The v2 Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

+27
Galted
Not grey and not a ghost
lostinwales
Mr Fishpaste
yappysnap
emack2
kingraf
GunsGerms
the-goon
Pot Hale
LeinsterFan4life
Cyril
PenfroPete
FerN
beshocked
Geordie
Welly
No 7&1/2
Sin é
aucklandlaurie
SecretFly
The Great Aukster
Knowsit17
Hammersmith harrier
doctor_grey
Rowanbi
fa0019
31 posters

Page 8 of 16 Previous  1 ... 5 ... 7, 8, 9 ... 12 ... 16  Next

Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Fri 22 Apr 2016, 3:44 pm

First topic message reminder :

doctor_grey wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
doctor_grey wrote:
SecretFly wrote:JFK left a final directive just weeks before he was assassinated that impelled the CIA to stop at all cost South Africa having more than one hosting of a World Cup per 20 year period.

The CIA, feeling guilty about Oswald and all, are trying to keep to the promise.... for old time's sake.

That's the only connection I can find between JFK and this thread...from reading 700 autobiographical books by Kennedy's Women.
I have the same abridged version of JFK and his women, too.  I read the same thing.  Camelot (the JFK presidency) strictly prohibited SA from hosting more than one RWC.  Said  it would endanger world security.  I thought I read in the Snowdon leaks the CIA is keeping Zuma in charge because no one in his right mind would put a major competition in a country wohch woul elect him.  It is all a plot hatched over 40 years ago.

The final part makes more sense then him simply appealing to the electorate.
I always thought it was the Mafia who got him elected.  So the mafia was his electorate, no?  Just like FIFA.

standard policy of slandering your rivals as witches and getting lookalikes to feature in grainy video stings with prostitutes.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down


2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by No 7&1/2 Wed 11 May 2016, 8:08 am

Rowanbi wrote:1928 Mark Nichols played for Welington,The selection Committee thought he didn't warrant a place in the first three Tests[of which he was a member].He won the 4th equalizing Test of his own boot. Benny Osler said openly he should have played all 4 and that Nichols was his most difficult player to mark he`d ever met.

Yes, it's coming back to me now. Bit before my time, of course. Nicholls was the first choice goal-kicker on the Invincibles tour of the Northern Hemisphere and scored in all the tests.

1937 Jimmy Duncan used the dive pass as far back as 1903,it never caught on because briefly the SH was out of the game.The NZ 2-3-2 Scrum had no tight head but 2 hookers the ball came back like a rocket.

Well, not like Craven, because it is well'known the Springobok halfback caught the All Blacks by surprise with his dive-passing technique in 1937.

Ken Gray refused to play against racist picked sides he was best Tight Head in NZ and an all time great.

Gray refused to play then? Didn't know that. Great player. But 1970 was the first time New Zealand was permitted to tour with non-whites, and Samoan Bryan Williams was the star of the series, despite the All Blacks' series defeat, with 14 tries in 13 games.

The Cavaliers was a paid circus,of many of the best Nz players of the 70`s/80`s
at the end of there careers.The Squad may well have been very similar to the one
picked and stopped by litigation.BUT they arrived by circuitous routes and put there careers on the line many werein the late 30`s including Dalton,Ashworth,and Haden.[Dalton had his jaw broken}The so called neutral Ref`s they were given choice of two ,the one who had all 4 tests.Was more biased than the home time variety and the 4th testwas in the words of Andy Haden "DAYLIGHT ROBBERY"


Have to disagree completely on this one. Apart from a couple of conscientious objectors - JK & Kirk - this was the best team New Zealand had at the time, and was indeed almost the same squad originally picked for the tour the previous year. At the end of their careers maybe, but I think only Fraser (JK's replacement) was the only one to actually come out of retirement for the tour. Many of the others were legends of the game, still regarded as among the best in the world in their respctive positions.This applied mostly to that great forward pack which had probably peaked in the 83 whitewash of the Lions. New Zealand's problem lay in the backs. They were severely outclassed by the Boks in that department - despite the recent departure of South Africa's own superstar, Ray Mordt, to rugby league. Danie Gerber was the best centre I ever saw, equally adept at setting up his wingers as he was at breaking through the defence himself. Outside him on the wings were the legendary Carel du Plussis and former track star Jaco Reinach, and this trio siimply tore the Kiwi defense apart. Naas Botha, meanwhile, was not only an accurate goal-kicker but a lethal punter who could carve off huge chunks of territory, particularly up in the rarified air of the high veldt, and he was also pretty quick on his feet as well. The Springboks all but whitewashed the Cavalies; they were decisively superior, and you would have to be completely deluded to see it otherwise. (Haden perhaps not the most neutral source either). In fact this was largely the story of the amateur era. New Zealand teams were traditionally renowned for their forward play, with big farmers like the Brownlie & Meads brothers marauding relentlessly against opposing packs in Britain & Australia. But when they came up against South Africa they suddenly found themselves matched in that department, even manhandled themselves at times by the big Afrikaaners, and when it came to backline play the South Africans generally had the edge; the hard, sunbaked grounds of the republic being more conducive to that style of play. This is why the Boks had the edge in the amateur era, and it was never more evident than during that final clash of the titans in 1986 - notwithstanding BG's heroics way back in '70. Little were the South Africans to know, however, that this would be a portent of things to come; and from the late 1980s on All Blacks teams would begin to feature an increasing Pacific Island presence, and that, in my view, is the reason they have so decisively turned the tables.

On the strength of the Cavaliers result,SA say the naysayers would have won 1987 RWC just by turning up.

That was the year New Zealad turned pro. I personally think they would have beaten the Springboks, who had probably reached a peak themselves in 1986. But a series in South Africa at the end of '87 would certainly have been intriguing.

Still waiting Rowanbi. Trying to completely twist someones point as you have is really low. You seem to have a thing against white Europeans though...

No 7&1/2

Posts : 31349
Join date : 2012-10-20

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Wed 11 May 2016, 9:00 am

Boks perhaps should have won in 81. Probably as close as you can get without winning a series.

I doubt they would have won in 87. The truth is that in SA people accept that whilst the 86 Cavs tour was made out of nearly all first choice ABs, they weren't facing the ABs and rather a touring party paid to play. Its a very different mentality. Those players wouldn't have had the same level of pride in playing.

Added to this, they were playing away. Away in SA. In those days SA always won. Flip that over.... SA in NZ, NZ always won.

Therefore a one off match in 87 in NZ, NZ vs SA. Possible the boks would have won, just like the Cavs won one test in the 86 series like the boks won one test in 81.. but the chances are NZ would have won.

Although in 91, in Europe in perfect conditions for bok rugby.... that is where I think the boks would have had a stronger chance (that's if their players were not banned from test rugby leading up to it and were seasoned test players, unlike in 92 when they had the talent but not the experience).

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Sin é Wed 11 May 2016, 11:08 am

While discussing Ireland's prospects going to SA for their summer tour, it came up that it was a waste going there and that the players should really be resting because of the long season as the Saffers are only interested in going to games that are against the ABs. I looked it up, and fair enough, the attendance for everyone bar the ABs is very poor.

So Rowanbi, do you think South Africans will attend in numbers, say SA v Romania if they meet in the world cup.

Recent attendance at SA games:
v ABs J'burg 2014: 61,261
v Australia Cape Town 2014: 45,000
v Argentina Pretoria 2014: 30,453
v Wales Durban 2014: 37,182
v Wales Nelspruit 2014: 25,424
v Scotland, Port Elizabeth 2014: 40,973
Sin é
Sin é

Posts : 13725
Join date : 2011-04-01
Location : Dublin

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Wed 11 May 2016, 11:16 am

Sin é wrote:While discussing Ireland's prospects going to SA for their summer tour, it came up that it was a waste going there and that the players should really be resting because of the long season as the Saffers are only interested in going to games that are against the ABs. I looked it up, and fair enough, the attendance for everyone bar the ABs is very poor.

