Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Mon Nov 08, 2010 1:13 pm  

Catalancs wrote:

Britain does not include Ireland.

Ireland's RU team includes Northern Ireland
Britain includes Northern Ireland, it's quite a well known issue. There has been considerable discussion over the years.

Hope this helps.

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Mon Nov 08, 2010 1:25 pm  

Shadow wrote:

Ireland's RU team includes Northern Ireland
Britain includes Northern Ireland, it's quite a well known issue. There has been considerable discussion over the years.
Hope this helps.

No, Britain doesn't include Northern Ireland. The United Kingdom includes Northern Ireland.
Which discussions were you following?

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Mon Nov 08, 2010 1:33 pm  

Shadow wrote:

Ireland's RU team includes Northern Ireland
Britain includes Northern Ireland, it's quite a well known issue. There has been considerable discussion over the years.

Hope this helps.

It would help, but only if it was factual.

Great Britain is England, Scotland and Wales

There are some sporting teams (athletics springs to mind) which compete as Great Britain & Northern Ireland, often shortened to GB for the sake of brevity.

The UK is the United Kingdom of Great Britan and Northern Ireland.

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Mon Nov 08, 2010 2:41 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

It would help, but only if it was factual.

Great Britain is England, Scotland and Wales

There are some sporting teams (athletics springs to mind) which compete as Great Britain & Northern Ireland, often shortened to GB for the sake of brevity.

The UK is the United Kingdom of Great Britan and Northern Ireland.

And there is an International Rugby Team that represents both Northern and Southern Ireland. As you have so correctly identified Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom, therefore showing Ireland's Rugby Union internationals on UK television is not showing a foreign team.

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:54 pm  

Having watched the second half at work, how frustrating must it be for Hape and Ashton to see how slowly the ball is distributed out towards the wings. I should stop watching matches with League eyes really.

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:36 pm  

Dunbar wrote:

What strikes me most about Union is how the rules stifle the best teams and bring the teams much closer

How would that be ?

the All Blacks were so superior to the English team it was untrue

Not sure which game you were watching, NZ started the game far better and were the more prescise team thoughout. They profited by poor England defence in the first half.

and yet the score line ended up pretty close. As far as I can see that is because the rules at the breakdown make it very difficult to develop structured attacking plays

The first 30 minutes England had trouble getting their hands on the ball and NZ were successful at generating quick ball. This contradicts what you stated above. The current law interpretations actually favour the attacking team.

What I would say is that if those two teams were playing League, the All Blacks would have won by 50+... Union must be such a frustrating game to play if you are a talented rugby player

Now I am pretty sure you did not watch the game. England one more ball in the opposition 22 than NZ did, the last 20 minutes England were in the ascendancy. Having said that NZ were the better team and deserved to in what ended up being a very close game. As for the comment about talented players being frustrated, Jason Robinson stated on more than one occasion RU gave him more opportunity to expression than he found in RL, arguably he was the most exciting back to emerge outside the NRL.

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Tue Nov 09, 2010 3:08 am  

Thoth wrote:

How would that be ?

Not sure which game you were watching, NZ started the game far better and were the more prescise team thoughout. They profited by poor England defence in the first half.

The first 30 minutes England had trouble getting their hands on the ball and NZ were successful at generating quick ball. This contradicts what you stated above. The current law interpretations actually favour the attacking team.

Now I am pretty sure you did not watch the game. England one more ball in the opposition 22 than NZ did, the last 20 minutes England were in the ascendancy. Having said that NZ were the better team and deserved to in what ended up being a very close game. As for the comment about talented players being frustrated, Jason Robinson stated on more than one occasion RU gave him more opportunity to expression than he found in RL, arguably he was the most exciting back to emerge outside the NRL.

Care factor not high other than to say Robinson would have said anything they, union, paid him to.

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Tue Nov 09, 2010 2:45 pm  

Catalancs wrote:

Why was there a game between two foreign teams on BBC 2 prime time?

Only 35,000 (exactly 35,000? ... really?) for the Ireland v South Africa game today.

Because Ireland play as one and Represent Ulster.

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Tue Nov 09, 2010 2:47 pm  

I see the Union calculator was out on Saturday. My weekend paper reported that 70,000 were at Wales v Aus.

Re: If you must discuss Union, do it here II : Tue Nov 09, 2010 7:24 pm  

Catalancs wrote:

Why was there a game between two foreign teams on BBC 2 prime time?

Only 35,000 (exactly 35,000? ... really?) for the Ireland v South Africa game today.

The IRFU f*cked up with ticket prices apparently.