Print Page | Close Window

World Cup Qualification

Printed From: National League Rugby Discussion Forums
Category: League Rugby - www.leaguerugby.co.uk
Forum Name: Clubhouse chat
Forum Description: For rugby related posts that fit nowhere else.. When you're ready Sandra.
URL: http://www.rolling-maul.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=16753
Printed Date: 16 Nov 2018 at 01:09
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: World Cup Qualification
Posted By: Pistacio
Subject: World Cup Qualification
Date Posted: 15 May 2018 at 16:18
http://https://www.worldrugby.org/news/334794" rel="nofollow - http://https://www.worldrugby.org/news/334794

Belgium, Spain and Romania gone

Russia through

Portugal and Germany to play off to play Samoa. 

Preocanin should be involved? Anybody else from the Championship of Nationals?



Replies:
Posted By: Robb
Date Posted: 15 May 2018 at 16:36
Russian hackers at it again! :)

Shame for Spain, they were probably the only team that might have put up a fight against Samoa. Nevertheless, I'd love Germany to get to the playoff because it will be great to see them get steamrollered by Samoa (Justice for 1900 I'd say!). But just goes to show the ludicrousness of the qualifying system that the IRB readjusted so that the Pacific Islands could get back in.


Posted By: JonDee
Date Posted: 15 May 2018 at 19:09
Hopefully the board of Rugby Europe will be sanctioned as they oversaw the whole farce


Posted By: Camquin
Date Posted: 15 May 2018 at 19:48
Whether you are Romania or Romsey check and double check player eligibility 

-------------
Blood and Sand


Posted By: Robb
Date Posted: 15 May 2018 at 20:05
Originally posted by JonDee JonDee wrote:

Hopefully the board of Rugby Europe will be sanctioned as they oversaw the whole farce

Even more of a farce when you discover that the IRB have no jurisdiction over Rugby Europe's RWC qualification system (ie. referee appointments, governance of player eligibility etc.).

If anything, the IRB should just formalise it in the lawbook that they are the top authority in rugby and have the power to intervene unilaterally where the regional federations have failed.


Posted By: Pistacio
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 07:54
I'm happy to do 20 GBP to a charity of your choice on this fixture , Germany in their current state will be steam rolled by Portugal.

If the likes of Bardy at Montepllier , de Chaves at London Irish, Marques at Brive, Bettencourt at Carcassone, Tadjer at Brive (to name a few) are selected I suspect Portugal first beat Germany away and then go on to  nick a victory in Lisbon on the 30th against Samoa before taking a major shoeing in Samoa a fortnight later.

Which if I'm correct leaves Portugal  in a four way tournament with Canada, Kenya and someone else for the final spot. 


Posted By: Blub
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 08:26
Originally posted by Pistacio Pistacio wrote:

http://https://www.worldrugby.org/news/334794" rel="nofollow - http://https://www.worldrugby.org/news/334794

Belgium, Spain and Romania gone

Russia through

Portugal and Germany to play off to play Samoa. 

Preocanin should be involved? Anybody else from the Championship of Nationals?


I suspect it is not over yet, as I am sure that Spain will appeal.  I understand that the (in)eligibility of the Spain players in question is not altogether straightforward.


Posted By: tworeefs
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 09:37
I am not sure that Spain will appeal.  My suspicion is that World Rugby would not make such an announcement if it hadn't been agreed, however reluctantly, by all the parties concerned.


Posted By: Robb
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 09:42
Originally posted by Pistacio Pistacio wrote:

I'm happy to do 20 GBP to a charity of your choice on this fixture , Germany in their current state will be steam rolled by Portugal.

If the likes of Bardy at Montepllier , de Chaves at London Irish, Marques at Brive, Bettencourt at Carcassone, Tadjer at Brive (to name a few) are selected I suspect Portugal first beat Germany away and then go on to  nick a victory in Lisbon on the 30th against Samoa before taking a major shoeing in Samoa a fortnight later.

Which if I'm correct leaves Portugal  in a four way tournament with Canada, Kenya and someone else for the final spot. 

Probably be Portugal, Rhodesia, Canada and Hong Kong in the repechage.  Here's hoping Hong Kong do well because the IRB robbed them of the automatic Asian qualifying spot.

By the way, I wasn't serious when I said Germany would get to face Samoa, I just said I would like to see it just based on history. 


