More from planet-rugby's faq: What are the differences between Rugby Union and Rugby League? Rugby union and rugby league are two separate games that evolved from a common rugby origin, and although they share many common features, the differences are marked. Despite their origins, union and league are now best regarded as different sports - though the styles of player and play have become increasingly similar in recent years. The main differences in laws, is that league teams have only 13 players whereas rugby union has 15. In Union line-outs are used to re-start play when the ball goes out of play. The scoring is different too. A League try is worth four points while Union's is valued a five; a drop goal in League counts for just one point while in Union it is worth three; a League penalty clocks up two points and the Union version three but a conversion kick following a try is worth two points in both codes. In League an attacking team can only be tackled six times each attack before the ball is turned over, where as in Union there is unlimited tackles. Rugby League has always been professional, where as payment for players in Union was only legalised in 1995.

And yet more from the same faq: Why did they split? The original split in 1895 was over the issue of paying players. Rugby Union held out as a strictly amateur sport, ie playing for no financial benefit, whereas rugby league allowed professionalism in the game. The split was very acrimonious and the issue was one of the most divisive issues in the sport. For a 100 years, at least on the surface, the Union code stuck to their principles and steadfastly refused to permit player payments of any kind, including things such as boot sponsorship and book deals. It was also against the union rules on amateurism for union players to be involved in any way with league. Anyone who turned to league to earn a living was banned from playing the Union game ever again. However, as the 20th century progressed the amateur status of the game was under increasing pressure. In August 1995, in the face of widespread abuses (in the form of under the table payments, player trust funds, etc) and pressure from the top players who were being expected to put in many hours of training in an era of increasing media interest in the game, the game's governing body the IRB finally relinquished and rugby union became fully professional at all levels.

And yet even more from that faq: Where is the game of Rugby Union played? Rugby Union is the more popular code of rugby on a global scale and is played in over 100 countries worldwide. As of 2000, there were 92 official Unions making up the iRB. The traditional powerhouses of rugby union in terms of popularity, numbers of people playing the game and international sucess remain the 'Home Unions' of England, Ireland, Scotland & Wales as well as France, South Africa, New Zealand and Australia. What are the major international competitions? International rugby currently revolves around a cycle building towards the Rugby World Cup, which has been staged in a different host country every four years since the inaugural tournament in 1987. For a full history, and list of winners, click here. Along the way there are three major annual international competitions; the Six Nations, the Tri-Nations and the Epson Cup Pacific Rim. The Six Nations tournament was borne out of the Five Nations which is the oldest, and probably most famous, competitive rugby union tournament in the world. It is contested by England, France, Wales, Ireland, Scotland and Italy. For more information, and a full history, click here. The Tri-Nations, first contested in 1996, sees New Zealand, South Africa and Australia compete every June/July/August. For more information, and a full history, click here. The Epson Cup, also first contested back in 1996, currently sees Samoa, Fiji, Tonga, USA, Canada and Japan clash each year.

