Wales want to host England RWC game

First topic message reminder :

This game is 3 years away and yet it has already gained some controversy. WRU chief exec Roger Lewis has already put out the idea of Wales hosting the match between Wales and the competition's holders. Enhancing his attempt to stir up trouble he has reminded the tournament organisers of their obligations to use the Millenium stadium as a venue during the competition saying "It is very important to remember that Wales was included in the England's bid for matches in the Millennium Stadium."

Link is below, cant believe stuff like this has already started but I love it. Its irrelevant really as there is no chance this game will be at MS but stuff like this makes the Anglo-Welsh rivalry what it is. We can be looking forward to this for a long while and each game between us now will have even bigger impetus. Enjoy.

http://www1.skysports.com/news/12040/8307194/#

It's not really cheeky, though it does smack of desperation.

The RFU's reply is perfect.

Lewis hasn't done his lot any favours here.

What happened in 1999 shouldn't have any influence on what happens in 2015. The game, and indeed the world, have changed since then. Maybe we could go back to 4 points for a try, ban South Africa and restore amateur status too, just for old times' sake?

These sort of events are always much better when retained within the host country. It's an atmosphere thing.

He got banned from 606, so now he is reduced to wummaging on breakfast radio.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Casartelli wrote:
I was more offended by the use of capital letters in 'Rugby Stadiums'. Ouch.

Surely "stadia"?

Well depends if you're using 'stadium' as first or second declension noun, and 'stadia' is not plural, it's singular nominative or ablative, in the first declension.

The declination in the first for stadi will be:
Case singular plural
=======================
Nominative - stadia - stadiae
Genitive - stadiae - stadiarum
Dative - stadiae - stadiis
Accusative - stadiam - stadias
Ablative - stadia - stadiis

Whereas in the second declension mode, it will be:
Case singular plural
=======================
Nominative - stadius (occasionally stadir) - stadii
Genitive - stadii - stadiorum
Dative - stadio - stadiis
Accusative - stadium - stadios
Ablative - stadio - stadiis

I hope that has helped....

And to think they say Union is a game for posh school kids

Plural of forum ... forums or fora?

dunno, but a funny thing happened on the way to there......

sirBiggles wrote:

I cant see why Wales/Australia game could not be at the MS. Dont think the Wallabies will see it as home advantage,

What? You're hoping they don't know their geography?

England will aim to rediscover their 2002, 2003 mentality.
Beat anyone anywhere, especially on the oppos doorstep.
We could offer to plaly Aus in Sydney if that would help.

As stated by others, the venue decisions will be taken by ER2015, who would surely not be inclined to give Wales home advantage against England. Plus, given that this will probably be the pool game with most demand and that one of ER2015's primary concerns is the financial success of the tournament, opting for the stadium with around 10,000 greater capacity would seem an absolute certainty.

Regarding the agreement with Wales on use of the Millennium stadium, I don't know how written in stone all aspects of it were, but as far as I'm aware it was that a certain number of games would be held there rather than specifying that Wales would definitely play there.

gregortree wrote:England will aim to rediscover their 2002, 2003 mentality.
Beat anyone anywhere, especially on the oppos doorstep.
We could offer to plaly Aus in Sydney if that would help.

You mean like the ABs generally do for most of each decade?

Secret, yes you got it, that is how you become no 1 (again)

... although it only helped NZ in 1987 and 2011 I do confess

Funny, when I look at the history of the world I just see black...with maybe a solitary grey cloud.
I must go to Specsavers.

maybe purple once in a while.
Never emerald green though.

yeah i can deffo see england climbing back to no.1 before the RWC,

gregortree wrote:maybe purple once in a while.
Never emerald green though.

You know how it is... even the Very Best rugby playing nation on the planet has only won the cup twice There's time enough in this century.

Secret, plenty of time for a craic such as that.
I would love to be there for that one.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Terrible idea.

The Millenium stadium is without doubt one of the best (if not the best)venues in the country to watch rugby. The pitch is a disgrace though.

I know , remeber that time Lee Byrne was clear through and tripped over a divot.....

Effervescing Elephant wrote:Nice response:

"We appreciate the kind offer and it's a lovely place to go and play rugby but we have a nice stadium of our own," RFU chief Ian Ritchie told BBC Sport.

Perfect response

SecretFly wrote:

sirBiggles wrote:

I cant see why Wales/Australia game could not be at the MS. Dont think the Wallabies will see it as home advantage,

What? You're hoping they don't know their geography?

