Nubiwan
Bench Player
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2010
- Messages
- 793
He meant Borat.
Beauden and Jordie Borat.
He meant Borat.
Beauden and Jordie Borat.
I will ask though IF Lions loose and loose by a bit does that mean last week was a fluke against 14 players who played without a backrow?
Just because association football is a dumb as **** name doesn't mean you get to call it football. Football is of the Gaelic variety, rugby is rugby, the rest are ****!Also it isn't soccer it is football FFS.
Things like american football (USA), Aussie rules football (Aus) and Celtic Football (IRE) are all poverty version of the main football.
What was the ball game called you and your uncle David played in the McDonald's ball pit when you were 5, until Uncle David had to go away for 10-15 years?Also it isn't soccer it is football FFS.
Things like american football (USA), Aussie rules football (Aus) and Celtic Football (IRE) are all poverty version of the main football.
I feel like you could already say that tbfI will ask though IF Lions loose and loose by a bit does that mean last week was a fluke against 14 players who played without a backrow?
It's attack therapy, you'll be strong soon.Mods do something to stop this bullying please.
Has anyone questioned Hansen taking a forward off for a back in the match, after the SBW red card? Haven't really followed the forums or 2nd Test thread on this matter. Given the wet conditions, and the nature of the Lions game, then I'd probably considered leaving the backs short a man for the contest, and keeping parity or better up front. If anything, Hansen gave the Lions the Parity they needed at scrum time, and in the loose. I reckon if he had hiss time back, then he''d have kept Kaino (sp?) on the park. Think it was a mistake to take a loose forward off. Certainly for a guy who is on debut. In fat, I'd go so far as to say it cost his side the match.
I will ask though IF Lions loose and loose by a bit does that mean last week was a fluke against 14 players who played without a backrow?
True but they made errors like playimg with 7 forwards. Alot of what ifs and we will never knowThe All Blacks played badly in the second test, that doesn't mean it was a fluke, that means that the Lions are good enough to catch them if their high standards slip.
NZ are the best team in the world by far, it doesn't mean they're inhuman or their performance doesn't vary.
True but they made errors like playimg with 7 forwards. Alot of what ifs and we will never know
It's attack therapy, you'll be strong soon.
Definitely not a fluke. The Lions played some of their best rugby when it was even. And being a man down is not always the guaranteed disadvantage that's implied. See Ireland v SA, England v Argentian, Munster v Glasgow, etc. Sure you can argue "if Barrett had gotten two better kicks" but then you can say "if Mako didn't give away two penalties" etc etc.
He should be so lucky.
I will be in Belushi's Bar in Hammersmith
agree. i think with the platform they set in the first half more of the team could take advantage from it and do all the higher level dynamic plays making everyone look good.I guess they had to work harder with a man down. It just looked like they shone more in the first test - perhaps because they provided the platform for a comfortable win.