Well said...appreciated. NZ had the chances...missed penalty and going for corner on penalty instead of taking 3 points. Hansen needs to have more respect for the Boks....knighted with a title Sir, Doesn't make him right.... All Blacks were not robbed...that's an insult to other teams. Yes it's good to see other teams in the mix creating a good game . All Blacks just need to evolve with the game. I tell you now other fans don't appreciate or respect comments like robbing the All Blacks of a title. That comment made by a "Sir" is not acceptable and he loses all respect and the hard work that gave him that title. All Blacks and Boks have good rivalry ...keep that spirit and accept defeat graciously ,giving praise to a better team on any given day!
Thanks a lot, Darren. You are quite right: NZ had their chances and missed. So whose fault is that? It's very sad actually that a man with his stature would speak like that.
Very good question. I know Mark Alexander (SARU president) was in contention at one stage. To be honest I'm not sure Pienaar or Smit are interested in that job right now. Certainly not Pienaar I would say.
Hahahaha! One of my best friends is actually an Italian-South African. His mother makes the most wonderful lasagna and his dad bakes his own bread because "the bread in South Africa isn't good." PS Italian food is my favourite cuisine!
@frontrowrugby anything but bangers and mash, fish, and chips. Occasionaly love pasta dishes, except when too much cheese covers the delish bits. Wholesome lamb roast with salads are just great (even if they don't win scrums) being downed with clear cold water and a light wine, the smell of a wood braai, the company of sober family, wide eyed children, and sincere friends, munching biltong and peanuts, sharing beautiful stories of sunshine, boerewors and Chevrolet ... now, if only some of us still had all of our teeth 😬
@rafiqhendricks6904 Seems like a great wish. Is that just a fantasy or, in the dreams of just about every bok, the east and many southern hemisphere fans ? 🤔 The best guess is that Rassie will just want to rest on the Islands (like Jersey, Mauritius, lands of setting suns, with seemingly truly honorable, and traditional people). 🎖
@rosemarybouwer2259 Honestly speaking, just a dream and a little bit of humor, but I think he would make the game too exciting for the current governing body. May even be able to compete with NFL.
What would also be very enlightening would be the membership and voting of the WR board ....ENG 2 votes, Wales 2 votes, Sco 2 votes, Wales 2 votes, FRA 2 votes, NZ 2 votes, SA 2 votes, AUS 2 votes....and then a bunch of 1 vote like Ireland and others each......so you can see why big decisions go certain ways
It's not fair. I guess you could say that one man, one vote could result in what you have with Fifa where 100 small countries can control things like when Jack Warner from Trinidad & Tobago was a vice president and heavily influential. But rugby is not as big as football and surely, we want to see the sport become truly global. I would love that.
It doesn't matter if you are New Zealand or Vanuatu, if you are a full member of World Rugby you should have a vote to decide who should run the governing body.
Bill was and will always be anti South African. He still thinks he is the captain of the team that dominated the Springboks, I think it was 1974. After that no northern hemisphere team ever dominated the Springboks. He still thinks he can. When he got the power to dominate he used it all. Sounds like a politician doesn't it. Hope his replacement will be more rugby oriented. Let's hope so for rugby's sake.
We can only hope. It doesn't look good to be honest but hopefully the new guy will do a good job. I can't remember but did Beaumont come to South Africa in 1974 with the Lions? I think he came in 1980 or thereabouts but not sure about 74. I think Willie John McBride was the captain of that team but as I say, I'm not certain.
I was going to use the argument that Benazzi is the only rugby player in contention but then again so was Billy Beaumont so it’s a bit tough but his policies of inclusion gets my vote If people are not happy with Beaumont then they shouldn’t give Robinson the vote (ask Kamala Harris😀) I think Benazzi might nick it if the voting is inclusive
Yes and don't forget Robinson is an ex-Wallaby. I think Benazzi has the best plan on the table and as I mentioned in the video the CEO is there to make sure the company makes money. The chairman is there to give his vision. Love your Harris analogy! Hahahaha.
Beaumont is exactly the same as "the" Sir John Kirwin from All Black fame!! Love the AB's but we know who "hate" us. And it's not playing victim as this comment would be answered - no - we know who our enemies are.
@@vasti018 It seems that most of (if not all) the 'Sirs' in rugby union (and WR) are a bunch of whining, grumpy old-boys club of rugby dinosaurs who lack innovation & non-bias. 'Sir' Kirwhine & 'Sir' Bully Beaumont are just two of the most painful that spring to mind.
I still believe, and have been saying this forever but I firmly believe that the World Cup tournament should have the same system as the Sevens, and have tournaments within the tournament and have a Plate and Bowl to play for, you could imagine some of the awesome matches that will happen and also have them play in curtain raising games so they all get more exposure and the fans get heaps more entertainment
I also like that. I actually think another way to do it is to stage those plate and bowl matches at smaller venues that did not get the chance to host matches during the tournament proper.
This is a terrible take. There is a finality to getting knocked out of the world cup and having to go home. Stakes is high, you're suggesting participation trophies for those not good enough. World cup has been the pinnacle of prestige longer than most of us have been alive and Joe you wanna change into a "you get a plate, you get a shield, you get a cup" like it's Oprah Winfrey's show
Fewer subs make no sense in terms of player safety. We all know that in any sport, fatigue is the number one reason people get injured. Fresher forwards mean less chance of fatigue induced injury to the most physically demanding positions. It decreases the error rate of the most physical players who can do the most damage given their size.
Exactly. And World Rugby's own research has concluded this. Fatigue might mean more tired players and that in turn could open more gaps in the last 20 minutes but the flip side is more injuries. You are spot on!
@davidwalker2402 Yep! That's what the IRBs own findings substantiate. Besides, most wings can sustain a full game showing and performing with less fatigue and more speed than any forwards do in a full game. This is why forwards have always been the majority of the subs in rugby. Their size and build are more for short burst of power and not for endurance. A question to ask yourself is : Which player is more dangerous when fatigued and makes errors that cause injury, to others, or to themselves, a forward, or a back?
It's very different for forwards and backs. Most of the hard work is done up front and so the correct way to look at it is rather the mismatch of a tired lock versus another tired lock.
