Jump to content


Club CFCnet | Facebook | Twitter | Google + | Main Site
Photo
- - - - -

2011 Rugby World Cup


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
99 replies to this topic

#91 Guest_DDA Drogbar._*

Guest_DDA Drogbar._*
  • Guests

Posted 16 October 2011 - 10:22 AM

I suggest you look at the laws of the game, as well as the IRB recommendations to referees regarding dangerous tackles.


Because it's the law, it's therefore correct and should be applied in unwavering terms and with no room for interpretation? Excellent.

TV pundits are TV pundits, whether ex players or not. Their role is to either be anodyne or controversial. It's absolutely ridiculous for them to say "... oh but it's a World Cup semi-final, he's ruined the game by sending him off..." It doesn't matter if it's an under 12s game or a World Cup final, a dangerous tackle is a dangerous tackle. The ONLY person who "ruined" the game was Warburton by being so stupid. At my rugby club EVERYONE watching was of one opinion... red card!


Fine, but can you make your mind up as to which argument you're using, please? Is it the 'no-one who has played the game can argue with it' one or the 'my mates at the rugby club agree with me' one? I'd be inclined to trust the chaps who have played the game at that level rather than your mates.

Let me ask you this... during the Spain v Holland World Cup final, who ruined the game? The Dutch players by adopting the tactics they did, or the ref for trying in vain to keep as many of them on the pitch as he could? If 3 had been sent off (which was justified) would the ref have been blamed by the pundits for "ruining the game"?


Nigel de Jong studding someone in the chest is so far removed from what's acceptable in football that the correct decision was a red card. Warburton's tackle was so marginal in between the 'legal' tackle and the 'spear' that a straight red was a bad decision. Before you bring up the fact that the IRB has banned Warburton for three weeks, that's irrelevant. Yellow card offences are capable of incurring longer bans even where the referee has correctly said that a red card wasn't sufficient.

Ignore TV pundits. Listen to current players in clubs up and down the country. The consensus on the rugby message boards was that it was a sending off offence.


Again, I'd prefer to listen to people who have played the game at that level rather than rugby club know-it-alls who spend most of their time drinking eachother's piss in pursuance of 'edgy banter'.

#92 Droy was my hero

Droy was my hero

    CFCnet Member

  • Members_2012
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,047 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Team:CFC

Posted 16 October 2011 - 01:19 PM

Fine, but can you make your mind up as to which argument you're using, please? Is it the 'no-one who has played the game can argue with it' one or the 'my mates at the rugby club agree with me' one? I'd be inclined to trust the chaps who have played the game at that level rather than your mates.

.................................................................

Again, I'd prefer to listen to people who have played the game at that level rather than rugby club know-it-alls who spend most of their time drinking eachother's piss in pursuance of 'edgy banter'.

Does that apply to football pundits too? As far as I can see football pundits "who have played the game" are both total idiots and total liars.

#93 Bob Singleton

Bob Singleton

    CFCnet Member

  • Members_2012
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,434 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, Surrey
  • Interests:Photography & Live Music
  • Team:Chelsea FC since 1968

Donator

Posted 16 October 2011 - 01:57 PM

DDA, I played at a higher level than you could imagine... England U19, England U23 and represented Surrey when the county game was the next stepping stone to international rugby... this of course in the days when it was an amateur game. I have the requisite coaching badges to coach up to Division 2 level and was an accredited RFU referee. I'm a million miles from the "coarse rugby" players you imagine drink each other's piss.

"Because it's the law, it's therefore correct and should be applied in unwavering terms and with no room for interpretation? Excellent."

When it comes to dangerous tackles, then yes, there should be no room for interpretation. Either it's dangerous (red card) or it's not. It was a dangerous tackle, and the red card was the correct decision.
I have a friend from my old days at Rosslyn Park who has been in a wheelchair for the last 25 or so years due to a similar tackle... would you care to explain to him how it wasn't really a dangerous tackle? Sadly back then the spear tackle wasn't considered dangerous... it was only when Brian O'Driscoll was tackled in a similar way during a Lions tour game that the laws changed, and about time too.

If you care, I could demonstrate a spear tackle on you and then you can tell me why it's not dangerous and why, in a game, I wouldn't deserve a red card.

#94 Guest_DDA Drogbar._*

Guest_DDA Drogbar._*
  • Guests

Posted 16 October 2011 - 02:13 PM

Does that apply to football pundits too? As far as I can see football pundits "who have played the game" are both total idiots and total liars.


I don't care, Droy.

#95 CostaTheBlue

CostaTheBlue

    CFCnet Member

  • Members_2012
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Interests:Chelsea
  • Team:Chelsea

Posted 16 October 2011 - 06:12 PM

France v New Zealand in the Final then. How many points will the All Blacks win by? 10? 20? 30? or more?

#96 Sciatika

Sciatika

    CFCnet Member

  • Members_2012
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,192 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:London
  • Team:Chelsea

Donator

Posted 16 October 2011 - 07:13 PM

At least with France in the final, I'll have no mixed feelings about who I want to win.

#97 CFC1966

CFC1966

    CFCnet Member

  • Members_2012
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,038 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Mids
  • Team:CHELSEA

Posted 23 October 2011 - 11:33 AM

France v New Zealand in the Final then. How many points will the All Blacks win by? 10? 20? 30? or more?


...or by 1 solitary point, even though they were on home turf with a referee who pretty much gave them every single marginal decision and missed ignored at least 3 kneck-high tackles commited by NZ. Not quite the "blackwash" you predicted.

#98 CostaTheBlue

CostaTheBlue

    CFCnet Member

  • Members_2012
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Interests:Chelsea
  • Team:Chelsea

Posted 23 October 2011 - 06:38 PM

New Zealand were by far the best team in this World Cup like I predicted they would be at the start of the tournament.

#99 Paul Mcgoochan

Paul Mcgoochan

    CFCnet Member

  • Members_2012
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,819 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Interests:Church,Rugby,Cycling,
    Heavy Metal,
    Reading,History,
    Politics.
  • Team:Born 1905

Posted 23 October 2011 - 08:49 PM

IMO,France were extremely unlucky today. They stayed in contention until HT and played out of their skins in the 2nd half.
One or two dubious calls in the game which can influence the outcome of a match. Then NZ had to hang on for about 7 or 8 mins to kill the game.
Unlucky France, you deserved so much more in this game.
Never thought I'd say that about the French!

#100 Guest_DDA Drogbar._*

Guest_DDA Drogbar._*
  • Guests

Posted 23 October 2011 - 10:43 PM

New Zealand were by far the best team in this World Cup like I predicted they would be at the start of the tournament.


What a brave prediction, oh Nostradamus.