World Rugby Board elections
-
@mofitzy_ said in World Rugby Board elections:
First off, apologies if my reply sounded a bit acerbic but I get a bit tired of the argument of SH good, NH bad and the accompanying stereotypes. However, always good to discuss things and exchange views.
@Catogrande said in World Rugby Board elections:
@mofitzy_ said in World Rugby Board elections:
Not quite sure where to start with this, so many tangents, however I'll give it a go.
@Catogrande
Rugby may be #1 in NZ but it's no longer the dominant force it was, and I can easily see it being just one of many sports codes as they have in Aus if things keep going the way they do. Fair dues to the European game but it is population and geography that are the key factors in it's financial dominance, things that can't be changed. >I'm not sure what this financial dominance you speak of is. Most of the NH unions are not that flush with cash and as previously alluded to, the club game in England (and also in France) is financially in queer street. Do you mean the drain of SH players to the North being the financial dominance? If so that is a club thing and nothing to do with the respective Unions who are busy trying to think of ways to encourage local talent. >
Ireland and project players has nothing to do with clubs. Likewise convicted murderer Kean (a staunch advocate of Beaumont) allowing French clubs to operate in Fiji in breach of regulations, then France ends up with multiple French players despite no historical link to the country.
I agree that the Irish project player thing was a pretty poor strategy all round, as do most people on the Fern. It is also history now. This is not something that you can look at and pin on the NH or the 6N, it was Ireland alone and not their finest hour. It seems that they came to the same conclusion. The Fiji/French clubs issue is also a bloody scandal and it is also nothing to do with the NH or the 6N. That is some French clubs overstepping the mark (by a long way!) in collusion with a seemingly corrupt Fijian rugby administrator. No conspiracy. Is that a problem for the NH to sort out the French clubs or the SH to sort out the corruption? I don't know really but I do see that Kean is no longer representing Fiji at WR. BTW tarring Beaumont by association because Kean backed him is pretty harsh too mate.> >
So either they realise they can look inwards except for once every 4 years or keep the status quo (and who knows, in 10 years or so the NH might even win another world cup) and slowly kill the game outside the 6N, or set up a system that means the sport doesn't die outside of the 6N.>
What makes you think the 6N are inward looking? Is it the reluctance to support the annual nations competition? If so I don't see that as being inward looking , in fact far from it. I see that as looking to make the game sustainable, taking into account player welfare, supporter fatigue, financial stability. To my mind there are two main issues with the proposal. Firstly growing the game and providing opportunity for the lower tier nations and I don't see anyone disagreeing with the idea that this would be a positive. Secondly chasing the money. Having the mind set that more rugby = more money without considering the more costs and player welfare. Tell me how that strategy is working out in the SH will you? You know, where rugby is apparently dying on its feet.
It's more complex than money but rugby will never compete in the Australian market (for example) if the best players aren't playing in the local competition.
I'm wholly in agreement with this statement and don't see how an annual national tournament is going to help.
I'm not convinced the average punter in Twickenham cares too much if th ANZAC nations never play Ingerlund again as long as he can pretend walloping Italy means something.>
Well here I would probably take the view of virtually every English, Welsh, Scots, Irish and French fan I've ever spoken to, the TV people that pay huge sums of money to televise NHvSH games and the gin related opportunities such games give to the 57 Old Farts at Twickenham over your view. Honestly mate, you couldn't be further from the truth if you spent a day in a fast car driving in the opposite direction.
I read the BBC comments for the announcement. That might not be the fairest representation but they speak for themselves.
You should spend a bit of time reading the comments on any rugby related BBC HYS. it is an hilarious mish-mash of parochial or jingoistic views and downright trolling. It's like getting your political information from the Daily Mail.
If the laws were formulated in Aus and NZ, then endless scrum resets and walls of offside players waiting to flop all over a breakdown wouldn't be the issue they are now.>
The laws are formulated by consensus. From a NH viewpoint we'd probably take the view that many of the law changes over recent years have been SH led but in all honesty that would have as much credence as your view. I agree that the current situation with scrum resets (and a few other issues) is awful but in so many cases we have seen a law brought in to combat one thing that simply causes another problem. The scrum problem is acknowledged within WR and I'm pretty sure they are looking at ways to correct this blight, hopefully without the law of unintended consequences applying.
The laws are formulated by consensus just like the board is voted by consensus i.e. money talks.
Just how is money talking here? Are you suggesting that the make up of the WR council is slanted by bribery, either overt or covert via promises of matches or gate sharing? Haven't seen much evidence of either.
