England's best motivational speech ever.... FACT. END OF.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/15069848.stm


Nice one Nick, thanks very much. Bonus? Grow up you snivelling little boy.

Talk like that makes me I don't want to see Scotland go out, I don't want to see any of the home nations or Ireland go out, but before the final at least three of them must. That's what a tournament is all about, but to talk about knocking another team out as a "bonus" is about as small-minded as you can get.

I suppose he feels comfortable talking in those terms because he's on the bench on Saturday, look out for him Courtney, if he does come on he'll be the one in brown shorts.

He doesn't know any better, I think all Scottish kids are brought up on Braveheart.

What does Scotland have against NZ and South Africa ?

I avoided watching this because i couldn't quite believe anyone would say that before a game but, it tells you that you are going to see a Scottish side intent on destroying England and i expect Lawes to be targeted.

De Luca is a chump for giving England this ammo.

Kev the Psychic cat has been on the salmon all week though

Gatts wrote:I avoided watching this because i couldn't quite believe anyone would say that before a game but, it tells you that you are going to see a Scottish side intent on destroying England and i expect Lawes to be targeted.

De Luca is a chump for giving England this ammo.

Kev the Psychic cat has been on the salmon all week though

Then he'll be 0 from 2 come Saturday lunchtime Gatts , it doesn't matter how intent Scotland are - if it takes them 3 games to amass 4 tries, how are they going to fair against the best defensive side in the group?

England will probably put 20-30 points on Scotland, and Scotland just don't have the firepower to keep up with that.

I will be sorry to see them go out, but De Luca's one idiot I wont be missing.

Well since you are wearing the yellow hat i think your pick might be a safer bet!

Gatts wrote:Well since you are wearing the yellow hat i think your pick might be a safer bet!

Well I did back Wales to beat SA by 4, then again I backed Ireland to beat Australia by 9 - you win some you lose some.

munkian wrote:What does Scotland have against NZ and South Africa ?

They can always turn the telly off.

what really makes me laugh is that after everything joking aside- he really means what he says- he really sees it as a bonus.

But what is more concerning is the fact that he is setting him self up for the biggest fall. Be modest if your a scotland, and then be happy if you win. the kiwis are cocky, tiger woods is cockey, fed is cockey. What the heck have scotland got to be cocky about.

the guy is one masive embarrasment to you scots and rugby as a whole

I think it's taken out of context. The guys clearly been asked a question, and it's a bit of a turn of phrase to say "it's a bonus". Presumably a back handed compliment, meaning nobody would have to face England in a knock out match if they go out at this stage.

I can't put it any more diplomatically than that.

TheGreyGhost wrote:I think it's taken out of context. The guys clearly been asked a question, and it's a bit of a turn of phrase to say "it's a bonus". Presumably a back handed compliment, meaning nobody would have to face England in a knock out match if they go out at this stage.

I can't put it any more diplomatically than that.

BS.

Imagine Quade in interview saying it would be a bonus if NZ were knocked out by Argentina! Guaranteed you would respond in such a neutral manner.

Think it is you that needs a new mouthguard

TheGreyGhost wrote:I think it's taken out of context. The guys clearly been asked a question, and it's a bit of a turn of phrase to say "it's a bonus". Presumably a back handed compliment, meaning nobody would have to face England in a knock out match if they go out at this stage.

I can't put it any more diplomatically than that.

How can it be taken out of context GG - it's not a quote mate, it's a VT of a press conference.

Nice try, but your wordsmithery has come up short for once.

Storm in a tea cup, fixating on one small thing as GG says partly taken out of context.
You think Brian Moore wouldve minced words if it were England looking to progress against France?
Is this any different to "Little Brothergate" earlier this year?

Theres far more important things to get wound up about, at least the guys honest. And lets face it if de Lucas still getiing in the scotland squad england dont have much to worry about.

I value your opinion Peter you're one of the most balanced (if at times a little mischievious) posters on here, but I don't see the "taken out of context" view.


