Certainly, it was against my expectations!
The Lions played the better Rugby, took their chances, and ran with the ball. This is what Rugby was always about!
When I read that John Smit was concerned about the citing and subsequent banning of Bakkies Botha for his shoulder charge into Adam Jones in a ruck, I was alarmed, rugby has never been about trying to injure your opponent. Armless tackles in the open have been outlawed so why should a shoulder charge into a man bound to a ruck be legal? The fact that the particular event did cause an injury should have been enough to say "wait a minute is, that, what the game is about?" I have been concerned for quite a long time about the ferocity with which people are "taken out" of the ruck.
Rugby is a rough and tough game, with little quarter given and none asked, certainly there is a need for clarification of the rules particularly as regards the maul and the ruck. It was fairly clear from the bemused expressions on both Captains faces, as they got answers from the ref for some of his decisions, that I am not the only one who does not understand the rules.
Clearly, on the day the Lions were the better side. They adapted much better to the calls being made by the ref and showed when they got opportunities they could run with the ball.