Frasier Online
home About The Show Episode Guide Merchandise Forum Reviews Gallery Contact

Six Nations - New Brooms sweep clean!!!!

Discussion of non-'Frasier' related topics

Six Nations - New Brooms sweep clean!!!!

Postby Rodge » Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:56 pm

The beers are in - thank god for my job.
The Calcutta Cup begins tomorrow, as an Englishman should I be excited or am I going to suffer for another 6-8 weeks of near misses!
I'm nervous which at least shows I have a feeling we may do better this year - we cannot do worse :shock: :shock:
Let the games begin!!!
My fine is over £700 !! (",)
Rodge
 
Posts: 5484
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 12:00 am

Re: Six Nations - New Brooms sweep clean!!!!

Postby Mr Blue Sky » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:13 pm

Rob wrote:The beers are in - thank god for my job.
The Calcutta Cup begins tomorrow, as an Englishman should I be excited or am I going to suffer for another 6-8 weeks of near misses!
I'm nervous which at least shows I have a feeling we may do better this year - we cannot do worse :shock: :shock:
Let the games begin!!!


I'm quite optimistic now Brian Ashton's been appointed, I think you're right to feel we may do a bit better this year. The only team to fear are France I reckon. Even with our disastrous run of results over the last 2 years I still think we have a better 15 than Wales, Ireland or Scotland. I heard the Welsh coach this morning saying he thinks they can win the World Cup this year! :lol: I remember Ally McCloud saying the same thing for the Scotland football team in 1978 (prior to their loss to Peru and draw with Iran which gave them another group stage exit :lol: ).

Sorry, I don't want to turn this into another footy thread, his bullish views just reminded me of that hilarious misplaced Celtic confidence!

I won't be cracking open the beers Rob (what have you got stocked?) but I'll be watching before I come back into work tomorrow evening. I'm looking forward to it too - it's a chance to get some much-needed national pride back!! :D
"You don't turn the other cheek, you slice it."
User avatar
Mr Blue Sky
 
Posts: 21732
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 1:00 am

Postby Mr Blue Sky » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:13 pm

Ooh, nice avatar!
"You don't turn the other cheek, you slice it."
User avatar
Mr Blue Sky
 
Posts: 21732
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 1:00 am

Postby Rodge » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:19 pm

Much that I would love to wipe that cocky grin off Brian O'Driscoll's face, I fear the Irish the most this year. Yep the French are always dangerous, but they tend to collapse if we get ahead, where as those bloody Irish will not let go and it only takes seconds for their big man in the centre to break through and score that try in the dying minutes.

I just hope it ends:
England
Ireland
Scotland
France
Italy
Wales :wink:
My fine is over £700 !! (",)
Rodge
 
Posts: 5484
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 12:00 am

Postby Mr Blue Sky » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:36 pm

I agree about Ireland - I definitely think they will provide the sternest test of the 'Home' nations.

What do you think about Jonny Wilkinson's inclusion, btw? I predict he'll be off before half time, but I hope I'm wrong, obviously.
"You don't turn the other cheek, you slice it."
User avatar
Mr Blue Sky
 
Posts: 21732
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 1:00 am

Postby Nervosa » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:59 pm

Beer Necessity wrote:I agree about Ireland - I definitely think they will provide the sternest test of the 'Home' nations.

What do you think about Jonny Wilkinson's inclusion, btw? I predict he'll be off before half time, but I hope I'm wrong, obviously.


I'm really proud of the Ireland team. O'Driscol (#13) is one of the best players of all time, IMO. He reminds me a lot of Joana Lumo (sp) actually. I'm glued to the tele every time the 6 Nations comes round.

As for Wilkinson, I think it's pretty stupid putting him on. No offence, but I think he's a total has-been. Don't get me wrong, I think he was the man that won England the World Cup....well his right foot won it. But these days, I think his Ruggers career is well and truly over.

