Rugby - (Yet another temp thread)

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Havak
*edit* A Saints fan has said to me "so what does this game prove - other than that they can shoot fish in a barrel?"

Nice summary - what was this fixture doing on the schedule?

Final score:

Manawatu 6 Lions 109

What does it prove?
Nothing at all. Obviously.
I don't think proving anything was what the Lions needed at that point though.

What they did was run up an awfully big score while giving their players time to get things (hopefully) into gear, not being under pressure from serious opposition.
They'll play it down of course, as they should. A ton up against a team of what amount-to-minnows isn't really that big of a deal but it'll still be in the backs of their minds regardless for the next game and I think that was what they needed more than anything else.
Had they run up against Canterbury or Auckland, put in another lacklustre performance under pressure, and escaped with another narrow win, or even worse taken another loss, I think they'd've been in much worse condition for the second test.
As it is I still wouldn't rate their chances at more than about 40% or so but I think they'll do a lot better this coming Saturday.

[Frozzy]

Sure, the Manawatu defence was craptastic and they wouldn't attack to save their lives, but the BIL still needed to execute through the backs to score tries, which they have been awful at so far, and they did it.

[Havak]

40% is probably generous.

I'm still concerned about the forwards - although I think they will ask more questions in the set pieces (they could hardly do worse).

I notice that the NZ media is not entirely with the AB camp over a certain incident? Very interesting editorial in the New Zealand Herald on Monday I understand?

And when he broke his silence on it Tana might have been advised to check with a Campbell character first - when asked why he was with his own players and never checked BOD he said:

"At that stage I had to try and keep them together. It was such a lengthy period, we had to sort some things out that worked for us. First and foremost my allegiance is to the All Blacks, that's just the way it is."

Whoops - how to defuse a situation (not).

[finbar]

Well I think that’s a bit strong myself although I fully believe you are right it is to ‘deflect and motivate’.

I don't think it's too strong at all. It's amounting to public character assassination, particularly because it's targeted solely at Tana Umaga. The hooker isn't getting a mention. And, patently obviously, it's driven by Campbell. Apart from deflecting and motivating, I'm sure it's also aimed at pressuring and upsetting Umaga and the AB camp. Which could backfire.

Am I right in reading through the lines that your fundamental argument is that because the time limit was exceeded, and simply because Clive is asking for it, that no case should be answered?

Absolutely not. My argument is that the tackle went through the judicial process despite the Lions not pursuing the matter within the time limit. Their public campaign via slow motion videos from myriad angles is (a) publicly accusing Umaga (but barely mentioning the hooker) of dangerous foul play; and (b) expressing disbelief that the judicial process cleared the tackle, "musing" publicly that the judiciary couldn't have seen the footage they're showing. In short, they're attacking a player and the judicial process. For self-serving reasons already canvassed. Because the tackle went through the judicial process anyway, it's ultimately irrelevant whether or not the Lions instigated action within the time limit. If they had instigated action within the time limit, and the same judicial decision were reached, they'd probably be mounting this same campaign anyway. Because Alastair Campbell is pulling the strings now. It has nothing to do with rugby anymore.

If the Lions disagree with the judicial finding on the tackle, and they obviously do, they can take the matter to the IRB through channels. They know that. Instead, for the self-serving reasons already canvassed, they're doing an Alistair Campbell.

Silence, and the entire AB camp saying ‘innocent’ every five seconds is just not acceptable.

Frankly, given the putrid campaign Campbell is running, I'm surprised there's been any response.

My problem in all this is that I didn't see the tackle, and I couldn't make out much detail in the video that was posted in the other thread. I've read countless statements that it was a dangerous tackle, I've read plenty of statements that it wasn't. Because someone is injured in a tackle, that doesn't - in retrospect - make it a dangerous tackle. Hitting the ground one inch in either direction can cause or avoid injury.

