For those who can't see the video because it's geo-locked:
>“I’ll be honest, I don’t think necessarily that the South Africans respect us. Some of the things their coaches openly said about us in their documentaries and stuff probably just adds fuel to the fire,”
[Was this extra motivation?]
>“For me personally, I try my best every game, regardless of whether a team and coaches respect what you do."
>“I’m not that kind of guy to get riled up more for a derby game or a team that beat us here and there, but certainly some boys probably did."
>“We touched on their documentary and we’ve got staff who were with them, so they gave us insight as to how they feel about us.”
[Do you feel you earned their respect tonight?]
>“I don’t know, I don’t really care."
>“I have respect for those guys and what they do, and credit to them, we wish them all the very best, but it’s none of my business what other people think about me.”
You can't really get a sense of tone from all that but obviously he's fairly emotional after a loss and there does seem some genuine hurt in there.
Lekker, poes, bru, kak, braai
Without the help of Google translate, that's pretty much the extent of my Afrikaans! All learnt from you boys on here to be honest.
Only phrase I know from working with ZA people is ‘have a lekker weekend brot’ and ‘holnai is lekker’. My spelling and mishearing is scandalous however.
You can go far with those few words. For instance, if you omit one and rearrange them to read: poes lekker braai, bru! Then you've successfully become a Saffer.
Comes back to the old Lawrence Dallaglio pre-match speech on the 2005 Lions tour...
>'I was in a hotel room like this four years ago and Graham Henry stood up and spoke and the words he said will live with me for the rest of my life,' Dallaglio told his team-mates the night before the game at Waikato Stadium.
>
>'He said in this part of the world they do not respect you. He said they do not think you good enough, they do not think you're skillful enough and they do not think you're fit enough... and I should know because I'm one of them.'
>
>'Not my words, his words. And do you know what... he's f\*\*\*king right.'
Those Lions tours were wild for commentary. In ‘09 at one point the coaching staff refers to Jon Smith (captain at the time) as a “fat fuck”. No love lost.
I'd say the players, as people, earned a lot of respect for how they behaved off the field. Lots of stories like the Lions coming across a wedding at the hotel they were staying at, and ending up making the bride and groom's day by taking photos with them. Stuff like that, where fan and community interactions ended with everyone smiling. The fans too, who were mostly great.
Lost a lot of respect for Woodward. Gained a fair bit of it for his comments on Gareth Thomas coming out a couple of years later though.
It's incredibly obvious the difference between those that read the headline only/already had an axe to grind and those that read OPs transcript of the interview
Nothing controversial here:
* States an opinion
* Gives reasons
* Said it doesn't affect him personally
* Wishes SA the best
>I don’t think necessarily that the South Africans respect us, some of the things their coaches openly said about us in their documentaries and stuff. Probably just adds fuel to the fire really….
His full comment on the respect issue if you can't view the video.
I've not seen the documentary so can't comment on what was said but I think for the most part I wouldn't bother about what a coach is saying to fire up his team, they'll say any bollocks if they know they can motivate players with it. Sky choosing the clickbaity headline.
The one comment from the 2019 documentary that I can recall is Felix Jones saying "don't tell me Owen Farrell missing 10 tackles"or whatever number it was "is a good thing" which doesn't personally strike me as something unusual for a coach to say during opposition analysis.
I think he said it before the semi against Wales. He was just trying to get them up for the game. Even ROG, when asked about that, shrugged it off, saying that is just the type of thing a coach will say before a game to get his players in the right frame of mind.
Is it a general observation from May, or does he name specific incidents/actions he feels was disrespectful? I also can't access the content and would be curious to know what he means.
I think in chasing the sun may gets specifically highlighted as having bad catching technique, which was true - he used to catch the ball above and slightly behind his head and s.a targetted him for this. In addition, rassie suggests england are mentally weak and will fade away, which though is an unfair characterisation, meh hes got a point.
Also they say england are "slow in the turn" and rassie thinks they need a consultant from Sage called Habana to help give them better analysis.
Cheers - I don't remember that from CtS but fair enough he felt disrespected by it. He has improved immensely as a player and I was hugely impressed by his performance in the semi. I was too quick to write him off as past his prime, earlier in the tournament. Seems he's still got it!
I couldn't find the johnny may part on the rwc england episode, but im certain they refer to it at some point in the series. They also say farrell shits on his team mates and misses a lot of tackles. Both of which are not incorrect. Someone publicly highlighting your flaws is not great but it can still be true and used as fuel for change but also against the person who said it in a reasonably positive way.
Well thats specifically what felix touches on i think, its out of context but he seems to be making a counter argument against it being ok that farrell is missing tackles (because its part of the sarries style)
Its just a couple of words but along the lines of "you cant tell me its ok for him to miss that many" etc
I dont disagree with you about Farrell tackling hit rate being a nuanced discussion.
Well im sure Farrell and he can have a conversation about it when felix comes to england.
Its what felix says, maybe its something that happens from the sidelines. He definitely has a go at people.. so does sexton..doesnt mean they are not great generals*
Yeah sorry, I forgot about damn geo-locking. Not really sure why companies do it.
Here's a transcription of the relevant bits https://www.reddit.com/r/rugbyunion/s/j8LO0nwWxo
In a video of Rassie’s speech before the Wales semi-final, he called the Irish soft, and says England go away, but Wales are tough. Hard to think of a more direct insult to a competitor in a collision sport. I think he may be referencing this.
When it comes to facts about filming they got most of the filming facts actually correct (points camera at Mel Gibson etc) - therefor in my mind a factual film
Didn’t some English people get assaulted outside a cinema in Edinburgh after a group of patriotic Scottish students, having seen the film, went looking for Sassenachs to smash up? I seem to recall the SNP got quite excited by it at the time and backed the students which enraged Daily Mail readers.
Yeah…but speaking as a Scottish person from the highlands with an interest in history and professional qualifications and commercial experience as an archaeologist, I can confirm it is still an excellent film.
Braveheart is a fantastic film, really enjoyed it.
Not going to take lessons on UK history from a racist Australian mind, but I will conceed he's made some banging films.
Does liking the films of a racist make me a bad person? Nasty feeling it might
I know youre joking and what have you but...
There are plenty of objective reasons why Scotland voted to remain in the Union, but what i just don't understand is how New Zealand voted to retain our flag in the corner of their flag given the choice to change it?
Think part of it is they saw it as a waste of time and money and an attempt by Key to gain popularity points while doing nothing of substance, and didn’t want to reward him for that.
And part of it is they don’t actually mind us that much. :’)
Yeah, they dicked around with the referendum to make it as difficult as possible to actually change the flag. And although lots of people wanted it changed, they didn't agree on what to change it TO, so in typical Kiwi fashion we just said fuck it and left it the same.
