Rugby World Cup and delayed games.

First topic message reminder :

Can any one recall a time in the history of the Rugby World Cup when a schedule game had to be called off, and rescheduled and what effect  did that rescheduled game have on the world cup? They say the weather might turn nasty before the next round gets under way. 




Discuss.

World Rugby yet again show their incompetence. Staging the tournament in a country where games are likely to be cancelled, without any contingency planned is gross negligence. As custodians of a multi-million dollar global sport their amateur approach needs to be questioned by every rugby fan as whether it is fit for purpose.

Having the situation where some teams are favoured over others is simply unacceptable. The eventual winners will inevitably suffer the accusation that the title is devalued because they played fewer games or more games or avoided injuries or lost players to injury. People are complaining that Scotland are the big losers but what about Ireland who would lose their chance to top the group?
What about the Italians who have been building and training for years to have the experience of meeting the ABs in this RWC? What about Japan making a first ever QF... because of the weather - how do they feel?

World Rugby have had eight years to plan for this tournament and to ignore the possibility of the regular weather affecting the validity of their quadrennial product is inexcusable.

As I said on the Scotland thread Biggee I expect a similar response from some of the Scotland players if the game is off. Greig Laidlaw in particular, who is likely to end his Scotland career at the WC.

Two players who have given huge amounts to their countries over the years and play with so much pride.

games can to be cancelled = group games

games cannot be cancelled = every other

sorry all blacks games off, you're out

No 7&1/2 wrote:And I'll be right upset. Honest.

ill be as upset as you 7.5

Everyone is talking about moving games like it's just 30 lads jumping in cars and driving to the next town. Like World Rugby haven't tried to get these games going ahead. Two days ago the typhoon was hitting Ireland vs Samoa, now it's moved and is hitting the NZ and England games. It's unpredictable, and just unfortunate.

Pool games are cancelled in the cricket world cup all the time for (less severe) weather. Noone moans about it. It's just part and parcel.

No team who won all their games and have one game rained out will be eliminated from the tournament. For that to happen would be a mathematical marvel. You'd have a minimum of 14 points, can you name a scenario where one team has a 3-1-0 W/D/L record and two other teams get to 15 points or more? Be as generous as you like with bonus points to make it happen. Then consider how ridiculous that scenario would be. If you lose a game you're walking a tightrope, be that other results going against you and now we have to factor in weather.

As for rescheduling games, it's theoretically possible now but only because we're in the last round of games. E.g. say England vs Tonga was cancelled. When can you replay it? Assuming you cannot play twice in under 4 days and 3 times in a week.

England play USA on the 26th and Tonga play Argentina on the 28th. You can't play it before those two, or both or either team will be too close to their next fixture. England could play again from the 30th, Tonga could play from 2nd October.

England's next game is against Argentina on the 5th October, so playing on the 2nd is a no-go. They could have played on the 1st, but that wouldn't give Tonga enough rest. Tonga play France on the 6th.

Tonga can therefore play again on the 10th, but England play France on the 12th, so cannot play then. Tonga play on the 13th.

Trying to shoehorn it in between the pool stages and the quarter-finals would mean that if any team qualified for the quarter-finals they'd play 3 times in a week. And if they were still in quarter-final contention, you'd have a lot of uncertainty about where teams should be until that game was played.

Logistically, you cannot accommodate postponed games in the pool stages except for that last game. Having different rules for different pool games doesn't seem fair.

It's an unfortunate situation and there is sympathy for every stakeholder who feels short-changed, but if you don't believe World Rugby have done everything in their power to get the games going then I think you perhaps underestimate the scale of the operation.

Sorry but it's not part and parcel of Rugby.

Soul Requiem wrote:Sorry but it's not part and parcel of Rugby.

That's not what I said.

What is your solution? Then think whether World Rugby may have considered that and deemed it unworkable.

Why is everybody talking about a devalued WC ?

If Wales get to the final and win it, it would mean we win it, without any of our games being cancelled. How would that be devalued ?

LordDowlais wrote:Why is everybody talking about a devalued WC ?

If Wales get to the final and win it, it would mean we win it, without any of our games being cancelled. How would that be devalued ?

Think about those saying its devalued... Now, do you really need an answer to the question... Dont feed them LD, we dont need their bitterness.

robbo277 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Sorry but it's not part and parcel of Rugby.

