Rugby - Hands Off, Wattle!

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
You will recall the Australians have been refused on many occasions the right to play Waltzing Matilda pre match when away from home? I guess the fact this is a little (and admittedly thoroughly annoying) patriotic ditty mean it is in the wrong spirit compared to the challenge dance of the Haka? I cannot agree.

Good point. As irritating as I find Waltzing Matilda, the IRB's decision reeks of hypocrisy.

I have not said this for a few weeks so forgive the indulgence – will someone please sack Robinson so his successor has some time before the Autumn tests.

Fear not. Though you're not saying it, we know you're thinking it. As we all are. Even ravagon. When he's not cranking out justifications for the All Blacks doing their pre-match jig while no one else is allowed anything remotely similar.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by finbar


Mmmmm. In order to shake up a lineup, you need someone available to insert into the team. Larkham and Rathbone have both failed fitness tests for this week and Gregan is out with his broken leg. The only fresh players he has available to him are a couple of utter rookies who played well very early in the season. I suppose they could reappear. But they played well when Larkham was there to guide and lead them. He's not going to be there.

Oh dear. Sounds like the Brumbies could be in for a thrashing then...unless the rookies step up to the plate.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by finbar
justifications for the All Blacks doing their pre-match jig while no one else is allowed anything remotely similar.

Well, the Haka has been part of the All Black tradition for quite a while now. It's also very politically correct. Get the Wallabies to do an Abo dance and you'll probably find the same acceptance of it among the IRB folk.

[LDiCesare]

Mmm... Considering some of the pre match dances I saw in France, I'm not sure they would be deemed politically correct.
The few such dances that I saw usually ended with the short pulled downwards and turnign one's back at the opponents, if you see what I mean. Showing one's ass is probably not deemed politically correct, yet I know teams which do this regularly. The words of the song aren't much about life and death as the Haka but more about wine and driking, but that's probably more traditional too.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Havak

I’m glad to see you don’t mind other nations finding their own responses – but it has to be in the same ‘spirit’? So who to your mind should arbitrate on this matter of ‘spirit’? You will recall the Australians have been refused on many occasions the right to play Waltzing Matilda pre match when away from home? I guess the fact this is a little (and admittedly thoroughly annoying) patriotic ditty mean it is in the wrong spirit compared to the challenge dance of the Haka? I cannot agree.

You're not seriously trying to trap me into defending the IRB are you?
I may have been a little thick lately ... stupid lithp ... er, sick lately, but not that sick.

Um. Actually I recall no such thing I'm afraid. I wasn't aware that other teams were trying to get their own, er, 'jig' as finbar puts it, nor that they'd been refused?
As for the spirit aspect I'd prefer some sort of wardance thingy from everybody to tell the truth but I could be a little flexible.
[Not quite to the extent of English tea parties flexible. ]
That 'zulu' wardance that the South Africans put on a few years ago for example?
I suppose it might not've been as effective if it'd been the Boks performing it and without all of the props though ...

Ah! Another Havak admirer. I knew there had to be another one out there somewhere.

We are few, but growing in number.

[finbar]

Originally posted by LDiCesare
Mmm... Considering some of the pre match dances I saw in France, I'm not sure they would be deemed politically correct.
The few such dances that I saw usually ended with the short pulled downwards and turnign one's back at the opponents, if you see what I mean. Showing one's ass is probably not deemed politically correct, yet I know teams which do this regularly. The words of the song aren't much about life and death as the Haka but more about wine and driking, but that's probably more traditional too.

And a lot more fun!

[finbar]

Originally posted by ravagon
We are few, but growing in number.

We're right at the very top of the WWF's endangered species list. Pandas and white rhinos are over-populated compared to us.

[Havak]

My cult of personality numbers two. I must be worthy for truly I am a leader amongst men. Always first to the bar (seldom first to pay).

The words of the song aren't much about life and death as the Haka but more about wine and drinking, but that's probably more traditional too.

Out of interest do players indulge in ‘flaming ****holes’ in France? It’s one of the stupidest rugby games I have ever seen – last to put out the flames wins. Mind you dwarf tossing is pretty bizarre too. I’ll stick with Spoof – the worst that happens to me with that is I get blind drunk.

You're not seriously trying to trap me into defending the IRB are you?

Not really – your doing so would have been ‘added value’.

Not quite to the extent of English tea parties flexible.

Sensible chap.

No one else has tried to introduce a haka type ‘dance’ for away games – but the problem is that teams have been refused to right to do anything away from home. Australia are the notable example.

Most of the other teams are more concerned about the protective cocoon that has been placed around the Haka – and the RFU certainly complained when the 10 metre rule was brought in. It annoys me too – if players want to get in the face of the haka I see no problem with that.

I guess I want to ask you why should it be protected (tradition and PC do not convince me at all – very ‘Tory’ arguments both), why should the opposition even have to watch it if they don’t want to? And why are the ABs allowed to do it immediately pre-match in other nations home grounds? Level playing fields not acceptable or something?

