Rugby - See You In Ten!

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Tamerlin

As far as I am concerned a replay that does not show the action from the beginning is worth nothing as, in Rugby, the way a try is conceived is far more beautiful than the mere act of diving to score the try.

I don't think I've ever seen a replay that didn't start at the beginning of the phase of play.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
the best team arguably didn’t win in 91, 95 or 99

*yawns again*

Oh, I heard on the wireless (great word wireless, much more evocative than radio) this morning that Winston Churchill had been nominated the Greatest Ever Briton. I gather you were in the running for quite a while but were eliminated from contention at around the same stage as Norman Wisdom.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by Caligastia I don't think I've ever seen a replay that didn't start at the beginning of the phase of play.

Most of the worst replays I have ever seen come from the SH (the others mostly come from Italy), your TV producers are so obsessed with the try in itself they often bypass the action which brang the try.

But I am exaggerating, they sometimes show the last pass before the try.

[finbar]

Just watch yourself, Tamerlin. I was watching a documentary on werewolves last night. They focused on the history of werewolves in France. Two of the key indicators of werewolfdom are the keeping of extremely irregular hours, and prolonged absences, particularly at the seaside in the company of têtards. Your secret remains safe, but only just. So behave or I shall reveal all!

[ravagon]

How odd ...

I must say I've never noticed replays that show only the try before. In fact most commentators seem to take great pains to show exactly how it came about with a fairly detailed slow-motion (not necessarily unbiased mind you ) depiction of the process.


*Starts hunting for silver-tipped blades, wolvesbane and belladonna*

[finbar]

Originally posted by ravagon
How odd ...

I must say I've never noticed replays that show only the try before. In fact most commentators seem to take great pains to show exactly how it came about with a fairly detailed slow-motion (not necessarily unbiased mind you ) depiction of the process.

You're quite right. Tamerlin misses most of the replays while he's changing razor blades.

[Havak]

You can count on me to back England (to the exception of a France-England of course).

Merci mon ami.

The simplified version of Rugby played in the SH is made to appeal to the masses and to satisfy the needs of those who believe Rugby is limited to the act of scoring a try, those that are satisfied when a replay only shows the moment a player is crossing the try-line.

The most impressive rugby of the summer for me for example was played in the England-Australia game. The England mauling in the first half was some of the most remarkable rugby I have ever seen – and the ways the Australians started to counter and even maul a decent time or two themselves in the second half was far more impressive in many ways than the spectacular tries scored in that game.

*scoops bitter drinking fish into net*

I’m still trying to wriggle off the hook!

Further forward in 91, and perhaps 99, but not 95. 95 was a farce.

I can understand your problem with it – but it helped the world game. It rejuvenated Bok rugby (which was a joke when they first rejoined the world game) and launched the tri-nations as a viable tournament rather than the bi-polar event that pundits were then predicting – I think it helped the world game.

If it makes you feel happier NZ helped us in 95 – that mauling of Underwood junior by Lomu ended our dalliance with small whippet like wings and accelerated the end of Jack Rowell with England – and for that I’m eternally grateful. It was painful at the time mind you.

You think so? I will certainly be interested to see if that happens. I have my doubts though...

Crunch the numbers – your player roster is huge compared to population – but your potential TV audiences suck even in the tri-nations. And TV is the law in Rugby right now. Add South Africa, NZ and Australia together and you don’t even have the potential TV Audience that an England-France clash has – and nowhere near the audience of a Grand Slam decider of any flavour. It’s a bitter pill for a country that breathes rugby no doubt but accurate none the less.

And yes we all live in fear that the US ever gets serious about our game – partly because of the potential audience and partly because they’ll want a commercial break after every phase?

I think that's an exaggeration of the SH style. Our forwards do far more than you give them credit for.

Climbing on a hook yourself?

Have I implied they do very little? I have implied your game is currently based around aback orientated style of play – was that wrong? I’ve also said your forwards are not as strong as those of either England or France – and I do actually believe that. I think the last tri-nations game – where a woefully misfiring Wallaby pack actually gave you trouble – would tend to support me on that one. You are as they say “only as good as your last game”.

And I’m very well aware that means England are losers before anyone says it!

Are you going to claim that they did this by playing a more NH style?

Nope. I’m going to point out the bleeding obvious and suggest that no refs police any offside laws very well any more - unless it’s ‘flavour of the match’ from the IRB, and that this ‘sea change’ has come from the SH influence on the global game, and that I think it’s a bad thing that the NH have let the other hemisphere change the game to suit short term strengths of theirs.

But it will change – the SH doesn’t totally dominate the IRB any more – and a damn good thing too.

And just curious – but these SH sides that have beaten NH sides with NH refs – who and when? It’s three years since any SH side beat us when we were away and four years since one beat us at home – and both refs were SH I think - so do you mean France by any chance – or maybe giants of the game like Wales or Italy?

It a problem with consistency. As is often pointed out here.

Consistency is a problem – but failure to enforce the offside laws is endemic so I don’t think that applies here?

