- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Roar Rookie
Joined April 2018
0
Views
0
Published
21
Comments
Published
Comments
Big Del lost us the world cup when Jason Robinson ran around him. He never learned how to play union at the top level
How Eddie’s attention-grabbing return will help Wallabies convince NRL stars like Suaali'i to switch codes
Now we just need KB to return to reunite the 3As!
'We want to get the country behind us': Everything Rennie said about beating Boks, JOC return
There are a few issues I can see here.
First is calling player welfare ‘woke’. Players are not looking for a ‘safe space’ on the field in case they might be insulted by the opposition because they have a difference of opinion. Playing hard and but safely is anything but woke. It is recognising for the reality of the game and playing within the spirit of the game.
Secondly, the spirit of the game is what is at stake here. At risk of sounding elitist the old saying that ‘Rugby is a thuggish game played by gentlemen, and League is a thuggish game played by thugs’ has an element of truth. Rugby isn’t about beating the heck out of the opposition. It’s about beating them, combining force and skill. (I wonder if some of the opposition towards Chieka was because he encouraged so much of the aggro, not so much of the skill). League seems quite accepting or condoning of dangerous plays, but in rugby it’s just ‘not cricket’, to mix metaphors.
Thirdly, the tackler is surely responsible for the tackle they make! If they make a tackle that injures themselves that can only be their own fault! But we have seen cases where the tackled player gets penalised for making the situation dangerous, eg Kerevi at the world cup.
Finally, if it is so difficult to not make head contact in a tackle, then why have there still been so few red cards even since the world cup? It is made out that it is all too much for players to correct their technique, yet the vast majority of players are capable of this.
The game is not ruined by red cards. It is ruined by dangerous or foul play not befitting the game of rugby.
We're missing the point in the rugby player welfare debate
I don’t follow league, but you get the impression that there is a culture that dangerous play is more accepted as part of the game than in union. Think of the resistance to banning the shoulder charge.
Union is a hard tough game as it is and doesn’t need careless head contact to be an accepted part of the game to make it look tougher. At least in union you know that it is the wrong thing to make a dangerous play, rather than it being just part of the game.
And AFL, well, that’s cheap shot city and they call it ‘rough play’.
The coaches and players should absolutely get it right. Hard good tackles would make a better spectacle (eg Koroibete) than any of these high shots.
Sam Cane says red cards are tough to avoid in Tests
May have been trained that way.
It’s well known that when the kiwis are under pressure they give away the cynical foul, only now are they getting pinged for it
Five talking points from Bledisloe 4
Tough to avoid with poor tackle technique.
Do we want Union to look like League or AFL?
Sam Cane says red cards are tough to avoid in Tests
SA outplayed Wales like Eng outplayed NZ.
Sure, it was good to see the contact in the first semi, but England don’t play thrilling rugby.
Whoever is complaining about it being boring should point the finger at Wales. Was that really the best that the 6N champions could dish up?
SA, unlike NZ, adjusted their game to win.
Here’s hoping that SA don’t take the mindless attack strategies of the wallabies and kiwis into next week and think about how to beat the defence.
For the sake of attacking, running rugby SA need to win.
Top of the Boks: South Africa join England in World Cup Final
Try scoring opportunities yes, but not capitalised on.
The poms even went for a field goal before trying to breach the all black line a second time.
Their strategy was to put pressure on the opposition until cracks emerged, not to be creative in attack themselves.
The defence was brilliant, and needed more than individual skills to beat it. Then they just kicked the penalties.
Spiro and Robbie Deans will have to eat their words about attacking rugby winning at this world cup.
All Blacks all over: England knock New Zealand out of Rugby World Cup
It was entertaining because of the moment, not because of the rugby. Running rugby might not be the game for you.
All Blacks all over: England knock New Zealand out of Rugby World Cup
I can see why Chieka wanted to play “the Aussie way”, although the execution of this was not brilliant.