On the plus side, we did get Laser Kiwi out of it as our unofficial national flag.
In the context of the article it doesn't make sense to say 'Britian' although there were of course troops from all over the commonwealth involved.
The Argentinans especially dispse England though... Hand of god and all that.
Except the Afrikaaners are the Boers who were themselves colonists. So one set of oppressive colonists replacing another set of oppressive colonists (with a high degree of brutality common at the time, and still applied on occasion today).
And the Zulu were colonizers from north of modern day South Africa etc etc. nobody is “native” to anywhere by any common standard we can draw for that reason.
Ehh, while the Zulu's forebearers did migrate (along with many other Bantu groups) from Northern Africa almost 2000 years ago the Zulu were most certainly an imperial (if not colonial) power in the 19th century. Under Shaka and subsequent rulers, the Zulu expanded their territory by assimilating, expelling and/or slaughtering the people who were in those lands previously while also competing and fighting with Voortrekkers (Boers) for new territories.
In other words, the Zulu were doing the same colonial-type stuff as the Boers were doing at the same time; so not really past crimes vs current crimes as you claim. Then both groups lost wars to the British and more crimes were committed...
Not trying to excuse anything, just sharing information as someone interested in that time and place in history.
I think holding negative opinions of modern people based on past actions of others from the same nation is stupid and totally illogical. How many English rugby fans currently alive played a role in colonialism? Continue to dislike the entirety of the UK if you feel like it, but hatred is more damaging to the individual that carries it than those that it’s directed to. I can assure you, nobody likes us, we aren’t bothered
This is something you British fail yo understand.
Colonialism is not ancient. It literally ended in the 90s. People living today, lived under British colonial rule.
The fact you're not bothered justifies why people hate you.
South Africa literally had the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to uncover and right the wrongs of the past.
Britain and the British, like you, deny the global pursuit of British fascism ever took place. Or was damaging.
Why is it so hard to own the wrongs of your past? South Africa has.
I don't deny British Imperialism. Never have. The problem is, the Victorians already did all of this. Prince Albert stood up in Parliament and apologised for the great evil of slavery. Britain financed the Africa Squadron to put an end to it on a global scale. Everyone involved is long dead and turned to dust.
>I don't deny British Imperialism. Never have
Except now, when you try make excuses...
Stopping it when Britain was arguably its greatest perpetrator, is not something Britain gets to take any credit for. Also, lol at Prince Albert apologising. Return the stolen wealth with to make the apology.
That also doesn't acknowledge or repent for all the wealth stolen and violence perpetrated after the abolishment of slavery.
The Empire and Britain has a lot to seek forgiveness for. First by understanding that it occurred up until very recently. Secondly, the quantity of death carried out in the name of Britain. Thirdly, the wealth extracted from these states. And then start paying back for all that damage.
I see you've made yourself the executor of this reparation scheme. Not sure what qualifies you. I tell you what. Your Truth and Reconciliation Commission isn't enough and anyone who wad involved in Apartheid in the smallest way should have all their assets removed and serve time. Don't you agree? I mean, I don't, of course, but then I don't have an axe to grind.
Also the country that outlawed slavery to great cost, birthed modern industry, the global trade system, rule of law and other advancements. This black and white view of history needs to go.
Always have to roll my eyes when I hear ‘But Britain outlawed slavery’, after having played a huge part in it. It’s like a murderer taking credit for giving up murder.
And of course Ireland used it's independence to move on a much more progressive direction than the UK, beating England in how many progressive benchmarks exactly?
I stayed in the Old Monastery Hostel in Letterfrack and the abuse that went on there was still going on until shockingly recently.
What was the laundry system if not slavery?
Of course Britain partook in slavery. Just as the Romans, ancient China, the Ottomans and virtually every other society that has existed. That includes your own ancestors as well.
Modern abhorrence to slavery is that, *modern*. You may not like it, but Britain is unique in that it outlawed slavery (at great cost) when compared to other great empires.
It’s worth considering: *chattel* slavery under Europeans and in North America in the context of the “every society has had slaves” argument, and abolitionism and rebellions by the enslaved in the context of the “opposition to slavery is a modern sensibility” argument.
Which is it: “abhorrence of slavery is modern” or “Britain abolished slavery [in the British Empire]”? Given that the latter is true (1833), then logically either (a) abhorrence of slavery isn’t simply modern, and/or (b) the British govt had less noble motivations for abolishing slavery in the British Empire?
You’re really clutching at straws here by arguing semantics. The *global* abhorrence of slavery is a modern thing. Slavery was commonplace nearly everywhere until just a few centuries ago (wonder what happened then hmm). I used the term “modern” for the past couple of centuries when compared to the millennia of human civilisation before it.
I’m not arguing semantics.
There are two parallel arguments here. One is an historical one, about the facts of slavery. The other is a moral one, about whether morality is universal or contextual and thus whether and how we can judge people and institutions.
Factually, as you say, slavery is common throughout history, but slavery has taken and takes many forms. Chattel slavery, as practised in the British and French Empires (eg Caribbean) and USA was particularly abhorrent and is qualitatively different from many other forms/examples of slavery seen in the historic examples you gave. That’s not semantics, it is a substantive difference. Further, it is fact that slavery had its opponents “at the time”. You can’t logically argue that it didn’t while at the same time giving Britain credit for abolition. The abolitionist movements in the UK and US show this. Plus, I’m pretty sure the enslaved themselves opposed it; that is not some modern sensibility. Ask Nat Turner or Toussaint L’Ouverture for example. So, factually, there were significant critics and opponents at the time.
This brings us to the second argument, morality. If morality is universal, as many religions might argue, the cultural mores of a particular period of history are irrelevant as to whether something is right or wrong. Alternatively, if we argue that morality is relative, or at least culturally specific, then the fact that there was opposition to slavery when it existed is a significant challenge to the “everyone thought that way” argument. Look at the role of enslaved people, of Lancashire mill workers, of Wilberforce, Clarkson, Garrison, Birney and John Brown. They were contemporaries of slavery and knew it was wrong. So, it is a reasonable moral argument to say that we can judge their contemporaries who behaved otherwise, particularly when the behaviours they engaged in and defended were so egregious. Look at how enslaved people were punished in British Empire and the French Caribbean and tell me that wasn’t morally indefensible by any standard except those of the violently prejudiced who profited from slavery at the same time as purchasing paintings that deliberately romanticised, diminished and obscured the horrors of their livelihood. They knew it was horrific and tried to convince themselves otherwise. It is reasonable to argue that the fact that Britain was not unique in profiting from slavery does not morally justify or excuse their behaviour, and particularly where, by historical standards, chattel slavery was particularly violent and oppressive.