*Edit* Out of deference to Finbar and his need to stay awake allow me to say the opinion that the Wallabies were not the best side in 91 and 99 - and in fact were as boring as hell in 99 - is mine and mine alone. I have no doubt the whole rest of the world thought they were brilliant and thoroughly exciting.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak

Have I implied they do very little? I have implied your game is currently based around aback orientated style of play – was that wrong? I’ve also said your forwards are not as strong as those of either England or France – and I do actually believe that. I think the last tri-nations game – where a woefully misfiring Wallaby pack actually gave you trouble – would tend to support me on that one.

True.

And just curious – but these SH sides that have beaten NH sides with NH refs – who and when? It’s three years since any SH side beat us when we were away and four years since one beat us at home – and both refs were SH I think - so do you mean France by any chance – or maybe giants of the game like Wales or Italy?

The Wallabies rolled France twice last June (even if Les Grenouilles were undermanned). Chris White was the ref in one of the matches.

[Havak]

Since tri-nations duty in 2002 Chris has never been quite the same Finbar. You caught him at just the right time it would seem.

[Caligastia]

Of course.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Havak
I can understand your problem with it – but it helped the world game. It rejuvenated Bok rugby (which was a joke when they first rejoined the world game) and launched the tri-nations as a viable tournament rather than the bi-polar event that pundits were then predicting – I think it helped the world game.

But the Bok RWC victory was shown to be a one-off thing for them back then as NZ beat them in 4 out of 5 games the next year. Even if you combined the Bok and aussie victories and called them one side the Tri-nations wouldn't be bi-polar. Out of 8 Tri-nations tournaments, SA have won 1, Oz have won 2, and NZ have won five.

If it makes you feel happier NZ helped us in 95 – that mauling of Underwood junior by Lomu ended our dalliance with small whippet like wings and accelerated the end of Jack Rowell with England – and for that I’m eternally grateful. It was painful at the time mind you.

Oh, yes. I'm so happy we were able to help you chaps out.

Crunch the numbers – your player roster is huge compared to population – but your potential TV audiences suck even in the tri-nations. And TV is the law in Rugby right now. Add South Africa, NZ and Australia together and you don’t even have the potential TV Audience that an England-France clash has – and nowhere near the audience of a Grand Slam decider of any flavour. It’s a bitter pill for a country that breathes rugby no doubt but accurate none the less.

You underestimate the potential audience here in the US. Last year the Boks played the US in Texas in front of a sizable crowd, and "Championship Rugby" (Fox Sports World's rugby show) is attracting major sponsors. And guess what? They only show SH rugby.

And yes we all live in fear that the US ever gets serious about our game – partly because of the potential audience and partly because they’ll want a commercial break after every phase?

I shudder at the thought. My american friends are amazed when I tell them rugby has two 40-minute halves uninterrupted by commercials.

Have I implied they do very little? I have implied your game is currently based around aback orientated style of play – was that wrong? I’ve also said your forwards are not as strong as those of either England or France – and I do actually believe that. I think the last tri-nations game – where a woefully misfiring Wallaby pack actually gave you trouble – would tend to support me on that one. You are as they say “only as good as your last game”.

And I’m very well aware that means England are losers before anyone says it!

Damn, you predicted my response!

[Havak]

But the Bok RWC victory was shown to be a one-off thing for them back then as NZ beat them in 4 out of 5 games the next year

Which is why they tied the consecutive win record in 1999 of course…

And guess what? They only show SH rugby.

No accounting for taste I guess.

But of course that could just be a prejudiced producer (almost certainly is in fact) and you are conveniently ignoring the fact the TV rights go for peanuts between Fox stations – and who has sole rights to NZ rugger broadcasting again?

And I’m not ignoring the potential audience in the US – but it’s for the Eagles not NZ and try not to kid yourself otherwise – if Rugger explodes there it will be USA! All the way and “who are the Ay-Bees?”

Oh and guess what – rugger devotees like myself aside hardly any SH rugby is watched in the UK. It’s not that popular here.

Tamerlin and myself are exceptions – and he only watches it to keep his blood boiling.

Damn, you predicted my response!

I’m psychic.

In a few minutes I'm leaving for another five day jolly.

On the plus side if England do well that spares you all - and doubly plus if they mess up I havwe time to calm down before sticking my head over the parapet.

Catch you all Wednesday.

*Edit* yes I know Tamerlin is in France - but you know what I meant!

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Havak
But of course that could just be a prejudiced producer (almost certainly is in fact) and you are conveniently ignoring the fact the TV rights go for peanuts between Fox stations – and who has sole rights to NZ rugger broadcasting again?

I don't actually know why it is that they don't show NH games anymore. They used to show a lot of them.

And I’m not ignoring the potential audience in the US – but it’s for the Eagles not NZ and try not to kid yourself otherwise – if Rugger explodes there it will be USA! All the way and “who are the Ay-Bees?”

You'd be suprised. Every show they have tons of letters from american viewers singing the praises of their favorite SH team. They give away AB Oz and SA jerseys on the show too.

Oh and guess what – rugger devotees like myself aside hardly any SH rugby is watched in the UK. It’s not that popular here.

No accounting for taste I guess.

Tamerlin and myself are exceptions – and he only watches it to keep his blood boiling.

In a few minutes I'm leaving for another five day jolly.

Have fun!

[Havak]

Touchế!

Will try to have fun - keep the rugger flags flying.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by Caligastia And guess what? They only show SH rugby.

Remember what I told you, SH Rugby appeals to the uneducated...




Have fun Havak!