Wales to face SANZAR Big Three

[Big Ewis]

#Awinisawin

#thatwasnotawinthoughthatwascheating
Oh, God...what the hell am I doing ?!...

Ahem: that was not a win though, that was cheating. If they made every penalty worth 10 points for England in stead of 3 and they won, by your logic we'd say "a win's a win". If you go against the rules and still get points for your play, it's just not really a win.
But yes, that's how it will go down in the history books. England beat Australia two tries to one, and by seven points.
Anyways, it's not important...

 

[Ospreylian]

no, no, you forgot the most interesting part:

I'm sure I could sue you for misquoting me there, Ewis

...but I won't, because I may or may not agree with the extra bits you added...

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

#thatwasnotawinthoughthatwascheating
Oh, God...what the hell am I doing ?!...

Ahem: that was not a win though, that was cheating. If they made every penalty worth 10 points for England in stead of 3 and they won, by your logic we'd say "a win's a win". If you go against the rules and still get points for your play, it's just not really a win.
But yes, that's how it will go down in the history books. England beat Australia two tries to one, and by seven points.
Anyways, it's not important...

Every team cheats at some stage, we merely got away with it. However looking at that game could you honestly say Australia deserved to win?

 

[Groundhog]

#thatwasnotawinthoughthatwascheating
Oh, God...what the hell am I doing ?!...

Ahem: that was not a win though, that was cheating. If they made every penalty worth 10 points for England in stead of 3 and they won, by your logic we'd say "a win's a win". If you go against the rules and still get points for your play, it's just not really a win.
But yes, that's how it will go down in the history books. England beat Australia two tries to one, and by seven points.
Anyways, it's not important...

Hey remember when Thierry Henry robbed us of a World Cup with a hand ball.
#neverforgive #never forget.

 

[big ginger 8]

This is great, it's been quite a while since we've had all 3 together in one Autumn. Not actually sure when the last time was. It will at least boost ticket sales and spark more public interest. I personally am really excited anyway.

I'd just like to remind all the critics of the Welsh team, the only Northern Hemisphere team to beat a Southern team this Autumn was England, and that was against a very lacklustre Australia (the Wallabies that turned up in Cardiff were a completely different side to the one at the beginning of the series). So, those who are trying to single out Wales are obviously forgetting about the other North V South results.

From where I stand, the margins are generally getting smaller, and the gap is narrowing slowly. The north now matches the south physically, it's just a case of getting our game awareness and basic ball and kicking skills up to the standards set by the south. That will be a huge challenge, and an ongoing one that will need to be set in motion in the club leagues - this brand of rugby needs to be played week-in, week-out in order to come to fruition at international level.

Why does eveyone forget that Samoa are from the Southern Hemisphere?

 

[Big Ewis]

Hey remember when Thierry Henry robbed us of a World Cup with a hand ball.
#neverforgive #never forget.

yeah, heard of somth like that....but nobody cares about football. But Wallabies in Twickenham, big big, important big !!

 

[RoosTah]

Every team cheats at some stage, we merely got away with it. However looking at that game could you honestly say Australia deserved to win?

We didnt. Australia should have closed that game out with an aggressive second half, but failed to do anything and made far too many errors. We didn't deserve to win.

 

[Aspry]

Hey Wales, losing to the SANZAR nations has become our thing now... so f**k off and find something else to do.

 

[Big Ewis]

Hey Wales, losing to the SANZAR nations has become our thing now... so f**k off and find something else to do.

not for long, though !

 

[Rich Taff]

Hey Wales, losing to the SANZAR nations has become our thing now... so f**k off and find something else to do.

It's ok, I'm sure we can share in the process.

 

[Maverick1987]

no, no, you forgot the most interesting part:

Like when Wayne Barnes gave the French absolutely everything in the 2007 rwc QF . I didn't know you then ewis but were you complaining about that ?

 

[Big Ewis]

Like when Wayne Barnes gave the French absolutely everything in the 2007 rwc QF . I didn't know you then ewis but were you complaining about that ?

that's a very unintelligent comment to make..

 

[Maverick1987]

that's a very unintelligent comment to make..

No your comment are massively anti-English and maybe you should think about the "favours" you have had from referees in the past before running your mouth

 

[Big Ewis]

No your comment are massively anti-English and maybe you should think about the "favours" you have had from referees in the past before running your mouth

do you find a problem in someone who admits both the 2007 pass to Michalak was forward AND Owen Farrell scored because of obstruction ?