My desired order would be:

1st - Ireland
2nd - Scotland
3rd - Italy
4th - France
5th - Wales
6th - England

Putting England in last place is simply because of my dislike of English sportsmen/commentaters, nothing against you English folk! I think the commentaters are sooooooo bias, and even after the team has got a total thrashing, there's always the predictable excuses by the commentaters/players/coaches.
There are 10 types of people in the world; those who understand binary code, and those who don't.
User avatar
Nervosa
 
Posts: 3291
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:33 am

Postby Rodge » Sat Feb 03, 2007 4:57 pm

Nervosa wrote:
Beer Necessity wrote:I agree about Ireland - I definitely think they will provide the sternest test of the 'Home' nations.

What do you think about Jonny Wilkinson's inclusion, btw? I predict he'll be off before half time, but I hope I'm wrong, obviously.


I'm really proud of the Ireland team. O'Driscol (#13) is one of the best players of all time, IMO. He reminds me a lot of Joana Lumo (sp) actually.


Not even close, yes he's good, and possibly was one of the best in the world a few years ago, but will never be a legend of the International greats.

Nervosa wrote: As for Wilkinson, I think it's pretty stupid putting him on. No offence, but I think he's a total has-been. Don't get me wrong, I think he was the man that won England the World Cup....well his right foot won it. But these days, I think his Ruggers career is well and truly over.


He has suffered from injury yes, and is possibly not fully match fit, but how on earth can you say his career is over and he is a "has been", when he hasn't played since 2003?? He is still young and he has skills far beyond his boot and any other fly half in England. I dare you to go up to Martin Johnson and tell him that the only reason England won the World Cup was down to one kick!!
I'm sorry but when I hear anyone who claims the World Cup was won by Wilko, it just shows to me that they do not know Rugby, probably didn't watch the game, and just read about it in the tabloids. It took 15 men and years of sweat at sheer guts, and fine leadership.

Nervosa wrote:My desired order would be:

1st - Ireland
2nd - Scotland
3rd - Italy
4th - France
5th - Wales
6th - England

Putting England in last place is simply because of my dislike of English sportsmen/commentaters, nothing against you English folk! I think the commentaters are sooooooo bias, and even after the team has got a total thrashing, there's always the predictable excuses by the commentaters/players/coaches.


It's odd isn't it, when England lose a game (I do not think they have been "thrashed" by anyone other than NZ for some time!) how they are slagged off and are constantly compared to the 2003 side. And yet when Wales, Scotland or Ireland lose a game, they are courageous, unlucky etc.
The bias is actually against England, and critics are so much harsher against England compared to any other home nation - So I'm not sure who you are listening to??
My fine is over £700 !! (",)
Rodge
 
Posts: 5484
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 12:00 am

Postby Moon-Crane » Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:04 pm

Rob wrote:
Nervosa wrote:
Beer Necessity wrote:I agree about Ireland - I definitely think they will provide the sternest test of the 'Home' nations.

What do you think about Jonny Wilkinson's inclusion, btw? I predict he'll be off before half time, but I hope I'm wrong, obviously.


I'm really proud of the Ireland team. O'Driscol (#13) is one of the best players of all time, IMO. He reminds me a lot of Joana Lumo (sp) actually.


Not even close, yes he's good, and possibly was one of the best in the world a few years ago, but will never be a legend of the International greats.

Nervosa wrote: As for Wilkinson, I think it's pretty stupid putting him on. No offence, but I think he's a total has-been. Don't get me wrong, I think he was the man that won England the World Cup....well his right foot won it. But these days, I think his Ruggers career is well and truly over.


He has suffered from injury yes, and is possibly not fully match fit, but how on earth can you say his career is over and he is a "has been", when he hasn't played since 2003?? He is still young and he has skills far beyond his boot and any other fly half in England. I dare you to go up to Martin Johnson and tell him that the only reason England won the World Cup was down to one kick!!
I'm sorry but when I hear anyone who claims the World Cup was won by Wilko, it just shows to me that they do not know Rugby, probably didn't watch the game, and just read about it in the tabloids. It took 15 men and years of sweat at sheer guts, and fine leadership.

Nervosa wrote:My desired order would be:

1st - Ireland
2nd - Scotland
3rd - Italy
4th - France
5th - Wales
6th - England

Putting England in last place is simply because of my dislike of English sportsmen/commentaters, nothing against you English folk! I think the commentaters are sooooooo bias, and even after the team has got a total thrashing, there's always the predictable excuses by the commentaters/players/coaches.


