Rugby World Cup 2003 - The Rugby Widows Weep!

[Caligastia]

Here's your new thread guys. I had Mrs Havak, Finbar and Caligastia in mind when I created this thread title. Are your ladies complaining yet fellas?

Link here for the old one.

I still have about 4 games on tape I have to watch, so I'm still avoiding this thread...

[Tamerlin]

Already a new thread, it seems that we will need at least three before the Rugby World Cup is over.

I know the question may sound stupid but how do you know the postcount...

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Tamerlin
I know the question may sound stupid but how do you know the postcount...

Easy, just look at the number of replies to the thread. 500 is the limit.

[finbar]

*EDIT* Okay I need to indulge in a little Tamerlin like spleen venting here.

John Eales, Eddie Jones, Rudi Straeuli (and regrettably Jacques Brunel who should know better) - SHUT YOUR HYPOCRITICAL MOUTHS!

Finbar can find out what the anti-Pom mob has been saying for you - I'm too damn angry

But I will give the last words to Neil Back who said the criticism of England was "borne out of fear" while England forwards coach Andy Robinson insisted that his pack was "very legal".

Bit desperate isn't it Finbar - wheeling out Nobody to help launch yet another SH coaching attack on referees with a view to making life suit only SH sides? It's getting tedious quite frankly. Respect to the ABs for keeping totally out of it.

I have no idea what you're talking about. I imagine something has been said somewhere. I'll have a look around.

Edit. I've since found the report. Frankly, I've wondered the same thing about Back's positioning at the back of the maul. He's rarely bound, he sort of hovers there. Presumably, with Clive having complained loudly that Joe Roff's try was illegal - while, hypocritically, using decoy runners himself - it's been decided that all's fair in love and war. I can't comment on the lineout observation because I haven't noticed it.

I know the question may sound stupid but how do you know the postcount...

It tells you in the column beside the thread title!

That aside, I have to inform the thread that, up until the end of the last thread - "Crunch Time" - we have totalled 5,976 posts since we started our first dedicated rugby thread. Shame on you all for wasting so much precious time and even more precious cyberspace!

[finbar]

I am unable to go to AB games in melbourne due to timing and work etc so thought i might go to an AB training session.On enquiry found that all training sessions are closed to public due to player and tactics privacy issues(Sth African spies mentioned).Not real happy with this so sent email to AB communications officer-very helpful chap.He advised that 4 AB players were signing autographs at melbourne sports store today and invited me to bring 11year old daughter(Joe Rokocoko fan) and she would be looked after. Daughter now very happy with autographed T shirt and poster and she got to meet Rokocoko and has photos with him. Most impressed with time he took to help out-not always found in large organisations.

Nice story. Very good - and sensible - PR.

[Andydog]

Originally posted by finbar
I have no idea what you're talking about. I imagine something has been said somewhere. I'll have a look around.

TheStinger posted the link in the last thread. Accusations of Cheating

Havak, water off a ducks back. Its the refs decision at the end of the day, and if he starts penalising then you and I both know England will adapt quickly.

[Andydog]

Originally posted by kiwiman
Rokocoko and has photos with him. Most impressed with time he took to help out-not always found in large organisations.

That's brilliant. I've heard a lot about how Cokopops always has time for his fans. Good on him.

Oh, btw, was at a work do yesterday at Twickers, and got the tour of the Presidents room, Royal Box and the players rooms under the East tadium. Awesome! The ground holds 74,000 odd now, but with the new North stand being completed in mid 2004, it will hold 83,000 odd! Did a wickedly smelly fart when I sat in Jonny Wilkinson's spot in the change rooms

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by Caligastia
Easy, just look at the number of replies to the thread. 500 is the limit.

Errrr... Thanks Caligastia, the question was indeed stupid.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by "don't remember who"
He advised that 4 AB players were signing autographs at melbourne sports store today and invited me to bring 11year old daughter(Joe Rokocoko fan) and she would be looked after.

Beware, in some countries a sentence saying that a high level sportsman is taking care of 11 years girls could be badly perceived.

[Havak]

Frankly, I've wondered the same thing about Back's positioning at the back of the maul. He's rarely bound, he sort of hovers there.

He is always bound, but does change hands as he makes himself busy looking to break off either side. Is that illegal? In this he is no different at all to the AB great Josh Kronfeld or the current incumbent McCaw – and the criticism is ill founded, untimely and unwelcome to be honest. Yes just like Clive’s comments on Australia’s use of obstruction – not defending those here – the difference being this criticism is entirely wrong rather than simply hypocritical - and mainly coming from two teams that can’t maul to save their lives.

Yup – still kind of about it!

Havak, water off a ducks back. Its the refs decision at the end of the day, and if he starts penalising then you and I both know England will adapt quickly.

True enough

I was annoyed – I may have exaggerated it a little. To be honest Jones does get to me sometimes – a hugely unsuccessful International coach he has no problem telling referees and even the IRB how things should be changed and/or policed – he gets my goat at times and to be joined in criticism by a former player I respect greatly – well that just disappoints me. I mean for goodness sake Wilson was always absolutely correctly bound right Ealesy? Yes?

