Sick finish.

**** me

Jesus christ

So bloody typical

This works too!!!

Just had to give that pen away with 3 seconds left.

wouldn't be scotland otherwise

Not that i'm complaining lol

In all seriousness, with the advantage still being played Eng scoring right in the corner wouldn't have been a terrible result.

Yup, I messaged my old man:-

'First time in my life time we've won at twick if this holds'

He replied:-
'Unlucky'

Yup I was actually rooting for them to score there. Ford can miss those.

Yeh, would have at least put a bit of pressure on the kick!

deny opp victory by coming back from 31-0 down, and still go home feeling like crap

[ ] not possible
[x] scotland

So in SANZAR are idiots development.

The Super Rugby tournament features a handful of teams from NZ, South Africa and Australia. Originally with 5 NZ teams, 4 South Africa and 3 Australia, the comp was fairly event.

Despite NZ dominating, the organisers decided stuff it, we need to dilute the talent pool further by adding more teams from Australia and South Africa, and then eventually from Argentina and Japan. This has been done with an eye on the Japan WC, and you know, Japan sponsorship opportunities.

The last three years the Japanese team has been rubbish, but improving and getting decent crowds in (playing in Hong Kong and Japan). With the upcoming World Cup, should be a prime opportunity for making some serious yen right about now.

Except that SANZAR have decided to cut the team from the competition for absolutely no good reason effective as of next year. It is ridiculous and it is an absolute lock that the Sunwolves will be playing in either Pro14, English or French league next year.

Rugby Union execs sneaky contender for Mt Rushmore of sporting execs with ICC, IOC and NCAA.

Weren't there murmurs that Super Rugby might include either separate teams or a combined team from the Pacific Islands?

Sheesh, how are SANZAR that friggin dumb? Even if the Japanese team continues to suck, I’d imagine the commercial aspects alone would/should merit their continued involvement. Instead they are just killing it off. Brilliant

Been that way for a while, but hasn't really happened.

Combined Islands (Tonga, Fiji, Samoa) made up of a "West Indies" type team played a few Test Matches in the mid 2000s but I don't think have done much since.

I honestly thought the Combined Islands team would make its way into the Tri-Nations at that time (which would make sense, one test on each island vs RSA, Aus and NZ). Instead, a few games here and there have been played while NZ and Aus take any good players for their own at a young age.

I doubt commercially they ever join the comp, but who knows.

Just the timing as well. With the WC around the corner, absolute best time to keep them alive.

Its actually bad for Super Rugby as well. There had originally been an agreement that in the offseason of Super Rugby, players could play Japan League rugby for serious $$$ and share the players. Japan will now want the players full time (rightfully so) and a few players are definitely going to go where the money is.

The main reasoning is that South Africa didn't want to do excess travelling, which is dumb because by getting rid of the conferences and doing a full round robin they will do more travelling (4-5 outside RSA games rather than 4 as is). South Africa apparently have the power since they bring in the most TV revenue.

Current format for a South African side

4 South African opponents play home and away (8 games)
4 Kiwis play either home or away, don't play the fifth (4 total games, 2 travel)
4 Aus/Japan play either home or away, don't play the fifth (4 total games, 2 traveling).

Now it will be a full single round robin, with 9 teams based outside South Africa.

To be honest, best solution would be to stuff off the South Africans, play with 4 Australian sides, 8 NZ sides (increased from 5), and a few others through Asia and the Islands. But that will never happen.

Anyone watching Edinburgh v. Munster?

Wallabies probably sacking Folau:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/47893542

- Brave to sacrifice your best(?) player to stand against bigotry.
- Will this sticks or will Australia allow Falau back after a half-baked apology?
- [derail]He insulted atheists (and others) as well as homosexuals and liberals needs to stand up against atheophobia[/derail]

He did this last year, was warned and told don't do it again, and did it anyway.

I would say he plays RWC2019 but who knows.

imo, it's less brave and more a reality of current public sentiment...almost impossible to be seen to allow/condone any kind of opinion or behaviour that it racist/sexist or prejudiced towards gay communities.

compounding the issue is that the CEO of their main sponsor is openly gay and almost pulled the sponsorship last time.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/47909515 :/

RWC organising committee making sure there's no terrible, terrible errors

Israel Folau sacked by Rugby Australia for social media post

I don't understand this. I'm an atheist but like, those are his religious views. That gay people will go to hell. Who cares, there is no hell, what a ridiculous concept? It feels like this is almost an absurd decision. He's a hardcore Christian, of course he thinks that? This almost feels like it's banning the religion which is surely dangerous road to go down. It's ok to be Christian guys as long as you don't talk about it and some of it's basic tenants. There is a difference between saying, "I hate gays" and "gays are sinners", or "gays will go to hell". A huge difference which has a massive impact on freedom of religion. Doesn't seem like rugby Australia has considered this point.

Weird to be in a situation where I find myself on the same side as a crazy Christian but it's happened before like when that preacher said all Muslims will go to hell and was up in court for it. Erm, yeah he's not a Muslim so obvs? Also the Asher's Bakery people not baking the gay marriage cake.

I think you're right. AFAIK most devout Catholics believe anyone who doesn't accept Jesus as their saviour goes to hell? That's different to thinking non-believers should be discriminated against in this life. I don't find his comments particularly offensive although like you I'm atheist and perhaps it would be different if I was gay. If he has discriminated against gays in person the ban is 100% justified but has he?