It's odd isn't it, when England lose a game (I do not think they have been "thrashed" by anyone other than NZ for some time!) how they are slagged off and are constantly compared to the 2003 side. And yet when Wales, Scotland or Ireland lose a game, they are courageous, unlucky etc.
The bias is actually against England, and critics are so much harsher against England compared to any other home nation - So I'm not sure who you are listening to??


I'd pretty much agree with everything here... especially the last bit.

It's the same criticism of fans, too. England seen as arrogant and always mentioning past glories, when it's usually fans from the other nations who constantly bang on about it.
''Fire in the hole, Bitch!'' Jesse Pinkman - Breaking Bad

My Top TV
User avatar
Moon-Crane
 
Posts: 20753
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:19 pm
Location: Bucks, UK

Postby Nervosa » Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:51 pm

Rob wrote:I'm sorry but when I hear anyone who claims the World Cup was won by Wilko, it just shows to me that they do not know Rugby, probably didn't watch the game, and just read about it in the tabloids. It took 15 men and years of sweat at sheer guts, and fine leadership.

The bias is actually against England, and critics are so much harsher against England compared to any other home nation - So I'm not sure who you are listening to??


I've played Rugby for years, watched the match live, have seen plenty of clips of that match, and I don't read the papers or regularly watch the news. It was my own view that Wilkinson won the game for England, I wasn't jumping on any band wagon.

English critics are bias against English sportsmen?? I totally disagree. I've yet to see England playing footy (1-0 Norn Iron) when the commentator doesn't bash on about 1966. Or a Rugby match when 2003 isn't mentioned. As for Cricket, you never hear it being stated that "England lost because Australia were the better side"....it's always "The high humidity made it difficult playing conditions" or "So-and-so's shoulder injury" etc..

I just don't like watching an England match with two English commentators, it really annoys the piss out of me. But same goes for any country I suppose, I just hate bias comments. It's never a fowl, it's always "a fair challenge, the ref was way out on that call."

I've nothing against English people at all (I've relatives living there and my parents lived in London for about 4 years), but I'm not a fan of English sportsmen based on what I've seen of them. I can't watch any Question of Sport episodes with Dawson on them as his smarmy attitude always sickens me.

Now, point me to the nearest pub and gimme a pint o'Guinness :lol:

(Nothing better than a sports debate!)
There are 10 types of people in the world; those who understand binary code, and those who don't.
User avatar
Nervosa
 
Posts: 3291
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:33 am

Postby Rodge » Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:55 pm

Nervosa wrote:I've played Rugby for years, watched the match live, have seen plenty of clips of that match, and I don't read the papers or regularly watch the news. It was my own view that Wilkinson won the game for England, I wasn't jumping on any band wagon.


I take it you play in the 3/4's???? :wink:
My fine is over £700 !! (",)
Rodge
 
Posts: 5484
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 12:00 am

Postby Nervosa » Sat Feb 03, 2007 6:02 pm

Rob wrote:
Nervosa wrote:I've played Rugby for years, watched the match live, have seen plenty of clips of that match, and I don't read the papers or regularly watch the news. It was my own view that Wilkinson won the game for England, I wasn't jumping on any band wagon.


I take it you play in the 3/4's???? :wink:


No idea what that means. But I've played in numerous schools cup matches, reaching the finals once. I started playing Rugby at about 9 years old. And still play down the park with a load of lads who play at uni. And I've been coached my Gary Longwell of Ulster/Ireland. If 3/4s has something to do with my age?? I'm 19 and would play "grown up" Rugby. I'm just making the point that I know enough about the game to have an opinion on it.
There are 10 types of people in the world; those who understand binary code, and those who don't.
User avatar
Nervosa
 
Posts: 3291
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:33 am

Postby Rodge » Sat Feb 03, 2007 6:28 pm

Nervosa wrote:No idea what that means.


