- Joined
- Jun 30, 2018
- Messages
- 6,112
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Ok, so learnt the qualifying process had different regions. Frankly thats ridiculous for the olympics, the best teams should be allowed to attend.Hang on, is samoa really not as good as korea these days, or is there some unfair qualifying process? Or does samoa just nit have the money to compete?
Ok, so learnt the qualifying process had different regions. Frankly thats ridiculous for the olympics, the best teams should be allowed to attend.
so ireland v kenya for a place in the quarters, and three teams from pool A looks like whats happening.
None of the quarterfinals will be obvious, so placings going into that dont matter too much, just have to win three games once you are there. In saying that, id prefer we finish in top spot and get to play ireland or kenya.
Four of the 6 remaining pool games will be interesting to watch too.
Yes i know that, but i dont believe its generally the case for the olympics? Global sports can do what they want, its a business. The olympics isnt supposed to be about the money aspect, its supposed to be about working out what countries or persons/teams are the best.You know that is literally the case for pretty much every global competition.
RWC is regional based and that is the top of the XV's game so why shouldn't the 7's be?
Yes i know that, but i dont believe its generally the case for the olympics? Global sports can do what they want, its a business. The olympics isnt supposed to be about the money aspect, its supposed to be about working out what countries or persons/teams are the best.
in at least some other olympic events the attendance of a lesser natiin diesnt prevent a better nation from attending. They can either bith attend, or the best gets to attend.
Even in individual competitions nations are limited to number of entries no matter how good their athletes are. It's pretty much par for course in just about every everything not to mention the host gets a berth in all sports regardless of how shite they are at it.Yes i know that, but i dont believe its generally the case for the olympics? Global sports can do what they want, its a business. The olympics isnt supposed to be about the money aspect, its supposed to be about working out what countries or persons/teams are the best.
in at least some other olympic events the attendance of a lesser natiin diesnt prevent a better nation from attending. They can either bith attend, or the best gets to attend.
Why though? What have areas got to do with anything? I can understand for a business, for gaining a wider audience, but not fir the olympics. I could also understand if it was about being inclusive, but regions dont achieve that either. Id rather samoa, a small and poor country who has only one olympic medal in its history, were given their fair chance of getting a medal rather than korea due to some random criteria - they are located in a certain region80% sure that every team sport has regional qualifications
The aim isn't so much money more covering more areas.
yes within a country, but nit between countries. and thars fine because the olympics is a competition between countries, in fact id rather inly one participant from a given country can participate in any given event.Even in individual competitions nations are limited to number of entries no matter how good their athletes are. It's pretty much par for course in just about every everything not to mention the host gets a berth in all sports regardless of how shite they are at it.
Why though? What have areas got to do with anything? I can understand for a business, for gaining a wider audience, but not fir the olympics. I could also understand if it was about being inclusive, but regions dont achieve that either. Id rather samoa, a small and poor country who has only one olympic medal in its history, were given their fair chance of getting a medal rather than korea due to some random criteria - they are located in a certain region
yes within a country, but nit between countries. and thars fine because the olympics is a competition between countries, in fact id rather inly one participant from a given country can participate in any given event.
I dont agree that regions are achieving that goal. Looking at the olympics as a whole, samoa's exclusion from this event makes a big difference to how included they are in the olympics as a whole. Even not looking at the olympics as a whole, why should there be two asian teams rather than two pacific island teams in the sevens?That's what the regions do though.
France finished 6th last year in the world rugby series and didn't make it.
Maybe you could explain why you think the current approach is a good one. The only argument you have made (?) is that a regional approach is inclusive. You havent said in what way a regional approach is inclusive. Would it also be inclusive if you randomly allocated countries inti groups, rather than geographically? Or is there something more to regions than geography? Are south korea and republic of korea somehow the same in a mire important way than say japan and the usa are? You also imply (?) that from an inclusion perspective new zealand and samoa should be lumped together. Why?New Zealand is a pacific team also.
Also in a normal competition they would be only 1 Asian team BUT Japan qualify automatically due the home nation rule for all sports.
Countries miss out, but all regions are represented along with having the top 4 teams in the world.
New ZealandDid not expect us to win that at all,
Strong start by USA
Not sure who we'll have in the semis