Speaker by Various Artists

Read Post

Speaker: It's the recrimination I don't need …

231 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 10 Newer→ Last

  • simon g,

    I guess it's our fault for following a game where officiating isn't so much a matter of adjudication as opinion.

    That's why a France-Argentina final would be fun, with the ref jabbering away in a foreign language to the players. Personally I'd love to see two English-speaking teams trying to cope with a ref speaking Japanese - it would give them a sense of perspective.

    I think most of NZ went for a bike ride, and today we're just getting on with life. Putting aside those who hate rugby or are just indifferent (I'm neither), even among AB supporters there is not the universal pre-game hysteria or post-game depression that the media would have us believe. I'd like to see hard evidence that there is (and online polls are not). People do actually know how to compartmentalise sport and personal life, and New Zealand is less extreme than many (where are our riots?).

    The Times (London) repeated the 1999 myth today, suggesting Helen Clark would be in trouble because of the World Cup. With an election tomorrow, maybe - but not next year, or even next month. Let's give ourselves some credit.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 688 posts Report Reply

  • Don Christie,

    After talking stats with Tracey Nelson, she completely dispelled the myth of Reuben "Mr Invisible" Thorne and had plenty of stats to say that he was a very productive player.

    I have great respect for Tracey but we agreed to disagree on this point. She alway had the "first three" to break down, tackle etc. in her stats and Thorne did pretty well as bringing up the rear in that three. Being a blind side flanker I would have expected him to do better. Some Canty blinkers in thos stats I fear.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1612 posts Report Reply

  • Nat Torkington,

    Interesting how the nation is going through the Kubler-Ross stages of grief in the wrong order. Supposed to be Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance. Instead we get Denial ("NO!!!!"), Depression (Sunday), Anger (Monday on talkback, the fingerpointing at players, coach, conditioning regime, administrators, ref, etc), Bargaining (the coming hunt for the new coach), and never Acceptance ("it was the ref! it was the waitress! it was it was it was ...").

    Ti Point • Since Nov 2006 • 100 posts Report Reply

  • JP Hansen,

    Here's my stat for the day;

    NZ Have won 100% of the Rugby World Cups held in New Zealand and won 0% of World Cups held on foreign soil.

    Roll on 2011...

    Waitakere • Since Nov 2006 • 199 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    NZ Have won 100% of the Rugby World Cups held in New Zealand and won 0% of World Cups held on foreign soil.

    Roll on 2011...

    Here's another. If the All Blacks are to soccer what Brazil is to rugby, then Brazil went from 1970 to 1994 without winning a world cup. 24 years.

    Roll on 2011...

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7315 posts Report Reply

  • Hamish,

    Excellent post,

    It's funny - looking at the stats, the ball handling, the 15 phase movements - you wouldn't think it possible.

    Which just reinforces what true believers have always known: the secret to our success lay in Carl Haymens beard.

    The A.K. • Since Nov 2006 • 152 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler,

    There's probably more teams in the show they've warred with than not..

    I was about to say the same thing.

    Do the Land Wars count?

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 2968 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Rowe,

    I'd rather not see Deans appointed the new coach (Ben Blair anyone?), but there is an argument for some new blood.

    To anybody suggesting Gatland - Go the Mighty Magpies! (my one piece of great news at the weekend!)

    Lake Roxburgh, Central Ot… • Since Nov 2006 • 556 posts Report Reply

  • Andrew Miller,

    I suppose it's predictable, but no less depressing if people are going to turn on Henry & the team. I seriously doubt a different approach to rotation or players in S14 would have made any difference. Those I talked to on the way back from Cardiff didn't seem of that view, they mostly seemed proud of team, gutted obviously & frustrated that teams of lesser ability march on, especially given their negative approach to the game (That NH negative spoiling approach certainly feeds into the way the game was reffed).

    This All Black team have been a joy to watch, the manner of play & skill level have at times been breathtaking. Having watched the England backs look like a bunch of six year olds ineptly playing pass the parcel there seems no doubt we are the butt of some cosmic joke.

    It's just one of those things I guess.