So Rowanbi, do you think South Africans will attend in numbers, say SA v Romania if they meet in the world cup.

Recent attendance at SA games:
v ABs J'burg 2014: 61,261
v Australia Cape Town 2014: 45,000
v Argentina Pretoria 2014: 30,453
v Wales Durban 2014: 37,182
v Wales Nelspruit 2014: 25,424  
v Scotland, Port Elizabeth 2014: 40,973

What are the stadium sizes for such games?

Cape Town 45,000 for a 51,000 stadium I wouldn't say as being very poor. Port Elizabeth has a capacity of 46,000. Nelspruit itself has a population of <60K. So in essence near half the population of the city attended the game vs. Wales. 37,000 in Durban is very good too.

The only one that could have been better is Argentina in Pretoria. You'd expect it would be filled to about 40,000 rather than 30,000. BUt Argentina were new to the tournament and I imagine this year you'll see far better turnouts.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Rowanbi Wed 11 May 2016, 11:27 am

So Rowanbi, do you think South Africans will attend in numbers, say SA v Romania if they meet in the world cup.

Why, not? They had a near capacity 45K when they met at Newlands in 1995, & South Africa does generally get the best crowds in rugby.

86-87 was a quantumn leap in NZ.

Yes, they turned 'pro.' Most of the 87 team were fulltime rugby players. As you say, the All Blacks were behind Australia and on a par with France at this time, and failing to win their own World Cup would have been disastrous for the image of the national sport - which had already suffered greatly due to South African ties. This was the national game's chance to regain favor with the public, but that required winning the tournament - at all costs. So they made the hard decision and abandoned the amateur ethos. They weren't the first. Why do you think it was that Australia & France had edged ahead of them? They'd already taken that step. Italy & Japan too, probably, not to mention SA. The big losers from this sham were the Home Unions and the Americas, who fell well off the pace over the next decade or so.

Cavaliers didn't reflect the best side in NZ in 86

Notwithstanding the odd withdrawal, they were the same players selected to tour the previous season and had remained in training for this very purpose. I knew a few of the players at the time, and from the moment the court injunction stopped the official tour, they knew they were going on an unofficial tour the following season. I can't think of any player who would've broken into that squad in 86. 87 is a very different story, for the reasons mentioned in the above paragraph. But the Springboks were simply much too good for the Cavaliers in 86, notably in the backs, as founding editor of the New Zealand Rugby News magazine Bow Howitt conceded in a full-page editorial directly after the tour. Rugby News, btw, was by far the biggest rugby magazine in NZ at the time, and the biggest rugby weekly in the world. Howitt was certainly one of the most astute and unbiased rugby writers you would ever find as well. He was widely ridiculed for another article in which he dared suggest John Hart was not the man to coach the All Blacks to the 1999 World Cup. Quite a call, really, given he was an Auck himself. The rest is history.

Sadly the publication went to the dogs after his retirement.  thumbsdown
Rowanbi
Rowanbi

Posts : 825
Join date : 2015-02-15
Age : 88
Location : Istanbul

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Wed 11 May 2016, 11:30 am

Rowanbi wrote:So Rowanbi, do you think South Africans will attend in numbers, say SA v Romania if they meet in the world cup.

Why, not? They had a near capacity 45K when they met at Newlands in 1995, & South Africa does generally get the best crowds in rugby.

86-87 was a quantumn leap in NZ.

Yes, they turned 'pro.' Most of the 87 team were fulltime rugby players. As you say, the All Blacks were behind Australia and on a par with France at this time, and failing to win their own World Cup would have been disastrous for the image of the national sport - which had already suffered greatly to South African ties. This was the national game's chance to regain favor with the public, but that required winning the tournament - at all costs. So they made the hard decision and abandoned the amateur ethos. They weren't the first. Why do you think it was that Australia & France had edged ahead of them? They'd already taken that step. Italy & Japan too, probably, not to mention SA. The big losers from this sham were the Home Unions and the Americas, who fell well off the pace over the next decade or so.

Cavaliers didn't reflect the best side in NZ in 86

Notwithstanding the odd withdrawal, they were the same players selected to tour the previous season and had remained in training for this very purpose. I knew a few of the players at the time, and from the moment the court injunction stopped the official tour, they knew they were going on an unofficial tour the following season. I can't think of any player who would've broken into that squad in 86. 87 is a very different story, for the reasons mentioned in the above paragraph. But the Springboks were simply much too good for the All Blacks in 87, notably in the backs, as founding editor of the New Zealand Rugby News magazine Bow Howitt conceded in a full-page editorial directly after the tour. Rugby News, btw, was by far the biggest rugby magazine in NZ at the time, and the biggest rugby weekly in the world. Howitt was certainly one of the most astute and unbiased rugby writers you would ever find as well. He was widely ridiculed for another article in which he dared suggest John Hart was not the man to coach the All Blacks to the 1999 World Cup. Quite a call, really, given he was an Auck himself. The rest is history.

Sadly the publication went to the dogs after his retirement.  thumbsdown

what you're talking about is BS in terms of pro players in the amateur days. Most players had full time jobs. Some like Campo were paid to play in places like Italy in that they were given cushy high paying jobs by chairman's of clubs mates but they still had jobs. Guys like Zinny were sheep shearing 2 days after the final.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Rowanbi Wed 11 May 2016, 11:43 am

Guys like Zinny were sheep shearing 2 days after the final. laughing

Ironic humor! Well done. But the word 'Shamateurism' entered the rugby vernacular precisely for this reason. Prior the 87, there were the odd individual superstars, Campese being an obvious one, but the 87 All Blacks were the first fulltime rugby team to come out of New Zealand. That was the 'quantum leap,' pure and simple.
Rowanbi
Rowanbi

Posts : 825
Join date : 2015-02-15
Age : 88
Location : Istanbul

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Sin é Wed 11 May 2016, 11:53 am

fa0019 wrote:
Sin é wrote:While discussing Ireland's prospects going to SA for their summer tour, it came up that it was a waste going there and that the players should really be resting because of the long season as the Saffers are only interested in going to games that are against the ABs. I looked it up, and fair enough, the attendance for everyone bar the ABs is very poor.

So Rowanbi, do you think South Africans will attend in numbers, say SA v Romania if they meet in the world cup.

Recent attendance at SA games:
v ABs J'burg 2014: 61,261
v Australia Cape Town 2014: 45,000
v Argentina Pretoria 2014: 30,453
v Wales Durban 2014: 37,182
v Wales Nelspruit 2014: 25,424  
v Scotland, Port Elizabeth 2014: 40,973

What are the stadium sizes for such games?

Cape Town 45,000 for a 51,000 stadium I wouldn't say as being very poor. Port Elizabeth has a capacity of 46,000. Nelspruit itself has a population of <60K. So in essence near half the population of the city attended the game vs. Wales. 37,000 in Durban is very good too.

The only one that could have been better is Argentina in Pretoria. You'd expect it would be filled to about 40,000 rather than 30,000. BUt Argentina were new to the tournament and I imagine this year you'll see far better turnouts.

You'd expect them to fill those stadia though. That is the Springbok playing home games. How much local support would Ireland v Argentina in SA attract at a world cup?
Sin é
Sin é

Posts : 13725
Join date : 2011-04-01
Location : Dublin

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Wed 11 May 2016, 11:55 am

Rowanbi wrote:Guys like Zinny were sheep shearing 2 days after the final. laughing

Ironic humor! Well done. But the word 'Shamateurism' entered the rugby vernacular precisely for this reason. Prior the 87, there were the odd individual superstars, Campese being an obvious one, but the 87 All Blacks were the first fulltime rugby team to come out of New Zealand. That was the 'quantum leap,' pure and simple.

