Rugby - Advantage Over!

[Caligastia]

Hopefully we won't keep you waiting for too long...

[MikeH]

Excellent.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by Havak
Tamerlin you do realise that you made that sound like you prefer SH refs – in total contradiction to the rest of your post?

Of course I don't prefer those overlenient referees from the SH, but I have noted that the NH referees have the tendancy to change their way of helming a game and that they are getting closer to their SH counterparts which is very worrying as far as I am concerned.

About Mr Jutge, I am sorry to tell you I am not considering him as a good referee, I know what I am talking about as I have seen him helming, and spoiling, too many games of the French championship.

Mr Méné will be a good referee the day he realizes that the laws have been made to keep the ball alive. To keep it short, he knows the letter of the law perfectly (I am sure he could give lessons to many international level referees that would learn laws they had not the lesser idea of) but is yet to understand their spirit.

IMO, the only good french referee is Mr Joël Dumé though he sometimes miss some games.

Havak, when I am talking about the referees I am generally talking about the International level referees (H-Cup and Tests' referees). I can't say anything about the English championship referees, nor about the way they are managing the domestic games, as I have not seen a single English vs. English game this year.

I wish you could read the articles published in this week Midi Olympique which is usually very kind with the referees. The umpiring has been called incomprehensible, mystic, abracadabrant and so on... After a meeting with the French staff during which they replayed the video of the game, Mr Andrew Cole left the room rather shaken and explained he had missed no less than 15 argentinans fouls as I wrote it earlier. A special mention to Mr Ramage (the referee who had previously refused a valid french try and didn't wait for the good video angle) who never sees a foul but imagines some from the border of the field. We can salute the courage of Mr Cole who recognized he was wrong when other referees would have hidden themselves behind the so called prestige of their role.

I don’t expect much from our warm up games – though I will save Tamerlin the time and say three months in advance that the refs in both French games will be awful and utterly biased towards the ‘Rosbiffs’.

Actually I don't care at all about their biased nature, I would be satisfied with referees who simply apply the laws as they are written keeping the spirit of the said laws in mind. But a law is a law and discarding completely the letter to the benefit of the spirit is not good.

Enough!

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
Nice to know you are human too.

Don't tell Tamerlin. He sees me as a God.

I see that Bill Young has launched a defence of your front row saying he felt that they performed a real step up from the corresponding fixture last November. I can’t agree with that to be honest.

Yes, I thought the exact opposite was the case. They were slightly more effective in the second half on Saturday night but only because England lowered the intensity.

I’ve been around the block – I can spot someone oozing insincerity a mile away.

What an unpleasant neighbourhood you must live in. Sorry about ending the sentence with a preposition, but I couldn't be fagged reconstructing to avoid it.

What troubles you so much about the grand scheme?

Ultimately, I believe, a person's achievements are no more or less important than the character with which they, um, achieve them. I hasten to add that I think there are exceptions. Supreme gifts can render character redundant. Wagner, amongst others, for example. But back to the mortals. In rugby, for example, for Australians, J**** will join - if he hasn't already - the Sean Fitzpatricks of the world as an opponent who sinks your ship, drives you mad in the process, but, publicly anyway - and that's all we have available to us to judge - displays great character. Maybe Woodward's effort on Saturday night was a one-off. I don't know.

I still think there’s a huge difference between pretending before a game that a referee should take your word as law and pointing out after a match what the referee missed of the opponents cynical play?

Sorry, you're spinning like a top. Eddie wan't pretending that the ref should take his word as law. He pointed out the penalties awarded against England in the ABs match and wanted the same laws applied if the same things happened on Saturday night. In Woodward's case, after the ABs match last November, he drew - in spectacular fashion - everyone's attention to what he believed was the SH teams' illegal use of dummy runners. It was more than a comment on the ABs match, it was blatantly obviously directed at the ref for the Wallabies match the week after. And, in fact, Woodward was - as you claim Eddie was doing - telling the refs he was right and they were wrong.

Although frankly both suggest men with huge egos?

Part and parcel of modern professional sport.

I hate to disagree but I think the refs have been somewhat stricter this year across the globe –at least in carefully defined aspects of play. IRB edicts seem to be smoothing a little of the cultural divide in refereeing?