No Fly, but quote the whole sentance (or paragraph) and it has a very different context...

sirBiggles wrote:
I cant see why Wales/Australia game could not be at the MS. Dont think the Wallabies will see it as home advantage, and after last weekend, what difference does that make. We will still shoot ourselves in the foot in the final minutes....

... as I was referring to Australia's recent record in the MS against us (Wales) and the fact that home advantage has little baring when we (Wales) cant close out a game with minutes to go.

Seems fairly clear cut to me.

England should have the home advantage as host nation. So Wales and Australia matches will probably both be a Twickenham / Wembley as they will definitely sell out. The Imagine some of England's other pool matches may be 'up north'.

Wales shouldn't have the right to play England at the Millennium Stadium, but there should be no issue with any of their other pool matches being played there including Australia. I imagine one of the quarter finals or even Semi finals will be played at MS so they will get their fair share.

Kingsholm will make a bid too.
1991, I saw ABs beat USA Eagles.
Maybe we could host Wales v the Tier 4 winner.

tomhughesnice wrote:Seems fairly clear cut to me.

England should have the home advantage as host nation. So Wales and Australia matches will probably both be a Twickenham / Wembley as they will definitely sell out. The Imagine some of England's other pool matches may be 'up north'.

Wales shouldn't have the right to play England at the Millennium Stadium, but there should be no issue with any of their other pool matches being played there including Australia. I imagine one of the quarter finals or even Semi finals will be played at MS so they will get their fair share.

The WC won't just include England, Australia and Wales. So,to clarify my point to Biggles and using your post to do it, if I may . Other nations might have an issue with a 'guest' Nation getting preferential treatment in having a 'home' game or games.

England are the hosts and should have all advantages given to other hosts. I have no problem with that. But Wales is just like the rest of us - a visitor. It should not be gifted a 'home' crowd for any of its games. Though I have no problem with Millennium being used for other games.

And even though it apprears a bit of a jokey one, I've said too earlier on another thread - or maybe this one - that neither should the roof be closed on Millennium for any of the games. A considered advantage for any side in one game might change the reflection for other sides in the competition who didn't have such an advantage. If one side is forced to play the elements of the day - heavy breeze or rain - then all sides should face the same elements and chance.
All roofless WC and Wales plays its games away from 'home'.

yeah spot on. wales shouldnt really be given any advanage in any game..

the nature of wales,ireland ,scotland and france being so close will give all of you abit of an edge over the rest i suppose. but thats just geography

Words can not describe how excited iam about this game, i don't give a stuff where it is played,
The game has upset written all over it, the host losing to backward cave men from over the border!
It has an air of inevitability about it, form will count for nothing, Wales will want the upset, Wales have a habit of turning up when playing the English.

Surely the English are just as excited?! going to be one hell of a test match.

Surprised HERSH hasn't started a score prediction thread for this match yet?

viewtothegym wrote:Words can not describe how excited iam about this game, i don't give a stuff where it is played,
The game has upset written all over it, the host losing to backward cave men from over the border!
It has an air of inevitability about it, form will count for nothing, Wales will want the upset, Wales have a habit of turning up when playing the English.

Surely the English are just as excited?! going to be one hell of a test match.

Surprised HERSH hasn't started a score prediction thread for this match yet?

Hersh is..............................................incommunicado might be a euphemistic way of saying it.

Hersh will be released in 2016.

The game itself will either live up to its Krakatoa billing or actually turn into a damp squib. It happens. We've all been there before. The newpapers, the TV discussions, the saliva of anticipation, the fireworks comments from coaches beforehand....the "What the hell was that???" afterglow.

Be careful - but of course we all wish for a total all out battle between two classic 'best pals'. We want blood, guts, shields buried in skulls, heroic injuries, carnage.

....................And then the rest of us all wink at each other - "well that takes care of those two as realistic challengers now"

SecretFly wrote:
The WC won't just include England, Australia and Wales. So,to clarify my point to Biggles and using your post to do it, if I may . Other nations might have an issue with a 'guest' Nation getting preferential treatment in having a 'home' game or games.

England are the hosts and should have all advantages given to other hosts. I have no problem with that. But Wales is just like the rest of us - a visitor. It should not be gifted a 'home' crowd for any of its games. Though I have no problem with Millennium being used for other games.

So RWC 1999, Hosts Wales.