That's not what I said.

What is your solution? Then think whether World Rugby may have considered that and deemed it unworkable.

Erm don't host the tournament in the middle of typhoon season, pretty simple solution really.

LordDowlais wrote:Why is everybody talking about a devalued WC ?

If Wales get to the final and win it, it would mean we win it, without any of our games being cancelled. How would that be devalued ?

It wouldn't be, regardless of who won it.

robbo277 wrote:Everyone is talking about moving games like it's just 30 lads jumping in cars and driving to the next town. Like World Rugby haven't tried to get these games going ahead. Two days ago the typhoon was hitting Ireland vs Samoa, now it's moved and is hitting the NZ and England games. It's unpredictable, and just unfortunate.

Pool games are cancelled in the cricket world cup all the time for (less severe) weather. Noone moans about it. It's just part and parcel.

No team who won all their games and have one game rained out will be eliminated from the tournament. For that to happen would be a mathematical marvel. You'd have a minimum of 14 points, can you name a scenario where one team has a 3-1-0 W/D/L record and two other teams get to 15 points or more? Be as generous as you like with bonus points to make it happen. Then consider how ridiculous that scenario would be. If you lose a game you're walking a tightrope, be that other results going against you and now we have to factor in weather.

As for rescheduling games, it's theoretically possible now but only because we're in the last round of games. E.g. say England vs Tonga was cancelled. When can you replay it? Assuming you cannot play twice in under 4 days and 3 times in a week.

England play USA on the 26th and Tonga play Argentina on the 28th. You can't play it before those two, or both or either team will be too close to their next fixture. England could play again from the 30th, Tonga could play from 2nd October.

England's next game is against Argentina on the 5th October, so playing on the 2nd is a no-go. They could have played on the 1st, but that wouldn't give Tonga enough rest. Tonga play France on the 6th.

Tonga can therefore play again on the 10th, but England play France on the 12th, so cannot play then. Tonga play on the 13th.

Trying to shoehorn it in between the pool stages and the quarter-finals would mean that if any team qualified for the quarter-finals they'd play 3 times in a week. And if they were still in quarter-final contention, you'd have a lot of uncertainty about where teams should be until that game was played.

Logistically, you cannot accommodate postponed games in the pool stages except for that last game. Having different rules for different pool games doesn't seem fair.

It's an unfortunate situation and there is sympathy for every stakeholder who feels short-changed, but if you don't believe World Rugby have done everything in their power to get the games going then I think you perhaps underestimate the scale of the operation.

Well said.. as I said earlier. These rules have been in place since the inaugural RWC, just never needed till now. 

Its really unfortunate if you're knocked out due to conditions outside of your control, but its not as if this has been manufactured. I know Japanese technology is advanced, but I dont think they can conjure up a typhoon to aid their progression.

[quote="LordDowlais"]Why is everybody talking about a devalued WC ?

If Wales get to the final and win it, it would mean we win it, without any of our games being cancelled. How would that be devalued ?[/quote]

For me, its this part

If Wales get to the final and win it

We'd never hear the end of it, although I guess it would mean Scott Gibbs/1999 could be put to bed

No9 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Why is everybody talking about a devalued WC ?

If Wales get to the final and win it, it would mean we win it, without any of our games being cancelled. How would that be devalued ?

Think about those saying its devalued... Now, do you really need an answer to the question... Dont feed them LD, we dont need their bitterness.

Well one silver lining with these cancelled games, at least now England cannot throw their game against France to end up on our side of the draw and avoid New Zealand and Australia.

Soul Requiem wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Sorry but it's not part and parcel of Rugby.

That's not what I said.

What is your solution? Then think whether World Rugby may have considered that and deemed it unworkable.

Erm don't host the tournament in the middle of typhoon season, pretty simple solution really.

I'm no meteorologist, but from a quick google search the main typhoon season is August to September with typhoons possible from July to October. About 3 hit the main islands a year. It's not like we're talking about a daily occurence, especially for a tournament that started in late September.

What can be done then? Bar Japan from hosting the World Cup? Push it back a month and smash the club season to pieces?

