Rugby!

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak


Consistently? Or sometimes? I saw him let it go several times, but then I was rather hungover at the time.

He penalised it when it happened, it seemed to me. Lager? Or fancy coloured stuff?

Um, but all I did was miss the 'some' out for SH refs. What a difference a single word can make! It should of course have been present for SH refs too

Now he tells us ...

Am I totally against SH refs - no. But once again my silkly posting skills turned a post that was supposed to say "you aint perfect for refs, neither are we" into "I hate SH refs".

The truth will out!

But you have seen adequate proof in the various threads that the SH/NH divide on what is and isn't important for refs to police is a big one?

Can you think of a solution other than compromise both ways?

I stand by the bottom line I posted the other day. If something has absolutely no impact on the game, let it go. Anything that impacts on the game should be dealt with. What say you to that?

[Havak]

I say how does it really move us on on the situation? You see “impact on the game” is a terribly subjective issue. What you think has no impact may be something I think gives the infringing team a slight advantage – the fact that you have no problem with marginal offsides and I do being a case in point? Who would be the arbiter of who is right and wrong in any law changes?

But on a lighter note…

Freudian slip?

The subconscious at work behind my back

England loses to 3rd World Countries.

Much as I would love to label the Celtic countries 3rd World I don’t think they will like your description there.

There is simply no way I can make you understand without you thinking I want the violins – these are teams you turn over home and away without having to even try. But that’s because they really couldn’t care less about losing to you – every time they play us the intensity is at the levels of NZ-Aus clashes – they absolutely hate us – nothing matters more to them than beating England. You can’t understand until you have sat in one of their stadiums and felt the hatred wash over you in unending waves.

I wouldn’t come away with the idea we lose to them regularly – we have lost 4 of our last 20 six nations matches, one of which was to France in Paris (not an easy game!). That success rate of 80% should be good enough to win the Tri-nations right?

He penalised it when it happened, it seemed to me. Lager? Or fancy coloured stuff?

Perhaps I had bad angles. I can't argue too hard based on the limited stuff I saw, and I am biased against Honiss based on games he has helmed up here.

Fancy coloured stuff (dark brown). Bitter is my tipple of choice.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
I say how does it really move us on on the situation? You see “impact on the game” is a terribly subjective issue. What you think has no impact may be something I think gives the infringing team a slight advantage – the fact that you have no problem with marginal offsides and I do being a case in point? Who would be the arbiter of who is right and wrong in any law changes?

Yes, it's subjective. That's the problem with it. We could toss up examples - with our answers - to each other till doomsday. Or England beats a 1st World Country, whichever comes first. Sorry for the unintended digression. It slipped out. In fact, sometimes, I feel like Peter Sellers' mad wheelchair-bound scientist in "Doctor Strangelove". Every so often I lurch in my wheelchair and am compelled to slag off England's rugby team. Very strange. Be all that as it may - Now I've forgotten the point I was going to make! I'm sure it will return ...

Much as I would love to label the Celtic countries 3rd World I don’t think they will like your description there.

Well, we like to think of New Zealand as 3rd World - why shouldn't you follow suit?

There is simply no way I can make you understand without you thinking I want the violins – these are teams you turn over home and away without having to even try. But that’s because they really couldn’t care less about losing to you – every time they play us the intensity is at the levels of NZ-Aus clashes – they absolutely hate us – nothing matters more to them than beating England. You can’t understand until you have sat in one of their stadiums and felt the hatred wash over you in unending waves.

I take your point. Though I'm not sure that they couldn't care less about beating us. Obviously there are traditional rivalries that bubble to the surface.

I wouldn’t come away with the idea we lose to them regularly – we have lost 4 of our last 20 six nations matches, one of which was to France in Paris (not an easy game!). That success rate of 80% should be good enough to win the Tri-nations right?

Well, it depends on whomever beats whomever else in a particular year, doesn't it? I mean, in terms of who takes the title. The possibilities and ramifications are enormous with six teams. How many years has it been 6 Nations?

Perhaps I had bad angles. I can't argue too hard based on the limited stuff I saw, and I am biased against Honiss based on games he has helmed up here.

