Why do Samoa not get the respect they deserve?

Planet Rugby are currently running a poll as follows.

Best chance of an upset this Saturday?
ITALY against Australia
ARGENTINA against England
JAPAN against Scotland
WALES against South Africa
SAMOA against Ireland
FRANCE against New Zealand

As Samoa are ranked higher than Ireland surely an Irish win would be the upset. This is not an anti Ireland post I just get annoyed by the assumption that the old guard are the top teams when results do not bear this out.

Ireland get more respect because they're a Tier 1 rugby nation wheras Samoa are tier two.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Ireland get more respect because they're a Tier 1 rugby nation wheras Samoa are tier two.

Being a Tier 1 country is not based on performance it is based on history. Surely respect should be earned and as Samoa's results are better than Ireland, Scotland, Italy and Argentina they deserve more respect.

Will you regard it an upset if Ireland win, Exiled?

If so, then there you go. That's all you need - your opinion. Do you really need a Planet Rugby poll to agree with you to make your opinion more meaningful to you?

Although Samoa are definately improved, and have become a very tough nut to crack, their results aren't quite based on an even playing field.

In Ireland against Ireland you would have to make Ireland the favourites, and rightly so.

SecretFly wrote:Will you regard it an upset if Ireland win, Exiled?

If so, then there you go.  That's all you need - your opinion.  Do you really need a Planet Rugby poll to agree with you to make your opinion more meaningful to you?

I would not regard a result either way as an upset. Results indicate both teams are of a similar standard. That is not opinion it is statistics. I am querying the arrogance behind the idea that Samoa winning would be any sort of upset.

butterfingers wrote:Although Samoa are definately improved, and have become a very tough nut to crack, their results aren't quite based on an even playing field.

In Ireland against Ireland you would have to make Ireland the favourites, and rightly so.

Except that because no one will play Samoa in Samoa their ranking is based on playing away.

Exiledinborders wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Will you regard it an upset if Ireland win, Exiled?

If so, then there you go.  That's all you need - your opinion.  Do you really need a Planet Rugby poll to agree with you to make your opinion more meaningful to you?

I would not regard a result either way as an upset. Results indicate both teams are of a similar standard. That is not opinion it is statistics. I am querying the arrogance behind the idea that Samoa winning would be any sort of upset.

How strong is the Samoa squad, and where are they playing = Underdogs, why are you creating something out of nothing?

When you consider the access we have to our players compared to Samoa, there's no excuse! We've had an extra week or two, players playing together at provincial level, only one player based outside Ireland!

But I expect it to be a close game, a tough game and a narrow Irish win...

Exiledinborders wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Ireland get more respect because they're a Tier 1 rugby nation wheras Samoa are tier two.

Being a Tier 1 country is not based on performance it is based on history. Surely respect should be earned and as Samoa's results are better than Ireland, Scotland, Italy and Argentina they deserve more respect.

So history determines Samoa remains a tier two Rugby nation?.... maybe Samoa needs to change history, and earn some respect?

Infact thinking about it now you've mentioned it maybe I have disissed your view a bit quick, I apologise for that.

I'm looking at the list, will Italy beating Aus be a real shock on current form? The Japanese have made great improvements of late, would a nicked win against Scotland be a huge shock? Would this current Wales team be underdogs V SA? They certainly have the players. I would also not be that surprised by France or Argentina winning either.

Exiledinborders wrote:

butterfingers wrote:Although Samoa are definately improved, and have become a very tough nut to crack, their results aren't quite based on an even playing field.

In Ireland against Ireland you would have to make Ireland the favourites, and rightly so.

Except that because no one will play Samoa in Samoa their ranking is based on playing away.

Don't you get more ranking points for success away from home? If you only play away from home then you're always in a position to gain more from the ranking system than a team that mixes up home and away fixtures. Does this skew their ranking points a bit?

butterfingers wrote:Infact thinking about it now you've mentioned it maybe I have disissed your view a bit quick, I apologise for that.

I'm looking at the list, will Italy beating Aus be a real shock on current form? The Japanese have made great improvements of late, would a nicked win against Scotland be a huge shock? Would this current Wales team be underdogs V SA? They certainly have the players. I would also not be that surprised by France or Argentina winning either.

