France in NZ newspapers

[cardassian]

Paddypower is a UK company, LordHope is referring to them paying out on the All Blacks winning already.

And all the media examples in this thread provided are all from English or Australian journalists (oh, and one article from Chris Rattue from 4 years ago, and no one in New Zealand bar a few inbred Cantabs bitter about Henry getting picked over Deans like the prick anyway).

I've got a lot of time for Chris Rattue, as do several people I know. His articles are always the first ones I turn to. I don't always agree with him of course but the guy speaks a great deal of truth.

Anything you want to tell us about your parents?
Or where you're really from?

j/k couldn't resist.

 

[Black Heart]

Anything you want to tell us about your parents?
Or where you're really from?

j/k couldn't resist.

Haha. Well I'm definatly not a Cantabrian put it that way.

 

[Seaton]

Arrogance from who?

Please don't say New Zealand, because despite what the French in this thread seem to think, the UK is not a New Zealand colony.

Lol no, I do not think that New Zealand is still a colony of the UK, and right at the begin I said "I know its not New Zealand...".

Arrogance from whom? Arrogant people, and borderline arrogant people! From all over the world! Nae need to get so defensive.

 

[justanargie]

At least they talk about France, when we played them, they have so much confidence that they almost dind´t mention us jaja... At lest the nz herald... It was the Carter Herald. But, but, they beat us for 20+. It's media guys, come on....

 

[nickdnz]

Ugh. I've had so many rants about the NZ Herald, but I'll say it once again:

It's a terrible editorial, where sensationalism sells. It's less than two weeks ago when the Herald was giving reasons why NZ wouldn't win against Australia with out Carter, and now they've jumped to super confident. It does not represent people's view points in New Zealand, at least not the majority. When people quote it as a representation of what New Zealander's think, it's so frustrating. It's the equivelent things from The Sun or The Evening Standard and then thinking it represents the views of everyone in London.

Other papers like the Dominion Posts have taken a less extreme view, with quietly confident being the main theme. Fact is most New Zealanders are quietly confident. We beat France in pool play comfortably, France didn't looks especially good against Japan and Canada and they lost to Tonga. They would have most likely lost to Wales in the Semi-Finals had they not had 62 minutes in the game with an extra player and the Welsh kickers hadn't choked. The only time they looked anywhere near the form they are capable of producing was for 40 minutes against a very lackluster English team which had its own set of problems. Meanwhile the New Zealand public had been dreading a run in with an Australian team which won the Tri Nations and yet the All Blacks blew them off the park with what is a near complete performance.

Despite this every New Zealander with a fleeting interest in rugby remembers 2007. The fact that New Zealand are being causious against this French team shows that the New Zealand public to respect the French team and know they are capable of a great performance. It seems that it's France's own insecurities about their teams chances, that it's confusing confidence in what is a very good team for arrogance. Regardless of a few sensationalist reporters and outside factors like the Paddy Power stunt, the All Blacks certainly won't take France lightly and neither will people with a decent long-term memory.

 

[igorBastia]

I wouldnt pay attention to it. NZ media will hate on anyone thats perceived as a threat to NZ winning. Media is the same in any country.

It's true the journalist want to sold his newspaper in chauvinistic way to get a lot of money and destroy a lot of forest. But I read on the french newspapers "l'équipe" an interisting inteview of Anton Oliver. Brillant man by the way.

 

[james5000]

It's pathetic because it is entirely disrespectful to the French, and just perpetuates ignorance and arrogance. As you say, in the pursuit of publicity. In business terms, it's unethical.

I don't understand your argument. If you think like this, then the whole idea of gambling must be unethical!!!!

Ignorance and arrogance?
The bookmakers deal on a mixture of Results, Form, Statistics and a few other factors. They don't base their decisions on ignorance and arrogance!
If they all were doing that, they would have been broke a long time ago.

They might be rip of artist's but I would never accuse them of being ignorant or arrogant (in a business sense any way haha).

Any knowledgeable Rugby fan knows that France are massive underdogs.

 

[james5000]

I've got a lot of time for Chris Rattue, as do several people I know. His articles are always the first ones I turn to. I don't always agree with him of course but the guy speaks a great deal of truth.

REALLY?

Chris Rattue is a knob and a headline hunter. He doesn't believe half the **** writes I am sure. He just likes to wind people up. He's basically one of those opinion writers that likes to be controversial to get people reading his articles. Have you ever noticed how often his articles back track because they were wrong?

I read them online just to read the comments part, and laugh at his faithful muppet supporters haha.

 

[Black Heart]

Chris Rattue is a knob and a headline hunter. He doesn't believe half the **** writes I am sure.

Oh, you're sure are you? Well that settles it.

Chris speaks his mind more bluntly and honestly than any of the other herald writers. Not that that makes the herald a first class paper, I'd personally rather read The Australian online. But at any rate, anyone being brutally honest is always going to draw contraversy, that doesn't make Rattue a deliberate s**t stirrer. For every person who disagrees with him there's always someone on the other side of the fence.

Rattue is also the only other writer who bothers to return e-mails.

You come across as the type of person who has to have everything wrapped in cotton wool as not to offend anyone.

 

[james5000]

Oh, you're sure are you? Well that settles it.

Chris speaks his mind more bluntly and honestly than any of the other herald writers. Not that that makes the herald a first class paper, I'd personally rather read The Australian online. But at any rate, anyone being brutally honest is always going to draw contraversy, that doesn't make Rattue a deliberate s**t stirrer. For every person who disagrees with him there's always someone on the other side of the fence.

You come across as the type of person who has to have everything wrapped in cotton wool as not to offend anyone.

I am sure because if he believes half the **** he writes than he's a straight nuff nuff and nuff nuffs can't even write!!!!

He is wrong almost every time he writes a column, if he were a gambling man he'd be homeless!!!!

 

[Saintjay]

Mark Reason up to his old tricks in the Telegraph over here, saying New Zealand should hang it's head in shame over Quaid Cooper, we are also getting reports of an article in The Herald of the filthy French, a piece about Buck Shelford and his missing nut sack, classic.

 

[james5000]

Oh, you're sure are you? Well that settles it.

Chris speaks his mind more bluntly and honestly than any of the other herald writers. Not that that makes the herald a first class paper, I'd personally rather read The Australian online. But at any rate, anyone being brutally honest is always going to draw contraversy, that doesn't make Rattue a deliberate s**t stirrer. For every person who disagrees with him there's always someone on the other side of the fence.

Rattue is also the only other writer who bothers to return e-mails.

You come across as the type of person who has to have everything wrapped in cotton wool as not to offend anyone.

Are you Rattue haha, both of you were predicting an Aussie victory in the semi if I remember correctly!!!!

I do remember you being negative anyway, and it was after the Argentina win.

 

[Black Heart]

I am sure because if he believes half the **** he writes than he's a straight nuff nuff and nuff nuffs can't even write!!!!

What??? Speak English.

He is wrong almost every time he writes a column, if he were a gambling man he'd be homeless!!!!

Lol, predicitions? Really? That's your argument? He's no more right or wrong than most other people who make predicitions on absolutly everything sport. Stop exaggerating.

 

[Black Heart]

Are you Rattue haha, both of you were predicting an Aussie victory in the semi if I remember correctly!!!!

I do remember you being negative anyway, and it was after the Argentina win.

No, I'm not Chris Rattue.

I never said the Wallabies would win. I bet vcash on the All Blacks to win by 7 or less. The comment I made (if you ever bother to read anything) is that the All Blacks would lose if they played the same standard of rugby they used against Argentina. Fortunatly, they played one of the best games I've seen for a long time.

 

[james5000]

What??? Speak English.

A nuff nuff is a retard, have you never heard the term?