I suppose it might not've been as effective if it'd been the Boks performing it and without all of the props though ...

Interesting thing is the Boks have a traditional touring dance – but it occurs during the match. It’s called ‘going the biff’.

This is of interest mainly to Finbar I think – we are now one week away from President Blair’s third term. The Tories campaign has been so unsuccessful they have just resorted to shouting “liar, liar, pants on fire” at Tony all the time about Iraq. Tricky game by them as they did and still do support the war – it’s all about the legal justification for it and what Tony said about that. It’s a hard line to exploit and it’s bad news for them as it means the debate on the issues has been lost. They trail in even the most optimistic poll by a margin that would only halve labours huge majority.

Personally I have found Mr Blair a huge disappointment in his second term – he really should not use the term ‘labour’ to describe his middle class satiating party. But even so I would vote for him ahead of the Thatcher disciple Mr Howard, who tried to bring in the poll tax as local government minister and had pregnant women handcuffed whilst giving birth when he was home secretary. Tony is the lesser of two evils certainly.

That doesn’t mean he is getting my vote by the way – but Mr Howard certainly will not.

[LDiCesare]

Out of interest do players indulge in ‘flaming ****holes’ in France? It’s one of the stupidest rugby games I have ever seen – last to put out the flames wins.

No. The only place I saw such stuff was England. And one of them managed to burn himself. We Frenhchmen were saying to each others that these rosbiffs are decidedly silly.
The only kind of initiation rugby rite I indulged in was drinking a lot of a horrible mixture and then running straight towards the toilets to get rid of it. One flanker didn't do the last part, and ended the day with more alcohol than blood in the veins, and a really nice headache on the day after.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
My cult of personality numbers two. I must be worthy for truly I am a leader amongst men. Always first to the bar (seldom first to pay).

We allow minor flaws in a leader, so that's all right.

I guess I want to ask you why should it be protected (tradition and PC do not convince me at all � very �Tory� arguments both), why should the opposition even have to watch it if they don�t want to? And why are the ABs allowed to do it immediately pre-match in other nations home grounds? Level playing fields not acceptable or something?

The bottom line is that the haka has become part of the rugby marketing package and it's being protected by the IRB. Which is nonsense, but that's the way it is in the modern rugby world of big bucks and marketing.

Yes, I've been following your election campaign with great interest. I find it absolutely incredible that the Tories remain so far behind in spite of Blair's assorted (and very serious) credibility problems. Obviously an indictment of the Tories' impotence and incompetence.

They're in a tricky spot re the war. In the same way that the opposition has been here. Blair and (our) Howard did exactly the same thing - very selectively used data to justify something they'd already decided anyway. It wouldn't have mattered what evidence there was against going to war, they were both going if Bush went. And their defence, now, is that they were using information they believed to be correct at the time. It's a standard defence against the lie accusation - if I believed it to be true, it can't have been a lie, because a lie is stating something you know to be untrue. Which, of course, is semantics. The stuff of politics.

(Our) Howard hasn't run into Blair's latest problem - the subsequently amended Attorney General's advice that the war was illegal. That should have hurt Blair because it reveals the deliberate manipulation that was going on. But, ultimately, neither Blair nor (our) Howard have really suffered politically because, thankfully for the troops and their families, neither has suffered battlefield casualties. Well, there have been some Brit casualties, but not many. And, while we have lost a couple of people via terrible accidents, there have been no Australian battle casualties. If either the Brits or the Australians had (perish the thought) lost any troops in numbers, I think Blair and (our) Howard might be far less comfortable than they are.

It has been interesting to see the influence of our Mr Crosby on the Tory campaign. The heavy-handed attempts to target and exploit fears re immigrants, etc, is a reworked version of what he did here in a couple of elections. It worked here because this is a very conservative population with a vein of racism running through it. I suspect that the Brit voting population is, on the whole, with some obvious exceptions, a bit more sophisticated. And comfortable with their lot, to boot.

[finbar]

Originally posted by LDiCesare

No. The only place I saw such stuff was England. And one of them managed to burn himself. We Frenhchmen were saying to each others that these rosbiffs are decidedly silly.

Your decision to watch and not take part was a good one!

The only kind of initiation rugby rite I indulged in was drinking a lot of a horrible mixture and then running straight towards the toilets to get rid of it. One flanker didn't do the last part, and ended the day with more alcohol than blood in the veins, and a really nice headache on the day after.

Which proves that hookers are more intelligent than flankers.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Havak

No one else has tried to introduce a haka type �dance� for away games � but the problem is that teams have been refused to right to do anything away from home. Australia are the notable example.

I thought that was the point I was trying to make. The haka is a challenge. A wardance. Pulling out a banjo before the start for a singalong was funny the first time, I'll give them that, but I don't think anyone would want to see it before each and every game ...

Most of the other teams are more concerned about the protective cocoon that has been placed around the Haka � and the RFU certainly complained when the 10 metre rule was brought in. It annoys me too � if players want to get in the face of the haka I see no problem with that.

