Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 09:28:20 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Sacre bleu! C'est Le Rugby World Cup.

Started by actwithoutwords, September 07, 2007, 03:08:04 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

ziggy starbucks

Quote from: aaaaaaaaaargh! on October 17, 2007, 02:26:08 PM
Where does Mark Cueto fit into the above analogy?  He's playing in the final on Saturday:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/english/7046466.stm

josh lewsey is argie striker claudio caniggia, who helped argentina get to the final (scoring the winner against brazil) but was suspended for the match as he got his second yellow card in the semi against italy.

however replaced caniggia is mark cueto.

Just been looking at some of the newspapers in the press department in my office to see if there were any stupid articles about England and South Africa in their world cup coverage.  Sure enough...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/rugby/article2687973.ece

Morrissey > Nelson Mandela for iconic status obviously, I don't know why they're being so contrarian.

Who put the rugby league tag into the "passion" thread?  Come on, own up!

Gulftastic

Quote from: aaaaaaaaaargh! on October 19, 2007, 10:32:31 AM
Who put the rugby league tag into the "passion" thread?  Come on, own up!

It wasn't me, but I would have done. You can stick your elitist kick 'n' clap bullshit up your arse. I hope South Africa knock seven shades of shit out of Jonny and the boys at the weekend.

Quote from: Gulftastic on October 19, 2007, 10:35:31 AM
It wasn't me, but I would have done. You can stick your elitist kick 'n' clap bullshit up your arse. I hope South Africa knock seven shades of shit out of Jonny and the boys at the weekend.

I'm sure you won't mind me saying that you're coming across as a bit of an idiot in this thread

Gulftastic

Quote from: aaaaaaaaaargh! on October 19, 2007, 12:32:22 PM
I'm sure you won't mind me saying that you're coming across as a bit of an idiot in this thread

No, feel free. I despise Yawnion and all it stands for, and don;t care who knows it, or what people think of me because of it.

The only thing that cheers me up about it is that one of the Windsor twats insists on supporting England, making it a lovely double hatred whammy for me.

Joy Nktonga

Yeah, and you're entitled to your hatred, but what's the fucking point in coming in this thread and gobbing off about it. In here it makes you look like a twat, but if you were to start a rugby thread and espouse your love of league in there then you'd be come across a lot better and people would engage you in discussion instead of telling you that you're being cunty.

Uncle TechTip


Pogue Mahone

The BBC have concocted a guide on "all you need to know about rugby".

Some highlights include:

Quote from: BBCKey aspects to look out for in rugby include:


  • Low-key celebrations - no robotic dancing or going to the crowd
  • Any back-chat to the referee is punished by moving the penalty forward 10 yards
  • Players rarely fake injury
  • Gracious in defeat - handshakes, as in football, and "tunnels" of applause at pitch-side followed by socialising in the bar

Quote from: BBCFor those people new to following the oval-shaped balls, there's a number of key questions that need to be answered, such as what do I wear, what do I drink and how should I behave?

Typical rugby fan outfit


1: Rugby shirt is a must (up-turned collar optional)
2: Lager, preferably bitter but never white wine
3: Stonewashed jeans, not shellsuit bottoms
4: Comfortable shoes such as deck shoes - no trainers
 

The outfit of the typical fan has long been rugby shirt, jeans and comfortable shoes. Unlike at Twickenham, where Barbour jackets and green wellies are also evident, England supporters in France have followed football's lead and dressed in anything from St George outfits to funny wigs.

While purists have always favoured bitter or Guinness as their bevvie of choice, the continental spirit that has imbued the current World Cup means newcomers will not be frowned on for drinking lager. However, white wine spritzers might be a cultural shift too far.

Essentially, it's an instruction manual on how to be a "rugby fan" for a night.

Pogue Mahone

#218
I just caught the end of the France-Argentina game and it seems France were over-run. I'm guessing they weren't really up for it?

mikeyg27

Quote from: Pogue Mahone on October 19, 2007, 09:59:02 PM
I just caught the end of the France-Argentina game and it seems France were over-run. I'm guessing they weren't relly up for it?