Yes, that is true. But obviously we're talking in generalities here. You can fall over from a heart attack while they're singing the national anthems after all.
Excellent content. Maybe Bill is also a sir like Hansen. Rassie is giving these poor chaps sleepless nights for sure. They just cannot handle Bok domination at the moment.
Rinaldo ? About as much chance as Colonel Sanders ? 🤪 Who the hell nominated him ? World Rugby missed the boat by not electing Pinochet instead of Beaumont .
I agree. They totally missed a golden opportunity by not going with Pichot last time. I think if we're honest, Rinaldo has not chance whatsoever. Comes across as a token candidate. Almost as if World Rugby are saying, "Look! We don't only have British/Irish and Australian/Kiwi chairmen."
As a South African stuff world rugby they can’t own it SA should form its own rugby World Cup and to hell with world rugby and if a Northern hemisphere team won the last World Cup no rules would be changed they all a bunch of babies
Brett Robinson is most certainly the worst choice from a Boks (and Rugby traditionalist) perspective .... with his Australian view, he'll most likely try to merge Union and League (basically change Union rules to make them more League) - which is not what the public outside of Australia is keen to happen
From your observation Benazzi seems the be the best choice. But then again he seems to be moving away from the "old boys club" World Rugby was Happy when we were under the days of Alistair Coetzee, but ever since we are back innovation seems to irk them.
That's a great point you make. They liked us when we "knew our place". I think Benazzi could come in and shake things up. At the end of the day rugby needs to decide if it wants to be a truly global sport or a commonwealth sport that allows France and Argentina to also play.
luister gou vir my, die is nie die vroumens league nie, is onse idea 7-1 split is onse se gedagte enige een wat daa ge elect word moet sterk wies,want daa kom nog beter ideas die naweek teen die engels [PSTD] " AS JULLE BANG IS SE NET ONS KAN N PLAN MAAK"
I don't want an extension of the disastrous Bill Beaumont and Australia rugby bosses destroying their rugby union for the league. Keep the Aussies and Neu Zeeland away from rugby. They have both supported the League in their countries to the point of weakening the Union game. Just look at French clubs and the standard of the game in France. They have a true rugby spirit in that country. The union still has a pedigree in France that we, as rugby supporters, can protect and love. If I think of people like Matt Williams, John Kirwann, Jeff Wilson and the rest of them, I want to cringe We need more pundits in these countries like Justin Marshall
That makes two of us, Wynand! League sucks! I also like Justin Marshall as a pundit. I didn't like him as a player ... but that's because he always seemed to know how to get the better of the Springboks! That "dislike" is actually the ultimate form of respect I would say.
@martinmouton4375 certainly is a most significant factor, and the best selectors and coaches know it and exploit it well within the current laws of the game. This says a lot about Dr. Rassie Erasmus and his backroom team.
The argument for fewer substitutions is not centred on injuries. It is primarily based on the size of players who can compete for 80 minutes which has a flow-on effect to the amount of force they can produce inducing injuries. Other benefits include ripping up the pitches, deliberate slow play to catch their breath, etc. It was a concession to the chattering class catered for by Soccer. The game for all shapes and sizes has homogenised into a fairly stock profile as a result. The necessary follow up law changes caused by this retrograde step are damaging the game. Croc rolls, HIA protocols, refs talking through scrums set up, off side for tactical kicking: it has been an unmitigated disaster. Medical replacements approved by the match doctor only.
I appreciate what you're saying but fewer substitutions ultimately results in more injuries. Whichever you way you want to arrive at that conclusion, that is the conclusion. If they go medical replacements only as you are suggestion, there will be more injuries. World Rugby is never going to go that route. I firmly believe they are scared to death of NFL-style lawsuits coming their way from former players who develop dementia, Alzheimers, CTE etc later in life.
@@frontrowrugby Rugby has never shrunk from the fact that it is a physical contest: injuries will happen. How the structure of the game deals with them and still present an entertaining spectacle is the more important element, even more so now that we have abandoned amateurism. The fake amateur era was arguably one of the most exciting periods of international Rugby. Where we saw 'normal' sized athletes stay in the game longer to exploit their carefully crafted experience. Ergo: 'Gym bodies' have little value for a game like ours which is in a daily fight for its existence.
@@peterclark6290 I don't dispute the fake amateur era was an exciting one but by pretty much every metric except nostalgia it is better today. Perhaps game play was better at a different stage, but that is subjective. The players themselves are better in every way. Do I understand you correctly in that you are asking for players to reduce their size? If I've got you, I'd agree that no one on that field needs to look like Arnold but there is tremendous value in props looking like wrestlers or weight lifters, the rest of the pack can/should resemble heavyweight boxers etc (the ones with muscles and six packs, not the ones with flabby tummies).
@@frontrowrugby I have been consistent is arguing that every player in the starting side should be of a size, metabolism, etc. that can carry them through 80 Rugby minutes. There is little doubt that certain positions make physical demands clear and obvious. Which given your example were met by shorter stocky _'unbendable'_ hard men who could, if asked nicely, make an avalanche retreat back up the mountain. They could also steal ruck ball like demons. Tactical replacements have changed the game and not for the better. Medical replacements (closely scrutinised) are possible however there are always those who try to cheat every rule and law ever written. BTW nostalgia was not the driver except to say that it used to be the case that the last 10-15 minutes of each half were when things happened (like scoring). Those whose resilience had negotiated the biff and bash, carb-fuelled starting minutes could exploit the fatigue of lesser mortals and decide the match. That's the purest entertainment there is, the ending is always in doubt. Which is not a corporate dream, but the people who shine in those situations are a corporation's recruitment posters. Win-Win.
Haha, maybe! It's certainly a good thing to drive revenue - I'm fully behind that. But you can grow the game globally and expand revenue at the same time. I don't think it's two tasks that can't be executed simultaneously.