They had jobs which allowed them to train 3 times a week after work, get allowances for touring and often in not so taxing jobs such as PR but its no shape or form professional.
NZ weren't smashing all other teams off the park like we saw 3N and England do from 96-00 in the first few years of the pro game due to superior fitness and training. If they were pro like you allude to they would have done so.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Wed 11 May 2016, 11:57 am

Sin é wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
Sin é wrote:While discussing Ireland's prospects going to SA for their summer tour, it came up that it was a waste going there and that the players should really be resting because of the long season as the Saffers are only interested in going to games that are against the ABs. I looked it up, and fair enough, the attendance for everyone bar the ABs is very poor.

So Rowanbi, do you think South Africans will attend in numbers, say SA v Romania if they meet in the world cup.

Recent attendance at SA games:
v ABs J'burg 2014: 61,261
v Australia Cape Town 2014: 45,000
v Argentina Pretoria 2014: 30,453
v Wales Durban 2014: 37,182
v Wales Nelspruit 2014: 25,424  
v Scotland, Port Elizabeth 2014: 40,973

What are the stadium sizes for such games?

Cape Town 45,000 for a 51,000 stadium I wouldn't say as being very poor. Port Elizabeth has a capacity of 46,000. Nelspruit itself has a population of <60K. So in essence near half the population of the city attended the game vs. Wales. 37,000 in Durban is very good too.

The only one that could have been better is Argentina in Pretoria. You'd expect it would be filled to about 40,000 rather than 30,000. BUt Argentina were new to the tournament and I imagine this year you'll see far better turnouts.

You'd expect them to fill those stadia though. That is the Springbok playing home games. How much local support would Ireland v Argentina in SA attract at a world cup?

They did during the football world cup, during the 95 rugby world cup.... you don't need to stretch the imagination to see how they would in any (0% chance now) SA based world cup.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Sin é Wed 11 May 2016, 12:03 pm

fa0019 wrote:
Sin é wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
Sin é wrote:While discussing Ireland's prospects going to SA for their summer tour, it came up that it was a waste going there and that the players should really be resting because of the long season as the Saffers are only interested in going to games that are against the ABs. I looked it up, and fair enough, the attendance for everyone bar the ABs is very poor.

So Rowanbi, do you think South Africans will attend in numbers, say SA v Romania if they meet in the world cup.

Recent attendance at SA games:
v ABs J'burg 2014: 61,261
v Australia Cape Town 2014: 45,000
v Argentina Pretoria 2014: 30,453
v Wales Durban 2014: 37,182
v Wales Nelspruit 2014: 25,424  
v Scotland, Port Elizabeth 2014: 40,973

What are the stadium sizes for such games?

Cape Town 45,000 for a 51,000 stadium I wouldn't say as being very poor. Port Elizabeth has a capacity of 46,000. Nelspruit itself has a population of <60K. So in essence near half the population of the city attended the game vs. Wales. 37,000 in Durban is very good too.

The only one that could have been better is Argentina in Pretoria. You'd expect it would be filled to about 40,000 rather than 30,000. BUt Argentina were new to the tournament and I imagine this year you'll see far better turnouts.

You'd expect them to fill those stadia though. That is the Springbok playing home games. How much local support would Ireland v Argentina in SA attract at a world cup?

They did during the football world cup, during the 95 rugby world cup.... you don't need to stretch the imagination to see how they would in any (0% chance now) SA based world cup.

Football is different to Rugby - there is huge travelling support. '95 was the beginning of the pro era and just not relevant. Ireland v France in ABSA stadium had 20K at it.
Sin é
Sin é

Posts : 13725
Join date : 2011-04-01
Location : Dublin

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Wed 11 May 2016, 12:06 pm

Sin é wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
Sin é wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
Sin é wrote:While discussing Ireland's prospects going to SA for their summer tour, it came up that it was a waste going there and that the players should really be resting because of the long season as the Saffers are only interested in going to games that are against the ABs. I looked it up, and fair enough, the attendance for everyone bar the ABs is very poor.

So Rowanbi, do you think South Africans will attend in numbers, say SA v Romania if they meet in the world cup.

Recent attendance at SA games:
v ABs J'burg 2014: 61,261
v Australia Cape Town 2014: 45,000
v Argentina Pretoria 2014: 30,453
v Wales Durban 2014: 37,182
v Wales Nelspruit 2014: 25,424  
v Scotland, Port Elizabeth 2014: 40,973

What are the stadium sizes for such games?

Cape Town 45,000 for a 51,000 stadium I wouldn't say as being very poor. Port Elizabeth has a capacity of 46,000. Nelspruit itself has a population of <60K. So in essence near half the population of the city attended the game vs. Wales. 37,000 in Durban is very good too.

The only one that could have been better is Argentina in Pretoria. You'd expect it would be filled to about 40,000 rather than 30,000. BUt Argentina were new to the tournament and I imagine this year you'll see far better turnouts.

You'd expect them to fill those stadia though. That is the Springbok playing home games. How much local support would Ireland v Argentina in SA attract at a world cup?

They did during the football world cup, during the 95 rugby world cup.... you don't need to stretch the imagination to see how they would in any (0% chance now) SA based world cup.

Football is different to Rugby - there is huge travelling support. '95 was the beginning of the pro era and just not relevant. Ireland v France in ABSA stadium had 20K at it.

For the big teams sure... yet the small teams vs. small teams were still sell outs and mostly filled by locals.

In truth I'm happy to agree to the below if you are.....

Rugby world cups, world cups, Olympics etc... they all increase interest and make persons attend matches they wouldn't normally attend and pay prices they wouldn't normally pay in all sport loving nations

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Sin é Wed 11 May 2016, 12:20 pm

With the state that the SA economy is in (and getting worse), will the locals be able to afford tickets?
Sin é
Sin é

Posts : 13725
Join date : 2011-04-01
Location : Dublin

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Wed 11 May 2016, 12:27 pm

Sin é wrote:With the state that the SA economy is in (and getting worse), will the locals be able to afford tickets?

bit patronising Sin e.

Could say the same about Ireland too given your recent economic history and issues such as having negative migration as young adults continue to leave the country because their aren't enough jobs for everyone etc.

SA's poverty line hasn't changed that much in recent years, poor people are still poor. Rich people still driver Mercs & BMWs.

Doesn't stop SA having the most supported domestic game in the sport.... and 2nd place isn't even close. Whatever anyone says about SA rugby, poverty etc.... that will be the overwhelmingly valid rebuttal to any question of this type.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Sin é Wed 11 May 2016, 12:44 pm

fa0019 wrote:
Sin é wrote:With the state that the SA economy is in (and getting worse), will the locals be able to afford tickets?

bit patronising Sin e.

Could say the same about Ireland too given your recent economic history and issues such as having negative migration as young adults continue to leave the country because their aren't enough jobs for everyone etc.

SA's poverty line hasn't changed that much in recent years, poor people are still poor. Rich people still driver Mercs & BMWs.

Doesn't stop SA having the most supported domestic game in the sport.... and 2nd place isn't even close. Whatever anyone says about SA rugby, poverty etc.... that will be the overwhelmingly valid rebuttal to any question of this type.

How is it patronising? The SA economy is in serious trouble while the Irish economy is the fastest growing economy in the Euro zone (increase of 7.8% for 2015). The unemployment rate is 9.7% (down from 14% at the height of the recession) so there are plenty of jobs for everyone now. Plenty of people coming back as well, but most young Irish people travel for a year or two with favourite destination of Australia. The difference between Ireland and SA is that Ireland does not have the same extremes of poverty and wealth as SA has - most people have a decent standard of living (with most people able to afford to go games).

The best attended game at the recent world cup was Ireland v Romania in Wembley (89,267). SA could not come close to getting an attendance like that for a Tier 2 team like Romania.

I'll be really interested to see what the attendances are like for Ireland's tour of SA this summer.
Sin é
Sin é

Posts : 13725
Join date : 2011-04-01
Location : Dublin

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Wed 11 May 2016, 1:02 pm

Sin é wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
Sin é wrote:With the state that the SA economy is in (and getting worse), will the locals be able to afford tickets?

bit patronising Sin e.

