NZ rugby supporters ...
Charles
Rugby Football team, find it necessary to be so smug and overbearing
about their country's incredible continuing success.
There is no doubt that NZ are the best rugby team in the world - and
have been since the game first became an international competition.
They are very rarely beaten, and some international teams have never
managed a win against them.
Why then do many of their followers find it necessary to be so smug,
rude, overbearing - and on occasions downright cruel, to supporters of
'lesser' nations, whose national sides are incapable of producing the
successes that NZ do?
Perhaps, instead of being so jingoistic, they might try being somewhat
more magnanimous, and attempt to understand the frustrations and
disappointments of teams that do not achieve such high standards.
If history has taught us anything, then the status quo is unlikely to
change in the foreseeable future. However, in the unlikely event that
at some future time NZ rugby ceases to be the force it currently is,
then those ultra chauvinists are in for a mighty fall.
Being proud of one's team is perfectly acceptable and understandable.
However, being brash, obnoxious and arrogant is very irritating and
ultimately totally unacceptable in what is after all only a sport.
Perhaps those that have some in-depth knowledge, could give us a
reason for their small country's outstanding contribution and
dominance of the game, which was originally inherited from their
British (English) roots.
Roger the Lodger
Go fuck yourself....
Mentalguy2k8
"Charles" <cha...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:5fjng5hnjh0tvm9od...@4ax.com...
> ... it is a continuing source of curiosity why supporters of the NZ
> Rugby Football team, find it necessary to be so smug and overbearing
> about their country's incredible continuing success.
Because they're useless at everything else?
didgerman
At 3.30 in the afternoon, you're probably a bit late with that one.
Why so serious?
Just some brief observations:
I don't think it's just Kiwi supporters that are smug and overbearing-
when other teams win, they tend to 'dish it out' just as well. Well
most of them- a friend of mine was in Scotland to see the Wallabies
lose last weekend, and had only good things to say about the Scots.
Perhaps with Kiwis there isn't that need to hold back, as they assume
that the status quo of the All Blacks' domination will indeed persist
indefinitely.
In the Trinations, Australians (the rugby supporters, anyway!) and
even most South Africans know that they won't always be on top. When
the All Blacks do suffer, as they did to some extent this year and in
1998, and as they seem to do at every World Cup, the rest of the world
savours the schaudenfraude.
Fact of the matter is that the All Blacks have achieved a level of
dominance in international sport over an extended period of time that
very few teams in any sport can emulate. Hence winning, and rubbing it
in, occur more frequently.
Also: the All Blacks (and rugby in general) is a central part of New
Zealand's identity. I think you are then missing something when you
say that it is 'only a sport'. Similarly, I guess you could also say
that there isn't much else to be 'brash, obnoxious and arrogant' about
in a country of 4 million people.
As for why the ABs dominate, someone else with more extensive
experience of NZ rugby culture [I only lived there for 7 years] can
answer that one.
Charles
wrote:
... after you Sir, you've had so much more practice!
Oh, and further, I think this kind of response QEDs some of the points
I was making, in what is a polite and perfectly valid and subjective
topic.
Charles
Greig Blanchett
Blimey. If that's not a shining example of Dully's Law I don't know
what is.
--
greig
Spizz
The funny thing is (and this goes for every country and not just NZ who are
no better or worse than anyone else), it is the accident of birth that
determines where we are born and our sum contribution to our country of
birth's team beating another's country of birth's team is precisely zero.
Sure we delight in the victories and we hurt when we lose, but to feel
superior to another person who happens to be born in a different country is
clearly, well......... pathetic. Not to mention jumping onto usenet and
throwing posts around declaring my team is better than your team as if you
had anything to do with it.
Anyway, *every* Kiwi I've known has been a good bloke (apart from one guy
called Andy who I caught eating my corn flakes in a youth hostel one
morning), and I'm sure even mg wouldn't be so bad if you had a beer with him
when he's old enough to drink. So I don't know why you aim for the Kiwis
particularly Charles, because it doesn't matter who's on top, they'd all
look down with the same knowing smile and wind the rest of us up anyway.
Yep, just wait until Scotland top the rankings, you bunch of cunts!
Spizz
viper
"Mentalguy2k8" <Mental...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%RSOm.122258$_o.5...@newsfe22.ams2...
That's close to the mark, at least the AB's are the only sporting entity
from NZ to be consistently dominant over a long period of time.
The Kiwis invest far too much emotion in their Rugby team, but it's
understandable....
Can't wait for 2011, hope they put security guards on the high structures
Viper
>
Bobs
Ridiculous and typical of a small minded little rodent such as
yourself Charlie. With the typical back-handed compliments and such.
Are you a woman?
We are not smug or overbearing anymore than the jarpies are, or the
poms. In fact, the poms are the worst. Your media will crow about
vicotories for weeks.
In fact, the UK is a disgrace. Remember the Dan Carter citing for a
high tackle? Yet that dickcheese Tim Payne can throw two punches and
get nothing.
Spizz
news:0cc873ac-c6e7-478e...@15g2000prz.googlegroups.com...
And this is the fault of the UK how?
Spizz
Klitty
Charles
You'll need to explain how you arrived at that cerebral conclusion,
given that the content of my post does not meet the exacting standards
required for a successful invocation.
Withdraw I say Sir, and have the good manners to make an apology, or,
at the very least, give your thinking when arriving at such a
controversial and incorrect conclusion!
