All Blacks v Irish property developers

terrydel

Capt. Autumn wrote: »

What, exactly, do you mean by that?

Rugny league exists because the poshos kept their sport amateur to ensure the working classes couldnt be part of it. So the working classes formed a new game for themselves.
Every element of the union game is elitist and exclusionary in nature. I cant abide it at all, and I'm personally delighted its been kicked off its high horse here.
Its popularity here is a product of and runs parallel with the celtic tiger, when so many became materialistic, money orientated shallow f**kers. Loads of them saw rugby as something to be associated with, and thus took an 'interest' in following it. The numbers actually participating in it beyond shouting at the tv in the likes of Searsons or Kielys is still painfully low, 12th in the country in terms of participation.
The largely middle class media we have flagellate themselves over it chasing their middle class audience. The players are all 'legends' or 'heroes' once they manage to get their arms thru the sleeves of their jerseys. Judged in a completely different manner to people in other sports.
They play in an 8 team sport and have never managed to get past the last 8 which is pitiful. Serial failures held up as the greatest sportsmen in the country without any justification at all.
I hope a bit of hubris is brought to them, but like their ilk who caused our recession, I doubt it will happen.

Andreas77

Personally I find football dull as dishwater. Great game to play, an absolutely abysmal sport to watch.

But neither do I feel the need to squeeze out a long smelly string of wet brown rope onto the faces of all those inadequate Irish footballers. They have much fewer successes than the rugby players, but are encased in a losing tradition stretching back since the birth of the beautiful game really. Different people will enjoy those different strokes. My football team is much more successful but still I won't watch that game.

Snickers Man

Hego Damask wrote: »

amazing the crap people will follow if Ireland wins at it, they'd go mad for the hammer throwing if we had some lad that could chuck a hammer 100m ... or whatever the olympic gold standard is for that ...

You do know that we used to be the best at the world in the hammer throw?
Seven of the first eight gold medals won in the modern Olympics were awarded to men born and raised in Ireland. Between 1900 and 1932 it was won by John Flanagan (three times) Matt McGrath, Patrick Ryan and Pat O'Callaghan (twice).

Only the latter actually won it for Ireland (in 1928 and 1932). Ireland didn't compete as an independent country before then. Flanagan, McGrath and Ryan were known as the Irish Whales, they were all born within a few miles of each other on the Limerick/Tipperary border, all won for the US and all worked at the same day job, which was of course as policemen in the NYPD.

New York's finest!

And still remembered 100+ years later.

What was your point?

PhilOssophy

Tadhg Furlong, a good Irish property developer.
All the Munster lads, yep good Irish property developers.

And wow, jesus wept when some south Dubliners wanted to do the best for their kids and they ended up playing their rugby and getting educated in Blackrock, Clongowes or St. Michaels.

There's this great thing called "Live and let live". And there is absolutely no disputing that rugby has done much better than the GAA at including everybody (especially in small towns, etc). In GAA, you'll always be an outsider if you are not from the parish.

Ah good old Irish begrudgery, don't ever change.

Snickers Man

terrydel wrote: »

Rugny league exists because the poshos kept their sport amateur to ensure the working classes couldnt be part of it. So the working classes formed a new game for themselves.
Every element of the union game is elitist and exclusionary in nature. I cant abide it at all, and I'm personally delighted its been kicked off its high horse here.
Its popularity here is a product of and runs parallel with the celtic tiger, when so many became materialistic, money orientated shallow f**kers. Loads of them saw rugby as something to be associated with, and thus took an 'interest' in following it. The numbers actually participating in it beyond shouting at the tv in the likes of Searsons or Kielys is still painfully low, 12th in the country in terms of participation.
The largely middle class media we have flagellate themselves over it chasing their middle class audience. The players are all 'legends' or 'heroes' once they manage to get their arms thru the sleeves of their jerseys. Judged in a completely different manner to people in other sports.
They play in an 8 team sport and have never managed to get past the last 8 which is pitiful. Serial failures held up as the greatest sportsmen in the country without any justification at all.
I hope a bit of hubris is brought to them, but like their ilk who caused our recession, I doubt it will happen.