@frontrowrugby yes growing revenue for the sake of growing revenue with no critical thinking or logic behind it in any business is a bad move. I would like to see SA expand the Six Nations to the Seven nations and have a B Division with Georgia, Spain, Portugal etc. on a promotion relegation format. That would remove the need for SA and the Six Nations teams to have June and autumn tours and they have the RC and Seven Nations at the same time in May or June. The winner of each also plays each other of they have a best of Seven Nations vs best of Rugby Champions teams who play each other at the end of each comp every year. I lot more rest time would also emerge from this for all teams. With SA out of the Rugby Championship it could host full tours with its teams every July and August.
@bunnychowmuncher great ideas! Sadly I don't think they'll ever introduce promotion/relegation. Too much money at stake. Or if they do agree, it will suddenly change if England finish in a relegation position.
@@frontrowrugby Haha I did not think of that but they need a second Six Nations Division and possible a second URC division which would include the Cheetahs, a Leinster B team some more Scottish teams, maybe the Pumas and Griquas and a Georgian, Spanish and Portugese team.
I also think maybe the tournaments like 6nations and championship are gatekeeping the growth of the game. Ek soek net een toernooi en dis die world cup 😂 laai die res van die kalender met toere!!
I've actually told a few people before that if the sport is ever going to grow you have to kill the Six Nations and Rugby Championship. Maybe expand it and hold it every two years as an alternative but as an annual competition all it does is make money for the top teams and keeps the smaller nations out. Ek hou van jou idee!
The northern hemisphere is always targeting the south. It's NOT just about stopping the Boks they had been trying to stop the All Blacks before that. There's always northern bias in world rugby. Less subs will mean players get tired creating more opportunities for running rugby. More subs were brought in to stop the ABs who continuously won games in the last 15 minutes.
They have the money and money equals power so in that sense there's not much we can do but we have to resist their nonsense as much as we possibly can.
Yes, this video was recorded ahead of the elections as a preview to who might take over from him. Now we know. Sadly I think it's just going to be a continuation of the Beaumont era.
Having rugby teams playing as many games as the soccer WC during such a short span of time will not be good on the players. Rugby is a collusion sport. Players are injured a lot more frequently and more seriously.
You have to have a week in between Tests. There is at least a limit on how many matches professionals can play. I actually think they can bring it down.
No American equity firms should come near the Bokke. Show me one example of an American equity firm that took over a club/province/nation and didn't mess it up. Just take a good look at MAN Utd to see what they are capable of. Grow the sport among the grassroots, get more viewers and opportunities for people to play, and TV revenue will already grow. Don't need dirty American money.
It's important to distinguish between the domestic and the international game. Personally I don't have a problem with it but it needs to be a good deal for us as well. This last offer seemed to be weighted disproportionately in favour of the Americans. We can't have that. We should always be open to growing our commercial side but we have to be intelligent about it.
@frontrowrugby I'll take another example... The All Blacks. It's not been that long since they got a massive equity deal. And as a Springbok, I have the utmost respect for them. But did that deal really help them? Are they better off now than before? SA rugby have been doing a lot of things right, in a country where things often don't go the way you plan. And a big part of that was real, honest integration. It started with bulletjie rugby. And today we have a captain that benefited from that. That investment literally paid off in millions thanks to the viewership increases. And that's really what drives most sport. It's viewership numbers. The more people that watch, play and know about it, the more money. Those dirty, soulless hedge fund managers will probabaly put big games behind paywall such as a 'pay per view'. They charge exorbitant fees for tickets. A college football game can easily cost you more than a $1000. American investment (and sport philosophy in general) is opposed to the belief of rugby loving fans all over the world. Fok hulle.
There are a few differences. SA is actually far more attractive. We have 10x the population New Zealand has - that's 10x the amount of customers! Or potential customers. Also we are in a good time zone compared to them. Our potential for growth is massive compared to the kiwis. Then you apply those numbers to broadcast deals and you can see how the All Blacks could easily be left behind in the future. That's why I believe their deal isn't working out. I agree with you SARU have actually done a great job. There was a time when they had a poor reputation but right now they are the best sports federation in SA! Let's hope they continue making wise decisions.
Listened to an Aussie podcast having a chat with that Dr Robinson. These SAFETY SAFETY characters are here to ruin our preferred and beloved Rugby sport. Even the Aussie guys were put off visibly. This guy IMHO are imposters that want to eliminate the gladiator physicality of our team sport - the last one left - and promote touch rugby. Why don't they bugger-off and join NFL or rugby League? They are going to kill rugby - mark my words. Mark my words I say again. 10 x rather the Benazzi guy!!! Why too are there no All Black or Springbok representatives there?? We should actually break away from these WORLD GOVERNING bodies altogether.
Very interesting. Look I agree that we want the sport to be as safe as possible otherwise parents will never allow their kids to play and within a generation you don't have a sport anymore. But at the same time you have to accept it's a sport of collisions. Accidents will happen. Anyone playing accepts that risk going in.
To be honest, I do not like the motivations of either a French or Australian Chairman. Both rugby regions have very selfish motivations. With Benazzi, there is a fear he would build the world season to support the club-dominated French union. Regarding Robinson, I am worried about the law changes an Aussie would propose, seeing as that region has a giant boner for league, and I fear that more of the same dissolving of forward play Balmont has been known for.
World Rugby is going the Fifa route, how quickly can you sell out the game to it's highest bidder, saturate a manly sport into some family friendly bs so you can attract advertisers etc.. Thus the soft ass yellow cards and red cards. Constant changing of formats that were never broken. Also expanding the world cup is useless, you'll just watch more meaningless games. Go watch the 2007 World Cup and you'll see there was nothing wrong with rugby, so all those law changes and "expanding the game" didn't do shyt, they ruined a game that didn't need change and it's still not any more popular in these "newer" regions than it was before
It's so frustrating, isn't it? I think we need a change at the top which is why I'm picking Benazzi as my man here. Let's be honest the only reason they're expanding it is because the USA didn't qualify for 2023 and they want the Americans there.
I always find it amusing that every rule change is met by South Africans as if the rugby world is only penalizing them , changes will always be designed for the good of the sport if they don’t work they can be changed and I don’t believe any team is targeted by world rugby to diminish their chances of growing. If the bomb squad is dangerous for competitors it should be changed, if not leave it alone.