Could say the same about Ireland too given your recent economic history and issues such as having negative migration as young adults continue to leave the country because their aren't enough jobs for everyone etc.

SA's poverty line hasn't changed that much in recent years, poor people are still poor. Rich people still driver Mercs & BMWs.

Doesn't stop SA having the most supported domestic game in the sport.... and 2nd place isn't even close. Whatever anyone says about SA rugby, poverty etc.... that will be the overwhelmingly valid rebuttal to any question of this type.

How is it patronising? The SA economy is in serious trouble while the Irish economy is the fastest growing economy in the Euro zone (increase of 7.8% for 2015). The unemployment rate is 9.7% (down from 14% at the height of the recession) so there are plenty of jobs for everyone now. Plenty of people coming back as well, but most young Irish people travel for a year or two with favourite destination of Australia. The difference between Ireland and SA is that Ireland does not have the same extremes of poverty and wealth as SA has - most people have a decent standard of living (with most people able to afford to go games).

The best attended game at the recent world cup was Ireland v Romania in Wembley (89,267). SA could not come close to getting an attendance like that for a Tier 2 team like Romania.

I'll be really interested to see what the attendances are like for Ireland's tour of SA this summer.

Unemployment rate of 9.7% is still quite high for a western EU nation. What is the UK's 5%? Net migration is still negative and has been for a long time. Thats more people moving away then coming back.  

Whether or not what you say is true about SA being a poor country. It is.. yet they still have the best supported club game in the sport... from the premier club competition in the world (super rugby).

You can't simply say oh we saw Ireland Romania in a RWC with 89,000 in England and therefore that is applicable into how well supported a world cup will be in Ireland. Its a different country and will be watched by many neutrals. Well England has a large Irish diaspora and Ireland is very close to England so I assume many would have supported Ireland, I give you that. Also most matches were sell outs in the entire tournament. SA never got Wembley. SA filled the Olympic stadium for their match with the USA with 55,000 which was close to capacity and more than NZ vs. Namibia managed and just shy of the 3rd place playoff match (which SA also were involved in). So 55,000 was as close as it would come and whilst officially 60,000 is the official capacity I think 55,000 was probably as close as it could come to being full.

How about Ireland's record at home vs. non tier 1 teams?

Ireland vs. Georgia 2014 (45,000)
Ireland vs. Samoa 2013 (39,108) from ESPN.

Look in the end a rugby world cup would be popular and well attended in SA.. and yes, even the lesser matches. Would it be in Ireland too? Yes.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Rowanbi Wed 11 May 2016, 1:43 pm

9 1/2, you said white men were better at the white men's game. What are you waiting for? Applause...?

Fa0019, I knew a number of the players personally. I was working as a rugby journalist in NZ at the time. Claim what you like, but I know exactly what was going on.
Rowanbi
Rowanbi

Posts : 825
Join date : 2015-02-15
Age : 88
Location : Istanbul

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by No 7&1/2 Wed 11 May 2016, 1:46 pm

Still waiting for you to fix the context of that statement RR. If you really don't understand and can't follow a conversation that's another thing. When you've been told several times and still haven't corrected yourself you're taking the mick.

No 7&1/2

Posts : 31349
Join date : 2012-10-20

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Rowanbi Wed 11 May 2016, 1:48 pm

I've answer the sensible questions already:

Rowanbi wrote:So Rowanbi, do you think South Africans will attend in numbers, say SA v Romania if they meet in the world cup.

Why, not? They had a near capacity 45K when they met at Newlands in 1995, & South Africa does generally get the best crowds in rugby.

86-87 was a quantumn leap in NZ.

Yes, they turned 'pro.' Most of the 87 team were fulltime rugby players. As you say, the All Blacks were behind Australia and on a par with France at this time, and failing to win their own World Cup would have been disastrous for the image of the national sport - which had already suffered greatly due to South African ties. This was the national game's chance to regain favor with the public, but that required winning the tournament - at all costs. So they made the hard decision and abandoned the amateur ethos. They weren't the first. Why do you think it was that Australia & France had edged ahead of them? They'd already taken that step. Italy & Japan too, probably, not to mention SA. The big losers from this sham were the Home Unions and the Americas, who fell well off the pace over the next decade or so.

Cavaliers didn't reflect the best side in NZ in 86

Notwithstanding the odd withdrawal, they were the same players selected to tour the previous season and had remained in training for this very purpose. I knew a few of the players at the time, and from the moment the court injunction stopped the official tour, they knew they were going on an unofficial tour the following season. I can't think of any player who would've broken into that squad in 86. 87 is a very different story, for the reasons mentioned in the above paragraph. But the Springboks were simply much too good for the Cavaliers in 86, notably in the backs, as founding editor of the New Zealand Rugby News magazine Bow Howitt conceded in a full-page editorial directly after the tour. Rugby News, btw, was by far the biggest rugby magazine in NZ at the time, and the biggest rugby weekly in the world. Howitt was certainly one of the most astute and unbiased rugby writers you would ever find as well. He was widely ridiculed for another article in which he dared suggest John Hart was not the man to coach the All Blacks to the 1999 World Cup. Quite a call, really, given he was an Auck himself. The rest is history.

Sadly the publication went to the dogs after his retirement.  thumbsdown
Rowanbi
Rowanbi

Posts : 825
Join date : 2015-02-15
Age : 88
Location : Istanbul

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by No 7&1/2 Wed 11 May 2016, 1:49 pm

Still waiting.

No 7&1/2

Posts : 31349
Join date : 2012-10-20

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by No 7&1/2 Wed 11 May 2016, 2:00 pm

Rowanbi wrote:9 1/2, you said white men were better at the white men's game. What are you waiting for? Applause...?

Fa0019, I knew a number of the players personally. I was working as a rugby journalist in NZ at the time. Claim what you like, but I know exactly what was going on.

And really if you are/were a journalist you should know about taking people out of context and misquoating.

No 7&1/2

Posts : 31349
Join date : 2012-10-20

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Wed 11 May 2016, 2:09 pm

Rowanbi wrote:9 1/2, you said white men were better at the white men's game. What are you waiting for? Applause...?

Fa0019, I knew a number of the players personally. I was working as a rugby journalist in NZ at the time. Claim what you like, but I know exactly what was going on.

Yet you give no specifics.

Paid or not... their performances, the physical statures, their results did not show themselves to look overtly professional.

Take NZ in 1993 then.

England was certainly not professional. A few forces guys who were training physically full time. The rest had 40hr week jobs. That's a fact. How did England manage to beat NZ in 93?

Now take this vs. teams who embraced professionalism first post 96. Literally Wales, Ireland, Scotland were blown away at times by 40, 50, 60 points... it took about 10 years for them to catch up. This was because the English, the French whilst already superior talent wise at the time improved their fitness, their training and started to breeze past teams.

So how was NZ so professional? How were they not blowing teams away. Sure they were still very good but fitness wise... not that far apart that you could almost argue professionalism.

Working in club shop, getting a cushy 9-5 or even working in the gym is not the same as training every day full time.

Please give examples if so. and anonymity is not required I don't think anything will harm if you say someone like David Kirk etc etc

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Wed 11 May 2016, 2:11 pm

this is what Sean Fitzpatrick said on talksport about 5 years ago.

Did I enjoy the final itself? Probably not. I enjoyed it a lot more once the whistle went and it was over. The celebrations were actually pretty tame, though. For us, it was a case of job done – a job that was expected of us – and now let’s move on to the next thing, which was a game against Australia in a few weeks.

We went back to the hotel, had one or two drinks in the hotel bar and were in bed by one or two in the morning. You have to remember, we were amateurs, so most of us were back to work on Monday.