    London • Since Jan 2007 • 6 posts Report Reply

  • Julian Melville,

    So was the scene at St Lukes mall a couple of hours later, when I dropped to kids off at the movies. People -- men especially -- were wandering about distractedly

    That's just men at shopping malls, horrible sterile places that they are, it's got nothing to do with the rugby :)

    Auckland • Since Dec 2006 • 180 posts Report Reply

  • Che Tibby,

    There's probably more teams in the show they've warred with than not..

    actually, if you remove the pacific islands because they were ruled by the brits via us till recently, and australian and us because we were british till recently...

    then the english have fought everyone

    (oh, you'd have to count namibia as south african at the time, and georgia as russian, but you get the picture)

    the back of an envelope • Since Nov 2006 • 2018 posts Report Reply

  • Richard Irvine,

    To anybody suggesting Gatland - Go the Mighty Magpies! (my one piece of great news at the weekend!)

    Paul, to Mooloo fans, that was just about the point where the day definitely couldn't get any worse :)

    Auckland • Since Dec 2006 • 241 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler,

    if you remove the pacific islands because they were ruled by the brits

    You don't even need to do that with all of the Pacific.

    Fought against Samoa in WWI. Us in the Land Wars (kinda). Etc.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 2968 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Nice message for the All Blacks from Paul Waite at Haka.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 17938 posts Report Reply

  • Rob Hosking,

    Namibia sort of counts because the Germans ran it before the Brits kicked them out in WWI.

    I went to the gym afterwards.

    The Freyberg was unusually busy for that time on a Sunday afternoon. Possibly a lot of guys thinking "after that, this might be my big chance" but I really don't think so. (and certainly not in my case: I would struggle to be picked for the Hataitai Over 40s C Team.) There was a weird vibe though.

    There's a load of nonsense talked about rugby and election results: it was a trope first mischeivously started by Michael Laws and those without a sense of humour or the ability to distinguish between correlation and causation still trot it out.

    South Roseneath • Since Nov 2006 • 798 posts Report Reply

  • Mikaere Curtis,

    I think Russell made an excellent observation on Bfm's Hard Word before the cup began. He said that if it were a 3 match series, he'd back the ABs to win 100%. But in a knockout match, you can never be sure. And so it proved.

    Mitchell's team was good, and Henry elevated them to greatness and I'd like to see Henry stay on.

    I didn't pay attention to the '91 cup, but all the other cup losses have been from teams with nothing to lose and everything to gain. To my mind, the ABs have never been in that position, apart from maybe the Baby Blacks after the Cavalier tour.

    They obviously have a problem adjusting to the pressure of high expectation and empassioned nothing-to-lose opposition. The problem, as I see it, is that they so rarely find themselves confronted by these high pressure games. Lately (and I mean for the last few years) the ABs been in crush/thrash/trounce mode, which is no preparation.

    I remember Hamish Carter saying how he managed to turn his 2000 Olympics below-par performance into 2004 gold medal. He took Sarah Ulmer's advice: "Just enjoy it".

    Which is hard to do with the ref making an international disgrace of himself and handing 17 points to the other side.

    Yes, I blame the ref. But I also blame Argentina for upsetting France and pushing them into a quarter against the ABs. And now I hope they go on to win the cup. I want a Falkland's final.

    Tamaki Makaurau • Since Nov 2006 • 441 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford,

    Not being a rugby enthusiast, not fully understanding the rules and without a TV in the house it's normally hard to get exited about the game (any televised sport) win or loose.

    However I watched the F & NZ match on a fat screen TV, in the lounge of king country farm house. But with out the Holden or Falcon parked in the drive.

    We did discuss the reliability of Toyota. This was odd because the young farmers and myself had these and other national identity discussions around and under the bonnet of my near dead Corolla.

    Since Nov 2006 • 2277 posts Report Reply

  • Devlin,

    Had we somehow managed to negotiate our way through the quarter final , it would have been seen as a gutsy victory that set us up very nicely for the last two games. Our lineout, previously the achilles heel of the side miraculously transformed into a strength, the scrum solid, the work at the break down competent, mental fortitude shown etc etc.

    Of course we didn't successfully negotiate the challenge and the thing that nags at me is that, notwithstanding the poor quality of the officiating and the bad luck with injuries is that we should still have won the game ( or at least have given ourselves a better chance to win it) had we spent the last 10 minutes trying to set up quick ruck ball in the centre of the field to give our kicker the bast chance at a drop goal. We only needed 3 points so why we insisted on repeated pick'n'goes in one corner of the field, especially given the fact the ginga lawyer pommie ref wasn't going to give us a penalty is a bit of a mystery.

