Rugby Thuggery

Speaking of Tony Ward...here is a list of rugger buggers who were also half decent Soccer players

1/ Tony Ward ( Shamrock Rovers and Limerick United)
Played for the Hoops in the mid 1970's and when he moved to Limerick he was asked to play for United and was a member of their 1982 F.A.I. Cup winning side and played in the Cup-Winners Cup for them.

2/Paul McNaughton ( Shelbourne) The Irish international Rugby centre played for the reds during the early to mid 1970's

3/ Hugo Mc Neill (UCD) He was our soccer clubs player of the year in 1978/79 scoring 46 goals in all competitions. Soccer's loss was rugby's gain when he judassed off to Trinity :D . And he played in the 1987 Rugby World Cup.

4/ Barry McGann ... The Irish outhalf also allegedly played League of Ireland soccer for one of the Dublin clubs. It must have been early in his career cause he made his name in rugby as far as I can recall with Cork Constitution.The information on him is anecdotal so I don't know which soccer club he was with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sirhamish

Oh dear, oh dear. If YOU are going to indulge in stereotypes, could you really not do better than a poor copy of Paul Howard's badly written and pathetic excuse for humouir in the back page of the Sunday Tribune? :rolleyes:

I make my comparision from the viewpoint of participation and observation, which gives me a certain degree of qualification in forming an opinion. Repeat example, which you conviently overlooked, is that it is much more difficult to control a ball and outwit opposition with the ball at one's feet than in one's hand.

Regarding your attempt at colloquailisms from outside the Pale - "feck" and "gas" are also used in Dublin, maybe even in Dublin 4? Travel does broaden the mind, try it.

Bogger? No, not bothered what you call me and my fellow "skangers" (really hip Dublin term :rolleyes: ) I quite enjoy the cut and thrust of harmless name calling. Rather ironic that you're lack of knowledge of both games and over emotional response rather deflects that former term onto you. Feel free to call us what you like. As for lowering the intellectual bar, sorry, I am not able to descend to your level. I also didn't request a self indulgent example either - your own opinions are quite suffcient, thank you.

In real newspapers like The Guardian (Robert Kitson) and The Observer (Eddie Butler - former Welsh International) - it is frequently stated that rugby is becoming less diverse with an over emphasis on physicality and scrums etc - witness the humiliation of the Lions outfit by NZ. Williams, the little Welsh chap, was wiped off the grass, wasn't he?
Will Carling - ok he's a bit of a prat - has stated that today's eggball player is much bigger than players of even ten years ago because of the over emphasis on muscle building and on forward play, resulting in a game - especially in the Northern Hemisphere - with fewer flowing movements and too much static play. Tom McGurk, George Hook, The NZ bloke whose name I cannot recall, have all stated this too. Are they all wrong?

Actually I do watch the occasional game of rugby, since like 70% of those who subscribe to Sky Sports - football fans - I have the opportunity to view it. Basically, we subsidise the promotion of eggball on Sky. You should be grateful. :D

We football fans have no hesitation in savaging football with regard to its faults and defects and suggesting improvements, both on and off the field. etc. Rugby journalists also have no hesitation in criticising "soccer". It seems that when the boot is on the other foot, we are quickly dropped into little boxes marked "skanger", "ignorant" etc. Now, that's what's REALLY pathetic, even in so called jest.

Finally, as for "fearing" eggball? Nothing to fear in terms of world popularity and participation. There is simply no contest. Also, having played both games in a so called rugby school, I found football far tougher and much more skilfull.

---

As far as rip-the-**** rugby steretypes go they don't come much better than Howard's. I mean, after what you guys started I thought we were all indulging in stereotypes to show how smart and well-informed we were?!

I also have spent many years playing and watching both games (even thought I don't have Sky) and I'm not trying to say one or the other is better, I can appreciate both but it annoys me when people who know little of a sport try to shoehorn it into a cliché somewhere in the back of their mind.

Did you see the Lions NZ match last week? Because yes, Williams took a few big hits from the big but the NZ backs emphasised a lot of what is good about rugby as in when they got space to attack they exploited the Lions with some really beautiful rugby and scored some quality tries.

I don't live in D4 (I do pass through it on occasion though, UCD is part of it after all) and on my travels I have never once heard anyone say 'feck' or 'gas', just so you know.

If you're going to enjoy the 'harmless cut and thrust of name calling' you might want to et your facts right- I was calling you boggers to rip the **** (which you still don't seem to get) and I called you skecks (not skangers-that was skangerball).

My lack of knowledge of both games? That's just wrong, I know more about rugby than apparently you ever will and I know a bit about football.

And I don't recall the last time anyone connected with rugby criticised socer, most rugby fans have a lot of complaints and suggestions about rugb 'on and off the pitch' -most pressingly the predicament of developing rugby nations.

And if you think soccer fans get shoehorned as 'skangers' and the rest of it, rugby is still considered a middle/upper class game and comes in for a bit of stick in the press and elsewhere (Tom Humphries, the GAA-loving idiot from the paper of record).

As dor the difference between beating an opponent one on one with ball in hand- look at it this way if a soccer player regularly takes on opponents and beats tehm (e.g. Cristiano Ronaldo and Ryan Giggs) they are considered good, as a certain type of player, in rugby the same is true, note every player is blessed with the ability to beat someone one on one but some do regularly where this is going is basically in soccer, the physical contact is limited- if you can push the ball past your opponent it's half the battle because basically, now he can't touch you, in rugby you can be tackled anywhere on your body, basically it's much easier for an opponent to stop you without breaking the rules and you need to be superior to him in some wa- if you want to take him on the outside you have to be faster, if you want to go therough him you need to be stronger etc.

