Discussion in 'General Rugby Union' started by Saint N Sinner, Nov 28, 2005.
43 - 28
It's Wasps v Leicester and Bath v Scarlets in the semis.
ahhhh - i think itll be a scarlets vs tigers final
Who'da thunk it?
Bath will be a totally different prospect come March. Ashton will have had two months to get the backs properly moving, and they already showed positive signs in the first half of the Gloucester game.
Should be a good day.
yes it should - for the scarlets that is - are you and robbinho coming down to the stadium to watch it.
I doubt I'll be there, (although the prospect of bitch slapping you in person is appealing) as I've got a league match that day, and it's a bit of a drive from Newcastle.
Wonder whether it was engineered to give Scarlets a semi with the 'lesser' English team in order to try to produce an English-Welsh final?
Although, as Boy says, Bath will be a different prospect when Ashton returns, and even still, I'd fancy our pack to brutalize Llanelli's anyway.
itll be a great game
but well have too much flair for your pack.
I thought you were an Ospreys supporter?
Flair is all very well, but it means nothing if a team sticks it up their jumper for 80 minutes and doesn't give you a sniff of posession. As Northampton's backs have found out this season...
yeah i am an ospreys fan, but i like all the welsh regions. there all there for the greater good - which is wales
You have no idea if Henson and Charvis share a room or not, that statement is just so rampantly idiotic.
You don't know if Charvis would step in with intent or not. I know certrtainly even if I was playing with someone I severely disliked and the got hopped on I'd get in and help them cos thy're on my team, regardless.
Drying up a bit?
No, I don't know, but hence the words 'think' and yes, the room statement is an assumption, but one based on fact, that he slagged him off in the book. I don't know what goes on, but guess what, you don't either. My assumption is based on fact, where as you are just saying, 'you definitely don't know it, so the statements you make are rampantly idiotic.' I don't know for certain, granted, but I can make a guess that is well founded to make it seem possible. How about you give some facts that make my statement seem more unlikely than it does, rather than weakly dismissing it?
Stopped targeting players who you have never laid eyes on now then!
Did you know:
"Northampton and Leicester teamed up to be the only English teams to beat the Springboks tour in 1905..." Was it ?
Thats what I heard on the BBC commentary.
1905 - are you sure?
Thought they said 1935 and it was the All Blacks. Might be wrong. Wasn't really paying much attention.
The English sides could be without their England players, as the games are in a Six Nations rest period and they might not be released. Bath have said that, as far as they're concerned, the players are available for selection.
Round of appaluse for organisers.
In semis, rugby fans want top quality players on show, and no way I can see any player not wanting to play. I highly doubt the players won't play, but how dumb can you get!
Their stupidity knows no bounds.
Now, now...your giving the RFU, WAY too much credit...
Your assumption is based on one fact, meaning any conclusions drawn are tenous at best, have you read the book?
Your guess is not well founded, you know one piece of information and have constructed a flawed argument around it. Your guess is no more likely than mine, in fact yours is less likely to happen as it promotes specific instances (Charvis not helping Henson in a fight) whereas mine is more generalised.
You cannot honestly state beyond all reasonable doubt that the relationship Henson and Charvis had has been badly damaged as you lack sufficent information. Maybe you should work for some kind of scandal rag, your style of writing and argument would suit adults who read at the level of 7-year olds.
My facts are as follows: Wales have played since the publication of the book, includind Charvis (Man of the Match against Australia), without any obvious adverse effects as have the Ospereys.
Really couldn't be arsed explaining my economics arguement again (you simply don't understand it). I've been sick for the last 4 days and I don't want to hear anymore of your 'this centre's no-one's ever heard of, he's savage, he's gonna play for Scotland'
Dear oh dear, not getting very far are we.
'Your assumption is based on one fact, meaning any conclusions drawn are tenous at best, have you read the book?'
Have you read the book? If so, tell me how bad it is. If not, you are making a guess it isn't. I don't know, but I have heard from people who have read the book, and they said it slagged Charvis off.
'Your guess is not well founded, you know one piece of information and have constructed a flawed argument around it. Your guess is no more likely than mine, in fact yours is less likely to happen as it promotes specific instances (Charvis not helping Henson in a fight) whereas mine is more generalised'
My guess is at least founded on information, my assumption is that Henson and Charvis don't get on well. Why else would he slag him off? Answer me please. That specific instance is just a result of what I believe to be this friction between the two. What is your generalised guess by the way?
'You cannot honestly state beyond all reasonable doubt that the relationship Henson and Charvis had has been badly damaged as you lack sufficent information. Maybe you should work for some kind of scandal rag, your style of writing and argument would suit adults who read at the level of 7-year olds.
My facts are as follows: Wales have played since the publication of the book, includind Charvis (Man of the Match against Australia), without any obvious adverse effects as have the Ospereys.'
You obviously have the memory capacity of a 7-year old. You have very good facts there, but neither are really suifficent, as I have pointed out before, HENSON HASN'T PLAYED SINCE THE BOOK. It is less likely that anything will happen if he isn't involved in the team. When Henson rejoins the squad, he may hurt team morale. Nothing that will be visable to us supporters, but it will affect the team.
'Really couldn't be arsed explaining my economics arguement again (you simply don't understand it). I've been sick for the last 4 days and I don't want to hear anymore of your 'this centre's no-one's ever heard of, he's savage, he's gonna play for Scotland''
Look, I understood it completely, but you have nothing to base it on. You haven't seen this player, who is performing in the well in the GP. Get your head out your arse, you know nothing about him, and very little about the GP as a whole. Many people have heard of them, just not ignorant idiots like you who have to concentrate on the Celtic League instead. You have been sick, well boo-hoo, but that doesn't construct much to the arguement as I neither care, nor think that it really matters. Just weaseling out of the fact that you think because you haven't heard of him, he is crap. Lastily, don't comment on Scotland, as they have been far better than Ireland this year, so making the Scots out to be a crap team is a little bit foolish, especially with a 6N round the corner.
I haven't read the book, hence I don't make claims about my content. Your 'I've heard from people' point is like the infamous Fox News line "Some people say..." which is when they start to influence people's opinions. I've heard it was blown out of proportion but I guess neither of us can really say as we haven't read the book.
You clearly don't understand my economics arguement, based on economics as a social science. If you understood economics you would have understood my inferior goods versus normal goods and not challenged it. It is a fundemental pillar of economics. This arguement isn't based on how good Cox actually is, rather how good he is percieved to be relative to BOD or Henson.
FYI, I hate the Celtic League. It doesn't involve real Irish teams, ever.
I am merely saying, if he is as good as you say he is, he would have come to my attention or the attention of the Scottish selectors.
I didn't make Scotland out to be a crap team, I said their centres lacked the class of Henson or BOD.
Consider the book, possibly not even written by Henson (ghostwritten). Maybe Henson is a complete idiot and just made up (or had made up for him) some sensationalist dross to sell the book.
My point about Wales surviving is because you were acting the Greek Oracle at Delphi and saying something along the lines of "he will make Wales fall apart". they haven't fallen apart, Henson has been in contact with them and clarified what he was saying. If it was as disatrous as you say its effect would have been clear to see.
Separate names with a comma.