Losing to Wales describe as "Embarrassment".

by anotherworldofpain Wed 23 May 2012, 7:48 am

First topic message reminder :

For world's second best team Wallabies, they describing potential lost to Wales would be embarrassment according to Australian newspaper (I putting the link beneath).

What do colleague posters think about it? My mind is a bit unfair although Australia #2 87.99 and Wales #5 83.32 so because home games Australia by ranking should win by more than 1 try each game. But also compare both teams make the semi-final RWC so maybe can be a bit more closer even though "Aussies" one the last 4 matchings including important world cup playoff and not lost for five years.

"CONCERNS that the Wallabies may suffer an embarrassment similar to losing to Samoa last season and Scotland in 2009 have convinced Test selectors to force key players to back up three times in one week when the international series starts next month.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/call-of-duty-for-ambushed-wallabies-20120521-1z192.html#ixzz1vflO7DZv
"

by FerN Wed 23 May 2012, 3:01 pm

biltongbek wrote:Fern, the problem is it is deeper rooted than that, it starts at cruyven week where players of colour has to be selected, as an example, a mate of mine's son wasn't selected for Cruyven week U13's because they needed another player of colour, and because he was the prop he was sacraficed as their reasoning was there is limited damage to lose a player who has general all round capability.

It then goes further, it goes to the senior school teams, then to the Vodacom, the province, the super rugby franchises. It isn't a case of these guys can't play international level, but they aren't our best.

And to beat the best, your can't play your second, third or fourth best player, you need your best.

I don't really have a problem with it in Craven week, as that is where I think it should happen - and let's be honest, some of those kids I have no idea how they got chosen on merit above some of the other players. I don't agree with interfering in the national team, but I still don't see us being able to have a better record since readmission against the All Blacks even with all of this going on.

by **Biltong** Wed 23 May 2012, 3:04 pm

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:All players the ABs would've welcomed with open arms given the chance, despite your reputation to pull out on transfer deals...

Pot calling the kettle black I see. Losing to Wales describe as "Embarrassment". - Page 3 Soek12

by kiakahaaotearoa Wed 23 May 2012, 3:06 pm

Ignore that racist pot. He's not worth the trouble...

by **Biltong** Wed 23 May 2012, 3:08 pm

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Ignore that racist pot. He's not worth the trouble...

Losing to Wales describe as "Embarrassment". - Page 3 Roflbl10

by mystiroakey Wed 23 May 2012, 3:09 pm

FerN wrote:
biltongbek wrote:Fern, the problem is it is deeper rooted than that, it starts at cruyven week where players of colour has to be selected, as an example, a mate of mine's son wasn't selected for Cruyven week U13's because they needed another player of colour, and because he was the prop he was sacraficed as their reasoning was there is limited damage to lose a player who has general all round capability.

It then goes further, it goes to the senior school teams, then to the Vodacom, the province, the super rugby franchises. It isn't a case of these guys can't play international level, but they aren't our best.

And to beat the best, your can't play your second, third or fourth best player, you need your best.

I don't really have a problem with it in Craven week, as that is where I think it should happen - and let's be honest, some of those kids I have no idea how they got chosen on merit above some of the other players. I don't agree with interfering in the national team, but I still don't see us being able to have a better record since readmission against the All Blacks even with all of this going on.

Do you lot not feel as though the quotas are something that is very much needed and something that goes way deeper than sport. Also in the long run you will end up with utilising a much larger population base on the back of it. Look at englands problems- its not neccesarily colour, more about class- i would be very happy to see a class qouta for instance- ok that comment is a bit of a joke- however if it meant getting all groups playing the game we would have so much more of a player pool to choice from

by **Biltong** Wed 23 May 2012, 3:21 pm

Mystir, i have no issue with quota's.

It is the way that it is done I have a problem with. As much as Apartheid was wrong, it has a name and it was there for everyone to see.