In hurling for the All-Ireland the two Regional winners go straight into the semi and gets a week or two off while the losing teams must play in the quarters. It has been a while since a regional winner won the whole thing because of the break. Players who have been injured are now missing out on a game to get back to match fitness.

if their game is/gets canelled
Winners
England - No longer must win 5 straight T1 games in 5 weeks
Japan - make the quarters as group winners
South Africa - got to play their last game with their full team before the break

Losers
Scotland - same as 2015 just needed to beat Japan
Ireland - uncooked as first team not played since Japan, no shot at top spot
New Zealand - the first game is along time ago where their first team played, undercooked
France - long time since Argentina
Australia - have to play England
Georgia/Uruguay lose chance to get third spot and automatically qualify for the next WC.

Soul Requiem wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Sorry but it's not part and parcel of Rugby.

That's not what I said.

What is your solution? Then think whether World Rugby may have considered that and deemed it unworkable.

Erm don't host the tournament in the middle of typhoon season, pretty simple solution really.

Yes... just keep it in UK, France, Aus, SA or NZ.... How dare world rugby try and develop the game by taking the RWC elsewhere... 


And before its said, play it at another time in the year... When.. In the middle of the NH season losing the 6 Nations or around Easter and lose the European tournament.. When?

Perhaps the best approach is to set down rules beforehand, that decide what happens IF games have to be cancelled.... Oh hang on, thats what they've done.. Well done RWC, glad you thought about this risk beforehand.. 

robbo277 wrote:What can be done then? Bar Japan from hosting the World Cup? Push it back a month and smash the club season to pieces?

It hasn't helped this club season either.

The only unions that benefit from having the WC this time every 4 years is SANZAR.

robbo277 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Sorry but it's not part and parcel of Rugby.

That's not what I said.

What is your solution? Then think whether World Rugby may have considered that and deemed it unworkable.

Erm don't host the tournament in the middle of typhoon season, pretty simple solution really.

I'm no meteorologist, but from a quick google search the main typhoon season is August to September with typhoons possible from July to October. About 3 hit the main islands a year. It's not like we're talking about a daily occurence, especially for a tournament that started in late September.

What can be done then? Bar Japan from hosting the World Cup? Push it back a month and smash the club season to pieces?

Well yes don't host it in Japan, you talk as though this wasn't a foreseen occurrence, there was a lot of talk long before the tournament began that it was likely to be disrupted.

Also with all these cancelled games how much money will WR be down.  Losing key games will surely result in compo/refund to TV deals struck. I would assume England v France was a massive selling point for ITV and the French TV.

As WR are already tight for money will this not bring back out the NH is killing the game because they have money. And we don't.

On an aside will this be the first time that the 4 SANZAAR teams have only managed to top one of the groups between them

There is no doubt the cancelled games are going to leave a bitter taste.

However the reality is what it is, no amount of criticism is going to change it, sadly.

RDW wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'll love to debate how devalued englands win is should we win it!

It'll be the "asterix" final in the record books:

Rugby World Cup winners 2019 - England*

*2019 Rugby World Cup when other sides were unable to complete their group games.

I really hate myself for doing this, but it's asterisk

Unless you're somehow involving the little French bloke with a moustache in the rugby world cup?

I blame the spelchequer Now poor old Asterix might not even get a game!

Brendan wrote:Also with all these cancelled games how much money will WR be down.  Losing key games will surely result in compo/refund to TV deals struck.  I would assume England v France was a massive selling point for ITV and the French TV.

As WR are already tight for money will this not bring back out the NH is killing the game because they have money. And we don't.

On an aside will this be the first time that the 4 SANZAAR teams have only managed to top one of the groups between them

We also have a pool headed by two NH tier one sides where neither finishes first. Gotta be a first as well.

Parisse is certainly raging, saying if NZ needed a result from the game it wouldn't have been cancelled! Also querying why there was never a Plan B in case of this eventuality, given it was a known risk.

Taylorman wrote:

Brendan wrote:Also with all these cancelled games how much money will WR be down.  Losing key games will surely result in compo/refund to TV deals struck.  I would assume England v France was a massive selling point for ITV and the French TV.

As WR are already tight for money will this not bring back out the NH is killing the game because they have money. And we don't.

On an aside will this be the first time that the 4 SANZAAR teams have only managed to top one of the groups between them

We also have a pool headed by two NH tier one sides where neither finishes first. Gotta be a first as well.