Bobs
> "Bobs" <mcaula...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
It was a BBC witch hunt on Carter that made the IRB cave and cite
Carter.
Just shows how farcical the IRB are. An accidental high tackle results
in a ban but two punches to the head of a player gets nothing
Softcocks.
Klitty
It wasn't even a high tackle. The Hobbit even ducked. What next? Fines
for stepping on Shane Williams or tripping over Ben Blair with malice
aforethought ? Jesus, they'll be sending Ronny Corbett down the field to
give the all clear in the long grass before they dare run with it before
long.
That citing and subsequent sentence was a bloody disgrace and everyone
involved should be ashamed. There was no malicious intent in that tackle
from Carter and everyone who knows anything about rugby should have seen
that.
Ronny Corbett. That reminds me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDAWNrjJ_es
haha.
Charles
wrote:
A classic response which clearly highlights and validates, in a most
grotesque way, many of the points I made.
Klitty
Klitty <mitt...@gmail.com> writes:
> Ronny Corbett. That reminds me:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDAWNrjJ_es
Better and includes the Welsh Baftas:
Massive Gonads
What a Massive Generalisation.
alvey
Well they're only good at two things Charles and the other is one that they
don't like being mentioned. Emigration.
alvey
Peter Ashford
> Rugby Football team, find it necessary to be so smug and overbearing
> about their country's incredible continuing success.
>
> There is no doubt that NZ are the best rugby team in the world - and
> have been since the game first became an international competition.
> They are very rarely beaten, and some international teams have never
> managed a win against them.
>
> Why then do many of their followers find it necessary to be so smug,
> rude, overbearing - and on occasions downright cruel, to supporters of
> 'lesser' nations, whose national sides are incapable of producing the
> successes that NZ do?
I don't know anyone at all who is like that. I've seen a couple of
people on Usenet who are like that and I'd assume that it's more to do
with the way the net works than anything else.
> Perhaps, instead of being so jingoistic, they might try being somewhat
> more magnanimous, and attempt to understand the frustrations and
> disappointments of teams that do not achieve such high standards.
>
> If history has taught us anything, then the status quo is unlikely to
> change in the foreseeable future. However, in the unlikely event that
> at some future time NZ rugby ceases to be the force it currently is,
> then those ultra chauvinists are in for a mighty fall.
No, they'll just find something else to be obnoxious about.
> Being proud of one's team is perfectly acceptable and understandable.
> However, being brash, obnoxious and arrogant is very irritating and
> ultimately totally unacceptable in what is after all only a sport.
Of course.
> Perhaps those that have some in-depth knowledge, could give us a
> reason for their small country's outstanding contribution and
> dominance of the game, which was originally inherited from their
> British (English) roots.
Rugby in NZ was initially the 'everyman's' sport - much like Soccer in
the UK. As such, it enjoyed more support here than in the UK. We set
up a strong domestic competition and that has been the genesis of the
strength of the All Blacks.
I suspect a lot of the success these days is due to other team's
psyches - teams like Ireland and Wales really should beat the ABs more
often than they have. Yes, the ABs are generally better, but they are
also good teams and should have managed the task at least a few times
in recent years. If Italy can beat the other 6N teams, Ireland and
Wales should be able to beat the ABs. I think they can only look to
themselves to find out why that is not the case.
Andrew Dunford
"Charles" <cha...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:5fjng5hnjh0tvm9od...@4ax.com...
Three days ago you wrote:
"Your team clinched it again at Twickenham yesterday, but despite the
dreadful weather we had a great day out and met up with, amongst many
others, a number of old Kiwi friends. "
So, if you actually wanted to know the answer to any of these questions
you'd have asked your NZ friends at the match. Unless you did and have
already forgotten.
Andrew
JD
Looks like someone's team lost.
didgerman
Yes but don't you feel bad knowing that you inherited the game from
British (English) roots? You jingoistic chauvinist you. Now if you'll
excuse me it's time for my coffee enema and then Pimms at the
Conservative club, yearse.....
Ben L
> ... it is a continuing source of curiosity why supporters of the NZ
> Rugby Football team, find it necessary to be so smug and overbearing
> about their country's incredible continuing success.
You know what, Charles?
This is the first time for a long time when NZ beat England and the
trolls didn't weigh in en masse with their pearls of wisdom (except
wee Matthew, but he's still trying hard to overcompensate for his
chronic insecurities around the love that dare not speak its name with
Matty).
Which may say more about how what a dour game and a forseeable result
it was than the state of Kiwi fanboihood, but there you go.
Charles
Earnest discussions of that type really aren't part of the Twickenham
scene, and my NZ friends are really nothing like the 'fanboiz' we get
here, so the unpleasant 'symptoms' I raised were not in evidence.
>Unless you did and have already forgotten.
That of course may well be a consideration, as were all very
'high-spirited'! ;o)
Charles
wrote:
And so it goes on, and on, and on ... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ...
snot-nose + toy shop window + little boy = sad boring old Didgerfuck
alvey
I'd opine that the last RWC took alot of the wind out of the sails of the
good ship AB FANBOYZ. It left them so very open to easy retaliation.
alvey
Matua
"alvey" <al...@play.com> wrote in message
news:1e4yng7qv8uy4.6...@40tude.net...
How did you go against Scotland you pack of wimps ????