Travel broadens the mind- it's clearly worked wonders on yours. It's probably done a bit for mine aswell, but you'll forgive me if I prefer Venice, Milan, Colorado et al to the Irish countryside- I am a rugby nancy boy with a dD4 accent after all :p

Interesting debate.

Although first and foremost a football fan growing up in Limerick everybody follows rugby.

1) I haven't experienced any antipathy towards football among rugby fans - I've lived in Limerick, Cork, Galway and Dublin. In Limerick local clubs and the branch have been very accomodating for amny many years.

2) A number of football fans in Dublin and elsewhere really dislike rugby. The main reason appears to be the D4 element i.e. pretty much the same reason the Limerick clubs dislike the Dublin ones.

3) The D4 (can also be SCD, D6 or D6W) stereotype is alive and well. Most obvious to me watching Limerick clubs in the AIL in dublin or attending a few Leinster HC games. There are of course many many genuine rugby fans in Dublin.

4) I attend all home football Internationals and almost all home rugby Internationals (unless I'm at an away football International) and there is a different mix of people at both.

As an aside one funny story - on the first day of the AIL Garryowen (Limerick) travelled to Dublin to take on Wanderers (all the media had the Dublin clubs to top the elague and the Limerick teams to be relegated - this persisted even after years of lucky Limerick wins). Garryowen duly beat Wanderers and the players were celebrating the win in the clubhouse in a manner not deemed to be appropriate. One lady member chose to admonish a Limerick ruffian enjoying a pint on the shoulders of a colleague jumping around the clubhouse. The then current Irish International (who shall remain nameless) responded with "We're the snob club in Limerick lady wait until Munsters come up and beat you".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by el tk

As far as rip-the-**** rugby steretypes go they don't come much better than Howard's. I mean, after what you guys started I thought we were all indulging in stereotypes to show how smart and well-informed we were?!

I also have spent many years playing and watching both games (even thought I don't have Sky) and I'm not trying to say one or the other is better, I can appreciate both but it annoys me when people who know little of a sport try to shoehorn it into a cliché somewhere in the back of their mind.

Did you see the Lions NZ match last week? Because yes, Williams took a few big hits from the big but the NZ backs emphasised a lot of what is good about rugby as in when they got space to attack they exploited the Lions with some really beautiful rugby and scored some quality tries.

---

Paragraph 1- Howard is displaying more of himself than he has the intelligence to realise and it is a badly written, unfunny and, basically, a waste of a good tree - or portion of........ :D

Paragraph 2 - too easy to lob the "cliche" ctiticism. That's a cop out.

Paragraph 3 - That just reinforces my point - and the other former rugby players' criticisms - of the Northern Hemisphere game. NZ have brought the game back to a more enjoyable spectacle with fluidity in both backs and forwards. Shock! Horror! We might even agree here. LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by el tk

I don't live in D4 (I do pass through it on occasion though, UCD is part of it after all) and on my travels I have never once heard anyone say 'feck' or 'gas', just so you know.

If you're going to enjoy the 'harmless cut and thrust of name calling' you might want to et your facts right- I was calling you boggers to rip the **** (which you still don't seem to get) and I called you skecks (not skangers-that was skangerball).

My lack of knowledge of both games? That's just wrong, I know more about rugby than apparently you ever will and I know a bit about football.

And I don't recall the last time anyone connected with rugby criticised socer, most rugby fans have a lot of complaints and suggestions about rugb 'on and off the pitch' -most pressingly the predicament of developing rugby nations.

And if you think soccer fans get shoehorned as 'skangers' and the rest of it, rugby is still considered a middle/upper class game and comes in for a bit of stick in the press and elsewhere (Tom Humphries, the GAA-loving idiot from the paper of record).
:p

---

Paragraph 1 - I have - in Doheny and Nesbitts, O'Sheas etc and. in the former, by fellows who were chatting about a rugby game they'd recently played. I have to say it, they spoke with a distinct D4 accent. What was I doing in those pubs? Worked in those areas for a while and, after all, a pub is a pub when one is thirsty. LOL

Paragraph 2 - "skangers", "skeks", "boggers"? So what. You're attempts, here, are really lame - it was that easy to get. Yawn.

Paragraph 3 - That, of course, is your opinion. :rolleyes:

Paragraph 4 - I have heard it far too many times - McGurk, Ward, Karl Johnson, the idiot on Morning Ireland who told Des Cahill that rugby players would never indulge in the likes of "roasting" and are far better behaved than soccer players. At the same time, the Observer carried a report of (white) players in a South African rugby club up on trial for murder when they arranged a hunt of black kids in a rural region. One was sentenced for murder. They walked in to court laughing and joking as if it were a mere jest.
There was, of course, that disgraceful Lions tour of South Africa during apartheid times. In itself, behaviour which was disgraceful.