Argentina pipped France and Ireland in 2007. They were Tier 2 at the time.

RDW wrote:Parisse is certainly raging, saying if NZ needed a result from the game it wouldn't have been cancelled! Also querying why there was never a Plan B in case of this eventuality, given it was a known risk.

Is his anger really that it probably would have been his last test?

robbo277 wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Brendan wrote:Also with all these cancelled games how much money will WR be down.  Losing key games will surely result in compo/refund to TV deals struck.  I would assume England v France was a massive selling point for ITV and the French TV.

As WR are already tight for money will this not bring back out the NH is killing the game because they have money. And we don't.

On an aside will this be the first time that the 4 SANZAAR teams have only managed to top one of the groups between them

We also have a pool headed by two NH tier one sides where neither finishes first. Gotta be a first as well.

Argentina pipped France and Ireland in 2007. They were Tier 2 at the time.

Oh fair enough, though Scotland’s game isn’t off yet. I’m hoping they play. Think they’ll win too.

robbo277 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Sorry but it's not part and parcel of Rugby.

That's not what I said.

What is your solution? Then think whether World Rugby may have considered that and deemed it unworkable.

Erm don't host the tournament in the middle of typhoon season, pretty simple solution really.

I'm no meteorologist, but from a quick google search the main typhoon season is August to September with typhoons possible from July to October. About 3 hit the main islands a year. It's not like we're talking about a daily occurence, especially for a tournament that started in late September.

What can be done then? Bar Japan from hosting the World Cup? Push it back a month and smash the club season to pieces?

The problem is with the format of the Tournament. If World Rugby had a modicum of intelligence they should follow the lead of the ICC.
The reason rained off days had less of an effect in the recent Cricket WC is because there were only 10 teams who are much closer in standard so the effect of cancelling an 'easy' or 'hard' game is minimised. Secondly they all play each other so 1 in 9 has less importance than 1 in 4. Thirdly they don't have a daft bonus point system that unfairly skews tables.

If World Rugby had any sense they would reduce the number of teams down to 16 in four pools of four for their ELITE competition. They could have both games per a pool played on the same day with a week before the next game. If any game was disrupted due to the weather they could play on the following day, so their recovery time would only be reduced by one day. Thus every team would have a fairer run of pool games and the cover of a reserve day should it be needed.

It might seem like rocket science to the old boys club called World Rugby, but for the good of the game all they have to do is look around and take on board a fresh idea or two.

Went digging online for the original bid submission for the tournament, came up short but found this link for the 2023 tournament - https://www.rugbyworldcup.com/news/252669

Assuming the criteria hasn't changed, they were as follows

2023 RWC Bid criteria wrote:This included confirmation of guarantees from governments and other appropriately empowered entities, the hosting agreement and detailed responses to core hosting requirements in line with World Rugby’s seven hosting objectives:

- Venues and infrastructure commensurate with a top-tier major event
- Comprehensive and enforceable public and private sector guarantees
- A commercially successful event with a fully funded, robust financial model
- Operational excellence through an integrated and experienced delivery team
- A vision that engages and inspires domestic and international audiences and contributes to the growth of rugby at all levels
- An enabling environment of political and financial stability that respects the diversity of Rugby World Cup’s global stakeholders
- An environment and climate suited to top-level sport in a geography that allows maximum fan mobility

Typhoons etc were clearly considered, it wasn't an oversight by World Rugby or the Japanese bid, but these things happen. The cricket World Cup in England this year, 4 matches in the group stage were abandoned / no result due to weather conditions

England, France and in all likelihood New Zealand were going through anyway. The order of their finish in the groups was all that was really on the line.

If the cancellation of the above games leaves scope for Japan v Scotland to be played in any event then it will all have been worth it imo - that's the game where the integrity of the competition is on the line, especially with the hosts being involved

robbo277 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Sorry but it's not part and parcel of Rugby.

That's not what I said.

What is your solution? Then think whether World Rugby may have considered that and deemed it unworkable.

Erm don't host the tournament in the middle of typhoon season, pretty simple solution really.

I'm no meteorologist, but from a quick google search the main typhoon season is August to September with typhoons possible from July to October. About 3 hit the main islands a year. It's not like we're talking about a daily occurence, especially for a tournament that started in late September.

