BS: Rugby World Cup

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Nov 03 - 04:15 AM

My greatest fear Ard, is that should they win they then prove to be poor winners (the Aussies at present are best known for this trait).

A poor loser you only have to put up with for at best a year - a poor winner, particularly of something like a "World Cup" competition you have to suffer for decades (example England's soccer World Cup win).

Still think they have a better than evens chance of doing it though.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: ard mhacha
Date: 12 Nov 03 - 03:48 PM

Correct, Amigo, but to lose at Wembley to Wales was a real upset and didn`t Ireland win at Twickenham, I can still picture Hooker Moore`s face and he WAS a sore loser. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Nov 03 - 01:59 PM

That was the dreaded "choke" I referred to Ard.

On the recent occasions you quote, if memory serves me correctly, the result of the championship was never in doubt, what they failed to achieve by losing those matches were Grand Slams and "Triple Crown" winners titles. They also lost one, unexpectedly, against France so had to console themselves as six-nations champions and holders of the triple crown for that year.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: ard mhacha
Date: 12 Nov 03 - 01:27 PM

Wolfgang, Rugby does throw up the surprise result, I can remember a few years ago England losing out to Scotland, Wales, and Ireland in different years in their last game, with the Championship at stake on all three occasions. I should know I can back losers at Rugby as well as any other sport. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Nov 03 - 11:30 AM

Wolfgang

In international rugby there have only been very few top teams. It has only been fairly recently - with the advent of the Rugby World Cup - that the smaller nations have become even remotely competitive. One of the reasons for this is that the rules allow Australians to qualify as Japanese.

The final 8 teams and the final 4 were pretty certain this time - but there are signs that it may not always be the case.

It would be very patronising indeed to describe the Welsh performance against England as plucky and brave.

......The Welsh performance against England was plucky and brave. *smiles*

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Wolfgang
Date: 12 Nov 03 - 04:04 AM

My lack of knowledge in this sport is so that I am unable to name even a single player of this sport. But I like watching it those rare moments when we get a tiny coverage in German TV.

Please correct me, but my impression is that unlike in football the number of surprises is extremely low. This time so far the only surprises have been how close a game was and not who has won. Is it always like that in rugby?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Gareth
Date: 11 Nov 03 - 06:48 PM

Phot - you go up in my esteam !

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Hrothgar
Date: 11 Nov 03 - 06:47 PM

Chris, do you think the run might have improved them?

Gareth, your view of England v France makes you sound like an Australian watching NZ v South Africa - the best result is a 0-0 draw with thirty injuries!

Australia will have an unchanged run-on team. What's the betting we lose when Wendell Sailor gets exposed in defence - particularly by coming in off his winger.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Phot
Date: 11 Nov 03 - 04:46 PM

HuwG, I can't agree more! Wales were by far the better team, I demand a recount, or better still a replay where Wales win!!

Wassail!
Chris

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Gurney
Date: 11 Nov 03 - 05:04 AM

I'll go with HuwG, kicking makes too much difference. Not because England has a great kicker, NZ has had them, too. When I played (Oh youth) it was one point for a kicked goal (I think) and one for a conversion, three for a try.

If it is an England-NZ final, I can't lose. Can't win either.

"His trousers, they were velveteen. One leg was blue. and one red."

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Nov 03 - 01:50 AM

Looking forward to next week-end and the Semis.

My personal prediction is that NZ will beat Australia and that England will beat France.

To date in this competition France have not been up against any rated opposition and some of those they did come up against held them for the first half. They will have to play against a team that will not fold in the second half. England's biggest problem will be overcoming their tendency to "choke" when faced with the prospect of winning (example: Their lost "Grand Slam" titles over the past few years against sides that they should have completely steam-rollered).

People shouldn't be too hard on England or Johnny Wilkinson - the French have won a few of their games courtesy of their kicker puting them in an unassailable position before the tries came. England and France past records tend to favour an England win, as does the tally of penalties conceeded by each team in this competition.

Biggest drawback if the above prediction is true and they then go on to win the final - we will all have to sit round and listen to it being endlessly referred to for the next forty-odd years.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Gareth
Date: 10 Nov 03 - 06:43 PM

God - I'am torn.

England V France - who the hell does a Good Welshman wish to see win least.