Paragraph 4 - Shock! Horror! Regarding Humphries, I tend to agree with you. I think he's overrated and, unfortunately, over here. I cannot recall how many times I have heard cheerleaders, in the guise of journalists, parroting how much the game has left its "traditional" areas and is being played by people of all classes. This is the new mantra - a game played by all classes. Certainly makes a change from the time when an Irish international (Foley, I think) was listed in an Irish match programme as a "company representative". He was a truck driver!
Did you see that Clongowes Wood programme a couple of years ago? The "great and the good", "leaders in/of society", "rugby instills a discipline of fellowship" which will give us great leaders in society. That mentality still exists, whether you like it or not.
The funniest part of that programme was near the beginning - it showed a sign pinned to a tree near the school's entrance. On it was "Beware of the bull". Now, if the definite article was removed, it would have been a perfect summary of the rubbish which followed. Early stages showed the Principal addressing the students stating that any rugby connection to the tragic Brian Murphy situation was "balderdash". Why did he even have to say that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by el tk

As dor the difference between beating an opponent one on one with ball in hand- look at it this way if a soccer player regularly takes on opponents and beats tehm (e.g. Cristiano Ronaldo and Ryan Giggs) they are considered good, as a certain type of player, in rugby the same is true, note every player is blessed with the ability to beat someone one on one but some do regularly where this is going is basically in soccer, the physical contact is limited- if you can push the ball past your opponent it's half the battle because basically, now he can't touch you, in rugby you can be tackled anywhere on your body, basically it's much easier for an opponent to stop you without breaking the rules and you need to be superior to him in some wa- if you want to take him on the outside you have to be faster, if you want to go therough him you need to be stronger etc.

Travel broadens the mind- it's clearly worked wonders on yours. It's probably done a bit for mine aswell, but you'll forgive me if I prefer Venice, Milan, Colorado et al to the Irish countryside- I am a rugby nancy boy with a dD4 accent after all :p

---

Paragraph 1 - In football, there is an emphasis on skill in both defenders and attackers. A good, forward - give better examples than Ronaldo and Giggs, the former rarely beats his marker - The forward has the ball at his feet with no use of his hands to outwit the defender and, much more importantly, the defender has to use skill to deprive him of the ball - he cannot drag him down. There are footballing skills involved regarding BOTH players. Of course, if the defender fouls, then a freekick is awarded and, if it continues, cards are issued. The actual attempt to tackle with one leg only allowed, makes it more than half a battle.
Jumping on, dragging down, involving, sometimes, a NUMBER of players, on the player in possession, cannot be considered remotely as skillful. Even shirt pulling seems to be allowed.

Paragraph 2 - A ha! A variation on the "some fo my best friends are...." argument. Also, the final sentence? Are we being a tad defensive here??? Again, whether travel has worked wonders on me - predictable attempt at sarcasm. Let me just state this, since I follow a game which gives me the opportunity to visit far more places on the planet than the sport you're defending, I think there is some hope for old Hamish. Sadly, not in your case. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CollegeTillIDie

Speaking of Tony Ward...here is a list of rugger buggers who were also half decent Soccer players

1/ Tony Ward ( Shamrock Rovers and Limerick United)
Played for the Hoops in the mid 1970's and when he moved to Limerick he was asked to play for United and was a member of their 1982 F.A.I. Cup winning side and played in the Cup-Winners Cup for them.

2/Paul McNaughton ( Shelbourne) The Irish international Rugby centre played for the reds during the early to mid 1970's

3/ Hugo Mc Neill (UCD) He was our soccer clubs player of the year in 1978/79 scoring 46 goals in all competitions. Soccer's loss was rugby's gain when he judassed off to Trinity :D . And he played in the 1987 Rugby World Cup.

4/ Barry McGann ... The Irish outhalf also allegedly played League of Ireland soccer for one of the Dublin clubs. It must have been early in his career cause he made his name in rugby as far as I can recall with Cork Constitution.The information on him is anecdotal so I don't know which soccer club he was with.

---

yep, saw them all "live" as it were.

"Half decent" - your words, not mine. :p :D Not that I disagree, mind you. I was at that Cup Final BTW and he deserves the credit for taking a fine corner kick which Brendan Storan..er....converted. :D Other than that, he was invisible but, I suppose, it's the goal "assist" (copywrite USA sawker) that is remembered.

Brent Pope - that's the guy. Met him once, briefly, when the schools outfit were organising the Irish Permanent sponsorship in the 1990s. Very pleasant chap - cannot remember what his role in the whole shebang was but he appeared to have an appreciation, if TBF, limited knowledge of football. Nothing wrong with that.

Barry McGann played for Shels.

As regards my well made points, CTID???? Your role in Footieland is to take the p!$$ of old Hamish and keep me in my place - you're slipping. LOL :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sirhamish

Paragraph 1- Howard is displaying more of himself than he has the intelligence to realise and it is a badly written, unfunny and, basically, a waste of a good tree - or portion of........ :D

Paragraph 2 - too easy to lob the "cliche" ctiticism. That's a cop out.

Paragraph 3 - That just reinforces my point - and the other former rugby players' criticisms - of the Northern Hemisphere game. NZ have brought the game back to a more enjoyable spectacle with fluidity in both backs and forwards. Shock! Horror! We might even agree here. LOL

---

Ok so you don't like Paul Howard, I am indifferent towards him although the style of speech from the 'Ross' column is apt to use on occasion if one is trying to annoy someone, didn't appear to work in this case.

The main reason I responded to this topic in the first place was I was bascially appalled by the amount of people trotting out the old rugby clichés which displeased me.

Firstly, New Zealand have always played the way they play now, Secondly you'll note of the 3 best teams in Europe (France and England and Wales by dint of their Grand Slam this years) two of them play a loose, pacy game with many offloads, England at the time of their RWC victory had world class backs but tended not to use them as much as they could.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sirhamish

Paragraph 1 - I have - in Doheny and Nesbitts, O'Sheas etc and. in the former, by fellows who were chatting about a rugby game they'd recently played. I have to say it, they spoke with a distinct D4 accent. What was I doing in those pubs? Worked in those areas for a while and, after all, a pub is a pub when one is thirsty. LOL

Paragraph 2 - "skangers", "skeks", "boggers"? So what. You're attempts, here, are really lame - it was that easy to get. Yawn.

