RugbyRebels

sharvey44 wrote:So if the game gets called off and each team awarded 2 points that's us out..

Let's hope this isn't the case as that would not be fair in any way, I know how I'd feel if the shoe was on the other foot.

So seems to be a feeling wr going to cancel the eng and Scotland game.

While England and France are both qualified considering the armchair ride Japan have had with ref decisions finding anywhere for the Japan scotland game to play is a must for credibility.

WR will rightly have questions to answer if they can’t arrange transport for 46 players and coaches with 3 days notice. Would even say SRU could make a strong case for a big fat Cheque as the SRU would play on a community pitch if it gave them a chance at a quarter final.

Yeah I wouldn’t get your hopes up then.

We looked far more organised and fired up, particularly in the forwards and defence, which is great. A good few of the scores should have come a phase or two earlier o think. I’m not going to complain at getting over the line 9 times but it felt like it should have been about 15 if we were really accurate.

That seems horribly unfair on Russia who competed well in so many ways then would make a few horrendous defensive errors in a row.

whatisthejava wrote:WR will rightly have questions to answer if they can’t arrange transport for 46 players and coaches with 3 days notice.

Exactly, this talk about fan's safety is a red herring. If it isn't safe, don't let them come. After all, it is better for the fans to watch it on the TV than not at all.

It is pretty vital that this game goes ahead for a number of reasons.
1. Scotland deserve a fair crack at getting through
2. Japan deserve a crack at getting through without there always being an asterisk by the achievement
3. It should be a belting game
4. The fans deserve to see how good Japan really are

Certainly getting this game on should be a priority over the England/France match.

WR announcement at 4.00am BST

They can play both matches if they try. All you need is a stadium, some transport and a ref. Fans are a bonus but not needed. Could even say the same about TV if it really came to it. Conditions might not be great but it is better than not playing (and that applies to all the games). We do have a few days too. To be honest, playing in a park tomorrow would be fairer than calling it off.

Incidentally, the BBC and AccuWeather forecasts show a nice clear evening on Sunday.

Eng v Fra & NZ v Italy confirmed cancelled.

Aust v Georgia & Ireland v Samoa to go ahead.

Sco v Jpn (and other Sunday games) remain under review.

An embarrassment, a farce and also an extra advantage for Eng & Fra in the next round.

Natural disasters in that part of the world are inevitable at this time of year. To not have had a single f*cking viable contingency plan in place is an embarrassment.

Yeah I’m still not following the reason it’s not feasible to find an indoor stadium and have someone film it on their iphone.

This WC is just becoming a fuckin chore. I'm almost at the stage where I couldn't give a shit if we're out.

So long as the sheds and pitch, in fact so long as the pitch can be accessed safely without the risk of anything collapsing then there is no reason the game shouldn't go ahead.

It is also too simplistic to say ach England and France are through so it doesn't matter. It does matter as it impacts the draw for the next stage and semi.

Big D wrote:It is also too simplistic to say ach England and France are through so it doesn't matter. It does matter as it impacts the draw for the next stage and semi.

This

And Italy would have got hammered but the whole point of tournaments is people have a chance to overturn the odds

Cameo wrote:

Big D wrote:It is also too simplistic to say ach England and France are through so it doesn't matter. It does matter as it impacts the draw for the next stage and semi.

This

And Italy would have got hammered but the whole point of tournaments is people have a chance to overturn the odds

This.

If you're just going to assume the results, then why bother playing matches at all? I mean, it's not like Japan are going to beat Ireland or anything, is it?

Everyone can just stay at home and look at the World Rankings to decide who wins each game.

I don't actually care what happens with the Jap-Sco game now, the cancellation of the other games means, in my eyes, this World Cup has lost it's legitimacy as a sporting contest.

laribold wrote:

Cameo wrote:

Big D wrote:It is also too simplistic to say ach England and France are through so it doesn't matter. It does matter as it impacts the draw for the next stage and semi.

This

And Italy would have got hammered but the whole point of tournaments is people have a chance to overturn the odds

This.

If you're just going to assume the results, then why bother playing matches at all? I mean, it's not like Japan are going to beat Ireland or anything, is it?

Everyone can just stay at home and look at the World Rankings to decide who wins each game.

I don't actually care what happens with the Jap-Sco game now, the cancellation of the other games means, in my eyes, this World Cup has lost it's legitimacy as a sporting contest.

This times 100.

hugh_woatmeigh wrote:

laribold wrote:

Cameo wrote:
This

And Italy would have got hammered but the whole point of tournaments is people have a chance to overturn the odds

This.

If you're just going to assume the results, then why bother playing matches at all? I mean, it's not like Japan are going to beat Ireland or anything, is it?

Everyone can just stay at home and look at the World Rankings to decide who wins each game.

I don't actually care what happens with the Jap-Sco game now, the cancellation of the other games means, in my eyes, this World Cup has lost it's legitimacy as a sporting contest.