That's what I said a couple of days ago. The differences these days are a bit of a myth.

To a certain extent that holds true – but it’s a little unfair. We have learnt from the SH in some aspects of play –

Yes, England is marrying the two styles, which is why, when they're humming, they're unstoppable. They have the best of both worlds. Other teams, playing a version of one or the other, struggle against them. Their big challenge, though, will come when the powerhouses of the pack retire, because it's the successful pack that sets up everything else.

but we’ve taken as much from France in some ways. And you really ought to note France can and do use blocking runners when it suits them.

They were when they were out here last season. In fact, they were playing a very similiar game to England's. Or trying to.

Even if the ABs sweep the tri-nations that means no more for the RWC than England’s recent wins really. Personally I suspect, with Larkham, Smith and Finnegan all available, that the Wallabies might shock the ABs yet again (at least in Aus).

Larkham is back training again. He will return at some stage during the Tri-Nations. Mortlock will still be missing for the Tri-Nations. If he plays in the WRC, it will be without any rugby for about 10 months.

I also notice that John Mitchell has replaced his entire front row with the front row that started against England. Oh, and McCaw is back.

Civ Gold time?

We're getting to that time. I'll dig out the Bank A/c.

[finbar]

Originally posted by MikeH
I will be petty and spiteful when we lose.

Mmmmm. Okay. But if you're not, it's a Red Card. You're out.

[Havak]

Hopefully we won't keep you waiting for too long...

Assuming we miss you in the first knock out round I think we can’t meet you until the semi-final stage? I wonder has Finbar analysed the draw in detail yet?

Havak, when I am talking about the referees I am generally talking about the International level referees (H-Cup and Tests' referees).

I see. Well there are one or two weak UK links – Nigel Williams and Steve Lander spring to mind. And I know you don’t like Chris White but he is showing signs of recovery from his tri-nations tainting – the last time I saw he was only going with the IRB favourites (back foot, line out tunnel, releasing after the tackle etc) and, shock horror, even pulled a couple of offsides.

After a meeting with the French staff during which they replayed the video of the game, Mr Andrew Cole left the room rather shaken and explained he had missed no less than 15 argentinans fouls as I wrote it earlier.

Well firstly this make Laporte as guilty as Woodward of the referee bullying charge Finbar countered to my accusation of exactly that by Jones. And also similarly the French edited the footage. Call me cynical but I wonder how many French infringements never got shown to the poor hen-pecked guy?

A private meeting to bully a referee post match – come to think of it that is way worse than Woodwards open press conference. What on earth made him agree to it. I think refs need protecting from this myself.

I do wonder if Laportes setup spends too much time crying ‘foul’ these days and not enough correcting the problems you have on the field? Great teams adjust to poor referees don’t they?

We can salute the courage of Mr Cole who recognized he was wrong when other referees would have hidden themselves behind the so called prestige of their role.

If he has admitted it publicy I suspect he will now have another meeting due at the IRB as he has undermined the whole of refereedom by doing so. The ref is never wrong. He may be a blind idiot but he is never wrong.

I would be satisfied with referees who simply apply the laws as they are written keeping the spirit of the said laws in mind.

Finbar should be over this like a rash asking for a definition of ‘spirit’. It’s a complete intangible and leads us right back to ‘interpreatation’.

Don't tell Tamerlin. He sees me as a God.

And poor Mr Cole gets the role of ‘Devil’ then?

What an unpleasant neighbourhood you must live in. Sorry about ending the sentence with a preposition, but I couldn't be fagged reconstructing to avoid it.

Doing so would have been wasted on me anyway.

for example, for Australians, J**** will join - if he hasn't already - the Sean Fitzpatricks of the world as an opponent who sinks your ship, drives you mad in the process, but, publicly anyway - and that's all we have available to us to judge - displays great character.

I bet it still surprises you to be writing such things? I'm sure you thought I hugely oversold him before?

I honestly don’t think you will find Woodwards was a one off. He occasionally speaks without the brain in gear. It surprised me he did what he did to snub the Aussies as he normally reserves his ire for our media and his domestic critics.

He pointed out the penalties awarded against England in the ABs match and wanted the same laws applied if the same things happened on Saturday night.