Talk about a chip on your shoulder!

You've got an Intel factory on each!

terrydel

Andreas77 wrote: »

Personally I find football dull as dishwater. Great game to play, an absolutely abysmal sport to watch.

But neither do I feel the need to squeeze out a long smelly string of wet brown rope onto the faces of all those inadequate Irish footballers. They have much fewer successes than the rugby players, but are encased in a losing tradition stretching back since the birth of the beautiful game really. Different people will enjoy those different strokes. My football team is much more successful but still I won't watch that game.

To reach the top in soccer is simply far, far harder than it is in rugby.
Our achievements in the soccer world cup far outweigh those in the rugby world cup in terms of difficulty and achievement.

s7ryf3925pivug

We're pretty good at showjumping, and women's hockey. Two more good respectable sports.

terrydel

Snickers Man wrote: »

Talk about a chip on your shoulder!

You've got an Intel factory on each!

Coming from someone who suggests rugby players are 'better people' I'll take that as a compliment.

Ready4Boarding

terrydel wrote: »

Its gas that the professional classes and market economy types who tend to make up the rugby supporting fraternity...

Over one million people tune in for Ireland's WC quarter-final with the All Blacks."

That's a lot of "market economy types." Doesn't even include those who watched on Eir or RTE Player.

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Ah good old Irish begrudgery, don't ever change.

From an Independent article today:

"It is true many of us have had a jolly time laughing at the "guys" and their blockbusting capitulation to the All Blacks in Japan. Unless you've been privately educated, work in public relations and /or make a point of wearing your statement sunglasses up over your head, the rolling omni-shambles that is Irish rugby is the comedy that is forever yielding chuckles. How awful if that was ever taken away from us."

Most comically, it's an article about the Dail voting controversy and other deficiencies in Ireland. His bitterness must have been extreme for him to have forced in a discussion of the Irish rugby team.

terrydel

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Tadhg Furlong, a good Irish property developer.
All the Munster lads, yep good Irish property developers.

And wow, jesus wept when some south Dubliners wanted to do the best for their kids and they ended up playing their rugby and getting educated in Blackrock, Clongowes or St. Michaels.

There's this great thing called "Live and let live". And there is absolutely no disputing that rugby has done much better than the GAA at including everybody (especially in small towns, etc). In GAA, you'll always be an outsider if you are not from the parish.

Ah good old Irish begrudgery, don't ever change.

Ah the typical irish response to anyone who doesn't climb on the bandwagon, call them a begrudger. Don't ever change.

Andreas77

That is simply untrue. Any country in the world can produce mediocre football team capable of “parking bus” against “on paper” superior team, with hope of edging stalemate by virtue of penalty in final quarter.
Rugby is far more difficult game to succeed in than football because it requires more in physicality, more in discipline, more in intelligence, and more in bravery.
Reason many football matches are so close in score is not because of high levels of skill, but because beautiful game is fairly easy to be decent at, whereas being good at rugby is far more difficult. Rugby has been played for many years in Germany, but still they have not the ability, also Spain, but even country like Ireland can put out football team capable of running good team close. There is no equivalent to New Zealand in football because ceiling is much lower. There is less to be good at, less to understand, less ways to play the game (tactics), less variety of physical specimens needed, just less variety in all facets.
Anyway I won’t talk of Irish footballers as I can’t bear to watch that. Different people will find different strokes. We won't argue.

friendlyfun

Luke Plump Gymnasium wrote: »

We're pretty good at showjumping, and women's hockey. Two more good respectable sports.

That's if the horses is not drugged 😅

ErnestBorgnine

Andreas77 wrote: »

That is simply untrue. Any country in the world can produce mediocre football team capable of “parking bus” against “on paper” superior team, with hope of edging stalemate by virtue of penalty in final quarter.
Rugby is far more difficult game to succeed in than football because it requires more in physicality, more in discipline, more in intelligence, and more in bravery.
Reason many football matches are so close in score is not because of high levels of skill, but because beautiful game is fairly easy to be decent at, whereas being good at rugby is far more difficult. Rugby has been played for many years in Germany, but still they have not the ability, also Spain, but even country like Ireland can put out football team capable of running good team close. There is no equivalent to New Zealand in football because ceiling is much lower. There is less to be good at, less to understand, less ways to play the game (tactics), less variety of physical specimens needed, just less variety in all facets.
Anyway I won’t talk of Irish footballers as I can’t bear to watch that. Different people will find different strokes. We won't argue.

This is why people take the piss when #teamofus enevitablty **** the bed in every World Cup.

Seeing as there are only ever 5, at most 6, competitive teams in the World Cup and Ireland have never gone beyond the last 8 is not really saying a lot for the disipline, intelligence and bravery of your heroes.

terrydel

Andreas77 wrote: »

That is simply untrue. Any country in the world can produce mediocre football team capable of “parking bus” against “on paper” superior team, with hope of edging stalemate by virtue of penalty in final quarter.
Rugby is far more difficult game to succeed in than football because it requires more in physicality, more in discipline, more in intelligence, and more in bravery.
Reason many football matches are so close in score is not because of high levels of skill, but because beautiful game is fairly easy to be decent at, whereas being good at rugby is far more difficult. Rugby has been played for many years in Germany, but still they have not the ability, also Spain, but even country like Ireland can put out football team capable of running good team close. There is no equivalent to New Zealand in football because ceiling is much lower. There is less to be good at, less to understand, less ways to play the game (tactics), less variety of physical specimens needed, just less variety in all facets.
Anyway I won’t talk of Irish footballers as I can’t bear to watch that. Different people will find different strokes. We won't argue.

Sorry mate, but you are talking absolute bollox.
Complete and utter bollox.
The simple fact of the numbers playing soccer mean reaching the elite level is harder. The argument ends there.

completedit

Germany, USA and Spain are **** at rugby for the same reason that Ireland is **** at tennis. You might get a few oddballs playing it once they find out they aren’t good enough for other sports but nobody actually dreams of playing the RWC final in those countries. Ireland probably has high numbers of people playing tennis but there’s no culture of it, it’s a simple game but nothing that demands excellence.

GreenandRed

Danthemanhere wrote: »

The last game I went to was a Leinster v Munster game, maybe not the best to assess things on but it wasn't great. I was surrounded by other Leinster fans so maybe I didn't hear the abuse from the other side but shouts of 'go home to the bog', 'culchie knackers' and things like that turned me off. We never went again.

A few posh bigots drove you away by letting you know they weren't happy about you being there? You'll encounter bigots all your life. If you liked the rest of the match experience, and I'm guessing there were some decent people there, go again and ignore people like that. The thing they want most from people is a reaction, ignoring them isn't easy, granted, but it'll scupper their powertrip. For me they're definitely in the minority so don't let them influence how you want to do things.

Snickers Man

terrydel wrote: »

Coming from someone who suggests rugby players are 'better people' I'll take that as a compliment.

I've been going to rugby internationals (here and abroad) for more than 40 years. I've also been to a few soccer matches. Granted, Irish soccer fans are generally speaking a sound bunch, out for the craic and not prone to nastiness.

The same cannot be said for many of the other "stakeholders" such as English football fans (in particular) but also those of other countries. There's a reason soccer fans have to be escorted by police from train stations and coralled into tightly segregated enclosures whereas rugby fans (and GAA fans, let's be fair) can mingle before during and after the game with impunity and no threat to the local populace.

Here's the acid test: when and where was rugby (or the GAA's) equivalent of The Heysel riot, the Hillsborough catastrophe, the Lansdowne Road riot, the (sic) Hampden riot........I could go on.

Better people. It's the only explanation.

SJW Lover

FrancieBrady wrote: »

My granny had advice on that as well...switch it off.

Why do you think anyone cares what your granny thinks? You are part of her line. Ergo, not that pushed on what her simplistic views are. Find me a quote on rugby from Isaac Newton's granny and we may have something to consider. Some old lady spouting generalities in Monaghan or Cavan, not so much.