Hey, mate I'm not disputing that you haven't played Rugby, I just asked if you played in the 3/4's - the backs - scrum half to full back? - 3/4's - a well know rugby term for the backs?? :lol:

It's just that most of the time it's lads who play in the 3/4's (backs) that praise Wilko and tend to forget that there were 8 massive men in front of him including Johnson, Hill, Back, Dallaglio who set the platform for Wilko to show his stuff.
And if you watch those last few minutes of the World Cup final it was once again the forwards who set it up and I, put it all down to the 10 yard run by your mate Matt Dawson, which put Jonny in the position to take that legendary kick.
My fine is over £700 !! (",)
Rodge
 
Posts: 5484
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 12:00 am

Postby Nervosa » Sat Feb 03, 2007 6:50 pm

Rob wrote:
Nervosa wrote:No idea what that means.


Hey, mate I'm not disputing that you haven't played Rugby, I just asked if you played in the 3/4's - the backs - scrum half to full back? - 3/4's - a well know rugby term for the backs?? :lol:

It's just that most of the time it's lads who play in the 3/4's (backs) that praise Wilko and tend to forget that there were 8 massive men in front of him including Johnson, Hill, Back, Dallaglio who set the platform for Wilko to show his stuff.
And if you watch those last few minutes of the World Cup final it was once again the forwards who set it up and I, put it all down to the 10 yard run by your mate Matt Dawson, which put Jonny in the position to take that legendary kick.


To be totally honest, I've never heard about 3/4s for the backs :? I actually played Hooker, then moved into First Centre as the other lads started getting bigger (ie. more suited than me to play hooker)

I actually like the England pack, there's some nasty brutes in there which is always great to watch. But it can't be over-looked that that kick came in the last minute of play, and if it had been missed, the Aussies would have won it.

Do you play, or have you played Rob? What position?
There are 10 types of people in the world; those who understand binary code, and those who don't.
User avatar
Nervosa
 
Posts: 3291
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:33 am

Postby Rodge » Sat Feb 03, 2007 6:59 pm

Nervosa wrote: But it can't be over-looked that that kick came in the last minute of play, and if it had been missed, the Aussies would have won it.


Hang on it was 17-17 at that point, so if the kick hadn't gone over then we would have still had the determination to get the points needed, through Jonny or Robbo.

Yes I played from 5-25, started at Fly Half until I eventually moved to Openside flanker, and the injury took me down!! I played school, town & county and loved every single minute of it both on and off the field.
It's such a great game.
My fine is over £700 !! (",)
Rodge
 
Posts: 5484
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 12:00 am

Postby Nervosa » Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:32 pm

Rob wrote:Yes I played from 5-25, started at Fly Half until I eventually moved to Openside flanker, and the injury took me down!! I played school, town & county and loved every single minute of it both on and off the field.
It's such a great game.


I hear you on the injury, broken finger (doesn't sound much at all) took me out of competative Rugby. I only get to play for fun now.

Well what's the verdict on the first match? Tbh, I think England played well and Johnny put in a good effort. Scotland also pulled their socks up too I think.
There are 10 types of people in the world; those who understand binary code, and those who don't.
User avatar
Nervosa
 
Posts: 3291
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:33 am

Postby Moon-Crane » Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:55 pm

Nervosa wrote:English critics are bias against English sportsmen?? I totally disagree. I've yet to see England playing footy (1-0 Norn Iron) when the commentator doesn't bash on about 1966. Or a Rugby match when 2003 isn't mentioned.


I didn't make this point specifically, because i knew one of our neighbours would quite happily trot it out - therefore reinforcing this point.

For every one time i hear '66 mentioned by an english commentator - i've heard every other home nation mention it ten-fold, in the context that they hate it being mentioned all the time. I'm sure the irony is lost.

Also, nobody seems to mind that Scotland constantly rattle on about '67?

Nervosa wrote:As for Cricket, you never hear it being stated that "England lost because Australia were the better side"....it's always "The high humidity made it difficult playing conditions" or "So-and-so's shoulder injury" etc..


If you were a cricket fan, or happened to listen to the Commentary team during the Ashes, you'd hear that the English commentary teams have done nothing but criticise the England team, while praising the fantastic ability of Australia? I guess people do hear what they want to hear, though?

Fair enough, we have English commentators, as we are in England. We do happen to have Andy Gray as the 'expert' on Sky Sports Premiership coverage, however. On Match of the Day we have Alan Hansen and Mark Lawrenson.