And you are spinning like Ali Campbell. Eddie said he would be ‘encouraging the referee to be strict in those areas’ implying very clearly the referee should do what Eddie tells him.

And, in fact, Woodward was - as you claim Eddie was doing - telling the refs he was right and they were wrong.

He probably thinks he is – just like Eddie.

I’m fed up defending him – I would like to see a real statesman like Richards or Evans (as a sop to MikeH) in the role soon after RWC anyway. I can see Clive staying too long.

That's what I said a couple of days ago. The differences these days are a bit of a myth.

You may be right. I think it’s more a case that the SH simply has more poor refs right now rather than the ‘interpretation’ being at fault?
Now that bait should land a Marlin?

Their big challenge, though, will come when the powerhouses of the pack retire, because it's the successful pack that sets up everything else.

It’s also fair to say the backs have a huge way to go yet as well. They are better than they were even seven months ago but it’s still a forwards dominated side by a long way.

They were when they were out here last season. In fact, they were playing a very similiar game to England's. Or trying to.

They would have turned you over but for them damn referees on the day?

I also notice that John Mitchell has replaced his entire front row with the front row that started against England. Oh, and McCaw is back.

Not surprised – last week he played a prop who got his first cap in four years – menaing he last played in the AB ‘dark times’. They didn’t beat Wales by pummelling them up front – it was an object lesson in beating a team with fast backs running at lumbering forwards.
McCaw back and no Betsen to counter – I really thing the French need their heads totally in gear to avoid a thrashing.

I wonder are they saving everything for us in the warm up games?

We're getting to that time. I'll dig out the Bank A/c.

I have a sizeable bet riding with you anyway.

[MikeH]

Originally posted by finbar
Mmmmm. Okay. But if you're not, it's a Red Card. You're out.

In the meantime I can be more smug and gloating if you want?

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by finbar
Don't tell Tamerlin. He sees me as a God.

Nor God, nor master...

Their big challenge, though, will come when the powerhouses of the pack retire, because it's the successful pack that sets up everything else.

This is the problem that must face all the great teams in the world, the Stade Toulousain have dealt with it when a full generation retired from the ranks, Leicester is facing it now and so will England.

They were when they were out here last season. In fact, they were playing a very similiar game to England's. Or trying to.

The current French team is the shadow of what it was last year and I am afraid Bernard Laporte is not making the good choices...

I also notice that John Mitchell has replaced his entire front row with the front row that started against England. Oh, and McCaw is back.

Three new players are starting the game against the AB,
Mas (USAP), Clément Poitrenaud (Stade Toulousain) and another third line player I have forgotten the name. ( )

Frédéric Michalack (Stade Toulousain) will be fly-half...

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Havak


Assuming we miss you in the first knock out round I think we can’t meet you until the semi-final stage? I wonder has Finbar analysed the draw in detail yet?

Here are my predictions:

First - the predictable results:

In pool A the Wallabies will win of course. I reckon Ireland will probably be the runner-up.

In pool B France will win with Scotland as runner-up.

In pool C England will win and South Africa will be runner-up.

Pool D will be won by New Zealand, and Wales will be runner-up.

In QF1 New Zealand beat South Africa

In QF2 Australia beat Scotland

In QF3 France beat Ireland

In QF4 England beat Wales

It's possible that Argentina could be runner-up in pool A instead of Ireland, and if that happens they have a chance to beat France and possibly make it to a semi against England. Ireland could also beat France to earn a semi against England, but in the end England will probably beat any of those three teams and go on to the final. I reckon of those three that France would be the most likely to beat England, but I don't think they can do it. As long as they win their pool (and this looks very likely at this point) England have a pretty easy ride to the final.

So Semi-final 1 is pretty much guaranteed to be NZ v Australia (the first time these two teams play each other in a RWC!), which in my unbiased opinion will be won by New Zealand.

Semi-final 2 is most likely to be England v France, but could also be England v Argentina or Ireland. In any case England will advance to the final.

The final will, of course, be won by New Zealand.

[MikeH]

I didn't realise our half of the draw was so easy.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
Assuming we miss you in the first knock out round I think we can’t meet you until the semi-final stage? I wonder has Finbar analysed the draw in detail yet?