The final was on a Saturday; being a builder, I was back on site bright and early Monday morning.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Wed 11 May 2016, 2:14 pm

This is what zinny said in the guardian

A lot of people in the late Eighties thought that New Zealand were a professional side in an amateur era. That's simply not true - another All Blacks myth. With the exception of John Kirwan, all of us were trying to hold down day jobs. I was still on the farm. I think that's why the 1991 squad weren't as focused as they should have been. It was the first time we realised that we could make a bit of money and some of the older players were more concerned with cashing in before they retired than with winning the World Cup. In short, we got our heads stuck up our arses.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2003/oct/05/rugbyworldcup2003.rugbyunion1

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Wed 11 May 2016, 2:18 pm

this was Jonah Lomu according to the telegraph

It was as a bank clerk. Lomu went off to work on his first day at the ASB bank in Auckland with a red shirt, green MC Hammer-style trousers and big Herman Munster-type boots. Not surprisingly, that branch was never targeted by bank robbers. And he was a big hit with the customers: not because he was fearsome, but, because he was gentle and affable and welcoming.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/newzealand/12004334/Jonah-Lomu-was-so-much-more-than-just-a-rugby-superstar-says-former-mentor-Phil-Kingsley-Jones.html

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Sin é Wed 11 May 2016, 2:32 pm

fa0019 wrote:
Sin é wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
Sin é wrote:With the state that the SA economy is in (and getting worse), will the locals be able to afford tickets?

bit patronising Sin e.

Could say the same about Ireland too given your recent economic history and issues such as having negative migration as young adults continue to leave the country because their aren't enough jobs for everyone etc.

SA's poverty line hasn't changed that much in recent years, poor people are still poor. Rich people still driver Mercs & BMWs.

Doesn't stop SA having the most supported domestic game in the sport.... and 2nd place isn't even close. Whatever anyone says about SA rugby, poverty etc.... that will be the overwhelmingly valid rebuttal to any question of this type.

How is it patronising? The SA economy is in serious trouble while the Irish economy is the fastest growing economy in the Euro zone (increase of 7.8% for 2015). The unemployment rate is 9.7% (down from 14% at the height of the recession) so there are plenty of jobs for everyone now. Plenty of people coming back as well, but most young Irish people travel for a year or two with favourite destination of Australia. The difference between Ireland and SA is that Ireland does not have the same extremes of poverty and wealth as SA has - most people have a decent standard of living (with most people able to afford to go games).

The best attended game at the recent world cup was Ireland v Romania in Wembley (89,267). SA could not come close to getting an attendance like that for a Tier 2 team like Romania.

I'll be really interested to see what the attendances are like for Ireland's tour of SA this summer.

Unemployment rate of 9.7% is still quite high for a western EU nation. What is the UK's 5%? Net migration is still negative and has been for a long time. Thats more people moving away then coming back.  

Whether or not what you say is true about SA being a poor country. It is.. yet they still have the best supported club game in the sport... from the premier club competition in the world (super rugby).

You can't simply say oh we saw Ireland Romania in a RWC with 89,000 in England and therefore that is applicable into how well supported a world cup will be in Ireland. Its a different country and will be watched by many neutrals. Well England has a large Irish diaspora and Ireland is very close to England so I assume many would have supported Ireland, I give you that. Also most matches were sell outs in the entire tournament. SA never got Wembley. SA filled the Olympic stadium for their match with the USA with 55,000 which was close to capacity and more than NZ vs. Namibia managed and just shy of the 3rd place playoff match (which SA also were involved in). So 55,000 was as close as it would come and whilst officially 60,000 is the official capacity I think 55,000 was probably as close as it could come to being full.

How about Ireland's record at home vs. non tier 1 teams?

Ireland vs. Georgia 2014 (45,000)
Ireland vs. Samoa 2013 (39,108) from ESPN.

Look in the end a rugby world cup would be popular and well attended in SA.. and yes, even the lesser matches. Would it be in Ireland too? Yes.

The average unemployment rate in the EU is 9.7%. Germany and UK both have very low unemployment rates of about 5%, which of course is very good for Ireland as it is next door to England (and in fact, NI which is part of the UK is part of the Ireland bid for the World Cup).

Ireland v Romania had a better attendance in Wembly than NZ v Australia (and there are millions of expats from those countries in the UK).

London is closer to Dublin (50 mins flying) than Cape Town is to Johannesburg (2hr 15 mins). Country bounderies don't really apply when it comes to getting to games. Ease of access does. Being so close to 2 centres of large population (England & France) is a good thing you know.

Maybe SA rugby is a bit like English football, people have more interest in their own club team rather than in the national team. What will be interesting is the attendance at the Ireland games in SA for the summer tour.

Sin é
Sin é

Posts : 13725
Join date : 2011-04-01
Location : Dublin

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Wed 11 May 2016, 2:42 pm

Sin e

NZ vs. AUS was at Twickenham. IRE vs. ROM was at Wembley with capacity of 8,000 higher.
NZ vs. ARG was also 89k attendance.

Lots of ARG fans right?

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Sin é Wed 11 May 2016, 2:47 pm

fa0019 wrote:Sin e

NZ vs. AUS was at Twickenham. IRE vs. ROM was at Wembley with capacity of 8,000 higher.
NZ vs. ARG was also 89k attendance.

Lots of ARG fans right?

Sorry, it was Ireland v Romania was better than NZ v Argentina (both in Wembley).

NZ would automatically attract the neutrals (though there are plenty of Argentinians based in Europe).
Sin é
Sin é

Posts : 13725
Join date : 2011-04-01
Location : Dublin

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Rowanbi Wed 11 May 2016, 10:32 pm

How did England manage to beat NZ in 93?

Now this is a really silly argument. It was at the end of a long season during which NZ had beaten the Lions, among other opponents. They put 50 on Scotland a week earlier at Murrayfield. How many times have the All Blacks lost at Twickers in similar circumstances? Look what happened to SA & Australia on last year's Autumn tours. I was roundly ridiculed on another forum for suggesting nothing much should be read into those results, Ireland were not the 4th best team in the world (or was it 2nd?) as the rankings stated for the next several months) and the SH teams would be back on top at the RWC. The rest is history.   Erm

The final was on a Saturday; being a builder, I was back on site bright and early Monday morning.
Lomu went off to work on his first day at the ASB bank in Auckland with a red shirt, green MC Hammer-style trousers and big Herman Munster-type boots.
With the exception of John Kirwan, all of us were trying to hold down day jobs. I was still on the farm


Me thinks they doth protest too much.  Rolling Eyes  So you expected them to say, Oh, yes, by the way, we are professionals competing in an amateur competition? Funny, I never heard the French, Aussies, Saffas, Italians or Japanese stars say that. But if you think nobody was being paid to play in those countries at the time you are either very naive or have an extremely limited insight into rugby during the final decade of the amateur era. It was, of course, known as the 'shamateur' era.

Are you aware, for instance, that the Auckland team made a quantum leap in New Zealand provincial rugby that was on about ten times the scale of that made by the All Blacks at international level? They were playing 3rd fiddle to Canterbury and Wellington for much of the 80s, and had finished behind the latter in the 1986 NPC. But with a team full of All Blacks they proceeded to destroy everything in front of them over the next decade, breaking all kinds of records along the way. How was such a transition possible? Even at juniors level, Wellington had been beating them regularly in the mid-1980s. The Aucks' quantum leap came literally out of nowhere. & perhaps most tellingly, while Wellington  was decimated by the league raids toward the end of the amateur era, Auckland managed to hold on to all of its All Blacks test players. Either they were the most loyal bunch of players in the history of all sports, or there was simply nothing the league scouts could offer them that they didn't already have...

Btw, what's Jonah got to do with the 87 World Cup squad? He was still at primary school then, I think.


 

Cavaliers didn't reflect the best side in NZ in 86

Just another note about this. The All Blacks forwards were getting on, yes, especially the front row which had already been dubbed the geriatrics the previous season. But this was not the problem. They held their own in the forward exchanges, and had a few youngsters in the midweek XV who could have come in anyway.

