RWC 2027 Australia

[Crashy]

AFL finals, NRL finals & Romania or Namibia's team of no-names getting belted by 80 points... I know which 1 of the 3 will get the least attention.

Yep a team from Penrith vs a team from Canterbury will get more coverage that 2 countries playing in a world cup.

 

[Major Tom]

There will be no clash as the World Cup is starting later all it will potentially clash with is some early season domestic cricket

Yeah @Crashy was calling for the tournament to be played in September.
Wouldn’t work with the other codes. Weather wise it works better anyways.

 

[PhilClinton]

Yeah @Crashy was calling for the tournament to be played in September.
Wouldn’t work with the other codes. Weather wise it works better anyways.

Don’t go the early crow on the weather.

This is by the far the wettest rugby season I can recall. Obviously sucks for the SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) crowds, but even more so for the local clubs who’ve no doubt seen a big downturn in match day sales during the year.

Hopefully this isn’t the new normal.

 

[Major Tom]

Don’t go the early crow on the weather.

This is by the far the wettest rugby season I can recall. Obviously sucks for the SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) (Super Rugby Pacific) crowds, but even more so for the local clubs who’ve no doubt seen a big downturn in match day sales during the year.

Hopefully this isn’t the new normal.

Well I meant temp wise really. But yeah fingers crossed there’s no rain. Not sure if we’ll be in an El Niño or La Niña.

 

[liquor box]

Yep a team from Penrith vs a team from Canterbury will get more coverage that 2 countries playing in a world cup.

That stands to reason, I would imagine a Tahs v Brumbies game would get a better coverage than The Czech Republic (21) v Norway (27)

Romania is ranked 21 and Namibia 27

 

[Omar Comin']

Canada (coached by Steve Meehan) beat USA and Tonga beat Samoa on the weekend to put both in prime position to qualify. Unless there's some big upsets in the next 2 weeks it's likely that Samoa will play USA for the final 'Pacific' spot. The loser of that then has a playoff with South America 2 (Chile or Uruguay) where the winner qualifies and the loser gets 1 more chance in the final qualifying tournament.

World Rugby are giving the USA every possible chance to qualify, but you'd have thought beating Canada was probably more likely than beating Samoa/Tonga, and even Chile or Uruguay (both are ahead of Canada in the rankings). If the US end up in the final qualifying tournament they'd be favourites, but Namibia and Belgium will be competitive!

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Canada (coached by Steve Meehan) beat USA and Tonga beat Samoa on the weekend to put both in prime position to qualify. Unless there's some big upsets in the next 2 weeks it's likely that Samoa will play USA for the final 'Pacific' spot. The loser of that then has a playoff with South America 2 (Chile or Uruguay) where the winner qualifies and the loser gets 1 more chance in the final qualifying tournament.

World Rugby are giving the USA every possible chance to qualify, but you'd have thought beating Canada was probably more likely than beating Samoa/Tonga, and even Chile or Uruguay (both are ahead of Canada in the rankings). If the US end up in the final qualifying tournament they'd be favourites, but Namibia and Belgium will be competitive!

I watched both games and I'd say that Samoa was probably the worst team of round one. Ponderous with ball in hand for the most part and lacking physicality.

 

[Omar Comin']

I watched both games and I'd say that Samoa was probably the worst team of round one. Ponderous with ball in hand for the most part and lacking physicality.

It wouldn't be a big surprise to see them lose to the US, but I'd still think they'll be favourites.

I'm just happy to see Canada back playing well again. Given how strong their women's team is it seems crazy how weak their men's team had become under the previous coach. They really need to figure out a way to have at least 1 professional team there again.

 

[Highlander35]

Generally speaking I want the USA to do well but I hope they lose every single game that Rufus McLean is in the squad for.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Generally speaking I want the USA to do well but I hope they lose every single game that Rufus McLean is in the squad for.

Yeah, I've been following the game in the States for years and want to support them but his presence makes it difficult. There was actually a nicely executed cross field kick leading to a try and at first I had to applaud it until I realised who the receiver/try scorer was.

 

[Omar Comin']

Generally speaking I want the USA to do well but I hope they lose every single game that Rufus McLean is in the squad for.

I just read up on it as wasn't familiar with the case. Totally understand your perspective - what he did was terrible. But do you think he should be life banned from the sport for it? It was almost 5 years ago when he was only 19-20, he pleaded guilty, showed remorse and finished his community service, plus it obviously cost him a lot professionally.

It's an interesting case study for where the line should be drawn between 'terrible, but in time a chance to redeem yourself is fair' vs 'totally unforgivable, life ban from the sport.'

 

[Highlander35]

I just read up on it as wasn't familiar with the case. Totally understand your perspective - what he did was terrible. But do you think he should be life banned from the sport for it? It was almost 5 years ago when he was only 19-20, he pleaded guilty, showed remorse and finished his community service, plus it obviously cost him a lot professionally.

It's an interesting case study for where the line should be drawn between 'terrible, but in time a chance to redeem yourself is fair' vs 'totally unforgivable, life ban from the sport.'

there's a gap between earning a living playing rugby and getting test level opportunities: if some Japanese, MLR or French teams wants him on their roster I'll think less of them but don't think it should be banned. But seeing him in the test arena still feels pretty despicable and I can't imagine that will change.

 

[liquor box]

I just read up on it as wasn't familiar with the case. Totally understand your perspective - what he did was terrible. But do you think he should be life banned from the sport for it? It was almost 5 years ago when he was only 19-20, he pleaded guilty, showed remorse and finished his community service, plus it obviously cost him a lot professionally.

It's an interesting case study for where the line should be drawn between 'terrible, but in time a chance to redeem yourself is fair' vs 'totally unforgivable, life ban from the sport.'

Unfortunately, professional sport is about making money and as long as you are really good many will overlook your indiscretions if you are winning games.

As for being 19-20, this should not matter. The beliefs and morals that allow DV to occur are inbuilt by that age, once you cross that line you are going to be a piece of shit for life, if you are lucky, you may disguise it to the rest of the world, but it is still within the person.

 

[Dctarget]

there's a gap between earning a living playing rugby and getting test level opportunities: if some Japanese, MLR or French teams wants him on their roster I'll think less of them but don't think it should be banned. But seeing him in the test arena still feels pretty despicable and I can't imagine that will change.

And what's more rugby clubs aren't normal employment. They require emotional investment from their fans, they try to engender a tribal/familial environment. We sing the National Anthem, they're quite literally representing us which is why 23 men who I've never met have the power to ruin my weekend. They should be held to a higher standard.

 

[Highlander35]

To attach further depth to the philosophy: I think on a fundamental level, once you reach a non-petty level of crime, I feel the ethics of rehabilitation should entitle you to an ordinary life without significant levels of judgement or harassment: if he decided to go be a chippy and turned out to play for some Nat 3 side because he still wanted to play the game, that's fine. Don't know if I'd want to personally be friendly with him, but he should be allowed that life.

He's not entitled to an extraordinary life, and it's incredibly difficult to see International sport as anything but extraordinary.

 

[Adam84]

And what's more rugby clubs aren't normal employment. They require emotional investment from their fans, they try to engender a tribal/familial environment. We sing the National Anthem, they're quite literally representing us which is why 23 men who I've never met have the power to ruin my weekend. They should be held to a higher standard.

I agree, but even if we ignore the fan aspect, sponsors are also paying to associate their brand with a club and subsequently an individual, these brands are a commodity that companies want to protect & enhance, and individual actions can impact this.

I disagree strongly when people say what happens off the field should have no impact on a player's contract, professional athletes aren't just paid a premium simply for the 80mins on the field, they're paid for the whole package that they represent.

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

I get the thinking @Highlander35 and want to agree in the most part but I have some real fundamental issues when your crimes physically damage another individual. You took someone elses freedom, innocence and trust away. DV, SA anything to do with a child etc are non-negotiable in my mind. You lose the privilege of pro sport. Just like you'd lose the right to do other professions

You could steal cars and yes this can mentally damage someone who is then scared but just for me sits differently when you use your body directly to affect someone else.