What is wrong with our society at the moment, is things don't have a name, there is no front page or index you can go to to read what are the criteria or stipulations of these things such as Quota's, balck empowerment, etc.

It is all there, unspoken rules and agreements whereby poeple are refused opportunties based on their skin colour.

If government wants it doen correctly they must fund these developments.

I'll use the Kings in Port elizabeth as an example.

The current five franchises are told the Kings WILL play in the super XV next year.

There is no place for another franchises which means someone must leave, now the Lions are being politically pressurised with all sorts of budgetary, performance, infighting, etc to promote the Kings into their position.

The kings were told 8 years ago in 2005 that they will get to play in the super XV, yet since that day they were investigated for mismanagement of funds, there has been no development of any black players as was the reason for starting a franchise there in the first place.

Cheeky Watson well known Anti aprtheid activist and deep in the ANC runs the Kings, with his son Luke Watson being appointed as the Kings captain.

Both are earning salaries in excess of 4 times more than any other player in at that level. They will enter the Super XV next year whilst they have not even gotten to the Semi final of our vodacom cup which is at best a 3rd tier level in SA, most of the teams there don't even contract players on a fully professional basis.

So finally, my opinion is if you want to use quota's then give it a name, stop BS'ing and saying it doesn't exist, but then ABSA turns around and say they won't sponsor the currie cup anymore unless transformation has improved.

Then do the quota's thing on the basis of where OUR teams compete with one another, not when we have to compete against the top Franchises of NZ and OZ and at test level.

From after Currie Cup these things must happen naturally, then players will trust each other more, have more belief in their team mates and play more expansive rugby.

by TycroesOsprey Wed 23 May 2012, 3:35 pm

It takes time for opinions to change. Until the late 60s Wales were ahead in the head to heads with the All Blacks. Whilst we have always been regarded as poor tourists I would postulate that we were one of the most respected rugby playing nations pre 1990 and would have been consistently regarded as in the top three in the world.

Australia were not highly regarded in Wales until Slacks grand Slam team and even before that match many of us expected a welsh victory. IT was the only time I remember my grandfather calling the result incorrectly. I clearly remember him saying "Their good, but were wales and we should beat them comfortably, its only Australia." of course we got out own back in 87 Very Happy

Post 1990 rugby turned the previous century on its head in the NH. England became a powerhouse rather than an also ran and for thirteen years were the dominant force in world rugby becoming world number one and world champions.

Wales once the power of the northern hemisphere went into terminal decline and for thirteen years were regularly humiliated by anyone and everyone. Whilst the reasons for that decline are myriad(League, unproffesionalism, tribalism) fundementally it was a failure to accept change that hampered welsh development.

I would argue that Wales were in the top three in world rugby in the first century of rugby based on their results. It took 13 years of humiliation to turn us into the village idiots of rugby if its going to take thirteen years until we win that respect back from the current top three then around 2015 articles like the one posted in the OP will have dissapeared( clearly we started winning respect back in 03 when the team threw out Hansens game plan and played).

When the English fans go back to expecting defeat at our hands home and away and are regularly proven correct in their despair, when NZ and SA fans relish the challenge of playing the welsh again and when Australia and France fear us then we will have proven we are back. A series win in Australia is the next step, then of course we can start to aim for the Boks or Blacks and topple them. Maybe its time for people to consider if the sleeping dragon has actually woken up? If it has then world rugby will return to the default setting it was on for the first 100 years. Were not doing to bad, a semi final in the world cup and a grand slam win. How much silverware did SA win last year for instance? Beaten quarterfinalists in the RWC and beaten in the tri nations, perhaps we are about to see the terminal decline of another great rugby nation. I mean I would have laughed if you had predicted the 13 years of shame for Wales in 1989.

by RubyGuby Wed 23 May 2012, 3:48 pm

Tycroes we must have been born on the same day and breathed the same air as that is almost exactly as I see it. I don't however remember England dominating for 13 years - Carlings lot brought pride and organisation and there was a blip between 1999 and 2003 when they had their halcyon days much like we did in the 70's - It has taken us 15 years to begin to compete again 1990-2005 and finally I think we are able to compete - That's good enough for me win or lose thumbsup

by disneychilly Wed 23 May 2012, 3:50 pm

TycroesOsprey wrote: England became a powerhouse rather than an also ran and for thirteen years were the dominant force in world rugby becoming world number one and world champions.