"To take something out of context is to ignore the overall meaning of an utterance in order to assign undue importance or meaning to a part of it. For example: Joe says "I think Fred is not a man to trifle with." The CNN network anchorman gleefully reports it as "Joe says Fred is not a man." That is taking Joe's words out of context." (courtesy of Answers.com)


Nobody is putting words into his mouth De Luca is the only one talking.

BM was a wum of the highest order and his comments were premeditated and intelligently thought out to cause maximum effect. Probably his "finest hour" was the needle he stuck into the French prior to the '91 semi final, in case your memory fails you, this "imperious" exhibition of wumming lead to the great Serge Blanco getting a red card for battering the carp out of the first Englishman to go anywhere near him, on that ocassion the unfortunate Nigel Heslop.

I will bet two things, firstly, Heslop would not have bought Moore a beer for his genius wind up, secondly, De Luca will be going on a long journey very shortly and none of his team mates will be standing him so much as a glass of water.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Fair enough PJH, but the guys got nothing on Gatland.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Fair enough PJH, but the guys got nothing on Gatland.

I disagree with the broad consensus and I think Grey Ghost is right. I'd put it slightly differently though. Given that I've worked in media and edited various pieces of materials and interviews, I'd be more chary of rushing to a conclusion based on an isolated clip.

The discussion of the phrase is being discussed out of context in this thread. Watch the clip from the beginning and listen to what he actually says. He begins to respond about the history of the game and the rivalry between the two sides. And it's in that context that he makes the added bonus comment.

What further isolates the overall comment is that it is a clip from a much longer news conference and we don't hear what the preamble is to the edited clip that is used.

The BBC written report says that it was a media grilling, so it's likely he was asked a few provocative questions - by both lots of media.

He could quite easily have been responding to a journalist - Scottish or English - asking, for example:

" Is there an added spice to the game this week because it's between the two oldest sides and there's a great history and rivalry between the two, Nick? Is the fact that you're playing England in your last match make it matter more?"

Or maybe

"Is the fact that's it England this weekend, Nick, make it extra special? Would it be an added bonus to defeat them/potentially knock them out, does it matter more that it's England you're playing?

de Luca then says:

"I think no matter who we're playing this weekend, you know it could be, hopefully it won't our last game in the world cup, so, it definitely doesn't matter in that sense, but there's that added edge you are desperate to beat these guys, it is, a lot of history is built up by yourselves, and by our families, and by everybody in the people you know, em the added bonus is if we do it right is that England would go out which would be an added bonus, but it's not the incentive itself, what we're trying to do is just go out and get through ourselves."

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Fair enough PJH, but the guys got nothing on Gatland.

Like I said, mischievious - oftentimes bordering on naughty you know?

Just to show that these things balance out, Ben Youngs provided a commentary for Scotland's dressing room if it's needed:

"Having Scotland adds that edge and that emotional excitement. You know what to expect, you know the rivalry. You love that rivalry. It would be like New Zealand facing Australia, with everything to play for and so much to lose. Scotland would love nothing better than spoiling the party for England. That is the way they are and we have to come in with the same attitude — there’d be nothing better than seeing them off on the plane. They would be happy to send us home and we would be them."

"Press conferences are huge. I am usually really relaxed, but the other day you knew it was a massive game with the amount of people there, the recorders slammed in front of you, questions being fired at you. I had to think carefully about my answers because you don’t want to give them ammunition. However, I couldn’t resist saying how satisfying it would be to send the Scots home, because I know they are thinking exactly the same. I am sure we can."

Same kind of press conference.

Pot Hale wrote:

...The BBC written report says that it was a media grilling, so it's likely he was asked a few provocative questions - by both lots of media.

He could quite easily have been responding to a journalist - Scottish or English - asking, for example:

" Is there an added spice to the game this week because it's between the two oldest sides and there's a great history and rivalry between the two, Nick? Is the fact that you're playing England in your last match make it matter more?"

