Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
Archived
Rugby World Cup 2007
Wales vs Australia
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="mackka" data-source="post: 145651"><p>I disagree. The mare fact that this so called B-team of South Africa remained competitive while touring both Australia and New Zealand (No easy requirement), goes to show how wrong your assessment is. I would have agreed that they were disrespecting the competition if Australia had destroyed the said team by more then 50 points not the end result which happened.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>South Africa have 100 years of successful bruising rugby behind them of which their record rivals that of the All Blacks. They are a Rugby Giant to be respected no matter what team they field on the day.</p><p></p><p>As for the problems of the ARU. Perhaps if they stopped complaining about the team South Africa was selecting and started working on developing a successful competitive club competition in Australia which rivaled that of curry cup, the perhaps Australia too could field their "B" side without a major drop in player quality.</p><p>[/b]</p></blockquote><p></p><p>Yes the side fielded by SA should be respected and I have no doubt that the players, coaching staff, fans and ARU all respected both the players and the team as a whole. However, irrespective of the quality of the players who arrived here, the willingness of SA to send a less competitive team and hence their lack of desire to actually win the competition devalues the whole tournament. What if they had sent their B team to the World Cup? Sure, they still would have been competitive but it would have shown they didn't give a rat's arse whether they won it. THAT'S the point. The Tri-Nations is meant to be one of the greatest showpieces of international rugby and SA went and shat all over it. The gripe was never with the players that were sent over who ultimately did themselves proud but with the SA rugby establishment. Even if SA had beaten Australia and NZ and won the tournament, they still would have devalued the Tri-Nations through their lack of commitment. Thus, the lack of cricket scores in the final matches is completely irrelevant.</p><p></p><p>PS. Re your last comment there, that's what the ARC is an attempt at doing.</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
[QUOTE="mackka, post: 145651"] I disagree. The mare fact that this so called B-team of South Africa remained competitive while touring both Australia and New Zealand (No easy requirement), goes to show how wrong your assessment is. I would have agreed that they were disrespecting the competition if Australia had destroyed the said team by more then 50 points not the end result which happened. South Africa have 100 years of successful bruising rugby behind them of which their record rivals that of the All Blacks. They are a Rugby Giant to be respected no matter what team they field on the day. As for the problems of the ARU. Perhaps if they stopped complaining about the team South Africa was selecting and started working on developing a successful competitive club competition in Australia which rivaled that of curry cup, the perhaps Australia too could field their "B" side without a major drop in player quality. [/b][/quote] Yes the side fielded by SA should be respected and I have no doubt that the players, coaching staff, fans and ARU all respected both the players and the team as a whole. However, irrespective of the quality of the players who arrived here, the willingness of SA to send a less competitive team and hence their lack of desire to actually win the competition devalues the whole tournament. What if they had sent their B team to the World Cup? Sure, they still would have been competitive but it would have shown they didn't give a rat's arse whether they won it. THAT'S the point. The Tri-Nations is meant to be one of the greatest showpieces of international rugby and SA went and shat all over it. The gripe was never with the players that were sent over who ultimately did themselves proud but with the SA rugby establishment. Even if SA had beaten Australia and NZ and won the tournament, they still would have devalued the Tri-Nations through their lack of commitment. Thus, the lack of cricket scores in the final matches is completely irrelevant. PS. Re your last comment there, that's what the ARC is an attempt at doing. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
Archived
Rugby World Cup 2007
Wales vs Australia
Top