No, but would you be?

Quote from: Joy Nktonga on October 19, 2007, 06:56:04 PM
if you were to start a rugby thread and espouse your love of league in there then you'd be come across a lot better and people would engage you in discussion instead of telling you that you're being cunty.

On the one hand, I get really frustrated by militant League fans because as has been pointed out they don't do the cause any good. On the other hand, it's understandable why such an attitude exists if you know a bit of the history. For some reason I find the schism between League and Union  one of the most interesting topics in the history of sport in general.

And cheer up Gulftastic, the GB - New Zealand series starts next week.

Uncle TechTip

So the rugby fan's uniform is exactly the same as the football fan's expect for trainers? Cheers BBC. Prob matches the Barmy Army supporter too. What a load of old bobbins.

Gulftastic

Quote from: mikeyg27 on October 19, 2007, 11:21:41 PM


And cheer up Gulftastic, the GB - New Zealand series starts next week.

True, but tonight there's a game between a 'Northern Union 13 ' and the 'All Golds' at Warrington, celebrating the centenary of the first ever international Rugby League game.

I'm going to get so pissed. In Warrington's ground you can get a two pint glass of lager. It's mint.

CaledonianGonzo

Quote from: Uncle TechTip on October 20, 2007, 12:05:00 AM
So the rugby fan's uniform is exactly the same as the football fan's expect for trainers? Cheers BBC.

Depends on your nationality.  I wouldn't be seen dead attending either rugby or football in those 'trousers' things they mention.

mikeyg27

Quote from: Gulftastic on October 20, 2007, 10:17:40 AM
True, but tonight there's a game between a 'Northern Union 13 ' and the 'All Golds' at Warrington, celebrating the centenary of the first ever international Rugby League game.

I'm going to get so pissed. In Warrington's ground you can get a two pint glass of lager. It's mint.

Never been to the Halliwell Jones, I had been thinking of going to the All Golds game but couldn't find anyone willing to go with me from London.

Oh, and anyone looking for good omens for the Final tonight, on the day of the last final I came down with a cold, and this morning I've woken up to find that I'm coming down with a cold. Which of course means that should England win I can't go out and celebrate.

Quote from: Pogue Mahone on October 19, 2007, 09:59:02 PM
I just caught the end of the France-Argentina game and it seems France were over-run. I'm guessing they weren't really up for it?

Two bald men fighting over a comb...

Damn, all hinged on that try decision.. Well done to South Africa

steven583699

No tries in the Rugby World Cup Final, and quite a dull match. Far too many kicks (although I suppose it was a conscious decision not to let SA have any space) and barely any finding touch. Is it me, or did rugby used to be better than this?

ziggy starbucks

Quote from: ziggy starbucks on October 17, 2007, 01:16:11 AM
in 1986 argentina won the football world cup playing great stuff with the help of one of the greats of the game diego maradona in fine health. In 1990 they went to the italian world cup to retain their trophy despite being considerably crapper than they were in 1986 and got to the final again, beating the hosts (italy) in the semifinal. Their star player, maradona was injury prone and and not nearly the match winner he once was. They get beat in the final by the miles better west germany in a tedious battle of attrition.

replace football with rugby, argentina with england, maradona with wilkinson, italy with france and west germany with south africa.

and just like the 1990 football world cup final, the 2007 rugby final was deeply deeply boring

remedial_gash

Quote from: steven583699 on October 20, 2007, 10:14:37 PM
No tries in the Rugby World Cup Final, and quite a dull match. Far too many kicks (although I suppose it was a conscious decision not to let SA have any space) and barely any finding touch. Is it me, or did rugby used to be better than this?


True.

It was a terrible finale to what has been a spiffing world cup. England deserved to lose, and didn't deserve to be in the final anyway,  for they were shit. Though not as shit as my own team of Wales who were fucking shithouse.