Posted By: castleparknight
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 10:16
Robb

Rhodesia ceased to exist in the 1970's - I assume you are an expat


-------------
Onward and Upwards C'mon Donny!


Posted By: Fat Albert
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 10:44
Romania have appealed, on the grounds that they followed due process and were advised by Rugby Europe that the player concerned was eligible...

If so, an even bigger farce

Having watched video of the controversial game that resulted in very long bans for some Spanish players, all I can say is the biased/incompetent decision making exhibited by the officials against Spain wasn't as bad that seen in National 1 most weeks Tongue


-------------
a Freudian slip is when you say one thing but mean your mother


Posted By: Camquin
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 12:29
Hang on Rugby Europe, run by a Romanian, told Romania that a player was eligible, even though he palpably wasn't. 

Quote
8.2 A player who has played for the senior fifteen-a-side national representative team or the next senior fifteen-a-side national representative team or the senior national representative sevens team of a Union is not eligible to play for the senior fifteen-a-side national representative team


Quote
Regulation 8 is a strict liability offence and shall be construed in accordance with the principles of strict liability in English law. It is not, therefore, necessary that fault or intent on the part of a Union be shown in order for a breach of Regulation 8 to be established. Nor is lack of fault or intent on
the part of a Union a defence to a breach of Regulation 8


Sione Faka’osilea played for Tonga in the 2013 Gold Coast 7s - erog captured by Tonga.

They might be able to appeal against the fine - but not the ponts deduction.


-------------
Blood and Sand


Posted By: Raider999
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 12:33
Originally posted by Fat Albert Fat Albert wrote:

Romania have appealed, on the grounds that they followed due process and were advised by Rugby Europe that the player concerned was eligible...

If so, an even bigger farce

Having watched video of the controversial game that resulted in very long bans for some Spanish players, all I can say is the biased/incompetent decision making exhibited by the officials against Spain wasn't as bad that seen in National 1 most weeks Tongue


I've just read an article on the bbc sport website, saying Romania were advised by Billy & Mako Vunipolu's father that the player concerned was eligible for Romania - not sure if Rugby Europe also told them.

-------------
RAID ON


Posted By: Count Ford
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 12:46
I think this whole issue has just shown how ridiculous the international eligibility rules have become.

Considering players can qualify by residence in just a few years it makes no sense at all to restrict players to one country only. Surely a two year gap between representing a different country is sufficient to avoid conflicts of interest.

Lets take Cameron Redpath. Say England cap him for 30 secs then discard him never to be seen again. For the rest of his career he is ineligible for competing for Scotland.


Posted By: Mark W-J
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 12:58
For me the most ridiculous thing is that Faka’osilea has played seventeen test matches in as many months for Romania, and yet World Rugby didn't once question his eligibility.  If this happened in a level nine match the club would receive an immediate points deduction, but World Rugby apparently don't have any system to record international appearances (in any tournament) to determine players' eligibility.


Posted By: Raider999
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 13:13
Originally posted by Mark W-J Mark W-J wrote:

For me the most ridiculous thing is that <span style=": rgb251, 251, 253;">Faka’osilea has played seventeen test matches in as many months for Romania, and yet World Rugby didn't once question his eligibility.  If this happened in a level nine match the club would receive an immediate points deduction, but World Rugby apparently don't have any system to record international appearances (in any tournament) to determine players' eligibility.</span>


Not always true - I seem to remember one N1/N2 side getting a minimal points deduction a few years ago when the ineligible player played over 20 games.

-------------
RAID ON


Posted By: Rabbie Burns
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 14:57
Couldn’t happen now with GMS unless he played under a false name

-------------
So many Christians not enough Lions


Posted By: Blub
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 16:38
Originally posted by Count Ford Count Ford wrote:


Lets take Cameron Redpath. Say England cap him for 30 secs then discard him never to be seen again. For the rest of his career he is ineligible for competing for Scotland.


Appreciate that you used Cameron Redpath simply as a hypothetical example, but i do think that we'll see a lot of him in an England shirt.  Not necessarily this summer, but certainly in the future.


Posted By: Blub
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 16:44
Originally posted by Camquin Camquin wrote:

Hang on Rugby Europe, run by a Romanian, told Romania that a player was eligible, even though he palpably wasn't. 

