Rugby - One game to rule them all

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
Plenty of rugby related self delusion around this morning maybe - but none from me.

Nev rides again.

Myself and Tamerlin are totally right on this one - but the trenches are long established too.

:Puke:

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin


United we stand!

:Bleah!:

[Havak]

But I'm not self deluded old bean.

I saw a great game between us and the All Blacks. I saw one side infringing more. period. And it wasn't us. Self delusion doesn't enter into it.

I am not saying they are not a good side - clearly they are. Give us our pick of their back division and no side in the world would beat England. But the way they went home and talked like they had won the world cup - or even had a successful tour - was plain silly. The tour was a moderate failure - they raised their game magnificently against us but still lost, the lads say the French game was poor and I can personally tell you they were not impressive at all against Wales - finishing with a margin that will not impress France or England.

All I want is a little reality check in the constant way SH media and pundits seem not to realise that some NH nations actually can turn you SH lads over now. It wouldn't hurt if one of them admitted that you treat the law book fast and loose either.

None of that alters the fact I consider them favourites for RWC - I've said that all along. Down in the SH it's them or Aus who have to be favourites.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin
Their history is intriguing, I will have a look at the link later as I have an urgent work to start right now.

Priorities, Tamerlin, priorities!

About the Etruscans, the young Roman nation has greatly helped the Etruscans to disappear into oblivion. The Romans have actually commited one of the first methodical genocide of human history. I used to say the Roman empire built itself on the ruins of the Etruscans.

The disappearance of the Etruscans is a fascinating topic for debate. I dig further into the Etruscans every time I go to Italy because I love them - they were an amazing people for their time. I love pottering around the Umbrian hill towns, a lot of which are Etruscan-based, and archaeologists are still uncovering Etruscan bits and pieces.

The thing is, the Romans, even from their very early days, documented their lives, and particularly their, um, conquests. But there's next to no documented evidence of conflict between the Romans and the Etruscans. I suppose it might be argued that the Romans quietly wiped them out - but the Romans didn't do many things quietly, particularly when it came to violence. In fact, the documented evidence seems to be to the contrary - the Romans traded with the Etruscans and the two even inter-married. I think it's certainly true that the Romans definitely profited from the Etruscan culture, knowledge and skills, but whether they actually wiped out the Etruscans is another matter.

But there are plenty of people who share your view. I'm just not so sure. The problem is, unless archaeologists unearth something extraordinary, we'll never know for sure.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by finbar
Priorities, Tamerlin, priorities!

Archaeologists are still uncovering Etruscan bits and pieces.

The Romans were such an efficient people only bits and pieces can now be found.

The Romans traded with the Etruscans and the two even inter-married.

It was the case at the beginning of the Roman history and growth but it seems Rome has turned against its former friends once it was powerful enough to crush them. Were the Etruscans perceived as a threat to the young Roman people, have they been culturally absorbed by the Romans like the Celts ? This is still a matter of debate. We must nonetheless admit Rome was not very kind with its neighbours and that the Etruscans were certainly considered as being a bit too close from their frontiers.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
But I'm not self deluded old bean.

Listen - Tamerlin's turned off his IE (or Netscape or whatever he uses) to get some work done, what about you!?

I am not saying they are not a good side - clearly they are. Give us our pick of their back division and no side in the world would beat England. But the way they went home and talked like they had won the world cup - or even had a successful tour - was plain silly. The tour was a moderate failure - they raised their game magnificently against us but still lost, the lads say the French game was poor and I can personally tell you they were not impressive at all against Wales - finishing with a margin that will not impress France or England.

Wouldn't impress France or England? France at full strength tried to beat them and didn't, and England at full strength squeaked home against them.

Everything is relative. Given the make up of the AB touring party, the tour wasn't a moderate failure, it was, IMHO, a qualified - I wouldn't know how to quantify it - success. With a second-string pack, they went down narrowly to a full-strength England team at Twickers. And I know you've argued before that, while they might be called second-string, they're still highly talented - yes, they are, but nowhere near the class and quality of what was left behind.