You might find it amusing but the actual chairman of World Rugby has questioned the our tactics despite it actually being in line with their own research on player welfare and safety.
We know world rugby hates South Africa and they will do everything to snub and undermine SA. He will make sure that Rassie and SA don’t ever get coach of the year!!
No one apart from the Boks themselves actually cares about what a new man will do for them. They got plenty of dodgy ref calls which won them the last WC so stop moaning. As for Beaumont being booed, well that's the French for you, doesn't this bloke understand anything.
I live in Doha and my house is actually across the road from one of the stadiums that hosted the football World Cup in 2022. I would love it if the Springboks came to play here.
It is interesting you say that because World Rugby conducted their own research and found that more substitutions actually results in a decrease in serious injuries.
What's with the SA victim complex? There's no conspiracy against you guys, your team won two world cups in a row and you can't complain the referees were trying to prevent it, chill out a bit.
Yeah we are indeed starting to get more favourable refereeing decisions. Sorry but it's also about bloody time given how we were treated for many years. No conspiracy you say? Want to explain Bryce Lawrence's 2011 Rugby World Cup quarter-final performance? And then subsequently never reffed again but was promoted to Head of Referees in New Zealand. Or was that just a co-incidence?
2 WC wins yes and now world rugby implementing laws to combat our strengths. It's funny though we will work around it and win 3 in a row or atleast get damn close.
But that's just how it is if a team becomes too good at something or too dominant the laws with evolve to level the field, always has been. Ireland were good at slowing sown rucks, laws are being changed for a more free-flowing game. France used to steal loads of balls at the breakdown, laws were changed to make challenges a lot more difficult. Honestly no scrum from mark law change makes perfect sense to me. And I don't see how it hurts SA that much. SA did it like... Once. If WR wanted to hurt SA a lot they would do something against box kicks which are SA's main strength.
Further more John, why did the rugby body changed their name ? I'm sure there was a huge law-suit coming their way. FIFA never changed their name even after Plater's criminal records...don't come out from behind that building yet.
An excellent video. Thanks
Thank you so much, Colin. Really appreciate the kind words.
Well said...appreciated. NZ had the chances...missed penalty and going for corner on penalty instead of taking 3 points. Hansen needs to have more respect for the Boks....knighted with a title Sir, Doesn't make him right.... All Blacks were not robbed...that's an insult to other teams. Yes it's good to see other teams in the mix creating a good game . All Blacks just need to evolve with the game. I tell you now other fans don't appreciate or respect comments like robbing the All Blacks of a title. That comment made by a "Sir" is not acceptable and he loses all respect and the hard work that gave him that title. All Blacks and Boks have good rivalry ...keep that spirit and accept defeat graciously ,giving praise to a better team on any given day!
Thanks a lot, Darren. You are quite right: NZ had their chances and missed. So whose fault is that? It's very sad actually that a man with his stature would speak like that.
Why no South African candidates? Francois Pienaar, John Smith?
Very good question. I know Mark Alexander (SARU president) was in contention at one stage. To be honest I'm not sure Pienaar or Smit are interested in that job right now. Certainly not Pienaar I would say.
Of course not !
South Africans know nothing about rugby union, so why should they seek input from our country.
Bokke 🏉🇿🇦 !!!
@@frontrowrugby That 'equity deal" is a horrible deal. I sincerely hope it does not go through.
I agree. At first glance I liked the idea but as we got more information it just started to look worse and worse.
Certainly Pienaar and Smith are qualified for the role. Two great leaders and managers.
Thanks for breaking it down. Very interesting
My pleasure. Glad you enjoyed the video.
Great video and fantastic channel
Thank you, Wynand! Appreciate the kind words.
As an Italian South African…. I can honestly say that no Italian should be in charge of anything like this 😂😂.
Hahahaha! One of my best friends is actually an Italian-South African. His mother makes the most wonderful lasagna and his dad bakes his own bread because "the bread in South Africa isn't good."
PS Italian food is my favourite cuisine!
@ 😂 sounds familiar 🙈
Hahahaha!
@frontrowrugby anything but bangers and mash, fish, and chips. Occasionaly love pasta dishes, except when too much cheese covers the delish bits. Wholesome lamb roast with salads are just great (even if they don't win scrums) being downed with clear cold water and a light wine, the smell of a wood braai, the company of sober family, wide eyed children, and sincere friends, munching biltong and peanuts, sharing beautiful stories of sunshine, boerewors and Chevrolet ... now, if only some of us still had all of our teeth 😬
Lol
Guys, we all know Rassie is the best man for this job. But that can be South Africans' contribution after his retirement from coaching.
I love this idea!!
@rafiqhendricks6904 Seems like a great wish.
Is that just a fantasy or, in the dreams of just about every bok, the east and many southern hemisphere fans ? 🤔
The best guess is that Rassie will just want to rest on the Islands (like Jersey, Mauritius, lands of setting suns, with seemingly truly honorable, and traditional people). 🎖
@rosemarybouwer2259 Honestly speaking, just a dream and a little bit of humor, but I think he would make the game too exciting for the current governing body. May even be able to compete with NFL.
@rafiqhendricks6904 and the NFL couldn't wish for that, could they😄😄
Please, do not take our coach.
What would also be very enlightening would be the membership and voting of the WR board ....ENG 2 votes, Wales 2 votes, Sco 2 votes, Wales 2 votes, FRA 2 votes, NZ 2 votes, SA 2 votes, AUS 2 votes....and then a bunch of 1 vote like Ireland and others each......so you can see why big decisions go certain ways
It's not fair. I guess you could say that one man, one vote could result in what you have with Fifa where 100 small countries can control things like when Jack Warner from Trinidad & Tobago was a vice president and heavily influential.
But rugby is not as big as football and surely, we want to see the sport become truly global. I would love that.
Why do Wales get 4 votes ? (from a Welshman)
Are you sure it's four, not two? The traditional big boys (old Five Nations and Tri-Nations) get two votes each.
It doesn't matter if you are New Zealand or Vanuatu, if you are a full member of World Rugby you should have a vote to decide who should run the governing body.
