Rugby World Cup 2003 - Crunch Time!

[finbar]

Originally posted by Andydog


Okay, I'll take a nibble. That June game in Wellington 15-13 to England was rubbish. Dickinson refereed appallingly, dishing out 33 penalties and effectively robbed the game of any flow whatsoever. We got the only try, with a new team starting at the beginning of our season, when you were at the end of yours. Our No 8 So'oialo was ruled to have made a double movement after taking a quick tap near the try line, another bollocks call that robbed us of another try.

England won because they showed the value firstly of experience, but also of goal kicking. Wilko kicked four from five, plus a drop goal, for all of his side's 15 points, Carlos Spencer struggled in the swirling conditions, landing just three from seven.

England showed enormous character, but in terms of playing actual rugby and putting together phases and implementing patterns, neither side was able to get past the first phase as Dickinson whistled the house down.

Nobody could walk away from that game and proclaim who was the better side.

Yuck, this bait tastes of pork, I think I'll spit it out now.

Now this guy could be a sports writer!

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by Havak
On which note I would really like Tamerlin to explain this outreageous lack of NH solidarity

First: Philippe Sella was a great player but his IQ is close to infamous David Campese's one (where one is at the same time relating to the IQ and to the result of the test).

Second: He has played all his French carreer at Agen

Third: He is now working for a French private television channel where he comments games.

Do you still think is opinion is important?

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin




First: Philippe Sella was a great player but his IQ is close to infamous David Campese's one (where one is at the same time relating to the IQ and to the result of the test).

Second: He has played all his French carreer at Agen

Third: He is now working for a French private television channel where he comments games.

Do you still think is opinion is important?

Any opinion that gives Havak the irrits is an important opinion.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin


Havak, England must grind the AB to dust in Final.

OTOH, this guy is une oie.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by finbar
OTOH, this guy is une oie.

Your Political Refugee status has just been revised by the Board of Inquiry.

[Havak]

I never did rate his opinion in this piece Tamerlin.

You may be right Finbar. Let me see if I can spice up the bait.

Dickinson had a poor game. It WAS a poor game all round. I think it would be fair to say the more experienced side ground a result out of a forgettable game. But Dickinson did catch and stop a lot of traditional AB infringements (double moves should count when you wear black?) so I can understand why Kiwis would be unhappy. The only try was scored from a traditional Howlett metres offside move that is becoming tiresome from such an obviously talented player – and THAT was the refs worst call of the game. The double movement was exactly that – but any player would have played innocent the way your guilty player did and that’s a sad indication of where the SH influence on the game has taken us IMO. Personally I was always brutally honest - "Of course I scored sir".

Sure we showed great character, particularly when down to 13 men and the ABs showed some flashes of brilliance – had Howletts try been legal I would have applauded it loudly as it actually showed good vision. It has to be frustrating that such a highly rated side couldn’t make a two man advantage tell?

But there is perhaps one thing to take issue with – the winner can always walk away and claim to be the better side surely? When the loser does it – as some Kiwis (not yourself of course!) are still maintaining even now – doesn’t it make them look pretty, um, daft? Look at it this way – had the ABs won would the fans be coming out of it not claiming to be the best. Of course not – they would be shoving it down everyone’s throat all the time. You are lucky I’m a fairly restrained Englishman instead.

Damn that hook hurts the mouth…

Anyway all this A better than B is not important – the acid test is near upon us. And I still would not be surprised at all if one or the other of us gets knocked out by someone else. Looking at the draw we are in separate halves and if we do win our group the first real challenge we should face is France in the semi…without wanting to upset Tamerlin I hope we find them in the frame of mind they were in at HQ earlier in the month. I think you meet the Boks in the Qf if all goes to (my) plan. In an all or nothing game can they hold off on the biff? Can the ABs handle the biff? Fascinating questions.

[Havak]

Lest we forget which hemisphere led in the blind rush to Professionalism in Rugby Union check this out

Poor old George. Such restraint of trade on a player would almost certainly be illegal in the EC.

[Andydog]

You think it was double movement, well I don't think it was. You think our try was scored from an offside position, and again, I don't think it was. Nor do I think it's fair to suggest that the Kiwis are traditional infringers, nor to suggest that Kiwis are always shoving our victories down everyone's throats. Every country is guilty of that.

But all that aside, I'm sorry but your claim that the better side always wins is absolute bollocks. There is a concept called luck, and luck plays a big factor in rugby, and sometimes luck goes against those who play better, and sometimes it results in the better side loosing. I'm not suggesting this was the case in that game, just making the point.

