Rugby World Cup 2007

[Darren]

What the rugby world cup should NOT be, is the be-all and end-all of rugby. It has its place, and test series have their place. Three years of test series should not be a sideshow to the world cup.

I absolutely agree with this. I'm sure a lot of people get excited about a world cup, I would have thought it was only the casual rugby spectator who sees it as the be all and end all?

It's all good to watch, but as a Wallabies supporter, the best thing about a world cup is those matches where we beat those dirty All Blacks or Sprinboks - and the poms too I guess.

A Bledisloe or TriNations win tastes at least as good - and we get it every year.

If you wish the debate to be lowered to personal insult, you will have to conduct it by yourself.

Exile's been living in Sydney too long...

Rugby fans are a different breed, for the better IMHO!!

I'd like to think so too - but that's mostly coz I'm a rugby fan ...

[Sagerian]

I'm not sure how many people consider the world cup to be the be all and end all of world rugby. Possibly just those that are casual fans of the sport (or of course the fans of the current holder, but only to use as an excuse when losing games). However you can't underestimate it's importance (or any tournament that only comes around once every 4 years).

It's laughable to make it seem as though players or coaches do not take every single test seriously and that tours aren't given their due respect. But the rugby world cup SHOULD be and IS the ultimate goal. It doesn't take away from other trophies but it is the ULTIMATE achievement in rugby.

been living in Sydney too long...

Hey!

[Darren]

been living in Sydney too long...

Hey!

Not having a go at you Sage, you're born and bred - you have built up tolerance, poor Exile is a defenceless west aussie in a harsh, harsh land....

[Sagerian]

Hehe all good mate, I can take a joke anyway.

[Burgs]

Yes, those are all things the rugby world cup should be. What the rugby world cup should NOT be, is the be-all and end-all of rugby. It has its place, and test series have their place. Three years of test series should not be a sideshow to the world cup.

I agree with others above that I don't think that the RWC is seen as the be-all and end-all of Rugby. You just have to look at the build up and passion surrounding the Lions Tour to NZ or the sudden upsurge in interest and commentary on the Bledisloe compared to the three previous fixtures.
However, what the RWC does offer is a four yearly focal point to ensure the best possible XV's are running out for each country at the same time rather than the less competitive out of season touring between Northern and Southern Hemisphere teams. Until the code establishes a global season, the RWC is as close as we can come to comparing apples with apples.
To me, a comparison can be made with Athletics, every years’ World Champion, in say the Men’s 100m or the Marathon, is special and should be celebrated however, the Olympic Champion is just that little more special. It doesn't make the World Champions any less important but the Olympic Champion knows that every person competing was peaking for that one in four year opportunity to join the immortals.
A Test Tour will always be only decided between two Nations, invariably with one out of season. More competitive is the Tri Nations and Six Nations, with their larger pool of talent competing. It is obvious that the only way that the pecking order can be determined is by holding a joint event of all nations and that is then of greater prestige and far harder and therefore valued to win.
I agree with Sage that it may be the case for "the casual fans of the sport", but if a person is serious about their Rugby they can celebrate every single fixture on it's own merits, regardless if that is the Rugby World Cup, the Bledisloe, the Lions Tour, Round 3 of the WA Fourths, a PSA match or a Golden Oldies jogathon.
That will always be the beauty and the heart and the soul of Rugby, not what may or may not lay behind the selection decisions for certain Test matches with an eye on the ultimate prize.
If the RWC does nothing more than attract more fans to become supporters and players with us of this magnificent sport then that is reward enough.

[Jess]

well said sage! that was some really brilliant writing too! you have a flair for it.
This has been one very interesting debate.

[tragic]

I don't think the RWC is the be-all and end-all of rugby, but it was the tournament that got me into rugby in the first place. I went from being a "casual" observer to going it alone in my WF membership because the manbeast couldn't c-c-c-commit.

The RWC is a great spectacle and promotes its game in the same way that any large international competition does. I also love watching the minnows games - when else do we ever get to see these guys play? And play with such enthusiasm and joy just to be there? Who doesn't remember the crowd's adoption of Japan's team last time around? Great stuff, IMHO.

[The InnFORCEr]

Who would have thought the the words Rugby World Cup would spark such debate? Most times I hear the words the first thing that comes to mind are the memories. Like many have already mentined watch and supporting Georgia here during 2003 was amazing ("There's only one Georgia, There's only one Georgia, walking along, singing a song, walking in a Georgian wonderland. (louder) There's only one Georgia...............), the atmosphere on the streets of Sydney during the final week again amazing. The banter between Poms and Wallabies on game day, fantastic, to see Darling Harbour a wash of white (and red) and having to walk right through it to get to our boat was probably the most daunting part of the cup, I reckon the only time there were more Poms in Sydney harbour was when Captain Cook and the First Fleet arrived! The emotion of heading to extra time in the final, what a way to finish a Rugby World Cup (no penalty shoot out here!) albiet not the way I had hoped. In my opinion I believe the Rugby World Cup is the pinnicle of representitive Rugby and ALL palyers world wide would strive to be part of (even if it means missing International matches in the lead up), the global stage has to No1.