Ireland get 1 vote mmmmm…
Bill was and will always be anti South African. He still thinks he is the captain of the team that dominated the Springboks, I think it was 1974. After that no northern hemisphere team ever dominated the Springboks. He still thinks he can. When he got the power to dominate he used it all. Sounds like a politician doesn't it. Hope his replacement will be more rugby oriented. Let's hope so for rugby's sake.
We can only hope. It doesn't look good to be honest but hopefully the new guy will do a good job.
I can't remember but did Beaumont come to South Africa in 1974 with the Lions? I think he came in 1980 or thereabouts but not sure about 74. I think Willie John McBride was the captain of that team but as I say, I'm not certain.
Good video, thank you.
Thank you! Really appreciate the kind words.
I was going to use the argument that Benazzi is the only rugby player in contention but then again so was Billy Beaumont so it’s a bit tough but his policies of inclusion gets my vote
If people are not happy with Beaumont then they shouldn’t give Robinson the vote (ask Kamala Harris😀)
I think Benazzi might nick it if the voting is inclusive
Yes and don't forget Robinson is an ex-Wallaby. I think Benazzi has the best plan on the table and as I mentioned in the video the CEO is there to make sure the company makes money. The chairman is there to give his vision.
Love your Harris analogy! Hahahaha.
Benazzi still a thuggish lunatic?
Beaumont is exactly the same as "the" Sir John Kirwin from All Black fame!! Love the AB's but we know who "hate" us. And it's not playing victim as this comment would be answered - no - we know who our enemies are.
@@vasti018 It seems that most of (if not all) the 'Sirs' in rugby union (and WR) are a bunch of whining, grumpy old-boys club of rugby dinosaurs who lack innovation & non-bias. 'Sir' Kirwhine & 'Sir' Bully Beaumont are just two of the most painful that spring to mind.
@@vivb5180 Agree 100% - Thank you!
Maybe the Ozzi dude should focus on growing rugby union in Oz first
Haha, yes! That would be better.
@@lukeboshier totally agree oz rugby is fucked useless team even aussies r ashamed of them
Thats the job of Rugby Australia
Another excellent video. Anything that gives Fiji more games and growth I am all for. Those fellas can play.
Thank you so much, Trevor.
Agreed.
I still believe, and have been saying this forever but I firmly believe that the World Cup tournament should have the same system as the Sevens, and have tournaments within the tournament and have a Plate and Bowl to play for, you could imagine some of the awesome matches that will happen and also have them play in curtain raising games so they all get more exposure and the fans get heaps more entertainment
And the host nation and the IRB would earn heaps more money
Overall Peter, I agree with you 100% , I am very skeptic of Robinson
I also like that. I actually think another way to do it is to stage those plate and bowl matches at smaller venues that did not get the chance to host matches during the tournament proper.
Indeed!
This is a terrible take. There is a finality to getting knocked out of the world cup and having to go home. Stakes is high, you're suggesting participation trophies for those not good enough. World cup has been the pinnacle of prestige longer than most of us have been alive and Joe you wanna change into a "you get a plate, you get a shield, you get a cup" like it's Oprah Winfrey's show
Whatever or whoever ....any changes don't just affect the boks but will disadvantage all other teams.its either u have it or not
Of course, but the purpose of this video is to look at it from our perspective.
You conviced me.
Cool ... but they've decided to go with Robinson. Let's hope for the best.
Bakkies Botha for me😃🇿🇦
Haha, yes! Bakkies will quickly sort them out.
Yes sir I do agree with your opinion
Thanks Izak. Appreciate you taking the time to leave a comment.
Play in New York in Nov/ Dec? think about the weather!
Yes, that's true ... maybe at a different time of the year! But we could go to Texas, Florida or California in Nov/Dec!
Nick Mallet would be a good contender for the possition.
I'm sure he'd shake things up!
😂😂😂😂couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery.
Fewer subs make no sense in terms of player safety. We all know that in any sport, fatigue is the number one reason people get injured. Fresher forwards mean less chance of fatigue induced injury to the most physically demanding positions. It decreases the error rate of the most physical players who can do the most damage given their size.
Exactly. And World Rugby's own research has concluded this. Fatigue might mean more tired players and that in turn could open more gaps in the last 20 minutes but the flip side is more injuries.
You are spot on!
So a fresh forward coming on against a tired winger , is that not a miss match leaving the tired player vulnerable?
@davidwalker2402 Yep! That's what the IRBs own findings substantiate. Besides, most wings can sustain a full game showing and performing with less fatigue and more speed than any forwards do in a full game. This is why forwards have always been the majority of the subs in rugby. Their size and build are more for short burst of power and not for endurance.
A question to ask yourself is : Which player is more dangerous when fatigued and makes errors that cause injury, to others, or to themselves, a forward, or a back?
It's very different for forwards and backs. Most of the hard work is done up front and so the correct way to look at it is rather the mismatch of a tired lock versus another tired lock.
Beautifully put, David. A tired wing can still outrun a fresh loose forward!
Fewer injuries leads to longer healthier careers, Rugby wins !
Precisely!
Whoever runs the show, can we please have our scrum rule back? 🤜🤛
Yes, that would be nice!
You can still get caught in an ugly angle and get badly hurt in 5 minutes of the game. Sport injuries are unpredictable.
Yes, that is true. But obviously we're talking in generalities here. You can fall over from a heart attack while they're singing the national anthems after all.
Excellent content. Maybe Bill is also a sir like Hansen. Rassie is giving these poor chaps sleepless nights for sure. They just cannot handle Bok domination at the moment.
Thank you so much Wayne! Love your comment.
Rinaldo ? About as much chance as Colonel Sanders ? 🤪 Who the hell nominated him ? World Rugby missed the boat by not electing Pinochet instead of Beaumont .
I agree. They totally missed a golden opportunity by not going with Pichot last time.
I think if we're honest, Rinaldo has not chance whatsoever. Comes across as a token candidate. Almost as if World Rugby are saying, "Look! We don't only have British/Irish and Australian/Kiwi chairmen."
@@Emjaygee1950 ha ha - good one
As a South African stuff world rugby they can’t own it SA should form its own rugby World Cup and to hell with world rugby and if a Northern hemisphere team won the last World Cup no rules would be changed they all a bunch of babies
Haha, now there's an idea!