You beat me to it. Would any of us see many of the results as 'upsets'? We might be a tad surprised but the International world is a fluid place right now - just ask 6N champs who know all about Japan.

SecretFly wrote:

butterfingers wrote:Infact thinking about it now you've mentioned it maybe I have disissed your view a bit quick, I apologise for that.

I'm looking at the list, will Italy beating Aus be a real shock on current form? The Japanese have made great improvements of late, would a nicked win against Scotland be a huge shock? Would this current Wales team be underdogs V SA? They certainly have the players. I would also not be that surprised by France or Argentina winning either.

You beat me to it.  Would any of us see many of the results as 'upsets'?  We might be a tad surprised but the International world is a fluid place right now - just ask 6N champs who know all about Japan.

Samoa, Argentina, Australia...

Griff wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

butterfingers wrote:Although Samoa are definately improved, and have become a very tough nut to crack, their results aren't quite based on an even playing field.

In Ireland against Ireland you would have to make Ireland the favourites, and rightly so.

Except that because no one will play Samoa in Samoa their ranking is based on playing away.

Don't you get more ranking points for success away from home? If you only play away from home then you're always in a position to gain more from the ranking system than a team that mixes up home and away fixtures. Does this skew their ranking points a bit?

I don't think it does, as they are at such a logistical disadvantage when compared to other teams.

They also play less games = less opportunity to rack up the points.

Because Samoa constantly breach the rules that are in place to ensure players safety, and get away with it.

Im sorry to dat that it is Largely the kind of cultural bias that sees such homogenous and flawed representation in administration and adjudication. Rugby had to be the most unteprestantive global sport. Fact is, this must be addressed before it can evolve beyond the current cultural horizon. This will be seen as petulance but it is a fact. It's true for totally valid historical reasons but in today's climate it is utterly inexcusable.

Because of player access issues they will always be a much more dangerous opponent at the RWC where they get a decent spell to work together. Things have obviously improved but I would bet they seldom get a chance to get their best team together at any other time

The Saint wrote:Because Samoa constantly breach the rules that are in place to ensure players safety, and get away with it.

I've got to agree with this. Last year's game against Wales saw some appalling head high, and 'no arm' tackles. It was not good to watch a team approach a game with the intention to hurt their opponents.

One comment I recall was ' headhunters'. They weren't wrong.

Samoa can be fantastically enterprising in attack, but their defensive brutality needs to be sorted out.

That's true Hound. I was shocked that were no cards or citing's for Samoa after that game. Most people seemed to dismiss it as well, yet when it happens against a team like SA the IRB will actually do something about it.

Borderline racism. The use if the word "head hunter" is unacceptable in the context. Frankly if it was reviewed and no case found then you need to close your mouth and not say such offensive and racially motivated things. Pigeon holing Samoans as dirty thugs is just unacceptable and you should be ashamed of yourself and the moderators should take action on this point.

The fact is we saw a no arms late charge from Yarde on the weekend. He got away with it. Now Ma'a Nonu was binned for the same thing in the RC...why? Because he's not English? And now you accuse all Samoans of doing it without evidence. Disgusting and Apalling.

 

Personally am not too bothered by the physicality the Samoans bring. If the ref does his job, it works in our advantage if he doesn't we just need to roll with the punches (sometimes literally) and I think that element in the game will stand us in good stead for two very tough games against Aus and NZ. It'll only toughen us up.

I think it's got more to do with a lazy acceptance that it's the way Samoa play. If so then that's unacceptable. Serious illegal tackling needs to be dealt with, no matter who you play for or what the playing culture of a country is perceived to he.

Good luck in the AI series.

GE - I really don't give a rat's rear end what you think.

Dont worry hound, Steve Walsh is in charge, I cant think of a more experienced/competent referee on the International panel for dealing with such issues.

Isn't GE's ridiculous accusing of people's comments being racist libelous mods?

Yes I certainly agree with that Hound. They're demanding help from the IRB and rugby world yet refuse to play by the rules. Bit rich if you ask me. I think they've punched well above their weight in recent years and would like to see them develop further, but if only they abide by the rules which of course means they would be punished accordingly for dangerous play.