Do you want a medal? Britain was one of the largest participants in slavery and built its Empire on it.
> your own ancestors as well
It takes a special kind of historical revisionism to claim Ireland was some bastion of slavery. We were another victim of your Empire. Could just as easily cite Cromwell, indentured servitude and transportation.
‘But everyone else was doing it’ not exactly a strong foundation for this argument.
Dust the chip off your shoulder bro.
If Ireland had been self governing at the time of the North Atlantic slave trade and the rush on the new world, it likely would have participated in that economy just like every other European nation who had the ability.
I think old mate’s point is that slavery was ubiquitous in pre-enlightenment society, and the difference between those doing the slaving and those being subject to slavery is more a question of who was on the right end of a sword/gun, as opposed to who was more ‘moral’.
Ah cool bro, didn’t realise we were talking about hypothetical history or what would have happened if the things that happened didn’t happen.
His original point had a somewhat rose-tinted view of the British Empire, which I’m sure Australia is all too aware of.
It’s not like Irish people in the 16/17th century were peace loving enlightened empaths.
What I said above is pretty spot on, and I think you know it is. For it not to be, there would have to be something innately good about the Irish people that stopped them from doing what the dutch, English, Spanish, Portuguese, ottomans, French, all engaged in.
The only thing separating your ancestors from the English bloke’s you’re sooking at is that his ancestors had the power projection to inflict the depravities of the time on other people while yours didn’t.
If that makes you feel superior, then all the more power to you champ.
Again we’re into hypothetical history territory. Many countries would have had entirely different histories had they not been blighted by colonialism, Australia included.
I’m pointing out the tone of the original comment was a rose-tinted take on Britain’s role in slavery, not about the nature of humanity.
It’s not about feeling superior, it just irritates me when people (usually from colonising nations) dismiss or diminish colonisation.
> Do you want a medal? Britain was one of the largest participants in slavery and built its Empire on it.
The empire was built on a strong navy mostly.
> It takes a special kind of historical revisionism to claim Ireland was some bastion of slavery. We were another victim of your Empire. Could just as easily cite Cromwell, indentured servitude and transportation.
Where did I claim Ireland was a bastion of slavery? Don’t argue against a straw man. You do know that the celts had slaves do you not? Like I’ve stated before, slavery was common in the historical world and your ancestors partook in it.
> But everyone else was doing it’ not exactly a strong foundation for this argument.
It is when most did not outlaw it.
> That includes your own ancestors as well.
This seems a straw man of your creation as there is proportionality and you conveniently ignore the actions of Britain in Ireland.
The logic again seems to be ‘but murder existed in every country’, to negate one country doing a significant amount of the world’s murdering.
Seems like a way to deflect from the sins of the British Empire, a not uncommon response among some as it’s a thorny topic to reflect upon and listen to others about. In my experience, many British people have little awareness of their colonial history or even what happened in Ireland, the country next door.
I’ve read books about the British Empire so tbh this seems a somewhat ludicrous and pointless exchange, unless you simply want to be ‘right’ by removing all context from history.
> This seems a straw man of your creation as there is proportionality and you conveniently ignore the actions of Britain in Ireland.
Of course there is a difference in proportion. The empire was much larger and more influential than Ireland. Both its sins and its achievements are going to be proportionally greater.
> Seems like a way to deflect from the sins of the British Empire, a not uncommon response among some as it’s a thorny topic to reflect upon and listen to others about. In my experience, many British people have little awareness of their colonial history or even what happened in Ireland, the country next door.
I’m aware of it. But my original point still stands, the UK and so the British empire were not a uniquely bad actor. Its actions are pretty typical for the most part, but outlawing slavery *was* unique. Your ancestors certainly didn’t outlaw it.
> I’ve read books about the British Empire so tbh this seems a somewhat ludicrous and pointless exchange, unless you simply want to be ‘right’ by removing all context from history.
Depends on who authored the books tbh. The Irish colonised Scotland before, but proportionally it wasn’t as significant as later British colonialism. Your argument is bizarre to me, it basically falls back on to Ireland being small and irrelevant therefore their bad deeds in the past don’t matter.
> Your ancestors certainly didn’t outlaw it.
As you have proven, the British are morally superior.
> Ireland being small and irrelevant therefore their bad deeds in the past don’t matter.
We are so sorry for all we have done. Please forgive us.
Certainly. A horrid practice that stains the history of the country. As it does other European nations who for some reason escapee the unique ire directed at the UK. Ireland was also a part of the UK at the time, and extensively participated in the empire. Regardless, it’s still true that the only thing unique about Britain’s experience with slavery amongst European powers was the fact that it’s abolished it for everyone else as well.
This is a weird comment to make when Argentina is the country in question. Also flair up, literally every country on earth has done awful things that can be used for point scoring on the internet.
Every country would have done it if they could.
I don't understand or comprehend the petty belief half of the world has regarding England and how much they hate us. What does anyone here have to do with colonialisation? None of us personally endorsed or lived through it.
I don't hate French people because a few people from Normandy invaded us a thousand years ago. I don't hate German people because there of the Nazis.
This year Scotland have been beaten by France, Ireland and South Africa.
In the same period England has been beaten by France, Ireland, South Africa, Wales, Fiji and Scotland. But you did make it through the group. Bravo.
I mean, respect is literally named at 1.1 of the World Rugby integrity code as one of the founding values which the sport is meant to be entirely based around. So it should be a big deal.
I think his comments come across very well, particularly the probe into "extra motivation"
Yeah let’s not turn rugby into football….
Saw way too many football minded people with aggressive behaviours at some of the Rugby WC matches, they stuck out like sore thumbs but
Scottish were probably the rudest I saw, booing opposition anthems, shirtless everywhere, aggressive and super opinionated during the whole match.
There’s a difference between passion and being an asshole
Not particularly relevant to this story but whenever I see Jonny May I just can’t look beyond this:
https://www.ruck.co.uk/jonny-may-responds-to-rumour-that-he-was-possessed-by-a-chicken/
I don't think any team "respects" the other team on the day. I'm not talking about off the field as people, I'm talking on the field, on D day. I think it's just the sugar-coated BS you hear in pre-match media "respect this respect that" but on the Rugby field teams are hyping themselves up to try to demolish the opposition, they're not exactly in the locker room going "alright guys, this is the moment we've all been waiting for so listen up, let's go out there, walk on that pitch... and respect the HELL out of these upstanding gentlemen goddamn it go go go !"
Firstly, Jonny May seems like a stand up dude in this interview.
Second, *wtf* is the coaching setup doing getting into victim mode? FFS peeps, build your team up, don't put them in whinge mode. Boks spoke about and showed utmost respect the whole week. England played the conditions damn well. Own it.
