RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C)
-
The pro-England ITV commentary is hilarious.
Going all ga ga over England's pedestrian win over a 14-man Argentinian team who have been on the skids for a couple of seasons.
9 wins in 45 matches since last WC
-
The pro-England ITV commentary is hilarious.
Going all ga ga over England's pedestrian win over a 14-man Argentinian team who have been on the skids for a couple of seasons.
9 wins in 45 matches since last WC
@MiketheSnow let’s hope the frogs put them in their place!
-
@chimoaus said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@booboo said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@MrDenmore said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@booboo Yes, I agree, Lavinini should pay the sanction. Hit him in the pocket. But not the people paying for it. Do you see the distinction?
I do. And think you're wrong.
Why should a thug have free reign on the field?
It's sport. As I have said sport is random.
Players make mistakes. And know there are consequences.
Way hey. Argies score. But still need 3 tries to win
So you think Lavinini knowingly targeted Farrells head knowing the outcome?
I still think there is a difference between intentional foul play like eye gouging and a player making a poor judgement in the tackle.
You say players make mistakes, I agree these red cards are mistakes and that is the big issue, should a players mistake decide the outcome of the game?
Yes.
Just as a poor intercept pass does.
That's how sport works.
@Chester-Draws said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@chimoaus said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@booboo said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@MrDenmore said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@booboo Yes, I agree, Lavinini should pay the sanction. Hit him in the pocket. But not the people paying for it. Do you see the distinction?
I do. And think you're wrong.
Why should a thug have free reign on the field?
It's sport. As I have said sport is random.
Players make mistakes. And know there are consequences.
Way hey. Argies score. But still need 3 tries to win
So you think Lavinini knowingly targeted Farrells head knowing the outcome?
I still think there is a difference between intentional foul play like eye gouging and a player making a poor judgement in the tackle.
You say players make mistakes, I agree these red cards are mistakes and that is the big issue, should a players mistake decide the outcome of the game?
Yes.
Just as a poor intercept pass does.
That's how sport works.
But to play devil's advocate, noting I don't agree with the sentiment being proposed that all sanctions occur post-match, an intercept try mistake is punished with a 5-7 point swing. A mistimed/misplaced tackle mistake has potential to be punished with a red card. Im.pretty sure if Argentina were given the choice tonight between a rwd card and a 7 point hit, they'd choose the latter.
Again, not saying red cards don't have their place. Just that I have sympathy for the view that a borderline red has a hugely significant impact considering they're often very subjective.
-
@Bones said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@Tim said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@Bones Who elbowed whom? You nitwit.
Lawes.
See, why doesn't that fuckwit lose the game for his team?
-
@MrDenmore said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@booboo Yes, I agree, Lavinini should pay the sanction. Hit him in the pocket. But not the people paying for it. Do you see the distinction?
I do. And think you're wrong.
Why should a thug have free reign on the field?
It's sport. As I have said sport is random.
Players make mistakes. And know there are consequences.
Way hey. Argies score. But still need 3 tries to win
-
Yesssssss! That's me three points out from the losers I work with.
I was hugely worried that England would win by more than 40 and deny me the bonus. As if.
@Chester-Draws I had England by 21 in superbru, last try killed my bonus point. Fucking English, fucking Argentinians!!!
-
The pro-England ITV commentary is hilarious.
Going all ga ga over England's pedestrian win over a 14-man Argentinian team who have been on the skids for a couple of seasons.
9 wins in 45 matches since last WC
@MiketheSnow said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
The pro-England ITV commentary is hilarious.
Going all ga ga over England's pedestrian win over a 14-man Argentinian team who have been on the skids for a couple of seasons.
It's all about selling to, and building, your audience.
-
You will never convince me that the current obsession with handing out red cards is a good thing.
They have shifted their interpretation of dangerous play, and how it should be dealt with, a long way from where it used to be. But they haven’t changed the card system. It is no longer fit for purpose.
Add in the inconsistency they are applying it with and it is a complete fucking mess.Straight red cards should be reserved for the worst of the worst. ie. biting, kicking, eye gouging, punching, stomping on a head and deliberate or extremely dangerous foul play eg. A stiff arm to the head.
Tackles that are part of the game but have just been poorly executed in the heat of the game should be dealt with differently. There is absolutely no reason another tier of card allowing for a replacement player after 10min and harsher suspensions wouldn’t work.
Or hey you could even start by not reducing every single ban by 50% because someone dressed nicely for the hearing.I would be very interested in seeing the stats for how often a team has gone on to win after copping a red card before 60 mins. It is so often a death sentence for the contest.
By the way, im not commenting on the red card in this game. Im not watching it because i refused to pay money to watch a RWC which was so clearly going to be tainted by bullshit cards and inconsistent application of the laws.
-
@booboo It’s not a sport. It’s a business. It’s a big money business. Sorry to disabuse you of your illusions. But that’s the way it is.
@MrDenmore said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@booboo It’s not a sport. It’s a business. It’s a big money business. Sorry to disabuse you of your illusions. But that’s the way it is.
Nah. It's a sport. We watch because it's not pre determined.
Don't try and be condescending because you want the sport to be be adjudicated differently.
-
@MrDenmore said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@booboo It’s not a sport. It’s a business. It’s a big money business. Sorry to disabuse you of your illusions. But that’s the way it is.
Nah. It's a sport. We watch because it's not pre determined.
Don't try and be condescending because you want the sport to be be adjudicated differently.
-
@booboo Well it is predetermined if a random decision of a referee decides the game. If you want sport for its own sake go to the ground on a Saturday and watch the amateurs.
@MrDenmore predetermined and random = Contradictio in terminis
-
@booboo Well it is predetermined if a random decision of a referee decides the game. If you want sport for its own sake go to the ground on a Saturday and watch the amateurs.
@MrDenmore said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@booboo Well it is predetermined if a random decision of a referee decides the game. If you want sport for its own sake go to the ground on a Saturday and watch the amateurs.
Yeah. Never watched amateurs and expected them to play within the laws ... or even played amateur footy (or St Peters under 15) and played within the laws.
At this level you expect the elite level athletes to know the laws and play within them.
Sorry to disavow you of your perceptions...
-
You will never convince me that the current obsession with handing out red cards is a good thing.
They have shifted their interpretation of dangerous play, and how it should be dealt with, a long way from where it used to be. But they haven’t changed the card system. It is no longer fit for purpose.
Add in the inconsistency they are applying it with and it is a complete fucking mess.Straight red cards should be reserved for the worst of the worst. ie. biting, kicking, eye gouging, punching, stomping on a head and deliberate or extremely dangerous foul play eg. A stiff arm to the head.
Tackles that are part of the game but have just been poorly executed in the heat of the game should be dealt with differently. There is absolutely no reason another tier of card allowing for a replacement player after 10min and harsher suspensions wouldn’t work.
Or hey you could even start by not reducing every single ban by 50% because someone dressed nicely for the hearing.I would be very interested in seeing the stats for how often a team has gone on to win after copping a red card before 60 mins. It is so often a death sentence for the contest.
By the way, im not commenting on the red card in this game. Im not watching it because i refused to pay money to watch a RWC which was so clearly going to be tainted by bullshit cards and inconsistent application of the laws.
@pukunui Agree totally. Red cards should be reserved for deliberate foul play. But too often now, we’re seeing them handed out indiscriminately over inches-level judgements pertaining to high tackles. It’s buggered the game. It’s destroyed the spectacle. It’s left the public watching with their hearts in their throats worrying about the height of every tackle instead of appreciating the play in itself.
-
@booboo Well it is predetermined if a random decision of a referee decides the game. If you want sport for its own sake go to the ground on a Saturday and watch the amateurs.
@MrDenmore said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@booboo Well it is predetermined if a random decision of a referee decides the game. If you want sport for its own sake go to the ground on a Saturday and watch the amateurs.
Firstly, you've edited your post.
Secondly, neither Owens nor World Rugby predetermined the foul play by Lavinini.
-
@MrDenmore said in RWC: England v Argentina (Pool C):
@booboo Well it is predetermined if a random decision of a referee decides the game. If you want sport for its own sake go to the ground on a Saturday and watch the amateurs.
Yeah. Never watched amateurs and expected them to play within the laws ... or even played amateur footy (or St Peters under 15) and played within the laws.
At this level you expect the elite level athletes to know the laws and play within them.
Sorry to disavow you of your perceptions...