Keep on dreaming about that. SA rugby can't afford that,and is almost bancrupt. If it wasn't for the Northern Unions SA would be bancrupt already.
I agree with you Peter- former Wallaby Dr Brett Robinson will take over from Bill Beaumont! Brett is a medical doctor by profession!
Yeah, as much as I would prefer it to be Benazzi it looks like it will be the continuity candidate, Robinson. Cool fact that he's a doctor!
Brett Robinson is most certainly the worst choice from a Boks (and Rugby traditionalist) perspective .... with his Australian view, he'll most likely try to merge Union and League (basically change Union rules to make them more League) - which is not what the public outside of Australia is keen to happen
Yeah, there's a reason it's a separate sport. And we don't like it.
From your observation Benazzi seems the be the best choice. But then again he seems to be moving away from the "old boys club"
World Rugby was Happy when we were under the days of Alistair Coetzee, but ever since we are back innovation seems to irk them.
That's a great point you make. They liked us when we "knew our place".
I think Benazzi could come in and shake things up. At the end of the day rugby needs to decide if it wants to be a truly global sport or a commonwealth sport that allows France and Argentina to also play.
luister gou vir my, die is nie die vroumens league nie, is onse idea 7-1 split is onse se gedagte enige een wat daa ge elect word moet sterk wies,want daa kom nog beter ideas die naweek teen die engels [PSTD] " AS JULLE BANG IS SE NET ONS KAN N PLAN MAAK"
Hahaha!
I don't want an extension of the disastrous Bill Beaumont and Australia rugby bosses destroying their rugby union for the league. Keep the Aussies and Neu Zeeland away from rugby. They have both supported the League in their countries to the point of weakening the Union game. Just look at French clubs and the standard of the game in France. They have a true rugby spirit in that country. The union still has a pedigree in France that we, as rugby supporters, can protect and love. If I think of people like Matt Williams, John Kirwann, Jeff Wilson and the rest of them, I want to cringe
We need more pundits in these countries like Justin Marshall
That makes two of us, Wynand!
League sucks!
I also like Justin Marshall as a pundit. I didn't like him as a player ... but that's because he always seemed to know how to get the better of the Springboks! That "dislike" is actually the ultimate form of respect I would say.
I like Benazzi, and his intentions.
From South Africa. ANYTHING BUT an Englishman ! If not Benazzi, it's time for the Southern hemisphere.
Haha, yeah, I also think Benazzi will be best.
Maak Dr Johan Erasmus president en Al die Kak is gesort.❤
Daar is 'n woord vir wat jy hier se ... "Wysheid!"
Wie gaan die Bokke dan afrig.
As usual, amazing content, facts and insights. League of your own, Peter. Thank you!
Moenie worry nie, Rassie kan sommer albei doen!
Thank you, Rosemary. Very kind of you. Appreciate the support as always!
How many teams are a chance of making the quarter finals? ... That would be 8 I think you'll find :D
Not how many make the quarter-finals. How many hold realistic ambitions of reaching that stage.
@frontrowrugby in that case 16.
@@frontrowrugby yeah I got what you were saying, I was piss taking... apologies lol
Cheers pal!
Intressant!
Baie dankie.
Yeah anything to disadvantage the Boks!
I truly believe the best thing for us will to have Benazzi elected.
I like the subs, makes SA win.😂
That makes two of us!
@martinmouton4375 certainly is a most significant factor, and the best selectors and coaches know it and exploit it well within the current laws of the game.
This says a lot about Dr. Rassie Erasmus and his backroom team.
I am with you!
The argument for fewer substitutions is not centred on injuries. It is primarily based on the size of players who can compete for 80 minutes which has a flow-on effect to the amount of force they can produce inducing injuries. Other benefits include ripping up the pitches, deliberate slow play to catch their breath, etc. It was a concession to the chattering class catered for by Soccer. The game for all shapes and sizes has homogenised into a fairly stock profile as a result. The necessary follow up law changes caused by this retrograde step are damaging the game. Croc rolls, HIA protocols, refs talking through scrums set up, off side for tactical kicking: it has been an unmitigated disaster. Medical replacements approved by the match doctor only.
I appreciate what you're saying but fewer substitutions ultimately results in more injuries. Whichever you way you want to arrive at that conclusion, that is the conclusion.
If they go medical replacements only as you are suggestion, there will be more injuries. World Rugby is never going to go that route. I firmly believe they are scared to death of NFL-style lawsuits coming their way from former players who develop dementia, Alzheimers, CTE etc later in life.
@@frontrowrugby Rugby has never shrunk from the fact that it is a physical contest: injuries will happen.
How the structure of the game deals with them and still present an entertaining spectacle is the more important element, even more so now that we have abandoned amateurism.
The fake amateur era was arguably one of the most exciting periods of international Rugby. Where we saw 'normal' sized athletes stay in the game longer to exploit their carefully crafted experience. Ergo: 'Gym bodies' have little value for a game like ours which is in a daily fight for its existence.
@@peterclark6290 I don't dispute the fake amateur era was an exciting one but by pretty much every metric except nostalgia it is better today.
Perhaps game play was better at a different stage, but that is subjective. The players themselves are better in every way.
Do I understand you correctly in that you are asking for players to reduce their size?
If I've got you, I'd agree that no one on that field needs to look like Arnold but there is tremendous value in props looking like wrestlers or weight lifters, the rest of the pack can/should resemble heavyweight boxers etc (the ones with muscles and six packs, not the ones with flabby tummies).
@@frontrowrugby I have been consistent is arguing that every player in the starting side should be of a size, metabolism, etc. that can carry them through 80 Rugby minutes.
There is little doubt that certain positions make physical demands clear and obvious. Which given your example were met by shorter stocky _'unbendable'_ hard men who could, if asked nicely, make an avalanche retreat back up the mountain. They could also steal ruck ball like demons.
Tactical replacements have changed the game and not for the better. Medical replacements (closely scrutinised) are possible however there are always those who try to cheat every rule and law ever written.