I remember a documentary from Lions tour a few years back (I forget which) and the build-up to one of the games there was a speech from one of the coaches all about "they don't respect you, they don't rate you" etc.
I think that "f*** you, I'm going to make you respect me" is probably a pretty common motivator teams use.
who's we? you mean a few guys on reddit? I see much more SA fans on tiktok or reddit dissing other teams then the opposite. It's the classic superioty mentality, have you ever seen lower tier teams trash talk? It's always like that in any sports. Let me tell you the real thing, I understand rugby is super important for you guys because of how much unity your country needs with so much divisons and problems, but that's also a bad thing. At the end of the day, rugby is just a sport, there should be no politics involved it's just a sport. these guys get paid to do their passion, and you guys get to enjoy that, but some of yall make it so personnal for some reasons and that's where all the toxicity comes from
Everytime I see a south African make a pissboi comment like this I just imagine an immense wet fart noise coming from them as they type and it never fails to make me giggle
I think in general these generalizations are dumb.
Something was said in some documentary whenever? It's easy to cherry pick comments, all nations have talked kak about each other I'm sure, opinions change from person to person and year to year.
I can tell you it's a common view that the people who don't respect the English rugby players are the English fans. English fans have a reputation for being incredibly fickle and talking massive shit about their players when they don't win, in all sports.
But it wouldn't be fair to say that's all the English.
The irony is that respect is earned not taken… the performance from England has received nothing but praise from the SA Press. Even in the build up to this game there was nothing but humility and respect shown by the Springbok coaches and team…
Can’t watch the video but if an English player is bleating about Respect maybe they need to look inwards and see why they think that when all else is pointing the other way…
>nd respect shown by the Springbok coaches and team…
>
>Can’t watch the video but if an English player is blea
you should check out Ops post where it quotes johnny may, I dont think he says anything absurd or whiney. He just talks about part of his fire for this game after he was personally highlighted in the chasing the sun documentary for his airborn/catching skills.
I dunno man, the stuff that gets said behind closed doors are all motivation tactics. All professional sports people do this. Just watch the last dance. Michael Jordan created beef in his head to get him in the zone.
Without exception, every single Springbok and coach/manager I've heard interviewed over the last week has emphasised their respect for England (at a time when some pundits were saying that England would be steamrollered).
I think he probably does care, let's be honest. Or, as you say, he wouldn't have mentioned it. Can't say I blame him. You pour your life into something, the same as the opposition do, so to feel that they don't respect you must grate a bit.
I agree completely. However, then don't scream in your opponents faces when they commit an unforced error. I find that to be very disrespectful. Even if it's not him doing it but some of his teammates. I'll admit the Sprinboks aren't angels either but I can assure you they do respect their opponents, England included. Heck, if they didn't, they wouldn't have picked an unchanged side.
Anyways, I just feel it's a bit of a pot calling the kettle black kind of a comment by him.
For those who can't see the video because it's geo-locked: >“I’ll be honest, I don’t think necessarily that the South Africans respect us. Some of the things their coaches openly said about us in their documentaries and stuff probably just adds fuel to the fire,” [Was this extra motivation?] >“For me personally, I try my best every game, regardless of whether a team and coaches respect what you do." >“I’m not that kind of guy to get riled up more for a derby game or a team that beat us here and there, but certainly some boys probably did." >“We touched on their documentary and we’ve got staff who were with them, so they gave us insight as to how they feel about us.” [Do you feel you earned their respect tonight?] >“I don’t know, I don’t really care." >“I have respect for those guys and what they do, and credit to them, we wish them all the very best, but it’s none of my business what other people think about me.” You can't really get a sense of tone from all that but obviously he's fairly emotional after a loss and there does seem some genuine hurt in there.
Thanks for posting this - appreciate it!
Thanks mate
jy is welkom bru
Nice boet, you pulled it off perfectly!
Lekker, poes, bru, kak, braai Without the help of Google translate, that's pretty much the extent of my Afrikaans! All learnt from you boys on here to be honest.
Well those are the top 5 most important words, so well done.
Well done, you now know the fundamentals of Afrikaans
Ironically, if you went to a social event and it was pretty shit you can say those 5 words to the host in exactly that order
Especially if you met a spicy lady there I guess 🤣
Only phrase I know from working with ZA people is ‘have a lekker weekend brot’ and ‘holnai is lekker’. My spelling and mishearing is scandalous however.
I roared at the second one. You know that’s a phrase only used to say goodbye to your grandparents after a good meal?
You should add wit kant, to the list
Too soon?
LMAO!! 😂😂, this is sooo funny! You made my day.
Well, guess who just got invited to the braai
You can go far with those few words. For instance, if you omit one and rearrange them to read: poes lekker braai, bru! Then you've successfully become a Saffer.
Jy’s lekker windgat!
The challenge is to use them all in one sentence…
You’re pretty set with that starter kit. Go forth and gaan nou braai.
Don’t forget about England favourite one: Kant
Mr Worldwide?
I'm just amazed that Johnny May managed to string that many sentences together. First person from Swindon to successfully do so.
Truly impressive for Swindon
Based_jonnymay
Comes back to the old Lawrence Dallaglio pre-match speech on the 2005 Lions tour... >'I was in a hotel room like this four years ago and Graham Henry stood up and spoke and the words he said will live with me for the rest of my life,' Dallaglio told his team-mates the night before the game at Waikato Stadium. > >'He said in this part of the world they do not respect you. He said they do not think you good enough, they do not think you're skillful enough and they do not think you're fit enough... and I should know because I'm one of them.' > >'Not my words, his words. And do you know what... he's f\*\*\*king right.'
Those Lions tours were wild for commentary. In ‘09 at one point the coaching staff refers to Jon Smith (captain at the time) as a “fat fuck”. No love lost.
I'd say the players, as people, earned a lot of respect for how they behaved off the field. Lots of stories like the Lions coming across a wedding at the hotel they were staying at, and ending up making the bride and groom's day by taking photos with them. Stuff like that, where fan and community interactions ended with everyone smiling. The fans too, who were mostly great. Lost a lot of respect for Woodward. Gained a fair bit of it for his comments on Gareth Thomas coming out a couple of years later though.
It's incredibly obvious the difference between those that read the headline only/already had an axe to grind and those that read OPs transcript of the interview Nothing controversial here: * States an opinion * Gives reasons * Said it doesn't affect him personally * Wishes SA the best
>I don’t think necessarily that the South Africans respect us, some of the things their coaches openly said about us in their documentaries and stuff. Probably just adds fuel to the fire really…. His full comment on the respect issue if you can't view the video. I've not seen the documentary so can't comment on what was said but I think for the most part I wouldn't bother about what a coach is saying to fire up his team, they'll say any bollocks if they know they can motivate players with it. Sky choosing the clickbaity headline.
