

They've taken the traditional strengths of the Samoan game, and bolted on some pragmatism, highly professional defensive organisation, a kicking game, something approaching set piece solidity and have a 9/10 combination to rival anything in the world.

Immensely proud of Samoa and devastated to see them go out so soon, albeit congratulations to South Africa for grinding out a difficult victory with composure.

With a fairer draw I think Samoa would have qualified from this group. And I think they would have qualified from any other group even with the compressed schedule.

I think everyone saw Owens' performance today, so I'll avoid my usual anti-ref rant.

South Africa sure will take some stopping.

[Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler]

I didnt see the game but having read about it and seen teh stats it looks liek Samoa thrashed the Boks in every deaprtment excpet the one that counts, the score.
Its hard to say what this means for SA...pushed close by two sides ranked way below them a sign of weakeness or a sign of true grit that they won two games they could easily have lost?

Samoa certainly derve more plaudits for their performances than the patronising guff spoken about Namibia.

[lostinwales]

Would it be an idea if in NZ there was the equivalent to the London Scottish/Welsh/Irish teams for PI nations where they could be more flexible about qualification?

[chewed_mintie]

Would it be an idea if in NZ there was the equivalent to the London Scottish/Welsh/Irish teams for PI nations where they could be more flexible about qualification?

funded by?

[Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler]

GG ... on the subject of refs Owens is still topping the poll of best perfromces from his perrs on rugbyrefs.com, Lawrence ...still bottom.
Youre mate Barnes is fourth depsite the controversy last week.

[Biltong]

I didnt see the game but having read about it and seen teh stats it looks liek Samoa thrashed the Boks in every deaprtment excpet the one that counts, the score.
Its hard to say what this means for SA...pushed close by two sides ranked way below them a sign of weakeness or a sign of true grit that they won two games they could easily have lost?

Samoa certainly derve more plaudits for their performances than the patronising guff spoken about Namibia.

Peter i don't think we were ever in danger of losing this match, the samoans were under the cosh in the first half and started gaining parity in the second half with their forwards.

We do have things to go work on tough. Our defensive lines went out of wack in the second half, Fouie and Habana was breaking the defensive line terribly badly and i am sure will be taken to task for that.

Our forwards allowed samoa to rattle them with off the ball niggles and they fell for it, rather now than later on.

Just one note, samoa would have given any team a rattle today. they were up for this no doubt.

[iso]

With a fairer draw I think Samoa would have qualified from this group.

Would could ifs buts auntie balls uncle.

[Knowsit17]

"I didnt see the game but having read about it and seen teh stats it looks liek Samoa thrashed the Boks in every deaprtment excpet the one that counts, the score."

Two different halves, SA clearly a level above at first but Samoa gave them a good battering on the tail end. Decisive contast being the Boks knew their way around the scoreboard better but that's hardly to say they were bested in every area.

biltong though, I think it's harsh to say SA never looked like losing. They were getting knocked backwards at will during periods of the 2nd half and only a knock-on seemed to deny Samoa a second try which would have made things very interesting indeed.

[Dominic Dicoco]

Agree with that Biltongbek. Samoa are a very good team and will give anyone a game. They have recently beaten Austrailia and pushed Wales and South Africa very close. If they can keep this up, they will be up there in the rankings.

I wasn't able to watch the full game but it seems as if Owens has taken a lot of stick for his refereeing. He seemed to control the game very well to me.

[Bullsbok]

"I didnt see the game but having read about it and seen teh stats it looks liek Samoa thrashed the Boks in every deaprtment excpet the one that counts, the score."

Two different halves, SA clearly a level above at first but Samoa gave them a good battering on the tail end. Decisive contast being the Boks knew their way around the scoreboard better but that's hardly to say they were bested in every area.

biltong though, I think it's harsh to say SA never looked like losing. They were getting knocked backwards at will during periods of the 2nd half and only a knock-on seemed to deny Samoa a second try which would have made things very interesting indeed.

I have to agree with Biltong here , i thought the Samoans would score the second try but i knew they couldnt score twice in 10min no offence to their fans. Despite dominating for pretty much the entire second half they only put 5 on the board and the Boks despite being seriously rattled never looked like breaking

[Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler]

I guess one things for sure then, the Boks can happily deal with teams in posession all day long and not conceed. They kept their shape and tackled teh hell out of Wales too.

[Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler]

With regard to the draw and Samoa...they were a 4th pot team. It wouldve been hard for them to get an easy group. In theory they could have pulled NZ, England, Scotland to qualify against....although perhaps Argentina Wales Fiji wouldve been a bit easier for them.

[RubyGuby]

I think Samoa would have topped the England Scotland Argentina group quite easily on the RWC evidence to date. Its a shame such a powerful and exciting team are out

[TheGreyGhost]

I guess one things for sure then, the Boks can happily deal with teams in posession all day long and not conceed. They kept their shape and tackled teh hell out of Wales too.