Back to that particular game however, consider this. It was a typical season opener by the All Blacks. There was a lack of cohesion in the partnerships of the new combinations. We also lacked composure at times and rhythm and our attack got a bit fragmented. However, we did show an improved lineout and a solid forward effort to earn more than enough ball to attack England. It was our young backline failed to fire on that evening, and look how far they've come since then.

I think you underrate our forwards. Australia may have an average forward pack, but that last Tri Nations Bledisloe clash had them playing their hearts out against us, and we still dominated and displayed some great phases of forward play.

The way I work it out, we are likely to face Australia in the semi and you either France or the Boks. I pray we see each other in the final so we can see how our forwards fair against yours, and which style will triumph.



but not really that

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Havak
Lest we forget which hemisphere led in the blind rush to Professionalism in Rugby Union check this out

Sorry mate, your link doesn't work.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Caligastia


Sorry mate, your link doesn't work.

If it's what I think it is, it's about George Gregan being stopped from playing for the Brumbies if he's not available for the Wallabies. Try this link:

http://www.planet-rugby.com/LATEST_NEWS/story_31049.shtml

The restraint of trade notion is interesting. George would have been aware of the arrangement when he signed his contracts. It will be interesting to see what happens.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin


Your Political Refugee status has just been revised by the Board of Inquiry.

I just appealed to the European Court and won!

[finbar]

Originally posted by Andydog
But all that aside, I'm sorry but your claim that the better side always wins is absolute bollocks. There is a concept called luck, and luck plays a big factor in rugby, and sometimes luck goes against those who play better, and sometimes it results in the better side loosing. I'm not suggesting this was the case in that game, just making the point.

True.

I think you underrate our forwards. Australia may have an average forward pack, but that last Tri Nations Bledisloe clash had them playing their hearts out against us, and we still dominated and displayed some great phases of forward play.

Not so true.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by finbar
The restraint of trade notion is interesting. George would have been aware of the arrangement when he signed his contracts. It will be interesting to see what happens.

Interesting...although it obviously is, I hadn't thought of the Super 12 as being so international. Though he isn't playing for the national team, the games are still (mostly) international.

I suspect ole Georgie will be forced to play by the rules. Fair enough too - he is free to choose whether he wants to accept the terms of the contract or not.

[Havak]

Well apologies for the busted link.

But all that aside, I'm sorry but your claim that the better side always wins is absolute bollocks.

Not guilty!!! I said no such thing!! I said the winner has a ‘better’ claim to being the ‘better’ side than the loser. If I phrased it ambiguously just call me an arse!

How can the better side always win – we have lost to both the Abs and Australia in the past and that surely proves your point?

And as for the foray into the realms of luck – well yes sure all sport has it as a factor. Rugby has less than a lot of sports though – skill really does tell most of the time.

However, we did show an improved lineout and a solid forward effort to earn more than enough ball to attack England.

Your ‘season opener’ was also our first game post season, with a changed line up, against a damn good side on their own patch. I have consistently tried to ***** this bubble in the thread that our forwards played anything other than badly in that game. They are hugely unlikely to play so badly against you again. Your chances of getting so much ball are highly questionable to me.

It was our young backline failed to fire on that evening, and look how far they've come since then.

Five games. A destruction of Wales, two superb runs away from home in the tri-nations and two frankly not that hot games at home? Mixed messages in a way – very English of you if you will forgive me for saying it. How far have they come – I find it hard to measure until you face us again to be honest.

You are clearly a very very good and promising side – England are a very good side too. We can beat you. I’m aware you can beat us too.

and we still dominated and displayed some great phases of forward play.

Dominated in the loose? Or overall? Hmm I watched that last game and I felt a known to be weak Aussie front row gave real problems to your boys. I’d like wider opinions I think.

I don’t under rate your pack – I don’t rate it as good as ours either. My opinion that - and if you like to see it as my problem then fine by me.

so we can see how our forwards fair against yours, and which style will triumph.

I’m just as keen to see that as you – and I think you really need to be prepared that it may be you not I that gets hugely surprised.

I’m not at all by the way.

I accept that as sole Englishman I’m going to draw ire by gobbing off from my corner – do keep it coming.

[Andydog]

Originally posted by finbar
Not so true.

You don't think so? Mealamu, head down, legs pumping, regularly made strong yards for good set-ups; Chris Jack was an imposing presence as was McCaw. I thought the Wallaby forwards played much better following the 50-21 hiding the few weeks before. If I remember it was Gregan's erratic options and the lack of cohesion in your backline that let you down. Overall it wasn't a stunning performance by NZ, and we still have deficiencies in our pack I admit, but I still think they can give England a few surprises.