Argentina were the only team to have come out of the world cup with credit, and if they'd played to prediction - though not to form, would half lost to Farance in the opening game and won the world cup.*, **

gah!


gash
x

*maybe - Only S.A. could have beaten the Argie menace and they did, so my theory suggests that anyway of avoiding the dastardly seth effrikkans till the final would have been double plus good.

** Argentina were more than likely to win the France match having beaten them 5 out of 7 times in their recent encounters, though ITV, who know precisely fuck all about rugby played it up as a massive shock.

Pissed so apols for sepllign




mikeyg27

Quote from: steven583699 on October 20, 2007, 10:14:37 PM
No tries in the Rugby World Cup Final, and quite a dull match. Far too many kicks (although I suppose it was a conscious decision not to let SA have any space) and barely any finding touch. Is it me, or did rugby used to be better than this?

Yes, it's the unfortunate paradox of the professionalisation of Rugby Union that as teams have had more time to train, go to the gym, do video analysis and all the other majigs that pro sportsmen do, as the individual standards have increased, so the general spectacle has decreased. Teams just don't have the space to run the ball any more, and if they have a half-chance they're afraid to take it because the stakes have increased (the flip-side of which is that teams are more willing to cheat / disrupt play because they stand to gain more).  The lack of tries and the intelligence level of the kicking not going much beyond 'hoof' are two of the reasons why I prefer Rugby League these days (to put the tries thing into context, Super League had its first tryless game this year in it's twelfth season, whereas there were four such games in the Guiness Premiership just last season alone), which I tend to see as an evolved version of Union - most of the moves Union would need to make to get a more flowing, running-based game (less men on the pitch, reduction of the value of dropped goals) have already been done by League.

And the final was boring, mainly because the of the video referee. If he had given that try (I would have, I thought that shot from behind Cueto was the best one for showing he'd scored) then the complexion of the game would have been totally different. Also, it served as a wake-up call to the Springboks, who them preceded to spend the next 38 minutes shutting England out of the game. To be fair though, the better team won, and Matfield was simply immense. The odd thing was that looking at it, England played pretty well. They didn't give the ball away that much and their back play was surprisingly solid. They just lacked the killer touch (Robinson having to end his glorious cross-code career in such a shit manner hardly helped) so South Africa just had to sit back and absorb the pressure, which they did with all-too-much ease. It's not all doom and gloom since England have some good young backs in Tait, Flood and Hipkiss, with other players like Anthony Allen and Ryan Lamb to come into the fray as well. My big fear is that this World Cup may have disguised the flaws in our forwards, who quite simply aren't as dynamic as the other packs in the world. Also, we stand to lose a good few of them now (Shaw, Regan, Corry etc...) so we're going to have to do a bit of rebuilding there methinks, whereas with the backs it's been obvious even during this resurgence that we lack a cutting edge.

Quote from: remedial_gash on October 20, 2007, 10:40:26 PM
Argentina were the only team to have come out of the world cup with credit,

Erm, South Africa? Fiji did quite well (am I hitting a nerve?). Tonga as well. Georgia weren't too shabby. Argentina definitely made the most strides, performing to the level they did on the stage they did. Japan scored the try of the tournament (you might have seen it...). Wales were gash, and for 50 minutes I genuinely thought Canada would beat them. However, things can only get better for them.

Pogue Mahone

#230
I thought the refereeing was as bad as the game. As well as the decision against the try, the referee punished England a few times for obstruction and awarded South Africa with soft penalties. On the other hand, when Habana was guilty of crossing over in front of his team-mate in possession, the referee let play continue.

Games tend to fizzle out and get a bit boring when a very strong sides manages to pull away by a two-score margin. Someone told me earlier that Corrie would be on tonight. If only.

Lee Van Cleef

There was another incident of blocking by a SA player that never got punished as well.