What can be done then? Bar Japan from hosting the World Cup? Push it back a month and smash the club season to pieces?

Well its one of the things that should have been considered when evaluating bids. A bit like hosting one in major earthquake zone 

RDW wrote:Parisse is certainly raging, saying if NZ needed a result from the game it wouldn't have been cancelled! Also querying why there was never a Plan B in case of this eventuality, given it was a known risk.

Well he doesn’t know it wouldnt have been cancelled, understand the emotion though. Italy needed a BP win by the looks of it. Not likely but the chance taken isn’t good. I think it’s the severity of the storm that removes some plan B options.

Gooseberry wrote:

RDW wrote:Parisse is certainly raging, saying if NZ needed a result from the game it wouldn't have been cancelled! Also querying why there was never a Plan B in case of this eventuality, given it was a known risk.

Is his anger really that it probably would have been his last test?

He didn't mention himself - he was talking about his team, particularly Ghilardini.

BamBam wrote:Went digging online for the original bid submission for the tournament, came up short but found this link for the 2023 tournament - https://www.rugbyworldcup.com/news/252669

Assuming the criteria hasn't changed, they were as follows

2023 RWC Bid criteria wrote:This included confirmation of guarantees from governments and other appropriately empowered entities, the hosting agreement and detailed responses to core hosting requirements in line with World Rugby’s seven hosting objectives:

- Venues and infrastructure commensurate with a top-tier major event
- Comprehensive and enforceable public and private sector guarantees
- A commercially successful event with a fully funded, robust financial model
- Operational excellence through an integrated and experienced delivery team
- A vision that engages and inspires domestic and international audiences and contributes to the growth of rugby at all levels
- An enabling environment of political and financial stability that respects the diversity of Rugby World Cup’s global stakeholders
- An environment and climate suited to top-level sport in a geography that allows maximum fan mobility

Typhoons etc were clearly considered, it wasn't an oversight by World Rugby or the Japanese bid, but these things happen. The cricket World Cup in England this year, 4 matches in the group stage were abandoned / no result due to weather conditions

England, France and in all likelihood New Zealand were going through anyway. The order of their finish in the groups was all that was really on the line.

If the cancellation of the above games leaves scope for Japan v Scotland to be played in any event then it will all have been worth it imo - that's the game where the integrity of the competition is on the line, especially with the hosts being involved

More than anything it makes me wonder how the heck they allowed games to be hosted in Wales. It rains constantly and traffic on the M4 is appalling.

Soul Requiem wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Sorry but it's not part and parcel of Rugby.

That's not what I said.

What is your solution? Then think whether World Rugby may have considered that and deemed it unworkable.

Erm don't host the tournament in the middle of typhoon season, pretty simple solution really.

I'm no meteorologist, but from a quick google search the main typhoon season is August to September with typhoons possible from July to October. About 3 hit the main islands a year. It's not like we're talking about a daily occurence, especially for a tournament that started in late September.

What can be done then? Bar Japan from hosting the World Cup? Push it back a month and smash the club season to pieces?

Well yes don't host it in Japan, you talk as though this wasn't a foreseen occurrence, there was a lot of talk long before the tournament began that it was likely to be disrupted.

There was talk of potential disruption. This is a Type 5 typhoon, which is the worst level, that just happens to be hitting the mainland during the final pool game. It's pretty much the perfect storm.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'll love to debate how devalued englands win is should we win it!

Just picking Wales v England as a comparison, Wales have had 2 full blooded test matches with at least 70 minutes of jeopardy. England have barely had past 20 minutes in 3 games, havent played their best group opponent, and have a huge rest to the QF ehere Wales had a 6 day turnaround. Seems obvious enough that NZ, England, France and anyone else missing a game are now operating on a different level to the competition.

My only regret is that Australia arent playing on Sunday.