I'm sure in this digital age, and the age of poiltical correctness, we'll no doubt get the option of choosing an audio option based on our own region.
''Fire in the hole, Bitch!'' Jesse Pinkman - Breaking Bad

My Top TV
User avatar
Moon-Crane
 
Posts: 20753
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:19 pm
Location: Bucks, UK

Postby Rodge » Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:04 pm

Nervosa wrote:
Rob wrote:Yes I played from 5-25, started at Fly Half until I eventually moved to Openside flanker, and the injury took me down!! I played school, town & county and loved every single minute of it both on and off the field.
It's such a great game.


I hear you on the injury, broken finger (doesn't sound much at all) took me out of competative Rugby. I only get to play for fun now.

Well what's the verdict on the first match? Tbh, I think England played well and Johnny put in a good effort. Scotland also pulled their socks up too I think.


Not too bad a start, but I am yet to be convinced. I hope it is enough to boost moral in the England camp, however against tougher competition, we must be tighter up front, and less mistakes, but if Ashston allows this new team to play together for the next few tests to allow the team to gel and knock a bit of rust from the edges then it may be interesting against Ireland, France & Wales. And if we can beat these 3 teams then only New Zealand have a better team on this planet.
My fine is over £700 !! (",)
Rodge
 
Posts: 5484
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 12:00 am

Postby Mr Blue Sky » Sat Feb 03, 2007 9:02 pm

Moon-Crane wrote:
Nervosa wrote:As for Cricket, you never hear it being stated that "England lost because Australia were the better side"....it's always "The high humidity made it difficult playing conditions" or "So-and-so's shoulder injury" etc..


If you were a cricket fan, or happened to listen to the Commentary team during the Ashes, you'd hear that the English commentary teams have done nothing but criticise the England team, while praising the fantastic ability of Australia? I guess people do hear what they want to hear, though?


I would have made that point myself if you hadn't, MC. I listened/watched a great deal of the whole sorry affair this winter (our worst tour down under in history) and quite rightly the commentators have made no excuses for England. The Aussies beat, nay thrashed us at cricket this winter becuase they are far superior right now. End of. For one thing, the commentators would begin to sound pretty silly if they tried to put our awful displays down to the weather or who won the toss. I'm confident we can give it a go in 2009 when half of this once-in-a-generation Aussie side will have retired. Until then we just have to admit we're lagging a long way behind the Australian side and the commentators and experts all do do that, to a man.

Your comments have much more validity regarding international footy. We tend to delude ourselves about how good our players actually are in this country and yes, if we lose the media has to give some reason for that (i.e. instead of admitting our players are over-hyped and overpaid).

Just a quick word about today's game - Go Jonny! I never doubted you for a minute, mate! :lol:
"You don't turn the other cheek, you slice it."
User avatar
Mr Blue Sky
 
Posts: 21732
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 1:00 am

Postby me123 » Sat Feb 03, 2007 9:08 pm

Beer Necessity wrote:
Moon-Crane wrote:
Nervosa wrote:As for Cricket, you never hear it being stated that "England lost because Australia were the better side"....it's always "The high humidity made it difficult playing conditions" or "So-and-so's shoulder injury" etc..


If you were a cricket fan, or happened to listen to the Commentary team during the Ashes, you'd hear that the English commentary teams have done nothing but criticise the England team, while praising the fantastic ability of Australia? I guess people do hear what they want to hear, though?


I would have made that point myself if you hadn't, MC. I listened/watched a great deal of the whole sorry affair this winter (our worst tour down under in history) and quite rightly the commentators have made no excuses for England. The Aussies beat, nay thrashed us at cricket this winter becuase they are far superior right now. End of. For one thing, the commentators would begin to sound pretty silly if they tried to put our awful displays down to the weather or who won the toss. I'm confident we can give it a go in 2009 when half of this once-in-a-generation Aussie side will have retired. Until then we just have to admit we're lagging a long way behind the Australian side and the commentators and experts all do do that, to a man.

Your comments have much more validity regarding international footy. We tend to delude ourselves about how good our players actually are in this country and yes, if we lose the media has to give some reason for that (i.e. instead of admitting our players are over-hyped and overpaid).