As I indicated pre-Saturday, he wasn't my favourite. I just thought he was better than usual. In SH terms.

Fancy coloured stuff (dark brown). Bitter is my tipple of choice.

M-hm. We don't have any decent bitters here. The only beers I really drink are Pierroni and Stella Artois with maybe some of that Elephant Brew if I want to clear my sinuses.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by finbar
Or we could simply start with 100 gold as you suggest, Caligastia.

It seems like a nice, round number. I vote 100 gold!

[Havak]

Or England beats a 1st World Country, whichever comes first

At least you didn’t say until Australia beat England again – now that would be some wait.

Well, we like to think of New Zealand as 3rd World - why shouldn't you follow suit?

Because it’s hard enough having you eloquently out word-smithying (is that a real expression?) me in the thread without me annoying Caligastia too overtly as well – even though it might be fairly safe whilst he sojourns for the big US holiday – also strangely enough an anti-English thing?

Though I'm not sure that they couldn't care less about beating us.

My bad again – I should have said ‘comparatively’ rather than ‘really’. Of course they want to beat you, laughable as the idea that they could is. The fact is they will accept losing to you far easier than to us, and won’t display the same intensity or passion against you as consistently. Even is the amateur days England was the scalp they wanted, and this desire has only intensified as England have started (note I say started) to become quite a good side that can mix it with the SH teams.

How many years has it been 6 Nations?

Since 2000, so three tournaments. Poor Italy have won one game from their fifteen so far – their very first against Scotland in 2000. The timing of their entry really scuppered them as it coincided with many senior players retiring.

The permutations are amazing, but it almost always boils down to the England v France game. These two teams have dominated it over the last decade and England haven’t finished lower than second for that decade.

I just thought he was better than usual. In SH terms

Fair comment.

Stella is okay as far as premium lagers go. If elephant is the Belgian beer I think you mean then it will sure aid sinus clearing.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Havak
There is simply no way I can make you understand without you thinking I want the violins – these are teams you turn over home and away without having to even try. But that’s because they really couldn’t care less about losing to you – every time they play us the intensity is at the levels of NZ-Aus clashes – they absolutely hate us – nothing matters more to them than beating England. You can’t understand until you have sat in one of their stadiums and felt the hatred wash over you in unending waves.

Classic Havak post.

Seriously though, couldnt this be seen as an advantage? It means that every game England plays will be against committed opposition, surely this is good for the development of the English team's concentration. Also it should provide motivation - "They hate us, so lets really give it to them!"

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by finbar
Well, we like to think of New Zealand as 3rd World - why shouldn't you follow suit?

Then why does Australia lose to "3rd world" teams?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Havak
Stella is okay as far as premium lagers go. If elephant is the Belgian beer I think you mean then it will sure aid sinus clearing.

Stella is pretty popular here in NYC. My english friend who lives here swears it doesnt taste the same as back home though...

There are some fantastic breweries in the New York area, and many micro breweries in other areas of the states as well. American beer gets a bad rep thanks to Bud and Coors.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Caligastia


It seems like a nice, round number. I vote 100 gold!

Okay, we're dealing in fantasy money; should we appoint a fantasy Treasurer?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by finbar


Okay, we're dealing in fantasy money; should we appoint a fantasy Treasurer?

I nominate you. If theres one thing you can trust an aussie with, its non-existent money.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak




At least you didn’t say until Australia beat England again – now that would be some wait.

Odd. I never equated Poms with optimism.

Because it’s hard enough having you eloquently out word-smithying (is that a real expression?) me in the thread without me annoying Caligastia too overtly as well – even though it might be fairly safe whilst he sojourns for the big US holiday – also strangely enough an anti-English thing?

Listen, for someone who obviously bathes in, cleans his teeth in, and waters his garden with lager, you have no trouble making yourself understood! You only seem to come a cropper when you, um, accidentally omit a couple of words that, um, qualify your utter hatred of SH refs! And, yes, Caligastia's little sojourn to Cleveland is entirely anti-British. I wouldn't take it if I were you. Reclaim the colony! Caligastia's trendy little pad in NYC is, in fact, yours. Reclaim it!