Gooseberry wrote:

BamBam wrote:Went digging online for the original bid submission for the tournament, came up short but found this link for the 2023 tournament - https://www.rugbyworldcup.com/news/252669

Assuming the criteria hasn't changed, they were as follows

2023 RWC Bid criteria wrote:This included confirmation of guarantees from governments and other appropriately empowered entities, the hosting agreement and detailed responses to core hosting requirements in line with World Rugby’s seven hosting objectives:

- Venues and infrastructure commensurate with a top-tier major event
- Comprehensive and enforceable public and private sector guarantees
- A commercially successful event with a fully funded, robust financial model
- Operational excellence through an integrated and experienced delivery team
- A vision that engages and inspires domestic and international audiences and contributes to the growth of rugby at all levels
- An enabling environment of political and financial stability that respects the diversity of Rugby World Cup’s global stakeholders
- An environment and climate suited to top-level sport in a geography that allows maximum fan mobility

Typhoons etc were clearly considered, it wasn't an oversight by World Rugby or the Japanese bid, but these things happen. The cricket World Cup in England this year, 4 matches in the group stage were abandoned / no result due to weather conditions

England, France and in all likelihood New Zealand were going through anyway. The order of their finish in the groups was all that was really on the line.

If the cancellation of the above games leaves scope for Japan v Scotland to be played in any event then it will all have been worth it imo - that's the game where the integrity of the competition is on the line, especially with the hosts being involved

More than anything it makes me wonder how the heck they allowed games to be hosted in Wales. It rains constantly and traffic on the M4 is appalling.

Not actually raining at the moment, so......

Credit to Rugby Fan and robbo I think it was btw - kept us all updated and warned us of this likelihood for a while.

It's also being mentioned that this is a 'rare' typhoon - late in the season, rare in its intensity. In which case there's a case to be made that they did have contingency plans, and it is huge misofrtune this has happened. Would that be fair?

It feels particularly galling as it's now like Christchurch in 2011 or whatever. It's not something unprecedented - there's prior warning. You COULD do something about it if you really tried. It doesn't help that, as Rugby Fan mentioned, other stadia aren't available as the RWC isn't the biggest ticket in town. Hypothetically, if this happened in any other country, Rugby would likely take priority, and you'd see someone else dumped on to make way for the RWC moving back in to stadia they used earlier in the tournament. Would definitely happen in Britain, for sure.

It's just a huge, huge shame. I'm still in minor shock tbh, never thought games would be cancelled, and it's so, so tough on Italy. Don't care what anyone says, upsets happen. Likewise for Scotland. There is 0 'fairness' about any of this. That goes for those going through without playing each other. The group is 4 games. England's path was 5 tough tier 1 games in a row, and that was the challenge, where other nations have it cut differently, like playing their biggest rival first up in the case of Ireland/Scotland/Boks/ABs, or playing big games with short turnarounds later in the tournament, like Wales - now it isn't. This has changed that and it there is no 'debate' to be had, the RWC has been 'disrupted', shall we say, to the point it's been massively tainted, if not ruined.

Dreadful shame.

sapporo to fukuoka is 2,000km

all affected??

Hmmm....just coming in on this 'storm' now. Was driving for quite a while and now I hear the Schidt had hit the fan with Haggis.

Can't comment much so far (not up to speed on implications) but so far Parisse speaks the absolute truth. Had NZ needed points a way would have been found..... even if a game had to be played with snorkels, a way would have been found.

I don't know miaow, I can't imagine the football clubs in the Premier League being willing to give up stadiums for home games for the sake of the RWC if it happened in England

Its a shame, and unfortunate for Italy. Right now I'm still assuming that the other cancellations were to allow Scotland to play Japan, and I'll stick by assuming that is the case until we know differently. If that game goes ahead, I find it difficult to consider the tournament tainted, its going to end up with the same quarter finalists that we had all predicted in the beginning, just with a couple of days extra rest for a few teams

Is that really enough for it to be considered a tainted / ruined RWC?

RDW wrote:Parisse is certainly raging, saying if NZ needed a result from the game it wouldn't have been cancelled! Also querying why there was never a Plan B in case of this eventuality, given it was a known risk.

This is what posters who are being a bit glib - or at least apathetic - about the cancellations are missing. Just shrugging your shoulders and saying 'it's the rules', 'oh well it doesn't change anything' or whatever is fundamentally missing the devastation it will/has caused the likes of Italy, and possibly Scotland, at being dumped out on a technicality. If nothing else, it's just not rugby - not this good old fashioned, fairness and equality, chaps - for such a difference in competition, good and bad, for those who have cancellations and those who don't. There's all sorts of other things like camps being moved, disruptions to training, the emotional side of things - but for Italy, for a team where it literally all ends in the biggest anticlimax possible, it must be heart wrenching.

