Rugby - Swinging Handbags!

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Tamerlin

I don't have too much time this morning, this is a problem I have already talked about before. Some of the main problems IMO are lack of technical skill and tight game plans killing what remains of the famous "french flair" in order to reduce the chances of a loss. The stakes are so high the clubs are not playing with the intent to win but with the intent to not lose.

Is this just in your domestic matches or did it affect the French National team during the 6N as well?
It sounds more like a bit of a slump than anything else.
Not that NZ rugby knows anything about this from first-hand experience of course.

As for the Mitchell quotes I didn't see him get anything right - he even thinks the team is in good hands with Graham Henry.

Somehow I have a feeling that certain press elements took a little creative license with whatever-it-was that Mitchell actually said.
(a) England aren't the same team without Wilco or He-with-the-jaw-commonly-likened-to-a-lantern (I doubt you'd dispute that), and neither of them are going to be down here in your next touring side.
That said, writing them off as not-a-threat is just plain silly - as with any of the major sides.

(b) Henry, for his part, has a little more to work with than he did with Wales - some of their 6N performances aside.
I wouldn't be too surprised if the AB's didn't do too badly with him around for a season or two.

I see much is being made of Tuiali'i's claim that his headbutt was a reaction to a racist slur.

Are players now going to be excused from any subsequent bad behaviour as long as they claim it was a reaction to "racism"? What a load of bollocks.

In his defense there weren't too many voices that disputed his version of events. He was both carded during the game and suspended for three weeks thereafter. While claims of racial remarks may have mitigated his punishment he was hardly excused from it.

Players aren't even necessarily the big potential problem.
During the last Australian domestic soccer (One of the few sports in which WA is a highly able contender) season for example, there was on on-field 'incident' between one of the opposing players and the local crowd.
Now the player in question just happened to be of Serbian descent and many of the crowd elements were Croatian - possibly the worst possible combination, with regards to Western civilisation anyway.
Basically it got pretty ugly indeed and could've been a lot worse.

While rugby fans may be slightly less prone to violent reaction than their soccer counterparts it's still something worth considering when taking post-match penalties into account - particularly with the RSA back in the game so to speak - they most of all have a vested interest in seeing it stamped out.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
As you say quite bizarre - It’s hugely worrying when considerable coaching changes like that fails to change previous systematic behaviour. Are there junior coaches or senior players affecting it I wonder?

It's a culture that's been there for years. It probably even pre-dates today's senior players. Bob couldn't kill it when he was coach. Even the mongrel that Plank can bring to things didn't help. The Waratah motto is: "Promise Much, Deliver Little And Usually Via Self Destruction". The galling this is that this year's high points were even higher than past years' high points, meaning the low points were even lower.

So our home semi in the wildcard kicks off at 7:15pm BST on Saturday. I won’t be there – silly time for rugby as there is drinking to be done.

Havak does a Tamerlin.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin


Give him the choice between the Tigers and a good pint and he throws his favorite team through the window...

If he chose a good pint over his team, I wouldn't mind. But he chooses a pint of llama p*ss!

Havak, don't say I am not a real supporter because I am not following the Stade Toulousain away from home anymore before the final phases.

He doesn't say that, I do.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Caligastia
I see much is being made of Tuiali'i's claim that his headbutt was a reaction to a racist slur.

What? Someone called him a North Aucklander?

Now there are calls for rugby rules to include protection against racist taunts.

Are players now going to be excused from any subsequent bad behaviour as long as they claim it was a reaction to "racism"? What a load of bollocks.

Rules against racist taunts, a good thing IMHO, are quite quite different to using a racial taunt as a defence. The AFL here, with a lot of Aboriginal players, has handled the situation quite well. The taunter is penalised, but retaliation by the taunted is also penalised.

[finbar]

Originally posted by ravagon

Players aren't even necessarily the big potential problem.
During the last Australian domestic soccer (One of the few sports in which WA is a highly able contender) season for example, there was on on-field 'incident' between one of the opposing players and the local crowd.
Now the player in question just happened to be of Serbian descent and many of the crowd elements were Croatian - possibly the worst possible combination, with regards to Western civilisation anyway.
Basically it got pretty ugly indeed and could've been a lot worse.

Wasn't this a classic case of the player being the problem? The player, of Serbian descent, offered a symbolic gesture to the crowd of Croatian descent that was culturally highly offensive to Croatians. If I recall, he was charged by the judiciary over the gesture but acquitted. He claimed his gesture was misinterpreted. What bullsh*t. It was perfectly clear what he intended with his gesture - to offend (and incite) the crowd. He should have been suspended.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by finbar
Rules against racist taunts, a good thing IMHO, are quite quite different to using a racial taunt as a defence. The AFL here, with a lot of Aboriginal players, has handled the situation quite well. The taunter is penalised, but retaliation by the taunted is also penalised.

How is it proven that a racist slur was actually uttered? What standard does the proof have to reach to be accepted?

[Havak]

Another day off for Havak - another 24 hour change of mind - I'm now going to the game on Saturday as I have been offered a lift meaning I can drink through the game.

A win-win scenario - and also means I can keep teasing tamerlin about his lack of stadium time.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Caligastia
How is it proven that a racist slur was actually uttered? What standard does the proof have to reach to be accepted?

Presumably it has to be heard (or overheard). But there have been cases in AFL where it hasn't been overheard, the recipient has complained and the instigator has admitted it when it could have been denied. In those cases it's an honesty thing dealing with a heat of the moment situation. And, in fact, it seems hardly to occur these days. There's been a lot of player education.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
Another day off for Havak - another 24 hour change of mind - I'm now going to the game on Saturday as I have been offered a lift meaning I can drink through the game.

A win-win scenario - and also means I can keep teasing tamerlin about his lack of stadium time.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by finbar


Presumably it has to be heard (or overheard). But there have been cases in AFL where it hasn't been overheard, the recipient has complained and the instigator has admitted it when it could have been denied. In those cases it's an honesty thing dealing with a heat of the moment situation. And, in fact, it seems hardly to occur these days. There's been a lot of player education.

Just as long as we don't have to endure endless ***-for-tat bickering over what may or may not have been said.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by Havak
A win-win scenario - and also means I can keep teasing tamerlin about his lack of stadium time.

It is the intent that counts.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin


It is the intent that counts.

That's right. You have no intention at all of going. He had no intention at all of going until he found a way of going and drinking.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by finbar


That's right. You have no intention at all of going. He had no intention at all of going until he found a way of going and drinking.

That, coming from a stay-at-home who only watch Rugby games on TV doesn't count.

By the way, did you manage to get out of your lair to watch "Les triplettes de Belleville"?.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin


That, coming from a stay-at-home who only watch Rugby games on TV doesn't count.

A desperate rejoinder if ever there were one! (Note appropriate use of the subjunctive tense!)

By the way, did you manage to get out of your lair to watch "Les triplettes de Belleville"?.

No, not yet. But I did catch up with "Pirates of the Caribbean" on DVD on the weekend. It's a lot of fun, even if at least half an hour too long. Johnny Depp's Keith Richard impersonation is très amusing.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by finbar


A desperate rejoinder if ever there were one! (Note appropriate use of the subjunctive tense!)

I will remember the angry smily at the end of your sentence.

No, not yet. But I did catch up with "Pirates of the Caribbean" on DVD on the weekend. It's a lot of fun, even if at least half an hour too long. Johnny Depp's Keith Richard impersonation is très amusing.

I saw the movie at the cinema and I was pleasantly surprised though I found two scenes ridiculous (among which the fight on the cart) and two rejoinders a bit out of place.

The scene featuring the undeads walking under the sea is great.