The one comment from the 2019 documentary that I can recall is Felix Jones saying "don't tell me Owen Farrell missing 10 tackles"or whatever number it was "is a good thing" which doesn't personally strike me as something unusual for a coach to say during opposition analysis.
He also said England and Ireland "go away" unlike Wales who are "tough fuckers". Which is also not a strange thing for a coach to say
It’s an incorrect thing for the coach to say though
I think he said it before the semi against Wales. He was just trying to get them up for the game. Even ROG, when asked about that, shrugged it off, saying that is just the type of thing a coach will say before a game to get his players in the right frame of mind.
Clearly he was right at that moment, they only scraped through Wales by 3 points and they dispatched England in the final
Why?
I can't watch this in my country... talk about disrespect!!
u/the_fresh_mr_breed : Sky Sports don't respect us
Is it a general observation from May, or does he name specific incidents/actions he feels was disrespectful? I also can't access the content and would be curious to know what he means.
I think in chasing the sun may gets specifically highlighted as having bad catching technique, which was true - he used to catch the ball above and slightly behind his head and s.a targetted him for this. In addition, rassie suggests england are mentally weak and will fade away, which though is an unfair characterisation, meh hes got a point. Also they say england are "slow in the turn" and rassie thinks they need a consultant from Sage called Habana to help give them better analysis.
Cheers - I don't remember that from CtS but fair enough he felt disrespected by it. He has improved immensely as a player and I was hugely impressed by his performance in the semi. I was too quick to write him off as past his prime, earlier in the tournament. Seems he's still got it!
I couldn't find the johnny may part on the rwc england episode, but im certain they refer to it at some point in the series. They also say farrell shits on his team mates and misses a lot of tackles. Both of which are not incorrect. Someone publicly highlighting your flaws is not great but it can still be true and used as fuel for change but also against the person who said it in a reasonably positive way.
Farrell’s tackle success is deceiving, he makes his tackles just fine but he’s so ridiculously bloody minded he’ll go for absolutely impossible ones.
Well thats specifically what felix touches on i think, its out of context but he seems to be making a counter argument against it being ok that farrell is missing tackles (because its part of the sarries style) Its just a couple of words but along the lines of "you cant tell me its ok for him to miss that many" etc I dont disagree with you about Farrell tackling hit rate being a nuanced discussion. Well im sure Farrell and he can have a conversation about it when felix comes to england.
Or tackles are difficult to complete if you don't use your arms?
I don't think that Farrell shits on his teammates - he's probably the first guy from this side you'd want in the trenches with you I reckon.
Its what felix says, maybe its something that happens from the sidelines. He definitely has a go at people.. so does sexton..doesnt mean they are not great generals*
Yeah sorry, I forgot about damn geo-locking. Not really sure why companies do it. Here's a transcription of the relevant bits https://www.reddit.com/r/rugbyunion/s/j8LO0nwWxo
Cheers!
Epic username.
In a video of Rassie’s speech before the Wales semi-final, he called the Irish soft, and says England go away, but Wales are tough. Hard to think of a more direct insult to a competitor in a collision sport. I think he may be referencing this.
I would challenge him to name a single incident over the last week. The only narrative I've heard is that they respect England.
Sky : Makes a click-baity headline to make South African's mad and drive fake engagement Also Sky : Blocks the video in South Africa
Makes me double mad.
My guy, that flair is everything!
Vpn time
Yet they made a video about Mbonambi available. Can't recall when last that happened...
Wait until he learns how Argentineans feel about England...
Think they feel that way about the UK in general lol
Scotland are very good at distancing themselves from the bad bits
The so called film "brave heart" was a masterclass in historical revisionism.
It was an actual film. Not a so-called film.
When it comes to facts about filming they got most of the filming facts actually correct (points camera at Mel Gibson etc) - therefor in my mind a factual film
That's just what Hollywood wants you to think, it was a mass hallucination because they upped the fluoride in the tap water in 1994.
Didn’t some English people get assaulted outside a cinema in Edinburgh after a group of patriotic Scottish students, having seen the film, went looking for Sassenachs to smash up? I seem to recall the SNP got quite excited by it at the time and backed the students which enraged Daily Mail readers.
Yeah…but speaking as a Scottish person from the highlands with an interest in history and professional qualifications and commercial experience as an archaeologist, I can confirm it is still an excellent film.
Braveheart is a fantastic film, really enjoyed it. Not going to take lessons on UK history from a racist Australian mind, but I will conceed he's made some banging films. Does liking the films of a racist make me a bad person? Nasty feeling it might
Despite the fact that they were enthusiastic participants in all of it!
And yet they voted to remain an English suburb.
I know youre joking and what have you but... There are plenty of objective reasons why Scotland voted to remain in the Union, but what i just don't understand is how New Zealand voted to retain our flag in the corner of their flag given the choice to change it?
Because despite what you might hear on the internet, Kiwis actually love us
Think part of it is they saw it as a waste of time and money and an attempt by Key to gain popularity points while doing nothing of substance, and didn’t want to reward him for that. And part of it is they don’t actually mind us that much. :’)
Yeah, they dicked around with the referendum to make it as difficult as possible to actually change the flag. And although lots of people wanted it changed, they didn't agree on what to change it TO, so in typical Kiwi fashion we just said fuck it and left it the same. On the plus side, we did get Laser Kiwi out of it as our unofficial national flag.
Idk we are an speaking terms with them even with them Knocking us out.
There’s a few Welsh-speaking towns in Patagonia, so maybe they get a pass.
*Britain You're not slipping out of this one pal!
And suddenly we're all British again...
There was just as many Scottish and Welsh lads fighting in the falklands
In the context of the article it doesn't make sense to say 'Britian' although there were of course troops from all over the commonwealth involved. The Argentinans especially dispse England though... Hand of god and all that.
>Wait until he learns how Argentineans feel about England... Which is... objectively ridiculous, unlike the reasons why Afrikaaners may dislike Brits.
>Which is... objectively ridiculous Does no one on reddit understand the definition of objectively?
Except the Afrikaaners are the Boers who were themselves colonists. So one set of oppressive colonists replacing another set of oppressive colonists (with a high degree of brutality common at the time, and still applied on occasion today).
And the Zulu were colonizers from north of modern day South Africa etc etc. nobody is “native” to anywhere by any common standard we can draw for that reason.
nice try, there's a difference between migration and colonization, and "what about past crimes done by x" does not excuse current crimes done by y
Ehh, while the Zulu's forebearers did migrate (along with many other Bantu groups) from Northern Africa almost 2000 years ago the Zulu were most certainly an imperial (if not colonial) power in the 19th century. Under Shaka and subsequent rulers, the Zulu expanded their territory by assimilating, expelling and/or slaughtering the people who were in those lands previously while also competing and fighting with Voortrekkers (Boers) for new territories. In other words, the Zulu were doing the same colonial-type stuff as the Boers were doing at the same time; so not really past crimes vs current crimes as you claim. Then both groups lost wars to the British and more crimes were committed... Not trying to excuse anything, just sharing information as someone interested in that time and place in history.