I also didn't see any hookers putting their fingers into rabid locks' mouths! If he did, he's a braver man than me. But then, as LDiCesares reminds us, hookers - when he's hooking - are a breed apart. My theory on LDiCesares' hooking career is that he simply doesn't drink enough.

Shame that having Ali Williams in the side totally blows that myth eh?

And ironic that Mr Williams, aided by the Lions' utter lineout incompetence, slaughtered the Lions perfectly legally!

*edit* I want to clarify my position on violent play in case Ravagon dislikes my flippancy above about the finger kisser.

Players who put their fingers in other players eyes should never play again.

Players who stand on peoples head should never play again.

Players who bite poeple on the pitch should never play again (and should probably be sectioned).

Players who stick their fingers 'inadvertently' in other players mouths should be banned for several months and then given IQ tests to discover just how dumb they are and find out therefore if it is safe to let them on a pitch again!

Now, Caligastia, where are you? Time to start a new thread with the title that acknowledges the true masters of illegal play in the ruck:

Rugby - Hands Off, White!

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
"At that stage I had to try and keep them together. It was such a lengthy period, we had to sort some things out that worked for us. First and foremost my allegiance is to the All Blacks, that's just the way it is."

Whoops - how to defuse a situation (not).

Without a doubt, he should have gone and checked on O'Driscoll's condition. I've seen him do it countless times before. And didn't he once stop someone from choking on the field by clearing their tongue? He's not the sort of man who would have deliberately avoided checking on O'Driscoll. I suspect it was a case of something overlooked at the time that has now come back to haunt him. Shame.

[Havak]

The Spin argument is a bit of a distraction to me Finbar. I have seen the tackle and it deserves punishment IMO. Of BOTH players involved. I’m not concerned with what Clive or Campbell or the AB camp are saying about Tana himself so much as I want the player(s) to actually acknowledge it was dangerous and for Tana that he let himself down with his subsequent conduct in not checking on BOD as he went off. If that means I have bought into the spin then sorry – but it is how I feel.

And yes he did once stop play for a welsh lad who got knocked clean out (I think this is the same incident with Charvis). He has let himself down a bit and when he did finally speak the choice of words was...unfortunate I think.

If the ABs use it as motivation so be it. Can’t say it worries me too much – I’d even call is poetic justice for the spin. BOD however deserved better.

The statement read after the Grewcock disciplinary hearing actually said that they recognised that the hookers fingers had ‘inadvertently’ found themselves in Grewcock’s mouth before the incident (but that isn’t mitigating in nature). It’s one of the most hilarious things I have ever heard in such a statement. Inadvertently?

And again can I be clear – it is my fervent hope that Grewcock will never play international rugby again. I am serious about that.

Next time Williams go tap dancing (and he will) I hope the Kiwi lads can take a similar principled stand?

And ironic that Mr Williams, aided by the Lions' utter lineout incompetence, slaughtered the Lions perfectly legally!

He had a solid game – not much more. One good snaffle and good strength to the line does not a star make. He’s a pretty average player in a position where NZ have little depth – but average looks good put next to ‘dire’. I'd still take Robinson over him any day.

Jack was the second row star of the match (he’ll be a Tiger some day I’ll wager). O’Connell did what he could with such poor throwing but Jack pretty much bossed him (to my huge surprise I have to say) and Kay’s RWC hangover is now international career terminal I suspect.

Wouldn’t ‘Hands off Red’ be more topical as it will match the Spin coming from the NZ side for most of the tour? “They are illegally slowing ball down” – yeah right because McCaw, Collins et al never do that do they?

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
If that means I have bought into the spin then sorry – but it is how I feel.

No, it doesn't mean you've bought into the spin. You're patently obviously entitled to your opinion. As, for that matter, are the Lions. The difference is this: even if you wanted to, you don't have any means of officially taking the matter further. The Lions do. They have official channels at their disposal. They're preferring to have Alastair Campbell ringmaster this media circus.

And yes he did once stop play for a welsh lad who got knocked clean out (I think this is the same incident with Charvis).

He saved a Taffy's life? Oh. I take back everything nice I said about him.