more, more. LAWS & REFS Your FAQ's on rugby What are the origins of rugby? There is not definitive history of where rugby came from or when or how. The game is likely to be a amalagamation of soccer and other games including the Eton Wall Game and Winchester football. The most famous and widespread legend on the founding of the game says the game originated at Rugby school in England, when one of the pupils, one William Webb Ellis, picked up the ball during a game of soccer in 1823 and ran with it. Of course the story is most likely apocryphal, since games involving running with ball in hand had existed for centuries before that. Despite the historical unreliablilty of the Webb Ellis story, it has become an enduring part of the game and the Rugby World Cup trophy is named the Webb Ellis Cup. What are the differences between Rugby Union and Rugby League? Rugby union and rugby league are two separate games that evolved from a common rugby origin, and although they share many common features, the differences are marked. Despite their origins, union and league are now best regarded as different sports - though the styles of player and play have become increasingly similar in recent years. The main differences in laws, is that league teams have only 13 players whereas rugby union has 15. In Union line-outs are used to re-start play when the ball goes out of play. The scoring is different too. A League try is worth four points while Union's is valued a five; a drop goal in League counts for just one point while in Union it is worth three; a League penalty clocks up two points and the Union version three but a conversion kick following a try is worth two points in both codes. In League an attacking team can only be tackled six times each attack before the ball is turned over, where as in Union there is unlimited tackles. Rugby League has always been professional, where as payment for players in Union was only legalised in 1995. Why did they split? The original split in 1895 was over the issue of paying players. Rugby Union held out as a strictly amateur sport, ie playing for no financial benefit, whereas rugby league allowed professionalism in the game. The split was very acrimonious and the issue was one of the most divisive issues in the sport. For a 100 years, at least on the surface, the Union code stuck to their principles and steadfastly refused to permit player payments of any kind, including things such as boot sponsorship and book deals. It was also against the union rules on amateurism for union players to be involved in any way with league. Anyone who turned to league to earn a living was banned from playing the Union game ever again. However, as the 20th century progressed the amateur status of the game was under increasing pressure. In August 1995, in the face of widespread abuses (in the form of under the table payments, player trust funds, etc) and pressure from the top players who were being expected to put in many hours of training in an era of increasing media interest in the game, the game's governing body the IRB finally relinquished and rugby union became fully professional at all levels. Where is the game of Rugby Union played? Rugby Union is the more popular code of rugby on a global scale and is played in over 100 countries worldwide. As of 2000, there were 92 official Unions making up the iRB. The traditional powerhouses of rugby union in terms of popularity, numbers of people playing the game and international sucess remain the 'Home Unions' of England, Ireland, Scotland & Wales as well as France, South Africa, New Zealand and Australia. What are the major international competitions? International rugby currently revolves around a cycle building towards the Rugby World Cup, which has been staged in a different host country every four years since the inaugural tournament in 1987. For a full history, and list of winners, click here. Along the way there are three major annual international competitions; the Six Nations, the Tri-Nations and the Epson Cup Pacific Rim. The Six Nations tournament was borne out of the Five Nations which is the oldest, and probably most famous, competitive rugby union tournament in the world. It is contested by England, France, Wales, Ireland, Scotland and Italy. For more information, and a full history, click here. The Tri-Nations, first contested in 1996, sees New Zealand, South Africa and Australia compete every June/July/August. For more information, and a full history, click here. The Epson Cup, also first contested back in 1996, currently sees Samoa, Fiji, Tonga, USA, Canada and Japan clash each year. Who are what is the governing body for rugby, what do they do and where are they based? The governing body for international rugby is the International Rugby board (IRB), who are based in Dublin, Ireland. There website is www.irb.org. The IRB are responsible for deciding and implementing the laws of the game, which can be found here. The IRB are the umbrella organisation of the international game, with the individual national rugby unions governing rugby - under the IRB laws - in their own countries, for example the South African Rugby Football Association (SARFU) who run the game in South Africa. What are the positions and numbering in rugby? 1. Loosehead prop 2. Hooker 3. Tighthead prop 4. Second-row or Lock 5. Second-row or Lock 6. Blindside flanker 7. Openside flanker 8. No.8 9. Scrum-half (also known as half-back) 10. fly-half (also known as stand-off or out-half or first five-eighth) 11. Left wing 12. Inside centre 13. Outside centre 14. Right wing 15. Fullback

What is the difference between a tightead and a loosehead prop?

Hey Neat, Terry!!! Thanks! If you are on cable (yes, you are) and get CNNSI you will see entire rugby games. I got to watch Rob's home town Canterbury team win. Yippee!!!

Sheesh.....will go look or ask Rob! (re What is the difference between a tightead and a loosehead prop?)

Gadzooks! They have Hookers on their teams!!! (Rob doesn't know and I'll have to hunt it up.... good stuff you have posted!!! Source?)

Hi Paul I have read your coments on Rugby which is simler to American football A simple question for anyone? why do the Americans call Football Football when the ball is rarely kicked by the foot? Now soccer as it is known in America is kicked most of the time by the foot and known round the world as football not soccer? So is Soccer football and not American Football?

This isn't the answer but it's interesting: Most modern versions of football, however, originated in England, where a form of the game was known in the 12th century. In subsequent centuries football became so popular that various English monarchs, including Edward II and Henry VI, forbade the game because it took interest away from the military sport of archery. By the middle of the 19th century football had split into two distinct entities. Still popular today, these two sports included the football association game, or soccer (the word being a slang adaptation of the three letters, s-o-c, in Association), and rugby, in which players ran with the ball and tackled. Modern football evolved out of these two sports. http://wwwwbs.cs.tu-berlin.de/user/tiny/fhistory.html

American football is often referred to as gridiron football. It is "kicked off" so we called it football. The Aussies call their roganized mayhem "footie" so there you go. Rugby is amazing. Soccer I would call "headball" if I had to pick a name. It is not kicked all that much, either.