(note I say started)

In light of the immediately above - noted.

Since 2000, so three tournaments. Poor Italy have won one game from their fifteen so far – their very first against Scotland in 2000. The timing of their entry really scuppered them as it coincided with many senior players retiring.

Still, they enjoy themselves, I'm sure. And they have the greatest food in the most interesting country in the world. Probably doesn't score them too many tries, but I'd settle for what they've got.

The permutations are amazing, but it almost always boils down to the England v France game. These two teams have dominated it over the last decade and England haven’t finished lower than second for that decade.

Yeah well, they could probably teach Nassar Hussein et al a few things.

Stella is okay as far as premium lagers go. If elephant is the Belgian beer I think you mean then it will sure aid sinus clearing.

Isn't it Danish? Or am I getting mildly confused?

[finbar]

Originally posted by Caligastia


Then why does Australia lose to "3rd world" teams?

Because it's cheaper than forking out zillions in aid to them!

[finbar]

Originally posted by Caligastia

I nominate you. If theres one thing you can trust an aussie with, its non-existent money.

Besides, our embezzlers pale into insignificance beside some of the bods you've got over there.

I've just had a late thought. How about we bet in pints of bitter? That might appeal to someone we both know. No names no packdrill, as the old saying goes.

[Havak]

Seriously though, couldnt this be seen as an advantage? It means that every game England plays will be against committed opposition, surely this is good for the development of the English team's concentration. Also it should provide motivation - "They hate us, so lets really give it to them!"

Daring to be serious you have an excellent point. There is no doubt that this has helped the English game develop in terms of motivation and concentration as you suggest. It will be interesting to see what you think of the mental strength of the Red roses in November as well as the actual quality of rugger played. I think the sheer disciplined aggression of the pack caught the Aussies slightly on the back foot last November (in that I think they expected a little more forwards indiscipline as in the recent French tests Finbar?). The soft games we face are certainly getting fewer and further between (despite Wales best efforts to keep us supplied with some).

Now that’s classic Havak too – a cheap jibe at Welsh rugger following a jingoistic reminder of English success.

Then why does Australia lose to "3rd world" teams?

A truly classic riposte!

My english friend who lives here swears it doesnt taste the same as back home though...

I think it is brewed in London here – and that Thames water is uniquely charactered. Seriously (again, it might be habit forming!) UK brewed Stella is good – I have to say I prefer the Belgian original myself. For the benefit of the French guys I really like 1664 as well – but I do only drink premium lagers really.

Have you ever tried Budvar – the Czech beer that ‘Weiser was apparently ‘based’ on. It’s all right

And Finbar you may be right about Elephant – I last drank it in Belgium whilst on tour so my recollection of where it was from is vague at best – and may have been influenced by where I was rather than where it actually got brewed.

But to return to non too serious type…

You have been waiting since June 2000 for a victory over us Finbar – two consecutive defeats (we will have to be careful about the vertigo!)

And I’m not your average Pom I guess.

I come a cropper when my sub-conscious stabs me in the back don’t you think – I didn’t even know I hated SH refs until I ‘accidentally’ wrote it.

What Caligastia’s adopted countrymen call the war of Independence is actually referred to as the “Tax dodgers rebellion” or “American Colonial Rebellion” here – buit I need to be careful expanding on that to avoid drawing in American posters who might not realise I’m not having a go at the good ‘ol US of A by saying that?

Interestingly though if the England development side tours Canada next summer I will possibly be calling in on a tour mates family in Manhattan – there might be scope to reclaim his pad for the Empire then.

Ouch – low blow on the cricket. Shame it’s accurate too.

And Italy is great yes – I did the Italy-England game in March 2000 and spent four blissful days in Rome which has all the qualities you imply (oh yeah and booze is dirt cheap in Northern Italy too).

Just about covered everything there – even if I overused the smilies as usual.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by finbar


Because it's cheaper than forking out zillions in aid to them!

Oh I see! You let us win! It all becomes clear now...