Quote
8.2 A player who has played for the senior fifteen-a-side national representative team or the next senior fifteen-a-side national representative team or the senior national representative sevens team of a Union is not eligible to play for the senior fifteen-a-side national representative team


Quote
Regulation 8 is a strict liability offence and shall be construed in accordance with the principles of strict liability in English law. It is not, therefore, necessary that fault or intent on the part of a Union be shown in order for a breach of Regulation 8 to be established. Nor is lack of fault or intent on
the part of a Union a defence to a breach of Regulation 8


Sione Faka’osilea played for Tonga in the 2013 Gold Coast 7s - erog captured by Tonga.

They might be able to appeal against the fine - but not the ponts deduction.
\

If I have understood that correctly, doesn't that make it incredibly difficult to be sure of the correct eligibility of a player.  They would surely have to rely on the memory and/or honesty of said player, if they cannot rely on the accuracy of the other national boards.

particularly given the fact that not every U20, or Sevens team, or even every game they play, would necessarily preclude playing fo ranother country later in life.

What a complete mess.


Posted By: Raider999
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 17:58
I am sure the Russians knew everything about it all.

-------------
RAID ON


Posted By: Camquin
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 18:38
Yes if you accept a cap from England, England 7s or the official second XV - Saxons  - you are captured for life and cannot play for another senior xv.

Note even if you just sit on the bench and do not get on, you are still captured.

The list of official second XVs is http://www.worldrugby.org/regulations/next-senior-representative-team" rel="nofollow - here .
Not sure how long it has been there though.


-------------
Blood and Sand


Posted By: Count Ford
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 20:42
Originally posted by Blub Blub wrote:

Originally posted by Count Ford Count Ford wrote:


Lets take Cameron Redpath. Say England cap him for 30 secs then discard him never to be seen again. For the rest of his career he is ineligible for competing for Scotland.


Appreciate that you used Cameron Redpath simply as a hypothetical example, but i do think that we'll see a lot of him in an England shirt.  Not necessarily this summer, but certainly in the future.


I agree and hope Cameron goes on to have a successful England career. It just seems crazy that you can spend 2 or is it 3 years in a country and suddenly you can play for that country under residence, but get one cap for a country and you are forbidden for your whole career from ever representing another that you may have been born in/have parents from.


Posted By: Camquin
Date Posted: 16 May 2018 at 21:35
Unless SRU get their way and he has a great Scottish one.

-------------
Blood and Sand


Posted By: Robb
Date Posted: 17 May 2018 at 08:05
Originally posted by castleparknight castleparknight wrote:

Robb

Rhodesia ceased to exist in the 1970's - I assume you are an expat

No, young Englishman.


Posted By: castleparknight
Date Posted: 17 May 2018 at 12:04
Harare (Salisbury) or Bulawayo districts?

and Correction 1980 officially 


-------------
Onward and Upwards C'mon Donny!


Posted By: Richard Lowther
Date Posted: 17 May 2018 at 12:29
Originally posted by Count Ford Count Ford wrote:

Originally posted by Blub Blub wrote:

Originally posted by Count Ford Count Ford wrote:


Lets take Cameron Redpath. Say England cap him for 30 secs then discard him never to be seen again. For the rest of his career he is ineligible for competing for Scotland.


Appreciate that you used Cameron Redpath simply as a hypothetical example, but i do think that we'll see a lot of him in an England shirt.  Not necessarily this summer, but certainly in the future.


I agree and hope Cameron goes on to have a successful England career. It just seems crazy that you can spend 2 or is it 3 years in a country and suddenly you can play for that country under residence, but get one cap for a country and you are forbidden for your whole career from ever representing another that you may have been born in/have parents from.

I disagree. It means the player has to make a decision and stick with it. To have players chopping and changing countries makes a mockery of international teams. You may as well do away with International sides and just replace them with clubs.....something some Premiership teams would love to happen. 


-------------
Moderator http://www.leaguerugby.co.uk" rel="nofollow - National League Rugby Message Boards



Remember Wakefield RFC


Posted By: Camquin
Date Posted: 01 Jun 2018 at 13:51
Anyway - back to Rugby Hong Kong pla South Korea tomorrow.
Having lost at home, South Korea need a 5-0 victory to progress.

Winner plays Cook islands for a place in the Repecharge.

Germany host Portugal on the 16th and the Africa Gold Cup (which doubles as qualification) kicks off on the same day.

Hopefully we will be talking rugby and not player eligibility.