Here's the difference though:
- the pass to Michalak in 2007 was forward, although the All-Blacks were beaten on the play regardless - i.e. the pass being earlier and legal wouldn't change the outcome of the try scored, of course it would've made it legal and we'd all have a lot less grief for the AB and I feel for them. France were fired up in the 2nd half and played an incredible piece of Rugby, holding the AB in the waning moments and beating them for the 2nd straight time in a RWC. Epic.
- England never had the upper hand against the Aussies and the score was tied. They won by exactly 7 points, the 7 points allowed by a try that couldn't have happened if not for a huge foul that is a fundamentally no no in Rugby: illegal screening, obstruction.
England hadn't beaten Australia at all on that play, and only, solely scored the try because of a big moment of cheating.

So you see, your comment is heavy-handed, and very silly.

 

[Maverick1987]

do you find a problem in someone who admits both the 2007 pass to Michalak was forward AND Owen Farrell scored because of obstruction ?

Here's the difference though:
- the pass to Michalak in 2007 was forward, although the All-Blacks were beaten on the play regardless - i.e. the pass being earlier and legal wouldn't change the outcome of the try scored, of course it would've made it legal and we'd all have a lot less grief for the AB and I feel for them. France were fired up in the 2nd half and played an incredible piece of Rugby, holding the AB in the waning moments and beating them for the 2nd straight time in a RWC. Epic.
- England never had the upper hand against the Aussies and the score was tied. They won by exactly 7 points, the 7 points allowed by a try that couldn't have happened if not for a huge foul that is a fundamentally no no in Rugby: illegal screening, obstruction.
England hadn't beaten Australia at all on that play, and only, solely scored the try because of a big moment of cheating.

So you see, your comment is heavy-handed, and very silly.

I'm not sure Hartley placed himself there purposely but even if he did the professional thing to do is play to the referees whistle which is exactly what England did . It's not up to the players to make those decisions it's up to the official .

Which in my opinion makes your comment about England CHEATING very heavy handed and silly

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Also to claim England didn't have the upper hand agains the Aussies is kind of stupid. We definitely had the upper hand but had issues when it came to getting our backs involved. With regards to creating an attacking platform with our forwards, we were able to do it pretty much every time. Ewis is also ignoring that, whilst the block helped, there is absolutely no guarentee that the player would have stopped Farrell from getting to the line. Fact is if England couldn't get the better of the Aussies, explain how England got into the position where Farrell could have made that run in the first place. The gap was there regardless of a block or not and England were close enough to the try line to make a run possible again regardless of a block or not.

It's like some of the more avidly anti-English posters who also claim our first try wasn't deserved because Brown was in touch. Because somehow Brown being in touch meant everything that followed wasn't England doing well and the score was illegal because of something 3 minutes prior to it.

 

[Ospreylian]

Oh no! This thread has become a "let's defend the English" thread :wacko: And only 2 pages in as well. *sigh*

Oh well, it was nice talking about the original thread topic while we could...

 

[Big Ewis]

Fact is if England couldn't get the better of the Aussies, explain how England got into the position where Farrell could have made that run in the first place. The gap was there regardless of a block or not and England were close enough to the try line to make a run possible again regardless of a block or not.

Sides are constantly in position to attack deep in the opposite 22, doesn't mean they're going to score this is just getting silly, believe what you want for your own good conscience, it's of no importance to me. Ignorance is bliss, and we're best playing the austrich game shoving our head in the sand, nothing new...

And using the "anti-English" thing here is just terribly, terribly cheap.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Sides are constantly in position to attack deep in the opposite 22, doesn't mean they're going to score this is just getting silly, believe what you want for your own good conscience, it's of no importance to me. Ignorance is bliss, and we're best playing the austrich game shoving our head in the sand, nothing new...

And using the "anti-English" thing here is just terribly, terribly cheap.

Really? I don't recall the Aussies being "consistently" in our 22 or even looking like scoring on that many occassions. The game for the most part was forwards play and kept tight and England won that.

As for "anti-English", as you say, ignorance is bliss. If you are ignorant that there are people out there who can't give England credit for a win regardless of whether it is a close game or an absolute smashing then I guess there is little more to say.

 

[Big Ewis]

Really? I don't recall the Aussies being "consistently" in our 22 or even looking like scoring on that many occassions. The game for the most part was forwards play and kept tight and England won that.

As for "anti-English", as you say, ignorance is bliss. If you are ignorant that there are people out there who can't give England credit for a win regardless of whether it is a close game or an absolute smashing then I guess there is little more to say.

dude, stop blinding yourself and speaking absolute nonsense, stop, it's just ridiculous to read.
Owen Farrell benefited from Hartley blocking out his defender opening up a huge gap in the Aussie defense, saw it and exploited it. England won by exactly 7 points. End of story. How the hell are we even having a talk here, how the hell ?? Just drop it, I'm not the one being anti anything or pro anything or anything at all. Open your eyes and try to be objective for a short instant, you'll see.