Rugby World Cup 2011

[elapid]

Greg Growden (Australian media) reported the following in The Age today:

"Now on to a final which could degenerate into one of the biggest anticlimaxes of all time, because the French have no hope. The supposed highlight of the tournament is expected to turn into a one-sided All Blacks shellacking because France have fumbled their way into the final, bumbling their way through the pool stage, getting it together for 40 minutes against England, and then playing the most brain-dead football imaginable in the semi-final against Wales, but got away with it only because they had one extra man for more than 60 minutes. If the All Blacks don't win the final by at least 25 points, they're not trying.

France coach Marc Lievremont was yesterday moaning about how his team received no credit in the New Zealand media for making the final. He's kidding himself. The local press let them off lightly, because they were rubbish. Where Lievremont got it right was when he described his players as a ''bunch of spoilt brats. Undisciplined, disobedient, selfish, always complaining, always whingeing''.

He could have added they are incompetent footballers."

While I don't think the French have a chance, they are being well and truly lambasted in both the New Zealand and Australian media. Probably deserving.

 

[The Hitch]

Wow, that semi was one sided. Australia never stood a chance.

That run in the first try was amazing.

 

[Captain_Cavman]

Greg Growden (Australian media) reported the following in The Age today:

"Now on to a final which could degenerate into one of the biggest anticlimaxes of all time, because the French have no hope. The supposed highlight of the tournament is expected to turn into a one-sided All Blacks shellacking because France have fumbled their way into the final, bumbling their way through the pool stage, getting it together for 40 minutes against England, and then playing the most brain-dead football imaginable in the semi-final against Wales, but got away with it only because they had one extra man for more than 60 minutes. If the All Blacks don't win the final by at least 25 points, they're not trying.

France coach Marc Lievremont was yesterday moaning about how his team received no credit in the New Zealand media for making the final. He's kidding himself. The local press let them off lightly, because they were rubbish. Where Lievremont got it right was when he described his players as a ''bunch of spoilt brats. Undisciplined, disobedient, selfish, always complaining, always whingeing''.

He could have added they are incompetent footballers."

While I don't think the French have a chance, they are being well and truly lambasted in both the New Zealand and Australian media. Probably deserving.

I'd agree with most of that, apart from the last line. They are not incompetant footballers at all. They are just poorly led and have lost confidence in themselves and each other.

I've found myself supporting the All Blacks for the Semis and the final. Never happened before. Up to this tournament it's been England to win always, NZ to lose always, and the rest I usually decide as I go along. But I also want to see a worthy winner lift the trophy, and the Aussies and especially the French don't qualify in that regard.

 

[elapid]

But I also want to see a worthy winner lift the trophy, and the Aussies and especially the French don't qualify in that regard.

+1. Despite being a Wallabies fan, the two teams who IMO deserved to be playing the final are the All Blacks and Wales based on their performances throughout the tournament. No other team has performed as well or as consistently as these two teams.

My one consolation is that the All Blacks still will not have a trophy cabinet to compare to the 1991 Wallabies. Small consolation, but consolation nonetheless.

 

[Captain_Cavman]

+1. Despite being a Wallabies fan, the two teams who IMO deserved to be playing the final are the All Blacks and Wales based on their performances throughout the tournament. No other team has performed as well or as consistently as these two teams.

My one consolation is that the All Blacks still will not have a trophy cabinet to compare to the 1991 Wallabies. Small consolation, but consolation nonetheless.

I'd also give a nod to Ireland and South Africa as two teams who had solid tournaments.

 

[AngusW]

+1. Despite being a Wallabies fan, the two teams who IMO deserved to be playing the final are the All Blacks and Wales based on their performances throughout the tournament. No other team has performed as well or as consistently as these two teams.

My one consolation is that the All Blacks still will not have a trophy cabinet to compare to the 1991 Wallabies. Small consolation, but consolation nonetheless.

Just wondering what was so special about the 1991 Wallabies trophy cabinet? (BTW they were a great team) I know it didn't include the Bledisloe cup that year - could you elaborate?

I'm really happy to see NZ make their first final since 1995. I agree that the most deserving teams to have made it to the final would have been NZ/Wales, but the competition is about the final scoreline in the knockout stages and France has somehow made it to the final. The final may not end up being as one-sided as many people predict. France weren't great in 2007 (lost twice to Argentina and once to England) but still upset NZ in the quarters.