Or maybe

"Is the fact that's it England this weekend, Nick, make it extra special? Would it be an added bonus to defeat them/potentially knock them out, does it matter more that it's England you're playing?

de Luca then says:

"I think no matter who we're playing this weekend, you know it could be, hopefully it won't our last game in the world cup, so, it definitely doesn't matter in that sense, but there's that added edge you are desperate to beat these guys, it is, a lot of history is built up by yourselves, and by our families, and by everybody in the people you know, em the added bonus is if we do it right is that England would go out which would be an added bonus, but it's not the incentive itself, what we're trying to do is just go out and get through ourselves."

Please forgive me for paraphrasing and adding bold type to highlight what I see as the key issue Pot Hale, I can assure you I'm not trying to take what you've written out of context and absolutely respect and agree with what you've said both about your experience in the media and what "the media" is capable of.

Here's my take on it:

Of course it was a "grilling" that's what the media do in these kinds of high pressure situations, they do it to get the headline quote that will sell their "paper", but De Luca DID say it, he didn't not say it or say it differently, he actually said (in effect) that sending England home would be a bonus.

The point (and the reason) I felt strongly enough to raise the topic is that De Luca has let the cat out of the bag, he has actually come out with the absolute truth as far as HE is concerned (but I suspect he's not entirely on his own), and admitted to the press (and therefore the world) that there IS a reason why Scotland raise their game when they play England, it's because it's still personal to the Scottish.

I'm going to be personal now, I absolutely do NOT understand that mindset and NEVER will, how can a professional sporstman admit that there is an extra flavour in a game against England that doesn't really exist in other fixtures?

Why the hell hasn't he approached every game the same way - with maximun intent, physically and mentally?

If players like De Luca (and we both know he's not on his own other than in the fact that he "thought out loud"), could redirect that "bonus" feeling into just winning as opposed to a side effect of winning, Scotland would have almost certainly beaten Argentina as they have better players, had a better position with 10mins to go and should have made this Saturday's game almost a dead rubber.

The sooner players like De Luca lose that kind of 18th century thinking and get stuck into the opposition whoever they are, the sooner Scottish rugby will be back on the up, and I cannot begin to tell you how much I mean that, which is why I found his comment so offensive and potentially motivational in the first place.

Good luck to Scotland and play well on Saturday.

Yep, I was posting my reply to you at the same time I think.

The point Youngs is making is that England HAVE to be absolutely on their game because they know that whatever Scotland have done so far in this WC, will not bear any resemblance to how they turn up against England on Saturday.

The problem I have with that is WHY Scotland will find an extra gear against England and nobody else?

If they've got it surely they should use it against everyone they play?

It's long been suspected and, unfortunately for him De Luca has provided the evidence, that Scotland will find that bit extra for one team that is lacking for all the others.

I can't relate that to professional sport and the quicker Scotland get rid of that thinking the quicker they'll get back to where they belong.

PJHolybloke wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/15069848.stm


Nice one Nick, thanks very much. Bonus? Grow up you snivelling little boy.

Talk like that makes me I don't want to see Scotland go out, I don't want to see any of the home nations or Ireland go out, but before the final at least three of them must. That's what a tournament is all about, but to talk about knocking another team out as a "bonus" is about as small-minded as you can get.

I suppose he feels comfortable talking in those terms because he's on the bench on Saturday, look out for him Courtney, if he does come on he'll be the one in brown shorts.

Wow, some one needs to calm down, take a deep breath etc Your really reading far too much into this "Talk like that makes me vomit"

Plus whilst we're looking at BBC interviews, a quote from Ben Youngs "As an Englishmen I couldn't think of anything better than beating Scotland to be honest with you" http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/15082429.stm (0:35) Does talk like that also cause you to vomit? Are you going to call Ben Youngs a "snivelling little boy" and suggest that he "grows up"?

[quote="PJHolybloke"]

Pot Hale wrote:

..
Here's my take on it:

Of course it was a "grilling" that's what the media do in these kinds of high pressure situations, they do it to get the headline quote that will sell their "paper", but De Luca DID say it, he didn't not say it or say it differently, he actually said (in effect) that sending England home would be a bonus.

