The Roar
The Roar

taylorman

Roar Guru

Joined February 2015

2.7k

Views

1

Published

11.5k

Comments

Support Auckland and the Blues. live in Wellington

Published

Comments

Yes agree, nor do they want to understand the issues. They’re not built that way. GODs word is final and that in itself matters more than the consequences of it. ‘As if they know more than GOD’ they’ll be dismissing.
For them it’s like building a glorious empire that serves the needs of everyone forever and someone dropping a gum wrapper on the pavement of it.
Insignificant in scale compared to the ‘glory of GOD’
To understand their point of view you need to understand the full scope of their faith. It IS without question. You must try to picture the absolute possibility of the scale such a belief can conjure up and immerse a person within.
Rugby, the RA, everyone’s comments become the wrapper.
And this, from an atheist. ????
His partner supports him not because she has ‘analysed’ the repercussions of what the words mean but because she has a ‘rock’ as a life long partner and ‘nothing on earth’ will undermine what they have, certainly not a ‘game’ or a few coins.
We should probably be envious that such faith exists in this day and age. We could all probably do with a bit of that.

Israel Folau saga erupts again as Taniela Tupou weighs in

Yet that exact scenario happened, and she was ‘accepting and loving’. Its the projection of the scripture to a personal level that is not actually happening. ‘She did not claim that ‘she’ should rot in hell’- no such specifics at the personal level are happening- they are only implied, and for me, that is where the misinterpretation lies.

Its where the logic of ‘All squares are rectangles. All rectangles have four sides. Logic, therefore, tells you that all squares have four sides’ actually isn’t the case, because its not actually being applied at the specific level.

Here Maria is supporting her Husband for posting a script that includes comments to the effect that all gays must repent or go to hell’

Yet she is not saying that he friend, who is gay, will go to hell. In fact she’s aligning with the exact opposite…she’s happy for her friends relationship.

Yet the simple logic doesnt work, hence the misinterpretation, and the inference that theyre suggesting things that are not actually happening, and theres legit proof of that. In both their cases.

Yet….here we are.

For me, I now see it as…he believes in his GOD, and GOD believes in those things. But that’s as far as it goes…for me.

Israel Folau saga erupts again as Taniela Tupou weighs in

Yes I’m starting to think this is really more of a cultural issue than a religious one, or at least, one of fusion between the two. I think what theyre really saying is ‘as a whole everything GOD says its true’ and everyone needs to follow what HE says to be ‘a better person’.

But theyre also saying, naively…’hey, but I didnt mean you …(specific name) ‘.

None of these guys have come out and said hey you…name…you will go to…wherever. I think they honestly believe the two can co-exist, where the moderrn, European, commercialised, PC based interpretation of that is the two most certainly are contradictory.

Both the Folau’s have reflected that on a specific level, Israel in his supporting the Oz gay rugby side, and Maria whole heartedly supporting a gay marriage of one of her team mates, ‘genuinely’ happy of the two friends, while supporting her husband 100%.

The ‘detail’ is irrelevant in the context of the overall ‘belief’ system, which is the higher authority in the hierarchy of things.

So I now think we have a cultural rather than religious disconnect in terms of how things are perceived.

Israel Folau saga erupts again as Taniela Tupou weighs in

I for one am glad you arent Steve Hansen then 🙂

Hansen won’t rush to swap Barrett for Mo’unga

Very nicely put, saying a lot I think many of us are thinking in this space.

Hansen won’t rush to swap Barrett for Mo’unga

I think theyre going to go highly mobile as a way to breaking down things like the rush defence so Tom Robinson would fit that best. I like the idea of sam Cane or Akira at 6 as well. We lose a bit of height and need a lock replacement, but Barrett can double for both.

One things for sure, a LOT of players are jumping out of their skins at the moment, havent seen this much mobility across the AB mains and particularly borderline players for a long time. Theres a real feeling everyone knows how important this year is, and they all want a part of it. Even for those that dont make it, they know the scouts are looking to pick up the excess, so good times ahead the nearer to the top of your position you are regardless.

Six options for the All Blacks' No.6 jersey

Fair enough, but Leicester 10 to World Cup final potential starting 10, 4 months out? About as likely as Folau playing.
Mind you, Cheika has liked him in the past. He’s tough, a good footy player, my point being he’s missing a lot in terms of being in a position to replace foley, who, right now, is probably already booked in by Cheika.

The case for selecting Matt Toomua as the Wallabies' flyhalf

Dmac value is not as start at 10, it’s as impact off the bench, and that is far more useful than Toomua starting for oz, where in all likelihood he would struggle. And we won’t go into all the absurd decisions Toomua has made on the field, particularly with charging up on his own trying to take out the entire opposition with his head.
Dmacs best is also far better than Toomuas best, and he’s much younger. Toomuas had several years to consolidate an oz position and at a time when he’s had virtually no one in front of him.
And you might take Toomua at 10 over Dmac but I very much doubt Cheika would.
You’re overblowing his credentials as a 10 in the context of his ability to perform at World Cup levels in 2019. It happens here, all of last year Quade was that person, then a revived CLL, then reality hits, so we’re painting Toomua as the ‘real thing’ now.
There’s no magic formula here. Foley is still probably the best 10 you have, warts and all.