Paragraph 3 - That, of course, is your opinion. :rolleyes:

Paragraph 4 - I have heard it far too many times - McGurk, Ward, Karl Johnson, the idiot on Morning Ireland who told Des Cahill that rugby players would never indulge in the likes of "roasting" and are far better behaved than soccer players. At the same time, the Observer carried a report of (white) players in a South African rugby club up on trial for murder when they arranged a hunt of black kids in a rural region. One was sentenced for murder. They walked in to court laughing and joking as if it were a mere jest.
There was, of course, that disgraceful Lions tour of South Africa during apartheid times. In itself, behaviour which was disgraceful.

Paragraph 4 - Shock! Horror! Regarding Humphries, I tend to agree with you. I think he's overrated and, unfortunately, over here. I cannot recall how many times I have heard cheerleaders, in the guise of journalists, parroting how much the game has left its "traditional" areas and is being played by people of all classes. This is the new mantra - a game played by all classes. Certainly makes a change from the time when an Irish international (Foley, I think) was listed in an Irish match programme as a "company representative". He was a truck driver!
Did you see that Clongowes Wood programme a couple of years ago? The "great and the good", "leaders in/of society", "rugby instills a discipline of fellowship" which will give us great leaders in society. That mentality still exists, whether you like it or not.
The funniest part of that programme was near the beginning - it showed a sign pinned to a tree near the school's entrance. On it was "Beware of the bull". Now, if the definite article was removed, it would have been a perfect summary of the rubbish which followed. Early stages showed the Principal addressing the students stating that any rugby connection to the tragic Brian Murphy situation was "balderdash". Why did he even have to say that?

---

1. Wow, fascinating, I recently read a story by a journalist who told of two Drogheda girls aged about 15 who spoke with perfect D4 accents despite having never left Drogheda in their lives.

2. If you going to point out someone's failings you might aswell be accurate, while we're on the subject your attempts, you're (you are)
making attempts.

3. Nice response- cutting and such.

4.a) Certainly there is a perception that rugby players are better behaved than soccer players, is it true? I can't say as I haven't studied the behaviour of every soccer/rugby player on the planet. However I don't remember the last time an opposition player came up to offer his condolences when a player on the other team got injured (BOD and Justin Marshall) in a soccer match, or any incident where a player gave up a goal/try to tend to a possibly dangerously injured opposition player (Tana Umaga and Collin Charvis a few years back) in soccer.
Ok, SA in the apartheid era presumably, are you attempting in a Michael Moore-ish way to make a tenous connection between the fact that these horrible racist murderers were rugby players and that rugby had led them to perpetrate these acts?

4.b) Firstly and foremostly, careful about bringing the Brian murphy incident into this, that's a loaded issue and not really a road we want to go down, as well as it having little relevance here. I didn't see the Clongowes programme, if you could specify the year I might have a friend who could obtain it for me. Rugby does instill a discipline of fellowship, it is impossible to win a rugby match unless every last player is working as a team with everyone else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sirhamish

Paragraph 1 - In football, there is an emphasis on skill in both defenders and attackers. A good, forward - give better examples than Ronaldo and Giggs, the former rarely beats his marker - The forward has the ball at his feet with no use of his hands to outwit the defender and, much more importantly, the defender has to use skill to deprive him of the ball - he cannot drag him down. There are footballing skills involved regarding BOTH players. Of course, if the defender fouls, then a freekick is awarded and, if it continues, cards are issued. The actual attempt to tackle with one leg only allowed, makes it more than half a battle.
Jumping on, dragging down, involving, sometimes, a NUMBER of players, on the player in possession, cannot be considered remotely as skillful. Even shirt pulling seems to be allowed.

Paragraph 2 - A ha! A variation on the "some fo my best friends are...." argument. Also, the final sentence? Are we being a tad defensive here??? Again, whether travel has worked wonders on me - predictable attempt at sarcasm. Let me just state this, since I follow a game which gives me the opportunity to visit far more places on the planet than the sport you're defending, I think there is some hope for old Hamish. Sadly, not in your case. :D

---

1. Dragging down a player simply doesn't work, if someone is coming at you with the pace of Rococoko or Sivivatu (both do 100m in under 10'6) trying to grab their jersey simply doesn't work, this is known as a '46A' tackle (i.e. stick out 10 fingers and hope it stops) it doesn't happen anymore as most teams wear skintight jerseys. The fast rugby player is also harder to stop as he has no ball at his feet to control and can therefore step either way at the drop of a hat (Jason Robinson has been known to change direction in mid-air).

2. Sure you can visit more places but whether you'd want to is another thing entirely and there are several places where soccer is basically non-existent as a sport. How many places you can visit is more than slightly irrelevant.

Another thing- rugby players are much more open to fans approaching them and talking to them, when was the last time you saw a bunch of English Premiership players (I consider this to be a more relevant comparison than eL) walking from their training ground to the stadium about 2 hours before the match and stopping to talk to anyone who approached them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by el tk

1. Dragging down a player simply doesn't work, if someone is coming at you with the pace of Rococoko or Sivivatu (both do 100m in under 10'6) trying to grab their jersey simply doesn't work, this is known as a '46A' tackle (i.e. stick out 10 fingers and hope it stops) it doesn't happen anymore as most teams wear skintight jerseys. The fast rugby player is also harder to stop as he has no ball at his feet to control and can therefore step either way at the drop of a hat (Jason Robinson has been known to change direction in mid-air).