Again, the problem was the backs, that's where they were outclassed, but aside from Fraser and Osborne, who were called out of retirement in their early 30s, the entire backline bar Loveridge was in its 20s. In fact, 9 of the 14 backs were in their mid-20s, including Fox, Taylor & Green who would go on to play in the World Cup final.

devil

Meanwhile, problems in Ireland:

The threat level from Northern Ireland-related terrorism in Great Britain has gone up from moderate to substantial.
It means an attack in England, Scotland or Wales is "a strong possibility".
Home Secretary Theresa May said the level, set by security service MI5, "reflects the continuing threat from dissident republican activity".
The level for Northern Ireland-related terrorism in Northern Ireland remains severe, meaning an attack is "highly likely".
Despite the increase in the threat level from Northern Ireland-related terrorism in Great Britain, it remains lower than the threat to the entire UK from international terrorism.
This is set at severe - the second-highest of the five ratings used.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-36267052
Rowanbi
Rowanbi

Posts : 825
Join date : 2015-02-15
Age : 88
Location : Istanbul

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Sin é Wed 11 May 2016, 11:17 pm

Rowanbi wrote:

Meanwhile, problems in Ireland:

The threat level from Northern Ireland-related terrorism in Great Britain has gone up from moderate to substantial.
It means an attack in England, Scotland or Wales is "a strong possibility".
Home Secretary Theresa May said the level, set by security service MI5, "reflects the continuing threat from dissident republican activity".
The level for Northern Ireland-related terrorism in Northern Ireland remains severe, meaning an attack is "highly likely".
Despite the increase in the threat level from Northern Ireland-related terrorism in Great Britain, it remains lower than the threat to the entire UK from international terrorism.
This is set at severe - the second-highest of the five ratings used.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-36267052

Just as well the IRFU is not planning on holding any games in England, Scotland and Wales Whistle

Dissident republicans like NI doing stuff with the Republic by the way Wink
Sin é
Sin é

Posts : 13725
Join date : 2011-04-01
Location : Dublin

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by emack2 Thu 12 May 2016, 1:38 am

My final comments on this thread purely on Games won/lost in OFFICIAL TESTS between
SA and NZ.NZ NOT SA were the most successful in the 20th century all be it by one game.
EXCEPT for the period 1937-49 they were NOT inferior to SA ,both Countries suffered
peaks and troughs.
It is sad that Politics had such an affect on the games between these two countries off
the field they usually got on all right.
I think probably a fully 100% fit NZ side would have won RWC 1995 but that is in the land
of what if`s.
That both Countries played Rugby no holds barred that included dirty play by BOTH sides
doing whatever to win.
CARE and HART ensured non-racial sides didn't tour period 1960-70,the 1967 side as
picked would I believe have been The First to win a series in SA[they toured uk unbeaten
instead]
As a Rule Home advantage/Refs decided the games both were almost impossible to beat
at Home.
The Cavaliers may well have been most of what an OFFICIAL Tour in the way of Players
and results may well have been similar.
BUT the itinery would almost not been as severe and spread over a longer period,training
facilities probably better a proper choice of neutral Refs etc.
The claim SA ALWAYS had better backs is specious,SA formula was Massive Pack,
Good Loose forwards,a crash tackling 12,kicking half backs and a Goal kicker running
Rugby may have been practiced by Western Province for example.BUT theTransvaal sides
including Eastern/Northen played classic Bok style.Most series were actually decided by
the Goal kickers.
By the late 1980`s EVERY Country employed a lot of Players who technically were no
Longer Amateurs.Things like being paid whilst sick from an injury for more than 2-4
weeks you considered a Professional.OR writing a Newspaper article.Book and taking
the proceeds was no longer acceptable to most top players worldwide.

emack2

Posts : 3686
Join date : 2011-04-01
Age : 80
Location : Bournemouth

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by No 7&1/2 Thu 12 May 2016, 8:02 am

Rowanbi wrote:How did England manage to beat NZ in 93?

Now this is a really silly argument. It was at the end of a long season during which NZ had beaten the Lions, among other opponents. They put 50 on Scotland a week earlier at Murrayfield. How many times have the All Blacks lost at Twickers in similar circumstances? Look what happened to SA & Australia on last year's Autumn tours. I was roundly ridiculed on another forum for suggesting nothing much should be read into those results, Ireland were not the 4th best team in the world (or was it 2nd?) as the rankings stated for the next several months) and the SH teams would be back on top at the RWC. The rest is history.   Erm

The final was on a Saturday; being a builder, I was back on site bright and early Monday morning.
Lomu went off to work on his first day at the ASB bank in Auckland with a red shirt, green MC Hammer-style trousers and big Herman Munster-type boots.
With the exception of John Kirwan, all of us were trying to hold down day jobs. I was still on the farm


Me thinks they doth protest too much.  Rolling Eyes  So you expected them to say, Oh, yes, by the way, we are professionals competing in an amateur competition? Funny, I never heard the French, Aussies, Saffas, Italians or Japanese stars say that. But if you think nobody was being paid to play in those countries at the time you are either very naive or have an extremely limited insight into rugby during the final decade of the amateur era. It was, of course, known as the 'shamateur' era.

Are you aware, for instance, that the Auckland team made a quantum leap in New Zealand provincial rugby that was on about ten times the scale of that made by the All Blacks at international level? They were playing 3rd fiddle to Canterbury and Wellington for much of the 80s, and had finished behind the latter in the 1986 NPC. But with a team full of All Blacks they proceeded to destroy everything in front of them over the next decade, breaking all kinds of records along the way. How was such a transition possible? Even at juniors level, Wellington had been beating them regularly in the mid-1980s. The Aucks' quantum leap came literally out of nowhere. & perhaps most tellingly, while Wellington  was decimated by the league raids toward the end of the amateur era, Auckland managed to hold on to all of its All Blacks test players. Either they were the most loyal bunch of players in the history of all sports, or there was simply nothing the league scouts could offer them that they didn't already have...

Btw, what's Jonah got to do with the 87 World Cup squad? He was still at primary school then, I think.


 

Cavaliers didn't reflect the best side in NZ in 86

Just another note about this. The All Blacks forwards were getting on, yes, especially the front row which had already been dubbed the geriatrics the previous season. But this was not the problem. They held their own in the forward exchanges, and had a few youngsters in the midweek XV who could have come in anyway.

Again, the problem was the backs, that's where they were outclassed, but aside from Fraser and Osborne, who were called out of retirement in their early 30s, the entire backline bar Loveridge was in its 20s. In fact, 9 of the 14 backs were in their mid-20s, including Fox, Taylor & Green who would go on to play in the World Cup final.

devil

Meanwhile, problems in Ireland:

The threat level from Northern Ireland-related terrorism in Great Britain has gone up from moderate to substantial.
It means an attack in England, Scotland or Wales is "a strong possibility".
Home Secretary Theresa May said the level, set by security service MI5, "reflects the continuing threat from dissident republican activity".
The level for Northern Ireland-related terrorism in Northern Ireland remains severe, meaning an attack is "highly likely".
Despite the increase in the threat level from Northern Ireland-related terrorism in Great Britain, it remains lower than the threat to the entire UK from international terrorism.
This is set at severe - the second-highest of the five ratings used.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-36267052

We really need to dig down into your dislike for White Europeans Rowanbi. Your need to to twist or lie and not accept and apologise when you're called out.

No 7&1/2

Posts : 31349
Join date : 2012-10-20

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Thu 12 May 2016, 9:07 am

Rowanbi

You are mistaking being paid to playing in a professional team. Those are two very different things.

Were they being paid? From all accounts, yes. They were too in South Africa but they all held down jobs because whilst the money was welcome, it wasn't nearly enough to live on. Were they professional. No.

You may see being professional as being someone who is simply getting money for doing something but its a little more complex than black and white I'm afraid.

Professionalism is really clubs who are able to train and prepare their players full time.   Every single day without distractions such as guys only being able to turn up at 5pm.

Look at the stature of players, look at the fitness levels? Compare them to league players? It was a completely different ball game and guys who jumped ship to league needed months of conditioning before they could compete.... because their fitness levels, their strength levels weren't up to scratch.

