[2015 RWC] Semi Final 2: Australia vs. Argentina (25/10/2015)

[RugbyTackle91]

Haha, holy ****. I'm going to blame these stouts.

No need for that language please

- - - Updated - - -

Argentina to edge this one, I think New Zealand and Argentina want this World Cup the most and judging by the passion they showed last week I just think they will do enough against the Aussies to get over the line. I think it will be a cracking match and maybe the best of the torny so far.

 

[ZeFrenchy]

How is the Arg media portraying the teams chances over there? Is the country getting behind them? Do people even know there's a RWC taking place? Lol

My feeling is that the main rugby pundits in Argentina are too close to the team to be effective reporters. They're pretty condescending and unwilling to criticize their friends.
Of course, that might have to do with them trying to get people interested in rugby, but apart from Diego Albanese, no one really tries to actually analyze what is going on on field, and are more interested in getting inside views. This, at its turn, creates a feeling of inbreeding, not allowing people whe were not into rugby to feel part of it.
Anyway, that's at least how I felt after years of getting all my rugby coverage from Argentine cable networks and websites.

 

[WaterboySA]

No need for that language please

- - - Updated - - -

Argentina to edge this one, I think New Zealand and Argentina want this World Cup the most and judging by the passion they showed last week I just think they will do enough against the Aussies to get over the line. I think it will be a cracking match and maybe the best of the torny so far.

So by the way, love the forum name. Very original.

 

[RugbyTackle91]

So by the way, love the forum name. Very original.

I have no idea how it wasn't taken to be honest

 

[FNS]

There´s only one place of news for rugby in tv =P. ESPN and maybe fox sports but the only real rugby opinions came from ESPN(Albanesse mostly). I think now Pumas reached a place were no one will say anything bad if they lose.

The names of the rivals just guarantees that. Loosing against Ireland sure that could have brought the " They suck, all ways the same result" speech....now? Well, great if we win but everyone knows that We are playing a power house.

But despite that...we are confidant, like we are not better but right now we are playing so good

 

[Xapi]

How is the Arg media portraying the teams chances over there? Is the country getting behind them? Do people even know there's a RWC taking place? Lol

I think the general media is protraying things rather fine: What has been done is great, the improvement is amazing, we are not favourites for the semis, but we're not dead either.

People not in the "rugby world" aren't really massively flocking towards the team, but they do ask stuff if they know you know, and are being somewhat interested in what is going on.

Yes, it is known that there is a World Cup taking place and that the Pumas are doing very good.

- - - Updated - - -

My feeling is that the main rugby pundits in Argentina are too close to the team to be effective reporters. They're pretty condescending and unwilling to criticize their friends.
Of course, that might have to do with them trying to get people interested in rugby, but apart from Diego Albanese, no one really tries to actually analyze what is going on on field, and are more interested in getting inside views. This, at its turn, creates a feeling of inbreeding, not allowing people whe were not into rugby to feel part of it.
Anyway, that's at least how I felt after years of getting all my rugby coverage from Argentine cable networks and websites.

I think ENZED's question was more about the general media, and not the rugby specialized media, so that's what my last message was about.

Most of the commentator in the rugby world are former Pumas, Albanese, Contepomi (fresh addition, he's really stiff talking on camera), Phelan (also former coach).

So there is indeed a "friend" mentality, where not many negative things will be pointed out unless they are evident. Also, there isn't much negative to go on about right now. However, since these people know what it is to play this matches, there is no "exitism", they wont tell you that Argentina is going to win everything because we are the best.

 

[Rukhage]

So there is indeed a "friend" mentality, where not many negative things will be pointed out unless they are evident. Also, there isn't much negative to go on about right now. However, since these people know what it is to play this matches, there is no "exitism", they wont tell you that Argentina is going to win everything because we are the best.

Creo que exitismo se traduce mejor al ingles como "victorism", pero es solo una observación.

In English. What he said.

 

[Xapi]

Neither word works.

"Exitismo", from "éxito" (succes) in Spanish means to be a person who is only interested in success as defined by being the very best, IE: "We are the champions or we are nothing" "We win or we suck", "We are going to win everything because we are the best".

An "exitista" from Japan would say "Yeah, sure, we beat the boks, but we didn't even get out of the pool! Show some nerve, Coward Blossoms!"

 

[FNS]

I think the general media is protraying things rather fine: What has been done is great, the improvement is amazing, we are not favourites for the semis, but we're not dead either.

People not in the "rugby world" aren't really massively flocking towards the team, but they do ask stuff if they know you know, and are being somewhat interested in what is going on.

Yes, it is known that there is a World Cup taking place and that the Pumas are doing very good.

- - - Updated - - -



I think ENZED's question was more about the general media, and not the rugby specialized media, so that's what my last message was about.

Most of the commentator in the rugby world are former Pumas, Albanese, Contepomi (fresh addition, he's really stiff talking on camera), Phelan (also former coach).

So there is indeed a "friend" mentality, where not many negative things will be pointed out unless they are evident. Also, there isn't much negative to go on about right now. However, since these people know what it is to play this matches, there is no "exitism", they wont tell you that Argentina is going to win everything because we are the best.

Game related they do question tactical and gameplay but luckly no trashtalk about players, union or things like that. There is not much to talk about actually nothing realy happens hahaha.

 

[ZeFrenchy]

I think ENZED's question was more about the general media, and not the rugby specialized media, so that's what my last message was about.

Most of the commentator in the rugby world are former Pumas, Albanese, Contepomi (fresh addition, he's really stiff talking on camera), Phelan (also former coach).

So there is indeed a "friend" mentality, where not many negative things will be pointed out unless they are evident. Also, there isn't much negative to go on about right now. However, since these people know what it is to play this matches, there is no "exitism", they wont tell you that Argentina is going to win everything because we are the best.

Yeah, it was ESPN I was talking about. Last time I watched, Manuel Contepomi was just starting to appear on TV (he was still playing the URBA), so I couldn't comment on him. But this "friend" mentality has two huge drawbacks in my view:
- No one dares to be critic. The Phelan tenure is a perfect illustration of this, when no one dared to say what a crap coach he was. And then, people who tune in wanting to learn about rugby learn nothing at all. I'm curious about how they treated Albacete-gate.
- When someone from a non-rugby background watches that, he doesn't feel like he belongs. It just reinforces the view that rugby is a closed, elite community.

I do make the exception of Diego Albanese, who you can tell is up to date with the international rugby debate, and dares to criticize the players and the coaching. I remember him being pretty harsh on Matias Moroni during the RC this year, and he really deserved it. Coccia, Alessandrini or Tachini would not have dared, and anyway wouldn't have noticed (the critique was about defensive positioning after a clearance kick by Arg).

 

[Xapi]

I think Albacete-gate was dusted under the rug. No one dared talk about that much.

 

[Rukhage]

Neither word works.

"Exitismo", from "éxito" (succes) in Spanish means to be a person who is only interested in success as defined by being the very best, IE: "We are the champions or we are nothing" "We win or we suck", "We are going to win everything because we are the best".

An "exitista" from Japan would say "Yeah, sure, we beat the boks, but we didn't even get out of the pool! Show some nerve, Coward Blossoms!"

Best explanation I have ever read!

Gracias querido!

 

[petite]

It's tough, also because there's still some ingrained class aspect involved where rugby, due to its amateur status, was considered to be a sport for the well-to-do and fancy people. I had hoped that the last 10 years had started wiping that facet away, as people start realizing that there are a bunch of clubs in Argentina that don't cater to the 'public schoolboy' stereotype.

Then again there's a famous saying that goes something like this:

"What is an Argentine? An Argentine is an Italian who speaks Spanish, thinks and dresses like the French but deep down wants to be British."

this is not a sayng is a borges quotation and goes "An Argentine is an Italian who speaks Spanish, lives in a french house and would like to be English" its a snappy phrase but is bull**** i think. at least now maybe in the 40s when he wrote that it was more accurate

i agree with the rest of the post more or less i would add that no one hates rugby but rugbiers wich is different.
why? because the are the rich, the conservatives and hold a big economic power.
as rukhage points out this is now changeing as more people joins the game. this conservative aspect of our rugby hold us to progress into professionalism.

 

[bjarg]

It just reinforces the view that rugby is a closed, elite community.

And is that a bad thing?
I for one pray that this doesnt change.
Look at the argentinian national football team, all uneducated idiots.
All they care about is money, girls, and how their hair looks on TV.
Just look at what the Pumas have done with an amateur sport and being always a second rate country in rugby.
And look at what our football has accomplished being a powerhouse and having some of the best players in the world (Messi included).
I know it will never be like football, but rugby becoming a popular sport in Argentina is the worst thing that could happen.

 

[ngw1102]

Two tickets for Sundays game available

I have two tickets for Argentina Vs Australia on Sunday, Cat C, face value £215 per ticket.

Located in Block M43, let me know if you are interested to attend.

Thanks

Nick

 

[petite]

My feeling is that the main rugby pundits in Argentina are too close to the team to be effective reporters. They're pretty condescending and unwilling to criticize their friends.
Of course, that might have to do with them trying to get people interested in rugby, but apart from Diego Albanese, no one really tries to actually analyze what is going on on field, and are more interested in getting inside views. This, at its turn, creates a feeling of inbreeding, not allowing people whe were not into rugby to feel part of it.
Anyway, that's at least how I felt after years of getting all my rugby coverage from Argentine cable networks and websites.

this is in fact very accurate all the comentators are ex pumas

- - - Updated - - -

And is that a bad thing?
I for one pray that this doesnt change.
Look at the argentinian national football team, all uneducated idiots.
All they care about is money, girls, and how their hair looks on TV.
Just look at what the Pumas have done with an amateur sport and being always a second rate country in rugby.
And look at what our football has accomplished being a powerhouse and having some of the best players in the world (Messi included).
I know it will never be like football, but rugby becoming a popular sport in Argentina is the worst thing that could happen.

complete disagree this is clearly how discriminative rugby is in argentina.. and also "existismo" ( And look at what our football has accomplished being a powerhouse and having some of the best players in the world (Messi included).
you see he is sayng that beeng runners up in the soccer world cup and beeng a power house wasnt enough

 

[Xapi]

Men, since I've read Conrad Smith's thread about working class in Argentina a couple weeks ago I've been wanting to reply to it, and now this topic comes up again!!!

I don't want this thread derailed but I agree in principle with petite, and I'd be much harsher on bjarg than he was.

I might yet reply to that other topic one of these days.

 

[ZeFrenchy]

And is that a bad thing?
I for one pray that this doesnt change.
Look at the argentinian national football team, all uneducated idiots.
All they care about is money, girls, and how their hair looks on TV.
Just look at what the Pumas have done with an amateur sport and being always a second rate country in rugby.
And look at what our football has accomplished being a powerhouse and having some of the best players in the world (Messi included).
I know it will never be like football, but rugby becoming a popular sport in Argentina is the worst thing that could happen.

I disagree with you. I admit, I took my view about "massification" as a given, and now I see it is not shared by everyone. I think that is a debate that I am not invited to participate in (as I'm not an Argentine myself), and anyway this wouldn't be the place (maybe a new thread?).

Anyway, about this match, I agree with some of the other posters, that whether Pocock is playing or not massively changes the balance of probabilities. He was, in my view, the best player of the pool games, and Argentina does not have the breakdown focus they would need to beat the pooper.
Also, the Argentine defence in the wide channels remains largely untested. Bosch will be fundamental, but none of the back three are really reliable tacklers. Has there been any talk about changes there?

 

[psychic duck]

Yeah, it was ESPN I was talking about. Last time I watched, Manuel Contepomi was just starting to appear on TV (he was still playing the URBA), so I couldn't comment on him. But this "friend" mentality has two huge drawbacks in my view:
- No one dares to be critic. The Phelan tenure is a perfect illustration of this, when no one dared to say what a crap coach he was. And then, people who tune in wanting to learn about rugby learn nothing at all. I'm curious about how they treated Albacete-gate.
- When someone from a non-rugby background watches that, he doesn't feel like he belongs. It just reinforces the view that rugby is a closed, elite community.

I do make the exception of Diego Albanese, who you can tell is up to date with the international rugby debate, and dares to criticize the players and the coaching. I remember him being pretty harsh on Matias Moroni during the RC this year, and he really deserved it. Coccia, Alessandrini or Tachini would not have dared, and anyway wouldn't have noticed (the critique was about defensive positioning after a clearance kick by Arg).

Good post. Appointing Phelan for an extra 2 years in 2011 when all he had to speak of on his record was a few plucky defeats was lunacy. And the way Albacete was simply brushed under the carpet was poor too, barely any media anywhere reported on one of the Pumas best players of 10 years getting banished for good.

- - - Updated - - -

Men, since I've read Conrad Smith's thread about working class in Argentina a couple weeks ago I've been wanting to reply to it, and now this topic comes up again!!!

I don't want this thread derailed but I agree in principle with petite, and I'd be much harsher on bjarg than he was.

I might yet reply to that other topic one of these days.

This.

 

[Every Time Ref]

Neither word works.

"Exitismo", from "éxito" (succes) in Spanish means to be a person who is only interested in success as defined by being the very best, IE: "We are the champions or we are nothing" "We win or we suck", "We are going to win everything because we are the best".

An "exitista" from Japan would say "Yeah, sure, we beat the boks, but we didn't even get out of the pool! Show some nerve, Coward Blossoms!"

I don't think there's an English equivalent. A "glory hunter" is someone who chooses who to support because they are winners, so someone born London who's parents are from London and who has always lived in London, but supports Manchester United because he was a child in the 90s when they were winning everything in sight. It's not quite the same thing as "exitismo" though.

Thanks for teaching me a new Spanish word! I like it - I think a lot of Kiwis are exitistas ...