Just a quick word about today's game - Go Jonny! I never doubted you for a minute, mate! :lol:


I don't have sky sports, so I could only watch the highlights and news items of the ashes :( . I noticed it was mostly excuses for the losses. I do support Englands cricket team (although I'm Scottish) and the only reason they really won the ashes the last time was because Australia had genuine excuses. England had some, but they still should have done better.

Another victim of this is Scottish football (the most embarassing thing since... ever). They will never admit that they are one of the worst teams in history, so they come out of a loss saying:

"Yeah, we lost 29-0 to the Faroe Islands, but I'm sure we'll thrash Brazil tomorrow!"

The sad thing is many Scots fall for it over and over again. :shock:
me123
 
Posts: 2781
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:40 am

Postby Mr Blue Sky » Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:46 pm

me123 wrote:Another victim of this is Scottish football (the most embarassing thing since... ever). They will never admit that they are one of the worst teams in history, so they come out of a loss saying:

"Yeah, we lost 29-0 to the Faroe Islands, but I'm sure we'll thrash Brazil tomorrow!"

The sad thing is many Scots fall for it over and over again. :shock:


Again, I don't want to derail Rob's rugby thread, but I must admit I'm of a similar opinion of the Scottish footy team. Even a decade ago Scotland still had 'very good' players even if the 'World Class' days of Law; Bremner; Hansen; Dalglish were long gone. Since the turn of the millennium Scotland have really had to scrape the barrel just to get a squad together. It's amazing how few top class players they have now - Barry Fergusson is probably the best and he was a flop in the English Premiership.

I think the Scots are much more realistic now than they used to be. As I mentioned earlier, the 1978 team set off for Argentina with the manager telling the Scotiich public they'd be coming home with the World Cup! :shock: Nowadays it's a big deal if Scotland even qualify for these tournaments.
"You don't turn the other cheek, you slice it."
User avatar
Mr Blue Sky
 
Posts: 21732
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 1:00 am

Postby Mr Blue Sky » Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:48 pm

Rob wrote:
Nervosa wrote:
Rob wrote:Yes I played from 5-25, started at Fly Half until I eventually moved to Openside flanker, and the injury took me down!! I played school, town & county and loved every single minute of it both on and off the field.
It's such a great game.


I hear you on the injury, broken finger (doesn't sound much at all) took me out of competative Rugby. I only get to play for fun now.

Well what's the verdict on the first match? Tbh, I think England played well and Johnny put in a good effort. Scotland also pulled their socks up too I think.


Not too bad a start, but I am yet to be convinced. I hope it is enough to boost moral in the England camp, however against tougher competition, we must be tighter up front, and less mistakes, but if Ashston allows this new team to play together for the next few tests to allow the team to gel and knock a bit of rust from the edges then it may be interesting against Ireland, France & Wales. And if we can beat these 3 teams then only New Zealand have a better team on this planet.


Just to get this back on to rugby - how did you think we handled ourselves without the ball today Rob? I thought that aspect in particular was a huge improvement over the last few games.
"You don't turn the other cheek, you slice it."
User avatar
Mr Blue Sky
 
Posts: 21732
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 1:00 am

Postby Rodge » Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:02 am

Beer Necessity wrote:Just to get this back on to rugby - how did you think we handled ourselves without the ball today Rob? I thought that aspect in particular was a huge improvement over the last few games.


It was so much better, however we did show a few chinks in our armour, I was worried that Wilko may hold back, but he showed all doubters that he is as good in defense as he is in attack. Harry Ellis was just awesome, and I felt a bit sorry for him that he was over shadowed by Wilko's return!
The two Scottish tries were however allowed too easily. These gaps must be closed, especially against O'Driscoll & France.
The Dan Parks kicks also showed a few big gaps, but I think young Morgan just needs a bit of guidance, and both Lewsey & Robbo, were so confident that they were a little to forward. Hopefully against a stronger side they may be a little more cautious.
As I said we need to get a few games under our belt and even if we lose
a few we must stick with this format and take it forward to the word cup.
I think the big difference today, compared to the last 2 years is that at no point did I think we would lose, which is nice for a England Rugby fanatic. :lol:

"Go, go, go jonny go go
go johnny go go
go johnny go go
go, johnny be good"

8-)
Last edited by Rodge on Sun Feb 04, 2007 11:47 am, edited 2 times in total.
My fine is over £700 !! (",)
Rodge
 
Posts: 5484
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 12:00 am

Postby Nervosa » Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:35 am

Moon-Crane wrote:
Nervosa wrote:As for Cricket, you never hear it being stated that "England lost because Australia were the better side"....it's always "The high humidity made it difficult playing conditions" or "So-and-so's shoulder injury" etc..