In the SH they still only trained 3 nights a week with a game on Saturday. So they got a few Dollars/Rand. Big deal, if wasn't that much more to cover expenses and many made big financial sacrifices for playing top level amateur rugby.

See the difference between the ABs in the early 90s to them in say in 99. Don't just look at their wallets, look at their stature, look at their conditioning. So they were paid... it was pretty basic, not enough to live outright on, they still held jobs, trained only in their evenings and didn't look that much different from everyday joes.

If you were close to the scene as you say you were and still think they were professional ala league (but in secret) I'm afraid you have a pretty obtuse outlook on the world. Life is not so black and white.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Rowanbi Thu 12 May 2016, 9:08 am

EXCEPT for the period 1937-49 they were NOT inferior to SA ,both Countries suffered peaks and troughs.

Yes, and those two series occurred in the amateur era, during which South Africa was decisively superior, going unbeaten in a series throughout the entire first half of the 20th century and recording 5 grandslams before the Kiwis managed 1. The All Blacks turned the tables in the pro era with a big influx of players of Pacific Island birth or ancestry, and with rapidly increasing encounters between the two teams NZ may well have nudged ahead on the head-to-head table by the end of the century.  

The claim SA ALWAYS had better backs is specious,SA formula was Massive Pack,
Good Loose forwards,a crash tackling 12,kicking half backs and a Goal kicker running
Rugby may have been practiced by Western Province for example.BUT theTransvaal sides including Eastern/Northen played classic Bok style.Most series were actually decided by the Goal kickers.


Well, there's more to South Africa than the Transvaal, and the hard sunbaked grounds of the republic were always more conducive to running rugby, whereas the rain-soaked winters in New Zealand saw a more forward-oriented game develop. In 1986 the Boks' advantage was definitely in the backs (I think this was the case in 81 too, though they were edged in that dramatic and controversial series, despite Mordt's hat-trick in the 'final).'

By the late 1980`s EVERY Country employed a lot of Players who technically were no Longer Amateurs.Things like being paid whilst sick from an injury for more than 2-4
weeks you considered a Professional.OR writing a Newspaper article.Book and taking
the proceeds was no longer acceptable to most top players worldwide.



Yes, I'd disagree that it was EVERY country, but this is precisely what I've been saying. the SANZAR trio, France, Italy and Japan definitely made the transition before the official change to the laws in 1996. As far as Italy & Japan went, it may well have only been the foreign imports who were getting paid prior to 1996. Wellington winger Mike Clamp returned from France just before the 1987 World Cup (to try and make the squad) and complained that Auckland was the only province that looked after its players. Doesn't take a genius to figure out what he meant by that.

Zinzan Brooke is quoted as saying he was back on the farm straight after the World Cup. Well, that's very curious, because the family farm was in Northland. So if he's claiming he was living and working on the farm at that time, why was he playing for Auckland? That would've been a breach of the rules back then, wouldn't it? Quite obviously he was enticed to Auckland, and that's where he was spending most of his time (as any regular on the nightlife scene back then would've been able to vouch for).

Also, I was covering the North Island junior provincial championships in the mid-80s, and there was no sign of the Auckland players who came through to dominate the All Blacks' inaugural World Cup squad in 1987. As mentioned earlier, Wellington routinely beat them at this level. & if you think you have more insight into this than me, tell me who the captain of the Wellington juniors was in the mid-80s.

Lomu may well have had a day-job prior to the 1995 RWC. That's because he was dropped from the squad, having been called in as a teenager to face the French (NZ's first & only series loss to a European nation at home). But if you think he went back to work after that RWC, you'd have to be living in Disneyland. The guy was being approached almost daily by the league scouts, and was even rumored to have been approached by the Dallas Cowboys. Oh, sure, he turned all that down to remain faithful to his team laughing I don't think so. He spent the rest of his career hopping from province to province...

Professionalism is really clubs who are able to train and prepare their players full time.   Every single day without distractions such as guys only being able to turn up at 5pm.

My interpretation exactly. & that describes the Auckland team of 1987 onward, and most of the All Blacks. They certainly weren't receiving huge sums of money. But they were being looked after sufficiently that they were able to play fulltime rugby, and for the most part were not tempted into switching codes as the Wellington stars were, among others.


Last edited by Rowanbi on Thu 12 May 2016, 9:15 am; edited 2 times in total
Rowanbi
Rowanbi

Posts : 825
Join date : 2015-02-15
Age : 88
Location : Istanbul

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Thu 12 May 2016, 9:11 am

Rowanbi

On another note, there were a side who were almost professional in the 1980s. That side was Romania until the end of communism. Those players were funded by the state and trained full time.
During that time they beat Wales, beat France, beat Scotland, beat Fiji. They were a decent outfit.
After the collapse they  simply couldn't remain "professional" and went back to becoming whipping boys once again.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Thu 12 May 2016, 9:13 am

The game went pro after the world cup Rowanbi so what you're saying is a non starter about Lomu.. nothing to dispute.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Rowanbi Thu 12 May 2016, 9:17 am

fa0019 wrote:The game went pro after the world cup Rowanbi so what you're saying is a non starter about Lomu.. nothing to dispute.

I know that. I wasn't the one who brought up Lomu and earlier questioned how he had found his way into the discussion. Rolling Eyes
Rowanbi
Rowanbi

Posts : 825
Join date : 2015-02-15
Age : 88
Location : Istanbul

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Thu 12 May 2016, 9:18 am

Also... the British Lions beat NZ in 1971. I think they can be seen as European nation.... oh and 14 of the 15 test players came from the UK on that tour too. The one Eire player was the prop Sean Lynch.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Thu 12 May 2016, 9:22 am

Rowanbi wrote:
fa0019 wrote:The game went pro after the world cup Rowanbi so what you're saying is a non starter about Lomu.. nothing to dispute.

I know that. I wasn't the one who brought up Lomu and earlier questioned how he had found his way into the discussion. Rolling Eyes

Up until the pro era he still had a job. End of.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Rowanbi Thu 12 May 2016, 9:22 am

Knew about the Lions too. But the British Isles & Ireland isn't a nation. Sorry.

Already explained about Lomu, who someone else brought up, not me.

Still waiting for an answer to my question about the Wellington juniors captain in the mid-80s. Rolling Eyes
Rowanbi
Rowanbi

Posts : 825
Join date : 2015-02-15
Age : 88
Location : Istanbul

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Thu 12 May 2016, 9:30 am

Rowanbi wrote:Knew that too. But the British Isles & Ireland isn't a nation. Sorry.

Actually until 2001 it was the British Isles not BI & IRE.

The Lions was the national touring side of the UK. Ireland was part of the UK when it began, and the IRFU continued to push its Southern Irish players for Lions selection after they left. Rugby in Ireland outside of dublin & Ulster wasn't as strong as it is now. Most of the greats (most not all) were from N. Ireland.

In 1971 the team comprised of 14 Brits. They sang God save the queen before the match, they hung the union jack as their flag. It was at the time.

Its like SA saying they never lost to Argentina at home until 2015. Its not quite true. They lost in the 1980s to the Jaguars.... who happened to be a South American touring side... but 15 of such were Argentinians.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Thu 12 May 2016, 9:44 am

Rowanbi wrote:Knew about the Lions too. But the British Isles & Ireland isn't a nation. Sorry.

Already explained about Lomu, who someone else brought up, not me.

Still waiting for an answer to my question about the Wellington juniors captain in the mid-80s. Rolling Eyes

Who gives a s*** who the captain was. It means nothing. Doesn't mean after that you are able to process 1 + 1 together correctly and come to a accurate answer because frankly what you're saying is not true.

I played representative rugby during the amateur era as a junior. For that we had free travel, food and kit. Does that mean I was professional because I was reimbursed for costs incurred, i.e. given money?