So says someone who predicted 0/2 for the semis...

 

[elapid]

I'd also give a nod to Ireland and South Africa as two teams who had solid tournaments.

I don't really agree with South Africa. A close win against Wales and an underwhelming performance against Samoa in the round robin phase and were then unable to break the Australians despite an overwhelming amount of possession and time in the Wallabies's territory. Ireland did do well, especially their win against the Wallabies, but not as good as Wales.

Just wondering what was so special about the 1991 Wallabies trophy cabinet? (BTW they were a great team) I know it didn't include the Bledisloe cup that year - could you elaborate?

Sorry, my mistake. I meant the 1999 Wallabies: William Web Ellis Cup (World Champions), Tri-Nations champions, and Bledisloe Cup. I used to have a photo of that trophy cabinet to stir up my Kiwi mates. Not often that the Wallabies get the upperhand against the Blacks, so I get my shots in when I can.

 

[42x16ss]

I don't really agree with South Africa. A close win against Wales and an underwhelming performance against Samoa in the round robin phase and were then unable to break the Australians despite an overwhelming amount of possession and time in the Wallabies's territory. Ireland did do well, especially their win against the Wallabies, but not as good as Wales.




Sorry, my mistake. I meant the 1999 Wallabies: William Web Ellis Cup (World Champions), Tri-Nations champions, and Bledisloe Cup. I used to have a photo of that trophy cabinet to stir up my Kiwi mates. Not often that the Wallabies get the upperhand against the Blacks, so I get my shots in when I can.

The Wallabies also beat the Barbarians, the British and Irish Lions and the NZ Maori side shortly after winning the three cups mentioned before. Neither had been beaten in years. For maybe 1.5 - 2 years they were easily the best side in the world. Hell, even their scrum was decent

Why was Rod McQueen not re-signed as coach? He rebuilt the side from the ground up into world beaters.

 

[Captain_Cavman]

I don't really agree with South Africa. A close win against Wales and an underwhelming performance against Samoa in the round robin phase and were then unable to break the Australians despite an overwhelming amount of possession and time in the Wallabies's territory. Ireland did do well, especially their win against the Wallabies, but not as good as Wales.

...

We'll have to disagree then as I thought South Africa had a solid tournament for precisely the reasons you mentioned: They beat Wales, most people's No2, albeit closely. And they had an overwhelming amount of possession and territory against Australia, despite a refereeing performance that has been criticised in all quaters. And the Welsh had just as much trouble getting past Samoa as they did.

But, the next tournament is in England and history tells us that the winner will be...

 

[Tank Engine]

Warburton banned for three weeks
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/15325714.stm

Some have said that the red card should have been automatic from the rules.
Below is the paragraph regarding lifting tackles (from the above page). The first case clearly does not apply as Warburton did not force Clerc into the turf in any way. Whether the second applies is debatable. What does "from a height" mean precisely. How should "no regard to the player's safety" be interpreted? When I saw the replay, it was clear that Clerc was lifted, but that seemed to be as the result of the impact rather than him being purposefully lifted. Warburton then let him go rather than go through with the tackle, in effect not raising him any further before dropping him (these are my impressions, I've got not chance of reviewing this in the cold light of day as I didn't record it). If the second case does not apply, then the third case certainly does.

"The player is lifted and then forced or 'speared' into the ground (red card offence).

"The lifted player is dropped to the ground from a height with no regard to the player's safety (red card offence).

"For all other types of dangerous lifting tackles a yellow card or penalty may be considered sufficient."

All ancient history though. Hope the All Blacks win next week, as they have undoubtedly been the more impressive of the two teams.

 

[Captain_Cavman]

Warburton banned for three weeks
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/15325714.stm

Some have said that the red card should have been automatic from the rules.
Below is the paragraph regarding lifting tackles (from the above page). The first case clearly does not apply as Warburton did not force Clerc into the turf in any way. Whether the second applies is debatable. What does "from a height" mean precisely. How should "no regard to the player's safety" be interpreted? When I saw the replay, it was clear that Clerc was lifted, but that seemed to be as the result of the impact rather than him being purposefully lifted. Warburton then let him go rather than go through with the tackle, in effect not raising him any further before dropping him (these are my impressions, I've got not chance of reviewing this in the cold light of day as I didn't record it). If the second case does not apply, then the third case certainly does.

"The player is lifted and then forced or 'speared' into the ground (red card offence).