More of interest, but, again, not the answer. Marci has the answer! American football history HISTORY OF AMERICAN FOOTBALL Football historians, those who have studied the game and its origins, place the game�s beginnings in rugby, an English game played with many similarities to football. Rugby began in eighteen twenty-three at the famous Rugby Boys� School in England. Another cousin of the game of football is soccer, sometimes called association football; its beginnings can also be traced to English origin, being played as early as the eighteen twenties. COLLEGE FOOTBALL: ITS BEGINNINGS At the same time, a group of students at Princeton began playing what was then known as �ballown�. First using their fists to advance the ball, and then their feet, this game consisted mainly of one goal: to advance the ball past the opposing team. There were no hard and fast rules applied to this earliest attempt at the game we now call football. At Harvard, the freshman and sophomore classes competed in a football-type game, played on the first Monday of each school year; this event came to be known as �Bloody Monday� because of the roughness of the game. Pick up games, similar in style to that played on �Bloody Monday�, soon became popular on the Boston Common, catching on in popularity around eighteen sixty. Soon after the end of the American Civil War, around eighteen sixty five, colleges began organizing football games. In eighteen sixty seven, Princeton led the way in establishing some rudimentary rules of the game. Also in that year, the football itself was patented for the very first time. Rutgers College also established a set of rules in eighteen sixty seven, and with the relatively short distance between it and Princeton, a game was decided upon by both universities. A date was chosen, November sixth, eighteen sixty nine; Rutgers won by a score of six goals to four, and thus was played what has become known as the very first intercollegiate football game. In eighteen seventy three, representatives from Columbia, Rutgers, Princeton, and Yale met in New York City to formulate the first intercollegiate football rules for the increasingly popular game, still being played with many of the rules of soccer. These four teams established the Intercollegiate Football Association, and set as fifteen the number of players allowed on each team. Walter Camp, the coach at Yale and a dissenter from the IFA over his desire for an eleven man team, helped begin the final step in the evolution from rugby-style play to the modern game of American football. The IFA�s rules committee, led by Camp, soon cut the number of players from fifteen to eleven, and also instituted the size of the playing field, at one hundred ten yards. In eighteen eighty-two Camp also introduced the system of downs. After first allowing three attempts to advance the ball five yards, in nineteen six it was changed to ten yards. The fourth down was added in nineteen twelve. Tackling below the waist had been legalized in eighteen eighty-eight. Within a decade, concern over the increasing brutality of the game led to its ban by some colleges. Nearly one hundred eighty players had suffered serious injuries, and eighteen deaths had been reported from the brutal mass plays that had become common in practice. In nineteen hundred five, President Theodore Roosevelt called upon Harvard, Princeton, and Yale to help save the sport from demise. At a meeting between the schools, reform was agreed upon, and at a second meeting, attended by more than sixty other schools, the group appointed a seven member Rules Committee and set up what would later become known as the National Collegiate Athletic Association, or the NCAA. From this committee came the legalization of the forward pass, which resulted in a more open style of play on the field. The rough mass plays, which once caused so many serious injuries, and even deaths, were prohibited by the committee. Also prohibited was the locking of arms by teammates in an effort to clear the way for their ball carriers. The length of the game was shortened, from seventy to sixty minutes, and the neutral zone, which separates the teams by the length of the ball before each play begins, was also established. Today, almost one hundred years since the inception of the NCAA, the sport of college football flourishes as one of the most popular of collegiate games. Colleges and universities are placed into three divisions under NCAA guidelines and each division has many conferences. Seasonal and conference play leads to post-season bowl games, where the champions of conferences meet to play in front of a world-wide television audience. Some of these bowls include the Rose Bowl, played on New Year�s Day in Pasadena, California, between the Big Ten and Pacific Ten conference champions. Other bowls include the Orange Bowl in Miami, Florida, the Sugar Bowl in New Orleans, Louisiana, the Cotton Bowl in Dallas, Texas, and the Peach Bowl in Atlanta, Georgia. PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL: ITS BEGINNINGS Professional football was first played soon after the demise of the Intercollegiate Football Association, around eighteen ninety-five. In nineteen twenty, the American Professional Football Association was formed; one year later it was reorganized and in nineteen twenty-two was renamed the National Football League. Unlike the APFA, which handed out franchises far and wide with little discretion, the NFL, from nineteen forty-six to forty-nine, was limited to ten teams. The APFA, on the other hand, consisted of twenty three teams in the year between its inception and the change-over in becoming the NFL. A merger in nineteen seventy, fifty years after the inception of the first pro football association, combined sixteen NFL teams with ten AFL teams to comprise one league with two conferences. In the nineteen eighties, further expansion was proposed and by the ninety three-ninety four NFL season, approval was given for a thirty-team league. The next step towards growth of the league would be to realign the NFL into eight different divisions, each with four teams. Pro football, like its college counterpart, was not without its failures. Among the number of competitive leagues that have folded in failure are the All-American Football conference, nineteen forty-six to forty-nine, the American Football League, nineteen sixty to sixty-nine, and the World Football League, nineteen seventy-four to seventy-five. Arena Football, an indoor league played in the spring with eight man teams, debuted in nineteen eighty-seven. It is still played, but does not enjoy the popularity or success that is found in the National Football League. PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL TODAY: A BUSINESS From its humble beginnings in eighteen sixty-nine, when the first intercollegiate game was played between Rutgers and Princeton, football has become a multi-billion dollar business in its professional form. Once watched by no more than a handful of loyal sideline enthusiasts, football is now available for worldwide viewing. With the advent of cable television, dozens of high school and college games can be watched over Friday and Saturday afternoons. Pro games are televised on Sunday and Monday nights, with at least half a dozen games televised each weekend during the season. At the end of each NFL season, champs from both the National and American conferences meet in the Super Bowl to determine a national champion. This game, always played in January, has been called the most watched sporting event of all time, with a viewing audience from around the entire globe, watching and listening to the televise in dozens of languages. Although television commercials foot a very large part of the bill, the competition between networks for the coverage rights highly inflates the value of NFL franchises. In nineteen twenty, a franchise cost one hundred dollars. By nineteen sixty, each was worth approximately two million dollars. In nineteen ninety three, when the league decided to expand, selling teams to Charlotte, North Carolina and Jacksonville, Florida, the cost rose to one hundred forty millions dollars per franchise. In the same year, the NFL signed a five-network, four year television contract, totaling almost four and a half billion dollars. Author's name omitted by request