Try being dominant for thirteen months. Was also SA's worst team ever during that period.

by Comfort Wed 23 May 2012, 3:56 pm

hey, i was born in 1989, ive only ever know wales to be the village idiots who could have our day!

currently Im the happiest ive ever been with welsh rugby! Yahoo

by RubyGuby Wed 23 May 2012, 3:59 pm

Comfort wrote:hey, i was born in 1989, ive only ever know wales to be the village idiots who could have our day!

currently Im the happiest ive ever been with welsh rugby!

I was at the Baa Baas New Zealand match as an 8 year old in 1973 Sad

by FerN Wed 23 May 2012, 4:01 pm

No, I think we (South Africa) are only getting strong now and our players only started really be competitive in super rugby since 2007 and we are still competitive now. From when super rugby was introduced till then, NZ rugby always seemed to outclass us. I wouldn't call that our teams would beat NZ teams in NZ for instance, now I am not afraid to make a call like that.

Also, since watching rugby in 1992 we never really had a South Africa style of rugby. All our different provinces played differently, but now it is clearly starting to shift to a SA type of play with our two top franchises - Stormers and Bulls, playing a similar style of rugby with the Sharks not to far away from this type of rugby. Only the Cheetahs still play a different style, and the Lions - I am not really sure what they are doing. I definitely feel positive about South African rugby.

For Wales on the other hand, when I grew up I never saw them play and I always thought they were a weak team. It is only after I started reading the old 606 forum that I became aware of their passion and history of the game. And it was only really last year that I felt that we were playing a good team. Hope you guys come back to where you belong then.

by TycroesOsprey Wed 23 May 2012, 4:01 pm

Dominance that saw England beat the SH consistently home and away for 2-3 years in the lead up to the 2003 RWC, finalists in the 91 world cup, Semi finalists in the 95 RWC, 4 grand slams, five triple crowns, six championships, Beating SA in the first test in 2000, beating the Austrlians away 99, beating Australia and NZ away in 2003. Like it or not (and I dont) England were the dominant power in world rugby in the 90's and noughties.

by mystiroakey Wed 23 May 2012, 4:01 pm

biltongbek wrote:Mystir, i have no issue with quota's.

It is the way that it is done I have a problem with. As much as Apartheid was wrong, it has a name and it was there for everyone to see.

What is wrong with our society at the moment, is things don't have a name, there is no front page or index you can go to to read what are the criteria or stipulations of these things such as Quota's, balck empowerment, etc.

It is all there, unspoken rules and agreements whereby poeple are refused opportunties based on their skin colour.

If government wants it doen correctly they must fund these developments.

I'll use the Kings in Port elizabeth as an example.

The current five franchises are told the Kings WILL play in the super XV next year.

There is no place for another franchises which means someone must leave, now the Lions are being politically pressurised with all sorts of budgetary, performance, infighting, etc to promote the Kings into their position.

The kings were told 8 years ago in 2005 that they will get to play in the super XV, yet since that day they were investigated for mismanagement of funds, there has been no development of any black players as was the reason for starting a franchise there in the first place.

Cheeky Watson well known Anti aprtheid activist and deep in the ANC runs the Kings, with his son Luke Watson being appointed as the Kings captain.

Both are earning salaries in excess of 4 times more than any other player in at that level. They will enter the Super XV next year whilst they have not even gotten to the Semi final of our vodacom cup which is at best a 3rd tier level in SA, most of the teams there don't even contract players on a fully professional basis.