We wouldn't let dodgy frog refs say "we have a deal" then go on to make one of the biggest ref errors in modern rugby,>
Whilst I acknowledge the error and also your pain, if you think this was a NH plot to de-stabilise NZ rugby, you'll be needing your tinfoil hat.
meanwhile Beaumont was no doubt cheering this decision. >
Yes no doubt there is a picture of him somewhere, holding a large gin, puffing on a Havana with a smug grin saying Vive La France.
At least Pichot would have been objective.
Yes, there is a picture of him dressed all in white, with a halo glowing above his head. It's right next to that picture of Beaumont.
This was a bit of a dig but the point I was making is that Pichot doesn't fall into the traditional hierarchy. >
Understand both points. I may have been having a little dig myself.
Plenty of talk pre series that the Lions could be an irrelevance if they lose 3-0.>
As there is on every Lions tour these days
As Hansen said an apology would have been nice.>
To be honest I was quite surprised at Hansen saying that. Not in the traditional Kiwi "get on with it and just beat the bastards next time' manner. Nor is there any real precedence for an official apology. I've seen refs own up to a howler a few times and this would have a been a good candidate for such. not that it makes any difference. You lot know it was the wrong decision, we know it was the wrong decision. It happens. Move on.
A fair chunk of casual and committed NZ supporters were seriously put off by that cowardly act leading to the farcical situation where there are no winners despite one team leading for a grand total of 5 minutes in the series after playing a man up for over 2/3 of the game..
Because sport.
-
To be honest I was quite surprised at Hansen saying that. Not in the traditional Kiwi "get on with it and just beat the bastards next time' manner. Nor is there any real precedence for an official apology. I've seen refs own up to a howler a few times and this would have a been a good candidate for such. not that it makes any difference. You lot know it was the wrong decision, we know it was the wrong decision. It happens. Move on.
In any other circumstance, I 'd agree. But this was a once in 12 year event, the dying minutes of a drawn test series where a player makes an obvious infringement, is whistled then the penalty is withdrawn with no explanation. If SBW had somehow gotten away with a yellow then I'd be surprised if WR didn't come out and make a statement.
If there is any conspiracy it's not the decision itself (mistakes happen however dodgy they appear), it's the lack of acknowledgement that there was any issue from any quarter outside the small NZ media bubble. Pure speculation but had the roles been reversed (Lions dominant first test win, red card and narrow loss in second then winning until the dying minutes of the 3rd until a decision miraculously and incorrectly is reversed to go the ABs way leading to a sister-kissing farce) it would go down as a massive controversy rather than swept under the rug.
-
Well bill showing his true face within hours, after all this talk of change
World Rugby chair Bill Beaumont plays down idea of Six Nations moving
Bill Beaumont said the Six Nations had been ‘played in February and March since I was a lad’ and that relegation from it was also unlikely
Status quo for the next four years whilst unions go down the drains. He'll achieve this, tho, bravo "He also wants to replace the divisive “tier one” and “tier two” terminology by referring instead to “emerging nations” . In addition he will also bring up the international eligibility rule, and will say cest la vie when Italy, Scotland, Wales vote it down. Again.
-
-
-
@erps said in World Rugby Board elections:
The more I think about all this, the more I am getting annoyed, particularly with Fiji and Samoa. I smell a rat, it is getting odder the more I dwell on it.
The bizarre thing is if it is just around the eligibility thing, they've gained nothing. Augustin would have supported that too.
-
@erps said in World Rugby Board elections:
The more I think about all this, the more I am getting annoyed, particularly with Fiji and Samoa. I smell a rat, it is getting odder the more I dwell on it.
I would guess, they didn't trust Pichot. Rugby has done fuck all for the islands, but has made huge strides for Argentina. If Pichot could get it done for the Argies, why couldn't he have got it done for the Islands?
-
@mofitzy_ said in World Rugby Board elections:
If there is any conspiracy it's not the decision itself (mistakes happen however dodgy they appear), it's the lack of acknowledgement that there was any issue from any quarter outside the small NZ media bubble. Pure speculation but had the roles been reversed (Lions dominant first test win, red card and narrow loss in second then winning until the dying minutes of the 3rd until a decision miraculously and incorrectly is reversed to go the ABs way leading to a sister-kissing farce) it would go down as a massive controversy rather than swept under the rug.
If the reverse had happened, irreversible damage to the game would have been done. The end of it would have never have been heard. Ever.
The only thing I didn't like about Hansen's comments is that they weren't direct enough. It wasn't howler. It was a fix. There isn't even any question.
