Rugby World Cup 2003 - The Rugby Widows Weep!

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin
You can't have a job, have a girlfriend and keep playing RPG and Wargames... it's like wanting the butter, the money of the butter and to f*** the dairywomen.

To feel secure I have renounced both.

How are you at kissing airport tarmacs? I think you're lining up to be the next Pope!

[finbar]

Blew a gale in Sydney today - 100kph winds - and the wind is still howling. The France -v- USA match is being played about 2 hours south of Sydney and the stadium is right on the coast where the wind really howls. Don't expect too many goals and conversions!

[Havak]

On a side note, Romania crushed Namibia 37-7 (32-0 at half time). Poor Namibians.

Elements of the Aussie media used the absolutely meaningless victory over Namibia to ‘prove’ that the world champions were back to their best according to something I heard on BBC Radio 5 Live last night.

On the same program it was alleged that there was a substitution issue in that match that led to the Australians also having XVI men on the pitch and questioning why exactly no fuss had been made of this? I think we all know the answer to that?

It was a fun show actually – Jonathan Pearce is quite Aussie in his broadcast style and he advised all the Aussie Journo’s (and they played a small sample of truly frightening nutters still moaning about England) to let the rugby be played on the field and shut their whining. Good advice – snowball in hells chance they will heed it.

I would also like to know Finbar where you heard that allegation Reddin had assaulted Walsh. You probably know by now it was totally without foundation and that in a ridiculous ‘playground’ moment Mr Walsh had actually squirted the contents of a water bottle at Reddin – there was no physical contact and Walsh is the one being punished for the incident. Reddin should consider libel action against the Journalist who raised this one?

Havak, it's totally impossible to support the Welsh against NZ unless you're Welsh. They'll be totally crushed.

Its even worse than we feared LDiCesare as the Welsh have named a second XV!

Not that unexpected actually – Hansen rolling over for his own country so his team can be fresh and strong against us.

So we will learn nothing about NZ this weekend – we will have to wait for the QF to see what they are made of under at least some pressure.

Okay.

But Finbar we knew Clive was odd already – you know I can’t defend that allegation!

It’s these NZ/Aussie journalists making sweeping statements about the British class and education system that I enjoy most. I suspect you know where I stand on both and I’ll be the first to criticise where it’s needed – but that Kiwi journalist was pretty amusing with his suppositions.

I disagree here. Imagine if England were playing a SH team with 16 players on the field for a significant portion of the match?
(And before you ask whether a SH ref counts - no he doesn't!)

Of course he does – no NH ref is likely to have cocked it up the way Kaplan did.

But consider this – 35 seconds on the field. At no point were 16 men involved in play – which kind of neuters your point. 16 men were briefly on the field before Samoa took a penalty because Tindall ran back on. And for this there is a witch hunt – for make no mistake that is what it was.

Englands relatively minor breach probably shouldn't have reversed a result but then it was a pretty close game...

I would have settled for a 13 point win in my day.

Oh I am really going to enjoy it when you have your first wobble of the tournament – for make no mistake it will happen. Probably at the QF stage. Expect much sympathy from me.

True, but then he was a fan and the IRB was rather limited in what they could impose. A ban on Officials/players who did the same would have a far far greater effect.

The IRB could do very little – but the South African Union was initially reluctant to take action – and did so only after external pressure. I think he is technically banned form all Rugby grounds or some such nonsense. It was a black incident as however poor McHugh can be you can’t have fans assaulting refs and national coaches then being very tardy to condemn it?

Of course you are right punishing officials sends a clear message. I suspect when you wrote it you expected an England official to be punished – but no doubt you are equally happy to see Walsh punished?

And I’m really happy today – I got marginally depressed last month when I officially qualified for Vets rugby, but am now thoroughly cheered up as Tamerlin is older than me (and somehow I had him pictured as a decade or so younger).



*edit* Especially for Finbar that he might laugh at Clive a little more as I certainly did

[Paddy]

Originally posted by finbar
Blew a gale in Sydney today - 100kph winds - and the wind is still howling. The France -v- USA match is being played about 2 hours south of Sydney and the stadium is right on the coast where the wind really howls. Don't expect too many goals and conversions!

The wind has died down quite a bit now... anything is possible

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Havak
So we will learn nothing about NZ this weekend – we will have to wait for the QF to see what they are made of under at least some pressure.

Somehow I rather suspect that you, personally, will never learn anything about NZ unless they stuff up somehow?

It’s these NZ/Aussie journalists making sweeping statements about the British class and education system that I enjoy most. I suspect you know where I stand on both and I’ll be the first to criticise where it’s needed – but that Kiwi journalist was pretty amusing with his suppositions.

Hmmm. How about "How much of the English performance lately can you attribute to their change in policy that no longer requires the ball to travel backwards whilst in the process of being passed?"

But consider this – 35 seconds on the field. At no point were 16 men involved in play – which kind of neuters your point. 16 men were briefly on the field before Samoa took a penalty because Tindall ran back on. And for this there is a witch hunt – for make no mistake that is what it was.