I guess I want to ask you why should it be protected (tradition and PC do not convince me at all � very �Tory� arguments both), why should the opposition even have to watch it if they don�t want to? And why are the ABs allowed to do it immediately pre-match in other nations home grounds? Level playing fields not acceptable or something?

I think I see where your argument is coming from now.
Last Saturday, ticketless and despondent, Havak wanders down to the local park seeking a place of peace and quiet to consume his regulation pork pie and even more regulation pint (keg?).
Our Havak is rudely interrupted by the onset of the semi-final between the far-East Leicester Tykes and the not-quite-so-far-East Leicester Tots for the East Leicester Under-8's championship.
The captain of the Tots throws a temper tantrum after being told to pull up his socks before the start of the game to match the immaculate Tykes.
The captain of the Tykes then calls him a Mummy's boy and the Tots, lacking the wits to counter this mortal insult, run in and start a punch-up getting half of them sent off before the game begins.
The Tot-captains mummy then begins a campaign to abolish all socks worn at Under-8's rugby matches.

The moral of the story?
Get your act together and make up your own haka you lazy plonker and stop taking the easy way out trying to abolish ours!
Either that or take up another sport where they disallow such things.
I don't recall the all-whites having a haka for example?

[finbar]

I caught up with a replay of the Leicester-Toulouse HC SF yesterday. Missed the start, thus missed the first Toulouse try and the flubbed Leicester effort. Beyond that, Leicester made a terrible mess of the first half while Toulouse bided their time. In the second half, Leicester turned into a lumbering outfit lacking creative options, or were made to look as such by Toulouse's shift into overdrive. Goodness knows why Leicester chose to kick the ball away so often in the second half.

Yes, the first Toulouse try that I saw (their second) was from a forward pass. But it didn't make the try. The try was on anyway thanks to excellent counter-attack. There were forward passes everywhere through the match. The lead up to Goode's penalty kick right on half time, that he missed, involved a blatant forward ball in the Leicester midfield. I think it might have involved Gibson. Who, I think, overall, was probably Leicester's best on the day. Toulouse looked very very good in overdrive.

Waratahs 41 -d- Highlanders 20

Very very impressive Waratahs' effort against what has been S12's strongest defence this season and, the Bulls aside, probably the comp's best-performed pack. Ewen McKenzie, Waratahs coach, has certainly changed this team's psyche. They played tough, aggressive, creative, pressure rugby. The pack more than matched the Highlanders', and Phil Waugh led a wonderfully mobile back row that punished the Highlanders all over the park. I think I've noted before that the Waratahs and Crusaders are the two best teams in the comp. Barring surprises, which is a dangerous thing to say, it will be an interesting contest between them. The Crusaders can be devastating in attack - as they've proved over the last couple of weeks - but their once mighty defence isn't what it was. They've been leaking a lot of tries. The Waratahs, on the other hand, have developed tremendous defence. I wonder whether the S12 finals will get an airing on Italian TV!

Hurricanes 49 -d- Brumbies 37

Fairly even first half, with the Brumbies combining better than they have for a month, seeming to have developed some of their old rhythm. OTOH, the Hurricanes weren't at their best in the first half. In the second half, when the Hurricans got into gear, the Brumbies were ruthlessly exposed. The final scoreline flattered them with a couple of late consolation tries. Without Gregan and Larkham, there is neither authority nor direction, either in attack or defence. Perhaps to be expected, given the skills and experience of those two. Matt Giteau, who has been filling in for Larkham at #10, remains the master's apprentice. For all his obvious skills, Giteau, at this point in his career, lacks Larkham's vision and organisational capacity. Of course, few possess Larkham's talents in those areas. So, in terms of the finals, the Brumbies' season is over. The wicked injury toll makes it hard to determine where they stand under the new coach. Next year should tell the story.

EDIT. And I notice Quins are to be relegated. Oh, and I think Leicester played Wasps.

[finbar]

Quins' CEO:

A fierce critic of the relegation system, Evans expects similar scenarios to play out in the future after a dramatic final weekend of fixtures.

"This is the first time a club has been relegated on 38 points and I think it will be very similar next season," he said.

"Maybe there will be one or two new partners at the dance but it will be the same situation.

"The way the league is structured means there will always be five or six sides battling it out. It's like musical chairs - who is ever left standing after 22 matches loses out.

"Gloucester and Newcastle are the two worst teams on current form but they're safe."

Perhaps you could explain his thinking to me, Havak. Beyond sour grapes. He's a fierce critic of the relegation system? He would prefer to keep the premier league a closed shop? I remember you saying there were some who wanted that. Gloucester and Newcastle are the two worst teams on current form but they're safe? What is "current form"? The "current form" is that Quins lost a match they had to win.

[ravagon]

Yikes. I just noticed the Tigers-Wasps scoreline ...
Methinks our Havak may have a wee bit of a hangover ...