Rugby and The Environment

First topic message reminder :

With so much discuss about the prospect of Argentina in the upcoming Rugby Championship, the opportunity for grow the game, the develop players of Argentina and effect on club rugby in Europe where so many Argentina players are make money was something miss?

Already heavy on "carbon footprint" the trinations expand to rugby championship and will be the second most unenvironmental friendly sporting tournament in the world behind F1 circuit, involving even more staggering number of airmiles over longer period of time than before.

Should the organisers designed the tournament to be "hosted" by each country and rotate each year? Would that make some more interesting anyway?

There is no point Smirnoff for me to continue here. Because already there is a set to remove me and we are now in a process where great cojoling continues without cease and is just some game for some people who have some kind of agenda. And this agenda unfortunately seems to be backed to the highest level as I have saught answers and got no responses.

So enjoy reinforcing your own mutually held opinions and missing out on diversion and stimulation of different view points!

The problem with one country hosting it is that it would, in all likelihood, ironically produce more emissions. Never mind the 50 or so players and support staff, how many fans from the other side of the world would travel to SA just for a one off match? Contrast that to if SA were solely hosting the 4N, in effect a mini world cup, how many fans would travel there to a month long rugby feast? Multiples more.

Not sure what agenda you see AWOP

You made a statement in your OP, posters questioned your statement (as is want on a debating forum),
other posters then provided proof/facts/figures) to further disprove your claims,
you then made a counter-argument without posting proof,
posters requested you provide proof (so posters could take onboard this new evidence and debate on it)
Not sure where the agenda is there?

Full Credit wrote:The problem with one country hosting it is that it would, in all likelihood, ironically produce more emissions. Never mind the 50 or so players and support staff, how many fans from the other side of the world would travel to SA just for a one off match? Contrast that to if SA were solely hosting the 4N, in effect a mini world cup, how many fans would travel there to a month long rugby feast? Multiples more.

I guess as a mini wrold cup then it would probably be a big money spinner for the host (and a profile riser for Argentina)

Undoubtedly it would be a great money spinner for the host, but in relation to the question posed by the op, the carbon footprint may well be larger.

True Full Credit and of course in countries the size of Oz, SA, NZ and Argie fans may well be flying between games as well.

(and don't forget that they'll be eating copious amounts of steak, meaning more farting!)

I though the problem is with beans?

biltongbek wrote:I though the problem is with beans?

Sorry I was harping back to a previous comment on the thread that said cows cause more emissions than planes, so we need to kill more cows/eat more steaks.

But of course the more you eat the more you fart...

And if you ask me to back up my claim with facts then I will call you childish biltong!

Smirnoffpriest wrote:

biltongbek wrote:I though the problem is with beans?

Sorry I was harping back to a previous comment on the thread that said cows cause more emissions than planes, so we need to kill more cows/eat more steaks.

But of course the more you eat the more you fart...

And if you ask me to back up my claim with facts then I will call you childish biltong!

I still think beans is a bigger problem...for me anyway.

Cauliflower and cabbage is a bad combination

Well in tat case we should all refrain from eating greens and beans.

correct.

Greens make you bum burp.

Therefore stick to eating meat only. In addition, eating the meat = less cows = less cows eating grass = less cows farting = less greenhouse gasses.

What we need to do is get to the root cause of this. The biggest Co2 emmsions come from the plankton in the sea. What we should do is teach the cows to eat the plankton instead of grass. This would lower the plankton and then we in turn would eat the cows which would lower the cows.

My logic is sound and cannot be argued with coz my dad is bigger than your dad!

Ahh but my dad can eat more cow than your dad - so soon he'll be bigger than your dad!

I have a better solution, there are Wales that eat plankton, we must breed them, they can eat the plankton which would lessen the CO problem, and it can feed all the people.

Wales like George North and Adam Jones?

Won't the Welsh get upset if everyone else starts eating them?

I suppose.

I am watching and learning Biltong how not to derail the thread

It's gone long time ago.

Since you are living curently in England AWOP,you will be aware of the Current Climatic problems here in UK.In My life time the Climate has definitely changed we seldom[in my area]Bournemouth Dorset get extremes of Weather.Neither except on the odd occasion did we ever.In Winter to the best of my memory we have had 4 Bad Snowfalls where it lay for anytime in 69 Years.The last really Scorcher of a Summer apart from brief periods was 1959.The Causes of Climatic Change are debated by scientists who argue about but come up with no
real solutions.Suffice to say IF we get a period of Hot Dry weather in say February and March,or a mild dry Winter.Mother Nature will compensate big time.
This is your thread and you are entitled to your opinions,Your English prowess
seems to vary from excellent to cod mischief mode quite often.Which makes me think maybe two of you are using the same handle.
The Main reason for the lack of success in my OPINION[before i`m jumped on Mods]by the Springboks is because they now play more away matches.
That please note is relative to the All Blacks since the traditional tour by the 3Ns has been abandoned .Australia has an identical or better 3Ns record now than the Boks in the 3Ns.Please note I am taking into Account political situations between SA and Therest of the world but refuse to comment on them now .
It is a taboo subject for me now,as an AllBlack fan,I want to see them tested against the best.THAT more often than not has been the Boks,but I don`t want to give them advantages of playing conditions and other factors.The Home and away format is just fine with me.Your Ecologogical theme is laudable but not really a germane one for a Rugby or indeed any sporting site.

Forget minimalisng Co2 emmissions.....


Save the cheerleader, save the world!!!

if everyone started supporting England the world would be saved. Its Science FACT that white reflects heat away from the Earth, if everyone were to wear England shirts and paint their houses white the Earth would cool counteracting the effects of global warming through other causes.

The all Blacks are bad for humanity, and the Earth, without even flying from their lair.

No, we'd just starting to trusting them and England would start wearing black again.

Climate change (and it's cause) is contoversial with many conflicting opinions. As an enigma, it ranks right up there with AWOP's remarkably inconsitent use of English.

Personally I find it somewhat arrogant to think that we can have anything other than an insignificant affect on our planet. We may destroy ourselves (and a fair few other species) but the planet will outlast humans.

Leave the 4N's alone - it seems to be a format that works and the fans enjoy. If it makes you feel better, plant a few more trees.

How do you if 4N format works and fans enjoying? It not even starting yet.

anotherworldofpain wrote:How do you if 4N format works and fans enjoying? It not even starting yet.

Well - I thought I'd take the 3N's, add 1N and apply a little educated guess work. You might want to try it.

I rhink the new four nations format is great, looking forward to it, Argentina will provide some nice variety to the tournament.

variety... you meaning tune up games for the rest???

Argentina ran NZ pretty close in the RWC and play with a lot of the passion and defense determination.

But it is some riddle in my mind if they will be capable to maintain this level of focus when they play more number of competitive games in the tournament.

My mind is they will start strong and play well at home and then fading away in the tournament later.

you mean in the first 20 mins? NZ were very comfortable with ARG by the end.

With Contepomi absent they miss a key player, muhc more important than lets say Carter is to NZ as ARG cannot reproduce such quality... the others can.

If ARG can get a couple of losing bonus points vs. NZ & SA they would have done very very well. AUS at home is the match they should be aiming at... then again AUS's pack did quite well vs. WAL so perhaps it won't be realistic either.

It could be a very painful introduction thats for sure.