Saint, the trouble with that line of thinking is that too many of the top International referees dont know what a legitimate tackle is, which causes them to witchhunt a team like Samoa, remember the two incidents in the World Cup when two Samoans were sent off for being suspected of not using arms in the tackle, and all the rest of the world could see that they were perfect tackles.

So from then on they should just be let off when putting in high/illegal tackles? Yeah that makes sense. I've never known any witchhunt against Samoa, funny you should mention the RWC though, because I also remember the players and coaches bringing the game into disrepute. They got off lightly in that event too.

Would you be happier if Samoa was banned?

Cheers laurie. I don't like to see serious foul play from any team/player. It's a tough enough game anyway.

Saint - what can you say? That Wales v Samoa game last year was an unedifying spectacle.

No it's pretty simple. Illegal tackles should be penalised, legal tackles should not.

Courtney Lawes had a no-arm shot against Australia which we'd be talking about if he was Samoan...

Too true Hound, What really I find irritating is that some people generalise too much when it comes to illegal tackles with Samoa, I agree that they arent lilly white, but thats no need to single them out for Special attention all the time, as it leads to some very embarrassing rulings by officials. and leaves Samoans disillusioned with the sport... So off they go and play American Football

Yarde got away with it. If he's been Samoan he would've seen a yellow.

It's this prejudice that Samoans are dangerous tacklers that sees them unfairly treated on the field whereas teams
Like England get away with murder time and time again...apparently touch lines don't even stand in the way anymore.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Would you be happier if Samoa was banned?

Now you're just being stupid by asking this ridiculous question. Of course not, just their players punished equally if they breach the rules, which wasn't the case when they last played Wales as just one example. A few of you Kiwi's are happy to label SA as a rabble of thugs which I think is unfair, yet when Samoa have been doing it, its all "but they play that way...they're a developing nation...it was only Samoa..." and so on. I know you have a soft spot for your cousin's but you certainly wouldn't be condoning foul play if your beloved AB's were on the receiving end.

And BTW, I'm not just picking on Samoa, this article asked the question and I answered. It helped that there was actually a case or two involving the Samoa rugby team.

I am very relieved to see that you dont want Samoa banned.

Notch wrote:No it's pretty simple. Illegal tackles should be penalised, legal tackles should not.

Courtney Lawes had a no-arm shot against Australia which we'd be talking about if he was Samoan...

And Quade Cooper tried a no-arm tackle too (although he got trucked over, so I suppose he got his due). But, I agree, if the ref sees an illegal tackle, he has to call it, regardless of which team the player is on. And I believe our referees absolutely do try in this regard, but its hard to catch all these by one referee.

The only "upsets" would be if NZ or England lost.

Biltong wrote:The only "upsets" would be if NZ or England lost.

I'd say Wales vs SA and England vs Arg are similar pegging Bilt. I'd predict wins for SA and England but it wouldn't be a massive shock to see it the other way round in either game. As ever I'd say the main frustration for most of the sides in the AI's (and not least Samoa) is how few teams are at full strength due to injury or player release issues.

Looking at Samoa there is no doubt the side they can field is impressive though given their player pool and resources. The real shame is that guys such as Alesana Tuilagi (excellent against Scotland in the summer) and Mapasua aren't available as they are playing in Japan.

1.Mulipola with Taulafo as back up
2.Avei
3.C Johnston with J Johnston as back up
4.Paulo or Tekori
5.Leo
6.Fa'asavalu or Treviranus
7.Lam
8.Tuifua

9.Fotuali'i with Sua as back up
10.T Pisi

11.Lemi
12.Leota
13.G Pisi
14.Leiua
15.Williams

Judging by their squad for the AI's and selection from the summer internationals that's the sort of side we can expect to see I reckon. Not too shabby at all!

Carlos, to me it is pathetic that player release is an issue, the IRB needs to be firmer in this regard.

As for Wales vs SA I will have to wait and see, I never feel confident when we go on an European tour, we just don't seem to play well end of year.