The point (and the reason) I felt strongly enough to raise the topic is that De Luca has let the cat out of the bag, he has actually come out with the absolute truth as far as HE is concerned (but I suspect he's not entirely on his own), and admitted to the press (and therefore the world) that there IS a reason why Scotland raise their game when they play England, it's because it's still personal to the Scottish.

I'm going to be personal now, I absolutely do NOT understand that mindset and NEVER will, how can a professional sporstman admit that there is an extra flavour in a game against England that doesn't really exist in other fixtures?

Why the hell hasn't he approached every game the same way - with maximun intent, physically and mentally?

If players like De Luca (and we both know he's not on his own other than in the fact that he "thought out loud"), could redirect that "bonus" feeling into just winning as opposed to a side effect of winning, Scotland would have almost certainly beaten Argentina as they have better players, had a better position with 10mins to go and should have made this Saturday's game almost a dead rubber.

The sooner players like De Luca lose that kind of 18th century thinking and get stuck into the opposition whoever they are, the sooner Scottish rugby will be back on the up, and I cannot begin to tell you how much I mean that, which is why I found his comment so offensive and potentially motivational in the first place.

Good luck to Scotland and play well on Saturday.

PJ - Go have a listen to the BBC report in the link above and listen to Ben Youngs answer a similar question - and give the exact same answer as de Luca. He knows Scotland would like to knock them out, and they'd like to knock Scotland out. No biggie. They enjoy the rivalry. England will derive no more leverage from de Luca than from what they're saying and acknowledging themselves.

[quote="Pot Hale"][quote="PJHolybloke"]

Pot Hale wrote:

The sooner players like De Luca lose that kind of 18th century thinking and get stuck into the opposition whoever they are, the sooner Scottish rugby will be back on the up, and I cannot begin to tell you how much I mean that, which is why I found his comment so offensive and potentially motivational in the first place.

:

But it's the same for all nations, every team has an opponent who they raise their game for. Case in point Ireland against England in the 6 nations this year.

[quote="GLove39"][quote="Pot Hale"]

PJHolybloke wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

The sooner players like De Luca lose that kind of 18th century thinking and get stuck into the opposition whoever they are, the sooner Scottish rugby will be back on the up, and I cannot begin to tell you how much I mean that, which is why I found his comment so offensive and potentially motivational in the first place.

:

But it's the same for all nations, every team has an opponent who they raise their game for. Case in point Ireland against England in the 6 nations this year.

I'd agree with that statement Glove, if England had "an opponent who they raise their game for". Case in point, England actually don't.

If they do, I'm mistaken and have been for the 30 odd years I've been watching them play.

I think my point is being missed, and I will be honest enough to admit that it's probably my fault, the way I see it is that Scotland will be a different team on Saturday to the one that has failed to impress in the 3 previous outings this world cup. If De Luca is a maverick and his take on the game is a one-off, I'll bare my a£5e on the Town Hall roof, the actuality is that the Scotland squad have been ramping themselves up for the game against England and that will be proven, not only by NDL's verbal indiscretion but also by the intensity in which Scotland attack the game in the first 10 minutes.

The major problem I have with NDL is that he described a potential Scotland victory as having a "bonus" attached to it by virtue of England going home and referenced the fact that this is an attitude that is apparently hereditary in so much as it appears to have been passed on as a family tradition where he comes from.

I wont lie to you, I too have a family tradition in relation to treating another country with that kind of contempt, I'll go as far as to tell you which country it is, it's France, but I'll argue with you till the day I die that the reasons for my "motivations" lie in much more recent and entirely valid waters than NDL's.

[quote="Pot Hale"]

PJHolybloke wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

..
Here's my take on it:

Of course it was a "grilling" that's what the media do in these kinds of high pressure situations, they do it to get the headline quote that will sell their "paper", but De Luca DID say it, he didn't not say it or say it differently, he actually said (in effect) that sending England home would be a bonus.