Let me clarify. I certainly don't think it should have cost points in any way shape or form. Nor any penalty beyond a minor reprimand (although the chap who "handled" an official is a rather different matter).
You do have to have some sort of punishment for such an infringement though, however minor the perceived effect, lest other teams start to have similar "accidents" with the rules that do have to be settled off the field. Nobody wants that.
I think you may exaggerate the point a bit with the term 'witch hunt' too. As far as the media is concerned, maybe, but then we don't really want to think about what would happen if they made all of the decisions now do we?

Oh I am really going to enjoy it when you have your first wobble of the tournament – for make no mistake it will happen. Probably at the QF stage. Expect much sympathy from me.

You're already carving the word "sympathy" into that .50 calibre silver bullet then?

The IRB could do very little – but the South African Union was initially reluctant to take action – and did so only after external pressure. I think he is technically banned form all Rugby grounds or some such nonsense. It was a black incident as however poor McHugh can be you can’t have fans assaulting refs and national coaches then being very tardy to condemn it?

Tardy?! You're not trying to imply that those champions of fair play, the Boks, weren't equally as outraged are you?

but am now thoroughly cheered up as Tamerlin is older than me (and somehow I had him pictured as a decade or so younger).

Oddly enough he gave me the exact same impression until he first posted his actual age a thread or two back.
Probably has something to do with all of the

[Havak]

Somehow I rather suspect that you, personally, will never learn anything about NZ unless they stuff up somehow?

You misunderstand me – I respect them as a great rugger side. What annoys me is the attitude that seems to surface (not from you or Andydog I hasten to add – I’m talking media mainly!) that they are somehow Crown Princes and only need to serve time to be given the Cup at the end of November. It’s a dangerous attitude I think.

"How much of the English performance lately can you attribute to their change in policy that no longer requires the ball to travel backwards whilst in the process of being passed?"

To which the reply is “yes Mitchell did great technical things for us in his time here – and has gone on the exceed them by some distance in his new post”

Forward passes are a problem throughout the tournament in all seriousness – and NZ are as guilty as anyone. If a ref finally clamps down on it that will cripple any big teams game.

although the chap who "handled" an official is a rather different matter).

He didn’t touch him. It was, how shall we say, totally ‘made up’.

As far as the media is concerned, maybe, but then we don't really want to think about what would happen if they made all of the decisions now do we?

But surely they do in Australia? After all you swallowed the nonsense about Reddin assaulting Walsh even though I have now corrected that twice?

You're already carving the word "sympathy" into that .50 calibre silver bullet then?

Ah you understand me too well.

Tardy?! You're not trying to imply that those champions of fair play, the Boks, weren't equally as outraged are you?

I think some of them wanted to give him a medal.

As for Tamerlin – I am sure you are right!

[Andydog]

Originally posted by Havak
A piece like that needs Names to the quotes dear boy - identifiers if you like! Without them it's nothing but meaningless hearsay.

Nonsense. It was his diary, dear boy, his observations about the English journos were just a few of many. The article wasn't dedicated to them by any means. So he reckons the Pommy journos a bunch of dickheads, why name names? Actually it's unusual for him to write in such a negative light, but from what I've seen, I'd say his observations hit the nail on the head.

To depart from Havak's 'SH Conspiracy against England' theory that he keeps bashing us with, the real worst enemy of the English is their media. They build their sportsmen up into gods, only to crucify them when they inevitably loose. They frequently distort facts and write in provocative emotive tones so as to wind up Joe Public and ultimately sell more papers. Their tabloids are nothing more than an embarrassment in my eyes – 99% of the time the articles in those are pure fiction. I wouldn’t be seen dead with the Sun – it’s a comic book, not a newspaper.

What kind of educated journalistic says 'got up my goat' incidentally?

Aw, come on! That’s a classic call! Don’t tell me it didn’t make you smile. I guess that’s more Kiwi humour than English.

Tell me Havak, are you one of those ‘Royalist’ nutters?

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
but am now thoroughly cheered up as Tamerlin is older than me

That makes me, if I'd been precocious, old enough to be your father! Off to bed without any dinner!

[Havak]

I'd say his observations hit the nail on the head.

Um - actually accusations without attributing opinions reported as ‘global’ is appalling journalism regardless of whether it is presented as a diary or a traditional article surely? He came across as the inarticulate illiterate one to me.

You liked what he said – it resonated with what you would like to believe - and that’s fine. It’s a free world (apparently).

Hell who am I kidding – what he said bothered me very little but I thought you might like me to pick it apart?

Their tabloids are nothing more than an embarrassment in my eyes – 99% of the time the articles in those are pure fiction. I wouldn’t be seen dead with the Sun – it’s a comic book, not a newspaper.

I don’t read tabloids – nor do I argue with what you say. Our print media is generally appalling. Large parts of it are owned by the same ex-Australian who makes portions of the Aussie and NZ press gutter fodder too.