Pool A
South Africa
Scotland
Spain
Uruguay

played in Scotland

Pool B
New Zealand
England
Italy
Tonga

played in England

Pool C
France
Fiji
Canada
Namibia

played in France

Pool D
Wales
Argentina
Samoa
Japan

played in Wales (host nation)

Pool E
Australia
Ireland
United States
Romania

played in Ireland


So how is this any different to the agreement currently in place and hence why shouldn't Wales be allowed to play at the MS. A precedent has been set.

I'm not really saying it is right or wrong, as I can see the argument for only the hosts having home advantage. But from a commercial view point, surely you want the games fully attended and that is more likely if fans can get there. Playing all welsh games in the MS (apart from against England, as all banter aside, being hosts, they should play Wales in Twickenham), will allow Welsh fans to attend. Playing elsewhere in the UK will require travel and some places overnight stops, which is costly and difficult to fit in with work. It is one thing if it was an overseas tournament, as fans will (as they have in the past) book several weeks off, but when it is in the UK I cant see that happening.

The 1999 world cup and surrounding deal for use of the Lillenium stadium just shows what a ridiculous decision it was to allow a principality not capable of hosting the thing to ..host it.

sirBiggles.... That is completely different. As you'll see from the list, games took place in many Nations. You might say that in real terms Europe hosted that one.

Now I'll repeat to really press my point. If one guest Nation gets what is perceived to be an advantage then other Nations will possibly have issues with it. It shouldn't be assumed between England and Wales that if they're ok with the arrangement that Wales can play some of its games at 'home' that nobody else will or should kick up a fuss. That's an unreasonable assumption.

sirBiggles........... sorry, missed your final point.

????? Welsh people might have to travel if they don't get Millennium games? But that's the deal. They're travelling to a WC hosted by a different Nation.

Irish people will travel willingly, by the thousands, even the ones without tickets. And we're some of the poorest people in Europe right now in real terms. But they'll get there by plane, ferry or rowing boat because they appreciate England are hosts and that's where the party will be.

Some of the stadiums may actaully be more accesable for some residents of Wales than Cardiff is.

SecretFly wrote:

tomhughesnice wrote:Seems fairly clear cut to me.

England should have the home advantage as host nation. So Wales and Australia matches will probably both be a Twickenham / Wembley as they will definitely sell out. The Imagine some of England's other pool matches may be 'up north'.

Wales shouldn't have the right to play England at the Millennium Stadium, but there should be no issue with any of their other pool matches being played there including Australia. I imagine one of the quarter finals or even Semi finals will be played at MS so they will get their fair share.

The WC won't just include England, Australia and Wales. So,to clarify my point to Biggles and using your post to do it, if I may . Other nations might have an issue with a 'guest' Nation getting preferential treatment in having a 'home' game or games.

England are the hosts and should have all advantages given to other hosts. I have no problem with that. But Wales is just like the rest of us - a visitor. It should not be gifted a 'home' crowd for any of its games. Though I have no problem with Millennium being used for other games.

And even though it apprears a bit of a jokey one, I've said too earlier on another thread - or maybe this one - that neither should the roof be closed on Millennium for any of the games. A considered advantage for any side in one game might change the reflection for other sides in the competition who didn't have such an advantage. If one side is forced to play the elements of the day - heavy breeze or rain - then all sides should face the same elements and chance.
All roofless WC and Wales plays its games away from 'home'.

I appreciate that your 'level playing field' idea is in the interest of fairness but it's not really that realistic. What I mean is that we could have the roof open all tournament but the weather might be different in Wales to, say, Manchester anyway. If the team in Cardiff then gets rained on when the one in Mancheater doesn't then there's been an advantage/disadvantage the other way than was intended. It often rains more in Wales than the rest of the UK, so the likelihood is that an open roof would actually be disadvantageous to the teams posted there. I'm all for fairness, but not sure that this example would promote fairness as you might want.

Also, they used a greenhouse-esque glass roofed stadium in NZ, so they've set the precedent. Can't remember any complaints then???

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Some of the stadiums may actaully be more accesable for some residents of Wales than Cardiff is.

And the prize for the most obvious post ever on the entire internet goes too....... Mr Wheeler! Well done, you've won a whole day of self imposed absence from the site. Congratulations!

Griff, if it's sunny, cloudless and breezeless in Cardiff and a force 10 gale in London, so be it...open to the elements, whatever they are. No problems. I'm not in the business of giving the sides that play Millennium a tougher time, just an equal time under the prevailing conditions - outside atmospherics.