Football By default, "football" is always taken to mean American football in the USA. European-style football is called soccer to distinguish it from American football. from the American English to British English Dictionary

It is not soccer, it is FOOTBALL!!! In England: F.C. Liverpool. What does the "F" stand for? Football of course!!! In Germany: F.C. Bayern. What does the "F" stand for? Fussball(=Football) of course! In Spain: F.C. Barcelona. What does th "F' stand for? Futbol(=Football) again!!! I assume you already know that there are hundreds of thousands of such examples around Europe (and also South America). There are very few countries which use the word soccer in order to distinguish the sport from some other national sport that is given the same name. This is ok, they can live in their own world if they want, but it is not fair to establish it as an international term through the Internet! The World Wide Web is GLOBAL and all people (except three countries USA,Canada & Australia) around the world call this sport with its right name. Experience has taught me that people who use the term 'soccer' usually (99%) have absolutely no idea about football (or should I call it real football?). I hope that this will be better understood in the future. Pantazis C. Houlis PS -- Yes I have read the article about the origin of the word "soccer". It is not actually a matter of origin, it is a matter of understanding the reason of calling it like that. Even the people who invented the word "soccer" call it football! I need to add that some people who read this article suddenly become "experts" and think that they know everything which is quite disturbing... PS2 -- They should call the barbarian (go for the man-not the ball) immitations of football as "THROWBALL", "HOLDBALL", "CHASEBALL", "TACKLEBALL", "EATBALL", "SQUEEZEBALL", "TIME-OUT-BALL", "ANIMAL-INSTICT-BALL" or "WHACKBALL". PS3 -- By the way, these immitations don't even use a round ball, they use an OVOID! Back to Europe's best clubs from http://www.maths.uwa.edu.au/~pandahou/realfoot.html

Gidday...I've been referred to this board to maybe help out in some explanations and to spread the word on what a great game Rugby is. Answers to some of the above questions... The props...The key part of the game for props is the scrum. The tighhead prop is the cornerstone of the scrum. The hooker binds on him and as the scrum forms and "hits" the tighthead has his head wedged in betwen the oppositions loosehead prop and hooker. As such the tighthead needs to keep his back straight, his hea

his head up and looking forward and have enough strenght to hold his hooker as the hooker strikes for the ball. The loose head is on the the otherside (left) of the scrum and he pushes against the oppositions tighthead prop. His head isn't wedged and the position requires more technique as well as strength. Its his job to push and slighty raise the opposition prop so the hooker has a clearer strike at the ball. Props are big, usually around the 110kg to 125kg size. Normally just under six foot though they are tending to be taller in most international teams these days. A great position and the grinders of the team that give the glory boys in the backs the platform to do their stuff.