-------------
Blood and Sand


Posted By: WEvans
Date Posted: 03 Jun 2018 at 13:26
Originally posted by Richard Lowther Richard Lowther wrote:

Originally posted by Count Ford Count Ford wrote:

Originally posted by Blub Blub wrote:

Originally posted by Count Ford Count Ford wrote:


Lets take Cameron Redpath. Say England cap him for 30 secs then discard him never to be seen again. For the rest of his career he is ineligible for competing for Scotland.


Appreciate that you used Cameron Redpath simply as a hypothetical example, but i do think that we'll see a lot of him in an England shirt.  Not necessarily this summer, but certainly in the future.


I agree and hope Cameron goes on to have a successful England career. It just seems crazy that you can spend 2 or is it 3 years in a country and suddenly you can play for that country under residence, but get one cap for a country and you are forbidden for your whole career from ever representing another that you may have been born in/have parents from.

I disagree. It means the player has to make a decision and stick with it. To have players chopping and changing countries makes a mockery of international teams. You may as well do away with International sides and just replace them with clubs.....something some Premiership teams would love to happen. 

Totally agree. Playing for your country should mean something and shouldn't just be playing for a country that is prepared to give you a cap.


Posted By: Count Ford
Date Posted: 03 Jun 2018 at 17:58
Originally posted by WEvans WEvans wrote:

Originally posted by Richard Lowther Richard Lowther wrote:

Originally posted by Count Ford Count Ford wrote:

Originally posted by Blub Blub wrote:

Originally posted by Count Ford Count Ford wrote:


Lets take Cameron Redpath. Say England cap him for 30 secs then discard him never to be seen again. For the rest of his career he is ineligible for competing for Scotland.


Appreciate that you used Cameron Redpath simply as a hypothetical example, but i do think that we'll see a lot of him in an England shirt.  Not necessarily this summer, but certainly in the future.



I agree and hope Cameron goes on to have a successful England career. It just seems crazy that you can spend 2 or is it 3 years in a country and suddenly you can play for that country under residence, but get one cap for a country and you are forbidden for your whole career from ever representing another that you may have been born in/have parents from.


I disagree. It means the player has to make a decision and stick with it. To have players chopping and changing countries makes a mockery of international teams. You may as well do away with International sides and just replace them with clubs.....something some Premiership teams would love to happen. 


Totally agree. Playing for your country should mean something and shouldn't just be playing for a country that is prepared to give you a cap.


I would agree, but ONLY if the big teams are stopped from sweeping up players from around the world through the residency ruling.

If players genuinely are eligible (strict birth or parents criteria) to play for more than one country I don't see why they should be stopped from doing so..with the proviso of a couple of years break between countries to ensure fairness


Posted By: WEvans
Date Posted: 05 Jun 2018 at 11:50
Originally posted by Count Ford Count Ford wrote:

Originally posted by WEvans WEvans wrote:

Originally posted by Richard Lowther Richard Lowther wrote:

Originally posted by Count Ford Count Ford wrote:

Originally posted by Blub Blub wrote:

Originally posted by Count Ford Count Ford wrote:


Lets take Cameron Redpath. Say England cap him for 30 secs then discard him never to be seen again. For the rest of his career he is ineligible for competing for Scotland.


Appreciate that you used Cameron Redpath simply as a hypothetical example, but i do think that we'll see a lot of him in an England shirt.  Not necessarily this summer, but certainly in the future.



I agree and hope Cameron goes on to have a successful England career. It just seems crazy that you can spend 2 or is it 3 years in a country and suddenly you can play for that country under residence, but get one cap for a country and you are forbidden for your whole career from ever representing another that you may have been born in/have parents from.


I disagree. It means the player has to make a decision and stick with it. To have players chopping and changing countries makes a mockery of international teams. You may as well do away with International sides and just replace them with clubs.....something some Premiership teams would love to happen. 


Totally agree. Playing for your country should mean something and shouldn't just be playing for a country that is prepared to give you a cap.


I would agree, but ONLY if the big teams are stopped from sweeping up players from around the world through the residency ruling.

If players genuinely are eligible (strict birth or parents criteria) to play for more than one country I don't see why they should be stopped from doing so..with the proviso of a couple of years break between countries to ensure fairness

Then you don't agree with me!


