RUGBY UNION

[yittz]

Thought I'd start a thread on rugby union, since the greatest event (after fifa world cup and olympics) is happening right now!!

I have an inkling feeling that I am the only one who gives a damn, anyone out there into the sport they play in heaven?

[dgfds01]

Thought I'd start a thread on rugby union, since the greatest event (after fifa world cup and olympics) is happening right now!!

I have an inkling feeling that I am the only one who gives a damn, anyone out there into the sport they play in heaven?

Calling it the Rugby World Cup greatest event after the FIFA World Cup and the Olympics is a bit optimistic considering how few countries even care about rugby. I read in a local paper that more countries bought TV rights to even the FIFA Women's World Cup, an event that few football fans even care about. Can't verify that for a fact but it does illustrate the overall lack of interest the world shows to rugby. The fact that it was once an upper class sport (as opposed to football) didn't do it any favours. It's only really massive in 3 nations - Australia, NZ, South Africa. It's big in some other countries as well - Argentina, England etc - but it's still overshadowed by football.

For the World Cup - the All Blacks will win of course. Italy still don't know what hit them.

[junny]

it does illustrate the overall lack of interest the world shows to rugby.

I don't think there's an overall lack of interest. Of course it can't rival the Olympics and football World Cup, but that doesn't mean it's not important or doesn't get the attention. It's a huge sporting event. The French seem to care about it more than they do football, and it's picking up interest in countries like Italy, Portugal and Japan, who traditionally were more into football and baseball respectively. People know of the All Blacks and Wallabies more than they know which is the No 1 women's football team. Newspapers don't necessarily give column space to women's football, but they will go big on the Rugby World Cup.

Maybe the Americans don't care too much, but I don't think that extends to the rest of the world. You'll be surprised by the amount of nations that do play rugby, whether league or union, sevens, even as a school sport. The Rugby World Cup is huge for sports fans. If you're a sports fan, you cannot not care about the Rugby World Cup.

[Moinllieon]

I don't think there's an overall lack of interest. Of course it can't rival the Olympics and football World Cup, but that doesn't mean it's not important or doesn't get the attention. It's a huge sporting event. The French seem to care about it more than they do football, and it's picking up interest in countries like Italy, Portugal and Japan, who traditionally were more into football and baseball respectively. People know of the All Blacks and Wallabies more than they know which is the No 1 women's football team. Newspapers don't necessarily give column space to women's football, but they will go big on the Rugby World Cup.

Maybe the Americans don't care too much, but I don't think that extends to the rest of the world. You'll be surprised by the amount of nations that do play rugby, whether league or union, sevens, even as a school sport. The Rugby World Cup is huge for sports fans. If you're a sports fan, you cannot not care about the Rugby World Cup.

If I recall correctly dgfds01 is British. So....

Rugby World Cup is huge in the same way World Baseball Classic, Cricket World Cup, or F1 are huge, in that they are the event in a rather niche sport. (Don't get me started on Women's World Cup ) I don't know if it is bigger than those other events, but it's definitely in the second tier of great sporting events. But to say "If you are a sports fan, you cannot not care about Rugby World Cup" is a bit extreme (well, except for denizens of certain nations).

[junny]

If I recall correctly dgfds01 is British. So....

Rugby World Cup is huge in the same way World Baseball Classic, Cricket World Cup, or F1 are huge, in that they are the event in a rather niche sport. (Don't get me started on Women's World Cup ) I don't know if it is bigger than those other events, but it's definitely in the second tier of great sporting events. But to say "If you are a sports fan, you cannot not care about Rugby World Cup" is a bit extreme (well, except for denizens of certain nations).

Rugby definitely receives more coverage and more attention than baseball and cricket. Rugby is certainly played in more schools around the world than baseball and cricket and is definitely gaining popularity in a big way. The Rugby World Cup is definitely big. Like I said, just because it's not big where you live, the US, doesn't mean it doesn't get the attention it deserves in the rest of the world. A lot more nations care about rugby than they do baseball and cricket, so don't ever call it a second-tier sport.

F1 is exclusive because of the lifestyle it caters to, not to mention the technicalities of the sport can bog the average person down.

[Moinllieon]

Rugby definitely receives more coverage and more attention than baseball and cricket. Rugby is certainly played in more schools around the world than baseball and cricket and is definitely gaining popularity in a big way. The Rugby World Cup is definitely big. Like I said, just because it's not big where you live, the US, doesn't mean it doesn't get the attention it deserves in the rest of the world. A lot more nations care about rugby than they do baseball and cricket, so don't ever call it a second-tier sport.

F1 is exclusive because of the lifestyle it caters to, not to mention the technicalities of the sport can bog the average person down.

But to say "If you are a sports fan, you cannot not care about Rugby World Cup" is a bit much. It has nothing to do with me being in America. Just because it's big where you live doesn't mean it gets the same attention in the rest of the world either. I'm not belittling rugby in any way, nor am I denying the Rugby World Cup is a big event, especially compared to more "American" sports. You should know better than most how little that means to me.

Put it this way, the lead story in the current bbc sports front page right now is the Cricket World Twenty20 tournament, followed by general football silliness, and only then does it get to the Rugby World Cup. Same with the guardian sports page. On the front page of La Gazzetta dello Sport, rugby news is relegated to WAY WAY down the page, below coverages of F1 (for obvious reasons), motorcycle racing, and basketball. The leading Portugese papers, a-bola and Record, both mentioned basketball more than rugby today.

Of course, football is so big in most nations that it squeezes everything else to second tier, but that's my point. Almost everything is second tier compared to football (and Olympics).

[dgfds01]

I don't think there's an overall lack of interest. Of course it can't rival the Olympics and football World Cup, but that doesn't mean it's not important or doesn't get the attention. It's a huge sporting event. The French seem to care about it more than they do football, and it's picking up interest in countries like Italy, Portugal and Japan, who traditionally were more into football and baseball respectively. People know of the All Blacks and Wallabies more than they know which is the No 1 women's football team. Newspapers don't necessarily give column space to women's football, but they will go big on the Rugby World Cup.

Ok, I'll admit women's football was an extreme example but I wanted to use it to make a point. Like I said, I can't verify the accuracy of the facts quoted. That said, this newspaper is from a rugby-mad country, who finds it hard believing that anything could be put above rugby.

All Blacks yes, they're pretty much a global brand name now. A massive achievement when compared to say, the brand name of Manchester United. The Wallabies are another matter, and don't even mention the Springboks. I believe you live in Singapore? Walk down the street and ask people at random whether they've heard of the Wallabies. I'll bet not many - that's certainly the case in Malaysia anyway. While most people have heard about the All Blacks, lots of them don't know the rules of rugby and some don't even know which country they're from (a friend once told me England ).

If you're a sports fan, you cannot not care about the Rugby World Cup.

Oh yes you can. Just like some sports fans couldn't care two hoots about the FIFA World Cup.

Of course, football is so big in most nations that it squeezes everything else to second tier, but that's my point. Almost everything is second tier compared to football (and Olympics).

Which was my point to begin with.

If I recall correctly dgfds01 is British. So....

Malaysian. Which is why I still don't get cricket and quite likely never will. But studying/living in New Zealand, without which I'll probably have barely come across rugby.

[yittz]

"The tournament is considered to be one of the largest international sporting events in the world, with only the FIFA World Cup and the Summer Olympics being paramount to it."

I got that from wiki - not sure how reliable it is. There were some over zealous advertising on my behalf. Really, only 3 nations consider union their national sport (nz, wales and one other? guess RSA, though soccer is huge there), and only 5 nations can truely win it (vs say soccer).

Only All blacks and Springboks have a real chance this time round. No doubt ABs are the favourites, but they potentially have to beat 3 top sides (France, Australia then South Africa) to win it after being in such a weak pool. They have the best scrum, that can only be matched by RSA, England, possibly France and George Gregan; best backrow, although McCaw will be under scrutiny of referees; and best backline only matched by Australia. What's worrying is their lineout - ABs lost 4 locks now? as well as their middle combination that Mortlock seem to tear apart at will.

South Africa have a mean forward pack and an easy road in, appears to be the only side that can topple ABs.

[Moinllieon]

Malaysian. Which is why I still don't get cricket and quite likely never will. But studying/living in New Zealand, without which I'll probably have barely come across rugby.

Why did I think Malaysian? I'm getting old....

Cricket is actually quite interesting, it appeals to me like baseball appeals to me (which makes sense considering the similarities).

What is the big sport in Malaysia anyways? I'm tempted to say badminton but then that's more Indonesian...

Oh, I know! Manchester United! That's the biggest sport in Malaysia!

[Moinllieon]

"The tournament is considered to be one of the largest international sporting events in the world, with only the FIFA World Cup and the Summer Olympics being paramount to it."

I got that from wiki - not sure how reliable it is. There were some over zealous advertising on my behalf. Really, only 3 nations consider union their national sport (nz, wales and one other? guess RSA, though soccer is huge there), and only 5 nations can truely win it (vs say soccer).

Only All blacks and Springboks have a real chance this time round. No doubt ABs are the favourites, but they potentially have to beat 3 top sides (France, Australia then South Africa) to win it after being in such a weak pool. They have the best scrum, that can only be matched by RSA, England, possibly France and George Gregan; best backrow, although McCaw will be under scrutiny of referees; and best backline only matched by Australia. What's worrying is their lineout - ABs lost 4 locks now? as well as their middle combination that Mortlock seem to tear apart at will.

South Africa have a mean forward pack and an easy road in, appears to be the only side that can topple ABs.

No love for the Wallabies? I'll admit my knowledge of rugby is elementary but isn't the Wallabies considered the second best team after the All Blacks going into the tournament? What makes you think the Springboks are more likely to succeed other than the easier path to the final?

[dgfds01]

Why did I think Malaysian? I'm getting old....

Cricket is actually quite interesting, it appeals to me like baseball appeals to me (which makes sense considering the similarities).

What is the big sport in Malaysia anyways? I'm tempted to say badminton but then that's more Indonesian...

Oh, I know! Manchester United! That's the biggest sport in Malaysia!

The only thing I fnd really interestingabout cricket is how the British describe it. All those ins and outs and the play on words. Trust the Brits to come up with something like that. My problem with cricket is that it's too long, I'm not quite sure how some people can follow a game religiously for days. I've heard that on-day cricket is more exciting but I've never tried watching it.

Baseball is fun to play but boring to watch.

The biggest sports in Malaysian are badminton (to play) and football (to watch, but only EPL). Almost everyone has picked up a racket at sme point in their lives. Indonesia are our traditional badmintn rivals and things have been know to get pretty intense when we meet, though not in the recent years thanks to China's domination. As for football, one English guy once told me about how he got of the plane in Malaysia only to see the biggest Liverpool FC poster he'd ever seen in hs life - and he's from Liverpool!

Manchester United isn't the biggest these days. They've been overtaken by Chelsea and Arsenal, or so I hear. Glory hunters! Then again, some might have come back after last season...

[dgfds01]

"The tournament is considered to be one of the largest international sporting events in the world, with only the FIFA World Cup and the Summer Olympics being paramount to it."

I got that from wiki - not sure how reliable it is. There were some over zealous advertising on my behalf. Really, only 3 nations consider union their national sport (nz, wales and one other? guess RSA, though soccer is huge there), and only 5 nations can truely win it (vs say soccer).

Only All blacks and Springboks have a real chance this time round. No doubt ABs are the favourites, but they potentially have to beat 3 top sides (France, Australia then South Africa) to win it after being in such a weak pool. They have the best scrum, that can only be matched by RSA, England, possibly France and George Gregan; best backrow, although McCaw will be under scrutiny of referees; and best backline only matched by Australia. What's worrying is their lineout - ABs lost 4 locks now? as well as their middle combination that Mortlock seem to tear apart at will.

South Africa have a mean forward pack and an easy road in, appears to be the only side that can topple ABs.

Well Yittz, I suspect you're the most knowledgeable on this forum when it comes to rugby. Time for me to reveal my ignorance. I know next to nothing about the technicalties of the game and very few players. My ruby knowledge comes from news headlines and bit and pieces of games watched.

About the ABs being favourites - they've been favourites in about every World Cup but have only won it once. So who's to say what the favourites tag actually does. But there's definately a huge amount of pressure. (I hope that they'll win but there's also a nasty side to me that doesn't want to see it happen. If they do, the Kiwis will go so absolutely mad that I'll be so sick of the word 'rugby'. Lord of the Rings was bad enough...)

The next match against Portugal will be a washout. Whether they'll win the Cup or not will depend on whether they can sort out their lineout. McCaw gave the team a scare a couple of days ago. A couple of injured players have been declared fit. So we'll see...