Gareth - Still sulking - Neil Jenkins - where were you when we needed you !

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Arnie
Date: 10 Nov 03 - 02:35 PM

On the radio today, rather predictably, everyone was knocking the English team. Was I in an alternative reality and we really lost on Sunday?? OK, it wasn't our best performance but we won against a strong Welsh team who played their hearts out. Is it now considered illegal to win by kicking penalties?? Any team with a Johnny Wilkinson would be happy to win through his excellent kicking. Bring on the French I say and let's see if England can't raise their performance and beat them. If we win, will be still be criticised if we score less tries than the French and only win on penalty kicks???

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: A Wandering Minstrel
Date: 10 Nov 03 - 08:20 AM

Hrothgar

You might be lucky and get the same referee as on Saturday :|

My heart goes out to Wales though. If those kicks had only gone over....

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Hrothgar
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 09:47 PM

At this stage, I reckon whoever beats the French will be the winner. They played the French game at its best the other night, and with far more discipline than ever before.

My heart almost bled for the Welsh. That first try was right up there with the best.

Now, if Australia keep playing the way we've been playing, I want 50 points start against the Kick One Whack Ones. On the other hand, if we play the way we should be playing, we'll win by a couple of points. This will mean dropping Sailor for Roff or Latham. Losing George Smith will be a blow if it happens, but Cockbain (Matt, not Brent) gives another lineout option.

Now, how do we get at the Ol Blecks' food .........

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Arnie
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 04:25 PM

Bringing on Mike Catt in the second half made all the difference - better bring him on to start against the French. I reckon we can beat the French but the All Blacks in the final will be a different proposition. Still, what do I know, I'm a Leeds fan!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Gareth
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 02:06 PM

HuWG - 2008 be b*****d - roll on the 6 Nations !

Gareth who is now going to sulk for the rest of the tournement.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Tattie Bogle
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 02:00 PM

Sorry, the word is plus not pus!!

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Tattie Bogle
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 01:59 PM

Allons enfants de la patrie! Le jour de gloire est encore pus proche!
I said when France hammered Scotland, they could win the final. I'm backing Les Bleues!

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: HuwG
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 09:12 AM

England v. Wales : one try and eight kicks beat three tries and one conversion. Boo ! Wales played far better rugby.


Ah, well, moral victory for Wales. Roll on 2008.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: ard mhacha
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 07:04 AM

France were kind to Ireland after sealing the game in the first half they decided with the Semi-Final in mind to take their foot of the pedal.
This French side will more than trouble England, right now it is looking like anyone`s game.

Wales lost their game with England simply because they didn`t take their chances, try chances and poor kicking proved fatal, but this Welsh side should take more away from this World Cup than most, they have the makings of a good team, and they are a joy to watch.

We have two mouth watering Semis coming up, still fancy the Blacks. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Phot
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 04:59 AM

England v Wales today, it should be a good match, but who do I cheer for?
Somtimes its a real sod being half Welsh, and half English!

Come on my boyo!

Wassail!

Chris

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Hrothgar
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 01:01 AM

Yes.

Does it have people who understand all of them?

No.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Peace
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 12:02 AM

I'm from Canada. Does rugby have rules?

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Hrothgar
Date: 08 Nov 03 - 11:54 PM

"awful mistake ridden bore" was definitely right.

I was the one who was "mistaken." I paid to go to the game.

If Australia don't improve by 300%, the Ol Blecks will do us by 30 points next week.

Oh, well, hope the Irish and Welsh get up tonight - but don't bet on it with your own money.

I don't know how well the FIFA rules work. Australia seems to have to fight the Third World War every time we want to get our players for representative duty. Mind you, it is a lot easier for a player to be released to play for Englnd by an English club when it doesn't involve flying halfway round the world and back.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 08 Nov 03 - 07:58 PM

NZ'ers are generally pleased if we beat France (still haven't forgiven them for their govt's act of terrorism on our shores in blowing up a ship, and their nuclear activity in the Pacific!), and are excessively pleased if we beat Sth Africa (because we think that some people there still retain a strong dolip of white supremist atitudes!).

NZ teams will always have a lot of Pacific people playing - we are after all the largest island in the South Pacific, and our population is multi-racial - many were born here!