2. Sure you can visit more places but whether you'd want to is another thing entirely and there are several places where soccer is basically non-existent as a sport. How many places you can visit is more than slightly irrelevant.

Another thing- rugby players are much more open to fans approaching them and talking to them, when was the last time you saw a bunch of English Premiership players (I consider this to be a more relevant comparison than eL) walking from their training ground to the stadium about 2 hours before the match and stopping to talk to anyone who approached them?

---

Paragraph 1 - Why do they do it then? The Lions game today included loads of tackles when players were grabbed and downed. Any fast player will be harder to stop in any sport, yet having to control the ball with one's feet whilst ourwitting/outpacing the opposing player(s) is vastly more difficult. The Lions, this morning, were simply inept at tackling, indidually and collectively, - comment made by most observers at the game while NZ were praised for better mobility. I meant grabbing a player around the waist, legs etc - grabbing the shirt , true, doesn't happen very often, regardless of jersey.

Paragraph 2 - You know, you're absolutely right. I had forgotten about Rockall, Antartica, Santa's home in the North Pole, Charlie Haughey's island to name one of "several". :rolleyes: Now, don't be jealous of football's size.

Joking aside, you're point is rubbish. Let's take NZ, since it's in the news at the moment. A rugby writer in the Observer recently stated that non Maori schoolkids are taking up football because they are physically smaller than Maoris and football is now played by more kids of European stock than rugby. Also, FIFA held an under 17 World Cup there a few years ago with average crowds of 8,000 per game and just under 25,000 at the final. Those attendances have not been bettered, even when the tournament has been hosted by football nations.
It is, by no stretch of the imagination, irrelevant as the more one travels, the more one learns of the enthralling variety of lifestyles/customs/societies in so many countries.

Also, given that football is played everywhere, it gives fans a greater opportunity to visit more countries and sample, admittedly briefly, more cultures. I'm sure that it must have been an education for Irish fans to see cities from Tehran to Tirana and witness local customs and sadly, in the latter's case, the daily struggles many people have to earn a crust.
The RTE programme on Irish fans visit to Iran was one example. It was amazing to witness Irish lady fans having to wear scarves when eating in Tehran's restaurants.
One only has to read through Footie and loads of magazines to witness fans comments/opinions on the various places they've been. The current BBC series "Frontline Football" also has a similar theme.

Paragraph 2 is your opinion but I tend to agree with you a little - some football players, in the Premiership for example, are becoming more distanced from the fans but in most other levels of the game, the players and fans meet on regular basis. Perhaps it is easier to meet with most fans, at some stage of the season, when a club's average attendance in the Guinness Premiership is around the 7,000 mark (Wasps) whilst Premier Division clubs have crowds of 30,000 or 40,000 or 50,000 plus at most games. Jamie Carragher, yesterday, seemed to be busy signing autographs, and chatting with, loads of fans and I know many Irish people who have taken trips to English clubs and met players, had photographs taken with them etc. So, it might be true with regard to Chelsea and Manure but, not, with many Premiership clubs. Where they meet them is not important.
Are you implying that rugby players are nicer, more well rounded people? LOL Back to square 1 then.

I've an idea - always a first for everything - see next post...... ;)

el tk - we've exhausted many themes/ideas etc already. Let's take a different tack....it might be.......er........a gas thing to do.

Here's only a few of the apects of football I would use the :eek: or :mad: smilies for.....
The G14's attempts to dominate the game and, ultimately, destroy it
Thuggery by some fans on the terraces
Diving and various cheating by some players
Dirty players
Players who use foul language towards referees etc.
Obscene wages
Clubs thrawling Africa for players and dumping them when they're considered not good enough - eg Belgium

I could go on.

Let's hear your eggball :mad: list??

Question.

When footballers fight on field or indulge in dangerous play why do football commentators use expressions like "disgraceful", "thuggery", "disgusting" "outrageous behaviour", "vicious" etc while, when there is violent activity on a rugby pitch , we are smothered in euphemisms such as "exchanging business cards", "getting to know one another", "friendly discussion", "difference of opinion" to name only a few.
I have heard those euphemisms in the past and in the last few weeks.
Woud you not agree that football commentators tell it like it is - more honestly - while eggball commentators water down the thuggery - people might get the wrong impression chaps - by using the eupemism cop out. You know that's true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by el tk

Ok so you don't like Paul Howard, I am indifferent towards him although the style of speech from the 'Ross' column is apt to use on occasion if one is trying to annoy someone, didn't appear to work in this case.

The main reason I responded to this topic in the first place was I was bascially appalled by the amount of people trotting out the old rugby clichés which displeased me.

Firstly, New Zealand have always played the way they play now, Secondly you'll note of the 3 best teams in Europe (France and England and Wales by dint of their Grand Slam this years) two of them play a loose, pacy game with many offloads, England at the time of their RWC victory had world class backs but tended not to use them as much as they could.

---

Let's forget about Howard, as a sportswriter/comic writer he's irrelevant, like his newspaper.

Not all criticisms indulge in cliches - again, that's cop out. They might be real facts, you know.

Not what I heard the rugby commentators say. They claimed that NZ had gone away from the Northern Hemisphere type of training and play which lost them World Cups - that's what was said lately by many, many commentators - most of them ex-players and coaches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by el tk

1. Wow, fascinating, I recently read a story by a journalist who told of two Drogheda girls aged about 15 who spoke with perfect D4 accents despite having never left Drogheda in their lives.

2. If you going to point out someone's failings you might aswell be accurate, while we're on the subject your attempts, you're (you are)
making attempts.