The statement read after the Grewcock disciplinary hearing actually said that they recognised that the hookers fingers had ‘inadvertently’ found themselves in Grewcock’s mouth before the incident (but that isn’t mitigating in nature). It’s one of the most hilarious things I have ever heard in such a statement. Inadvertently?

My fingers inadvertently find their way into my own mouth when I'm licking my fingers when I'm scoffing chocolate. Does that mean that if I bite my own fingers, I can't claim provocation?

And speaking of nice things like chocolate. I'm now able to access the full range of Italian beers. About the only one available in Australia is Nastro Azzuro. I'm currently trying out Birra Moretti. Quite a nice drop. More character than Nastro Azzuro. Or isn't "character" a word that appears in the beer drinker's lexicon? I feel sure you can guide me on such matters.

I'd still take Robinson over him any day.

Gee, I wish he'd get fit again. Now he's someone with, um, "character".

Wouldn’t ‘Hands off Red’ be more topical as it will match the Spin coming from the NZ side for most of the tour? “They are illegally slowing ball down” – yeah right because McCaw, Collins et al never do that do they?

Hands off Red? You mean, hands off Queensland Reds? Give them a break, it's about the only time they touch the ball these days.

[Andydog]

Lions Tour a Debacle

I thought I'd drop back to leave my 2 cents about the BOD incident. All a bit of a storm in a tea-cup really.

I refuse to call it a spear tackle, as it wasn't. BOD lost the contact collision area, as he was driven off the pill by two people, and there lies the cause of the accident. Players are now trained to 'hook a leg' when driving at players, it puts them off balance, and you can do with them as you will. Unfortunately for BOD, he was hit by two players at once, who both hooked a leg, and then that was it, once you are off your feet you are vulnerable. If Umaga and Mealamu had wanted to hurt the blouse, they could have driven him into the ground, landing on top of him and in general causing great harm. However, they dropped him, and he landed on his shoulder. Unfortunate accident. It's not as if BOD was sitting there minding his own business either, he was trying to drive through the ruck, and came off second best. A pity to see him go, but realistically, his form was nothing to write home about anyway, and his leadership is ****e.

Tell you what though, the thing that really got up my arse was the Brit's whinging. I saw headlines such as "Was this rugby or All Black thuggery?", while another simply read "THUGS!".

Honestly, where the fuk do you Brits get off? Seriously, sometimes you can be the most pathetic bunch of whinging, whining, moaning, groaning, b*tching, buck-passing nancy boys on god's green earth. You seem to love nothing more than getting a thrashing on the field so you can go back home and sit in front of the TV sulking and waiting for the newspapers to be printed with headlines such as "we woz robbed" and "better team beaten by cheating bastards". Probably to reinforce your entirely unfounded sense of superiority over the rest of the world, so you can all puff your chests out and prattle indignantly about what a bunch of horrid colonials we all are.

Clive Woodenhead is an embarrassment to your race. What makes me laugh is that despite all his w*nking on about the incident, the All Black's preparation this week has not been disrupted by a judicial hearing from Umaga and Mealamu, while his team's prep has been ten press conferences a day, making plans to keep Hansen away from the booze, and trying to work out better lineout calls than yelling out five, while holding up five fingers for confirmation...

[Havak]

Vent your fury by all means - but I recommend searching for NZ press headlines on the subject too. There's not total solidarity there...

Did you mean Henson btw old boy? Charlotte is the one who likes a drink, Gavin just likes Charlotte.

Hansen is one of your "cheating horrid colonials" I think?

So there you go - you say they didn't drive him into the ground. Which actually it appears to me they pretty much did. One of us is right - and you have my commiserations for being wrong.

It is also interesting that the ABs had totally compromised the lions calls isn't it? I prefer to put that down to great work by Jack myself.

Sir Clive can be a right **** though - I'll grant you that.

Living in London would make me hate Brits too incidentally. I detest the place.

[Caligastia]

New thread guys...

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=135791