Posted By: Count Ford
Date Posted: 05 Jun 2018 at 18:00
Originally posted by WEvans WEvans wrote:

Originally posted by Count Ford Count Ford wrote:

Originally posted by WEvans WEvans wrote:

Originally posted by Richard Lowther Richard Lowther wrote:

Originally posted by Count Ford Count Ford wrote:

Originally posted by Blub Blub wrote:

Originally posted by Count Ford Count Ford wrote:


Lets take Cameron Redpath. Say England cap him for 30 secs then discard him never to be seen again. For the rest of his career he is ineligible for competing for Scotland.


Appreciate that you used Cameron Redpath simply as a hypothetical example, but i do think that we'll see a lot of him in an England shirt.  Not necessarily this summer, but certainly in the future.



I agree and hope Cameron goes on to have a successful England career. It just seems crazy that you can spend 2 or is it 3 years in a country and suddenly you can play for that country under residence, but get one cap for a country and you are forbidden for your whole career from ever representing another that you may have been born in/have parents from.


I disagree. It means the player has to make a decision and stick with it. To have players chopping and changing countries makes a mockery of international teams. You may as well do away with International sides and just replace them with clubs.....something some Premiership teams would love to happen. 


Totally agree. Playing for your country should mean something and shouldn't just be playing for a country that is prepared to give you a cap.


I would agree, but ONLY if the big teams are stopped from sweeping up players from around the world through the residency ruling.

If players genuinely are eligible (strict birth or parents criteria) to play for more than one country I don't see why they should be stopped from doing so..with the proviso of a couple of years break between countries to ensure fairness


Then you don't agree with me!


fair enough...but the current system clearly needs looking at. Very clearly favours the 'big countries'


Posted By: Raider999
Date Posted: 05 Jun 2018 at 18:44
Agreed, for years New Zealand and Australia have plundered the south sea islands for physical players to boost their national teams, exploiting the lack of money available to pay players in those nations.

Now we have South Africans being targeted by the Scots, eventually qualifying through residency.

The whole system is a farce.

Why can you qualify via Grandparents? Should be restricted to Parents nationality.
Make the residency period 10 years to solve those moving to earn caps, this would still allow youngsters who move to other countries to qualify before they are too old.

-------------
RAID ON


Posted By: Rabbie Burns
Date Posted: 05 Jun 2018 at 19:06
As you say Raider999 England have never worked this to their advantage😂😂

-------------
So many Christians not enough Lions


Posted By: Raider999
Date Posted: 05 Jun 2018 at 19:34
Originally posted by Rabbie Burns Rabbie Burns wrote:

As you say Raider999 England have never worked this to their advantage😂😂


I didn't say they haven't, however we are still playing catch-up in this respect.

-------------
RAID ON


Posted By: WEvans
Date Posted: 08 Jun 2018 at 14:55
Originally posted by Raider999 Raider999 wrote:

Agreed, for years New Zealand and Australia have plundered the south sea islands for physical players to boost their national teams, exploiting the lack of money available to pay players in those nations.

This is a myth perpetuated by lazy journalists over the years. The facts tell a different story.


Posted By: Raider999
Date Posted: 08 Jun 2018 at 15:04
Originally posted by WEvans WEvans wrote:

Originally posted by Raider999 Raider999 wrote:

Agreed, for years New Zealand and Australia have plundered the south sea islands for physical players to boost their national teams, exploiting the lack of money available to pay players in those nations.


This is a myth perpetuated by lazy journalists over the years. The facts tell a different story.


A well founded 'myth' - just wart he'd last weeks Super Rugby match - Queensland Reds only had 1 or 2 Australian names in their starting 15 - rest were of south sea island origin

-------------
RAID ON


Posted By: Pistacio
Date Posted: 12 Jun 2018 at 07:57
Jacques Le Roux and Francisco Vieira ( still at Rotherham? i don't know)  in the match day squad for Portugal v Germany. Not sure on German squad yet but could feature Preocanin. 


Posted By: WEvans
Date Posted: 14 Jun 2018 at 16:45
Originally posted by Raider999 Raider999 wrote:

Originally posted by WEvans WEvans wrote:

Originally posted by Raider999 Raider999 wrote:

Agreed, for years New Zealand and Australia have plundered the south sea islands for physical players to boost their national teams, exploiting the lack of money available to pay players in those nations.


This is a myth perpetuated by lazy journalists over the years. The facts tell a different story.