3. Nice response- cutting and such.

4.a) Certainly there is a perception that rugby players are better behaved than soccer players, is it true? I can't say as I haven't studied the behaviour of every soccer/rugby player on the planet. However I don't remember the last time an opposition player came up to offer his condolences when a player on the other team got injured (BOD and Justin Marshall) in a soccer match, or any incident where a player gave up a goal/try to tend to a possibly dangerously injured opposition player (Tana Umaga and Collin Charvis a few years back) in soccer.
Ok, SA in the apartheid era presumably, are you attempting in a Michael Moore-ish way to make a tenous connection between the fact that these horrible racist murderers were rugby players and that rugby had led them to perpetrate these acts?

4.b) Firstly and foremostly, careful about bringing the Brian murphy incident into this, that's a loaded issue and not really a road we want to go down, as well as it having little relevance here. I didn't see the Clongowes programme, if you could specify the year I might have a friend who could obtain it for me. Rugby does instill a discipline of fellowship, it is impossible to win a rugby match unless every last player is working as a team with everyone else.

---

Par 1 - stop dodging - this was a Dublin team I referred to and with Dublin players. Do I have to spell it out? Jesus.

Par 2 - What, in God's name, are you talking about.

4(a)
A perception that is fostered by far too many in the game and its cheerleaders in the media.
Let's give an example of good reporting, an Observer report a few years ago had an inteview with a rugby referee who had given up the game because of abuse from players and fans.500 referees left the game that season for the same reason. He said the days are gone when a referee could have a pint with the players afterwards as the atmosphere was now so unpleasant. Not my opinion - his. The fact that this might be considered a negative report on the game was the biggest shock - there are so few of them. Why?
The New Zealand captain was very sporting, wasn't he - immediately after the BOD incident and in his subsequent behavior.
Football example? Easy.
Paula de Canio when he grabbed a ball with the goal at his mercy following an injury to an opposing player - that happened in his West Ham days. In EVERY football game, players will tap the ball over the sideline in the event of injury and bang it back to the opposition on the restart.
Tenuous connection my ar$e - the murder was committed by players of a rugby club which, in South Africa,
has a history closely connected to the Broederbond/White South African supremacists and an attitude of racial superiority to Black people. If you think elistest, live elitest and play elitest then, it is inevitable that such actions will occur.
Also, remember the SA player RECENTLY who was dropped after refusing to share a room with a "kaffir" - his words not mine. He was only dropped after the media got word of it.
Also, a recent book by a Black member of the SA World Cup winning team thrashed the notion that the squad was a multi-racial harmonious outfit. He stated that he was treated as a second class citizen. His name escapes me at the moment. If I recall it, I'll edit it in. He was the first "big" Black star in SA eggball.
It's usually right wing nuts that label the "tenuous" tag on Michael Moore and his views - please don't allow yourself to be associated with them, even by accident. Then again, right wing, elitism??
4(B) - It is most certainly not irrelevant - it is elitism, pure and simple, to try and distance a sport from a tragedy. My point was on the Principal's response - he seemed to be more concerned with eggball's image. I'm well aware of the sensitive aspect regarding Brian Murphy. I concentrated on the game's defensive attitude, not the poor chap. The programme, itself, was one big PR cliche and you blame us..........?
I'm sure RTE have it on sale somewhere or maybe the IRFU shop.
All sports have a team ethic. Are you implying that rugby's theme ethic is superior to other sports - and you criticise those of us who, you claim, use cliches?? :rolleyes:

RTE NEVER mentioned the SA situation, above. Ditto the Irish newpapers. I wonder why? :rolleyes: Any and every situation where there is bad behaviour in football is a certainty for the sports programmes/sections. Of course bad behaiour should be highlighted BUT in ALL sports.
In fact, I get great satisfaction in seeing the likes of that moron Lee Bowyer getting blasted for his behaviour - I look forward to the day when he is transferred to his appropriate team eg Pentonville FC where, hopefully, he will have a 6ft 4in cellmate who'll make him his bitch. A pox on the likes of Steve Bruce in attempting to sign him. The sooner we rid the game of Bowyer, Dyer, Ashley Cole etc the better. See? We football fans have no problems criticising our game. Try it with eggball.
A cheerleading attitude, as opposed to a journalistic one, will ensure that one's sport escapes strong criticism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sirhamish

Paragraph 1 - Why do they do it then? The Lions game today included loads of tackles when players were grabbed and downed. Any fast player will be harder to stop in any sport, yet having to control the ball with one's feet whilst ourwitting/outpacing the opposing player(s) is vastly more difficult. The Lions, this morning, were simply inept at tackling, indidually and collectively, - comment made by most observers at the game while NZ were praised for better mobility. I meant grabbing a player around the waist, legs etc - grabbing the shirt , true, doesn't happen very often, regardless of jersey.

Paragraph 2 - You know, you're absolutely right. I had forgotten about Rockall, Antartica, Santa's home in the North Pole, Charlie Haughey's island to name one of "several". :rolleyes: Now, don't be jealous of football's size.

Joking aside, you're point is rubbish. Let's take NZ, since it's in the news at the moment. A rugby writer in the Observer recently stated that non Maori schoolkids are taking up football because they are physically smaller than Maoris and football is now played by more kids of European stock than rugby. Also, FIFA held an under 17 World Cup there a few years ago with average crowds of 8,000 per game and just under 25,000 at the final. Those attendances have not been bettered, even when the tournament has been hosted by football nations.
It is, by no stretch of the imagination, irrelevant as the more one travels, the more one learns of the enthralling variety of lifestyles/customs/societies in so many countries.