Biltong wrote:Carlos, to me it is pathetic that player release is an issue, the IRB needs to be firmer in this regard.

As for Wales vs SA I will have to wait and see, I never feel confident when we go on an European tour, we just don't seem to play well end of year.

Yeah. You guys hang it out all over us then go all powder puff in Europe. It's so annoying.
Stop doing it.

Exiledinborders wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Ireland get more respect because they're a Tier 1 rugby nation wheras Samoa are tier two.

Being a Tier 1 country is not based on performance it is based on history. Surely respect should be earned and as Samoa's results are better than Ireland, Scotland, Italy and Argentina they deserve more respect.

Wales were a tier III team for the World Cup Samoa were II! I think Samoa have great respect in the NH and they get games too. I think more respect should be shown by the SH sides and they should make the effort to go to Samoa and play a few tests there so some well earned cash PLUS their test hungry fans get the chance to see the big stars.

I am sorry, but I have to agree with The Saint on this one, far too often do I see people just shrugging off the physicality that Samoa, Tonga and Fiji bring to the game just because they are of a physical DNA. Countless times I have seen these nations tackle dirty and not just when they are representing their country, how many times do we one of these nationalities make hard hits for their clubs only for people to just say "ah that was just a proper Samoan tackle" . Look, I am all for seeing a good proper hard bone shacking tackle, but when it is more to do with assaulting another player this must be looked at, tackle hard, and tackle fair, that is what I say, if you are going to take somebodies head off, or charge with your shoulder then that is not right, it's a shame as these Island nations can play some of the most beautiful rugby when they have the ball in hand, it is just how they go about the game when they do not have the ball.

Id be interested to see their results over a long period.

Yes Samoa have beaten most of the top teams now...but is it consistant or has it been one off games over a long period?

I may be wrong but it appears to me that all 3 teams (Samoa, Fiji, Tonga) go through cycles of being decent. A few years back fiji had a very strong team...now they look quite poor.

I think this is why Samoa are still thought of as a Tier 2 team...but they certainly have the players to change that opinion with some long term consistancy...

Lord Dowlais, thats where we rely on the best referees controlling the idslanders technique. If they continuously illegally tackle then they lose players to red cards.

If they want to be considered a tier one team they need to be tret and act like one.

Oh and whoever mentioned Steve Walsh as a top referee ....my granny could do a better job than that mirror loving, attention seeking waste of space...

Samoa are a very dangerous team, especially if they get some momentum. Ireland will have to match them physically and try an suffocate them upfront.

LordDowlais wrote:I am sorry, but I have to agree with The Saint on this one, far too often do I see people just shrugging off the physicality that Samoa, Tonga and Fiji bring to the game just because they are of a physical DNA. Countless times I have seen these nations tackle dirty and not just when they are representing their country, how many times do we one of these nationalities make hard hits for their clubs only for people to just say "ah that was just a proper Samoan tackle" . Look, I am all for seeing a good proper hard bone shacking tackle, but when it is more to do with assaulting another player this must be looked at, tackle hard, and tackle fair, that is what I say, if you are going to take somebodies head off, or charge with your shoulder then that is not right, it's a shame as these Island nations can play some of the most beautiful rugby when they have the ball in hand, it is just how they go about the game when they do not have the ball.

Whilst I have some sympathy for your view Lord, I'd have to say that you seem to argue that there is one brand of rugby and that all sides must agree to play that brand - even if it means suicide on the scoreboard.

Yes, the game has rules and I've seen enough dark and bloody dirty moves to say the book should be thrown at certain grim-reaper style players who seem intent not just on stopping opposing players (their job) but on truly hurting them; hurting them enough to force their exit from games (not their job).

But rules are rule and brands are still brands.  You still can have quite a few brands that operate differently but still within the rules.