So finally, my opinion is if you want to use quota's then give it a name, stop BS'ing and saying it doesn't exist, but then ABSA turns around and say they won't sponsor the currie cup anymore unless transformation has improved.

Then do the quota's thing on the basis of where OUR teams compete with one another, not when we have to compete against the top Franchises of NZ and OZ and at test level.

From after Currie Cup these things must happen naturally, then players will trust each other more, have more belief in their team mates and play more expansive rugby.

Ok ta for that. Qoutas should only ever be a short term thing in my book- they have to be set up in a way that works and then eventually you should be able to go back to just picking the best there is. I dont know much about south africa- maybe it isnt being handled well enough

by TycroesOsprey Wed 23 May 2012, 4:03 pm

TycroesOsprey wrote:Dominance that saw England beat the SH consistently home and away for 2-3 years in the lead up to the 2003 RWC, finalists in the 91 world cup, Semi finalists in the 95 RWC, 4 grand slams, five triple crowns, six championships, Beating SA in the first test in 2000, beating the Austrlians away 99, beating Australia and NZ away in 2003. Like it or not (and I dont) England were the dominant power in world rugby in the 90's and noughties.

personally Im convinced Carling sold his soul for thirteen years of English dominance. Happily those days look to be behind us.

by disneychilly Wed 23 May 2012, 4:05 pm

Jeepers Comfort you poor fella. It gets better than that mate!

The Welsh still never beat NZ or SA in the 70s so as good as they were they were never the top of the tree then.

I hope you guys do get back to that level though. At the moment Wales are still inconsistent-I mean the WC record was won 4 lost 3. Good luck vs the Aussies-if you can get a test then it'll be something to build on.

by munkian Wed 23 May 2012, 4:06 pm

My first ever live Welsh rugby match was Western Samoa in Cardiff Yikes

by FerN Wed 23 May 2012, 4:06 pm

TycroesOsprey wrote:Dominance that saw England beat the SH consistently home and away for 2-3 years in the lead up to the 2003 RWC, finalists in the 91 world cup, Semi finalists in the 95 RWC, 4 grand slams, five triple crowns, six championships, Beating SA in the first test in 2000, beating the Austrlians away 99, beating Australia and NZ away in 2003. Like it or not (and I dont) England were the dominant power in world rugby in the 90's and noughties.

Maybe the dominant NH team, but in my book NZ was the dominant team in the 90's.

by kiakahaaotearoa Wed 23 May 2012, 4:06 pm

More like a dominant power rather than the dominant power in the 90s and noughties Tycroes. There is a big difference.

Australia, SA, NZ and England dominated at different times and for different lengths of times during the era you mention.

by Toadfish Wed 23 May 2012, 4:06 pm

disneychilly wrote:
TycroesOsprey wrote: England became a powerhouse rather than an also ran and for thirteen years were the dominant force in world rugby becoming world number one and world champions.

Try being dominant for thirteen months. Was also SA's worst team ever during that period.

I have to say I was surprised by the 13 year thing for England but if you look at the stats it’s not far off. From 1990 to 2003 England won 75% of their games, only surpassed by NZ with 76%.

As for your 13 month crack that really is a touch disrespectful as what I remember as England’s period of dominance was 4 years from 2000 to 2003. This is backed up by us winning 89% of our games over that time, a win percentage probably only ever sustained by New Zealand over such a period.

by TycroesOsprey Wed 23 May 2012, 4:08 pm

disneychilly wrote:Jeepers Comfort you poor fella. It gets better than that mate!

The Welsh still never beat NZ or SA in the 70s so as good as they were they were never the top of the tree then.

I hope you guys do get back to that level though. At the moment Wales are still inconsistent-I mean the WC record was won 4 lost 3. Good luck vs the Aussies-if you can get a test then it'll be something to build on.