-
@MajorRage said in World Rugby Board elections:
@mofitzy_ said in World Rugby Board elections:
If there is any conspiracy it's not the decision itself (mistakes happen however dodgy they appear), it's the lack of acknowledgement that there was any issue from any quarter outside the small NZ media bubble. Pure speculation but had the roles been reversed (Lions dominant first test win, red card and narrow loss in second then winning until the dying minutes of the 3rd until a decision miraculously and incorrectly is reversed to go the ABs way leading to a sister-kissing farce) it would go down as a massive controversy rather than swept under the rug.
If the reverse had happened, irreversible damage to the game would have been done. The end of it would have never have been heard. Ever.
The only thing I didn't like about Hansen's comments is that they weren't direct enough. It wasn't howler. It was a fix. There isn't even any question.
Deans did score!
-
@Catogrande That's different, as that went against us ...
-
@MajorRage said in World Rugby Board elections:
@mofitzy_ said in World Rugby Board elections:
If there is any conspiracy it's not the decision itself (mistakes happen however dodgy they appear), it's the lack of acknowledgement that there was any issue from any quarter outside the small NZ media bubble. Pure speculation but had the roles been reversed (Lions dominant first test win, red card and narrow loss in second then winning until the dying minutes of the 3rd until a decision miraculously and incorrectly is reversed to go the ABs way leading to a sister-kissing farce) it would go down as a massive controversy rather than swept under the rug.
If the reverse had happened, irreversible damage to the game would have been done. The end of it would have never have been heard. Ever.
The only thing I didn't like about Hansen's comments is that they weren't direct enough. It wasn't howler. It was a fix. There isn't even any question.
Any publicity ...
-
On the Ken Owens offside and the conspiracy theory. Firstly I agree it was offside and it was a penalty. Tough for you guys but move on. Second the "We have a deal" conspiracy. Here you have to accept that English is not Poite's first language. In French it would have been an accord, meaning an agreement and in French the use of the auxiliary verb avoir (to have) is used in many different examples. To say we are in agreement in French would have a literal translation of we have an agreement (accord/deal).
So balls up yes. Conspiracy to deny NZ their just rewards, no.
-
@Catogrande nup, bullshit.
If he blows the whistle immediately and calls it accidental, scrum black, I accept it.
He didn’t. He blew penalty, the right call. Tough for the lions but that’s the rules. Same as we had the prior week when the lions player jumped to catch the ball and penalty for tackle on the air. Rules are rules and it means penalty. Eat it, deal with it.
A week later same again, opposite direction. However this times the two officials literally conspire to overturn the correct ruling. I don’t give a shit about the we have a deal. It was a stone cold penalty and those two fuckheads invented bullshit to change it. Right in front of everybody.
A stone cold, lay down misere fix.
-
@MajorRage said in World Rugby Board elections:
A stone cold, lay down misere fix.
I'm somewhere between that and @Catogrande . I don't think the refs were 'got to', but they sure as hell bottled it and didn't want to make a match defining call that cost the Lions the draw. Same thing with Wayne Barnes - in pressure moments, referees swallow their whistles and won't make the calls they should make.
I'm still pissed at TJP flapping around at that scrum instead of getting the ball out and giving us the chance to win the damn game and series, and overcome the mistake. Flapanara was appropriate that night, no composure at all
-
@nzzp said in World Rugby Board elections:
I'm still pissed at TJP flapping around at that scrum instead of getting the ball out and giving us the chance to win the damn game and series, and overcome the mistake. Flapanara was appropriate that night, no composure at all
I've always thought that, if Smith plays every minute of that series, we win. TJP was fucking terrible.
-
-
The same leadership and genius that had us bundled out in the semi two years later.
-
@antipodean said in World Rugby Board elections:
The same leadership and genius that had us bundled out in the semi two years later.
in hindsight, Hansen stayed on 2 years too long. That Lions series we go abused by injuries and didn't do ourselves favours with the refs. I'm still dark on Kaino copping a yellow in Test 3 ... just so tough.
Anyway, here's hoping Foster makes a good fist of it when he gets a chance, and our playing ranks swell as players stay in NZ. Always cause for optimism!
At the RWC, by the way, we were the only Tier 1 nation that didn't select their best players and make exceptions for good players playing overseas. So in one world we were a weakened side, up against England, SA, Aus, Wales and Ireland who selected the best available players. I woulnd't change it, as it'd wreck rugby here, but it's something to contemplate
ASTROSLOT Official Link Pragmatic Play Terpercaya 2024