"The lifted player is dropped to the ground from a height with no regard to the player's safety (red card offence).

"For all other types of dangerous lifting tackles a yellow card or penalty may be considered sufficient."

All ancient history though. Hope the All Blacks win next week, as they have undoubtedly been the more impressive of the two teams.

What does the second part mean anyway? What constitutes 'Having a regard for the player's safety'? What is defined as 'A height'? And can any player really have a regard for another person's safety when that person is wrestling with him?

Not surprised the IRB are trying to sweep this one away but it is still a shockingly poor interpretation of an unclear law. One that, whatever the letter of the law, has never been interpreted in that way in a match I've seen. A bit like waking up to find yourself under arrest for failing to do your archery practice.

 

[sublimit]

At Least Warburton is available for selection in 3 weeks even though the law is unclear on the foul/transgression.
In football Wayne Rooney is looking at virtually a year out for a non premeditated small kick out for the England Football team with the recipient in no danger whatsoever however.

The rugby admins are more clued up than in football but its difficult to say on this one though some consistency would be good. Brian O'Driscoll was picked up and slammed onto his head by a couple of NZ players while playing for the Lions and no reds or anything a few years back.. We need consistency and not arbitrary decisions.

 

[lancaster]

having a regard for the safety of other players in this regard means don't drop them on their head/neck.

when he made the tackle, he should have realised that the tackled players hips were above his shoulders, and as such was pretty much defenceless.

once you holding a player upside down. you must make every conceivable effort to return them to the ground as safely as possible. this probably means trying to right them to at least horizontal before impact, or holding them and slowly lowering them to the ground.

obviously all of that is much easier in slow motion/theory than in realtime. but it's fellow players ability to walk that's at stake, so don't get yourself in that situation.

it is clearly dangerous play (even when compared to the whole sport, which is dangerous). it's unfortunate that a generally clean player got sent off early in a crucial game, but if the french player had been paralysed (which is perfectly conceivable) i don't think we'd be blaming the ref for ruining the game.
the position warburton has got in he has no control on how the french player lands and the fact he was uninjured is through luck rather than good judgement.


all that being said, i do think that the decision was harsh, but only because of the inconsistency with which big hits are dealt. it's too frequent that huge but safe hits result in cards and too often that careless and very dangerous hits are let go with a penalty.

warburton was fairly dealt with, (but many players have been dealt with too leniently in similar situations).



the comparison footage that has been shown many times of a tongan player (against france) is (i think) a very good example of how this should happen. he picks him up, holds on to him and the tackled player lands on his side. dangerous so penalty and yellow card, but showing regard for the safety of the tackled player (not smashing him on his head or neck).

 

[The Hitch]

In football Wayne Rooney is looking at virtually a year out for a non premeditated small kick out for the England Football team with the recipient in no danger whatsoever however.

Thats because in football a little kick can cause life threatning injuries.

Life threatning injuries that heal completely the moment the opposition player gets the red card.

 

[Ragerod]

At Least Warburton is available for selection in 3 weeks even though the law is unclear on the foul/transgression.
In football Wayne Rooney is looking at virtually a year out for a non premeditated small kick out for the England Football team with the recipient in no danger whatsoever however.

That's a ridiculous way to look at it. Rooney misses 3 games for a deliberate retaliatory action whilst Warburton could've missed the biggest game of his life for an accident. Punishments seem fair to me.

What does the second part mean anyway? What constitutes 'Having a regard for the player's safety'? What is defined as 'A height'? And can any player really have a regard for another person's safety when that person is wrestling with him?

A height would be any distance off the ground.

 

[AngusW]

Sorry, my mistake. I meant the 1999 Wallabies: William Web Ellis Cup (World Champions), Tri-Nations champions, and Bledisloe Cup. I used to have a photo of that trophy cabinet to stir up my Kiwi mates. Not often that the Wallabies get the upperhand against the Blacks, so I get my shots in when I can.

Thanks - yes, that makes sense. I remember for a few years after that World Cup the All Blacks couldn't string together the two wins that they needed to get back the Bledisloe Cup.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

I used to think that Kapa O Pango was banned.

 

[sublimit]

That's a ridiculous way to look at it. Rooney misses 3 games for a deliberate retaliatory action whilst Warburton could've missed the biggest game of his life for an accident. Punishments seem fair to me.


Lol we have a live one here..