The only sad thing about losing to OZ (if we do!) is coping with their lippyness about it - sigh. Just remember - NZ's entire population is about the size of Sydney.

Go All Blacks!!!!Yeah!!!!!Go antipodaes (..and wild colonial boys)!!

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: ard mhacha
Date: 08 Nov 03 - 12:17 PM

Even mistake ridden. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: ard mhacha
Date: 08 Nov 03 - 07:02 AM

Very impressive showing by NZ, they should have been out of sight by half time, the Aussies v Scotland game was an awful mistaken ridden bore,they will ertainly have to play a lot better against NZ. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Gurney
Date: 08 Nov 03 - 04:26 AM

NZ 29, RSA 9.

Good Game, with the All Blacks tiny advantage leading to an incremental success. Wish we had SA's kicker, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Tattie Bogle
Date: 06 Nov 03 - 06:11 PM

Allons enfants de la patrie! Le jour de gloire n'est pas trop loin!

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Raedwulf
Date: 06 Nov 03 - 05:44 PM

Hrothgar - I'm doubtful about some of your assumptions regarding wages. Your $200,000 (Aus) amounts to about £85K. I'd be surprised if any of these missing players were earning as much as £50K. If they did, they'd probably have the clout to insist on their release!

In any case, when I said that the IRB ought to gurantee their income, I didn't necessarily mean that the IRB ought to fork out themselves. A limited application of FIFA's rules on international selection ought to do the trick - clubs *must* release internationals for the WC (possibly for WC qualification too), & would still be expected to pay them. Compensation could be paid for all players at 60% of their salary or @£300/wk (whichever is less), which is probably a substantial proportion of minnows players wages, but far less so for the big boys.

If the IRB want a real "World" Cup, they must take some kind of action, but I strongly suspect they haven't got the balls.

Ard - Speaking of football, be fair. Most of England's "many millions" play football as their first sport. Although Rugby is regarded as a national sport, it's still very much the poor relation in both finance & numbers compared to football.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: ard mhacha
Date: 06 Nov 03 - 07:53 AM

Yes Hrothgar, I agree with you regarding the Oz and NZ sides fielding those Pacific Islanders, sometimes its hard to know whos playing whom, nearly as bad as England fielding, Bracken[Irish] and Catt [South African] and you can enlighten me as to who the others are, I imagine there is a NZ man whose name I have forgotten.

Ireland, Scotland and Wales can be forgiven for helping themselves to a couple of players whose grannies were banished for loaf pinching, population wise they are many millions short of England`s huge pick. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 06 Nov 03 - 03:58 AM

Ard Mhacha: "I think the Rugby authorities went a bit over the top about England fielding 16 men"
One problem was that the 16th man was told not to take the field by the "fourth official" but ignored the instruction. It was not a mistake, but a blatent disregard of the rules by a team who believe they're above the rules.
Of course, it it was any other team I would probably be more understanding

Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Hrothgar
Date: 06 Nov 03 - 03:43 AM

Interesting to work out the economics. 20 teams with 30 players in each squad makes 600 players.

If each of these is palying at a pretty good level in UK, Europe, or Japan, they will be on about $200,000 per season. If they lose 20% of their season through World Cup duty (including a basic minimum for team camps etc), that is $40,000 eash.

600 x $40,000 = $24,000,000.

Which, in terms of the money generated, is not all that much (it isn't mine at all, so I can say that!).

Where the argument comes in: Should only selected poorer countries have their players paid by the RWC organisation, or should it be a flat fee for all players? The Australian players, for example, will pick up a couple of hundred grand each as their share if they win the Cup. England, France, NZ, and the Jappies would be in the same league. I can see the reaction of these blokes to the proposition.

On the other hand, how should players be selected for the subsidy? Should some no-name amateur from Georgia get the same as Jacob Rauluni (Fiji) or Brian Lima (Samoa), who might be on big contracts elsewhere?

Should the big earners from the powerful countries have the RWC amount added to their already large payout?

These are dififcult questions - but they have to be dealt with, somewhere, and the sooner the better.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Raedwulf
Date: 05 Nov 03 - 06:31 PM

At the least, the IRB must surely guarantee the income of any selected international player for the next WC, so that the likes of the PI don't come to the tournament half crippled through missing 1st choice caps? Betcha the useless tossers don't, though... :(

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Hrothgar
Date: 05 Nov 03 - 03:32 AM

Yes, the timetable for the whole thing stinks, and Syd Millar admitted that yesterday when he said that they have to present the best teams on prime time TV to make money.

Far worse, though, is the way the Pacific Islands countries in particular have been gutted since the advent of professionalism. From the islanders who play in NZ to make a living and have to declare their availability for NZ to get a contract, to the players who can't afford not to play for their European clubs and so can't come to the World Cup, it's little better than a crime.

I blame the people who negotiated the Tri-Nations agreement whch was the trigger for professionalism. There should have been a Pacific Islands country in the Super 12. That would change the whole structure of world rugby.

Don't even think about the hundreds of PI kids on rugby scholarships in Australia and NZ, who will probably go on to play for those countries instead of their home nations ...

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Raedwulf
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 08:03 PM

I'll predict the predictable in 3 out of 4 Q/F's; England, Australia, NZ; but France vs. Ireland has to be the "must watch" game of the quarters! Am I wrong in thinking that Ireland have had something of an Indian sign over the Frogs in the last few years? No way is this a foregone conclusion (I'll cordially disagree with Hrothgar here)!

England & NZ will be competitive but predictable results I think, Aust. predictable & comfortable (unless unquantifiable factors, such as weather, intervene), but France/Ireland ought to be a game & a half! I'll be cheering the Green! :)

What gets up my nose about this WC, though, is the condescension from the IRB. Rugby is clearly divided into 3 divisions. First, there's the old 5 Nations/Tri-Nations group that dominate world rugby & comprise the Quarter's this time round. Next, you have the second division sides - Samoa, Tonga, Argentina, Italy, & so on - that can upset the big boys on their day. Last, there is the valiant minnows; the Japans, USAs, Namibias, Georgias...

Why on earth are the amateurs, who can't possibly cope with the physical demands, asked to play 3 or 4 games within little more than two weeks? The "big sides" get far more rest between their games, & a senior IRB official happily admits that TV scheduling demands this. The IRB rolls over, & says that the next WC is unlikely to be any different. Fiji & Samoa may not even be able to enter the next WC for lack of funds, & the IRB chases TV money... Is it only me that sees a woeful inequality in this? Not only that, but ultimately it must be damaging to the notion of a "World Cup"?

We've had glorious mis-matches & glorious performances from the minnows. What's the point, if the minnows can't hope to progress? And given the patronising, favouring attitude of the governing body, what hope is there? Sad... :(

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: ard mhacha
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 12:51 PM

I think the Rugby authorities went a bit over the top about England fielding 16 men, a genuine mistake, they were on top at the time and it mattered little.

This World Cup, much maligned at the beginning has redeemed itself with some cracking games and there is much more to come. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 10:03 AM

Just got back from Oz - had an absolutely fantastic time.

Cold reason would have me backing ard mhacha's prediction of NZ v Australia and France v England, for the semi-finals. Same reasoning would then indicate an England v NZ final.

Cold reason apart I would not rule out Ireland against the French - or Scotland against Australia. The French have yet to come up against any hard opposition in this tournament (their match against Scotland was against a Scottish team on the night that would have had trouble coping against a Roedean mixed-infants XV), that they will come up against when they meet Ireland. Scotland always play one suberb game in any competition they take part in - they love being cast in the role of underdog. Their coach, is no fool, and has voiced no concerns, and the Aussies are not the side that won the last World Cup. I believe that Scotland could upset them - but as I said above that is heart and not head.

The 16 man thing was firmly the fault of the FMO; it occurred with just over 81 minutes on the clock; with an England player receiving treatment off the pitch; England had that 16th man on the field for all of 34 seconds. Some of the remarks I heard ranged from demands for disqualification of England from the tournament, through loss of their bonus points, to awarding Samoa a bonus point for a try they might have scored from a penalty awarded during that period of play. Hell they could have awarded Samoa a penalty try and it still would not have affected the result one iota. Fact was the FMO was in radio contact with the referee and should have called the ref's attention to it the second Lugar put a foot onto the pitch - he didn't.