The point (and the reason) I felt strongly enough to raise the topic is that De Luca has let the cat out of the bag, he has actually come out with the absolute truth as far as HE is concerned (but I suspect he's not entirely on his own), and admitted to the press (and therefore the world) that there IS a reason why Scotland raise their game when they play England, it's because it's still personal to the Scottish.

I'm going to be personal now, I absolutely do NOT understand that mindset and NEVER will, how can a professional sporstman admit that there is an extra flavour in a game against England that doesn't really exist in other fixtures?

Why the hell hasn't he approached every game the same way - with maximun intent, physically and mentally?

If players like De Luca (and we both know he's not on his own other than in the fact that he "thought out loud"), could redirect that "bonus" feeling into just winning as opposed to a side effect of winning, Scotland would have almost certainly beaten Argentina as they have better players, had a better position with 10mins to go and should have made this Saturday's game almost a dead rubber.

The sooner players like De Luca lose that kind of 18th century thinking and get stuck into the opposition whoever they are, the sooner Scottish rugby will be back on the up, and I cannot begin to tell you how much I mean that, which is why I found his comment so offensive and potentially motivational in the first place.

Good luck to Scotland and play well on Saturday.

PJ - Go have a listen to the BBC report in the link above and listen to Ben Youngs answer a similar question - and give the exact same answer as de Luca. He knows Scotland would like to knock them out, and they'd like to knock Scotland out. No biggie. They enjoy the rivalry. England will derive no more leverage from de Luca than from what they're saying and acknowledging themselves.

I'll do that Pot But I doubt Young's answer is anywhere near the same, it's a very subtle issue we're discussing here, and I maintain my original stance that the England players will not and never would consider it a "bonus" that Scotland would go home as a by-product of an England victory.

They wont cry about it, but wouldn't crow about it either, the alternative is that the England players would have their noses well and truly rubbed in it for many a year to come and that's their sole motivating factor, not some age-old need to find redemption through "sending someone home", I think some people get carried away by the Scottish rugby anthem and should really look at themselves as to why they haven't delivered the goods in any of their 3 previous games, rather than try and talk themselves up for an encounter they're unlikely to take much part in.

I will listen to Young's press conference and be entirely honest with my response.

Quick everyone lets get the hate going! Scottish player says he'd like to knock England out shocker! Get over it. Scotland and England is the oldest international rivalry in rugby. As said above Ben Youngs said the same thing. It's not racist it's just sport. jeez

mckay1402 wrote:Quick everyone lets get the hate going! Scottish player says he'd like to knock England out shocker! Get over it. Scotland and England is the oldest international rivalry in rugby. As said above Ben Youngs said the same thing. It's not racist it's just sport. jeez

+1

Nicks quote made me smile when I saw it as I suspected it would provoke this debate, but as so many have pointed out, you have to take it in context as it was just a snippet edited from a much larger interview.

I actually blame the english/british media for this as they love to stoke the fire... there's no news in everyone being happy & supportive of each other.

Just look at the Andy Robinson interview, the reporter tried again & again to provoke Andy into jumping onto the anti england bandwagon but being a bit older & wiser Andy saw it for what it was and neatly avoided the trap.

Ha not to mention the fact that he is in fact English...

Metal Tiger wrote:
I actually blame the english/british media

I balme the Scottish/British media

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Metal Tiger wrote:
I actually blame the english/british media

I balme the Scottish/British media

+1

Murdoch - defo of Scottish origin

PS Could we cap Wendy thru marriage? Would like to see her up against Manu in the centres

PJHolybloke wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/15069848.stm


Nice one Nick, thanks very much. Bonus? Grow up you snivelling little boy.

Talk like that makes me I don't want to see Scotland go out, I don't want to see any of the home nations or Ireland go out, but before the final at least three of them must. That's what a tournament is all about, but to talk about knocking another team out as a "bonus" is about as small-minded as you can get.

I suppose he feels comfortable talking in those terms because he's on the bench on Saturday, look out for him Courtney, if he does come on he'll be the one in brown shorts.

What's Lawes going to do?