People talk about the roof as though it has no effect at all, and that people who mention it are being precious at best, childish at worst. But if so, then why the deal of whether Wales should be allowed close their own roof or not? That's an argument that often crops up and it becomes quite animated. It becomes animated quite simply because Welsh fans believe the roof does add a little extra boost at some level - crowd noise intensified being one, fast running rugby v forward based 'spoiling' stuff being another.

It is a factor. I say if the roof can open as well as close, what's so very wrong with the idea of opening it? If it should never be opened weld it closed.

Biltong wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:you are a good Dad.

Well you're the lucky dad. Having played rugby with your son. Not fair.

That's truth. I'm absolutely lucky. The best part was how my son was treated after the match by both teams, as an equal, not as a kid. Now I need to bring son number 2 into the mix and I can die happy (after England win the 2015 RWC, in Twickenham of course).

So, I asked son number 1 about this subject last night, the notion of Wales hosting England in the RWC. As he grudgingly looked up from his computer game, he said:

"Do the Welsh love the English so much that they want them in Cardiff more and more? Can't get enough of the lovely English?"

"If Cardiff hosted France-New Zealand in a French RWC, then shouldn't Cardiff host France again?"
"Son, that does not make any sense"
"Neither does this idea"
"Oh"

"Are the girls in Cardiff pretty?"
"the pretty ones are"
"Oh'

Fly, 'open' is the standard position for the roof. No team on their own can get them to close it, not even wales. However, if a pair of coaches/managers/nations decide 'yeah, why waste 80 minutes sliding in the mud when we could give the fans some better fare with a roof closure' then why not? Scotland asked for it to be closed in Feb and we obliged. Bad weather may have spoiled the game so I think the head coaches did the right thing.

Grand Griff. As you say I just want the idea of fairness to be real rather than illusion when the time comes.

We all know that you often need an extra touch of skill to play in conditions... a whirling wind for example. We know that it can sometimes separate the men from the boys, certainly in kicking duties...

If down the road two teams are having to express those more honed skills and up the road, their prospective opponents in QF etc are having a guaranteed no-wind day with a less than special kicker...then that becomes an edge they didn't need - and might drop them into a QF that the windy day might have precluded them from. Just an example of how a roof in one game can impact in later games/stages

I like conditions...I don't like sterile Always-a-good-night rugby. Players want an easy time but I'm not so certain we should always give it to them. The drama of weather can often be a major factor in a classic game.

The three worst playing surface that the All Blacks had to play on this year would have been Argentina, Rome and Cardiff.

Thing is, the Argentinians and the Italians were playing on grounds not primarily dedicated to Rugby.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:The 1999 world cup and surrounding deal for use of the Lillenium stadium just shows what a ridiculous decision it was to allow a principality not capable of hosting the thing to ..host it.

Wales is a country not a principality sunshine. At least get your facts right

dragonbreath wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:The 1999 world cup and surrounding deal for use of the Lillenium stadium just shows what a ridiculous decision it was to allow a principality not capable of hosting the thing to ..host it.

Wales is a country not a principality sunshine. At least get your facts right

A Welsh poster was telling me a few weeks back that Wales isnt a Country, thats why it doesnt have a President, a Prime Minister, or a king... apparently no ones in charge.

Like Scotland too then?

mystiroakey wrote:yeah i can deffo see england climbing back to no.1 before the RWC,

Funniest post yet

glad amused ya.. the ranking pts have been closed up by us..

we have done everyone a favour in that regard

Griff wrote:Like Scotland too then?

Griff you were the one that told me.

I never said that Wales wasn't a country; I just said that the 1st minister for Wales would be the one to attend our games, not David Cameron (if memory serves).

Fair enough Griff, its a very complicated situation to us Antipodeans.

Anyway I was beginning to wonder how you got away with playing International Rugby for so long if you werent a country.

You know you could have typed the 5 letters - WALES - into google and hit enter. Follow the first hit and it says on the first line that Wales is a country. Would have saved you months of fretting!

well actually the truth is wales is not a recognised country by the UN, neither is scotland an neither is NI..

However i am happy to call it a country in the truest sense of the word- they want that cultural difference so fair play- but in truth internationally speaking wales is no different to catalan in regards to Spain or a state in USA. We all would all go to the same embassys- we all have the same passports, we fight the same wars- we are treated the same way in other countries(well legally and politically anyway)

we have seprate sporting teams because we have allways historically, and due to the fact that we invented these sports still have a say in how there are run.