2003 World Cup: Australia Namibia REQUEST

[Big Ewis]

Of course I don't like humiliation, in ANY circumstances wtsever, I'll always try to make things as gracious and humble n all that...but I ain't playin, I'm just watchin behind my TV set.
Tight games are by far the most exciting ones, no doubt - it's just that those monster blowouts are a huge amount of fun !!...it's a different kind of fun, and you ought to relax about it Little Guy, I mean, just take it for what it is...not EVERYTHING in rugby is that serious !!
I mean when I've just come on to watch and it's 10min gone and I see a team up 23-0 or somethin, I start rubbing my hands tbh !! It's just hilarious to watch !! I wouldn't laugh at the players ever ever, but that's just a totally different story...I'm a spectator, I have my right to entertainment whichever way it happens naturally: and monster blowouts make me crack up, spontaneously !...even when it's France (well, sometimes...).

 

[LittleGuy]

:lol:

Didn't realize we actually had a team. Could have gone the rest of my life without knowing that fact.

I read it in a random sports facts book about ten years ago. I'm guessing the New Zealand team had difficulty skating with that kind of score line, thats about a goal a minute and it takes some time to do faceoffs and the goalie must have made some saves just by having his body in the way surely. It smashed our record of a 40 something win the 40's.

@ Yoe I guess it isn't the end of the world but I feel badly when it happens to amateur's like the Namibian guys or kids teams that are simply totally outclassed(though the overeaction these days of refusing to show high scorelines is just as absurd.) When it happens to professionals it isn't nearly as bad as often they have given up and they are still receiving compensation for their efforts whethere they win or lose by 150.

 

[psychic duck]

Nah these matches are **** to watch.

From the look of that highlight video it looked like basically an unopposed training session. Australia weren't even running that fast or doing anything particularly special.

People want as little of these games in the RWC as possible for a reason.

Only a mean hearted twat would purposefully want sides obviously so much weaker to get as thrashed as possible.

 

[nickdnz]

I'm always mixed to be honest. For example - I enjoyed New Zealand v Ireland 60-0. Not because Ireland got humiliated - but because the result came on the back of some exciting, expansive rugby in which players showed what they are capable of when they perform near their best (Hosea Gear's try for example was a brilliant piece of individual skill). I personally find it enjoyable to watch my sporting heroes perform well - or even another team perform some magic rugby - All Blacks v England this year was one of our heaviest defeats of all time - but it was done in an attractive way, so despite not relishing the result or scoreline - I think it was probably a more enjoyable game than many of the All Blacks tighter victories.

But at the same time - I see your point, especially in regards to professional v amature teams. Like anyone, Namibia in 2003 were trying to represent their country and to go down 142 points seems like an unnessecery humiliation which probably does more harm for the sport in Namibia than good (1995 AB's v Japan is credited with hurting the game in Japan significantly).

At the same time I can't blame the players at all. It may suck to see Australia's 'B' side destroy Namibia, but the reality is that there would have been players in that team whose only oppertunity to get a look in for the bigger tests was through that game, so being a bit of a bully is pretty much what you have to do. And then there are players like Mark Ellis who play the bully too much and score 6 tries through selfish play which hurts their career.

Personally I've played in teams which have put 80+ points on other teams because our 1st XV was placed in a too low devision (which we won undefeated). I don't think there was a time where I ever really felt guilty of it - we were representing our school to the best of our ability and as a team we worked really hard to get to where we were. It wasn't about humiliating the other team, it was about doing our best and playing like the score was always 0-0, which I think shows a bit of respect to be honest. So yeah, I'm always in two minds on this issue.

 

[psychic duck]

I'm always mixed to be honest. For example - I enjoyed New Zealand v Ireland 60-0. Not because Ireland got humiliated - but because the result came on the back of some exciting, expansive rugby in which players showed what they are capable of when they perform near their best (Hosea Gear's try for example was a brilliant piece of individual skill). I personally find it enjoyable to watch my sporting heroes perform well - or even another team perform some magic rugby - All Blacks v England this year was one of our heaviest defeats of all time - but it was done in an attractive way, so despite not relishing the result or scoreline - I think it was probably a more enjoyable game than many of the All Blacks tighter victories.

But at the same time - I see your point, especially in regards to professional v amature teams. Like anyone, Namibia in 2003 were trying to represent their country and to go down 142 points seems like an unnessecery humiliation which probably does more harm for the sport in Namibia than good (1995 AB's v Japan is credited with hurting the game in Japan significantly).

That's different though as you were a supporter of the All Blacks, and also 100+ thrashing takes it to a different level to the one you referred.

New Zealand are guaranteed to thrash Africa 1 in RWC 2015, probably by over 90 or 100 at a minimum, I reckon as an All Blacks fan and you had the chance to watch your team for one match at the RWC, that NZL vs Africa 1 would be bottom of the list.

