***England v France - MATCH CANCELLED***

First topic message reminder :

MATCH CANCELLED  Result in the book is 0-0.

Massive disappointment all round.

Was looking forward to witnessing two teams try their hardest not to win the pool and have the easier route to the Final.
As it is England finish on top and now face a massive challenge to overcome to make the final.

Can't help but think dark forces are at work to scupper our chances of lifting the Webb Ellis Cup again.

Poorfour wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:France will make the final now, 2 weeks prep plus added time to sort out their bust up within the camp. I wouldn't want to play them.

As for England it wouldn't surprise me if the RFU pay for Georgia to come and train with them for a couple of days.

Not a bad idea, if tournament rules permit. But I'd probably go for Fiji rather than Georgia given the likely opponents are Australia.

Rules doesn't permit it. 

Training must be within the squad and only in that squad. Otherwise, what would stop a Tier 1 side taking more players to the tournament stating they where for training purposes and hence then have extra stand in players already there in the event they needed to call up injury replacements.

Poorfour wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:France will make the final now, 2 weeks prep plus added time to sort out their bust up within the camp. I wouldn't want to play them.

As for England it wouldn't surprise me if the RFU pay for Georgia to come and train with them for a couple of days.

Not a bad idea, if tournament rules permit. But I'd probably go for Fiji rather than Georgia given the likely opponents are Australia.

I agree, but we have worked with Georgia before with scrum practice sessions.

Rules are there to be broken.

So another week for our injured bodies to rest but a missed opportunity to give Mako, Slade and possibly Nowell another run out before the knockouts. I guess Billy and Marler would have been rested anyway but at least it reduces the chance of picking up further injuries or suspensions.

All in all I think I'd rather have played this match, but maybe that's biased by the fact that I'll be watching Paw Patrol on Saturday morning instead now.

Hopefully they can still train unimpacted by the weather, possibly at indoor facilities if needs be, but obviously the more time on grass pitches the better.

I'd take what Eddie says about two week breaks with a pinch of salt. Your standard two week break is in the Six Nations, it's predetermined and you know at the start of the break both that you actually have a break and who you'll be playing. We could probably now safely prepare for Australia but that gives us 9 days, not 2 weeks. And all the considered we lost this year (Wales week 3) and last year (Scotland week 3, France week 4) off the back or 2 week breaks, although all three of those were away (as opposed to neutral) and the other team had the same break.

I'd make us marginal favourites for an Australia quarter-final, although the needle hasn't moved much with today's announcement. Had we smashed France I'd be more confident, had we creeped past I'd be less confident. Had we lost to France I'd have made Wales favourites against us but had Wales lost to Fiji I'd have made us favourites against them - and indeed if Wales were to lose to Uruguay I'd put us as favourites to beat them too.

4. Opposed Training Sessions
From September 8, 2019 Teams are not permitted to play non-Tournament Matches but are allowed to conduct opposed training sessions. Teams are not permitted to include players from the Preliminary Training Squad or any other player that could potentially be selected for the Tournament Team in opposed training sessions with or against the Tournament Team.

Once a Team has officially entered the Tournament all training sessions, opposed or otherwise, must take place at agreed and nominated JR2019 Training Venues.

These sessions cannot be advertised, have recorded scores, cannot be ticketed or reported as Matches by media and must be de-structured as much as possible. All Commercial Rules must be respected by all participants in an opposed training session.

Teams must inform RWCL and JR2019 if any opposed training sessions are planned.

https://www.rugbyworldcup.com/tournament-rules

I can't see how a training session against Georgia would go against these rules - none of them are potential squad players - as long as it wasn't in any way billed as a game.

I don't think it will happen, but if World Rugby were informed and sanctioned it, it doesn't go against their rules.

Eddie moves in mysterious ways. I fully expect he'll plan something for the Lads to stay match sharp.

I hear the next RWC is planned for India, in the monsoon season. Could try Antarctica, I hear it's nice this time of year.

Farcical situation. Move the game for god sake, dont cancel it. At the last RWC Ireland picked up 4 injuries and 1 suspension after playing France in our last pool game. Giving teams a week off makes a mockery of this tournament.

Just let them out down the pub to decompress. A spot of dwarf throwing and cheating on your partners never hurt anyone.

Collapse2005 wrote:Farcical situation. Move the game for god sake, dont cancel it. At the last RWC Ireland picked up 4 injuries and 1 suspension after playing France in our last pool game. Giving teams a week off makes a mockery of this tournament.

The game wasn't under threat two days ago, then the typhoon shifted. "Just move it" is the equivalent of saying "get Brexit done", it's an outcome which ignores all the complexities of the situation - with a limited timescale available.

This isn't a park game where if your pitch is unplayable you reverse the fixture and drive to the other ground instead. It's the Rugby World Cup.

Would it have been an easier route to win if they had come second

Winning the group probably means Aus, NZ, then SA

Second would have meant Wal, SA, then NZ.

So really the only difference was Wales or Australia, which latest results would suggest is close, but with Wales the harder option

No9 wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:France will make the final now, 2 weeks prep plus added time to sort out their bust up within the camp. I wouldn't want to play them.

As for England it wouldn't surprise me if the RFU pay for Georgia to come and train with them for a couple of days.

Not a bad idea, if tournament rules permit. But I'd probably go for Fiji rather than Georgia given the likely opponents are Australia.

Rules doesn't permit it. 

Training must be within the squad and only in that squad. Otherwise, what would stop a Tier 1 side taking more players to the tournament stating they where for training purposes and hence then have extra stand in players already there in the event they needed to call up injury replacements.

But those rules should be amended in thsi scenario.....

No he's right. WR and the Japanese Union had a number of years to prepare for this, and their response is to cancel games. Farcical. Teams lose their fighting chance of securing top spot in the pool, or a place in the last 8. The fans and players in Japan are hit the worst but I guess that's okay in the Rugby World Cup...

mikey_dragon wrote:No he's right. WR and the Japanese Union had a number of years to prepare for this, and their response is to cancel games. Farcical. Teams lose their fighting chance of securing top spot in the pool, or a place in the last 8. The fans and players in Japan are hit the worst but I guess that's okay in the Rugby World Cup...

Yeah you'd think after all the decades of unexpected giant monster attacks Japan would be better prepared for contingency planning

I kind of worry that we are going to go into the quarters a bit under-cooked. Without trying to sound arrogant, England haven't been properly tested yet. Argentina have been the toughest opponents so far and England didn't need to get out of second gear to beat the comfortably. Australia are looking like a nasty ambush waiting to happen...

Cumbrian wrote:I kind of worry that we are going to go into the quarters a bit under-cooked.  Without trying to sound arrogant, England haven't been properly tested yet. Argentina have been the toughest opponents so far and England didn't need to get out of second gear to beat the comfortably.  Australia are looking like a nasty ambush waiting to happen...

Yes thats what i was thinking aswell....but im sure Mr Jones will keep them fired up.

Yeah, I'm thinking that. I think those without a two week break are going to be sharper - we see it in the 6 nations that the games after the two break weeks are always a little more messy.

robbo277 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:Farcical situation. Move the game for god sake, dont cancel it. At the last RWC Ireland picked up 4 injuries and 1 suspension after playing France in our last pool game. Giving teams a week off makes a mockery of this tournament.

The game wasn't under threat two days ago, then the typhoon shifted. "Just move it" is the equivalent of saying "get Brexit done", it's an outcome which ignores all the complexities of the situation - with a limited timescale available.

This isn't a park game where if your pitch is unplayable you reverse the fixture and drive to the other ground instead. It's the Rugby World Cup.

Its the lesser of two evils to move the game. Fans have traveled from all over the world to go to it, it gives England and France an unfair advantage going into the quarters (no injuries, tiredness nor suspensions) and makes an absolute farce of the competition. Games can be rescheduled to be played during the week in stadia with roofs. For the fans most grounds, unless in Hokkaido or Oita are a short enough shinkansen ride away from the main hubs of Tokyo or Osaka.

Cancelling the Italy game is even worse as Italy technically could have still qualified with a win over NZ. Yep we all know thats highly unlikely but whats the point of putting the two teams in the same group if Italy are knocked out over weather.

You can guarantee that if NZ or England's participation was at stake world rugby would have found a way for the game to go ahead. Its no surprise Italy are absolutely fuming.

The Brexit analogy is really wide of the mark.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

No9 wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:France will make the final now, 2 weeks prep plus added time to sort out their bust up within the camp. I wouldn't want to play them.

As for England it wouldn't surprise me if the RFU pay for Georgia to come and train with them for a couple of days.

Not a bad idea, if tournament rules permit. But I'd probably go for Fiji rather than Georgia given the likely opponents are Australia.

Rules doesn't permit it. 

Training must be within the squad and only in that squad. Otherwise, what would stop a Tier 1 side taking more players to the tournament stating they where for training purposes and hence then have extra stand in players already there in the event they needed to call up injury replacements.

But those rules should be amended in thsi scenario.....

Yeah.. dont like the rules then change them mid tournament... 

Oh world rugby dont have to change them but they are making themselves look very very bad when the whole world is watching. Its completely in their interest to change them. I wonder if the weather had knocked England/Wales out would you be adopting a different POV?

mikey_dragon wrote:No he's right. WR and the Japanese Union had a number of years to prepare for this, and their response is to cancel games. Farcical. Teams lose their fighting chance of securing top spot in the pool, or a place in the last 8. The fans and players in Japan are hit the worst but I guess that's okay in the Rugby World Cup...

Get your facts right Mikey... these rules are RWC rules set down from the inaugural RWC, not set down for this tournament only. Its just that its the first time these rules have had to be put into place. If the rules are not liked then change them, but they cannot be changed mid tournament.

Collapse2005 wrote:Oh world rugby dont have to change them but they are making themselves look very very bad when the whole world is watching. Its completely in their interest to change them. I wonder if the weather had knocked England out would you be adopting a different POV?

Totally disagree.... If they amended the rules mid tournament to suit Tier 1 teams (ie Scotland), then they would look bad. By sticking to the rules, irrespective to who loses out, makes them look professional.

No9 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:No he's right. WR and the Japanese Union had a number of years to prepare for this, and their response is to cancel games. Farcical. Teams lose their fighting chance of securing top spot in the pool, or a place in the last 8. The fans and players in Japan are hit the worst but I guess that's okay in the Rugby World Cup...

Get your facts right Mikey... these rules are RWC rules set down from the inaugural RWC, not set down for this tournament only. Its just that its the first time these rules have had to be put into place. If the rules are not liked then change them, but they cannot be changed mid tournament.

Well then just pretend that I wrote "RWC, WR, and the Japanese Union...".

Collapse2005 wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:Farcical situation. Move the game for god sake, dont cancel it. At the last RWC Ireland picked up 4 injuries and 1 suspension after playing France in our last pool game. Giving teams a week off makes a mockery of this tournament.

The game wasn't under threat two days ago, then the typhoon shifted. "Just move it" is the equivalent of saying "get Brexit done", it's an outcome which ignores all the complexities of the situation - with a limited timescale available.

This isn't a park game where if your pitch is unplayable you reverse the fixture and drive to the other ground instead. It's the Rugby World Cup.

Its the lesser of two evils to move the game. Fans have traveled from all over the world to go to it, it gives England and France an unfair advantage going into the quarters (no injuries, tiredness nor suspensions) and makes an absolute farce of the competition. Games can be rescheduled to be played during the week in stadia with roofs. For the fans most grounds, unless in Hokkaido or Oita are a short enough shinkansen ride away from the main hubs of Tokyo or Osaka.

Cancelling the Italy game is even worse as Italy technically could have still qualified with a win over NZ. Yep we all know thats highly unlikely but whats the point of putting the two teams in the same group if Italy are knocked out over weather.

You can guarantee that if NZ or England's participation was at stake world rugby would have found a way for the game to go ahead. Its no surprise Italy are absolutely fuming.

If England had to play France on Monday or Tuesday that would give the other side an advantage in the quarter-finals, so which way do you cut it? There is no scope in the rules to postpone pool games and I think all things considered that is fair. It is impossible to postpone a pool game earlier in the pool unless you shoehorn it in between the end of the pool stages and the quarters - which would leave undesirable outcomes. I walked through how England vs Tonga could not be postponed on the cancelled games thread. Why should one game be subject to postponement when others would not have been?

As for moving games, I believe this is what World Rugby have spent the last couple of days looking at and have found no workable solution. That means either they are incompetent and have missed a workable solution or there are no workable solutions. As much as we may feel that it is the first, I'm sure they've explored every avenue to get the game to go ahead and found it unworkable.

No-one gets eliminated because of a cancelled pool game. You get awarded 2 points. If that's not enough to see you through, look at your performances in the other pool games first.

mikey_dragon wrote:

No9 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:No he's right. WR and the Japanese Union had a number of years to prepare for this, and their response is to cancel games. Farcical. Teams lose their fighting chance of securing top spot in the pool, or a place in the last 8. The fans and players in Japan are hit the worst but I guess that's okay in the Rugby World Cup...

Get your facts right Mikey... these rules are RWC rules set down from the inaugural RWC, not set down for this tournament only. Its just that its the first time these rules have had to be put into place. If the rules are not liked then change them, but they cannot be changed mid tournament.

Well then just pretend that I wrote "RWC, WR, and the Japanese Union...".

My point wasn't WR or RWC... it was rules are rules and cannot be changed mid tournament. I wasnt being pedantic over the rugby body....

Gooseberry wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:No he's right. WR and the Japanese Union had a number of years to prepare for this, and their response is to cancel games. Farcical. Teams lose their fighting chance of securing top spot in the pool, or a place in the last 8. The fans and players in Japan are hit the worst but I guess that's okay in the Rugby World Cup...

Yeah you'd think after all the decades of unexpected giant monster attacks Japan would be better prepared for contingency planning

Some of them are fake ones made out of rubber, I saw a documentary on it.

robbo277 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:Farcical situation. Move the game for god sake, dont cancel it. At the last RWC Ireland picked up 4 injuries and 1 suspension after playing France in our last pool game. Giving teams a week off makes a mockery of this tournament.

The game wasn't under threat two days ago, then the typhoon shifted. "Just move it" is the equivalent of saying "get Brexit done", it's an outcome which ignores all the complexities of the situation - with a limited timescale available.

This isn't a park game where if your pitch is unplayable you reverse the fixture and drive to the other ground instead. It's the Rugby World Cup.

Its the lesser of two evils to move the game. Fans have traveled from all over the world to go to it, it gives England and France an unfair advantage going into the quarters (no injuries, tiredness nor suspensions) and makes an absolute farce of the competition. Games can be rescheduled to be played during the week in stadia with roofs. For the fans most grounds, unless in Hokkaido or Oita are a short enough shinkansen ride away from the main hubs of Tokyo or Osaka.

Cancelling the Italy game is even worse as Italy technically could have still qualified with a win over NZ. Yep we all know thats highly unlikely but whats the point of putting the two teams in the same group if Italy are knocked out over weather.

You can guarantee that if NZ or England's participation was at stake world rugby would have found a way for the game to go ahead. Its no surprise Italy are absolutely fuming.

If England had to play France on Monday or Tuesday that would give the other side an advantage in the quarter-finals, so which way do you cut it? There is no scope in the rules to postpone pool games and I think all things considered that is fair. It is impossible to postpone a pool game earlier in the pool unless you shoehorn it in between the end of the pool stages and the quarters - which would leave undesirable outcomes. I walked through how England vs Tonga could not be postponed on the cancelled games thread. Why should one game be subject to postponement when others would not have been?

As for moving games, I believe this is what World Rugby have spent the last couple of days looking at and have found no workable solution. That means either they are incompetent and have missed a workable solution or there are no workable solutions. As much as we may feel that it is the first, I'm sure they've explored every avenue to get the game to go ahead and found it unworkable.

No-one gets eliminated because of a cancelled pool game. You get awarded 2 points. If that's not enough to see you through, look at your performances in the other pool games first.

That is still the lesser of two evils. Short turn arounds are a reality for world cups. Typhoons are not.

Collapse2005 wrote:Oh world rugby dont have to change them but they are making themselves look very very bad when the whole world is watching. Its completely in their interest to change them. I wonder if the weather had knocked England/Wales out would you be adopting a different POV?

I would 100% be annoyed. But if you look at it dispassionately it's the right call. And if it were England knocked out I think ultimately I'd have to concede that.

No9 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

No9 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:No he's right. WR and the Japanese Union had a number of years to prepare for this, and their response is to cancel games. Farcical. Teams lose their fighting chance of securing top spot in the pool, or a place in the last 8. The fans and players in Japan are hit the worst but I guess that's okay in the Rugby World Cup...

Get your facts right Mikey... these rules are RWC rules set down from the inaugural RWC, not set down for this tournament only. Its just that its the first time these rules have had to be put into place. If the rules are not liked then change them, but they cannot be changed mid tournament.

Well then just pretend that I wrote "RWC, WR, and the Japanese Union...".

My point wasn't WR or RWC... it was rules are rules and cannot be changed mid tournament. I wasnt being pedantic over the rugby body....

You are though, and you missed my point. I was talking about prep, they didn't prepare adequately for this scenario. You're the one mentioning changing rules mid tournament.

Of course it doesn't affect my team so I could keep my mouth shut. But as a rugby fan then I feel for those most affected; players, fans, and teams - Italy, France, England, Japan, Scotland, Ireland; with potentially more to come.

robbo277 wrote:No-one gets eliminated because of a cancelled pool game. You get awarded 2 points. If that's not enough to see you through, look at your performances in the other pool games first.

Not really true. You could be all set to be runners up in the pool with a game against Canada, Namibia etc last and be thrown out.

Collapse2005 wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:Farcical situation. Move the game for god sake, dont cancel it. At the last RWC Ireland picked up 4 injuries and 1 suspension after playing France in our last pool game. Giving teams a week off makes a mockery of this tournament.

The game wasn't under threat two days ago, then the typhoon shifted. "Just move it" is the equivalent of saying "get Brexit done", it's an outcome which ignores all the complexities of the situation - with a limited timescale available.

This isn't a park game where if your pitch is unplayable you reverse the fixture and drive to the other ground instead. It's the Rugby World Cup.

Its the lesser of two evils to move the game. Fans have traveled from all over the world to go to it, it gives England and France an unfair advantage going into the quarters (no injuries, tiredness nor suspensions) and makes an absolute farce of the competition. Games can be rescheduled to be played during the week in stadia with roofs. For the fans most grounds, unless in Hokkaido or Oita are a short enough shinkansen ride away from the main hubs of Tokyo or Osaka.

Cancelling the Italy game is even worse as Italy technically could have still qualified with a win over NZ. Yep we all know thats highly unlikely but whats the point of putting the two teams in the same group if Italy are knocked out over weather.

You can guarantee that if NZ or England's participation was at stake world rugby would have found a way for the game to go ahead. Its no surprise Italy are absolutely fuming.

If England had to play France on Monday or Tuesday that would give the other side an advantage in the quarter-finals, so which way do you cut it? There is no scope in the rules to postpone pool games and I think all things considered that is fair. It is impossible to postpone a pool game earlier in the pool unless you shoehorn it in between the end of the pool stages and the quarters - which would leave undesirable outcomes. I walked through how England vs Tonga could not be postponed on the cancelled games thread. Why should one game be subject to postponement when others would not have been?

As for moving games, I believe this is what World Rugby have spent the last couple of days looking at and have found no workable solution. That means either they are incompetent and have missed a workable solution or there are no workable solutions. As much as we may feel that it is the first, I'm sure they've explored every avenue to get the game to go ahead and found it unworkable.

No-one gets eliminated because of a cancelled pool game. You get awarded 2 points. If that's not enough to see you through, look at your performances in the other pool games first.

That is still the lesser of two evils. Short turn arounds are a reality for world cups. Typhoons are not.

Not in the knock-out stages, where every other team get 6 days minimum in between games. South Africa, for instance, finished their campaign 11 days before their likely quarter-final and that was with a soft match against Canada.

The knock-out stages are protected. There is deliberately no matches played next week so everyone can prepare for them adequately. Having more than 6 days is fortunate. Having fewer than 6 days is not expected for anyone.

Yeah that's a bit of a dumb perspective. In the RWC it isn't over until it's over (IE once you've played all of your games), it is a competition after all. Cancelling games and awarding 2 points, that's a disaster.

Scottrf wrote:

robbo277 wrote:No-one gets eliminated because of a cancelled pool game. You get awarded 2 points. If that's not enough to see you through, look at your performances in the other pool games first.

Not really true. You could be all set to be runners up in the pool with a game against Canada, Namibia etc last and be thrown out.

Right, so South Africa played Canada in their last game. If that was rained out, they would have been on 12 points, with NZ on 14 and Italy on 10. Had Italy then beat New Zealand, yes, South Africa would have been eliminated. But they would have been in that situation because they lost to NZ - a team Italy had then beat.

South Africa weren't qualified before the NZ vs Italy game was rained out. There was a mathematical chance they could have been eliminated even after they took the 5 points against Canada. If you don't win all your games, it's not always in your hands. If you win all your games (as NZ, England and France did), you can suffer one washout and still qualify.

mikey_dragon wrote:

No9 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

No9 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:No he's right. WR and the Japanese Union had a number of years to prepare for this, and their response is to cancel games. Farcical. Teams lose their fighting chance of securing top spot in the pool, or a place in the last 8. The fans and players in Japan are hit the worst but I guess that's okay in the Rugby World Cup...

Get your facts right Mikey... these rules are RWC rules set down from the inaugural RWC, not set down for this tournament only. Its just that its the first time these rules have had to be put into place. If the rules are not liked then change them, but they cannot be changed mid tournament.

Well then just pretend that I wrote "RWC, WR, and the Japanese Union...".

My point wasn't WR or RWC... it was rules are rules and cannot be changed mid tournament. I wasnt being pedantic over the rugby body....

You are though, and you missed my point. I was talking about prep, they didn't prepare adequately for this scenario. You're the one mentioning changing rules mid tournament.

Of course it doesn't affect my team so I could keep my mouth shut. But as a rugby fan then I feel for those most affected; players, fans, and teams - Italy, France, England, Japan, Scotland, Ireland; with potentially more to come.

 ... what... 

First, I'm Welsh, so it doesnt impact "my team" either. 
Second, I have not once mentioned changing rules mid tournament. I said you CANNOT change rules mid tournament. If they need looking at then that has to be for for future tournaments.
Third, this is risk management. The risk is Sep, Oct and Nov is less than earlier in the year, as we are moving out of Typhoon season for Japan, but the risk is still there. The organisers have looked at and managed the risk (within the rules) as best they could. The rules being pool games are cancelled. 

Now you mentioned prep... please say how you can prepare for a typhoon 2 years in the future, as that is what you are accusing them of (ie, not being prepared).

There are some risks you just have to accept, which they have and there was rules in place to deal with the consequences. Some wont like the outcome.... Welcome to life.

robbo277 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

robbo277 wrote:No-one gets eliminated because of a cancelled pool game. You get awarded 2 points. If that's not enough to see you through, look at your performances in the other pool games first.

Not really true. You could be all set to be runners up in the pool with a game against Canada, Namibia etc last and be thrown out.

Right, so South Africa played Canada in their last game. If that was rained out, they would have been on 12 points, with NZ on 14 and Italy on 10. Had Italy then beat New Zealand, yes, South Africa would have been eliminated. But they would have been in that situation because they lost to NZ - a team Italy had then beat.

South Africa weren't qualified before the NZ vs Italy game was rained out. There was a mathematical chance they could have been eliminated even after they took the 5 points against Canada. If you don't win all your games, it's not always in your hands. If you win all your games (as NZ, England and France did), you can suffer one washout and still qualify.

Absolute drivel.

No9 wrote:
Now you mentioned prep... please say how you can prepare for a typhoon 2 years in the future, as that is what you are accusing them of (ie, not being prepared).

There are some risks you just have to accept, which they have and there was rules in place to deal with the consequences. Some wont like the outcome.... Welcome to life.

Sat on a hospital bed watching Sky Sports saying this could be the worst typhoon in 50 years to hit Japan.

robbo277 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

robbo277 wrote:No-one gets eliminated because of a cancelled pool game. You get awarded 2 points. If that's not enough to see you through, look at your performances in the other pool games first.

Not really true. You could be all set to be runners up in the pool with a game against Canada, Namibia etc last and be thrown out.

Right, so South Africa played Canada in their last game. If that was rained out, they would have been on 12 points, with NZ on 14 and Italy on 10. Had Italy then beat New Zealand, yes, South Africa would have been eliminated. But they would have been in that situation because they lost to NZ - a team Italy had then beat.

South Africa weren't qualified before the NZ vs Italy game was rained out. There was a mathematical chance they could have been eliminated even after they took the 5 points against Canada. If you don't win all your games, it's not always in your hands. If you win all your games (as NZ, England and France did), you can suffer one washout and still qualify.

That's just one game of the pool. The fact would be that they would be eliminated only because their game was called off, with the win against Canada a formality.

Don't forget, SA beat Italy 49-3.

Collapse2005 wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:Farcical situation. Move the game for god sake, dont cancel it. At the last RWC Ireland picked up 4 injuries and 1 suspension after playing France in our last pool game. Giving teams a week off makes a mockery of this tournament.

The game wasn't under threat two days ago, then the typhoon shifted. "Just move it" is the equivalent of saying "get Brexit done", it's an outcome which ignores all the complexities of the situation - with a limited timescale available.

This isn't a park game where if your pitch is unplayable you reverse the fixture and drive to the other ground instead. It's the Rugby World Cup.

Its the lesser of two evils to move the game. Fans have traveled from all over the world to go to it, it gives England and France an unfair advantage going into the quarters (no injuries, tiredness nor suspensions) and makes an absolute farce of the competition. Games can be rescheduled to be played during the week in stadia with roofs. For the fans most grounds, unless in Hokkaido or Oita are a short enough shinkansen ride away from the main hubs of Tokyo or Osaka.

Cancelling the Italy game is even worse as Italy technically could have still qualified with a win over NZ. Yep we all know thats highly unlikely but whats the point of putting the two teams in the same group if Italy are knocked out over weather.

You can guarantee that if NZ or England's participation was at stake world rugby would have found a way for the game to go ahead. Its no surprise Italy are absolutely fuming.

The Brexit analogy is really wide of the mark.

Not really. Only 3.5 hours to Oita by Shinkansen/rapid train from Osaka and just over 4 hours to Sapporo from Tokyo.

No9 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

No9 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

No9 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:No he's right. WR and the Japanese Union had a number of years to prepare for this, and their response is to cancel games. Farcical. Teams lose their fighting chance of securing top spot in the pool, or a place in the last 8. The fans and players in Japan are hit the worst but I guess that's okay in the Rugby World Cup...

Get your facts right Mikey... these rules are RWC rules set down from the inaugural RWC, not set down for this tournament only. Its just that its the first time these rules have had to be put into place. If the rules are not liked then change them, but they cannot be changed mid tournament.

Well then just pretend that I wrote "RWC, WR, and the Japanese Union...".

My point wasn't WR or RWC... it was rules are rules and cannot be changed mid tournament. I wasnt being pedantic over the rugby body....

You are though, and you missed my point. I was talking about prep, they didn't prepare adequately for this scenario. You're the one mentioning changing rules mid tournament.

Of course it doesn't affect my team so I could keep my mouth shut. But as a rugby fan then I feel for those most affected; players, fans, and teams - Italy, France, England, Japan, Scotland, Ireland; with potentially more to come.

 ... what... 

First, I'm Welsh, so it doesnt impact "my team" either. 
Second, I have not once mentioned changing rules mid tournament. I said you CANNOT change rules mid tournament. If they need looking at then that has to be for for future tournaments.
Third, this is risk management. The risk is Sep, Oct and Nov is less than earlier in the year, as we are moving out of Typhoon season for Japan, but the risk is still there. The organisers have looked at and managed the risk (within the rules) as best they could. The rules being pool games are cancelled. 

Now you mentioned prep... please say how you can prepare for a typhoon 2 years in the future, as that is what you are accusing them of (ie, not being prepared).

There are some risks you just have to accept, which they have and there was rules in place to deal with the consequences. Some wont like the outcome.... Welcome to life.

Seriously, you've lost me here - by arguing with yourself, misunderstanding stuff, debating points that I didn't make - very miaow-esque. I'll try again. The organisers (RWC - there you go, WR, Japan) had years to prepare for a competition being held in typhoon season. They had time to put more adequate contingencies in place should disaster strike. They failed. Fans, players, unions are unhappy. The game cancellation with 2 points is an unacceptable outcome, for me anyway (and others it seems). That was my point.
Yes, therefore you're the one discussing changing rules mid tournaments. I never mentioned anything of the sort so you shouldn't have even mentioned it to me. There's no need to keep on mentioning it.

Soul Requiem wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

robbo277 wrote:No-one gets eliminated because of a cancelled pool game. You get awarded 2 points. If that's not enough to see you through, look at your performances in the other pool games first.

Not really true. You could be all set to be runners up in the pool with a game against Canada, Namibia etc last and be thrown out.

Right, so South Africa played Canada in their last game. If that was rained out, they would have been on 12 points, with NZ on 14 and Italy on 10. Had Italy then beat New Zealand, yes, South Africa would have been eliminated. But they would have been in that situation because they lost to NZ - a team Italy had then beat.

South Africa weren't qualified before the NZ vs Italy game was rained out. There was a mathematical chance they could have been eliminated even after they took the 5 points against Canada. If you don't win all your games, it's not always in your hands. If you win all your games (as NZ, England and France did), you can suffer one washout and still qualify.

Absolute drivel.

How?

You win 3 games and get your 4th washed out, you will not be eliminated.

Pal Joey wrote:Not really. Only 3.5 hours to Oita by Shinkansen/rapid train from Osaka and just over 4 hours to Sapporo from Tokyo.

That depends. If you're from Wales than that's a very long distance. If you're from Canada or Japan it could be visiting your neighbour.

mikey_dragon wrote:

Pal Joey wrote:Not really. Only 3.5 hours to Oita by Shinkansen/rapid train from Osaka and just over 4 hours to Sapporo from Tokyo.

That depends. If you're from Wales than that's a very long distance. If you're from Canada or Japan it could be visiting your neighbour.

Here it can be a round trip to the mailbox at the end of the driveway... or dropping the kids of at rugby practice; then returning back home.

robbo277 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

robbo277 wrote:No-one gets eliminated because of a cancelled pool game. You get awarded 2 points. If that's not enough to see you through, look at your performances in the other pool games first.

Not really true. You could be all set to be runners up in the pool with a game against Canada, Namibia etc last and be thrown out.

Right, so South Africa played Canada in their last game. If that was rained out, they would have been on 12 points, with NZ on 14 and Italy on 10. Had Italy then beat New Zealand, yes, South Africa would have been eliminated. But they would have been in that situation because they lost to NZ - a team Italy had then beat.

South Africa weren't qualified before the NZ vs Italy game was rained out. There was a mathematical chance they could have been eliminated even after they took the 5 points against Canada. If you don't win all your games, it's not always in your hands. If you win all your games (as NZ, England and France did), you can suffer one washout and still qualify.

Absolute drivel.

How?

You win 3 games and get your 4th washed out, you will not be eliminated.

That isn't the bit that's drivel, if Scotland are eliminated because their game against Japan is cancelled that is the reason why they are going home not the loss to Ireland. Your point only has relevance if every team has a game washed out.

Soul Requiem wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

robbo277 wrote:No-one gets eliminated because of a cancelled pool game. You get awarded 2 points. If that's not enough to see you through, look at your performances in the other pool games first.

Not really true. You could be all set to be runners up in the pool with a game against Canada, Namibia etc last and be thrown out.

Right, so South Africa played Canada in their last game. If that was rained out, they would have been on 12 points, with NZ on 14 and Italy on 10. Had Italy then beat New Zealand, yes, South Africa would have been eliminated. But they would have been in that situation because they lost to NZ - a team Italy had then beat.

South Africa weren't qualified before the NZ vs Italy game was rained out. There was a mathematical chance they could have been eliminated even after they took the 5 points against Canada. If you don't win all your games, it's not always in your hands. If you win all your games (as NZ, England and France did), you can suffer one washout and still qualify.

Absolute drivel.

How?

You win 3 games and get your 4th washed out, you will not be eliminated.

That isn't the bit that's drivel, if Scotland are eliminated because their game against Japan is cancelled that is the reason why they are going home not the loss to Ireland. Your point only has relevance if every team has a game washed out.

If Scotland had beat Ireland and sat on 3 wins now, a draw would see them through. This is why Japan aren't sweating about the weather.

Japan won 3 games in 2015 and didn't go through. If Scotland beat Japan, a team in this pool will go out having only lost once. If washed out, Scotland will have won 2 games out of 3 and not go through. It's unfortunate, but noone has won a World Cup dropping a game on the way. Now it seems you drop 1 game and you might not make it out the pool. It's something teams are going to have to get used to - lose 1 game and it's out your hands.

Not the total accumulation of points? Just this last game?

See that's the bit that is drivel.

What do we think is the collective balance between the extra rest and prep time for Eng and Fra in their 1/4 finals versus missing out on hard match experience? An advantage or disadvantage?

hugehandoff wrote:What do we think is the collective balance between the extra rest and prep time for Eng and Fra in their 1/4 finals versus missing out on hard match experience? An advantage or disadvantage?

All answers depend on whether you support England, France, New Zealand, Australia, Wales, Scotland or Japan

Can’t they move those matches to South Korea?

No9 wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:France will make the final now, 2 weeks prep plus added time to sort out their bust up within the camp. I wouldn't want to play them.

As for England it wouldn't surprise me if the RFU pay for Georgia to come and train with them for a couple of days.

Not a bad idea, if tournament rules permit. But I'd probably go for Fiji rather than Georgia given the likely opponents are Australia.

Rules doesn't permit it. 

Training must be within the squad and only in that squad. Otherwise, what would stop a Tier 1 side taking more players to the tournament stating they where for training purposes and hence then have extra stand in players already there in the event they needed to call up injury replacements.

They've been training with a local Japanese team at least, so this is partly untrue. If they did 'cal in Georgia' it would add insult to injury. As Parisse say, no way would the ABs game be cancelled if it meant they were knocked out and Italy went through - big teams shouldn't get any more benefit from this than they already are, and that includes using financial clout. But, suppose that's just the way it is.

England will benefit from this rather than be undercooked in my opinion. England's game is literally all about explosiveness and fitness. I really didn't see them going 5 big games in a row, even with the Argentina non contest after the red card. Saw them flagging in the final quarter against an Australia or, particularly, a NZ, and not having the basic skills and discpline to make up for the loss of intensity.

Now, they're right back up there as tournament favourites, or at least second choice behind the ABs.