This times 100.

Really?

They haven't cancelled the matches just because they feel like it - it's a super typhoon! It's a natural disaster! I can't believe you're seriously suggesting that the entire tournament is worthless because NZ-Italy and England-France got called off in the face of something that's a hell of a lot bigger than a rugby game.

Puja

Puja wrote:

hugh_woatmeigh wrote:

laribold wrote:
This.

If you're just going to assume the results, then why bother playing matches at all? I mean, it's not like Japan are going to beat Ireland or anything, is it?

Everyone can just stay at home and look at the World Rankings to decide who wins each game.

I don't actually care what happens with the Jap-Sco game now, the cancellation of the other games means, in my eyes, this World Cup has lost it's legitimacy as a sporting contest.

This times 100.

Really?

They haven't cancelled the matches just because they feel like it - it's a super typhoon! It's a natural disaster! I can't believe you're seriously suggesting that the entire tournament is worthless because NZ-Italy and England-France got called off in the face of something that's a hell of a lot bigger than a rugby game.

Puja

I can and I do.

I also appreciate the magnitude and seriousness of the typhoon and neither am I suggesting that some games of rugby are more important.


Are you seriously suggesting that a World Cup whereby a number of crucial deciding qualifying games are simply chalked off and hugely affecting the following knock out games has the same level of legitimacy as one where that doesn't happen?

Puja wrote:

hugh_woatmeigh wrote:

laribold wrote:
This.

If you're just going to assume the results, then why bother playing matches at all? I mean, it's not like Japan are going to beat Ireland or anything, is it?

Everyone can just stay at home and look at the World Rankings to decide who wins each game.

I don't actually care what happens with the Jap-Sco game now, the cancellation of the other games means, in my eyes, this World Cup has lost it's legitimacy as a sporting contest.

This times 100.

Really?

They haven't cancelled the matches just because they feel like it - it's a super typhoon! It's a natural disaster! I can't believe you're seriously suggesting that the entire tournament is worthless because NZ-Italy and England-France got called off in the face of something that's a hell of a lot bigger than a rugby game.

Puja

Whilst I don't agree with the above assessment. It really isn't a good look for WR - natural disaster or not.

Rugby needs a suitably marked out field, players and officials. There is no reason these games couldn't be played elsewhere in Japan. This weather warning has been around for a few days now the necessary travel arrangements could have been made.

They could have stacked Saturdays games in Fukuoka. Sure the players may have faced less than ideal accommodation and travel but it could have been done.

laribold wrote:

Puja wrote:

hugh_woatmeigh wrote:
This times 100.

Really?

They haven't cancelled the matches just because they feel like it - it's a super typhoon! It's a natural disaster! I can't believe you're seriously suggesting that the entire tournament is worthless because NZ-Italy and England-France got called off in the face of something that's a hell of a lot bigger than a rugby game.

Puja

I can and I do.

I also appreciate the magnitude and seriousness of the typhoon and neither am I suggesting that some games of rugby are more important.


Are you seriously suggesting that a World Cup whereby a number of crucial deciding qualifying games are simply chalked off and hugely affecting the following knock out games has the same level of legitimacy as one where that doesn't happen?

That's a different question. Obviously, I'd prefer the two games to be played and obviously it would have more legitimacy if they were than if they weren't.

However, there's a big step from, "Not playing these games affects the tournament, even if it's very likely that they will go to the heavy favourites, as the underdogs deserve their chance," to "The entire competition is now worthless as an entity."

Puja

Puja wrote:

laribold wrote:

Puja wrote:
Really?

They haven't cancelled the matches just because they feel like it - it's a super typhoon! It's a natural disaster! I can't believe you're seriously suggesting that the entire tournament is worthless because NZ-Italy and England-France got called off in the face of something that's a hell of a lot bigger than a rugby game.

Puja

I can and I do.

I also appreciate the magnitude and seriousness of the typhoon and neither am I suggesting that some games of rugby are more important.


Are you seriously suggesting that a World Cup whereby a number of crucial deciding qualifying games are simply chalked off and hugely affecting the following knock out games has the same level of legitimacy as one where that doesn't happen?

That's a different question. Obviously, I'd prefer the two games to be played and obviously it would have more legitimacy if they were than if they weren't.

However, there's a big step from, "Not playing these games affects the tournament, even if it's very likely that they will go to the heavy favourites, as the underdogs deserve their chance," to "The entire competition is now worthless as an entity."

Puja

Question for you. Italy have been denied the chance to qualify. If in a contrived scenario NZ lost to SA without a LBP but Italy got a LBP against SA do you believe that WR would call off the NZ vs Italy game and have it as a draw with Italy going through? Without moving it elsewhere or finding wriggle room to do something?

Big D wrote:

Puja wrote:

laribold wrote:
I can and I do.