One thing about the Rugby World Cup - so much of it seems pointless. The competition could quite easily have been held with half the number of team, if not less, with no loss. It's pretty much a waste of time playing with teams like Portugal and Japan. I don't think any other World Cup has such one-sided matches.

But anyway, I'll add to Moin's question - what makes you so sure it'll be the Springboks?

[Moinllieon]

The only thing I fnd really interestingabout cricket is how the British describe it. All those ins and outs and the play on words. Trust the Brits to come up with something like that. My problem with cricket is that it's too long, I'm not quite sure how some people can follow a game religiously for days. I've heard that on-day cricket is more exciting but I've never tried watching it.

Baseball is fun to play but boring to watch.

The biggest sports in Malaysian are badminton (to play) and football (to watch, but only EPL). Almost everyone has picked up a racket at sme point in their lives. Indonesia are our traditional badmintn rivals and things have been know to get pretty intense when we meet, though not in the recent years thanks to China's domination. As for football, one English guy once told me about how he got of the plane in Malaysia only to see the biggest Liverpool FC poster he'd ever seen in hs life - and he's from Liverpool!

Manchester United isn't the biggest these days. They've been overtaken by Chelsea and Arsenal, or so I hear. Glory hunters! Then again, some might have come back after last season...

You can try the newer Twenty20 version of cricket that's going on right now. The rules for that have been changed so that a match should be about 3 hours long. Much more offensive too.

So I was right about badminton huh? I thought it was a more regional thing. And China's getting good at it now? Who knew? More medals next year I guess.

I remember Manchester United had to cancel a recent tour of Malaysia or something because of the Asian Cup. So that's why I figured they are the most popular.

What is interesting is that, by a wide margin, Arsenal is the most popular team in America. Manchester United has better brand recognition, but all the American fans pick Arsenal. It's quite disconcerting if you ask me.

[dgfds01]

You can try the newer Twenty20 version of cricket that's going on right now. The rules for that have been changed so that a match should be about 3 hours long. Much more offensive too.

Never heard of it. Will give it a try if I come across it.

So I was right about badminton huh? I thought it was a more regional thing. And China's getting good at it now? Who knew? More medals next year I guess.

Yep. It's pretty much an Asian sport anyway. The only non-Asians who take it seriously are Denmark and to a certain extent England.
China's been big at badminton for years, created some legends in the 80s. They won 3 gold medals at the last Olympics. They used to have some weaknesses (men's doubles) but now that it's been taken care of, they're darn near unstoppable. Lots of fans complain about boring tournaments nowadays with Chinese players dominating every category.

I remember Manchester United had to cancel a recent tour of Malaysia or something because of the Asian Cup. So that's why I figured they are the most popular.

They are extremely popular. And also extremely good at marketing, something I believe, you pointed out a couple of year back. They were the first to start touring to Asia.

What is interesting is that, by a wide margin, Arsenal is the most popular team in America. Manchester United has better brand recognition, but all the American fans pick Arsenal. It's quite disconcerting if you ask me.

Well, Arsenal is a good team. The play beautiful football and have a really talented crop of young players. Much the same reason why I was attracted to Man Utd back in the 90s. Gotta hand it to Wenger, I don't like him much but I have to admit he did a fantastic job with turning a boring team into one of the most entertaining ones in the Premiership.

And now I'll stop hijacking Yittz's thread.

[yittz]

Haha, it's ok. So far it's a 3 man thread .

On Springboks: they have a fearsome forward pack. There lineout is the best, so they will keep kicking the ball out and watch Matfield do his thing. Their backline is ok - their wings are exciting, but the rest don't really have that much flair though with good defence.

Wallabies don't have a scrum and don't have replacements in key spots. I am an AB fan, 2003's nightmare still lingers.

Rugby isn't really global eh - could really halve the number of teams, but you want the game to grow. I assume soccer started in a similar fashion, but nowadays almost any national team has a chance to topple any other.

On cricket - the best was summer test matches while studying or cleaning or painting. Entertainment is great in 20/20, but it destroys the strategy and the balling side of the true form of cricket.

Both rugby and cricket requires understanding of the rules in order to enjoy it. Or else rugby seems too much eh male to male contact, and cricket is just a 5 day garden bowls.