"Being fixed up" means nothing. They would get jobs with "understanding" employers who would give them good salaries, time off when touring and jobs that wouldn't be too taxing.
In England Bath were the masters of this. They recruited loads of guys such as Ben Clarke from Saracens with an easy PR job, paid very well and got all the time off they needed. Doesn't mean they didn't do 40 hrs a week at the job, doesn't mean training didn't start at 530 pm 3 times a week and weight training was things they saw on VHS only.

Bath actually tried to recruit Campo back in the day. Its a famous story of the time. He said fine but he needed a job that would give him 60k. 60k a year the chairman proclaimed (remember this was 1989-91 time so big money) "nah, 60k for the 6 months I'm here for". That was the no.1 player in the world... and yet he still said he would need a job and would only expect to train as an amateur.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by No 7&1/2 Thu 12 May 2016, 10:12 am

Still waiting for an apology for twisting my words Rowanbi.

No 7&1/2

Posts : 31349
Join date : 2012-10-20

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Rowanbi Thu 12 May 2016, 12:02 pm

the British Isles & Ireland isn't a nation.

Fact. Of course I knew about it anyway. So what's the point in arguing this. In fact, wasn't everyone clamoring to tell me they were 4 separate countries a while ago when I was suggesting staging alternate World Cups in the Home Unions (partly or otherwise) was like sending it back to the same country every 8 years? I chose my words carefully - technically France is the only European nation to have won series in NZ.

Who gives a s*** who the captain was. It means nothing.

It means you don't have the insight into New Zealand rugby during the shamateur era that I do. I quite happily bow to your superior insight into South African rugby and have been quite respectful in that regard.

Anyway, it was halfback Johnny Bradbrook. All things being equal he would've gone on to play for the All Blacks. But things were not equal, plainly.

& I brought up the juniors because the players who came through during that so-called great era for Auckland in the late 80s & early 90s were never on the radar at junior level. Of course, they were around somewhere, playing for othr provinces (like Brooke) or playing rugby league, perhaps. But it was the advantage of competing as fulltimers in an amateur sport that brought them to the forefront as senior players.

So can you explain how Zinny was living and working on a farm in Northland while playing rugby for the Auckland province. If he was an amateur, he would have been playing for the local province, obviously.
Rowanbi
Rowanbi

Posts : 825
Join date : 2015-02-15
Age : 88
Location : Istanbul

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Thu 12 May 2016, 12:07 pm

Rowanbi wrote: the British Isles & Ireland isn't a nation.

Fact. Of course I knew about it anyway. So what's the appoint in arguing this. In fact, wasn't everyone clamoring to tell me they were 4 separate countries a while ago when I was suggesting staging alternate World Cups in the Home Unions (partly or otherwise) was like sending it back to the same country every 8 years? I chose my words carefully - technically France is the only European nation to have won series in NZ.

Who gives a s*** who the captain was. It means nothing.

It means you don't have the insight into New Zealand rugby during the shamateur era that I do. I quite happily bow to your superior insight into South African rugby and have been quite respectful in that regard.

Anyway, it was halfback Johnny Bradbrook. All things being equal he would've gone on to play for the All Blacks. But things were not equal, plainly.

& I brought up the juniors because the players who came through during that so-called great era for Auckland in the late 80s & early 90s were never on the radar at junior level. Of course, they were around somewhere, playing for othr provinces (like Brooke) or playing rugby league, perhaps. But it was the advantage of competing as fulltimers in an amateur sport that brought them to the forefront as senior players.

So can you explain how Zinny was living and working on a farm in Northland while playing rugby for the Auckland province. If he was an amateur, he would have been playing for the local province, obviously.

ok, ask yourself this then.

Fitness levels, times spent in training.

Was there a difference between NRL players and union players?

and that's your answer to one being professional, one being amateur.

Will Carling didn't have a job from 1991. He was England captain. His job was going on speaking tours during the day, presentations to businesses about leadership. Yet his rugby training was the same... amateur club, 3 nights a week training, Saturday game.

He was amateur. He was just as professional as those players you make up, just as amateur.

Compared to league he was not a professional.

Rugby at the highest did in some nations pay players, find well paying jobs with little commitment. They got lots of benefits. But they were not professional.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Thu 12 May 2016, 12:10 pm

Rowanbi wrote: the British Isles & Ireland isn't a nation.

Fact.

sorry old bean. But it wasn't the British Isles and Ireland touring team until 2001.

It was the British Isles. The Union jack was the official flag, GSTQ was the official anthem and this was sung before every test. ROI players chose to play from them... like Carney of late in League has done so for the RL Lions... like Morgan has done so for England in cricket. It was the UK rugby side. Fact.

Was it right it changed. Yes.

Does it mean they weren't representing the UK prior? No.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Rowanbi Thu 12 May 2016, 12:14 pm

Was there a difference between NRL players and union players?


Not if we're talking All Blacks & Auckland late 80s thru early 90s, no. I seem to recall burly Auckland winger of the shamateur era 'Inga the Winger' going to British rugby league and running riot.

What's your point about Carling? Already said the Home Unions and the Americas were the big losers during the shamateur decade, being left well behind.

Lions technically represent two nations in political terms, and four in rugby terms. I've no interest in arguing this further, because pointless.
Rowanbi
Rowanbi

Posts : 825
Join date : 2015-02-15
Age : 88
Location : Istanbul

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Thu 12 May 2016, 12:21 pm

Rowanbi wrote:Was there a difference between NRL players and union players?


Not if we're talking All Blacks & Auckland late 80s thru early 90s, no. I seem to recall burly Auckland winger of the shamateur era 'Inga the Winger' going to British rugby league and running riot.

What's your point about Carling? Already said the Home Unions and the Americas were the big losers during the shamateur decade, being left well behind.

Lions technically represent two nations in political terms, and four in rugby terms. I've no interest in arguing this further, because pointless.

The reason you have no point in arguing further is because you are wrong and you know it.

Before test matches the union flag walked out the players, GSTQ was played as their anthem. That is a fact. There were no dual flags, dual anthems. It was not a two nations team. The players in 2001 actually made the request to do so and it was rightly accepted.

NZ didn't run through players. Scotland in 1990 took them all the way in the 2 match series in NZ. Had it been pro players vs. the scottish amateurs it would have been a riot. Scotland were very unlucky to lose one of the tests in fact.  The Lions almost won the series being 13-3 up in the final test, the French won the 94 series and AUS was in fact dominant over them from 1990 onwards.

Had they been professional they would have swamped teams, they didn't do any more than they do now... in fact they weren't as dominant.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Rowanbi Thu 12 May 2016, 12:33 pm

No, I think you're trying to regain your pride after having your butt kicked on the issue of New Zealand domestic rugby in the shamateur era, because you weren't there and don't know, and you couldn't even answer the few simple questions I put to you.

Rowanbi
Rowanbi

Posts : 825
Join date : 2015-02-15
Age : 88
Location : Istanbul

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by fa0019 Thu 12 May 2016, 12:40 pm

Rowanbi wrote:No, I think you're trying to regain your pride after having your butt kicked on the issue of New Zealand domestic rugby in the shamateur era, because you weren't there and don't know, and you couldn't even answer the few simple questions I put to you.


I wasn't there... and if you were and you came out with those conclusions I'm afraid you lack even the most basic forms of rational thinking.

Your simple questions of.... do you know this player? It means nothing.

I bet I know somethings about Bath rugby which bath rugby fans don't know only because I was around at the time when they were not. However it doesn't mean I know Bath rugby better than them nor whether I can add 1+1 successfully together.

Answer this if you want.

The 2003 NZ team vs. the 1987, 1991 or 1995 NZ team.

Who would win?

Not who had better skill, not who had better players.... who would win in a hypothetical match?

If you say anything bar the 2003 team in essence you need to get a brain transplant.

fa0019

Posts : 8196
Join date : 2011-07-25

Back to top Go down

2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa - Page 8 Empty Re: 2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 8 of 16 Previous  1 ... 5 ... 7, 8, 9 ... 12 ... 16  Next

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum