Of course a world cup in Japan has games threatened by Super Typhoons.
Wales seem to have steadied the ship after being 10-0 down. Now 14-10 up and Fiji have to finish the first half with 14, Wales will obviously be looking for another try before the break.
Wales went behind again, but won through in the end - though with a potentially serious injury to one of their key players, Jonatha Davies. At least they can play their second string against Uruguay, which gives them some valuable breathing space ahead of the quarter finals.
It’s clearly 100% the opponent’s responsibility if:
- you’re trapped in a ruck and an opponent shoulder-charges your head
- you’re being lifted in a line-out and an opponent takes out one of your supports
- you’re in the air catching a high kick and an opponent smashes into you
- you’re picked up by two opponents and spear-tackled
Yes that probably would qualify Japan, but it’s unpleasant to think that Japan could win 3 / 4 games and not qualify YET AGAIN!
Looked like a cracker of a game from the highlights. I’m sad Fiji are out, always a great team to watch.
NZ v Italy and England v France cancelled for the typhoon. Scotland v Japan in jeopardy. Damn shame but probably the right decision I guess.
I don’t think France will be too disappointed by that outcome - OK, they lose their chance to top the group, but that means they will likely face a depleted Wales in the QF, which they may prefer to Australia (as more of a known quantity) anyway. And of course, they get more rest and much lower chance of injury, they probably wouldn’t have beaten England without laying bodies on the line.
Italy are the worst-affected so far - despite the odds being against them, no doubt they fancied their chances at somehow springing an upset against the All Blacks. But that will pale into insignificance compared with Scotland’s frustration if they don’t get to play Japan, a match they have much more chance of winning than Italy had of beating NZ. Here’s hoping (mostly for those who live in the affected areas) that the storm turns away fast.
Not sure I agree. The presumption should be in favour of playing as many scheduled matches as possible. I don’t know the ins and outs of the logistics, so quite possibly every attempt has been made to get the games to happen anywhere - even down to a closed (but televised) match at a low-level club pitch. Maybe there is absolutely nowhere in the entirety of Japan that could host these matches in a pinch. But it doesn’t seem that’s been the approach.
I get that, in the event the match is moved, supporters are going to be pissed off at finding themselves in the wrong city, reduced to watching in a bar or their hotel room despite having shelled out for a live game. But this is a 2x2 outcome situation: either the conditions are playable, or they’re not; either the game is moved, or it’s not. The outcomes are:
Not playable, match not moved: game cancelled, fans shit out of luck; tournament affected by weather
Not playable, match moved: game on, fans no worse off than above; tournament reflects actual contests
Playable, match not moved: game on, fans happy, tournament reflects actual contests - the best of all possible worlds
Playable, match moved: game on, but fans shafted; tournament reflects actual contests
If you move the match, you may or may not piss off ticket holders but you definitely ensure that the tournament is decided only by skill on the day. If you don’t move the match, you might get the best outcome of having the match as planned, but you risk having a tournament partially decided by the weather.
Parisse of Italy has just put the question: “If the All Blacks needed 5 points from the game, do you really think it would have been cancelled?”. I think that’s kind of fair. And I’m partisan enough to ask the corollary: “If Japan needed to win their game, would the organisers be taking the same gamble on the weather in Yokohama, or would they be moving it to be sure the hosts had their chance?”
Like I say, maybe it is impossible to move it. But I suspect it’s merely very difficult, and people are OK taking a gamble to avoid that difficulty because of which teams’ progress is in jeopardy.
If you are for Scotland, I would be getting prepared for the shaft. Italy could have progressed had they beaten NZ (however unlikely that outcome). The precedent therefore has been set - World Rugby are not in the business of worrying too much about whether this impacts who goes through, they will make the decision regardless.
Part of me is thinking “what goes around comes around” though. Scotland were major beneficiaries of the slanted schedule in 2015, giving Japan very limited turn around time from the SA game and making it very difficult for them to beat Scotland, with the result that they went out. World Rugby fucked up the organisation then, they fucked it up again this time (it’s typhoon season, it can’t have been beyond the wit of man to see this could have happened) and I didn’t see too many Scots complaining in 2015.
World Rugby obviously have a case to answer. As an Englishman, firstly I hope that everyone is going to be OK in what looks like a pretty major weather event, the same thought occupies slots 2-4 in my thoughts and then in number 5, reasonably pleased that England are avoiding a game where injuries may have been accrued and can get on prepping for a QF. They’ve come out as the biggest beneficiaries of this whole debacle, I think.
I fear so, and while I take your point about Japan’s short turnaround in 2015, at least they got to play the game.
You are also probably right about England coming off best - but that’s kind of the point. No-one wants an asterisk beside their achievements, they want a clear victory. (Although, if it comes to it, we’ll all take the asterisk in a pinch.)
The most populous metropolitan area on earth is likely to be hit by a huge typhoon. Personally I think a few pool games (even crucial ones) being disrupted isn’t really the most important thing here. Yes it sucks for the teams affected. But a bit of perspective is required.
Of course we all hope that the typhoon will not cause casualties.
Nevertheless this event has been years in the planning (including the knowledge that it’s typhoon season in the area during the tournament) and the organisers surely could have done better than simply cancelling games.
Um… to be fair, we have literally all said that. It doesn’t mean we can’t discuss how the tournament could have been organised differently.
I think if England end up winning the tournament, it would be the smallest of small asterisks given they had already qualified for the QF anyway (and may well be facing a tougher game vs Australia rather than Wales). NZ’s asterisk would be slightly bigger, but not much given the recent form of them and Italy. If Japan were to somehow win, then it’s a proper asterisk, but let’s not get silly.
I remember way back in the 1999/2000 English football season (20 years ago - goodness) when Manchester United unprecedentedly didn’t enter the FA Cup, because it clashed with their World Club Cup commitments. There was much commentary about how the winners that season would always have the asterisk “*Manchester United did not compete” against their achievement. But I don’t think anyone really cares about that now, it’s just one strong team among many. Then again, I can’t remember offhand who did win the cup that season.
I have to join the chorus here. This isn’t some zero-sum game, where complaining about poor organization of the World Cup means that we somehow have less concern to spare for the people of Japan. It’s called “typhoon season” for a reason, and you’d think that they might have taken some account of that, beyond simply “If there’s a big typhoon, we might have to cancel some games.”
The Wallabies didn’t exactly look convincing in their 27-8 win over Georgia. England must be feeling reasonably confident right now.
Georgia did make more of a game of it than I thought. But I don’t think Australia will be unduly concerned. After all, it’s Georgia’s last international for several months, their last game in a major tournament for 4 years, in a way they had a lot more to play for than Australia (given that Wales’ fifth-choice XV will still beat Uruguay) who would have been prioritising injury avoidance above most other things. They gave it everything but it was still comfortable for the Aussies who didn’t really need to come out of third gear. Their level against England will no doubt be rather higher.
I’m going make a not-very-bold prediction: at least one of the quarter-finals will be effectively decided by a yellow/red card. I hope not, but it looks pretty nailed on at this point. If I were coaching out there my number one priority would be getting my players to avoid it being them. Which is hard, given you want players to aggressively compete for the ball and be really fired up on the pitch.
I think all of this is right, but my real concern is that when Australia really do need to step it up against good competition, they have shown a real tendency over the last few months to make far too many mistakes. I have no doubt at all that their intensity will be higher; I just worry about their ability to execute when it really matters.
Don’t worry, England are exactly the same.
Fair enough coverage here in NZ has been all about the rugby with precious little about the wider impacts.