Bledisloe 1
-
-
@ARHS said in Bledisloe 1:
I think it is a bloody disgrace and cynical from Rennie and ARU. Doing anything to lighten the consequences of a bad injury. Top 23 players should not be on A team tour. His name stood out as odd amongst a group of marginal super players.
“Darcy’s form has slipped in recent weeks, that’s why we are naming him in the Australia A squad. We expected him to be selected however because of his suspension he will miss the three scheduled matches. We are supporting Darcy through this time to get him back into top form.”
😀
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Bledisloe 1:
@ARHS said in Bledisloe 1:
I think it is a bloody disgrace and cynical from Rennie and ARU. Doing anything to lighten the consequences of a bad injury. Top 23 players should not be on A team tour. His name stood out as odd amongst a group of marginal super players.
“Darcy’s form has slipped in recent weeks, that’s why we are naming him in the Australia A squad. We expected him to be selected however because of his suspension he will miss the three scheduled matches. We are supporting Darcy through this time to get him back into top form.”
😀
that's satire, surely, not an actual Rennie quote
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Bledisloe 1:
@nzzp I’m here all week…
Modern times, I've got to damn well check. Crazy eh
-
-
@Crucial said in Bledisloe 1:
So Rennie claims that WR supports them on time wasting
Is that really a surprise...
-
@Crucial said in Bledisloe 1:
So Rennie claims that WR supports them on the time wasting call. Really? Care to share what they said Dave?
"We understand your concerns".
-
@KiwiMurph said in Bledisloe 1:
ABs have counted game of 3 havles for bans so i have no issue with Aus A games counting.
I am same, he misses the games so that's how it is. Can not see any problem at all really.
-
@KiwiMurph said in Bledisloe 1:
ABs have counted game of 3 havles for bans so i have no issue with Aus A games counting.
Yup, Steve Hansen and his pet, SBW.
-
In the most contentious and controversial refereeing decision of the year, we have to rely on the aggrieved coach’s second-hand version of what World Rugby has said about Australia’s complaint. If that doesn’t tell you how corrupt and opaque the governance structures (or lack of them) are in rugby union, nothing will. Where is the official WR statement? Is anyone in charge here? Or are they all too busy covering their arses and protecting their expense accounts to comment? Of course Rennie is going to say that. He’s like the kid who comes home from school and tells his parents the teacher has given him the week off from doing homework.
-
@His-Bobness said in Bledisloe 1:
In the most contentious and controversial refereeing decision of the year, we have to rely on the aggrieved coach’s second-hand version of what World Rugby has said about Australia’s complaint. If that doesn’t tell you how corrupt and opaque the governance structures (or lack of them) are in rugby union, nothing will. Where is the official WR statement? Is anyone in charge here? Or are they all too busy covering their arses and protecting their expense accounts to comment? Of course Rennie is going to say that. He’s like the kid who comes home from school and tells his parents the teacher has given him the week off from doing homework.
Trouble is that WR have a great history of opening their mouth only to fill it with a shoe.
-
@Dan54 said in Bledisloe 1:
@KiwiMurph said in Bledisloe 1:
ABs have counted game of 3 havles for bans so i have no issue with Aus A games counting.
I am same, he misses the games so that's how it is. Can not see any problem at all really.
I think the issue is not the game level but the seemingly cynical approach of selection for that game.
It was great timing for RA to have the 'loophole' available.
BTW the rules are that there are level groups and in this case the International Representative side and the designated second side are in the same grouping. The game itself isn't part of the equation hence the game of three halves scenario.
But yes, we used the same loophole so cant really complain unless there is evidence that he was only added to the squad after the foul play.
-
@Crucial said in Bledisloe 1:
@Dan54 said in Bledisloe 1:
@KiwiMurph said in Bledisloe 1:
ABs have counted game of 3 havles for bans so i have no issue with Aus A games counting.
I am same, he misses the games so that's how it is. Can not see any problem at all really.
I think the issue is not the game level but the seemingly cynical approach of selection for that game.
It was great timing for RA to have the 'loophole' available.
BTW the rules are that there are level groups and in this case the International Representative side and the designated second side are in the same grouping. The game itself isn't part of the equation hence the game of three halves scenario.
But yes, we used the same loophole so cant really complain unless there is evidence that he was only added to the squad after the foul play.
And I believe they didn't use games , but actually gave date he was suspended until anyway mate.
-
@His-Bobness said in Bledisloe 1:
In the most contentious and controversial refereeing decision of the year, we have to rely on the aggrieved coach’s second-hand version of what World Rugby has said about Australia’s complaint. If that doesn’t tell you how corrupt and opaque the governance structures (or lack of them) are in rugby union, nothing will. Where is the official WR statement? Is anyone in charge here? Or are they all too busy covering their arses and protecting their expense accounts to comment? Of course Rennie is going to say that. He’s like the kid who comes home from school and tells his parents the teacher has given him the week off from doing homework.
Hi Bob, can you pint me to report(s) where Rennie said this? Ta much
-
@Dan54 said in Bledisloe 1:
@Crucial said in Bledisloe 1:
@Dan54 said in Bledisloe 1:
@KiwiMurph said in Bledisloe 1:
ABs have counted game of 3 havles for bans so i have no issue with Aus A games counting.
I am same, he misses the games so that's how it is. Can not see any problem at all really.
I think the issue is not the game level but the seemingly cynical approach of selection for that game.
It was great timing for RA to have the 'loophole' available.
BTW the rules are that there are level groups and in this case the International Representative side and the designated second side are in the same grouping. The game itself isn't part of the equation hence the game of three halves scenario.
But yes, we used the same loophole so cant really complain unless there is evidence that he was only added to the squad after the foul play.
And I believe they didn't use games , but actually gave date he was suspended until anyway mate.
They do but the process is that they provide a date calculated on eligible games counted.
They are provided with a list of games at the group level that he would be eligible/likely for selection in. eg they wouldn't count the Oz A games if he wasn't in the squad and therefore the date would go well into the EOYT -
I think it's in this one, there's a couple of the roar https://www.theroar.com.au/2022/09/22/mouthing-off-rennie-reveals-riekos-haka-disrespect-meltdown-wanted-newell-cited-over-sio-injury/
-
Wallabies coach says World Rugby backs him on controversial time-wasting call
Dave Rennie said he wrote to the governing body after last weekend's defeat.
-
"We've obviously been in contact with World Rugby around it and they agreed with our concerns," Rennie said.
They could mean so many things. eg we agree that you are concerned about the language barrier contributing to understanding the situation or we agree that a situation has happened which has changed the perception of a great game.
Doesn't mean that we agree you were robbed.
