Rugby World Cup general discussion
-
@Billy-Webb well written, I really feel for the Irish and French fans many who were saying "if we don't win this one we wont ever win".
I guess I remember as an AB fan how that felt during the long, long drought from 1987 to 2011.
Fiji and Wales certainly over-extended themselves are weren't far off the pace for going a step further.
Fiji rugby looks bright, I hope they build on this success, the Dura in SR really seems to have given them a boost player retention wise.
-
@Windows97 i don't feel for them, at all really
Yes, Ireland and France turned up with arguably their best ever teams, both in great form, and it was their time.
But, funny thing about World Cups, the previous years mean jack shit, you need to get it done on the day. And i have seen the Rugby World openly and loudly revel in AB teams getting bundled out when they were supposed to win (2007 was huge), so, frankly, fuck 'em. Welcome to the pain of expectation.
-
@mariner4life yep, as much as I dont like the laser focus on the RWC, it is what it is, and the Boks play the game geared to winning it...
that being said, as has been alluded to for the past few months, this has been Fozzies sole focus, while it doesnt sit well with most that we have lost so many records along the way, yet he has a pretty decent chance right now of getting his team to walk away with the lollies!
-
@taniwharugby I'v enever thought the World Cup determined the best team in the World, rather the best team at a certain style of rugby at a certain time. It does tend to have the best team win it, but not always.
And i hate the focus on a four year cycle for it. I hate "sacrifices" made in the mythical pursuit of building for the World Cup. Every game on its merits.
But that's just my view, and not shared by the rugby world, i know that.
-
@mariner4life said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:
@Windows97 i don't feel for them, at all really
Yes, Ireland and France turned up with arguably their best ever teams, both in great form, and it was their time.
But, funny thing about World Cups, the previous years mean jack shit, you need to get it done on the day. And i have seen the Rugby World openly and loudly revel in AB teams getting bundled out when they were supposed to win (2007 was huge), so, frankly, fuck 'em. Welcome to the pain of expectation.
-
Deserve?
Oh Jonny, I'll give you a pass because you're probably exhausted, and definitely gutted. But that's not the word champ -
@mariner4life said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:
@Windows97 i don't feel for them, at all really
Yes, Ireland and France turned up with arguably their best ever teams, both in great form, and it was their time.
But, funny thing about World Cups, the previous years mean jack shit, you need to get it done on the day. And i have seen the Rugby World openly and loudly revel in AB teams getting bundled out when they were supposed to win (2007 was huge), so, frankly, fuck 'em. Welcome to the pain of expectation.
-
-
@TeWaio said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:
Question: if we win the RWC, will Foster get knighted like Hansen and Henry?
Unlikely due to the potential embarrassment factor.
“Arise Sir Ferret “. Then the fat sod can’t get up.
-
This post is deleted!
-
@Bovidae said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:
Based on the SF appointments it appears that the ref for the final will be either Barnes or Raynal.
Generally the guy who has done the final has refereed right through the knockouts... the way I read it, is they had Barnes or O'Keeffe down to do the final, with Jaco Peyper as the contingency plan, but as he got injured, they now needed a new contingency for a NZ v SA final, and were not happy with Raynal last week, thus have brought Gardiner back in.
The reason they have gone BOK over Barnes for this week, is because England are way more likely to lose than New Zealand so they expect Barnes to do the final.
-
@Catogrande said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:
I find it difficult to argue with anything you’ve said, but I really want to. Does that make any sense?
The other thing I didn't add, is if they were looking at Barnes and Raynal for the final, they'd have done this weeks games. There is no good reason for Raynal not to be doing our game, other than the fact he was poor last week.
-
@frugby said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:
Generally the guy who has done the final has refereed right through the knockouts
That wasn't the situation in 2015 as Owens never refereed a SF, only a QF and the final.
I agree that Jutge will have a pecking order for the refs with contingencies for who is playing.
-
@Bovidae said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:
@frugby said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:
Generally the guy who has done the final has refereed right through the knockouts
That wasn't the situation in 2015 as Owens never refereed a SF, only a QF and the final.
I agree that Jutge will have a pecking order for the refs with contingencies for who is playing.
True, though that was a slightly unique situation, where we had four southern hemisphere sides, and three strong northern hemisphere referees, so they were quite happy to make their decisions there and then, as Owens was the best of that crop.
Garces and Joubert both had semis, Rolland did not, but these are all different circumstances. I think they see B.O.K and Barnes as the top two, and had Peyper at three - the QF appointments showed that. As I say, there is no good reason for Raynal not to be reffing this week if he is in line for the final.