However in saying all of that a Bledisloe Cup match has so much history and tradition between Us and Them that many players (especially pre RWC palyers) would consider a Bledisloe match to be the No1 for a Wallaby or All Black.

I think that the Tri Nations and Six Nations suit the Rugby world for the moment, which does beg the quetsion...how will that change? As many before have suggested without a Rugby World Cup every 4 years we would barely be able to see the 2nd and 3rd teir teams play let alone provide them with the funds to improve form a grass roots level. I would like to see more of these 2nd and 3rd tier countires playing our Australia A and Junior All Blacks to minimise blow out scores and to give them a sniff and I guess to have them return or welcome us abroad.

[Happy]

so we're pretty much all in favour of world rugby ever four years!!

[Weebie]

Lads with regards to RWC tickets they are on Sale and ahve been for sometime don't waste your money on stupid travel packages.

I got tix 2 All Wallaby matches including Wales and Both Quarter Finals, Play-off and Semi final 1 (hopefully All blacks Vs Wallabys) all i need now is Final and Semi 2 even though i can only stay in France for 2 weeks.

www.rugbyworldcup.com

[Sagerian]

well said sage! that was some really brilliant writing too! you have a flair for it.
This has been one very interesting debate.

Oh really? I thought it was pretty ordinary but I'm very flattered now. *blush*

[rick boyd]

I can see we have plenty of true believers here who enjoy the world cup for the great festival of rugby that it is, but still value test series and other competitions such as the Bledisloe Cup. This is as it should be, in my opinion.

Expressions of such sentiment will console me next time I see a newspaper report saying how this or that coach is sending a development team somewhere thinly disguised as the national XV to encourage depth and prepare that nation to "peak for the next world cup".

Once upon a time (when I had long, flowing locks and could slip down that touchline like a startled gazelle) such a sentiment would have been greeted with horror. The national jersey was a thing to be treasured and envied, and only to be worn by those athletes that had earned the honour by being the very best in their position in the nation. The only first choice players who failed to make any test selection home or away, were those out injured.

I am delighted to hear from supporters that have been drawn to rugby through the great carnival of international rugby that is the world cup. This is exactly what it was designed for.

My fear is only that the world cup will become the only important prize in rugby, which is not a good thing. Not good for the balance of the game, and not sensible when you consider the structure of the competition.

You may not agree with this, my fellow rugby afficiandos, but the world cup was not designed to find the best team in world rugby. It was designed to be a great festival of the sport that would culminate in a final, from which would emerge a winner.

Consider this: what is the fairer way of finding the better of two teams -- by a three-test series, or a single one-off game?

Of course we will all agree, the three test series will determine the better team more accurately. Flukes are less likely to influence the result and if a team isn't good enough to win the best out of three then they can't complain about coming second.

Then think about the world cup. After the quarter finals, pretty much the same nations get to contest the semi-finals and there is no best from three. A fluke result can knock a country out of the world cup and the eventual winner is just as likely to have gained the position through good luck as good management.

Arguably the 2003 world cup was the first time the favourite had ever won a rugby world cup, and even they have been hopeless ever since. World champion for four years? The concept is silly.

England deserved their rugby world cup win, and full marks to them. They have their place in the history books and a full share of the glory of the event. But to imagine the title confers any greater honour then a festival cup does not make sense.

The world cup may be the highest profile event in world rugby, but it should not be the only important thing in world rugby. And reading most of the comments in TWF, I am heartened to see that despite what the media say, grass roots fans clearly do not regard it as such.

[.X.]

If you wish the debate to be lowered to personal insult, you will have to conduct it by yourself.

If I was to personally insult you Mr Boyd, I would have called you a **** or a ***** or perhaps even a ****%^$#.

Clearly I didnt do that.

What I did do was question your need to put down a sporting event that as been shown in this thread members of TWF are passionate about.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion Mr Boyd, but such open ended statements demand clarity so that they do not upset people like me.

your most recent post certainly clarrifies your position, a shame you didnt do that in the first place. would have made everything clear if you had of stated your full opinion from the start.

[Flamethrower]

****%^$# Wow!! Thats a real stinger.

[Em-Forcer]

Thanks Jess, I'm really quite rusty on my french however Happy and his babelfish got it pretty much right.

I would love to travel however work commitments make it difficult.

J'aimerais voyager en France, cependant des engagements de travail le rendent difficile.

Happy to offer my services as guide/translator! Very reasonable rates.

Reckon I'll try to get tix for the Murrayfield matches when singles go on sale... it'd be rude not to!