Caligastia already has a bit further back up the page. It seems pretty logical. Barring the extraordinary. I wonder if we should run a special WRC Sweepstakes on how early Les Grenouilles will bomb out? No bets will be taken on them catching a plane to Austria by mistake on the basis that, the way they're going, it's highly likely.

Call me cynical but I wonder how many French infringements never got shown to the poor hen-pecked guy?

Put it this way - Tamerlin was operating the VCR.

A private meeting to bully a referee post match – come to think of it that is way worse than Woodwards open press conference. What on earth made him agree to it. I think refs need protecting from this myself.

It sounds very odd. How private was it? I mean, was it set up through channels or did Laportes just get on the eau de cologne and invite the ref around for a chat? I'm surprised the IRB let it happen. Then again, I'm probably not.

I do wonder if Laportes setup spends too much time crying ‘foul’ these days and not enough correcting the problems you have on the field? Great teams adjust to poor referees don’t they?

Fair point. Though a coach just to the West of Laportes - and another one a very long way South-East - have been known to indulge themselves on the odd occasion from time to time.

Finbar should be over this like a rash asking for a definition of ‘spirit’. It’s a complete intangible and leads us right back to ‘interpreatation’.

Yes, I noticed that particular canard floating blissfully in its barrel and contemplated emptying an AK-47 into it. I took pity.

Doing so would have been wasted on me anyway.

Yes, but these threads are my, um, practice ground. Or even, occasionally, target range.

I bet it still surprises you to be writing such things? I'm sure you thought I hugely oversold him before?

Not at all. My constant, utter contempt for J**** - increasing as I saw more of him - should have been indicative.

I honestly don’t think you will find Woodwards was a one off. He occasionally speaks without the brain in gear. It surprised me he did what he did to snub the Aussies as he normally reserves his ire for our media and his domestic critics.

No, I don't think it was one-off either. I think he has an unfortunate streak within him, probably exacerbated by the pressures and expectations. Some handle such things better than others.

And you are spinning like Ali Campbell. Eddie said he would be ‘encouraging the referee to be strict in those areas’ implying very clearly the referee should do what Eddie tells him.

It's amazing what you can read between lines if you try hard enough. Heavens above, I found the latest Harry Potter tome between the lines of Tamerlin's last post. (And, angry at the number of typos, he called a meeting with a ref who admitted missing 15 typos)

I’m fed up defending him – I would like to see a real statesman like Richards or Evans (as a sop to MikeH) in the role soon after RWC anyway. I can see Clive staying too long.

I don't know those guys, but I thought our Rod Macqueen trod a reasonable line.

You may be right. I think it’s more a case that the SH simply has more poor refs right now rather than the ‘interpretation’ being at fault?

More a case, I think, that the standards, worldwide, are low. Certainly if you and Tamerlin are to be believed, and you have both, over time, vis a vis refs and your opinions of same, set standards of absolute objectivity that Koffi Anan would struggle to equal.

Now that bait should land a Marlin?

Contemplated it, dismissed it as unworthy.

They would have turned you over but for them damn referees on the day?

Yes, according to Tamerlin, whose only vision of the matches was on the plasma screen of his cerebellum.

I have a sizeable bet riding with you anyway.

Yep. Did we double it from the original 50? I remember suggesting it.

[finbar]

Originally posted by MikeH


In the meantime I can be more smug and gloating if you want?

No, your current excess is a nice counterbalance to Havak's tactfully understated mild enthusiasm.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin


Nor God, nor master...

Go forth and multiply, My Son.

This is the problem that must face all the great teams in the world, the Stade Toulousain have dealt with it when a full generation retired from the ranks, Leicester is facing it now and so will England.

That's a classic example of bad news followed by very good news followed by blissful news, isn't it.

[finbar]

Originally posted by MikeH
I didn't realise our half of the draw was so easy.

Clive sold his soul to the Devil.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by finbar
Yes, according to Tamerlin, whose only vision of the matches was on the plasma screen of his cerebellum.

I am not angry against Mr Cole because France lost the game, they deserved to, but because he spoiled this game.

Great teams adjust to poor referees don’t they?

I don't think France can be qualified as being a great team these days...