ruckingkiwi says...

Dingbat,

You're right, I have no idea where you live but making a reference to something is not an accusation, you being married to a barrister should know this.

Also , as most barristers should know, you need to research your material before providing it as evidence - with regards to the statements you use "I cannot say if there was match-fixing without facts to prove it." - This is a wise statement - Henry has no evidence, so he should not say anything!,

These were words of a former Springbok coach :)

Posted 22:08 03rd August 2012

Rosbif says...

@Stellenbosched2. you're so right! we've all had those moments methinks (certainly I recognise the blood pressure bit you refer to). Important that we all keep calm and enjoy the global community and share the banter. PR at its best can be very good indeed. It's up to us all to keep it that way, as you say!

:-)

Posted 14:24 03rd August 2012

Stellenbosched2 says...

Hi Rosbif,

I am sure you didn't mean anything by using the words 'digging', 'stirring', and 'fingers' in such close proximity.

Don't worry, I'm not stirring at all. After reading all the posts on this story I figured the best thing to do is sit back and shake my head. It's like two wind-up toy boxers hitting each other. As I am typing this no doubt both sides are gearing up to have another go at each other, bringing EXACTLY the same arguments and bitchy comments to the fight.

I am not sitting in judgement by the way-I used to behave in the same manner. What made me change was the realisation that I wasn't enjoying the magic of rugby and the fun of reading PR's stories and interacting with rugby fans from across the world. I changed to a one-man defence system protecting South Africa. Instead of reading the stories I would rush through looking for any mention of SA, and check whether there was a negative slant in any way. There went the blood pressure if I felt there was a slight. As things stand only Richard Anderson can still get me going, but I assume he is a Pom after all, so I should expect that type of baiting.

Posted 12:18 03rd August 2012

Rosbif says...

@7ton. one of the most balanced, considered and coherent posts I have seen on the whole topic (although I accept we have strayed somewhat from the original article on GH).

I hope next year's NZ-Fra 3-test series is a cracker, with no digging up of the past, and no stirring in the media. Fingers crossed.

Meanwhile, go well in the RC! (but I will still be cheering Freddie and the Sharks tmw)

Peace :-)

Posted 11:08 03rd August 2012

ruckingkiwi says...

"he suspected match fixing".

OK Dingbat, maybe that is the basis for being guilty in your country but the rest of the world works differently.

In my opinion Henry has done right.

He has written a book on his career.

What kind of person would he be if he missed out an important part of one of the most important matches of his entire career?

The match statistics didn't add up in his opinion. He thought something may have been amiss. In the end nothing came of it. Nothing.

He is merely retelling his thoughts from that time.

Simple.

On the other hand.. who said this?

"I cannot say if there was match-fixing without facts to prove it. But people are entitled to their opinions and they can make up their own minds."

Posted 00:59 03rd August 2012

new_j4a says...

@kitsch, time to lighten up on the French hate thing....okay to have a go in the heat of the moment when everyone is slinging insults at each other, at refs, etc....but its nearly a year ago now. If you carry on, you'll begin to believe the sh!t you are spouting. Save a little animosity for the next time they beat you...as they surely will in that infuriatingly French way.

Posted 19:55 02nd August 2012

Toulousain says...

@7ton. a good point. and asked in a reasonable way. it is indeed the most serious affront to befall someone on the field. having the wherewithal to put it behind you and fulfill media duties so soon after the whistle, given the intensity of emotion on winning etc etc is surely asking too much. In any event, I am not a big fan of the immediate camera-in-face-on-sidelines type of interview (although some might say McCaw has not exactly mastered the art of diplomacy in other such interviews!)

Having said that, no other players shaking hands (did they ALL know about McCaw?), doing a victory haka, getting Dusautoir's name wrong, wandering around the stadium making strange duck-hand gestures at the French bench (Dagg anyone?), then hounding the team out of their hotel the next day (after having moved them around 3 hotels during their stay), and jeering the bus practically all the way to the airport (remember: all this was before any of the Rougerie video-nasty had been aired - and the circumstances surrounding the airing are themselves hardly salubrious)...... What's the explanation for that?

Can you blame the French for feeling like something stuck to the bottom of NZers shoes?

Posted 16:53 02nd August 2012

amaboko says...

I remember that quarter final in 2007. It was a magnificent game. The French played like hell, the ab`s got surprised and attacked with much intent, but not much direction. Just like the boks generally do when their game plan doesn`t work. The blacks lost, not because of the imaginary forward pass, but because they underestimated their opponent. It`s a very common flaw, for all southern hemisphere teams.

Posted 14:36 02nd August 2012

APV1 says...

@ BokAvenger - your comments are censored because you're a wally.

@ new_j4a - I like to use "twrep", "berk" and "wally", as I feel they are all underused. It's aklso difficult for the recipient to get too uset, as they are such childish words. But in BA's case, childish seemed appropriate.

@ porridge_time - how very dare you suggest that I have "crappy" comments. All of mine are well thought-through, intelectual and based on nothing but facts. Never opinions, banter nor wind-up shall ever fly from my keyboard.

Honest!

;-)

Posted 11:26 02nd August 2012

Toulousain says...

@Rosbif: thanks for your reply!

@Kitch: interesting you choose to pick up Marc Lievremont's own words when describing his team. Like that's somehow an excuse. The point is you're the one who believes this stuff and has been bothered to go find it to cut and paste it! (This is the same ML, not a great English speaker I might add, who was hounded, day in, day out, by the NZ press for sound-bites, and who was trying to find ways to gee up his players). Like Martin Johnson's reference to "rugby player drinks beer - shocker" is somehow a reflection on him, his team, or his nation's character traits. No it's not.

I like your point re the begrudging respect the French earned in the final. Not enough, apparently, to warrant a hand-shake, a mention by your captain in the after match speech, a correct identification of our captain's name by your post-match TV interviewer, or any kind of post-match grace in the press. Just a witch-hunt and national stereotyping. No wonder all those neutrals have come out in support of France. Which, I guess, just makes you more angry?

Posted 09:06 02nd August 2012