BTW nostalgia was not the driver except to say that it used to be the case that the last 10-15 minutes of each half were when things happened (like scoring). Those whose resilience had negotiated the biff and bash, carb-fuelled starting minutes could exploit the fatigue of lesser mortals and decide the match.
That's the purest entertainment there is, the ending is always in doubt. Which is not a corporate dream, but the people who shine in those situations are a corporation's recruitment posters. Win-Win.
@peterclark6290 yeah, good points you make but how do you get the players down to a certain size/metabolism etc?
Would you introduce weight limits?
Abdelatif Benazzi............................withot a doubt
The Australian guy wants to drive more revenue. Is Rocky Elsom going to be his CFO?
Haha, maybe! It's certainly a good thing to drive revenue - I'm fully behind that. But you can grow the game globally and expand revenue at the same time. I don't think it's two tasks that can't be executed simultaneously.
@frontrowrugby yes growing revenue for the sake of growing revenue with no critical thinking or logic behind it in any business is a bad move.
I would like to see SA expand the Six Nations to the Seven nations and have a B Division with Georgia, Spain, Portugal etc. on a promotion relegation format.
That would remove the need for SA and the Six Nations teams to have June and autumn tours and they have the RC and Seven Nations at the same time in May or June. The winner of each also plays each other of they have a best of Seven Nations vs best of Rugby Champions teams who play each other at the end of each comp every year.
I lot more rest time would also emerge from this for all teams.
With SA out of the Rugby Championship it could host full tours with its teams every July and August.
@bunnychowmuncher great ideas! Sadly I don't think they'll ever introduce promotion/relegation.
Too much money at stake. Or if they do agree, it will suddenly change if England finish in a relegation position.
@@frontrowrugby Haha I did not think of that but they need a second Six Nations Division and possible a second URC division which would include the Cheetahs, a Leinster B team some more Scottish teams, maybe the Pumas and Griquas and a Georgian, Spanish and Portugese team.
@@bunnychowmuncher Yeah they are selfish okes over there! But I agree with you. I'd love to see those teams get chances at the top table.
I also think maybe the tournaments like 6nations and championship are gatekeeping the growth of the game. Ek soek net een toernooi en dis die world cup 😂 laai die res van die kalender met toere!!
I've actually told a few people before that if the sport is ever going to grow you have to kill the Six Nations and Rugby Championship. Maybe expand it and hold it every two years as an alternative but as an annual competition all it does is make money for the top teams and keeps the smaller nations out.
Ek hou van jou idee!
Why not SA person were the best exsmple
Mark Alexander was in contention at one stage but I think he eventually withdrew.
Victim complex or not. Screw Bill Beaumont and World Rugby as well as anyone who has a problem with the Boks. Love from a Saffa 🇿🇦
Jeffrey, you and I are thinking the same things.
where's SA
The northern hemisphere is always targeting the south. It's NOT just about stopping the Boks they had been trying to stop the All Blacks before that. There's always northern bias in world rugby. Less subs will mean players get tired creating more opportunities for running rugby. More subs were brought in to stop the ABs who continuously won games in the last 15 minutes.
They have the money and money equals power so in that sense there's not much we can do but we have to resist their nonsense as much as we possibly can.
Only one point - Beaumont is gone!
Yes, this video was recorded ahead of the elections as a preview to who might take over from him.
Now we know. Sadly I think it's just going to be a continuation of the Beaumont era.
Any one but a Pom please!
Hahahaha!
Having rugby teams playing as many games as the soccer WC during such a short span of time will not be good on the players. Rugby is a collusion sport. Players are injured a lot more frequently and more seriously.
You have to have a week in between Tests. There is at least a limit on how many matches professionals can play. I actually think they can bring it down.
Benazie
I'm with you!
Rassie or Gus Pichot are the only reasonable options ..
Sadly Gus was beaten last time by Bill Beaumont. I would have loved Gus to get in.
Maybe in time to come Rassie could take that job!
No American equity firms should come near the Bokke. Show me one example of an American equity firm that took over a club/province/nation and didn't mess it up. Just take a good look at MAN Utd to see what they are capable of. Grow the sport among the grassroots, get more viewers and opportunities for people to play, and TV revenue will already grow. Don't need dirty American money.
It's important to distinguish between the domestic and the international game. Personally I don't have a problem with it but it needs to be a good deal for us as well. This last offer seemed to be weighted disproportionately in favour of the Americans. We can't have that.
We should always be open to growing our commercial side but we have to be intelligent about it.
@frontrowrugby I'll take another example... The All Blacks. It's not been that long since they got a massive equity deal. And as a Springbok, I have the utmost respect for them. But did that deal really help them? Are they better off now than before?
SA rugby have been doing a lot of things right, in a country where things often don't go the way you plan. And a big part of that was real, honest integration. It started with bulletjie rugby. And today we have a captain that benefited from that. That investment literally paid off in millions thanks to the viewership increases. And that's really what drives most sport. It's viewership numbers. The more people that watch, play and know about it, the more money. Those dirty, soulless hedge fund managers will probabaly put big games behind paywall such as a 'pay per view'. They charge exorbitant fees for tickets. A college football game can easily cost you more than a $1000. American investment (and sport philosophy in general) is opposed to the belief of rugby loving fans all over the world. Fok hulle.
There are a few differences. SA is actually far more attractive. We have 10x the population New Zealand has - that's 10x the amount of customers! Or potential customers.
Also we are in a good time zone compared to them. Our potential for growth is massive compared to the kiwis.
Then you apply those numbers to broadcast deals and you can see how the All Blacks could easily be left behind in the future. That's why I believe their deal isn't working out.
I agree with you SARU have actually done a great job. There was a time when they had a poor reputation but right now they are the best sports federation in SA! Let's hope they continue making wise decisions.
As long as the get rid of the old school Brits
Haha, I'm in!
Listened to an Aussie podcast having a chat with that Dr Robinson. These SAFETY SAFETY characters are here to ruin our preferred and beloved Rugby sport. Even the Aussie guys were put off visibly. This guy IMHO are imposters that want to eliminate the gladiator physicality of our team sport - the last one left - and promote touch rugby. Why don't they bugger-off and join NFL or rugby League? They are going to kill rugby - mark my words. Mark my words I say again. 10 x rather the Benazzi guy!!! Why too are there no All Black or Springbok representatives there?? We should actually break away from these WORLD GOVERNING bodies altogether.