If you were a cricket fan, or happened to listen to the Commentary team during the Ashes, you'd hear that the English commentary teams have done nothing but criticise the England team, while praising the fantastic ability of Australia? I guess people do hear what they want to hear, though?

Fair enough, we have English commentators, as we are in England. We do happen to have Andy Gray as the 'expert' on Sky Sports Premiership coverage, however. On Match of the Day we have Alan Hansen and Mark Lawrenson.

I'm sure in this digital age, and the age of poiltical correctness, we'll no doubt get the option of choosing an audio option based on our own region.


I should have stopped you after the first line, I'm not a Cricket fan! :lol: But fair play, I hardly know every word uttered by the commentators in that particular game.

It's just that the stuffy commentators rub me the wrong way (and a lot of other sports fans I know as well) and therefore give me a bad impression of the team they're talking about. I suppose part of their aim is to generate national prestige, but to an outsider (ie. me not being English) it really does come across to sound very arrogant.

As for the match today, I was impressed with how England managed to shut down a lot of Scotish advances before they materialised into anything much. I do think the English pack is one of the strongest in the comp.
There are 10 types of people in the world; those who understand binary code, and those who don't.
User avatar
Nervosa
 
Posts: 3291
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:33 am

Postby Rodge » Sun Feb 04, 2007 2:45 pm

Nervosa wrote:It's just that the stuffy commentators rub me the wrong way (and a lot of other sports fans I know as well) and therefore give me a bad impression of the team they're talking about. I suppose part of their aim is to generate national prestige, but to an outsider (ie. me not being English) it really does come across to sound very arrogant.

As for the match today, I was impressed with how England managed to shut down a lot of Scotish advances before they materialised into anything much. I do think the English pack is one of the strongest in the comp.


Did you actually watch the post match discussions? Granted, when it comes to an International Rugby match we get 5 minutes discussion, so a lot has to be crammed in - compared to the usual 30-45 minutes needless commentary after a somewaht ordinary dull football match!
Anyway, yes Jerry Guscott was appreciative of the way England performed but still (like me) he realised that we must not get our hopes up after one match against a mediocre Scottish side. He did make the point that we were still not brilliant in any shape or form. And yet Jonathan - Rugby League reject - Davis, could not even attempt to cover up his frustration that England played well, and basically made every attempt to put us down prefering to slag off Scotland rather than praise England. :evil: - and you are trying to tell me that it's England commentators who are biased.
Again in every news coverage afterward, we were inflicted with the "non-try" that was awarded - that's not the teams fault, that's down to the non-English TV ref, who must have been asleep - as if it would have made a difference to the result. No talk of how well the pack dominated, how good Robbo's return was on the wing and how well the new format, worked??? Biased my arse!!
My fine is over £700 !! (",)
Rodge
 
Posts: 5484
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 12:00 am

Postby Nervosa » Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:20 pm

Probably best to leave the 'English commentators biased' discussion for a while, I'm never gonna win that one against an English bloke! :lol:

I was pleased with the match today, but not with how Ireland played. They had me quite panicked at the end of the first, and they made quite a lot of fumbles and errors. They could have had an additional try during the first if they'd pushed harder at it. I think the second half was better for Ireland, but still not to their full potential IMO. I think Wales also put in a bad performance too.

Does anyone enjoy the matches that don't invlove a home nation as much? Personally I do enjoy them. France v Italy is always a good one to watch.
There are 10 types of people in the world; those who understand binary code, and those who don't.
User avatar
Nervosa
 
Posts: 3291
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:33 am

Next

Return to Off Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 6 guests


© Site contents are copyright Stuart Lee 1999 - 2019. This is a Frasier fan site and is not affiliated in any way with the program, Grub St Productions, Paramount or NBC.