Yes, but will they be able to back that up with the same against Australia, then NZ, and then a final?

[Comfort]

I didnt see the game but having read about it and seen teh stats it looks liek Samoa thrashed the Boks in every deaprtment excpet the one that counts, the score.
Its hard to say what this means for SA...pushed close by two sides ranked way below them a sign of weakeness or a sign of true grit that they won two games they could easily have lost?

Samoa certainly derve more plaudits for their performances than the patronising guff spoken about Namibia.

Peter i don't think we were ever in danger of losing this match, the samoans were under the cosh in the first half and started gaining parity in the second half with their forwards.

We do have things to go work on tough. Our defensive lines went out of wack in the second half, Fouie and Habana was breaking the defensive line terribly badly and i am sure will be taken to task for that.

Our forwards allowed samoa to rattle them with off the ball niggles and they fell for it, rather now than later on.

Just one note, samoa would have given any team a rattle today. they were up for this no doubt.

They gave Wales a rattle a couple of weeks ago. This Samoan team is one that needs to be taken seriously by every side in the world.

Frankly, if their progress continues they could be a very scary prospect for everyone.

[hawalsh]

Man, Samoa have gone toe to toe with the current world champs and but for the absence of Pisi would probably have knocked out the Welsh. Why are we welcoming the Pumas to the 3N before Samoa?

How would they 'probably have knocked out the Welsh'? We're yet to play Fiji. A win of any sort against Fiji will probably see us through, even if Samoa had beaten South Africa (without a 4 try bonus point), as we have a much better points difference. Please explain.

He was referring to the Samoa v Wales match, that they could well have given Wales their second loss if they had had more than a 4 day turn around allowing them to be more rested and not had the late pull out of their chief playmaker Pisi because he only had a few days to recover from his injury.

With only 5 days since their last match, they looked stronger in the final quarter today compared to against Wales. God knows what they could have achieved in this tournament if they were afforded a full week or 8 days between games like the more affluent teams.

[Cymroglan]

And Pisi could have had a nightmare game against Wales it's all if's and buts.

[Glas a du]

If Andy Haden wasn't such a cheat...

[Gatts]

Man, Samoa have gone toe to toe with the current world champs and but for the absence of Pisi would probably have knocked out the Welsh. Why are we welcoming the Pumas to the 3N before Samoa?

How would they 'probably have knocked out the Welsh'? We're yet to play Fiji. A win of any sort against Fiji will probably see us through, even if Samoa had beaten South Africa (without a 4 try bonus point), as we have a much better points difference. Please explain.

He was referring to the Samoa v Wales match, that they could well have given Wales their second loss if they had had more than a 4 day turn around allowing them to be more rested and not had the late pull out of their chief playmaker Pisi because he only had a few days to recover from his injury.

With only 5 days since their last match, they looked stronger in the final quarter today compared to against Wales. God knows what they could have achieved in this tournament if they were afforded a full week or 8 days between games like the more affluent teams.

What if they had raised the issue of the gap between games before the tournament and not complained after losing...all this what if smacks of poor sportsmanship. What if they were in NZ pool and beat them, what if they put 50 points on the boks. What if their centre hadn't discredited himself on twitter. Fact is Wales beat them fair and square.

[HammerofThunor]

It has been mentioned before

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2007/sep/07/rugbyunion.rugbyworldcup20077

And here's a link about Pat Lam who also mentioned it (before the cup started)

http://www.manusamoa.com.ws/index.php/25-demo-content/carousel-news/89-pat-lam-its-about-performance.html

[Gatts]

It has been mentioned before

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2007/sep/07/rugbyunion.rugbyworldcup20077

And here's a link about Pat Lam who also mentioned it (before the cup started)

http://www.manusamoa.com.ws/index.php/25-demo-content/carousel-news/89-pat-lam-its-about-performance.html

Has the Samoan Rugby Union raised it formally?

[HammerofThunor]

Don't know. Probably. How would we know? When they were told the fixtures I doubt very much they said "awesome, 4 days rest before Wales"

Would you like them to inform you of their communications with the IRB.

And why do you require an official announcement from the Samoan union before the cup but complain about unofficial complaints after? It's definitely been mentioned unofficial before and after the game. There has been no media complaint by the Samoan union has there? There may have been an official complaint to the IRB before and/or after the games.

[TheGreyGhost]

The IRB would have to be a bunch of clowns to not realise. It hardly seems that Samoa should have to "formally" complain about something so clearly inequitable.

Of course the IRB already know and did it for commercial reasons. Another reason the RWC is a bunch of hee-haw.

[Cymroglan]

Yes it's wrong that they have such a short turnaround but they knew that months ago.
The mistake Samoa did was play their best XV against arguably the weakest side in the tournament knowing full well that the same players baring any injuries would be playing again four days later.
They could have rested players against Namibia but would these players then have been rusty against Wales nobody knows.
Playing Namibia should be no worse than a strenuous training session.