Lol, predicitions? Really? That's your argument? He's no more right or wrong than most other people who make predicitions on absolutly everything sport. Stop exaggerating.

No, I am not exaggerating. It is hard to believe how often he can be wrong.

He's supposed to be a knowledgeable sports writer, he just spouts out his flavours of the month and its mostly rubbish.
For the last year he's changed his mind on SBW repeatedly, I don't know whether he loves him or hates him.

He doesn't just get it wrong with predictions in results, he gets it wrong on many issues. That's why he has to back track on topic's so often.

The funny thing is, he does have many supporters, I'd say 20% of the people that read his column love him, it cracks me up.

 

[Black Heart]

A nuff nuff is a retard, have you never heard the term?

Would I be asking otherwise? It's not much of an endorsment on your part to call someone a retard simply because you don't agree with them.

He's supposed to be a knowledgeable sports writer, he just spouts out his flavours of the month and its mostly rubbish.

Yeah, that's your opinion mate so I won't bother arguing.

For the last year he's changed his mind on SBW repeatedly, I don't know whether he loves him or hates him.

Oi. Rattue's initial thoughts of Williams were the same as mine and as most other people. He thought the move the NZRU made to bring him here simply for a garunteed spot in the World Cup was morally wrong, especially when you take into account his history and more importantly, the players who were shunted for celebrity's sake. There was nothing wrong with that opinion and I think it's still relevant to a degree. The guy was simply speaking his mind.
Afterwards he went on to admit that Sonny Bill did deserve his spot in the WC squad based on what he had produced. Again, he's simply speaking the truth even though Sonny Bill had proven him and just about everyone else wrong, myself included.
On the other hand, he's always said that Sonny still doesn't have the full natural ability for union as he does for league. This I also agree with. He does play superbly well at times but he needs to develop his skill set a bit more to suit the game at test level.
As far as Super Rugby goes, he's always maintained that SBW was built for such a competition. It is, after all, much easier for individuals to play their own game in such an arena as opposed to test rugby. That's why (if I recall correctly) he was very excited about the prospect of Williams playing for the Blues. Again, I agree with him.

Nothing contradictory in that. You just have to bother reading.

The funny thing is, he does have many supporters, I'd say 20% of the people that read his column love him

Twenty percent? Did you just decide on that number because it was nice and round when you pulled it out of your ass?

 

[Groundhog]

now now if i wanted low quality ***** fights id watch an irish presidential election debate.....(see what i did there)

 

[james5000]

Nothing contradictory in that. You just have to bother reading.

I wont say I read his column religiously because I don't, but I do read it regularly.
Rattue likes to use hyperbole, which exaggerates the situation. It is a great way of selling newspapers though.

Twenty percent? Did you just decide on that number because it was nice and round when you pulled it out of your ass?

Judging by the comments I read on his page, I'd say a lot less than the majority are pro Rattue.
I wasn't stating it as a fact, it was just my perception. If we did a poll in this Forum I would bet that less than 20% would like Rattue.
He has a habit of shooting himself in the foot.

IMO Rattue purposefully errs on the side of controversy, the best way he knows how to get noticed.
I honestly think he enjoys it, even if he doesn't believe it most of the time.

 

[Black Heart]

Judging by the comments I read on his page, I'd say a lot less than the majority are pro Rattue.
I wasn't stating it as a fact, it was just my perception. If we did a poll in this Forum I would bet that less than 20% would like Rattue.
He has a habit of shooting himself in the foot.

I'm guessing that opinion is based on the opinion of those who don't make an effort to actually follow his columns but still make wild assumptions about his view points and somehow come to a decision that they are contradictory anyway.

 

[TRF C A Iversen]

Mark Reason up to his old tricks in the Telegraph over here, saying New Zealand should hang it's head in shame over Quaid Cooper

I seem to remember Sir Richard Hadlee getting a much more constant and coarser type of response in Australia. At the end of the day, it was just some booing from people who exaggerated his importance to the Australian squad.