French were a rabble from go to whoa

Teams don't actually cite though, they can ask a citing officer to look at something specific but they're not the final arbiter. And they can't over-rule something should a citing officer decide something bears further examination.

the french should have won the final...the referee was quite determined to give the ABs as much leeway as possible to avoid auckland being razed to the ground. sad but true. I don't think the ABs can lose the choker tag until they win away from home. The next world cup, given it's rumoured fairier games scheduling, will give a more accurate account of how teams are performing (eg. the second tier nations) and if ABs can handle the pressure of knock out tournaments.

I'm sorry to reply late, but Mungehead, firstly, I've already condemned eye gouging. If proven, it should be punished although I believe the citing period in this case is over. The All Blacks did not press further after the game. The article was not just about eye gouging, but was repeating the notion that the French were a rabble from beginning to end, undeserving to be in the final and a poor rugby team. I think as do many others that this is clearly untrue, is going too far, and given other incidents such as the constant crowd booing of Cooper, reflects poorly on the writer and parts of the NZ public, as well as certain roarers. Its offensive, unsporting, and ungracious coming from fans of the winners who were somewhat lucky in the final! Secondly, the knee jerk reactions to any criticism of their team seem in my opinion to come mainly from kiwi supporters, surprisingly given that they won the WRC after all! Witness the reactions to opinions about the ref, the McCaw kneeing incident, head high tackles, off side players, and so on. Many more Kiwis responded immediately in outrage at such criticism than Frenchmen have responded to criticism of their team. I also think the French have taken their loss extremely well, all things considered, and are justifiably proud of their team for showing they were equal to the ABs, at least for one match. Allow French supporters that pleasure. Finally, the media I thought is there to inform first, not to entertain or be provocative. Now I believe the All Blacks are a great rugby team, the best of the last couple of years, and the best for most of this WRC. They were a little lucky to win the final which I think the French deserved to win. But thats rugby! Now, don't get upset, or criticize the French, who I believe deserve praise for playing a great final - just enjoy and be grateful for the AB win!

Completely agree Mike. I think you could also argue that the incidents that have led to KTinHK defining Les Bleus as a rabble, Lievremont's continuous spleen venting for example, actually served to galvanise them along with the media incorrectly pasting them as easybeats. Harinordoquy has certainly affirmed this line of thinking in the media recently. "The trouble is that so many people predicted that the French would be slaughtered in the final because of their indifferent form in the lead up games". I was one of the ignorant masses who subscribed to this theory unfortunately and have ultimately learned my lesson. The Tricolores were immense, and Thierry Dusautoir is a legend.

Mungehead, I think you are being far too harsh on Parisien I heard similar arguments in relation to the All Blacks spear tackle on O'Driscoll a few years ago - kiwi fans taking refuge in the fact that no official action was taken and therefore nothing could be said about it. Officially, that was correct, but Irish (and other) fans were entitled to point out that it was a despicable act. I would like to see the Rougerie incident dealt with, as the video appears to be clear evidence of foul and dangerous play (I say 'appears' because I am assess evidence for a living and I have seen incidents where even very clear video evidence can turn out to be wrong - but I am reasonably confident that this one is what it appears to be). But, one of the big problems in this case is that All Blacks haven't cited Rougerie and apparently do not intend to do so. Personally, I think they should.

Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!

The thing I don't understand about this eye-gouging incident is why the All Blacks didn't report it. Or rather, I do, because its a perennial problem. There seems to be a gentleman's agreement (rather ironic title) among all teams that foul play doesn't get reported, no doubt to avoid a rash of tit-for-tat citings. I can understand that, but there is foul play and foul play. Things like eye-gouging (or e.g. what All Black players did to O'Driscoll a few years ago) are in a different class, being very dangerous. I hope ABs will reconsider and report this Rougerie incident, even at this late stage. And I agree with others, just because one French player indulged in this doesn't mean the whole team should be blamed for it. Nallet and Dousatoir in particular are quite different players.

I'm with Pothale on this one. The trouble is that so many people predicted that the French would be slaughtered in the final because of their indifferent form in the lead up games. Past performance is an iron-clad guide to future results, right? Now those commentators are left trying to cover up for their incorrect prediction by talking down the French performance in the final. The French of all teams cannot be predicted in this way. On their day, they can beat anyone, regardless of how they played the week or month before. That particularly applied to this tournament because of the terrible problems they were having with their coach - sooner or later the team was going to shake it off and produce a big one. On the day, the French played as well as the All Blacks - intensity, skill, commitment - it was all there. Both teams made mistakes, but not too many considering the intense pressure they were under, and the defence of both was superb. The result was just - neither team deserved to have more than one try and one goal scored against them. Awesome effort, and a great advertisement for rugby.

You French have an interesting sense of humour.

Oh thats alright then too. Its OK to spit on people if they take your picture.....

I think you’ve missed the point I’m trying to make Oh I get it alright, you don't like the bad press the French have got. But your objections to KTinHK's article seem to be limited to "how dare you say that", "you kiwis are hypocrites and just as bad" or "we're heard all that before, lay off". To me the tone of your post is far worse than the tone of the article - in fact the only objectionable thing in the original article I saw was the word "rabble", which perhaps looks harsher in translation than it does in general usage. As for the eye gouging, I’ve seen the footage, it looks bad, but my opinion is irrelevant on this matter – I leave it to the appropriate authorities. You're dissembling again. I think if you can describe KTinHK's article as "whipping up hysterical antagonism that borders on racism", hyperbole if ever I heard it, then it wouldn't hurt you to say, eg. "Rougerie's eye-gouging was a despicable cowardly act and it borders on being criminal if he avoids all consequences from it". If you did then I'd have a lot more sympathy to what otherwise appear to be knee-jerk reactions towards anyone who dares criticize the French team in any way. Note carefully that I mention Rougerie in particular, nobody else. I do not defend thugs, and your question is absurd. Do I ask if you defend bad sports, graceless winners, sore losers and poor crowd behaviour? If you continue to overcompensate in your criticism of the media (who, let's face it, are hired to be provocative) and the All Blacks and refuse to condemn a clear action of foul play in anything but the most general of terms just because it happened to originate from a French player, then I'll stand by that comment thanks all the same.

Mungehead, I think you've missed the point I'm trying to make, which was about the article as a whole, the quality of press coverage the last few weeks, fans in general, and the atmosphere and sportsmanship at this particular World Cup. Do you feel these comments are unwarranted or unjustified? As for the eye gouging, I've seen the footage, it looks bad, but my opinion is irrelevant on this matter - I leave it to the appropriate authorities. I'm not "trying to turn it on to the All Blacks". I denounce all dirty and illegal play, as well as poor fan behavior and sportsmanship. As an aside, I also hate players trying to milk the ref for favorable decisions - and there seems to have been more than usual in this cup. I do not defend thugs, and your question is absurd. Do I ask if you defend bad sports, graceless winners, sore losers and poor crowd behaviour?

"Maybe you wil not think as a primary peasants after." That's definitely one of my favourite lines from the Roar since I joined. I'm pasting that one above my computer for tossing as a casual insult into conversations.

Yep that's convincing evidence of one French player gouging - but not the whole team as a rabble. And the article on the snapper spat is just another newswire reprint of the same story. Snappers invade sport person's privacy - they get a slap for their trouble. BIG news story. Not. Happens every day of the week - goes with the territory for irritating the sh1t out of people.

Want to try and give a run down on how France qualified for the 2010 football w-cup ...

WoobliesFan is a troll. Man up Gaullois.