This idea that English journo’s are **** heads – and Kiwi ones aren’t – bit Xenophobic maybe?

Out TV journalism on the other hand in a order of magnitude ‘better’ than the crap I saw in Australia – thanks god for the BBC! I’ve not had the joy of seeing Kiwi TV so don’t know where this ranks?

Aw, come on! That’s a classic call! Don’t tell me it didn’t make you smile. I guess that’s more Kiwi humour than English.

Smile – yes. But you said it was serious Professional critique of his English colleagues not a piss take.

Not bad that - I might send it to a few royalists for comment.

As fro me I am a full blooded Republican and an actual Socialist (as in I sit at the centre of old labour and believe in mutual social responsibility). There is therefore little room for me in the UK right now.

It does mean in addition by the way that if I thought your Kiwi friend was right – that all our journo’s are all stuck up public school nobs - I would have said so. I have no love for the Class or Public school system. He really is wrong.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
What annoys me is the attitude that seems to surface (not from you or Andydog I hasten to add – I’m talking media mainly!) that they are somehow Crown Princes and only need to serve time to be given the Cup at the end of November. It’s a dangerous attitude I think.

Curiously enough, we had your Paul Ackford's column in the Sydney Morning Herald constantly telling us how England were dead certs to win the Cup. One of his arguments was that they'd win because they were better prepared because they'd stayed in squillion dollar resorts preparing for the event. Oddly enough, the column hasn't appeared since the Samoa match.

[finbar]

Les Grenouilles 41 -d- Bush's Boys 14

Les Grenouilles got worse the further the game went. There was some terrific rugby from them in the first half, but the Americans pretty much matched them on the scoreboard in the second half, taking the attack to the French. The French defence was scrambling at best, letting two tries through, and they seemed to lose the plot themselves in attack. The Americans, backing up only 4 nights after the Japan match, should be proud of themselves.

I don't know how much of a concern it is for Laporte. It was very much a 2nd XV, with the Big Guns starting on the bench and staying there.

[Havak]

No Duck fat on toast for Havak's supper? Shame!

Thanks for actually naming a name Finbar – it gives me something to go at. Ackford, who writes for the Sunday Telegraph here, is not my favourite English journalist. Not much of a lock IMO, he never played for us again after that final you keep watching.

A graduate of Kent University in actual fact he indulges far too often in that kind of triumphalist and uber-optimistic nonsense that I so despise when I see it in your countrymen journalists. He was in fact the author of an amazing piece before the Bok game entitled “There is no way England can lose to the Boks”. As we all know when two teams take the field either can end up the loser. That’s the measure of the man.

So well done Finbar – a palpable hit!

As for the France game I think you are right to raise the question of how important it is for Laporte that his second XV are pretty pedestrian – not very I would suggest?

[Andydog]

Originally posted by Havak
Um - actually accusations without attributing opinions reported as ‘global’ is appalling journalism regardless of whether it is presented as a diary or a traditional article surely? He came across as the inarticulate illiterate one to me.

Cripes I'm starting to feel a little tired. It was only his diary, not a piece of journalism. If I kept a diary it probably would also be full of inarticulate illiterate opinions. The point that seems to have been missed here is that he comments on how the English journalists are the ones blowing out of proportion minor SH criticism of the England team. That's what I'm saying I agree with, and yes I think he hits the nail on the head judging from the articles I read on the BBC website and the articles I read on NZ websites. Nothing xenophobic about that. Take a closer look at it if you fancy.

[Havak]

If he published it then it's a piece of journalism surely?

Reading the full thing he comes out with more credit - but he is still wrong about the background and education of our journalists.

Glad he likes Gomers though - and I did find the Tindall/Mitchell reference to rucking very interesting.

Time to perhaps shift the emphasis though?

With Paddy O'Brien taking the helm for Ireland-Australia the irish coach has raised the issue of interpretation again. If Finbar doesn't find it I'll post the quotes later.

Oh and Jonathan Davies has criticised Wales for their team choice calling it a surrender. Davies is a really nice bloke and talks a lot of sense - I think he has this one right.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by finbar
How are you at kissing airport tarmacs? I think you're lining up to be the next Pope!

I am not yet ready.

It seems that I have finally managed to disqualify myself as a step son-in-law.

Oddly enough he gave me the exact same impression until he first posted his actual age a thread or two back.

I appear younger than I am.

Hmmm. How about "How much of the English performance lately can you attribute to their change in policy that no longer requires the ball to travel backwards whilst in the process of being passed?"

Coming from a Southern Hemisphere heretic "C'est l'hôpital qui se moque de la charité" ("it is hospital mocking charity").

No Duck fat on toast for Havak's supper? Shame!

No doubt allowed, he is British from head to toes and as such doesn't know what we can do with such a delicacy...



Appalling performance from the French reserve team, it only confirms what I already knew since a long time, that the replacements are not on par with the first choice players. Dimitri Yachvili is nothing more than a second division level player, the forwards are really less efficient, the centers are unable to pierce through a defence... add whatever you want.