Also, given that football is played everywhere, it gives fans a greater opportunity to visit more countries and sample, admittedly briefly, more cultures. I'm sure that it must have been an education for Irish fans to see cities from Tehran to Tirana and witness local customs and sadly, in the latter's case, the daily struggles many people have to earn a crust.
The RTE programme on Irish fans visit to Iran was one example. It was amazing to witness Irish lady fans having to wear scarves when eating in Tehran's restaurants.
One only has to read through Footie and loads of magazines to witness fans comments/opinions on the various places they've been. The current BBC series "Frontline Football" also has a similar theme.

Paragraph 2 is your opinion but I tend to agree with you a little - some football players, in the Premiership for example, are becoming more distanced from the fans but in most other levels of the game, the players and fans meet on regular basis. Perhaps it is easier to meet with most fans, at some stage of the season, when a club's average attendance in the Guinness Premiership is around the 7,000 mark (Wasps) whilst Premier Division clubs have crowds of 30,000 or 40,000 or 50,000 plus at most games. Jamie Carragher, yesterday, seemed to be busy signing autographs, and chatting with, loads of fans and I know many Irish people who have taken trips to English clubs and met players, had photographs taken with them etc. So, it might be true with regard to Chelsea and Manure but, not, with many Premiership clubs. Where they meet them is not important.
Are you implying that rugby players are nicer, more well rounded people? LOL Back to square 1 then.

I've an idea - always a first for everything - see next post...... ;)

---

1. Great, it happens, just like in soccer when players commit niggling fouls to prevent opposition players from getting around them, even to stop a rugby player in full flight, even by grabbing him around the waist can be difficult as his full momentum crashes into your body.

2. What the hell does that mean?

Ok, so you can go to 'more places' if you follow football, what do you achieve?

When was the last time you were able to, after an international match, go up to both sets of teams and coaches, talk to them and get autographs and photos etc.?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sirhamish

el tk - we've exhausted many themes/ideas etc already. Let's take a different tack....it might be.......er........a gas thing to do.



Let's hear your eggball :mad: list??

Question.

When footballers fight on field or indulge in dangerous play why do football commentators use expressions like "disgraceful", "thuggery", "disgusting" "outrageous behaviour", "vicious" etc while, when there is violent activity on a rugby pitch , we are smothered in euphemisms such as "exchanging business cards", "getting to know one another", "friendly discussion", "difference of opinion" to name only a few.
I have heard those euphemisms in the past and in the last few weeks.
Woud you not agree that football commentators tell it like it is - more honestly - while eggball commentators water down the thuggery - people might get the wrong impression chaps - by using the eupemism cop out. You know that's true.

---

Ok here we go rugby issues:

Player eligibility
Developement of rugby in second and third tier rugby nations (i.e. those ranked from about 10 to 35)
Player poaching by southern hemisphere teams (New Zealand)
Proper competitions at all levels all over the world
Argentina, and their acceptance into the Tri-Nations or 6N
Eventually getting all countries onto a level and fair playing field
Player burnout.

About your thuggery and such comment- football is a game of limited physical contact, rugby is a full on contact sport, anyone who has played rugby will tell you this and I know from experience- if you're not in the game physically you're going to lose-that simple, you have to front up and let the oppostion know it's not going to be an easy ride, take this example- a year and a half ago my team played another school who had had a long bus journey and arrived late and therefore had little warmup time, we were fully ready and in the first few minutes over-powered them physically and won by about 60 points to nil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sirhamish

Let's forget about Howard, as a sportswriter/comic writer he's irrelevant, like his newspaper.

Not all criticisms indulge in cliches - again, that's cop out. They might be real facts, you know.

Not what I heard the rugby commentators say. They claimed that NZ had gone away from the Northern Hemisphere type of training and play which lost them World Cups - that's what was said lately by many, many commentators - most of them ex-players and coaches.

---

Point out to me a real rugby-related fact made on the first two pages of this thread (preferably not by you)...

You heard rugby commentators who were wrong, that simple

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sirhamish

Par 1 - stop dodging - this was a Dublin team I referred to and with Dublin players. Do I have to spell it out? Jesus.

Par 2 - What, in God's name, are you talking about.

4(a)
A perception that is fostered by far too many in the game and its cheerleaders in the media.
Let's give an example of good reporting, an Observer report a few years ago had an inteview with a rugby referee who had given up the game because of abuse from players and fans.500 referees left the game that season for the same reason. He said the days are gone when a referee could have a pint with the players afterwards as the atmosphere was now so unpleasant. Not my opinion - his. The fact that this might be considered a negative report on the game was the biggest shock - there are so few of them. Why?
The New Zealand captain was very sporting, wasn't he - immediately after the BOD incident and in his subsequent behavior.
Football example? Easy.
Paula de Canio when he grabbed a ball with the goal at his mercy following an injury to an opposing player - that happened in his West Ham days. In EVERY football game, players will tap the ball over the sideline in the event of injury and bang it back to the opposition on the restart.
Tenuous connection my ar$e - the murder was committed by players of a rugby club which, in South Africa,
has a history closely connected to the Broederbond/White South African supremacists and an attitude of racial superiority to Black people. If you think elistest, live elitest and play elitest then, it is inevitable that such actions will occur.
Also, remember the SA player RECENTLY who was dropped after refusing to share a room with a "kaffir" - his words not mine. He was only dropped after the media got word of it.
Also, a recent book by a Black member of the SA World Cup winning team thrashed the notion that the squad was a multi-racial harmonious outfit. He stated that he was treated as a second class citizen. His name escapes me at the moment. If I recall it, I'll edit it in. He was the first "big" Black star in SA eggball.
It's usually right wing nuts that label the "tenuous" tag on Michael Moore and his views - please don't allow yourself to be associated with them, even by accident. Then again, right wing, elitism??
4(B) - It is most certainly not irrelevant - it is elitism, pure and simple, to try and distance a sport from a tragedy. My point was on the Principal's response - he seemed to be more concerned with eggball's image. I'm well aware of the sensitive aspect regarding Brian Murphy. I concentrated on the game's defensive attitude, not the poor chap. The programme, itself, was one big PR cliche and you blame us..........?
I'm sure RTE have it on sale somewhere or maybe the IRFU shop.
All sports have a team ethic. Are you implying that rugby's theme ethic is superior to other sports - and you criticise those of us who, you claim, use cliches?? :rolleyes:

RTE NEVER mentioned the SA situation, above. Ditto the Irish newpapers. I wonder why? :rolleyes: Any and every situation where there is bad behaviour in football is a certainty for the sports programmes/sections. Of course bad behaiour should be highlighted BUT in ALL sports.
In fact, I get great satisfaction in seeing the likes of that moron Lee Bowyer getting blasted for his behaviour - I look forward to the day when he is transferred to his appropriate team eg Pentonville FC where, hopefully, he will have a 6ft 4in cellmate who'll make him his bitch. A pox on the likes of Steve Bruce in attempting to sign him. The sooner we rid the game of Bowyer, Dyer, Ashley Cole etc the better. See? We football fans have no problems criticising our game. Try it with eggball.
A cheerleading attitude, as opposed to a journalistic one, will ensure that one's sport escapes strong criticism.

---

1. I was merely pointing out, by use of anecdotal evidence, that you could be wrong

In paragraph 2, bad grammar annoys me, I was willing to let it go once but I felt I should correct you this time for your own benefit. I tend not to respect people who can't spell.

2. I wouldn't trust the Observer as far as I could throw the printing press on which it is fabricated.This problem isn't limited to rugby.

3. The captain (also the guy who saved Charvis' life), yes his behaviour was questionable but you still haven't provided an example of a footballer doing anything like what Marshall did and what others do.

4. Elitism to distance a sport from a tragedy? Did Brian Murphy die on a rugby pitch? How would you feel if your sport was seen to be full of murderers? I would prefer not to get involved with this as Brian Murphy used to go to my school and his family live extremely nearby and are geniunely nice people.

5. Sorry my order doesn't follow yours, So you're basically saying that because they were rugby players they were racists? Because rugby is elitist and that makes some sick freaks want to hunt black kids? Yeah, back in apartheid times the whites thought they were the sh!t, and they were filthy racists, SA is a f*****g basket case. I know a good few soccer players have had rape allegations against them, do I cast all soccer players as misogynistic? Or just accept that these players are in the minority? Face it- it's a horribly tenous connection- did these guys have jobs? or parents? or friends? why not blame their acts on this common denominator? As I have said before, rugby fans and journalist regularly criticise the game, I sure if you read tomorrow's London Sunday Times they will havea lot to say about it.

So you say football is a bigger sport but then criticise the fact that not as much news of rugby incidents achieves significant penetration in the media?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by el tk

1. Great, it happens, just like in soccer when players commit niggling fouls to prevent opposition players from getting around them, even to stop a rugby player in full flight, even by grabbing him around the waist can be difficult as his full momentum crashes into your body.

2. What the hell does that mean?

Ok, so you can go to 'more places' if you follow football, what do you achieve?

When was the last time you were able to, after an international match, go up to both sets of teams and coaches, talk to them and get autographs and photos etc.?

---

1 - Niggling fouls are illegal and punished. We still don't have the advantage of grabbing someone - concentration is on the ball. It's called skill.

2 - There are some places where football is not played - as you said. Dear God, why do I even bother.

3 Achieve? An appreciation/understanding of other cultures is a start. A raised awareness of the dreadful lived by many countries' citizens have. The sowing of seeds that will make people more agreeable to aid to countries. That's only the tip of the iceberg. Even the establishing of internet connections brtween fans of different countres - witness the banter here after the last two Irish internationals. Tourism also can benefit. Shame on you for even asking that question.

4. Still happens I believe. Fans also go out to Clontarf to get autographs and photographs with the players. Maybe you got them on a bad day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by el tk

Ok here we go rugby issues:

Player eligibility
Developement of rugby in second and third tier rugby nations (i.e. those ranked from about 10 to 35)
Player poaching by southern hemisphere teams (New Zealand)
Proper competitions at all levels all over the world
Argentina, and their acceptance into the Tri-Nations or 6N
Eventually getting all countries onto a level and fair playing field
Player burnout.

About your thuggery and such comment- football is a game of limited physical contact, rugby is a full on contact sport, anyone who has played rugby will tell you this and I know from experience- if you're not in the game physically you're going to lose-that simple, you have to front up and let the oppostion know it's not going to be an easy ride, take this example- a year and a half ago my team played another school who had had a long bus journey and arrived late and therefore had little warmup time, we were fully ready and in the first few minutes over-powered them physically and won by about 60 points to nil.

---

I'm not talking about "fronting up" and "aggressive game". I'm talking about punch ups, stamping on players' heads, biting fingers. After all, didn't you refer to discipline in the game??? There is no excuse, NONE, for violence - your above paragraph is, again, a cliche.
Thank heaven football is about skill - less chance players will end up in wheelchairs.
TBH I DO worry about the effects of heading the ball - remember Jeff Astle's "industrial injury".