I didn't see the French game so I can't comment - yet France is being rated, currently, as one of the best couple of teams in the world. Regardless of the quality of the match, the ABs, with a second-string pack, drew against one of the best couple of teams in the world. I saw the Wales match. The ABs always threatened to cut them to ribbons but didn't - thanks to careless mishandling and some top Wales defence - until the last 10-15 minutes.

As I've said before, slot the missing proven quality players back into the AB team and you have a fearsome proposition.

All I want is a little reality check in the constant way SH media and pundits seem not to realise that some NH nations actually can turn you SH lads over now.

No one - least of all Eddie Jones! - is denying the NH teams - well, two of them - are top quality teams! You have to overcome this self-esteem problem!

None of that alters the fact I consider them favourites for RWC - I've said that all along. Down in the SH it's them or Aus who have to be favourites.

Frankly, barring unforseen dire events, I would list the full-strength AB team as favourites for the WRC wherever it's played. I forsee an AB blitz reminiscent of days of yore.

[Havak]

Guys is it not possible that as Rome grew it simply absorbed the Etruscans to the point that they had no seperate identity?

I think Finbar has a point - the Romans generally celebrated their genocides so it would be quite out of character not to claim 'credit' for that one.

I have a vague memory of seeing a documentary that cited absorbtion and falling birth rates as distinct possibilities.

By the way did the Romans or Etruscans play Rugby? I bet if they did they played to NH interpretations.

Worked in another bite onto the baited hook.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin
The Romans were such an efficient people only bits and pieces can now be found.

Every time I go to Volterra - in Tuscany, where D.H. Lawrence lived for a while - I like to stand in the Etruscan gateway in the city wall. Just to remember the poor old Etruscans. The gateway is the only piece of Etruscan architecture left in the town.

It was the case at the beginning of the Roman history and growth but it seems Rome has turned against its former friends once it was powerful enough to crush them.

That's very true. But they always wrote about it. Gloating bastards. And there's nothing written about taking on the Etruscans.

Were the Etruscans perceived as a threat to the young Roman people

Not physically. The Etruscans seemed to prefer thought to violence. A little like you, Havak and me.

have they been culturally absorbed by the Romans like the Celts ?

I suspect that's probably what happened. Over time, with intermarriage, etc, the sheer numbers of the Romans just swallowed them up.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
Guys is it not possible that as Rome grew it simply absorbed the Etruscans to the point that they had no seperate identity?

I think that's probably right.

By the way did the Romans or Etruscans play Rugby? I bet if they did they played to NH interpretations.

And they'd've had self-esteem problems stemming from eons of hidings.

[Havak]

Listen - Tamerlin's turned off his IE (or Netscape or whatever he uses) to get some work done, what about you!?

I’ll have to do the same shortly sadly.

Return game against ASBH tomorrow, they’ll find our ground a shock after theirs (ours will be full)

Wouldn't impress France or England? France at full strength tried to beat them and didn't, and England at full strength squeaked home against them.

You know full well I was referencing their poor performance against Wales where only a late blitz saved face.

We didn’t squeak home as far as I am concerned – two of their tries were results of our errors in attack and that can happen to the best of sides.

Plus I think the point you are missing here is that they play us so rarely these days that given wins against them have always been such a rare thing we have to enjoy it whilst we can.

And I know you've argued before that, while they might be called second-string, they're still highly talented - yes, they are, but nowhere near the class and quality of what was left behind.

Also because I am English I think you need to understand I have been exceptionally polite about them. Yes certain things impressed me – Howlett simply blew me away for example but he is first string for sure, but on the whole I saw a team whose forwards came off clearly second best, who were shown far too much respect by our lads and who were in the final analysis very lucky to end so close to us. I honestly think a referee who policed the game line more effectively would have seen them totally out of the game as their entire game is built on infringement – the classic “what you can get away with”.

