Rugby - See You In Ten!

[finbar]

Originally posted by Andydog
Hey Tamerlin, I made a fantastic barbeque last night. Cut a 44 gallon drum in half and plonked a Safeways shopping trolley on top of it. Smashed up half the back fence and there's your charcoal. Whacked on the bangers, chops, steaks and mushies, hooked into the Grolsh, and washed the lot down with a few Tullamore Dews.

I'll wager you won't find recipe that in any of your French cooking books.

I haven't checked Frozzy's "Oxymorons" thread recently, but I assume someone suggested New Zealand Cooking.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin
Ravagon, it's not Friday!

Actually, it's ravagon this time, not the imposter. There was a typo in the post.

[Havak]

As I may not get chance to post tomorrow I would just like to say I have no idea why Mike Catt was picked.

If there is logic to it it escapes me totally.

I'm surprised Shaw lost out to Grewcock as well - he was far the better of the two in the warm up games.

Rowntree can feel a little agrieved too - he has done nothing wrong since facing the Abs in June - I suspect he misses out to lower the average age in the pack.

Overall I can't be too sad Smith, healey and Rowntree did miss out though - we need them this Saturday as the season starts in earnest (London irish at home).

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
As I may not get chance to post tomorrow I would just like to say I have no idea why Mike Catt was picked.

If there is logic to it it escapes me totally.

Clive said it's for his experience.

I'm surprised Shaw lost out to Grewcock as well - he was far the better of the two in the warm up games.

Presumably Grewcock throws a better punch.

The Springbok racism business continues to bubble. It seems coach Straeuli was of the view that that a player's ability was more important than his racial preferences. Silly man. So much for team unity. It's said he will lose his job over it.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by finbar
The Springbok racism business continues to bubble. It seems coach Straeuli was of the view that that a player's ability was more important than his racial preferences.

Don't you mean "more important than racial preferences"?

Silly man. So much for team unity. It's said he will lose his job over it.

Lose his job for not towing the racial prefernces line? I'll have to check out the story.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Caligastia


Don't you mean "more important than racial preferences"?

I was talking about the particular player. Or, it seems, reading between the lines, possibly more than one player. All boiled down, the coach was of the view that he would overlook a player's racist attitudes providing the player played good rugby.

Lose his job for not towing the racial prefernces line? I'll have to check out the story.

I thought it was clear, perhaps not. The talk is of the coach losing his job because he has turned a blind eye to racism within the squad. There was an incident recently of a white player refusing to share a room with a black player. The incident was investigated in-house and the white player was cleared in terms of the racism aspect. The team's Media Relations Manager has now resigned in protest against racism within the squad and the team management's covering up of same. He has provided a detailed document outlining the problems as he observed them first hand. It has been referred to an independent inquiry chaired by the same retired judge who chaired the inquiry into cricketer Hanse Cronje's corruption.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by finbar


I was talking about the particular player. Or, it seems, reading between the lines, possibly more than one player. All boiled down, the coach was of the view that he would overlook a player's racist attitudes providing the player played good rugby.

I see. Well the player would have to be an idiot to make such feelings (if he had them) known to the rest of the team.

I thought it was clear, perhaps not. The talk is of the coach losing his job because he has turned a blind eye to racism within the squad. There was an incident recently of a white player refusing to share a room with a black player. The incident was investigated in-house and the white player was cleared in terms of the racism aspect. The team's Media Relations Manager has now resigned in protest against racism within the squad and the team management's covering up of same. He has provided a detailed document outlining the problems as he observed them first hand. It has been referred to an independent inquiry chaired by the same retired judge who chaired the inquiry into cricketer Hanse Cronje's corruption.

Sounds like a storm in a teacup then.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Tamerlin
Ravagon, it's not Friday!

Smarmy git.

I haven't checked Frozzy's "Oxymorons" thread recently, but I assume someone suggested New Zealand Cooking.

I was going to include "Australian culture" ... right up there with "French rugby".
And there was no spelling error - unless one is using a non-english dictionary.


You have to feel a little sorry for Strauli really. Given past history he was between a rock and a hard place as soon as the suggestion of racial bias came up.
However he'd dealt with it (if indeed it fell under his authority to do so - I don't know exactly how their system is structured) he was always going to be accused of either covering up or blowing things completely out of proportion.
Having the "victim" player (Davids IIRC?) ejected from the WC seems a little harsh on the surface too. Both sides aren't always at fault.

[finbar]

Originally posted by ravagon
You have to feel a little sorry for Strauli really. Given past history he was between a rock and a hard place as soon as the suggestion of racial bias came up.
However he'd dealt with it (if indeed it fell under his authority to do so - I don't know exactly how their system is structured) he was always going to be accused of either covering up or blowing things completely out of proportion.

We don't yet know the extent of what's been going on. Presumably all will be revealed in the inquiry.

I'm not sure how you blow racism out of proportion, but anyway.

Having the "victim" player (Davids IIRC?) ejected from the WC seems a little harsh on the surface too. Both sides aren't always at fault.

Neither player was picked but it's hard to know on what basis. I'd be surprised if the "victim" player - I think it's Davids - was omitted because of the incident.

[Havak]

It's said he will lose his job over it.

If he does I'll not shed many tears.

I'm not buying the 'experienced' line from Woodward - I'm thinking 'expendable' myself - I expect Catt will be thrown in against the minnows where it doesn;t matter if he gets hurt.

Bizarre decision though - Healey could have filled that role and covered Wing and scrummy.

Strangely all three scrummies he has named are in great form - probably better at the moment than George - but not IMO as good as George has been in the past.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
I'm not buying the 'experienced' line from Woodward - I'm thinking 'expendable' myself - I expect Catt will be thrown in against the minnows where it doesn;t matter if he gets hurt.

Bizarre decision though - Healey could have filled that role and covered Wing and scrummy.

Yes, but some of us would have been praying he'd get hurt.

[Havak]

Well Austin no doubt celebrated the decision to disallow Matilda (whilst the rest of us just breathed a sigh of relief such jingoistic nonsense was curtailed?)

Reading around our selections it seems Austin has been told he is first choice cover for 9, 10 and Wing in case of injury - and was left out due to lack of match fitness apparently.

I'll be interested to see if he starts for Tigers at scrummy Saturday. And also, given Pez has been dropped by Italy from their RWC (naturally - we sign a player and his form plummets) when he might join us?

Thats a strange decision actually - not only is he their incumbent fly half he is also first choice for kicking at the pegs...

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by ravagon
Smarmy git.

I am not smarmy!

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
Well Austin no doubt celebrated the decision to disallow Matilda (whilst the rest of us just breathed a sigh of relief such jingoistic nonsense was curtailed?)

But they've now allowed it. Prior to the team arriving on the ground.

Reading around our selections it seems Austin has been told he is first choice cover for 9, 10 and Wing in case of injury - and was left out due to lack of match fitness apparently.

Presumably his tongue's fit anyway.

I'll be interested to see if he starts for Tigers at scrummy Saturday.

You should pray not, I'd've thought.

Thats a strange decision actually - not only is he their incumbent fly half he is also first choice for kicking at the pegs...

They're a strange mob. That's what I like about them.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin


I am not smarmy!

Classic one-liner response!