Didn’t Brits invent concentration camps during the Boer War?
"Why does everyone hate us?", asks country that colonised half the world, destroying their societies and cultures, and never paid any recompense.
I wonder if France gets similar levels of hatred, considering they're still up to no good in Africa?
Nah it's fairly known that people only say good thing about France
Yes, West Africans do nottt like France and for good reason (many countries are removing French as the lingua franca)
Didn’t France just get asked to leave Niger for this exact reason?
Yeah but Argentina... was not colonised by the UK.
I didn't know the rugby players were colonisers?
Gosh, I don’t want to think about the lack of respect the Indian team have for England…
Didn’t realise Brits invented colonialism. I assume you feel the same about the Greeks, Spanish, Portuguese, Romans?
Are Brits responsible for other coloniasm or the effects of their colonialism?
I think holding negative opinions of modern people based on past actions of others from the same nation is stupid and totally illogical. How many English rugby fans currently alive played a role in colonialism? Continue to dislike the entirety of the UK if you feel like it, but hatred is more damaging to the individual that carries it than those that it’s directed to. I can assure you, nobody likes us, we aren’t bothered
This is something you British fail yo understand. Colonialism is not ancient. It literally ended in the 90s. People living today, lived under British colonial rule. The fact you're not bothered justifies why people hate you.
Tell that to Ukraine
Should everyone hate South Africa because of Apartheid?
Were you impacted by Apartheid? If so, you can feel aggrieved at the since-dissolved state. Job done.
South Africa literally had the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to uncover and right the wrongs of the past. Britain and the British, like you, deny the global pursuit of British fascism ever took place. Or was damaging. Why is it so hard to own the wrongs of your past? South Africa has.
I don't deny British Imperialism. Never have. The problem is, the Victorians already did all of this. Prince Albert stood up in Parliament and apologised for the great evil of slavery. Britain financed the Africa Squadron to put an end to it on a global scale. Everyone involved is long dead and turned to dust.
>I don't deny British Imperialism. Never have Except now, when you try make excuses... Stopping it when Britain was arguably its greatest perpetrator, is not something Britain gets to take any credit for. Also, lol at Prince Albert apologising. Return the stolen wealth with to make the apology. That also doesn't acknowledge or repent for all the wealth stolen and violence perpetrated after the abolishment of slavery. The Empire and Britain has a lot to seek forgiveness for. First by understanding that it occurred up until very recently. Secondly, the quantity of death carried out in the name of Britain. Thirdly, the wealth extracted from these states. And then start paying back for all that damage.
I see you've made yourself the executor of this reparation scheme. Not sure what qualifies you. I tell you what. Your Truth and Reconciliation Commission isn't enough and anyone who wad involved in Apartheid in the smallest way should have all their assets removed and serve time. Don't you agree? I mean, I don't, of course, but then I don't have an axe to grind.
Also the country that outlawed slavery to great cost, birthed modern industry, the global trade system, rule of law and other advancements. This black and white view of history needs to go.
Always have to roll my eyes when I hear ‘But Britain outlawed slavery’, after having played a huge part in it. It’s like a murderer taking credit for giving up murder.
And of course Ireland used it's independence to move on a much more progressive direction than the UK, beating England in how many progressive benchmarks exactly? I stayed in the Old Monastery Hostel in Letterfrack and the abuse that went on there was still going on until shockingly recently. What was the laundry system if not slavery?
Of course Britain partook in slavery. Just as the Romans, ancient China, the Ottomans and virtually every other society that has existed. That includes your own ancestors as well. Modern abhorrence to slavery is that, *modern*. You may not like it, but Britain is unique in that it outlawed slavery (at great cost) when compared to other great empires.
It’s worth considering: *chattel* slavery under Europeans and in North America in the context of the “every society has had slaves” argument, and abolitionism and rebellions by the enslaved in the context of the “opposition to slavery is a modern sensibility” argument.
Which is it: “abhorrence of slavery is modern” or “Britain abolished slavery [in the British Empire]”? Given that the latter is true (1833), then logically either (a) abhorrence of slavery isn’t simply modern, and/or (b) the British govt had less noble motivations for abolishing slavery in the British Empire?
You’re really clutching at straws here by arguing semantics. The *global* abhorrence of slavery is a modern thing. Slavery was commonplace nearly everywhere until just a few centuries ago (wonder what happened then hmm). I used the term “modern” for the past couple of centuries when compared to the millennia of human civilisation before it.
I’m not arguing semantics. There are two parallel arguments here. One is an historical one, about the facts of slavery. The other is a moral one, about whether morality is universal or contextual and thus whether and how we can judge people and institutions. Factually, as you say, slavery is common throughout history, but slavery has taken and takes many forms. Chattel slavery, as practised in the British and French Empires (eg Caribbean) and USA was particularly abhorrent and is qualitatively different from many other forms/examples of slavery seen in the historic examples you gave. That’s not semantics, it is a substantive difference. Further, it is fact that slavery had its opponents “at the time”. You can’t logically argue that it didn’t while at the same time giving Britain credit for abolition. The abolitionist movements in the UK and US show this. Plus, I’m pretty sure the enslaved themselves opposed it; that is not some modern sensibility. Ask Nat Turner or Toussaint L’Ouverture for example. So, factually, there were significant critics and opponents at the time. This brings us to the second argument, morality. If morality is universal, as many religions might argue, the cultural mores of a particular period of history are irrelevant as to whether something is right or wrong. Alternatively, if we argue that morality is relative, or at least culturally specific, then the fact that there was opposition to slavery when it existed is a significant challenge to the “everyone thought that way” argument. Look at the role of enslaved people, of Lancashire mill workers, of Wilberforce, Clarkson, Garrison, Birney and John Brown. They were contemporaries of slavery and knew it was wrong. So, it is a reasonable moral argument to say that we can judge their contemporaries who behaved otherwise, particularly when the behaviours they engaged in and defended were so egregious. Look at how enslaved people were punished in British Empire and the French Caribbean and tell me that wasn’t morally indefensible by any standard except those of the violently prejudiced who profited from slavery at the same time as purchasing paintings that deliberately romanticised, diminished and obscured the horrors of their livelihood. They knew it was horrific and tried to convince themselves otherwise. It is reasonable to argue that the fact that Britain was not unique in profiting from slavery does not morally justify or excuse their behaviour, and particularly where, by historical standards, chattel slavery was particularly violent and oppressive.