I know we cycle this one but NH refs tend to keep teams more honest (unless they are really poor ones). I think we messed up in allowing three SH officials in the autumn although I understand why they did it as we will come up against them in RWC (and god help us when we do).

It’s really not cricket for any Kiwi to bleat about the tour being a second string side by the way – don’t send men in the jersey unless you are happy for them the represent you – that’s as rude as we were to Australia in 1998 if you do so. Talk instead about how it was a “shame we couldn’t see” Jack or McCaw rather than say “with them we would have beaten you” because frankly – you simply don’t know that. Would Ireland then have buried the Wallabies were Keith Wood fit?

I trust you realise my advise there is generally aimed at kiwis Finbar - and is not another example of my homogenising antipodeans.

I saw the Wales match. The ABs always threatened to cut them to ribbons but didn't - thanks to careless mishandling and some top Wales defence - until the last 10-15 minutes.

I saw the same games highlights and read it differently. They looked like England to me – backs and forwards in separate game plans. Nowhere near as good as against us.

And they shouldn’t threaten Wales – they should destroy them. I did point out that Ireland have fiftied them home and way in the six nations in the last couple of years right? A weak ABs side should still bury Wales – and only the last ten made it a comfortable win.

As I've said before, slot the missing proven quality players back into the AB team and you have a fearsome proposition.

I agree. Don’t be surprised to see them lose at RWC though will you? God help them if they face the Biffing Boks in the quarters.

You have to overcome this self-esteem problem!

I probably allow the fan opinions on Planet Rugby to get under my skin too much.

Frankly, barring unforeseen dire events, I would list the full-strength AB team as favourites for the WRC wherever it's played. I foresee an AB blitz reminiscent of days of yore.

They were missing McCaw, Jack and Robinson in the pack right? Hmmm. Even with those guys back they are still facing formidable French and English packs. And I do mean formidable. They wouldn’t be favourites in either France or the UK IMHO (repeat ad nauseum to Kiwis that they failed to beat either England or France last time out!!)

I also don’t see them gaining such a massive ascendancy as the Fitzpatrick era. Unless they find a completely new angle like the slow saunter back onside. That made them truly awesome, as the oppo could never pass the ball safely.

[Havak]

One small point on the tribal discussions - the romans never truly absorbed the celts, at least here in the UK. The celtic way of life was affected very little in the fringes of Britain under the Eagles and as is well documented they, like generations of English after them found the Scotti and Picts too savage and troublesome to worry with (as the land they were on was worthless). The Cymri continued to live as they had for generations and still retain a distinct and traceable identity today.

Interesting fact of course is that the Scotti, the origin of the names Scottish and Scotland, were an irish tribe that invaded 'Scotland'.

Shame they are all so poor at rugby then really?

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by finbar
Listen - Tamerlin's turned off his IE (or Netscape or whatever he uses) to get some work done, what about you!?

I'am still listening!

[Havak]

So this weekend Edingburgh visit you?

The expression "turkey shoot" comes to mind.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by Havak
So this weekend Edingburgh visit you?

The expression "turkey shoot" comes to mind.

PULL!

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by Havak
I think Finbar has a point - the Romans generally celebrated their genocides so it would be quite out of character not to claim 'credit' for that one.

It was their first one, their experience of propaganda was limited at this time...

I have a vague memory of seeing a documentary that cited absorbtion and falling birth rates as distinct possibilities.

Kill or enslave the females and you will see a sudden fall of the birth rates.

By the way did the Romans or Etruscans play Rugby? I bet if they did they played to NH interpretations.

Given the shape of their arenas I think they would have invented something that would now be called the "Roman Rule"...


About the France AB game :

- "Gv'us a real ref' and ya'll see!"

Spit!

Ding!