I also appreciate the magnitude and seriousness of the typhoon and neither am I suggesting that some games of rugby are more important.


Are you seriously suggesting that a World Cup whereby a number of crucial deciding qualifying games are simply chalked off and hugely affecting the following knock out games has the same level of legitimacy as one where that doesn't happen?

That's a different question. Obviously, I'd prefer the two games to be played and obviously it would have more legitimacy if they were than if they weren't.

However, there's a big step from, "Not playing these games affects the tournament, even if it's very likely that they will go to the heavy favourites, as the underdogs deserve their chance," to "The entire competition is now worthless as an entity."

Puja

Question for you. Italy have been denied the chance to qualify. If in a contrived scenario NZ lost to SA without a LBP but Italy got a LBP against SA do you believe that WR would call off the NZ vs Italy game and have it as a draw with Italy going through? Without moving it elsewhere or finding wriggle room to do something?

We'll sooner see pigs fly.

Puja wrote: However, there's a big step from, "Not playing these games affects the tournament, even if it's very likely that they will go to the heavy favourites, as the underdogs deserve their chance," to "The entire competition is now worthless as an entity."
Puja

Notwithstanding the shabby treatment of Italy (and the fairly patronising response from some quarters - but not you I hasten to add), France have a long and decent history of beating England, so to say England are even 'heavy favourites' is a pretty big exaggeration.

That result goes France's way and it's a totally different set of QFs, SFs and Finals. Just saying 'oh well, they were both qualified anyway' doesn't make it any better.

The sporting integrity of this World Cup has been radically altered by a massive typhoon and a seeming inability to have much in the way of any sort of contingency plans.

Big D wrote:Question for you. Italy have been denied the chance to qualify. If in a contrived scenario NZ lost to SA without a LBP but Italy got a LBP against SA do you believe that WR would call off the NZ vs Italy game and have it as a draw with Italy going through? Without moving it elsewhere or finding wriggle room to do something?

No, but that is a very different scenario from Italy needing to not only beat NZ for the first time, but to ensure that NZ don't get a bonus point without them getting one.

No-one is saying that the game is pointless or that Italy don't deserve to play or that it's not utterly rubbish that they're not playing (or, at least, they *shouldn't* be saying that). I am however questioning writing off the whole tournament as meaningless because of two games that probably wouldn't have affected qualification.

laribold wrote:

Puja wrote: However, there's a big step from, "Not playing these games affects the tournament, even if it's very likely that they will go to the heavy favourites, as the underdogs deserve their chance," to "The entire competition is now worthless as an entity."
Puja

Notwithstanding the shabby treatment of Italy (and the fairly patronising response from some quarters - but not you I hasten to add), France have a long and decent history of beating England, so to say England are even 'heavy favourites' is a pretty big exaggeration.

That result goes France's way and it's a totally different set of QFs, SFs and Finals. Just saying 'oh well, they were both qualified anyway' doesn't make it any better.

The sporting integrity of this World Cup has been radically altered by a massive typhoon and a seeming inability to have much in the way of any sort of contingency plans.

True, it could have been a different set of quarters, semis, and finals and who knows what the butterfly effect of that would've been. But if (massive if) England were to win the tournament by beating Australia, South Africa, and New Zealand, will we really be saying that it was futile because they might have lost to France and therefore might have faced Wales? Or (more likely), New Zealand win by beating Japan, England, and South Africa, will we say they weren't the best because it's possible that they might've faced France or Australia in the semi instead?

It is rubbish that this has happened. But there is still a lot of rugby to go and I don't regard this as invalidating the entire tournament past this point. Your mileage may vary.

Puja

Eng, France and NZ are getting a serious leg up here no doubt about it

Ridiculous that there is no contingency, it's not like Japan is low on infrastructure

Puja wrote:

Big D wrote:Question for you. Italy have been denied the chance to qualify. If in a contrived scenario NZ lost to SA without a LBP but Italy got a LBP against SA do you believe that WR would call off the NZ vs Italy game and have it as a draw with Italy going through? Without moving it elsewhere or finding wriggle room to do something?

No, but that is a very different scenario from Italy needing to not only beat NZ for the first time, but to ensure that NZ don't get a bonus point without them getting one.

No-one is saying that the game is pointless or that Italy don't deserve to play or that it's not utterly rubbish that they're not playing (or, at least, they *shouldn't* be saying that). I am however questioning writing off the whole tournament as meaningless because of two games that probably wouldn't have affected qualification.

I will watch and will call the winners world champions. It will not invalidate it for me. But the whole point of the tournament is everyone gets given an equal chance to prove they are the best. Italy were alive in the tournament then nothing more than a lack of organisation and flexibility has stopped them being given a chance no matter how small.

Japan had never beaten Ireland or South Africa until they did at the last two world cups.

Rugby needs a field, players and a ref. There are bound to be enough pitches in Japan between now and Sunday to have played these games even if behind closed doors.