Thoughts go to fans who pay to be out there as well, but ultimately, my main concern and sympathy lies with the Italians at the moment. Likewise any tier 2 team denied the prospect of deciding their own fate for 3rd place and automatic qualification. But that then also extends to literally every other team - those who play and those who have cancelled games - as it's like the butterfly effect...expect we've already got the typhoon setting the whole thing off than coming at the end. Let's just hope there isn't any more scandal or drama or anything that can be linked back to this - but sadly, any result, particularly any shock, will be chalked up to the preparation time. And it's really hard to argue that the teams, like England, France, and NZ, that have longer prep time are likely to be fresher and more tactically switched on than their opponents.

Anyway, yeah. Feel people are missing the point. Devastating for Italy. We'll never know what they could have done, never know how they could have pushed or even pulled off an amazing shock win v the ABs. And that's really, really hard to just shrug and say 'them's the rules' about.

Gooseberry wrote:

RDW wrote:Parisse is certainly raging, saying if NZ needed a result from the game it wouldn't have been cancelled! Also querying why there was never a Plan B in case of this eventuality, given it was a known risk.

Is his anger really that it probably would have been his last test?

Can't boil it down to 'one thing'. That's just harsh and silly. It's legitimate devastation for a huge multitude of reasons. Very sad all round, have to feel for Italy.

Cricket (and tennis) aren't great comparisons to rugby in my opinion. Very different sports by nature, despite perhaps having similar cultures (at least in cricket).

BamBam wrote:I don't know miaow, I can't imagine the football clubs in the Premier League being willing to give up stadiums for home games for the sake of the RWC if it happened in England

Its a shame, and unfortunate for Italy. Right now I'm still assuming that the other cancellations were to allow Scotland to play Japan, and I'll stick by assuming that is the case until we know differently. If that game goes ahead, I find it difficult to consider the tournament tainted, its going to end up with the same quarter finalists that we had all predicted in the beginning, just with a couple of days extra rest for a few teams

Is that really enough for it to be considered a tainted / ruined RWC?

Twickenham, Wembley and the Principality would be more than capable of taking up any slack.

We can't cope with 3 inches of snow. A cat 5 hurricane would close down the country!

Also Twickenham and Wembley are about 10 miles apart, if one isn't feasible neither is the other!!

miaow wrote:
Thoughts go to fans who pay to be out there as well, but ultimately, my main concern and sympathy lies with the Italians at the moment.

First and foremost my thoughts go out to the people of Japan who right now will be fearing the potentially devastating effects of this Typhoon.

BamBam wrote:I don't know miaow, I can't imagine the football clubs in the Premier League being willing to give up stadiums for home games for the sake of the RWC if it happened in England

Obviously the premier league teams don't play on the pitch 7 days per week. If the footy is playing on a Saturday I'm sure the rugby could negotiate a Sunday or Monday RWC game! Or even kicking off later that day (e.g. 9pm) after the footy has finished!

BamBam wrote:I don't know miaow, I can't imagine the football clubs in the Premier League being willing to give up stadiums for home games for the sake of the RWC if it happened in England

Interesting question. Of course Britain/England is fortunate enough to have stadia pretty much everywhere. I'd imagine the first option would be looking at a Rugby League stadium before football - bet they'd love that - but I think, ultimately, yes. If it came to football - and don't forget some League One and even League Two stadia are the equivalent or better than grounds used by NZ in 2011 - that we'd see rugby push football out and a football match rearranged, as it's infinitely easier to do that in the long, neverending football season. But the point is there are loads of options you could take. Maybe Britain is a bad comparison as it would probably be relatively easy to rearrange - and of course there's basically minimal threat of a disruption like this; the only isue we'd have is likely to be a terrorist threat in this day and age.

I don't know. It's a pitiful situation really. Don't doubt WR have done allthey can, and that they've eventually landed on a decision that is what they deem fairest. It's just very tough to take. Personally, I think delaying the RWC - and, yes, inconveniencing fans and stakeholders later in the tournament - by up to a week would have been the best option to take, but understand that would require some monumental work to happen.