As Campo said back in 91, and has been true ever since, the English are just so boring with their rugby.
Sure, they won on being more clinical than the kiwis, but their only try was from a lapse close to the ruck. Their two “disallowed tries” (otherwise known as non-tries) were disallowed due to poor execution. If they had truly learned entertaining rugby they would have nailed those tries as well.
I’m glad the reign of the darkness if over, but surely the poms winning the cup overall would be worse for entertaining rugby!
All Blacks all over: England knock New Zealand out of Rugby World Cup
I agree.
I wonder how many takes it took to get them to not stumble over their words! For memory they were neutral about his opposition to gay marriage, but now that their jobs are on the line…
Michael Cheika the latest to hit out at Israel Folau's recent social media post
Yes, Jesus is about love and inclusion.
Love, by dying on the cross for everyone’s sins, and inclusion, by opening the way for everyone to receive forgiveness.
As had been pointed out above, a plain reading of the Bible shows that Jesus is clear that all are sinful and all need to repent.
All the gospels are clear that Jesus’s purpose was to save people from their sins (that’s what his name means). Jesus does talk about hell more than others in the Bible. Jesus primarily loves people by telling them of his saving power and work on the cross. So, this is the most loving that his followers can communicate to others.
Sure, Folau could have said it another way, but the meme was consistent with a plain reading of the Bible.
"Do not judge," said Jesus: An open, personal letter to Israel Folau
How about these words from Jesus, also from Luke’s gospel:
Chapter 13:1 Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. 2 Jesus answered, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? 3 I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. 4 Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? 5 I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.”
Folau’s message seems to align pretty spot on with Jesus here.
"Do not judge," said Jesus: An open, personal letter to Israel Folau
1 Corinthians 6:9 is where the list comes from, but he’s quotes Galatians next to it.
1 Cor 6: 9 says:
Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God
Tah-Tah, Izzy: Rugby Australia, NSW Rugby confirm they'll sack Folau
Concerned supporter you’re right.
So if Jesus is the Son of God, also referred to as Jesus Christ, in the Christian faith, then it’s pretty clear that this view of Jesus is entirely at odds with every other religion.
So you can see how it can be very offensive to people who don’t want to consider Jesus as God.
Calling Jesus ‘the Christ’ in Roman times was an affront to the Roman emperor and many were thrown to the lions.
The relevance to this discussion is that surely to be consistent to ‘not offend’ if they want to change the name Crusaders they should also change the name Christchurch.
I’m not advocating for this, just drawing logic where it leads
Crusaders want patience over name change
The name Christ is offensive to many people, making Christians the most persecuted people around the world.
The reason the name is offensive is because of its meaning – God’s king over the world – and Christians believe this is Jesus.
If religion is not important to someone they might not be offended. For everyone else the concept of Christ necessarily offends their world view
Crusaders want patience over name change
Surely the name Christchurch is just as offensive???
Crusaders want patience over name change
Slavery? It was Bible believing Christians who led the charge to dismantle the slave trade which had been justified by a ‘Christian’ society that misused the Bible
We need to talk about Israel. Again
“Better people make better All Blacks”… hence celebrating winning the World Cup at a strip club???
And I’m sorry Nick, but you’ve missed a vital part of the biblical story about the non-stoning of the adultress. At the end of the story Jesus says to the woman “Go now, and leave your live of sin.” So Jesus does say that the adultress is sinning and that that she should repent of her sin (he doesn’t say and turn to God, but this is implied).
So using the passage you’ve alluded to as a reference, when Folau was asked what God’s plan was, he was simply tweeted what the Bible says.
What Folau didn’t say, although I think he believes this, is that the statement of God’s plan “for gays” is the same for everyone. He wasn’t asked this directly, but he could have made this clearer in his tweet.
Why David Pocock is the real role model in Australian rugby
Expecting him to be carded at WC when his technique is exposed
'Passion and skill in perfect measure': Marika wins second John Eales Medal despite missing Spring Tour