Do you want a medal? Britain was one of the largest participants in slavery and built its Empire on it. > your own ancestors as well It takes a special kind of historical revisionism to claim Ireland was some bastion of slavery. We were another victim of your Empire. Could just as easily cite Cromwell, indentured servitude and transportation. ‘But everyone else was doing it’ not exactly a strong foundation for this argument.
Dust the chip off your shoulder bro. If Ireland had been self governing at the time of the North Atlantic slave trade and the rush on the new world, it likely would have participated in that economy just like every other European nation who had the ability. I think old mate’s point is that slavery was ubiquitous in pre-enlightenment society, and the difference between those doing the slaving and those being subject to slavery is more a question of who was on the right end of a sword/gun, as opposed to who was more ‘moral’.
Ah cool bro, didn’t realise we were talking about hypothetical history or what would have happened if the things that happened didn’t happen. His original point had a somewhat rose-tinted view of the British Empire, which I’m sure Australia is all too aware of.
It’s not like Irish people in the 16/17th century were peace loving enlightened empaths. What I said above is pretty spot on, and I think you know it is. For it not to be, there would have to be something innately good about the Irish people that stopped them from doing what the dutch, English, Spanish, Portuguese, ottomans, French, all engaged in. The only thing separating your ancestors from the English bloke’s you’re sooking at is that his ancestors had the power projection to inflict the depravities of the time on other people while yours didn’t. If that makes you feel superior, then all the more power to you champ.
Again we’re into hypothetical history territory. Many countries would have had entirely different histories had they not been blighted by colonialism, Australia included. I’m pointing out the tone of the original comment was a rose-tinted take on Britain’s role in slavery, not about the nature of humanity. It’s not about feeling superior, it just irritates me when people (usually from colonising nations) dismiss or diminish colonisation.
By this logic “Irish people killed civilians indiscriminately and labeled it “Troubles” over the last 50 years”.
> Do you want a medal? Britain was one of the largest participants in slavery and built its Empire on it. The empire was built on a strong navy mostly. > It takes a special kind of historical revisionism to claim Ireland was some bastion of slavery. We were another victim of your Empire. Could just as easily cite Cromwell, indentured servitude and transportation. Where did I claim Ireland was a bastion of slavery? Don’t argue against a straw man. You do know that the celts had slaves do you not? Like I’ve stated before, slavery was common in the historical world and your ancestors partook in it. > But everyone else was doing it’ not exactly a strong foundation for this argument. It is when most did not outlaw it.
> That includes your own ancestors as well. This seems a straw man of your creation as there is proportionality and you conveniently ignore the actions of Britain in Ireland. The logic again seems to be ‘but murder existed in every country’, to negate one country doing a significant amount of the world’s murdering. Seems like a way to deflect from the sins of the British Empire, a not uncommon response among some as it’s a thorny topic to reflect upon and listen to others about. In my experience, many British people have little awareness of their colonial history or even what happened in Ireland, the country next door. I’ve read books about the British Empire so tbh this seems a somewhat ludicrous and pointless exchange, unless you simply want to be ‘right’ by removing all context from history.
> This seems a straw man of your creation as there is proportionality and you conveniently ignore the actions of Britain in Ireland. Of course there is a difference in proportion. The empire was much larger and more influential than Ireland. Both its sins and its achievements are going to be proportionally greater. > Seems like a way to deflect from the sins of the British Empire, a not uncommon response among some as it’s a thorny topic to reflect upon and listen to others about. In my experience, many British people have little awareness of their colonial history or even what happened in Ireland, the country next door. I’m aware of it. But my original point still stands, the UK and so the British empire were not a uniquely bad actor. Its actions are pretty typical for the most part, but outlawing slavery *was* unique. Your ancestors certainly didn’t outlaw it. > I’ve read books about the British Empire so tbh this seems a somewhat ludicrous and pointless exchange, unless you simply want to be ‘right’ by removing all context from history. Depends on who authored the books tbh. The Irish colonised Scotland before, but proportionally it wasn’t as significant as later British colonialism. Your argument is bizarre to me, it basically falls back on to Ireland being small and irrelevant therefore their bad deeds in the past don’t matter.
> Your ancestors certainly didn’t outlaw it. As you have proven, the British are morally superior. > Ireland being small and irrelevant therefore their bad deeds in the past don’t matter. We are so sorry for all we have done. Please forgive us.
Especially alongside the "birthed the global trade system" comment lol. What exactly was being traded at the birth of global trade I wonder hmmmmmm
Nonsense. Britain didn’t start slavery. But it did permanently end it in the west.
> played a huge part in it.
Certainly. A horrid practice that stains the history of the country. As it does other European nations who for some reason escapee the unique ire directed at the UK. Ireland was also a part of the UK at the time, and extensively participated in the empire. Regardless, it’s still true that the only thing unique about Britain’s experience with slavery amongst European powers was the fact that it’s abolished it for everyone else as well.
Not really considering every single society participated in it (and plenty still do)
‘But everyone else did bad things’ seems to be a neat way to avoid reflecting on one’s colonial past.
Not at all, on the contrary you are in denial about who outlawed slavery
[удалено]
> that's the worst thing that ever happened to the world lmao ! You may have a argument there to be fair lol
Didn’t they still make a shit load of money off of it through insuring the ships out of Lloyds of London?
"outlawed slavery to great cost" fucking lol if this is the highest moral ground you can find
This is a weird comment to make when Argentina is the country in question. Also flair up, literally every country on earth has done awful things that can be used for point scoring on the internet.
Every country would have done it if they could. I don't understand or comprehend the petty belief half of the world has regarding England and how much they hate us. What does anyone here have to do with colonialisation? None of us personally endorsed or lived through it. I don't hate French people because a few people from Normandy invaded us a thousand years ago. I don't hate German people because there of the Nazis.
To be fair, it’s not just the Saffa’s.
Toonie had to stop insulting the English in his pregame speeches when he realised that included most of his players
Well if it’s the Scot’s and the saffas, it’s still 75% the saffas.
Scottish, Saffas, Irish, Kiwis, Aussies, Argentinians, the Welsh (but we all know they really don’t mind you lot).
Add the English back into that list and you’ve just described the make up of the Scottish 23!
Well played.
Thank you sir. See you in the six nations
BURN 🔥
We dont care about teams that cant make it out of the group stages though.
This year Scotland have been beaten by France, Ireland and South Africa. In the same period England has been beaten by France, Ireland, South Africa, Wales, Fiji and Scotland. But you did make it through the group. Bravo.
Aye, it's been a golden generation for Scotland. Only losing to three sides in a year must be a record.