The French player was in danger of spinal damage, shoulder damage. The guy Rooney kicked was in no danger but might have got a bruise that will heal up in a couple of days.

Warburton misses 3'rd/4'th play off final and back after that. Rooney effectively out for 6 including 3 competetive matches, he probably wont play till summer next year.

 

[ramjambunath]

How can you compare football and rugby football though. Any tackle made by a rugby union player woud be either a red or a yellow card in football. It's chalk and cheese.

Equal comparisons can be made about players and their attitudes towards referees, and football will not come out civilized there.

 

[Tank Engine]

Some news

Gavin Henson to join Cardiff Blues
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/15359520.stm

As a Blues fan (living in the Munster heartland ), I'm split between hoping that they've just signed a very talented player and fear that it's going to go horribly wrong again.

IRB to "consider" Gatland's statement that Wales thought about cheating by faking an injury to a prop, which would mean they no longer had two fit, recognized props and so there could be no pushing in the scrum.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/15350332.stm

Seems a bit of a non-story really, if the IRB have a doctor pitch-side to check on injuries.

 

[Tank Engine]

So it's the last weekend. Tomorrow the 3rd/4th place playoff: Wales vs Australia, which on paper looks the most competitive fixture. Wales have an unchanged back line. Hook must feel the pressure to perform as he had a sub-par game last week. Apparently Shane Williams is now not going to retire before the next Wales vs Australia match in Cardiff at the beginning of December. Obviously, the scrum is weakened due to Warburton's ban, Adam Jones' injury and Alun Wyn Jones not being 100% fit (he's on the bench). These losses will be felt strongly, but the Welsh scrum should stand up well against the Aussie scrum. Faletau moves to No. 7 with ex-captain Ryan Jones coming in at No. 8. Bradley Davies comes into the second row and Craig Mitchell comes in at prop. The strength of the Aussies lies in their backs. Fullback Beale is back from injury. He's a real danger, as when we played them last year, our scrum was dominant, but Beale cut through the Welsh defence on several occasions to lead the Wallabies to a win. It should be a close battle with hopefully plenty of flair from the backs.

Edit: Should have said Paul James at prop

 

[ramjambunath]

Some news

Gavin Henson to join Cardiff Blues
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/15359520.stm

As a Blues fan (living in the Munster heartland ), I'm split between hoping that they've just signed a very talented player and fear that it's going to go horribly wrong again.

Are there any details about the contract? He has too much baggage to 'splash the cash' on.

 

[ramjambunath]

Quade Cooper out for 6 months

Seriously bad luck after a fotgettable end to the tournament.

 

[Tank Engine]

Quade Cooper out for 6 months

Seriously bad luck after a fotgettable end to the tournament.

He was playing really well and just landed badly while changing direction with nobody touching him. Congratulations to the Aussies. They deserved to win. Their defence was very impressive (they certainly controlled Jamie Roberts) and Shane's try did come from a forward pass. Nice try from the Welsh lads at the end and it was appropriate that 1/2-penny was the scorer. We definitely missed Adam Jones. Pocock and Barnes had great games. Ryan Jones was impressive for Wales, especially in the first half. Overall, Wales have a lot of grounds for optimism. The highlights of the tournament were:

Firstly, the (somewhat) unexpected

Lee Halfpenny - Very solid in gathering kicks with a howitzer kick and dangerous on the break. He's still young and could well become the first choice full back.

Rhys Priestland - An unknown quantity at international level until a couple of months ago. After the tournament he's the first choice at no. 10. His passing was very impressive.

Toby Faletau - A good runner and controlled well at the back of the scrum.

Luke Charteris - A real target in the lineout and stood out in defence.

In addition, Jamie Roberts had a good tournament (him together with an in form Henson would be my dream centre partnership for the Cardiff Blues, force and guile). Alun Wyn Jones also had an outstanding tournament. George North is going to be a great player, fast and very powerful. His try saving tackle was very impressive.

With regard to Sam Warburton, a sad end to what had previously been a great tournament. It was a nice gesture from the team that no-one really led them out at the start. I think he's going to be captain for a long time.

Looking forward to the final. Hope the All Blacks show their class.

 

[Tank Engine]

Are there any details about the contract? He has too much baggage to 'splash the cash' on.

It's initially for 8 months, although Dai Young hopes he'll stay till the end of his career (at 29 that might be another 5 years, but also might be 8 months).