In those 100+ point matches, the latter stages of them just get borign once the opposition is demoralised and it's less about skill and running rugby as you put above, and more about waltzing through. I don't think I would put that in the category of "hilarious" and "rubbing hands with glee", nor would most fans hence why most want these nations to improve. Thankfully during the last RWC, other than games with Namibia or where Japan, USA and Romania played second sides against other nations, there is gradually getting fewer of those games.

It's also worth remembering as well during RWC's sides like Namibia and other get half the rest time (it was actually much worse for Tier 2 nations in 2003 compared to 2011 even though there was a big fuss last time round), and also have rested their best team for a match they would have a better chance of winning (like Namibia did in 2003, and Japan do every RWC against the likes of NZL or AUS).

 

[usausa]

Edit: Also it looks like I was wrong on the details of the Seattle game since I only saw the final 5 minutes after the other game I was watching ended, but if the coack was criticized in the media here than it dosen't at all go against the point I'm making about the mentality being different. Bellichek also got a lot of heat during the Patriots 16-0 season for doing the same thing and I think it was a reason so many people were hoping the Giants would beat them in the Super Bowl.

Belichick does indeed take a lot of heat for not pulling his starters when the game is well in hand, even Patriots fans get annoyed because it runs the risk of injury, and I believe that is how Gronkowski got his injury.

They also have the biggest ever win in International Ice Hockey history a 58-0 win over New Zealand in 1987.

That is the biggest win at the senior men's level.
At the 1998 Asia-Pacific U18 Championships, South Korea ran up a 92-0 scoreline on Thailand. I believe the Koreans took 176 shots to Thailand's 2 (or 4?)...I have the gamesheet somewhere, I think I left it at school when I came home for school break.
After Japan and South Korea tied earlier in the tournament, the ***le came down to goal differential. With Japan beating Thailand 58-0 in the opening match. Entering the South Korea-Thailand match, South Korea was at +50 (this was their final game) and Japan a +121 (with one game to play versus China). So South Korea needed to win by 71 plus some extra in order to win the ***le. In the end, South Korea won the ***le by having the better goal differential by 15 goals.

An Olympic qualifier in women's hockey featured an 82-0 win by Slovakia over Bulgaria. Here is a video clip (one of a three short clips on youtube from the game). Slovakia in white. This game I find ridiculous, as Slovakia is constantly crashing the net no matter the score.



Box: http://stats.iihf.com/Hydra/166/IHW166907_74_4_0.pdf

 

[usausa]

I can see both sides to the argument. Our club's second side beat a team 166-0 in a league game, and both sides weren't gaining much out of it. We ran in 26 tries in total, 91 points in the second half. It is tough because you have a B side and subs who want to prove themselves worthy of first side consideration but the opposition offered little resistance to the point where we didn't/couldn't even run our patterns. When you consider as well the lack of games there really is, players need to make the most out of each game. But as the referee noted in his post game report, there was no gloating during or after the match. This is an example at USA club level of a professionally/competitively run side versus a social/amateur side. For the losing side, they lost their matches by the following scores: 0-69 (0-11 tries), 7-72 (1-12 tries), 24-66 (4-12 tries), 0-166 (0-26), 0-96 (0-14 tries), 7-85 (1-15 tries), 0-127 (0-19 tries). Season was 0-7, 38-681 (6-109 tries). Unfortunately, this is the lowest division in the league, so nowhere for this team really to go.

 

[Big Ewis]

yeah sure the AUS NAM must get super boring at some point lol, obviously !...
but it's still cool to watch matches à la NZ JAP...

 

[InsaneAsylum]

I'm with little guy on this one, it's a crap game. The sense of accomplishment beating a good team in a hard fought contest is far greater than handing out a thrashing.

 

[usausa]

I'm with little guy on this one, it's a crap game. The sense of accomplishment beating a good team in a hard fought contest is far greater than handing out a thrashing.

I think we all agree on that (well I know I do), the argument is more based on the relevance of this game and it's existence on tape. Sure it was a crap show quickly but just because it was a big margin we shouldn't wish for the game to forever disappear so nobody can ever see it.

 

[LittleGuy]

I think we all agree on that (well I know I do), the argument is more based on the relevance of this game and it's existence on tape. Sure it was a crap show quickly but just because it was a big margin we shouldn't wish for the game to forever disappear so nobody can ever see it.

That was a hyperbolic statement by me over a year ago, I really don't care if the game on full tape exists, I honestly thought no one would enjoy watching this beyond a few highlights of the curiosity factor.

Each to his own though and to be perfectly frank I don't want to talk about this game anymore, it's not a part of rugby history I'm fond of and I just hope we never see anything that bad again at an RWC though Africa vs. New Zealand in 2015 is worrying in this regard.

 

[usausa]

Well, gentleman (and ladies?), just recently uploaded online by a youtube account, is this full match. Not trying to discuss the nature of the game, I'm just sharing the link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTYbqBzyK2A