Did a wickedly smelly fart when I sat in Jonny Wilkinson's spot in the change rooms

I know at my age I shouldn’t but I did laugh at this. Twickers is a nice ground – shame they built it where they did. I’d have preferred…Leicester.

Beware, in some countries a sentence saying that a high level sportsman is taking care of 11 years girls could be badly perceived.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin


Beware, in some countries a sentence saying that a high level sportsman is taking care of 11 years girls could be badly perceived.

Funny you should mention it. Yet another of our top swim coaches is being accused of behaving improperly with young female swimmers. Part of the problem seems to be that instruction, as laid down in the coaching manuals, requires various degrees of physical contact. Exactly how that is interpreted - or misinterpreted - is the question.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak


He is always bound, but does change hands as he makes himself busy looking to break off either side.

No, he's not always bound.

Is that illegal?

Yes, if he's not bound.

Yup – still kind of about it!

I was annoyed – I may have exaggerated it a little. To be honest Jones does get to me sometimes – a hugely unsuccessful International coach he has no problem telling referees and even the IRB how things should be changed and/or policed – he gets my goat at times and to be joined in criticism by a former player I respect greatly – well that just disappoints me.

Time to put things into context. Channel 7 has a Tuesday night WRC show during which games are analysed, and, amongst other things, a fancy video screen is used to examine and analyse various interesting tactical bits and pieces. John Eales, whose turn it was as analyst, used the screen to illustrate how Neil Back several times wasn't bound. Not that he was moving the ball from one hand to another. He had the ball under one arm and wasn't bound.

The point was raised with Eddie at a media event a day later. On the evidence provided, Eddie agreed with Eales.

Cue a certain retired tighthead with a high forehead to suggest that, obviously, Eddie had organised for Eales to highlight the situation before organising to have someone ask him it about the next day.

I don't understand why he has joined the fray... the said illegal tactic, and it is certainly not an illegal one, is a common occurence in the French and English championships where mauls are still in use.

It most certainly is illegal. The laws require you to be bound to the maul, otherwise you are being shepherded. Shame on you for condoning such illegality!

"I didn't feel England were as confident as some people said they would be. Even against us, they seemed at times to have doubt about their game and to be over-careful about every move," Saurel said.

"I think they are so much under stress that they are going to be scared stiff before every game and I don't think you would be able to get a smile from (coach) Clive Woodward even if you bought him a bag of tickles."

The Georgia coach enters the mindgames fray!

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by finbar
It most certainly is illegal. The laws require you to be bound to the maul, otherwise you are being shepherded. Shame on you for condoning such illegality!

I must have missed something when I read the article, I was thinking about something else...

There is something strange in what is said and in the same time that is completely stupid... tell me how a forward can take part in a rolling maul without being locked to his partners... there are also some moments when the forwards have to unlock in order to change their position in the maul... sounds like it is a bit ridiculous!

It is all the same very curious that the said infringements of the laws are related to the mauls, a phase that is less and less used in the SH and that is considered as unaesthetic by the uneducated heretics of the SH.

Whatever the case, to the exception of Jacques Brunel (I still don't understand why he has joined this spurious debate), the criticisms of the SH nations are completely out of place when you know these same nations are ever trying to bend the laws through their referees and their interpretations.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin


I must have missed something when I read the article, I was thinking about something else...

There is something strange in what is said and in the same time that is completely stupid... tell me how a forward can take part in a rolling maul without being locked to his partners... there are also some moments when the forwards have to unlock in order to change their position in the maul... sounds like it is a bit ridiculous!

Obviously forwards have to unbind in order to reposition themselves! We're not talking about that! We're talking about the player with the ball hovering behind the maul without being attached! That's what Neil Back sometimes does! I've seen him do it!

It is all the same very curious that the said infringements of the laws are related to the mauls, a phase that is less and less used in the SH and that is considered as unaesthetic by the uneducated heretics of the SH.

Only because we don't have the fat players to do it! If Les Grenouilles - full of Cassoulet - and the English - full of Pork Pies - are obviously prepared to elevate their cholesterol levels to astronomic proportions just for the sake of a maul, that's their problem!

Whatever the case, to the exception of Jacques Brunel (I still don't understand why he has joined this spurious debate)

He wasn't debating the maul situation, he was complaining about the English habits in the lineout! See below:

They only pretend to contest the ball, they put their arms around the opponent's jumper while he is coming down to stop him from releasing the ball," said Brunel.

"At the same time another of their players goes through and round the line-out with his arms in the air to say 'sorry ref, mistake' but he is actually slowing down their opponents' support players.

"They often manage to spoil line-out possession with these tactics."

[finbar]

Hey, Tamerlin, I turned on the TV and they're showing the 1987 RWC final! Care to put some of your hard-earned Euros on France to beat the ABs?



Edit. Sorry, Tamerlin, you lost. That'll be 20 Euros, thanks. Oh, I invested 20 Euros of your money for you on France in your absence ...