Proteas or Bokke? Which team would you prefer to lift the trophy if only one option was possible?

Which team would you prefer to lift the trophy if only one option was possible?

  • Proteas (Cricket)

    Votes: 31 36.5%

  • Bokke (Rugby)

    Votes: 54 63.5%
  • Total voters
    85
Agent_Smith said:
Tough one. I think if the Boks were playing the English or French in the final, I'd say the Boks. But a loss to NZ would be easier to get over.

Seeing the Proteas finally lift the holy grail of cricket would be amazing so I'll go with them.
Click to expand...
So much this, the All Blacks are such a worthy foe, no shame in losing to them.
 
Dups! said:
Proteas?

I would bet my last cent that they will not win it, they will choke as per the norm.
Click to expand...

They've also been screwed over by ICC who are giving India, OZ, England and to a lesser extent NZ privileges.

However, even with those privileges, England still struggle to win.
 
UrBaN963 said:
Bokke winning will unite the country.
Click to expand...

I would not call acquaintances sharing hugs and handshakes for a short time unity. That is the type of very superficial "unity" sports brings.

Real unity is Jan, Rahul and Sipho going to each others houses and enjoying themselves and it should not be forced either.

It's not just in SA where sports creates a facade of unity either. France has been dominating the football world which is a more global sport than rugby for ages and they still do not have good race/intercultural-relations.
 
JuliusSeizure said:
I would not call acquaintances sharing hugs and handshakes for a short time unity. That is the type of very superficial "unity" sports brings.

Real unity is Jan, Rahul and Sipho going to each others houses and enjoying themselves and it should not be forced either.

It's not just in SA where sports creates a facade of unity either. France has been dominating the football world which is a more global sport than rugby for ages and they still do not have good race/intercultural-relations.
Click to expand...
France is full of French people, so you cannot use it as an example.

And yes, it is temporary unity, but unity nonetheless. When people are hugging, they aren't fighting or hijacking and that's worth celebrating.
 
UrBaN963 said:
France is full of French people, so you cannot use it as an example.
Click to expand...

It is a relatable example. They are French but diverse like SA. Their football team regularly demolishing all the other teams has not made them any more united.

UrBaN963 said:
And yes, it is temporary unity, but unity nonetheless. When people are hugging, they aren't fighting or hijacking and that's worth celebrating.
Click to expand...

Superficial unity is not achieving anything because they will just go back to fighting the next day. The only way we will achieve true unity is by having uncomfortable convos and compromising.
 
JuliusSeizure said:
It is a relatable example. They are French but diverse like SA. Their football team regularly demolishing all the other teams has not made them any more united.



Superficial unity is not achieving anything because they will just go back to fighting the next day. The only way we will achieve true unity is by having uncomfortable convos and compromising.
Click to expand...
Yes, but they are French. It's an entirely different ballgame. As a people, they're generally konte.

And of course it's superficial unity dude. It's a game. Still, better than the nonsense we usually deal with.
 
UrBaN963 said:
And of course it's superficial unity dude. It's a game. Still, better than the nonsense we usually deal with.
Click to expand...

Businesses exploit the whole "unity" message because it makes them profits. I hope you okes realize that.

We can all do our bit to create actual unity without them and without sport.
 
JuliusSeizure said:
Businesses exploit the whole "unity" message because it makes them profits. I hope you okes realize that.

We can all do our bit to create actual unity without them and without sport.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you should review which thread you're in. More coffee too.
 
Bokke without a doubt. Right now the rivalry in rugby is as strong as it's ever been. Our team is a uniting force. Cricket seems bland by comparison. I'd rather see the Boks raise the web Ellis for the 4th time before the All Blacks. That will go a long way to shut those AB clowns in the Republic of the WC up.
 
stefan9 said:
That was before d&l. Was 22 of 1 ball. D&L was introduced to haunt us in 2003 when Pollock & co failed to read the top line vs Sri Lanka.
Click to expand...
It was 22 off 7 - because you have to dangle a little bit of hope before you completely crush it ... it then changed to 22/1
You're right about DL though - thanks.

Twelve minutes of rain was all it took to wreck a classic contest and produce the sort of farce that so often crops up when cricket's regulations get themselves in a tangle. In theory, the organisers had come up with a clever ploy to cope with rain interruptions - the reduction in the target was to be proportionate to the lowest-scoring overs of the side batting first, a method that took into account the benefits of chasing, as opposed to setting, a target. That didn't work so well, however, when the chase had been all but completed, and South Africa were made to rue Meyrick Pringle's excellent figures of 9-2-36-2. At first the scoreboard showed a reduction to 22 off seven balls, and then moments later, it read 22 off one (which should in fact have read 21 off one).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter