• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Australia vs New Zealand, September 11 2010, Sydney.

And they didn't choke that year either because losing in extra time when more than half the team has food poisioning was a pretty awesome effort, pretty much reflects how good that team was. Can be pretty sure if they hadn't been sick the result would likely have been different.

DoubleFacePalm.jpg
 
anyone got a link for the sydney match, havnt seen the whole game yet,
watched the 07 quarter final for the first time about a month ago,was surprised at how tense the all blacks were in that game so early on and with the issue of no penaltys against france in the second half from memory there was penalties awarded to either team from about the 45 min mark, could be wrong about that
 
Jer1cho

One double facepalm... fair enough, but a double-double facepalm... that's a bit over the top don't you think?
4.gif
 
Jer1cho

One double facepalm... fair enough, but a double-double facepalm... that's a bit over the top don't you think?
4.gif

If you take the "being posioned by someone", part out of it, it's quite true that half the All Black squad was ill, 6 or 7 of them violently so. Jeff Wilson was visibly vomiting on the side of the pitch. I saw that with my own two eyes.

I am not saying that South Africa wouldn't have won. The only thing that is being said in this post is that they were definitely very unwell.

That is the truth, face-palm or what-ever else. :)
 
Thats right. Whether or not they were deliberately poisoned is up for debate... personally, I think they were and the evidence certainly points to it.

However, what undeniable is that they were very, very ill.

Too many highly credible witnesses saw them in a really terrible state to fob it off as a fabrication.
 
timmy horan vs south africa 99,game of his life and he was as crook as ****

Wow, that was specific. So much detail. Which game? Where has that been documented? It may well be true, but a little more evidence would be great. :)

Also, since when is Tim Horan over half of a World Cup squad? One player being very crook doesn't quite have the same effect of 14 out of a whole touring squad.


Also, I personally file the whole "poisoning" thing under I Just Don't Know How It Happened. A large number of players were sick and that's a fact. The RWC doesn't have another day set aside for the game, so they had to play it or forfeit it.

Personally, if I was under control of the team I would've forfeited. The organisers and TV networks would definitely have had a huge quick summit and postponed to play a week later. It would've cost the networks etc some money, but not as much as a forfeit.
 
Same deal as Tottenham v West Ham on the final day of the Premier League season when a win for Tottenham got them the Champions League spot ahead of Arsenal a few years ago. Half the Spurs squad got food poisoning the day before the game. Theories abound as to whether someone put something in their food, but it was just chalked up to one of those things.

Should've been postponed by a day, in both cases; food poisoning can be like that. One day, and you can be back feeling fine.
 
anyway what was the dish suzie fed them dodgy kfc or somehing

Please learn to edit your previous posts rather than double post. :)

There probably never was a Suzie, that was merely the name recalled by All Black management (may not have been the actual name) of someone who brought the AB's food.

The issue being discussed here is the fact that they were sick with food poisoning, not whether or not they were poisoned deliberately. That is a never-ending argument I don't want in this discussion for the sake of the harmony of the forum.

For the record, as stated earlier, it is entirely possible that South Africa would have won the tournament anyway, so it's all a part of history now.
 

Latest posts

Top