Off Topic Thread 3.0

thomond2006

molloyjh wrote: »

Except it was also used to give more women game time in advance of the RWC. As there are so few women's games, particularly at international level, the more that get exposed to it prior to the RWC the better. And this helped to maximise the game time and therefore develop, in as much as they could, the squad depth ahead of the RWC.

But that doesn't promote outrage so it doesn't get the attention.

Perhaps Joe should send a few men's players to the Sevens.

(I kid, I kid)

Erik Shin

sydthebeat wrote: »

it did the team no harm at all... and may actually have done a lot of good in the long term

Try that argument for the men's game....It's double standards, thats my gripe

Podge_irl

Erik Shin wrote: »

Try that argument for the men's game....It's double standards, thats my gripe

It's a different standard sure - but then the underlying fundamentals are different. Seems a bit pointless to pretend otherwise.

Women's 7s is likely to have a much greater reach then womens XV due to the Olympics effect.

irishbucsfan

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

That turned out to be a bit of #fakenews. Or at least as far as the 15s team and players were concerned, who were told well in advance.

This isn't correct...

Edit: Also similar issues from the IRFU with putting major pressure on the women's players for signing up to IRUPA, quite similarly to the issues that the women's soccer players have had. But at least the IRFU allow them to sign up for IRUPA. As opposed to the FAI who refuse to deal with the union the girls want to work with.

HOWEVER, they aren't treated nearly as badly as the soccer girls, in fact the rugby girls (some of whom are friends with the soccer girls) treatment is cited as an example often by the soccer girls, in fact the friendships between the groups has a fair amount to do with the soccer girls realising how unacceptably they're being treated (as well as their friendships with girls playing for other national teams).

sydthebeat

Erik Shin wrote: »

Try that argument for the men's game....It's double standards, thats my gripe

of course its double standards... ones a professional contracted team the other is fully amateur.... two completely different standards.

in fact the 3 girls that went to play the 7s were centrally contracted to the 7s program.

instead of it "not sitting right" with you.... perhaps do some investigation into the facts

irishbucsfan

molloyjh wrote: »

Except it was also used to give more women game time in advance of the RWC. As there are so few women's games, particularly at international level, the more that get exposed to it prior to the RWC the better. And this helped to maximise the game time and therefore develop, in as much as they could, the squad depth ahead of the RWC.

But that doesn't promote outrage so it doesn't get the attention.

This isn't the full story. It'd be great if one of the girls came out and explained how it ended up happening, but I can understand why they won't.

Erik Shin

sydthebeat wrote: »

of course its double standards... ones a professional contracted team the other is fully amateur.... two completely different standards.

in fact the 3 girls that went to play the 7s were centrally contracted to the 7s program.

instead of it "not sitting right" with you.... perhaps do some investigation into the facts

The facts are that the sevens side took precedence over the full national side...What part of this is giving you issues ? .. Strange and angry post there, perhaps you should smile a little more during the day .

Podge_irl

Erik Shin wrote: »

The facts are that the sevens side took precedence over the full national side...

The 7s side is a full national side. You mean it took precedence over the XV a side version of the sport.

As things stand at the moment 7s is going to give women a much bigger stage to play on.

CMOTDibbler

irishbucsfan wrote: »

This isn't correct...

Are you saying that the team manager didn't know that the three members of the sevens team would be going to Vegas before the women's 6N started?

irishbucsfan

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Are you saying that the team manager didn't know that the three members of the sevens team would be going to Vegas before the women's 6N started?

No, don't think anyone said that he didn't know though?

Bazzo

Unless I'm mistaken it was former and to some degree current members of the women's team themselves who were unhappy about the situation with the girls being pulled for the 7s, so there was definitely a real issue there.

Zzippy

Erik Shin wrote: »

The facts are that the sevens side took precedence over the full national side...What part of this is giving you issues ? .. Strange and angry post there, perhaps you should smile a little more during the day .

A little less condescension please. Perhaps you should smile a little more yourself. Attack the post not the poster.

CMOTDibbler

irishbucsfan wrote: »

No, don't think anyone said that he didn't know though?

Well that's what I was referring to. The team manager and the team not knowing until the last minute was how it was portrayed initially in the media.

irishbucsfan

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Well that's what I was referring to. The team manager and the team not knowing until the last minute was how it was portrayed initially in the media.

Ah, well I'm not sure how it was portrayed in the media but there were definitely issues with the communication, although exactly who knew what I'm not sure. It wasn't invented by the media though, there were real issues there.

Erik Shin

I'm all smiles

sydthebeat

Erik Shin wrote: »

The facts are that the sevens side took precedence over the full national side...What part of this is giving you issues ? .

i think you may have misunderstood... i dont have any issues with it at all...

You are the ones with the issues, youve admitted so yourself.

im just outlining the facts to you so that your opinion can then be educated and your unease satiated.

molloyjh

Podge_irl wrote: »

Erik Shin wrote: »

Try that argument for the men's game....It's double standards, thats my gripe

It's a different standard sure - but then the underlying fundamentals are different. Seems a bit pointless to pretend otherwise.

Women's 7s is likely to have a much greater reach then womens XV due to the Olympics effect.

The men's team play more and have more scope to develop their squad. There are also more games at higher levels for the provinces. The two set ups are incomparable that way. Unless people want to have a gripe about something, in which case they'll find a way.

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

molloyjh wrote: »

Except it was also used to give more women game time in advance of the RWC. As there are so few women's games, particularly at international level, the more that get exposed to it prior to the RWC the better. And this helped to maximise the game time and therefore develop, in as much as they could, the squad depth ahead of the RWC.

But that doesn't promote outrage so it doesn't get the attention.

This isn't the full story. It'd be great if one of the girls came out and explained how it ended up happening, but I can understand why they won't.

I never said it was the whole story. The use of the word "also" in the first sentence was deliberate and important. :pac:

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Well that's what I was referring to. The team manager and the team not knowing until the last minute was how it was portrayed initially in the media.

Ah, well I'm not sure how it was portrayed in the media but there were definitely issues with the communication, although exactly who knew what I'm not sure. It wasn't invented by the media though, there were real issues there.

The manager was made aware of it in early December apparently. There does seem to have been communication issues, but if the manager knew in December and the teammates didn't find out until February the communication issue is internal within the team environment. That's certainly how I read it at the time anyway.

irishbucsfan

molloyjh wrote: »

I never said it was the whole story. The use of the word "also" in the first sentence was deliberate and important.

Yeah, I'm not so certain that was ever the explicit intent, rather a convenient outcome of having those girls pulled from the 6 Nations

b.gud

Ah lads a rugby argument in the off topic?

I come in here to get away rugby arguments, plus to make fun of awecs perverse sexual preferences

irishbucsfan

molloyjh wrote: »

The manager was made aware of it in early December apparently. There does seem to have been communication issues, but if the manager knew in December and the teammates didn't find out until February the communication issue is internal within the team environment. That's certainly how I read it at the time anyway.

The issues go deeper than communication, and the person who made the decision is also the person who is responsible for communicating the decision directly to the players, Mr Eddy. And it doesn't really work if the person in charge of women's rugby has issues with communication/managing the women's players.

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Yeah, I'm not so certain that was ever the explicit intent, rather a convenient outcome of having those girls pulled from the 6 Nations

I'm sure it played a part in the decision. It probably came down to a few things rather than any one specific thing. The IRFU have been looking to increase the exposure the women's team have to the game and this fits with that. It also makes complete sense ahead of the RWC to ensure there's a decent squad there.

irishbucsfan

molloyjh wrote: »

I'm sure it played a part in the decision. It probably came down to a few things rather than any one specific thing. The IRFU have been looking to increase the exposure the women's team have to the game and this fits with that. It also makes complete sense ahead of the RWC to ensure there's a decent squad there.

Ah grand, I can see where you're coming from. I wouldn't be so sure myself.

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

The issues go deeper than communication....

No doubt they do, I was just referencing your point on communication directly. If I'm honest I don't know enough about the women's game to discuss it much beyond individual incidents like this anyway, which obviously means I'm not seeing the full picture when doing that.....

Erik Shin

sydthebeat wrote: »

i think you may have misunderstood... i dont have any issues with it at all...

You are the ones with the issues, youve admitted so yourself.

im just outlining the facts to you so that your opinion can then be educated and your unease satiated.

So, the facts are that the Sevens game is held in higher regard than the full national side (IV) for some....That's the fact yeah? And it wouldn't be tolerated with the men's game...Which points to the women's game being held in much lower esteem...The last one is my opinion...Not a fact just in case

CMOTDibbler

Erik Shin wrote: »

So, the facts are that the Sevens game is held in higher regard than the full national side (IV) for some....That's the fact yeah? And it wouldn't be tolerated with the men's game...Which points to the women's game being held in much lower esteem...The last one is my opinion...Not a fact just in case

Hmmm... yes... VII is greater than IV.

Erik Shin

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Hmmm... yes... VII is greater than IV.

It's a long standing joke...I made that mistake once and keep doing it

Podge_irl

Erik Shin wrote: »

So, the facts are that the Sevens game is held in higher regard than the full national side (IV) for some....That's the fact yeah? And it wouldn't be tolerated with the men's game...Which points to the women's game being held in much lower esteem...The last one is my opinion...Not a fact just in case

But its asinine to compare them. There is a perfectly reasonable argument to be made that for women 7s is likely to be the more popular version of the sport going forward due to the Olympic exposure. Men's rugby has well established tournaments in XV a side (as well as a fully professional game!) and XVs is undeniably the larger version of the sport.

You can't apply the same standards to two scenarios which have completely different fundamentals behind them.

The Lost Sheep

Erik Shin wrote:

Pulling players from the 6n to play in a Sevens tournament wasn't great either though

to some extent it didn't but when the ladies are contracted to play 7s then that has to be the priority..

Erik Shin wrote:

I think it's more the fact that it was done at all is the issue. Sevens is nice to look at for a weekend, but to prioritize it over the full national side....Not sitting well with me personally

7s is a full national side. It is the exact same as the 15s side. A fully senior national side.

molloyjh wrote:

Except it was also used to give more women game time in advance of the RWC. As there are so few women's games, particularly at international level, the more that get exposed to it prior to the RWC the better. And this helped to maximise the game time and therefore develop, in as much as they could, the squad depth ahead of the RWC.

yep and it's not like ladies have a very very high level outside of internationals to play(not dismissing AIL...

molloyjh wrote:

The men's team play more and have more scope to develop their squad. There are also more games at higher levels for the provinces. The two set ups are incomparable that way. Unless people want to have a gripe about something, in which case they'll find a way.

+1..