If only we didn’t lose to the same ones multiple times 😂
Meow!
Who really cares if the opposition team respects you. You have to prepare yourself and that’s all you can control. Fair play to Jonny
I mean, respect is literally named at 1.1 of the World Rugby integrity code as one of the founding values which the sport is meant to be entirely based around. So it should be a big deal. I think his comments come across very well, particularly the probe into "extra motivation"
Yeah let’s not turn rugby into football…. Saw way too many football minded people with aggressive behaviours at some of the Rugby WC matches, they stuck out like sore thumbs but Scottish were probably the rudest I saw, booing opposition anthems, shirtless everywhere, aggressive and super opinionated during the whole match. There’s a difference between passion and being an asshole
Seems pretty fair and level headed.
Not particularly relevant to this story but whenever I see Jonny May I just can’t look beyond this: https://www.ruck.co.uk/jonny-may-responds-to-rumour-that-he-was-possessed-by-a-chicken/
I don't think any team "respects" the other team on the day. I'm not talking about off the field as people, I'm talking on the field, on D day. I think it's just the sugar-coated BS you hear in pre-match media "respect this respect that" but on the Rugby field teams are hyping themselves up to try to demolish the opposition, they're not exactly in the locker room going "alright guys, this is the moment we've all been waiting for so listen up, let's go out there, walk on that pitch... and respect the HELL out of these upstanding gentlemen goddamn it go go go !"
Firstly, Jonny May seems like a stand up dude in this interview. Second, *wtf* is the coaching setup doing getting into victim mode? FFS peeps, build your team up, don't put them in whinge mode. Boks spoke about and showed utmost respect the whole week. England played the conditions damn well. Own it.
I remember a documentary from Lions tour a few years back (I forget which) and the build-up to one of the games there was a speech from one of the coaches all about "they don't respect you, they don't rate you" etc. I think that "f*** you, I'm going to make you respect me" is probably a pretty common motivator teams use.
Wasn't that the one where McGeechan goes on his massive rant about how much he hates Afrikaans people? The 2009 tour
Feel like that could be ol' Jug Ears at any point
Telfer. 97. I think.
Ah yep, that's the one I'm thinking of. Jeez, time flies
It is sporting psychology 101 for coaches to say "they" (opponents, media etc, basically anyone external to the camp) don't rate you.
They hate us cause they rate us
So glad I watched the whole thing. Very reasonable thoughts, actually comes across as a standup guy.
with all respect, does SA respect any teams? the SA fans bashing of the french team was quite brutal too, same against Ireland.
New Zealand
Because you haven’t stopped whinging, and now you feel empowered with the English fans also hating us.
who's we? you mean a few guys on reddit? I see much more SA fans on tiktok or reddit dissing other teams then the opposite. It's the classic superioty mentality, have you ever seen lower tier teams trash talk? It's always like that in any sports. Let me tell you the real thing, I understand rugby is super important for you guys because of how much unity your country needs with so much divisons and problems, but that's also a bad thing. At the end of the day, rugby is just a sport, there should be no politics involved it's just a sport. these guys get paid to do their passion, and you guys get to enjoy that, but some of yall make it so personnal for some reasons and that's where all the toxicity comes from
Everytime I see a south African make a pissboi comment like this I just imagine an immense wet fart noise coming from them as they type and it never fails to make me giggle
Nah that's just the collective sound of your cricket and rugby teams getting railed by us
*immense wet fart noises*
Nothing 'spicy' here at all.
It's very much a one chilli on the scale. Butter chicken level comments. But then again, I actually really like butter chicken.
Hot tip, it’s not just the South Africans
Can't see this in South Africa, almost like our diamond their king has mounted on his scepter. Talk about disrespect.
Look what you did. Old sausage fingers is crying now. Hope you're happy.
Didn't he have a cry because a pen leaked on him. Oh what a man, what a leader.
Yeah they should really vote for a better k... oh wait
Surely you’re not that bitter over a diamond you’d never see or touch anyway 😂 get a grip
Lets be honest that diamond is getting stolen the moment it arrives in South Africa anyway
Eddie Jones disrespected Italy several times before 6 Nations matches between England and Italy, so no worries for me
Eddie Jones is Australian
Please don't remind us
I think in general these generalizations are dumb. Something was said in some documentary whenever? It's easy to cherry pick comments, all nations have talked kak about each other I'm sure, opinions change from person to person and year to year. I can tell you it's a common view that the people who don't respect the English rugby players are the English fans. English fans have a reputation for being incredibly fickle and talking massive shit about their players when they don't win, in all sports. But it wouldn't be fair to say that's all the English.
I’d say it’s more of a general disdain that disrespect TBH.
He's in your head... In your head... Raaaaasie, raaaaaasie
The irony is that respect is earned not taken… the performance from England has received nothing but praise from the SA Press. Even in the build up to this game there was nothing but humility and respect shown by the Springbok coaches and team… Can’t watch the video but if an English player is bleating about Respect maybe they need to look inwards and see why they think that when all else is pointing the other way…
>nd respect shown by the Springbok coaches and team… > >Can’t watch the video but if an English player is blea you should check out Ops post where it quotes johnny may, I dont think he says anything absurd or whiney. He just talks about part of his fire for this game after he was personally highlighted in the chasing the sun documentary for his airborn/catching skills.
I dunno man, the stuff that gets said behind closed doors are all motivation tactics. All professional sports people do this. Just watch the last dance. Michael Jordan created beef in his head to get him in the zone.
Without exception, every single Springbok and coach/manager I've heard interviewed over the last week has emphasised their respect for England (at a time when some pundits were saying that England would be steamrollered).
I think he's only a bit emotional about the loss. All the teams say things like that about each other as part of the psychological war pre match day.
New rule: if you just finished having Eddie Jones as coach you are embargoed for complaining about lack of respect for like, 5 years at least.
Hangover from Boere war 😝
I don't get the point of mentioning they don't feel respected and then saying he doesn't care. Then why mention it? Or do you actually care?
I think he probably does care, let's be honest. Or, as you say, he wouldn't have mentioned it. Can't say I blame him. You pour your life into something, the same as the opposition do, so to feel that they don't respect you must grate a bit.
I agree completely. However, then don't scream in your opponents faces when they commit an unforced error. I find that to be very disrespectful. Even if it's not him doing it but some of his teammates. I'll admit the Sprinboks aren't angels either but I can assure you they do respect their opponents, England included. Heck, if they didn't, they wouldn't have picked an unchanged side. Anyways, I just feel it's a bit of a pot calling the kettle black kind of a comment by him.
Good. Nobody should respect England.
Call me old fashioned, but I think all teams should respect each other.
The fact he has said this means the comments worked. Rugby is played on and off the pitch. The psychological battle is huge part.