PaPaGeorGeo
Fan Favourite
Yep That Final Was Great.
-
This is a reminder of 3 IMPORTANT RULES:
1- External self-promotion websites or apps are NOT allowed here, like Discord/Twitter/Patreon/etc.
2- Do NOT post in other languages. English-only.
3- Crack/Warez/Piracy talk is NOT allowed.
Breaking any of the above rules will result in your messages being deleted and you will be banned upon repetition.
Please, stop by this thread SoccerGaming Forum Rules And Guidelines and make sure you read and understand our policies.
Thank you!
why do they bother with the rugby world cup?
- Thread starter danger zone
- Start date
danger zone
Reserve Team
Originally posted by Curt
@Danger Zone: for a 27 year old you have an amazing memory of the 1987 World Cup considering you would have been only 11. Isn't Google a wonderful thing? Btw, I'm 36 years old, just in case age is oddly representative to intelligence for you.
[/B]
Why wouldnt I remember it you arrogant prick? I don't care about one thing you've written but that comment is pathetic. I was there I recall it like yesterday and I don't need to research anything about it. You write as though you contain wisdom. So what you're saying is that you dont remember one thing about the English rugby or soccer teams of 1978 when you were 11. Your memory is that piss poor is it? Somehow you recall your first game of rugger when you were eleven and the exact score so why wouldnt I remember that?
Just for the hell of it, international rugby is still a joke, always has been , always will be.
danger zone
Reserve Team
I just said that as a riposte to that other fellow. Try to insinuate I dont know my history, especially when it comes to J.K. and Buck!
Arrogance is constantly talking down to people as you have done throughout this thread when people have disagreed withg you. And no, I don't believe you have tucked away in your brain every single score that you have quoted throughout this thread - but that is merely my opinion and I will hold my hands up if I was wrong. But I believe you also have done research to back up your arguments (which is nothing to be ashamed of admitting btw). I do agree that I could have worded my posting less intimidatingly but I felt the need to sink to your level to get your attention.
In this I admit an error of judgement - it was never my intention to insinuate that you don't know your history and for that I apologise.One point I do think you've done a good job of disguising is the fact that in football a scoreline doesn't have to be 8-0 to represent a thrashing or humiliation. 3-0 or 4-0 can be just as indicative and I've watched numerous international games of such scorelines where the play has been so one sided that it could be described as embarrasing to the sport.
The fact that scorelines of 70 plus are recorded in one-sided Rugby internationals is only indicative of the fact that the scoring system could maybe do with some changes. It is simply much easier in a one-sided rugby game for the stronger team to accumalate points because of this scoring system and the fact that the whole width of the pitch is the score zone and not just the area between the posts, as is the case in football (not to mention that the area between the posts in football has a man standing there trying to guard it).
This World Cup has generated a lot of money for the IRB and we can only hope that some of this money will find its way into the hands of the developing rugby nations. In this way alone will we see a closing of the gap between the top countries and the rest. Whether this will be the case only time will tell, but I hope it will be for the good of the sport. But just as important is that each Rugby loving fan in rugby-developing countries help support the game in whatever way they can to help it grow. The first FIFA World Cup only had 13 countries enter.
One fact remains - this years final was definitely for the good of the sport and can only help to generate interest.
Curt the wise ......... *cough*
They have the Rugby World Cup for three reasons:
To generate money for the sport.
To give good teams something to crow about.
To give mediocre teams (like my U.S.A.
) a chance to shine by beating teams on their own level or even (god forbid) a good team.
Really, I don't get the point of the question. The Rugby World Cup exists for the same reason every other sporting event exists, to give people the chance to compete. If you don't like good teams beating bad teams, the chance of you liking something like the AL baseball league or EPL soccer league is next to nil, where the wealthy teams ALWAYS dominate.
To generate money for the sport.
To give good teams something to crow about.
To give mediocre teams (like my U.S.A.
) a chance to shine by beating teams on their own level or even (god forbid) a good team.Really, I don't get the point of the question. The Rugby World Cup exists for the same reason every other sporting event exists, to give people the chance to compete. If you don't like good teams beating bad teams, the chance of you liking something like the AL baseball league or EPL soccer league is next to nil, where the wealthy teams ALWAYS dominate.
but honestly, there were only 3 teams who could win the world cup - australia, england and new zealand. thats 3 out of 20 teams that have a chance. the organisers of the tournament should consider lowering the amount of teams to 10 - two groups of 5 and them the top two from each group would go into the semis. the groups would look something like this:
Group A
Australia
New Zealand
France
Samoa
USA (because the USA couldn't miss out on a global tournament, could they)
Group B
England
South Africa
Wales
Ireland
Fiji
I may have left a good team out so i apologize if i have but that in my opinion is the best format for a rugby world cup. they call it the game they play in heaven, however for Namibia, Georgia, Romania and all of the other minnows, the world cup for them was hell. so why put them through the pain of getting beaten 100-0 every game?
Group A
Australia
New Zealand
France
Samoa
USA (because the USA couldn't miss out on a global tournament, could they)
Group B
England
South Africa
Wales
Ireland
Fiji
I may have left a good team out so i apologize if i have but that in my opinion is the best format for a rugby world cup. they call it the game they play in heaven, however for Namibia, Georgia, Romania and all of the other minnows, the world cup for them was hell. so why put them through the pain of getting beaten 100-0 every game?
danger zone
Reserve Team
good to see the rugby minnows making such an impression nearly two years later. fiji, samoa and the usa, really on their way aren't they? and namibia? semi finalists for sure at the next tournament.