The gamesmanship at the end by SA was a bit crap.  But eh.  They were the better team on the field because they effectively shut England down.

drberbatov

South Africa deserved their victory, the line out was immense and with a 100% kicking rate they were never going to slip up.

I hope for England's sake that reaching the final does not cover the fact that the last four years have been abysmal. If Ashton gets a new contract then we need to give him an assistant who can take the reigns if he retires. It was also good to see the likes of Flood, Tait and Hipkiss in the final as they represent the next generation who could and should take Englands game forward. Add the likes of Lamb, Cipriani, Strettle and Abendanon and perhaps even Vainakolo then there is plenty to be excited about.

I think its difficult to compare League to Union in terms of tries per game. If you want try fests then you get that with the Super 14. The standard of play in the Guinness Premiership and the Heinekken Cup has improved immensely in recent years and in that competition teams like Toulouse, Biarritz, Gloucester and Leinster have provided attractive attacking play that is easy on the eye.
Rugby League also allows the team with the ball 6 virtually guarenteed attempts to attack, ball retention is also a lot easier because of the lack of rucks / mauls and retreating tacklers. They are two completely different games and in my opinion should not be compared as both forms of the game have merits.


mikeyg27

Quote from: drberbatov on October 21, 2007, 11:13:58 AMThey are two completely different games and in my opinion should not be compared as both forms of the game have merits.

I agree it is probably unfair on Union to compare try-scoring levels in both codes as League has evolved in such a way to advantage the attacking side, whereas the balance of Union tends to favour defence. Someone once said the focus of Rugby Union is gaining possession, whereas the focus of Rugby League is what you do with possession, which is definitely the mindset I prefer.

Here are two quotes I love from a League vs Union charity dinner that I think was held during the last Lions tour. In the after-dinner speech, former England Union captain Martin Johnson said:

"Every time a player like Garrick Morgan leaves rugby union to go to rugby league, it lifts the average IQ of both codes."

As a riposte, former Aussie League captain Laurie Daley said:

"Rugby league is a simple game played by simple people. Rugby union is a complex game played by wankers."

Sovereign

I have to say that Rugby Union is, and always has been to me, mind dumbingly dull. The entiring sporting contest appears to rest on which side wins the most penalties, which are awarded for seemingly random infringements at random intervals. Its not even like they attempt to score tries anymore! What also shows is that even though in the years since turning pro they've improved dramatically, Union players even at the highest level seem incapable of stringing together a few quick passes to open up a defence. Once you get past the "full-back tennis" stage of the game, and they are in good field position to go for a try, they always seem to fuck up. They're alarmingly poor at winning the overlap and committing an opposition player. They're getting better but its still annoying because it prevents anything truly exciting from happening.

The world cup final I sat through seemed entirely to rest on the referee, from giving the tries to giving out penalties. I couldn't tell which team was playing better, though on the whole South Africa seemed better, it was not easy to tell. Exactly how a team can win a rugby game without scoring a try is a mystery to me, as the point of Rugby is to score tries.

Anyway I wasn't going to post about League-Union, but I cant help but be drawn into it. I was more going to comment on how glad I am that England didn't win. I cannot stand this media-fuelled Rugby fever. It seems to have filled a gap left by the curent woefullness of the England soccer team, and the bandwagon is being jumped on by fairweather fans who have little appreciation of what Rugby is, therefore have no objection to sitting through tedious shit like that world cup final. A lot of men, who have little interest in sport beyond the opportunity for macho posturing, are now talking about rugby in the same pseudo-expert way that they'd have talked about football a few years back. It gets on my fucking tits hearing these people talk up Rugby Union as a game thats limitlessly exciting, exceptionally violent, physically demanding and played by "Real men"  who shake each other's hands after games and never dive etc etc, because to me Rugby Union is as dull as it gets. Its NOT exciting its tedious kick and clap shite, its only exceptionally violent because of an overall lack of discipline thats much worse than soccer and manages to shoot to pieces the romantic notion that these so called "real men" have some sort of noble honour code and manly respect for the people they're gouging the eyes of and studding in the face of during rucks, its most definitely not physically demanding at all, there's so many stoppages in play and kicks and other bollocks that you get a breather every 2 minutes anyway. Its a poor excuse for a sport.

