Sky showed 2004 Cats vs Chiefs

Forum » Rugby » Sky showed 2004 Cats vs Chiefs

Jun 19, 2020, 10:04

Which I watched last evening.

Man oh man the game has moved on somewhat since then.

It was so pedestrian and far less skilful back then

The tempo and skill levels of the players today are so much higher

The game has certainly moved on for the good

Jun 19, 2020, 16:48


I often watch the 95 world cup. not just the final.

I cringe when i see the type of passing and set play that we saw back then.

I played club rugby until 2010... i swear some of the club players that i played with could show a 95 backline a thing or 2.

Jun 19, 2020, 17:29

Jun 19, 2020, 16:48


I often watch the 95 world cup. not just the final.

I cringe when i see the type of passing and set play that we saw back then.

I played club rugby until 2010... i swear some of the club players that i played with could show a 95 backline a thing or 2.

Sure Chippo...
Some of your pub team players could show players of the calibre below a thing or 2...

9.   Joost Van Der Westuizen
10. Joel Stransky
12. Hennie Leroux
13. Japie Mulder
14. James Small
15. Andre Joubert
11. Olivier/Chester Williams

This backline would give the current Bok backline a good go. 

Jun 19, 2020, 20:28


idiot. rugby in 95 was very different to rugby now. just look at your high school team that you still go and mascot for. look how they have evolved.

in no uncertain terms, those players were unbelievable...

but look at highlights... very rarely were 4 phases ever put together.

im not saying my club side would come close to beating a springbok backline from 95, but what i am saying is that the inclination to be creative didnt exist much back then for many reasons.

Jun 19, 2020, 22:01

Jun 20, 2020, 01:42

The game has changed. Players are better athletes today, but passing hasn't improved. The players we have now can't pass more than a metre or more without floundering and couldn't pass in heavily congested areas with a more oppressive line (which actually saw angles of running take on greater importance). The 1995 to 1999 seasons saw arguably the greatest period of change in such a short span of time. The 90s definitely wasn't the best, but the All Blacks and Wallabies still had great skill. The All Blacks of 2005 to 2007 were the best overall All Black side

Jun 20, 2020, 11:48

The above description fits in very well with the Meyer era - when the coach was too stupid to coach anybody.   He was fired by Stade Francais for that precise reason.   Remember his statement that the Springboks cannot play a ball-in-hand  game because of deficient skill sets.

I watched the  final a number of times and am convinced that there would not be a  single player from the 1995 and 2007 finals if a combined team be selected as the top performers of the Springboks in WC finals.   The player who comes nearest would be Habana - the rest was clueless.  

I still like the valuation of Squidge in dealing with the final.    He is a funny guy - but he knows what he is talking about.   Obviously Mozart and AO are too ignorant to realize what change Erasmus brought to the game after near to two decades of poor coaches.   .  .    

Jun 21, 2020, 00:46

The only good passers now are Esterhuizen, RG. That's it. Mapimpi would make the 2007 team. Who else? Thor? Louw? Beast? Pollard? That's about it. 

Jun 21, 2020, 15:46


You will always be the most stupid idiot posting on site.   I was comparing the two teams based on the finals in 2007 and 2019 respectively and not at career  performances.  

Lets look at the England team of  2007.   It consisted largely from has beens way past their prime and the list is very long,   If the Springboks of 2019 had to play the 2007 team the result would be more like a cricket score than a rugby score.   

Lets first look at the match summary:- 

Scores      2007       =   15/6

                 2019      =    32/12

Tries scored    2007   =  zero

                         2019   =   Springboks 2 - England -  0

So now look at the forwards:

*    Scrumming - Springbok forwards barely managed in 2007 - the 2019 team dominated the English.  

*    Ball Protection, recovery and turn-overs - 2019 team superior by a mile.

*    Defense was outstanding - there was just no way through for the English. 

Now for the backline:-

The best backline performance by any Springbok team since re-admission.  Attack superb in all aspects of the game. Defense sublime

So the fact is that  Erasmus was the key to the win - the best coach SA ever had since re-admission.

I did not know Esterhuizen was in the Springbok squad for the WC?        

Jun 22, 2020, 00:26

That has been England side happened to be very strong up front. So strong that Australia spent the majority of their semi straining to get into England's half of the field. That England side could negate everything the 2019 Boks did in their final. You never think before you speak. 

Jun 22, 2020, 03:36

They were very strong up front - joke of the century.   They did lose against SA in the Round Robin  game by a huge margin and was not all that good anyway.   The SA team of 2019 would have wiped the floor with that lot of has beens.   

England beat Australia 12-10 in the quarterfinal - with the Aussies scoring one converted try and one penalty goal - the England 4 penalty goals.   The try and the penalty goal  showed another lie on your part, but keep it up - it shows how really ignorant  you are about rugby.   

The fact is that the SA side was properly coached for the first time since 1992 and that made a huge difference.   The SA side  of  2019 would have beaten that English side by what would sound like  a cricket score. 

The English side played SA twice in finals - they scored no tries in those two finals - South Africa scored 2,   In total the English had 18 points - SA had 47 points.   But 14 of those points came from converted tries.   The difference in points in 2007 was 9 points - in 2019 it was 20 points - get the message.?   

Try to find a better excuse next time. LMAO  

You need to Log in to reply.
Back to top