A well founded 'myth' - just wart he'd last weeks Super Rugby match - Queensland Reds only had 1 or 2 Australian names in their starting 15 - rest were of south sea island origin

I didn't realise Queensland Reds were a "national" team.

And what exactly is an "Australian name"?


Posted By: Surreyben
Date Posted: 15 Jun 2018 at 16:24
Speaking as a Cultural Geographer, an "Australian name" would have to be one of Aboriginal/Torres Strait Island descent. Given the names of several "Australian" sporting stars also comprise Tomic, Kyrgios, Kokkinakis, Gavrilova and Tomljanovic, the mind boggles what was meant by the comment an "Australian name".


Posted By: Camquin
Date Posted: 16 Jun 2018 at 15:53
Germany 16 13 Portugal FT

-------------
Blood and Sand


Posted By: Robb
Date Posted: 17 Jun 2018 at 18:50
Looking forward to seeing Samoa demolish their former colonial masters. 

Just don't mention the war! ;)


Posted By: Robb
Date Posted: 02 Jul 2018 at 22:56
66-15 to the Samoans
26-3 to Hong Kong against the Cook Islands


Posted By: Camquin
Date Posted: 02 Jul 2018 at 23:22
With Samoa just West of the Date line and Cook Islands just East, both games kicked off at 15:00 on Saturday, 23 hours apart.


-------------
Blood and Sand


Posted By: Steve@Mose
Date Posted: 03 Jul 2018 at 22:23

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-44699168" rel="nofollow - Zimbabwe's rugby union team sleep rough in Tunisia



Posted By: Gareth
Date Posted: 03 Jul 2018 at 23:09
Have a friend out there & he is not a happy chappie.




Posted By: Robb
Date Posted: 04 Jul 2018 at 06:55
I imagine he wouldn't be!




Posted By: Camquin
Date Posted: 15 Jul 2018 at 10:46
Samoa duly completed the double over Germany 28-42.
However German missed a penalty and two conversions and were still within 7 points until 79 minutes.
The 51 point margin probably meant the Samoans were relaxed.

Germany (29) join Hong Hong (21) and  Canada (22) in the repecharge.

I believe Zimbabwe were found an alternative hotel after one night on the streets but still lost to Tunisia.

Amazingly, having lost 118-0 to Namibia, Tunisia's win means they are still mathematically in with contention.
They need Zimbabwe and Kenya to beat Namibia and to beat Uganda and Kenya.




-------------
Blood and Sand


Posted By: Raider999
Date Posted: 15 Jul 2018 at 12:03
Originally posted by Camquin Camquin wrote:

Samoa duly completed the double over Germany 28-42.
However German missed a penalty and two conversions and were still within 7 points until 79 minutes.
The 51 point margin probably meant the Samoans were relaxed.

Germany (29) join Hong Hong (21) and  Canada (22) in the repecharge.

I believe Zimbabwe were found an alternative hotel after one night on the streets but still lost to Tunisia.

Amazingly, having lost 118-0 to Namibia, Tunisia's win means they are still mathematically in with contention.
They need Zimbabwe and Kenya to beat Namibia and to beat Uganda and Kenya.




I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.

-------------
RAID ON


Posted By: Robb
Date Posted: 15 Jul 2018 at 23:38
Originally posted by Raider999 Raider999 wrote:

Originally posted by Camquin Camquin wrote:

Samoa duly completed the double over Germany 28-42.
However German missed a penalty and two conversions and were still within 7 points until 79 minutes.
The 51 point margin probably meant the Samoans were relaxed.

Germany (29) join Hong Hong (21) and  Canada (22) in the repecharge.

I believe Zimbabwe were found an alternative hotel after one night on the streets but still lost to Tunisia.

Amazingly, having lost 118-0 to Namibia, Tunisia's win means they are still mathematically in with contention.
They need Zimbabwe and Kenya to beat Namibia and to beat Uganda and Kenya.




I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.

That hotel mess up probably ruined Zimbabwe-Rhodesia's chances of finishing second.


Posted By: Gareth
Date Posted: 16 Jul 2018 at 14:09
Sables have a player from LS1 playing for them this time around if they actually gave him the ball more we could see what he can do. Had the ball twice in 80 mins. First carry knocked out his opponent ( poor tackling tech) second one knocked on & Tunisia scored from it..




Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2015 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk