- Jan 21, 2013
- 17,089
- 30,887
Walesonline are notorious for being idiots.
It wasn’t Walesonline. He’s got a column for the Irish independent.
Walesonline are notorious for being idiots.
It wasn’t Walesonline. He’s got a column for the Irish independent.
Oh fair enough, I just glanced at the link preview thing. The "NZ are cheats" thing is as old as the hills. I swear they just rotate these story ideas. That is why I didn't actually read it.
It wasn’t Walesonline. He’s got a column for the Irish independent.
We do know, though. We hear every day from players and coaches about the dangers of a busy fixture list.
You’re not undercooked. 7 games in 2 months 4 and a half of those games against tier 1 sides. You’re not undercooked. Sorry.
If you lose it won’t be because you’re undercooked. I think this was going to be a close game but now you’ll win this comfortably by 15 points. If you don’t it’s because you’ve bottled it.
I think you would do well to read the comments from Matt Dawson:
“I wouldn't be surprised if there was a little bit of raw emotion coming out in the players during the win over Scotland, and perhaps individually they were hurt by a lot of the media coverage this week. The focus all of a sudden was whether the tournament would be remembered for the games that were cancelled. I found it insane that people were trying to belittle the enormity of what was going on. The reality is people have unfortunately died and been injured in a natural disaster and that takes precedence over any kind of sport or game. It's a game of rugby, get over yourselves and focus on what's important.”
Reports are that it’s the worst typhoon for 60 years so hardly something organiser could have planned for even though the tournament is during the typhoon season. What makes me laugh even more is that it hasn’t even changed the outcome of who qualifies for the quarter finals – you’re whining like hell just about a team getting more rest.
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that a few games of rugby is more important than peoples lives that’s why people were asking why couldn’t these games be played behind closed doors in another location. The contingency plans could’ve been better. Also the fact, that as far as I’ve seen, no reason has been given as to why these games couldn’t have been played behind closed doors.
I also think that you’re naive if you think that these games wouldn’t have been rescheduled/ played behind closed doors if NZ or England needed the points to qualify. Do you really think World Rugby would treat England and NZ the same way they’ve treated Italy? Perhaps I’m to cynical?
So yes, obviously peoples lives are more important but you have to look at the contingency planning seeing as world rugby knew this WC was being played during Typhoon season.
You say it didn’t effect who qualified but you’re missing the point. Firstly you don’t know that anyway especially seeing as this is the red card World Cup. But at the very least it would’ve effected who qualified in what position but the other is that for the first time in history the WC is not a level playing field. That’s just a sad fact. Ultimately you have to question whether having it in Japan at this time was the right call as it was always a bit of a gamble.
You really are massively overplaying the fact that it's 'not a level playing field'.
Michael Aylwin in the Grauniad going for:
Australia, Ireland, Wales & South Africa.
Hmm.
It’s not though. That can’t be argued. Obviously to what degree it’s not level is debatable but a scenario where say SA play NZ or Wales play England in a final knowing that in both of those scenarios 1 team had played a game more than the other is not fair or equal. Especially at the end of the tournament when everyone is knackered.
I think it was Schmidt who said it would’ve been fairer if everyone’s last game was cancelled. At least that way it would’ve been more even.
Michael Aylwin in the Grauniad going for:
Australia, Ireland, Wales & South Africa.
Hmm.
Certainly an argument for Australia beating England, and I agree on Wales and South Africa. Not quite sure on what grounds he thinks Ireland will beat NZ though. Would certainly make the tournament more interesting!
It's a nonsense expecting a completely 'level playing ground' regardless of typhoon preparations.
The groups aren't level.
Teams travel from different distances.
There's different funding.
etc etc etc.
The six nations operates on a 'non-level playing ground' EVERY year due to the home and away situation.
Japan have very much created a non-level playing ground by being hosts...those dastardly swine.
Each team will have had at least a week off by the time of the Quarter Finals. Most of Wales' team will have had the best part of 11 days off by the time they get to that match.
Anyone using it as an excuse come the end of the tournament is really clutching at straws IMO.
I thought Arnold was meant to be the pedantic one. Come on mate, you know what I’m talking about but, yeah, I should’ve said not a level playing field with regards to games played which then rolls onto rest, injury exposure and prep and training time. All of those things have always been equal. Apart from host nations tend to get more favourable rest time between games but every World Cup has had everyone playing the same amount of games.
No WC has ever been played on the moon as far as I’m aware so there’s always a host. I’m obviously not moaning about England being the richest rugby nation on the planet, that would be silly as it would be silly to make the point that some teams are better than others, that’s sport, that’s why you want the key things, like number of games played, to be the same for everyone. But yeah, like I said, I should’ve said not a level playing field with regards to games played, injury exposure, prep time and rest
I thought Arnold was meant to be the pedantic one. Come on mate, you know what I’m talking about but, yeah, I should’ve said not a level playing field with regards to games played which then rolls onto rest, injury exposure and prep and training time. All of those things have always been equal. Apart from host nations tend to get more favourable rest time between games but every World Cup has had everyone playing the same amount of games.
No WC has ever been played on the moon as far as I’m aware so there’s always a host. I’m obviously not moaning about England being the richest rugby nation on the planet, that would be silly as it would be silly to make the point that some teams are better than others, that’s sport, that’s why you want the key things, like number of games played, to be the same for everyone. But yeah, like I said, I should’ve said not a level playing field with regards to games played, injury exposure, prep time and rest
The team that wins the World Cup will be the best team in the tournament.
Anyone who says otherwise is being a sore loser to be honest. You just don't normally see people be sore losers before they've lost!