We were robbed in 78 and you know it steam

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugby-union-haden-dived-to-cheat-the-welsh-1179032.html

meh, Deans never scored.

by TycroesOsprey Wed 23 May 2012, 4:13 pm

Toadfish wrote:
disneychilly wrote:
TycroesOsprey wrote: England became a powerhouse rather than an also ran and for thirteen years were the dominant force in world rugby becoming world number one and world champions.

Try being dominant for thirteen months. Was also SA's worst team ever during that period.

I have to say I was surprised by the 13 year thing for England but if you look at the stats it’s not far off. From 1990 to 2003 England won 75% of their games, only surpassed by NZ with 76%.

As for your 13 month crack that really is a touch disrespectful as what I remember as England’s period of dominance was 4 years from 2000 to 2003. This is backed up by us winning 89% of our games over that time, a win percentage probably only ever sustained by New Zealand over such a period.

And during that time England got to two RWC finals winning one a semi and a quarterfinal a much better record than NZ in that period.

by disneychilly Wed 23 May 2012, 4:14 pm

I suppose it's standards TO. as far as the Triple Crowns go, well obviously England was the only Home Nation to beat NZ so the ABs are unbeaten against the others. It doesn't mean that much to us as we grab a Triple Crown pretty much every time we go north. NZ never lost to England in a WC and won the others save the 26 all draw in 97. Throw in a WC final, being in the midst of a 50 game unbeaten streak at the start of said 13 years, a series win over SA, only losing one game from 1996 to mid 1998, a few 3N and BC, thrown in and that's NZ's record. Australia had 6 years with the BC and two WCs, SA a 17 game streak and the 95 WC. I think the win percentage over the 13 years will not see England at the top of the tree let alone dominant.

by Comfort Wed 23 May 2012, 4:15 pm

hahahah I wasnt even alive and i know that Haden is basically the welsh rugby folks equivalent of Voldemort, he who shall not be named.

Gatlands been the only coach who's looked at the welsh structure top to bottom, and I get the feeling hes having more than 1 hand in some of the changes the WRU will be working on and he's definitely influenced changes throughout the regions.

Wales still seemed to be a "nearly" team at the world cup. Again, they did enough to present themselves with chances to win all of their games, it was just taking those chances that hampered us.

The 6nations seemed a small step on from there again, hopefully being down under can be the natural step, I'd be happy with 1 win, I'm expecting 1 win, I'd prefer the series though!!! angel

by **Biltong** Wed 23 May 2012, 4:20 pm

TycroesOsprey wrote:It takes time for opinions to change. Until the late 60s Wales were ahead in the head to heads with the All Blacks. Whilst we have always been regarded as poor tourists I would postulate that we were one of the most respected rugby playing nations pre 1990 and would have been consistently regarded as in the top three in the world.

Australia were not highly regarded in Wales until Slacks grand Slam team and even before that match many of us expected a welsh victory. IT was the only time I remember my grandfather calling the result incorrectly. I clearly remember him saying "Their good, but were wales and we should beat them comfortably, its only Australia." of course we got out own back in 87

Post 1990 rugby turned the previous century on its head in the NH. England became a powerhouse rather than an also ran and for thirteen years were the dominant force in world rugby becoming world number one and world champions.

Wales once the power of the northern hemisphere went into terminal decline and for thirteen years were regularly humiliated by anyone and everyone. Whilst the reasons for that decline are myriad(League, unproffesionalism, tribalism) fundementally it was a failure to accept change that hampered welsh development.
Xd
I would argue that Wales were in the top three in world rugby in the first century of rugby based on their results. It took 13 years of humiliation to turn us into the village idiots of rugby if its going to take thirteen years until we win that respect back from the current top three then around 2015 articles like the one posted in the OP will have dissapeared( clearly we started winning respect back in 03 when the team threw out Hansens game plan and played).