The case for selecting Matt Toomua as the Wallabies' flyhalf

… in saying that, Toomua should be given a shot pre World Cup but as Peterk says, the next three matches will say a lot. Oz have four options at 10 probably and I’d say Toomua is currently a distant fourth behind CLL. Foley will play World Cup if uninjured, he’s consistently been Cheika pet since day 1, even when Quade was ‘marginally’ better in the bled a couple of years ago.
Cheika anchored his entire Wallaby career on Foley, and despite the shortcomings, probably still feels ‘his best is yet to come ‘

The case for selecting Matt Toomua as the Wallabies' flyhalf

‘Hansen is happy to have the latter as back up’

Rhys…DMac is back up to possibly the worlds best 10, hes won the POTY title twice and is a consistent top level test match winner. Proven probably more than any 10 today.

Mo’unga is a very consistent test level 10 replacement as a sub, and was competing with DMac as sub for 10. DMac is a ‘specialist’ playmaker at both 10 and FB in a way that Toomua is nowhere in sight of. DMac is there to come on as impact sub and reek havoc around tired bodies.

Here you are touting Toomua as a 10 and comparing him ‘more’ favourably than DMac because ‘hansen’ is prepared to have him as sub.

Toomua is being discussed here amongst three other failing 10’s, none of whom has been consistent enough at test or super rugby level to even warrant a spot in the side…’at all’!

A far cry from being back up to two proven and consistent matchwinners at BOTH Super and test level.

Please, stop the comparisons. Totally different ballgame.

The case for selecting Matt Toomua as the Wallabies' flyhalf

Ahh, no, he hasnt, and doesnt. Please dont compare the two. Toomua is not in DMacs league either at test or Super level. NZ’s entire world cup plans are in disarray because of DMacs injury, Toomua isnt even certain of starting for the Wallabies.

The case for selecting Matt Toomua as the Wallabies' flyhalf

A Brumbies win and a loss classifies him as a specialist 10 for test, or any rugby then, despite him playing probably 90% elsewhere most of the time?

Hes a specialist like Foley, Quade, Carter, even Barrett? Aah…I don’t think so.

He might be capable of playing there and you might prefer him playing there but a ‘specialist’? nah.

But fine if you think its so. 🙂

The case for selecting Matt Toomua as the Wallabies' flyhalf

Well we play in the NRL, AFL and used to play in the netball to get done every year. Surely we can reciprocate that? 🙂

The Wrap: Is Rugby Australia about to kill off the NRC, and if so, what happens next?

Yes, but dan carter, is dan carter.

The case for selecting Matt Toomua as the Wallabies' flyhalf

Rubbish, theres a difference between being a specialist 10 and you ‘believing’ hes a specialist 10. Hes played 46 tests, started four at 10, losing three of those. Started and subbed almost his entire test career at 12, with the odd 10 and FB. He doesnt play club at 10…so in summary hes nowhere near a ‘specialist 10’ , nor has he been effective there, at test level at least.

Now none of the above is casual, nor biased, in fact its you being exactly that, and having not a clue what youre on about. The man is a midfielder, has the typical skills of a midfielder, has predominantly played in the midfield and has been most effective there, club and country.

No way if all 10 options are available will Cheika switch him to 10 in a world cup year.

The case for selecting Matt Toomua as the Wallabies' flyhalf

dont forget Nonu…

Super Rugby team of the week: Round 11

One swallow doesnt make a summer. Not everyone that goes to the NH turns into Superman. Some regress as well. Skelton and possibly Nick White look very much more the exception than the rule. And, it doesnt confirm their ability at test level is enhanced …until it actually is. They are not playing test matches.

Seven talking points from Super Rugby Round 11

Yes agree this is not the Toomua I recall. Last year and the beginning of this it was all Quade. Now the reality that hes not the player folks think he is (through his inconsistency) some have jumped ship onto something else that ‘isnt there’. Amusing if anything…

The case for selecting Matt Toomua as the Wallabies' flyhalf

Yes well I said injury permitting so yeah, no Foley and Cooper, in comes probably CLL and maybe Toomua, but at least the white baiter was actually a career hardened and only ever 10, not 12.

The case for selecting Matt Toomua as the Wallabies' flyhalf

Really? Since when could you prove anything when playing Scotland? 🙂

The case for selecting Matt Toomua as the Wallabies' flyhalf

Geez talk about clutching at straws. In a Cheika World Cup year he’s going to put a 10 who isn’t even familiar with the position at test level for years? And when he was there he wasn’t ever effective, trying too hard, rushing his poor tackling technique.

Seems there’s been a switch from poor performing Quade to the next best possible that isn’t called Bernard.

Ok to throw it out there of course but no chance in this lifetime he’ll start at 10 this year unless injury hits big time.

10s not a position you throw a non specialist at four months out from a World Cup. Goes without saying I’d have thought.

The case for selecting Matt Toomua as the Wallabies' flyhalf

Well its exactly what hansen did in 15…and subsequently got called arrogant for that as well. So it seems one is arrogant…no matter what they do. 🙂

Would it be smart to lose at the World Cup?

Obviously, you seem to be the expert on it.

Would it be smart to lose at the World Cup?

Yes, scintillating stuff.

Shoulda, coulda, woulda! The World Cup's almost-upsets

Yes I recall the 10 fumble now, cost them badly. Great match though.

Shoulda, coulda, woulda! The World Cup's almost-upsets