I cant stand to see this truly inferior version of rugby recieve so much praise bordering on overkill for another 4 bastard years. I cant stand to see the souther media refer to it is "rugby" as if its the only form of the sport that exists, I cant stand to see the super-league final or the 100th anniversery All Golds - Nothern Union game get utterly ignored for a sport that offers nothing in terms of excitement and competitiveness when compared to League. If we'd have won we'd be having statues of Jonny the wanker Wilkinson and all his arsehole mates being given blowjobs by supermodels and minor royalty in Trafalgar square for another for fucking years. I am SO happy we lost so all the know-it-all tossers who dont follow any sport when its not a world cup on TV can crawl back into the woodwork and stop pestering me with all their rugby talk. Coming up to me in pubs;

"hi mate, what teams that on your shirt?"
"its St.Helens Rugby shirt."
"oh I never knew they had a team, but I like rugby too, thats a mans game, way better than soccer, no flouncey overpaid prima donna diving poofs for us eh? I bet you cant wait for JONNY to kick us a winner in the world cup eh what what?"
"Actually its a rugby league team I have very little interest in Union."
" League? what?"
" go away you tedious fuckwit"

I cant be fucked with all that for another four years. The Media are to blame, the way they're talked it up (the "how to be a england rugby fan" article is a prime example of the sort of SHIT I dont wanna be seeing inthe future) as if it actually matters beyond life and death. I hate the fact the media get behind England in the same sort of way that they get behind the England football team. Rugby does not have the same sort of appeal as soccer. Its not even in the same league. When England play every cares, its a massive event. When the England rugby team play, its should only be proper Union fans (who do not number that many) who genuinely care, because in vast parts of the country, especially in northern england and big football cities, no-one gives a rats arse what the England Rugby Union teams does. It will NEVER have the same unifying appeal as the proper world cup, and the media should stop trying to contrive that sort of mass support for a sport that just doesn't deserve it. 

_Hypnotoad_

Jeez, did someone piss in your cornflakes or summat?

Blue Jam

Quote from: Pogue Mahone on October 19, 2007, 09:56:41 PM
Essentially, it's an instruction manual on how to be a "rugby fan" for a night.

*cringe* I've seen a few "World Cup Guide For Women"-type articles, which basically tell women how to pass themselves off as genuine football supporters and impress men. The most patronising thing I've seen has to be one of the local news programmes at the time of the Ashes (or whatever the last thing the Englad cricket team won- I have no fucking idea, I hate cricket). The reporter was stopping women on the street and asking them if they'd been getting into the cricket, and if they had started to understand many rules. They'd then start blithering things like "Ooooh yes, I know overs, and leg-before-wicket, and sixes and fours" instead of saying "Fuck off."

Hornet

Quote from: Gulftastic on October 19, 2007, 03:56:52 PM
No, feel free. I despise Yawnion and all it stands for, and don;t care who knows it, or what people think of me because of it.

The only thing that cheers me up about it is that one of the Windsor twats insists on supporting England, making it a lovely double hatred whammy for me.

I have read some shit on this forum before but you really are making a play to go straight to the top of the table aren't you?

Gulftastic

Top of the league, I'm having a laugh, top of the league, I'm having a laugh.

Pogue Mahone

After the game, when I saw Gordon Brown and Thabo Mbeki on the pitch with Sarkozy, I was wondering, wouldn't Brown support Scotland? I suppose, other than being the primary democratic representative of the UK, he's the closest thing, other than the queen, to being a head-of-state-type representative for England, but would he also appear if Wales had managed to make their way to the final?

Or, would George Bush have been invited had the USA made the final, I wonder?