When the English fans go back to expecting defeat at our hands home and away and are regularly proven correct in their despair, when NZ and SA fans relish the challenge of playing the welsh again and when Australia and France fear us then we will have proven we are back. A series win in Australia is the next step, then of course we can start to aim for the Boks or Blacks and topple them. Maybe its time for people to consider if the sleeping dragon has actually woken up? If it has then world rugby will return to the default setting it was on for the first 100 years. Were not doing to bad, a semi final in the world cup and a grand slam win. How much silverware did SA win last year for instance? Beaten quarterfinalists in the RWC and beaten in the tri nations, perhaps we are about to see the terminal decline of another great rugby nation. I mean I would have laughed if you had predicted the 13 years of shame for Wales in 1989.

Tycroes nice post mate. thumbsup

by Bullsbok Wed 23 May 2012, 4:22 pm

i dont blame the aussies for saying it would be an embarrasment even though they seem to lose to wales more than their tri nations counterparts.think the only reason i dont want wales beating any tri nations teams is the mouthing off before a game and the even bigger mouthing off after a win .i for one will never get over the june 2010 comments by a welsh legend saying we'll send the springboks packing with their tails between their legs. And you jsut know if Wales beat australia all those legends will be coming out to inform the world how Wales is the best rugby country in the world without a doubt

by disneychilly Wed 23 May 2012, 4:24 pm

TycroesOsprey wrote:meh, Deans never scored.

It's ok I'm over it. There were plenty of NZ Wales games when the whole Welsh team never scored a try so that makes me feel better about it Wink

by Comfort Wed 23 May 2012, 4:27 pm

Bullsbok wrote:i dont blame the aussies for saying it would be an embarrasment even though they seem to lose to wales more than their tri nations counterparts.think the only reason i dont want wales beating any tri nations teams is the mouthing off before a game and the even bigger mouthing off after a win .i for one will never get over the june 2010 comments by a welsh legend saying we'll send the springboks packing with their tails between their legs. And you jsut know if Wales beat australia all those legends will be coming out to inform the world how Wales is the best rugby country in the world without a doubt

Yes because Wales is the only country guilty of that......

by TycroesOsprey Wed 23 May 2012, 4:30 pm

Comfort wrote:hahahah I wasnt even alive and i know that Haden is basically the welsh rugby folks equivalent of Voldemort, he who shall not be named.

Gatlands been the only coach who's looked at the welsh structure top to bottom, and I get the feeling hes having more than 1 hand in some of the changes the WRU will be working on and he's definitely influenced changes throughout the regions.

Wales still seemed to be a "nearly" team at the world cup. Again, they did enough to present themselves with chances to win all of their games, it was just taking those chances that hampered us.

The 6nations seemed a small step on from there again, hopefully being down under can be the natural step, I'd be happy with 1 win, I'm expecting 1 win, I'd prefer the series though!!!

To be honest comfort I think Gatland has had luck with the work done before he came on board. The advent of regionalism, the setting up of the academy system. From the breakaway season in 97 to the civil war 99-02 in welsh rugby, Thats the period when the real structural reform on welsh rugby happened. Gatts is a great coach and proven winner and hes really brought this team together but he has also been blessed with systems taht have started to nurture welsh talent rather than dispersing it. The two men who welsh fans should really thank for dragging the WRU and welsh rugby as a whole screaming and kicking, biting and fighting into the 21st century was Henry and Moffett.

by Comfort Wed 23 May 2012, 4:32 pm

Gotta be fair, I agree with all of that. Its taken us up until now to really see the regions and academy systems starting to bear fruit, its definitely coincided quite nicely for Gatland and his ideas.

by gregortree Wed 23 May 2012, 4:33 pm

Wales fans can be embarrassing winners.
Bit like the drunken relation celebrating at a wedding. You pretend not to know them. Maybe that is what the Aussies are saying.

by Barney McGrew did it Wed 23 May 2012, 4:34 pm

Questioning ABs world dominance is sheer arrogance. How very dare you. Even turns out the Rev. William Webb Ellis was a New Zealander (or at least his grannie was).

by disneychilly Wed 23 May 2012, 4:36 pm

I think what gets our goat are the arrogant pre game predictions. "I really reckon we can beat South Africa, bring it on" isn't heard as often as "We're going to send the Boks packing with their tails between their legs". Again the small minority are the loudest. Thankfully I'm not even half the age required to have experience of my team coming off second best against them.

by disneychilly Wed 23 May 2012, 4:40 pm

Not at all Barney. South Africans question our dominance every time they take the field against us. Just in this case England being dominant for 13 years I felt was a fallacy as most 3N blokes I know had felt England was the best team in the world for a couple of years-thanks TO for the stats too. I'd say 90-91 NZ, 92-95 Australia/England, 95-98 NZ, 98-99 SA, 99-02 Aus, 02-03 England.

And Bill's grannie played fullback for Epsom Girls mate Wink

by Comfort Wed 23 May 2012, 4:43 pm

what do you mean disney, we ARE going to send those ozzies packing with thei tails between their legs! Shocked

by TycroesOsprey Wed 23 May 2012, 4:43 pm

disneychilly wrote:I think what gets our goat are the arrogant pre game predictions. "I really reckon we can beat South Africa, bring it on" isn't heard as often as "We're going to send the Boks packing with their tails between their legs". Again the small minority are the loudest. Thankfully I'm not even half the age required to have experience of my team coming off second best against them.

remember how it felt after the RWC in 99? its going to feel like that and sooner or later its going to happen. I landed in NZ just after the RWC in 99 and was stunned at the self immolation of a rugby nation, I actually thought only the welsh were capable of that.

by disneychilly Wed 23 May 2012, 4:45 pm

I'll believe it when I see it mate Wink

And not just a one point job either-you have to wallop them if you want to keep talking that fighting talk!

by TycroesOsprey Wed 23 May 2012, 4:48 pm

disneychilly wrote:I'll believe it when I see it mate And not just a one point job either-you have to wallop them if you want to keep talking that fighting talk!

well the sleeper agent brainwashed in Gwaen Cae Gurwen by old Mrs Edwards and despatched back to NZ in 2004 on a mission to destroy NZ rugby just as he murdered the last vestiges of welsh respectability is in position so..........

by disneychilly Wed 23 May 2012, 4:50 pm

To be honest TO Australia were clearly the best team in the world come that 99 tournament. If we'd won the semi we'd have been well beaten in the final.

I do have traumatic recollections of losing a game in Cardiff so I'll imagine it being like that. The thing is the South Africans were the ones who joined in the least at the schadenfreude party. Thank heavens I was in Scandinavia after the tournament. Overcompensated for lack of scoring on the pitch all right. You're right though it was pretty dark in 99.

Biltong how was the Welsh reaction for you when they won against you?

by Comfort Wed 23 May 2012, 4:53 pm

ahhh Hansen, lets see how he does.....

I gotta be fair, the welsh legends do tend to need to pipe down as far as shooting off their opinions goes.

Still, I dont necessarily see the fans being any better or worse than that of any other nation, we've jsut been crap for a fair while and we're just about getting used to winning again Wink

by TycroesOsprey Wed 23 May 2012, 4:54 pm

disneychilly wrote:To be honest TO Australia were clearly the best team in the world come that 99 tournament. If we'd won the semi we'd have been well beaten in the final.

I do have traumatic recollections of losing a game in Cardiff so I'll imagine it being like that. The thing is the South Africans were the ones who joined in the least at the schadenfreude party. Thank heavens I was in Scandinavia after the tournament. Overcompensated for lack of scoring on the pitch all right. You're right though it was pretty dark in 99.

Biltong how was the Welsh reaction for you when they won against you?

I would argue that they were certainly the best defence in the RWC (although if the ref in the Quarter final had glasses that result would have been different) 99 was despite it being in wales and me having tickets to most of the good games not a great world cup. Defences stifled attacking play and it abysmal quality when you compare it to last year.

by **Biltong** Wed 23 May 2012, 4:56 pm

I am all for fighting talk, but it must be done with respect. When a fan has these illusions of grandeur and idealistic hallusinations it gets my goat.

I am always nervous before any game, no matter whether I believe we should win or not

by **Biltong** Wed 23 May 2012, 5:00 pm

disneychilly wrote:

Biltong how was the Welsh reaction for you when they won against you?

Disney had no contact with any Welsh at that stage so won't know, however, after being on 606 since 2009 I expect pretty histerical and OTT

by Bullsbok Wed 23 May 2012, 5:02 pm

biltongbek wrote:I am all for fighting talk, but it must be done with respect. When a fan has these illusions of grandeur and idealistic hallusinations it gets my goat.

I am always nervous before any game, no matter whether I believe we should win or not

i've just spent 5min looking for the retweet button before i realised im not on twitter Yahoo

by Toadfish Wed 23 May 2012, 5:02 pm

disneychilly wrote:Not at all Barney. South Africans question our dominance every time they take the field against us. Just in this case England being dominant for 13 years I felt was a fallacy as most 3N blokes I know had felt England was the best team in the world for a couple of years-thanks TO for the stats too. I'd say 90-91 NZ, 92-95 Australia/England, 95-98 NZ, 98-99 SA, 99-02 Aus, 02-03 England.

And Bill's grannie played fullback for Epsom Girls mate

Even though some of your periods overlap so they don't make much sense I've put the top team based on win % below for those periods. Yes I have learns how to use ESPN Statsguru today and yes I am very proud of myself.

90-91 NZ 82%
92-95 ENG 77%
95-98 NW 79%
99-02 Eng 81%
02-03 Eng 92%

by munkian Wed 23 May 2012, 5:06 pm

Jayzus, whose countries' drunken fans and pundits DON'T big up their teams pre -match or over celebrate afterwards ? Some Leinster fans are proclaiming leinster could have the All Blacks. I think some people are a little oversensitive.

by TycroesOsprey Wed 23 May 2012, 5:07 pm

biltongbek wrote:I am all for fighting talk, but it must be done with respect. When a fan has these illusions of grandeur and idealistic hallusinations it gets my goat.

I am always nervous before any game, no matter whether I believe we should win or not

I think thats a fair point, the only difference with this tour is that welsh fans now have belief that their team can compete rather than vain hope. In the past our rugby romanticism and passion for the game has gotten the better of us espescially when the team has been performing as poorly as the welsh did for so long. One of the reasons many English fans over the age of 45 love to wind the welsh up is because of the scars of the first 20 years of their lives.

At the moment Im chomping at the bit because I can see somthing very different about this young team. However Im happy to enjoy the ride as we win the respect back. Personally I think the dragon is back and some teams are gonna get burned in the next few years. Once that has happened I can forget about the nineties and just pretend it was all a bad dream.

by **Biltong** Wed 23 May 2012, 5:08 pm

Munkian, perhaps more low key than sensitive

by munkian Wed 23 May 2012, 5:13 pm

biltongbek wrote:Munkian, perhaps more low key than sensitive

My objection was more to people painting the Welsh as bad fans, it all depends on who you meet. I was standing next to some Sprignbok fans during a Wales v SA game (forget which, it was rather close though) and they were some of the most stuck and arrogant 'fans' I have ever met.

On the otherhand theres a very quiet and soft spoke SA dude that has been to Cardiff with me to watch a few games and hes the nicest down to earth person you'll ever meet.

by **Biltong** Wed 23 May 2012, 5:15 pm

Well I guess it takes all kinds, doesn't it

by Sponsored content