FrancieBrady

ErnestBorgnine wrote: »

This is why people take the piss when #teamofus enevitablty **** the bed in every World Cup.

Seeing as there are only ever 5, at most 6, competitive teams in the World Cup and Ireland have never gone beyond the last 8 is not really saying a lot for the disipline, intelligence and bravery of your heroes.

Who is 'taking the piss' of a company's advertising slogan cashing in on a team's success, just like Opel quickly did on the Irish soccer team's success or AIG did on Dublin's.

Nobody of any importance is 'taking the piss', just the lazy arsed perpetual moaners disappointed because they got suckered into some hype.

Deary me.

Montage of Feck

Dr_serious2 wrote: »

Men vs goys.

Racist

terrydel

Another reason we are 'good' at rugby, apart from the fact its a tiny pool in world terms and relatively easy to get to the top of, is that the game here is largely centered on well-to-do elitist private schools. And these schools use the sport as a form of propaganda to make themselves look good. The players are given professional level coaching, facilities, advice from a very young age, it is the closest thing to in this country to the American college sports system. This gives them the best of everything from a very early age, and the schools facilitate the time to train and focus on rugby at least to the same degree as the academic side, no other sport has these advantages in this country.
If our soccer players had this kind of access to elite and professional level coaching, facilities etc from the same age as the rugby lot do, they'd be in a far better place in the world pecking order, tho probably not as near to the top as the rugby lot allegedly are, because unlike rugby, the soccer pyramid is far higher and harder to scale, because it is the number one sport in dozens of nations, rugby is the number one sport in possibly 1-2 nations at most.

GreenandRed

Snickers Man wrote: »

I've been going to rugby internationals (here and abroad) for more than 40 years. I've also been to a few soccer matches. Granted, Irish soccer fans are generally speaking a sound bunch, out for the craic and not prone to nastiness.

The same cannot be said for many of the other "stakeholders" such as English football fans (in particular) but also those of other countries. There's a reason soccer fans have to be escorted by police from train stations and coralled into tightly segregated enclosures whereas rugby fans (and GAA fans, let's be fair) can mingle before during and after the game with impunity and no threat to the local populace.

Here's the acid test: when and where was rugby (or the GAA's) equivalent of The Heysel riot, the Hillsborough catastrophe, the Lansdowne Road riot, the (sic) Hampden riot........I could go on.

Better people. It's the only explanation.

Rugby Union has upper class origins, still in Ireland a large upper class support base,and soccer is a working class game and maybe 8 or 9 times more soccer supporters worldwide than rugby union. A bit easier to be a better person when you're family has some some money compared to working class kids and the route to a better education is easier. Heysel and Landsdowne riots were caused by idiots. Hillsborough was caused by woeful planning and bad policing.Your 'better people' comment would compound the mistaken belief that every rugby union person in Ireland is a snob. Plenty of rugby clubs, players, supporters around the country. And plenty of them participate in Rugby Union, GAA, Soccer and other sports.

terrydel

Snickers Man wrote: »

I've been going to rugby internationals (here and abroad) for more than 40 years. I've also been to a few soccer matches. Granted, Irish soccer fans are generally speaking a sound bunch, out for the craic and not prone to nastiness.

The same cannot be said for many of the other "stakeholders" such as English football fans (in particular) but also those of other countries. There's a reason soccer fans have to be escorted by police from train stations and coralled into tightly segregated enclosures whereas rugby fans (and GAA fans, let's be fair) can mingle before during and after the game with impunity and no threat to the local populace.

Here's the acid test: when and where was rugby (or the GAA's) equivalent of The Heysel riot, the Hillsborough catastrophe, the Lansdowne Road riot, the (sic) Hampden riot........I could go on.



Better people. It's the only explanation.

I've been to well in excess of 100 soccer games in the uk and seen only one incident, a small argument between 3 lads were a punch or two was thrown.
I've been to numerous games in other European countries too and seen nothing.
Better people my arse.

terrydel

GreenandRed wrote: »

Rugby Union has upper class origins, still in Ireland a large upper class support base,and soccer is a working class game and maybe 8 or 9 times more soccer supporters worldwide than rugby union. A bit easier to be a better person when you're family has some some money compared to working class kids and the route to a better education is easier. Heysel and Landsdowne riots were caused by idiots. Hillsborough was caused by woeful planning and bad policing.Your 'better people' comment would compound the mistaken belief that every rugby union person in Ireland is a snob. Plenty of rugby clubs, players, supporters around the country. And plenty of them participate in Rugby Union, GAA, Soccer and other sports.

I'd say its more like 80 or 90 times than 8 or 9.
You can go anywhere in the world and be practically guaranteed to meet someone, not speak eachothers language and still communicate about football. As a sport it is unique in that regard. Rugby is a drop in the sporting ocean, the preserve of in the main the professional classes who like to keep things for themselves. They are welcome to it.

PhilOssophy

terrydel wrote: »

Ah the typical irish response to anyone who doesn't climb on the bandwagon, call them a begrudger. Don't ever change.

No, I don't care who jumps on the bandwagon or whatever. I don't take any delight in any Irish person's failure, be that at rugby/golf/hockey/tennis/football/show jumping/whatever. Live n let live, enjoy what you want to enjoy and let others do the same. If it doesn't float your boat, don't worry.

FrancieBrady

PhilOssophy wrote: »

No, I don't care who jumps on the bandwagon or whatever. I don't take any delight in any Irish person's failure, be that at rugby/golf/hockey/tennis/football/show jumping/whatever. Live n let live, enjoy what you want to enjoy and let others do the same. If it doesn't float your boat, don't worry.

Has Terry been dropped from Team Of Us as well as the others?

Muahahaha

Andreas77 wrote: »

Rugby is far more difficult game to succeed in than football because it requires more in physicality, more in discipline, more in intelligence, and more in bravery.
Reason many football matches are so close in score is not because of high levels of skill, but because beautiful game is fairly easy to be decent at, whereas being good at rugby is far more difficult. .

sorry not buying that, there is far more skill in a game where your feet are the primary way you play it. If you took a Premier League striker and asked him to make 10 conversion attempts from 30 yard his success rate would be far higher than if you took a professional rugby player and asked him to hit the top corner of the net from 30 yards. We all grow up using our hands, its natural to us. Using your feet requires much more skill and a deftness of touch. Im not saying rugby isnt a skillful game because it is but football is a harder skill to master.

terrydel wrote: »

Sorry mate, but you are talking absolute bollox.
Complete and utter bollox.
The simple fact of the numbers playing soccer mean reaching the elite level is harder. The argument ends there.

As a friend said to me recently when you think about it there are 8 billion in the world of which about half are male. Virtually every one of them will have at some stage played a game of football, even it is was just kicking an empty can of coke between school jumpers as goal posts. Out of those 4 billion who've played the game only around 400 ever make it into the Premier League each season. Its insanely difficult to reach the elite level of football and it has gotten harder and harder over the years as evidenced by Ireland only having a couple of international players now playing in the Premier League whereas 20 years ago more or less all our international players were playing at the very top level.

Mike9832

terrydel wrote: »

To reach the top in soccer is simply far, far harder than it is in rugby.
Our achievements in the soccer world cup far outweigh those in the rugby world cup in terms of difficulty and achievement.

Not enough far's

Absurd even comparing them

I'd compare it with Cricket

Duckworth_Luas

I guess when rugby football made the jump from "foreign sport", like soccer, to a truly national sport, like Gaelic football and hurling, it was always setting itself up for criticism from the insecure soccer people.

terrydel

Duckworth_Luas wrote: »

I guess when rugby football made the jump from "foreign sport", like soccer, to a truly national sport, like Gaelic football and hurling, it was always setting itself up for criticism from the insecure soccer people.

In terms of participation it's 12th on the list in this country, so hardly truly national I'd wager.
Soccer has nothing to be insecure about, it's a global phenomenon and transcends the notion of a mere sport. It is practically an international language in many ways. Put simply, it matters. Rugby doesn't.