Knee him in the head with a cheap shot as NDL is lying in touch with him back to him?

Like Pot Hale mentioned, Foden stated he'd like to see Scotland on the plane. Pre match hype that the journo's lap up.

Grow up son!

And I hope Lawes does something stupid and get's carded the wee tube. He shouldn't even be on the pitch for his actions against Argentina.

But then again, we wouldn't have the opportunity to see Stroks give him a bit.

PJHolybloke wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/15069848.stm


Nice one Nick, thanks very much. Bonus? Grow up you snivelling little boy.

Talk like that makes me I don't want to see Scotland go out, I don't want to see any of the home nations or Ireland go out, but before the final at least three of them must. That's what a tournament is all about, but to talk about knocking another team out as a "bonus" is about as small-minded as you can get.

I suppose he feels comfortable talking in those terms because he's on the bench on Saturday, look out for him Courtney, if he does come on he'll be the one in brown shorts.

Daily mail reader. Has been a rugby fan since August

Im pretty sure Nich de Luca has been in rugby longer than that Mckay, although form his play I admit youd be surpissed

Didn't Ben Youngs say how much he would love to knock Scotland out?

He's just playing up to the (sometimes true) stereotype. I have met Scots up here that will put on a "as long as we beat the English" mentality when they don't necessarily believe it. It's like the Al Murray joke "where would we be without rules?" "France!". Of course there are also a fair proportion who do think it. Which camp he falls into doesn't really matter, it wasn't the smartest thing to say, but I doubt it will really change much in the game.

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:

PJHolybloke wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/15069848.stm


Nice one Nick, thanks very much. Bonus? Grow up you snivelling little boy.

Talk like that makes me I don't want to see Scotland go out, I don't want to see any of the home nations or Ireland go out, but before the final at least three of them must. That's what a tournament is all about, but to talk about knocking another team out as a "bonus" is about as small-minded as you can get.

I suppose he feels comfortable talking in those terms because he's on the bench on Saturday, look out for him Courtney, if he does come on he'll be the one in brown shorts.

What's Lawes going to do?

Knee him in the head with a cheap shot as NDL is lying in touch with him back to him?

Like Pot Hale mentioned, Foden stated he'd like to see Scotland on the plane. Pre match hype that the journo's lap up.

Grow up son!

And I hope Lawes does something stupid and get's carded the wee tube. He shouldn't even be on the pitch for his actions against Argentina.

But then again, we wouldn't have the opportunity to see Stroks give him a bit.

Bit of an irony telling somebody to grow up and then in the same breath call Lawes a 'wee tube' (whatever that means in the FRISP vernacular), suggest that he shouldn't be on the pitch after serving a ban which where I come from means he's actually been punished and is now free to play and then suggesting that 'Stroks' gives him a bit.

From what i've seen, even if 'Stroks' can get anywhere near Lawes (which I doubt) the only 'bit' he'll be giving lawes is man love.

Mediocrity. Live with it. Have no fear, your boys will be on the plane home soon enough and will be free to bolster another impressive Scottish charge up the Celtic League. PMSL.

I really dont get what the lad has said wrong? He's made it quite clear that they are focused on getting through....but hey if England went out then its nice little "extra".

Im sure England are thinking the same - we focus on getting through....then hey we also get a bonus of sending the Auld Enemy home.

Most teams are chuffed when they knock out a rival..especially one as close as Scotland and England.

I can think of better team talks than using this....

Are Scotland really our biggest rival?

I would much prefer to beat France,Australia,South Africa,New Zealand,Wales,Ireland or Argentina.

Of course we want to win but there are bigger matches, more tough opponents.

Focus on each game as it comes.

Beshocked...

Im not sure they are our biggest rival...but they're next door and probably our oldest rivals, so it does make it quite special.

The Aussies are the ones i love to beat...especially with so many aussie mates...

GeordieFalcon what I am saying is that I want England to beat Scotland. Not because they are Scotland but because they are our next opponents.

The next game is the biggest game. You should want to win every game you play as much as possible.

If Scotland can only motivate themselves for England games then fair enough. That's their problem.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Im pretty sure Nich de Luca has been in rugby longer than that Mckay, although form his play I admit youd be surpissed

Ha ha was talking about the OP

beshocked wrote:Are Scotland really our biggest rival?

I would much prefer to beat France,Australia,South Africa,New Zealand,Wales,Ireland or Argentina.

Of course we want to win but there are bigger matches, more tough opponents.

Focus on each game as it comes.

Maybe not biggest rival but certainly a rival of a similar level. You may want to beat those other teams more but that is mainly because you know they are superior.

mckay1402 wrote:

beshocked wrote:Are Scotland really our biggest rival?

I would much prefer to beat France,Australia,South Africa,New Zealand,Wales,Ireland or Argentina.

Of course we want to win but there are bigger matches, more tough opponents.

Focus on each game as it comes.

Maybe not biggest rival but certainly a rival of a similar level. You may want to beat those other teams more but that is mainly because you know they are superior.

Probably true for NZ and SA, but the English love beating the Aussies and the rest are about our level (in fact as we are fourth in the IRB rankings the rest are technically worse)

PJHolybloke wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/15069848.stm


Nice one Nick, thanks very much. Bonus? Grow up you snivelling little boy.

Talk like that makes me I don't want to see Scotland go out, I don't want to see any of the home nations or Ireland go out, but before the final at least three of them must. That's what a tournament is all about, but to talk about knocking another team out as a "bonus" is about as small-minded as you can get.

I suppose he feels comfortable talking in those terms because he's on the bench on Saturday, look out for him Courtney, if he does come on he'll be the one in brown shorts.

I don't understand why this has made you so angry. Are you telling me that the English players won't take that little bit more pleasure from beating Scotland in the knowledge that they're sending them home early in the process?

Unless, of course, it's come as a complete surprise to you that there are, gulp, rivalries between the home nations...

screamingaddabs wrote:

mckay1402 wrote:

beshocked wrote:Are Scotland really our biggest rival?

I would much prefer to beat France,Australia,South Africa,New Zealand,Wales,Ireland or Argentina.

Of course we want to win but there are bigger matches, more tough opponents.

Focus on each game as it comes.

Maybe not biggest rival but certainly a rival of a similar level. You may want to beat those other teams more but that is mainly because you know they are superior.

Probably true for NZ and SA, but the English love beating the Aussies and the rest are about our level (in fact as we are fourth in the IRB rankings the rest are technically worse)

I was just kidding around. It was a gentle bit of wummery...

Gatts wrote:Imagine Quade in interview saying it would be a bonus if NZ were knocked out by Argentina! Guaranteed you would respond in such a neutral manner.

Think it is you that needs a new mouthguard

I dunno, I remember an English mate of mine talking to me after the 07 QFs. I empathised with him when he said it was a huge bonus that France knocked us out. Of course it was for his team-England have a better record vs France than NZ at WCs and are more familiar with them. If Ireland beat Italy that makes Australia's loss a bonus as (if we win the QF) we'd only have to play one of Aussie or SA. The Aussies I was with understood that I was happy after that game due to that reason. GG would understand Quade saying that too for the same.

mckay1402 wrote:

screamingaddabs wrote:

mckay1402 wrote:

beshocked wrote:Are Scotland really our biggest rival?

I would much prefer to beat France,Australia,South Africa,New Zealand,Wales,Ireland or Argentina.

Of course we want to win but there are bigger matches, more tough opponents.

Focus on each game as it comes.

Maybe not biggest rival but certainly a rival of a similar level. You may want to beat those other teams more but that is mainly because you know they are superior.

Probably true for NZ and SA, but the English love beating the Aussies and the rest are about our level (in fact as we are fourth in the IRB rankings the rest are technically worse)

I was just kidding around. It was a gentle bit of wummery...

Meh, went straight over my head

I love all this "be modest" Scotland stuff that's going around - The irony is it's coming from a side who had already prepared a Grand Slam winning DVD in 2011 - Hows that for modesty