[Gatts]

Don't know. Probably. How would we know? When they were told the fixtures I doubt very much they said "awesome, 4 days rest before Wales"

Would you like them to inform you of their communications with the IRB.

And why do you require an official announcement from the Samoan union before the cup but complain about unofficial complaints after? It's definitely been mentioned unofficial before and after the game. There has been no media complaint by the Samoan union has there? There may have been an official complaint to the IRB before and/or after the games.

Someone had a few too many late nights.

I felt sure since you clearly know everything about the issue that you would know whether their Union had formally complained or not, since that seems to be the most logical and professional approach if you have an issue with scheduling that you also had 4 years ago.

Put your address up and i'll mail your dummy back to you

[hawalsh]

Wales beat them in a completely legitimate manner under unfair IRB enforced circumstances.

I'd be shocked if they hadn't raised it with the IRB when they were told. Much more likely that them raising it just didn't make the news. As to it being raised now, the players know that if they are to avoid it again next time around they have to make as much noise as possible whilst the world media affords them the attention and is questioning them on it.


In any case, GG's original point was about how competitive Samoa are and how they could probably give as good if not better account of themselves than the Pumas in the 3/4N. Someone queried a part of how he was qualifying that, assuming that he was talking about the result of the SA v Samoa match, I was clarifying that he was alluding to Wales v Samoa match and its circumstances. No one was moaning about Wales, simply that Samoa could perform even better with more equal treatment.

[HammerofThunor]

I don't understand what difference it makes that they knew before hand. They did what they thought was best in the situation. Whether they did the best thing or not is irrelevant. The point is the situation is Poopie and shouldn't be there. People involved in Samoan rugby have complained about it before and after the games (as have people involved with other 'minnows').

It seems that some people have the attitude "tough Poopie".

I personally would prefer England (and other top tier unions) to have the disadvantage as they're better equipped to deal with it than the lower tier unions.

Gatts,I don't know everything about the situation. I spent a couple of minutes with an internet search. Not hard.

[Cymroglan]

They are competitive now because they happen to have a good bunch of players but it would be very difficult for them to compete year in year out when their population is so small.

Look at their stats http://www.rugbydata.com/samoa/gamesplayed
Even if they did get funding most of it would be spent on getting their players together from the four corners of the globe.

[Gatts]

I agree, the position is untenable. Nobody should be disadvantaged. It is akin to positive discrimination to favour a particular nation. Sure you want England to be disadvantaged.

The only way to change it is before the competition not after you have knowingly entered into it. And it is certainly not in the way the Samoan player went about it which in my opinion only undermines their case and certainly will not garner support.

[TheGreyGhost]

Perhaps the teams with more depth at their disposal could be expected to play more regularly. It would create more even match ups for a start, and prevent teams throwing games by naming reserve sides creating worthless pointless games.

[Glas a du]

It's not been a bad tournament has it.

[HammerofThunor]

The only way to change it is before the competition not after you have knowingly entered into it. And it is certainly not in the way the Samoan player went about it which in my opinion only undermines their case and certainly will not garner support.

Agree with the second part but we're now before the next world cup. It was mentioned just before 2007, it was mentioned before 2011, it was mentioned during 2011. It's mentioned pretty frequently.

NB I understand Eliota's frustration but do not understand Twitter at all.

[Gatts]

Then maybe they need to take a stand and veto the comp...pretty sure the public outcry would do the job, i for one would fully support them.

[HammerofThunor]

It's difficult. They get a lot of funding for the World Cup.If they refused to play would they lose it? Would the IRB withhold funding in the future? It's a difficult situation but it needs to change.

Reduce teams? Surely this would go against the concept of spreading the game.

Lengthen the competition? Teams like Samoa already need to raise funding for the length it is now.

Move the top tiers to have reduced recovery time? Sponsors wouldn't be happy, nor would they get the attendances.

Don't know

[Gatts]

SPONSORSHIP.

[TheGreyGhost]

Yeah, they could all get sponsored mouth guards...oh wait.

[Cymroglan]

Population of Samoa is under 200.000 they are not commercially viable.

[hawalsh]

Playing Namibia should be no worse than a strenuous training session.

Are you serious? You don't think that a side playing for national pride in their opening match of the WC might bring just a little more spirit & physicality to contact and try and prove a point or two to their more fancied opposition, even (especially) if they can't compete on a skills level?

[Cymroglan]

Yes I'm very serious players often say that the training sessions are just as physical especially when you have players playing for selection.

[Taylorman]

Well what a match.havnt caught up with the posts yet as had a big night out watching this one.
Certainly the pool was close bu my initial thoughts are SA have it even more up hill.
All 3 matches involving the 3 were close so in one respect SA are slightly above the levels of Wales and samoa.
Id think that might be pleasing for the rest of the qualifiers.

[Sponsored content]