Hrothgar, sorry I missed you - didn't get your PM until I arrived back home yesterday. Brisbane was fantastic as were the few days spent up at Noosa Heads - all in all a wonderful holiday, lots of very fond memories.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Hrothgar
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 05:09 AM

If the French play the game I fear, it'll look like 16 men even if they're a couple short.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: ard mhacha
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 03:26 AM

Hrothgar,In regard to the France v Ireland game, I don`t like the word fix, does that mean France are going to field 16 men. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: GUEST,Iain Higgins
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 12:32 AM

Being a Kiwi lad myself... I'd just like to say bloody good on the Welsh. They had us looking unorganized in defence, finding more holes than tiger woods. The passion with which they played is a tribute to the history between the two nations. Well done. Now go one better - cause the biggest upset possible.

Im also half Scottish, and if theres one team I despise more than England, it's my ANZAC big brother Australia. GO SCOTLAND THE BRAVE. I'd be in the stands with my bagpipes if I wasn't sitting uni exams.

p.s. Go Ireland - France is our bogey team.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Hrothgar
Date: 03 Nov 03 - 04:27 AM

Well, even as badly as Australia are playing, I'll back them to beat Scotland.

I wouldn't care to pick the NZ - South Africa game after last night, despite what I said a couple of days ago. The laws of nature say NZ.

France should fix the Irish - I just can't see two performances in a row like that from Ireland. All we need now, of course, is for the Frogs to self-destruct.

England v Wales ..... hmmm ..... the book says England, but if the Welsh get up I won't be able to sleep for a week for laughing. Have to be careful here - my boss is a Pom.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Gareth
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 06:24 PM

Really Nigel - The matter was under critical discussion in the bar of the "Royal Oak" Ystrad Mynach tonight.

Up quotes Chris our village postmaster " Pity they don't put 17 men on the field, then they'l be disqualified "

And you acuse me of being biased !!!

Actually it reminds me of the 1970's jokes (Max Boyce and others)

"To make it a fairer contest England have agreed to use a 20 man team against Wales next Saturday"

ARRRRGGHH ! - As Mary Hopkin sang,
"Those were the days, my friend,
We thought they'd never end ... !"

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: ard mhacha
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 03:25 PM

C`mon lets have your forecasts for the quarter finals, OZ,NZ,England`s 16, and France. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 11:40 AM

Gareth: that last crack is hardly worthy of you. England have already been fined £10,000 for fielding 16 men against Samoa. Surely you didn't expect them to play against that mighty team on equal terms?

Nigel



(p.s. England only had 16 men on the pitch for 34 seconds, and one of those was receiving treatment at the time!)

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Gareth
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 10:29 AM

And here is how der BBC saw it Click 'Ere - Some National pride restored.

Now let all come on - (provided that England only field 15 players that is !)

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: ard mhacha
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 06:41 AM

For three-quarters of the Welsh v New Zealand game, this Welsh [2nd string?] had the mighty All Blacks reeling. I was thinking, can this be Rorkes Drift replayed, I have never seen a team play with such courage, Wales, even Gareth would have been proud of your magnificent performance.

The Welsh tries were far better constructed than the Blacks, just a pity, being a wee bit more alert in the early stages of the first half would have prevented two of the NZ tries, but nothing should detract from these Welsh furies. And I see England scraped home by 99 points. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Hrothgar
Date: 01 Nov 03 - 11:13 PM

South African 'catters, if there are any, probably won't want to even think about NZ. The Kiwi backs will shred the Jappie defence if it is the same as against Samoa.

Australia can play better - not that Scotland showed anything wonderful against Fiji. Have to pick Tuquiri ahead of Sailor.

Going out in an hour or so to watch England play Uruguay. It won't be a match, but then at least I can say I've watched this England team. It is probably the best they've ever had, even without Wilkinson and Johnson. With a bit of luck, the refs will start penalising them for killing ruck ball, and that will change their results a bit.

Subject: RE: BS: Rugby World Cup
From: Gareth
Date: 01 Nov 03 - 01:44 PM

Perhaps that it was that Australia were playing in "Orange" shirts inspired them **BG**

What I saw of the recorded bits on TV confirms that they played well, and with spirit.

Now a warning ! - Unless there is divine intervention in tommorows game, 'Catters mentioning New Zealand may consider thier dangly bits, and knee caps, under attack with a virtual sledgehammer.

Gareth