[Poll] Who would you prefer to win?
-
@reprobate said in [Poll] Who would you prefer to win?:
i think i want to support the saffas cause they love rugby
then i watch the rugby they play, and i think... actually, maybe they hate rugby
then i think i want to support the poms, cause at least they occasionally pass/run
then i remember the cricket, and i see owen farrell's face, his shoulder charges and his dive from a forehead push.
then i see faf's face, and him shoving opposing halfbacks immediately after they put the ball into a scrum.it's lose/lose, there's no way around it. best case scenario is the boks winning via some shit technicality which they shouldn't be able to feel good about (but will anyway) and the poms cop some karma from the boundary countback debacle. i'm thinking a couple of controversial red cards as World Rugby try to show that they haven't given a directive to refs to fuck over the pool games then ignore the knockouts with cards, then double extra time followed by a 13 players each goal-kicking contest which the poms lose because a random gust of wind blows an english flag into the ball, knocking it off the tee as that cockhead marler lines up his game-winning shot.
exactly how I feel with the Poms eventually losing and blaming the French Ref and we have another massive English - French revolt
-
-
@raznomore said in [Poll] Who would you prefer to win?:
Choosing between these teams is like choosing which arm you'd prefer to cut off or which sister you'd like to kiss.
Your options are both much easier decisions than choosing this game.
But.....pictures of Owen Farrell holding our Wiremu aloft going into the English walk bank sway the decision for me.
-
I don't like any of these guys!
-
I still haven't voted because I can't decide.
-
Obviously I don’t expect saffas to agree.
But for the good of rugby , would it be a positive, england winning, playing an expansive game style by their standards ?
-
@kiwiinmelb said in [Poll] Who would you prefer to win?:
Obviously I don’t expect saffas to agree.
But for the good of rugby , would it be a positive, england winning, playing an expansive game style by their standards ?
Well with all the money in the NH, having the world champions temporarily up there would be good for rugby.
As for the style, I’m not expecting them to go wide this time, but with Eddie who knows.
-
-
@raznomore said in [Poll] Who would you prefer to win?:
Choosing between these teams is like choosing which arm you'd prefer to cut off or which sister you'd like to kiss.
This.
-
Yeah... Go on then England. Those going against England because fans have short memories. I still remember hanging with some okes and them losing their shit about an EOYT game against Italy or something, crowing at me about that's how you play rugby....then asking if the ABs were playing that weekend. I think we'd just beaten an actual decent side so they got pretty quiet after that.
It won't be easy seeing Itoje and that dick prop and sure some poms will be dicks but hey they have less to crow about.
-
@booboo said in [Poll] Who would you prefer to win?:
Very much firmed to the Bokke.
Firstly: England do not need any more excuse to not share revenue.
Secondly: Eddie Jones's childish response to Warren Gatland's perfectly reasonable observation about performance dipping after a huge emotional effort.
But was it perfectly reasonable? Gatland didn't say anything about South Africa, only a swipe against in England. Why? Did South Africa not have a hard match against Wales? Did they not put their all into that match? No he just had a dig at England. Sour grapes. I thought Eddie's response was bang on the money.
-
@Catogrande said in [Poll] Who would you prefer to win?:
@booboo said in [Poll] Who would you prefer to win?:
Very much firmed to the Bokke.
Firstly: England do not need any more excuse to not share revenue.
Secondly: Eddie Jones's childish response to Warren Gatland's perfectly reasonable observation about performance dipping after a huge emotional effort.
But was it perfectly reasonable? Gatland didn't say anything about South Africa, only a swipe against in England. Why? Did South Africa not have a hard match against Wales? Did they not put their all into that match? No he just had a dig at England. Sour grapes. I thought Eddie's response was bang on the money.
Yep Gatland protecting his legacy.
'We lost to them, now if you lose to them then I don't look so bad.
Even though I should have changed tactics late in the match'
-
I want England to win, hopefully fulfilling Eddie's statement this week that they can play better than they did against NZ
But my biggest hope is if SA win it's on merit.
Regardless of whether the match is a barn burner or slow as molasses, as long as either side win independent of Garces & Skeen I'll be happy.
In fairness though if the usual suspects play up, then they should be dispatched
-
OK comon England let's do this
-
@Catogrande said in [Poll] Who would you prefer to win?:
@booboo said in [Poll] Who would you prefer to win?:
Very much firmed to the Bokke.
Firstly: England do not need any more excuse to not share revenue.
Secondly: Eddie Jones's childish response to Warren Gatland's perfectly reasonable observation about performance dipping after a huge emotional effort.
But was it perfectly reasonable? Gatland didn't say anything about South Africa, only a swipe against in England. Why? Did South Africa not have a hard match against Wales? Did they not put their all into that match? No he just had a dig at England. Sour grapes. I thought Eddie's response was bang on the money.
Yeah it was.
And in the end justified.
Gatland made a perfectly reasonable and reasoned comment and warning that there's been a history of hyped up performances followed by flat ones, e.g.,:
1987 France semi
1995 NZ semi
1999 France semi
2007 France QF
2011 NZ semi
2015 NZ QFI extend my sympathies for your result Cato. But I have none for Eddie.
-
@booboo said in [Poll] Who would you prefer to win?:
@Catogrande said in [Poll] Who would you prefer to win?:
@booboo said in [Poll] Who would you prefer to win?:
Very much firmed to the Bokke.
Firstly: England do not need any more excuse to not share revenue.
Secondly: Eddie Jones's childish response to Warren Gatland's perfectly reasonable observation about performance dipping after a huge emotional effort.
But was it perfectly reasonable? Gatland didn't say anything about South Africa, only a swipe against in England. Why? Did South Africa not have a hard match against Wales? Did they not put their all into that match? No he just had a dig at England. Sour grapes. I thought Eddie's response was bang on the money.
Yeah it was.
And in the end justified.
Garland made a perfectly reasonable and reasoned comment and warning that there's been a history of hyped up performances followed by flat ones, e.g.,:
1987 France semi
1995 NZ semi
1999 France semi
2007 France QF
2011 NZ semi
2015 NZ QFI extend my sympathies for your result Cato. But I have none for Eddie.
Who is currently being chased down the street by an Anthropomorphic Personification whose name is Disappointment...
-
-
@Tim said in [Poll] Who would you prefer to win?:
@booboo No, @Catogrande is having consolation sex with Katie Hopkins.
Again?
