• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[RWC2019][Pool D] Round 2 - Georgia vs. Uruguay (29/09/2019)

You can hear in Wayne's voice that he knows that's not a red. But he also knows he has no choice.
 
Shame to end on a red for Uruguay. Georgia v Fiji could be a barnstormer , slightly favouring Georgia with that pack and structured gameplan also decent defensively .
 
The Georgian power just too hot to handle for the urugians and with the 4day turnaround the fatigue clearly showing , I'd love to see Georgia in the 6 nations but don't really want to lose Italy either can't we make it the 7 nations

Or have home nations B teams competing in the Rugby Europe Cup? It would be mutual development still.
 
Shame to end on a red for Uruguay. Georgia v Fiji could be a barnstormer , slightly favouring Georgia with that pack and structured gameplan also decent defensively .

Opposite for me!

I wouldn't write off Fiji based upon the Uruguay loss. They only kept three players from their first game with Australia.

If they play the same side they put out against Australia, I'd expect them to win.
 
4 day turnarounds are a joke of scheduling. Tier1 sides should be subjected to it when playing the lowest seed in their group (it's be the fairest way to do things given the likely squad rotation).

Georgia infuriated me here. Played ambitious rugby near the start but then moved towards exploiting physical dominance as the game went on. They will learn nothing that will help them against the Wallabies or Fiji by flexing physically on undersized Uruguayans.


Black always looks black though... you'd have to touch me to know I'm wet ;)!

You'd wear black on a hot sunny day? You must get even less sun down there than Scotland to come out with that fashion advice! Besides, everyone knows the top fashion tip for a summer's day is a cagoule.
 
4 day turnarounds are a joke of scheduling. Tier1 sides should be subjected to it when playing the lowest seed in their group (it's be the fairest way to do things given the likely squad rotation).

That's what happened to England when they played USA. TRF still decided they weren't battering the USA hard enough, mind.

It does make upsets less likely, but it's not a big deal for a team that doesn't let it. I also don't think scheduling should be a 'punishment' for sides that earn themselves a top seeding - do you want a situation where a team would have a reason to toss away a top four ranking?

I think if you want to fix it, have five groups of four.
 
Last edited:
That's what happened to England when they played USA. TRF still decided they weren't battering the USA hard enough, mind.

It does make upsets less likely, but it's not a big deal for a team that doesn't let it. I also don't think scheduling should be a 'punishment' for sides that earn themselves a top seeding - do you want a situation where a team woul dhave a reason to toss away a top four ranking?

I think if you want to fix it, have five gorups of four.

Fair points, but I doubt many would happily swap Englands top seeding for the chance of being grouped with NZ? I hadn't twigged that England got landed with a four day turnaround. Maybe the short turnarounds are being dished out more evenly than I thought. (Tier1 seem to usually avoid the worst of it and have the inbuilt advantage of not having to qualify for the tournament).

And five groups creates major issues with allocating QFs fairly.
 
It's not just a disadvantage being meted out to Tier 2.

For example, Scotland have a 4 day turnaround between Russia and Japan. By contrast, Japan have 8 days to prepare after their game with Samoa.
 
Don't WR just change the qualifying each cycle to make it mostly the same teams unless someone unseats them?
Exactly, and Uruguay is usually the best target to unseat in repechage. This time it was Romania through disqualification, they'll be back for 2023 though.

That's all moot now.
 
I get the feeling the Georgia v Fiji game is going to be a slight clash of styles...
 

Latest posts

Top