    It's been a fantastic side that has played some insanely brilliant rugby, its just so sad that when it really mattered we couldn't summon any brilliance or, alternatively, just buckle down and go for the ugly win.

    ps in a fit of masochism I just read Stephen Jones's article in the Times on the game. What a horrendously mean spirited and inelegant piece of writing. To say it was an abysmal performance simply isn't right and,as well as putting the boot gratuitously into us, also damns the French with faint praise given how well they played.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 3 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    Nice message for the All Blacks from Paul Waite at Haka.

    Uhm... if by nice you mean: you were beaten by the ref, guys, we're right behind you, then I guess it was nice. It's an awfully simplistic way of looking at it, though, and I would hope that most players would reject it. You play to the conditions and guess what, when you play against the hosting nation you also play to an extent against the ref.

    Don't get me wrong, I come from a long line of bad sports and my first two reaction are always going to be "it's a crap sport anyway" and "in my head we actually won". But would you really say that it wasn't the best team who won on the day, is that what you take out of the game?

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7315 posts Report Reply

  • Tom Semmens,

    Actually, Stephen Jones is right, and we have to deal with it.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1711 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Fitzgerald,

    We can bitch about the ref all we like (& I have) but where was the losey to secure the ball in the ruck from that swift french hand? where was the defense to stop the try made of a forward pass 2 men back in the line? where was the support runner for Ali Williams to pass to?
    The ref needs a kick but the All Blacks lost it, choked if you will.
    Why do we put some much meaning into it?

    Since May 2007 • 631 posts Report Reply

  • Mikaere Curtis,

    You play to the conditions and guess what, when you play against the hosting nation you also play to an extent against the ref.

    Are you saying that the ABs won in 1987 because they had hosting rights ?

    Paul Waite is right on the money.

    That being said, I would like the next cup team to be able to slot a drop goal from anywhere in their opponent's half.

    Plus I'd like to see some moderation of important rulings from the quarter finals onwards. Any yellow card, red car or try should be sent to the TMO for confirmation. At the very least, this would have prevented Barnes' ignoble performance from getting as out-of-hand as it did.

    Tamaki Makaurau • Since Nov 2006 • 441 posts Report Reply

  • Andrew Miller,

    >Actually, Stephen Jones is right, and we have to deal with it.

    Having just read it, no he isn't.

    We have to deal with defeat, but that man's bitterness towards anything to do with NZ & in particular rugby is simply bizarre.

    London • Since Jan 2007 • 6 posts Report Reply

  • Andy Milne,

    But would you really say that it wasn't the best team who won on the day, is that what you take out of the game?

    Well judging by some of the comments here, thats exactly what people are taking from the game. Wah wah, the ref cost us the game, the french were offside all day, wah.

    Grow up. The AB's lost the game not because of the referee's inadequacies, but their own. Yes the French scored points that a different referee may not have allowed, but the fact is that the ABs failed to respond to the circumstances they found themselves in. So the french defence was "up flat"? Then try chipping over the top and exploiting the space beyond. Carlos McAlister tried that once, successfully, in the first half, and yet the tactic was never repeated. When they were 20 metres out with 3 mins to play, why did they not set for the drop-goal instead of hammering away fruitlessly with pick n goes? The real fault lies with the option-taking and decision making, not the officiating.

    The referee's decisions only appear important due to the AB's inability to score points. Had the ABs made better tactical decisions and converted 70% possesion and 60% territory into points, then one missed forward pass wouldn't have mattered a jot. You can't have 70% of the ball and then claim it was the ref's fault you lost. 70%!!

    The fact is, we were beaten by a superior side. They made the most of the little ball they had, and put pressure on the ABs and didn't allow them to play the style of rugby they wanted to.

    Christchurch • Since Aug 2007 • 58 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    Actually, Stephen Jones is right, and we have to deal with it.

    Whoa, I wouldn't go that far. When you make the other team complete 173 tackles, you must be doing something right, and the other team is doing something simply enormous. Both teams have to be given credit (the French more so) for a classic game. Jones has often been found wanting in that department.

    Why do we put some much meaning into it?

    It sure beats waging actual wars.

    Are you saying that the ABs won in 1987 because they had hosting rights ?

    I'm not. Are you saying that the ABs couldn't have won the game yesterday?

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7315 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 10 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.