Very interesting. Look I agree that we want the sport to be as safe as possible otherwise parents will never allow their kids to play and within a generation you don't have a sport anymore.
But at the same time you have to accept it's a sport of collisions. Accidents will happen. Anyone playing accepts that risk going in.
To be honest, I do not like the motivations of either a French or Australian Chairman. Both rugby regions have very selfish motivations. With Benazzi, there is a fear he would build the world season to support the club-dominated French union. Regarding Robinson, I am worried about the law changes an Aussie would propose, seeing as that region has a giant boner for league, and I fear that more of the same dissolving of forward play Balmont has been known for.
Yeah look there are pros and cons to every candidate. I don't think there's a perfect platform here but I'd still pick Benazzi over the other two.
Why don't SA just break away and do our own thing?!! We can call it Rugby Union for "Real Men"!😅
Hahaha, love it!
The new guy is going to ruin rugby union.
Hopefully we get the result we need.
bill a fool
Many will agree with you.
Beaumont... Does he know rugby?
He knows how to protect his own interests.
Ozzy made such a mess of rugby in their country, why come make a mess of it globally?
Love it!!
World Rugby is going the Fifa route, how quickly can you sell out the game to it's highest bidder, saturate a manly sport into some family friendly bs so you can attract advertisers etc.. Thus the soft ass yellow cards and red cards.
Constant changing of formats that were never broken.
Also expanding the world cup is useless, you'll just watch more meaningless games.
Go watch the 2007 World Cup and you'll see there was nothing wrong with rugby, so all those law changes and "expanding the game" didn't do shyt, they ruined a game that didn't need change and it's still not any more popular in these "newer" regions than it was before
It's so frustrating, isn't it? I think we need a change at the top which is why I'm picking Benazzi as my man here.
Let's be honest the only reason they're expanding it is because the USA didn't qualify for 2023 and they want the Americans there.
The North is kak with kak ideas. More subs leads to more high energy rugby and a much better spectacle.
I love the way you think!
I always find it amusing that every rule change is met by South Africans as if the rugby world is only penalizing them , changes will always be designed for the good of the sport if they don’t work they can be changed and I don’t believe any team is targeted by world rugby to diminish their chances of growing. If the bomb squad is dangerous for competitors it should be changed, if not leave it alone.
You might find it amusing but the actual chairman of World Rugby has questioned the our tactics despite it actually being in line with their own research on player welfare and safety.
So you believe in coincidence.
And rassie
Just get rid of bill
Well he'll be gone tomorrow.
We know world rugby hates South Africa and they will do everything to snub and undermine SA. He will make sure that Rassie and SA don’t ever get coach of the year!!
I agree. It's such BS. How on Earth could they not give Rassie coach of the year? It's actually a disgrace.
🇿🇦❤...a third world country 😂..with a first world Springbok team 😂...and a corrupt and useless Anc goverment...😢 Go Rassie and Bokke ❤🇿🇦
No surprises regarding the French booing Bill. They are French overall. They boo the English no matter what. We have just learned to shrug it off.
They also booed their president Macron. I won't lie, I enjoyed that part.
@@frontrowrugby😂😂😂😂🎉
But rassie has allredy achieved that
the old fart
Hahahahaha.
No one apart from the Boks themselves actually cares about what a new man will do for them. They got plenty of dodgy ref calls which won them the last WC so stop moaning. As for Beaumont being booed, well that's the French for you, doesn't this bloke understand anything.
Thanks for watching my video and taking the time to leave a comment.
My name is Peter by the way.
This video is obviously only for Sth Africans to watch, clearly playing the Victim mentality card.
Yes, you're right. This channel is indeed for Springbok supporters.
@@frontrowrugbyI like this 😅
just dont sell out to the arab bloc for money like everyone else...golf, tennis, football , motorsports, sailing.....
sorry...should be in the main log not a sub point of this comment
I live in Doha and my house is actually across the road from one of the stadiums that hosted the football World Cup in 2022. I would love it if the Springboks came to play here.
I think we should have less subs. Fatigue is not as big a part of the game as it used to be.
It is interesting you say that because World Rugby conducted their own research and found that more substitutions actually results in a decrease in serious injuries.
What stops other team from doing what the boks are doing so that's bullshit
Nothing. They just hate it when they don't come up with the ideas.
What's with the SA victim complex? There's no conspiracy against you guys, your team won two world cups in a row and you can't complain the referees were trying to prevent it, chill out a bit.
Yeah we are indeed starting to get more favourable refereeing decisions. Sorry but it's also about bloody time given how we were treated for many years.
No conspiracy you say? Want to explain Bryce Lawrence's 2011 Rugby World Cup quarter-final performance? And then subsequently never reffed again but was promoted to Head of Referees in New Zealand.
Or was that just a co-incidence?
2 WC wins yes and now world rugby implementing laws to combat our strengths. It's funny though we will work around it and win 3 in a row or atleast get damn close.
But that's just how it is if a team becomes too good at something or too dominant the laws with evolve to level the field, always has been. Ireland were good at slowing sown rucks, laws are being changed for a more free-flowing game. France used to steal loads of balls at the breakdown, laws were changed to make challenges a lot more difficult. Honestly no scrum from mark law change makes perfect sense to me. And I don't see how it hurts SA that much. SA did it like... Once. If WR wanted to hurt SA a lot they would do something against box kicks which are SA's main strength.
Get lost John. Rules keep on changing because the Boks are strong on all departments...so go and cry around corner. D.O.E.S.!
Further more John, why did the rugby body changed their name ? I'm sure there was a huge law-suit coming their way. FIFA never changed their name even after Plater's criminal records...don't come out from behind that building yet.
Rubbish
Elaborate.
What a load of BS. Look at what SA rugby did to Super Rugby. Selfish CUNext Tuesday’s.
New Zealand and Australia kicked South Africa out. See you next Tuesday.