I've seen the cheap and dirty kinds of players on all sides in my time.  And a few of them are still around in my opinion - won't name them, as their apologists would undoubtedly rise from the ashes and say what I'm about to say to you:

Welsh rugby is probably defined by its attacking and counter-attacking invention and beauty.  Its offloading and high tempo.  And you've hinted that Samoa have those traits too if only they'd concentrate more on them and less on the hard impact stuff in between.
They might say that you only hint at such a thing because you feel that's a game they might be good at but Wales is much better at.  
They'd say therefore that you want them to play to a style that would suit a natural Welsh victory better than a Samoan one.
They'd say that their natural game is about the 'hit'.  That they're not ashamed of it.  That its a valid aspect of a physical contact game.  That rules uphold it as an instrument that can be used to stop an opponent.  They might say that they'll play rugby their way...not yours - as their main aim is the same as yours - winning.

I say again, I know what you mean about dirty hits and I'm only using Wales v Samoa as an example - but to tag 'dirty' stuff as being an essential component of Samoan rugby is probably just a cultural rugby difference exposed.  As someone has said, if they hit dirty then they should get reds - if they hit hard and fair (by the rules) then that's a tough day at the office for their opponents.

Exiledinborders wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Will you regard it an upset if Ireland win, Exiled?

If so, then there you go.  That's all you need - your opinion.  Do you really need a Planet Rugby poll to agree with you to make your opinion more meaningful to you?

I would not regard a result either way as an upset. Results indicate both teams are of a similar standard. That is not opinion it is statistics. I am querying the arrogance behind the idea that Samoa winning would be any sort of upset.

Its not arrogance when the match is in Dublin and history has shown that they usually get hammered there.

They are a decent team and could win for sure but if a majority believe that Ireland will win they will be favorites. Nothing to do with arrogance. Thats just the way odds work. Current form is just one factor.

brands are still brands

I believe that is very important.

Teams have their own identity and manner in which they play.

Every team has a thug, or have had thugs and will have thugs, that is the nature of rugby. Is it right or wrong, I don't know.

All I know is when you look at south African rugby culture we play hard and every now and then we go over the line, I grew up playing rugby where fights and bloody noses were a common theme. I don't believe for one second that south Africa is the only country that played rugby in that manner.

What I cannot handle though is the "holier than thou" attitude of some supporters, they are quick to lable another teams' players as thugs, but very defensive when it comes to their own players.

I love Samoan rugby, yes it is hard and sometimes they go over the top, case in point we lost Frans Steyn for the RWC quarter final due to Samoan players going a tad over the top.

But as much as they can niggle like many other teams (Scotland this June in SA) they play honest rugby.

Nothing wrong with that.

To be honest if anyone saw the SA vs Samoa match this year you would acknowledge that they have a problem with taking their physicality too far.  Soon they will end up seriously hurting someone, I'm talking Max Brito hurt.

People always say, yes but they're gentle giants off the pitch etc, lovely people, very religious etc. That has no concern from a safety point of view and in fact clouds the actual matter concerned.

It won't give the family of a chap placed in a wheelchair any solace that the person who hit him is a god fearing man etc and an introvert off the pitch.

On a rugby pitch, things often get out of hand. It is something the IRB needs to crack down on.

Fly, you have completely miss read my post, I have not once used reference to a Wales v Samoa game, and I have also stated that I like to see a good bone shaking tackle, and if this is what the Polynesians bring to the game then I say let them and lets see more of it, what I do not like is when these players that more often than not use their shoulders to tackle and do go around the neck area with a swinging arm and it is just shrugged off because that is "their way", I love the physicality these guys bring to the game, and you just know what you are going to get when they play, and I have no problem with them using their physicality within the rules, but lets not get blinkered by the fact they are physical so we should except the dirty stuff attitude
. These are very gifted and very good rugby players, so lets play rugby not street fighting.

fa0019 wrote:To be honest if anyone saw the SA vs Samoa match this year you would acknowledge that they have a problem with taking their physicality too far.  Soon they will end up seriously hurting someone, I'm talking Max Brito hurt.

People always say, yes but they're gentle giants off the pitch etc, lovely people, very religious etc. That has no concern from a safety point of view and in fact clouds the actual matter concerned.

It won't give the family of a chap placed in a wheelchair any solace that the person who hit him is a god fearing man etc and an introvert off the pitch.

On a rugby pitch, things often get out of hand. It is something the IRB needs to crack down on.

+1. 

This is what I was trying to say, I am just not as diplomatic as you.