Thanks for the elucidation on the fine art of getting the bejabbers kicked out of your shins. I still say it looks like a mobile spider. Quite a show and fun to watch, it is far more complex and exciting than one might think. And, they play it without pads!! Aloha to the Aussie expert. Do you play?

Thanks for the Canadian welcome...no I'm not Australian, I'm a Kiwi, I did play but restrict it to the odd appearance or social rugby now. My position was hooker. Rugby is actually a simple game made too complex by some of the people that play it.

P.S...most of the smart ones wear soccer shin pads.

Oooh, another Kiwi! If you go to Geo conference one of my most eager posters goes to Canterbury and lives in Christchurch. Where are you? He actually listened to a cricket game with me.... me on short wave radio and he on the local radio. Aloha!

Hi all Hehehehehe!!!!! Tis a bad time to be an Australian sportsperson - beaten by their oldest rival in the Netball World Cup final, steamrolled by the All Blacks last night.... hmmmmmmm this is looking good. It has been a fantastic week for New Zealand sport, but none more so than on the netball courts and the rugby fields. To beat the Australians in any of their traditional sports is one thing, but to win a World Cup Final against them and then steamroll them again 5 days later is something completely different again. Rugby enthusiasts will tell you that the All Blacks must be on to something when they cream the Springboks one week, and then take the mickey out of the World Champions the following. You know you done something significant in the rugby world when the Sydney Morning swarms over the Australians like angry hornets. http://rugbyheaven.smh.com.au/articles/2003/07/27/1059084280542.html Rob

Hi all With the World Cup in October you should be watching this space. I will try to post stuff in a respectable time frame or alternatively watch the Sydney Morning Heralds Rugby Heaven: http://rugbyheaven.smh.com.au Rob

Hi all Terry can you please create a Netball conference, so I can introduce what I currently think is one of the most exciting sports on Earth to the Spring folk. Thanks Rob

Will you write the intro in the next post and I'll create it. Of course, you can create it yourself if you like. But I'll be more than happy to do it once I get your intro to copy and paste in to the introduction.

Hi all I asked Marcia last time we talked, and I thought you had to set the Sports subjects. Anyway here is the title and blurb: "Netball - Basketball's little sis" - A predominantly women's sport similar to basketball in more ways than one. Thanks Rob

Hi Glad to see that the All Blacks beat Australia. As a Springbok supporter, any team that beats them is okay to me. (Never minde the 16-52 beating we took from the All Blacks!). Leigh

Kia Ora Leigh, good to hear from you. I hear one of your batsmen has amassed 277 during the South African innings against England while Herschelle Gibbs added another 178 or something like that? Impressive. How does RSA rate it's chances at the World Cup based on current play? I pick on current play NZ, England and France in the semi's with either Australia or South Africa taking the fourth position. England have come of age and have two very fast backs Dad tells me. Last thing. Did the South African press cover much of the Netball? I have been trying to gauge reaction to New Zealand doing what no one has done against Australia for 16 years - win a Netball World Cup final. Cheers Rob

one of your batsmen has amassed 277 Yes, our new captain - Graham Smith. He took over the captaincy from Shaun Pollock in a way which upset the country, but he has proven that he's got what it takes. RSA rate ... World Cup based on current play Don't even ask. Before NZ beat us, Australia beat us, and the week before that Scotland gave us a good scare - we won, but only because the ref made some questionable descisions. The coaches etc, think that we're already in the final and don't see any problems!! South African press cover much of the Netball? Not at all. Netball (local and international) is given about 1 hour a week on TV. The sponsorship isn't good, and so no coverage.

So, what part of South Africa do you hail from? I hail from Christchurch in the South Island of New Zealand (Canterbury Crusaders country if you follow the Super 12 competition). New Zealand and South Africa have had good sporting contact since Apartheid ended, and the South Africans have always impressed, be it in cricket or rugby. What sports do you follow? Rob

I live in Centurion, Pretoria - as in the Cricket Stadium, Centurion Park (1.2km or 10 minutes walk away). Cricket, Rugby, Hockey and Grandprix are the sports our family follows almost religiously. We have followed the Super 12 for a few years now, but need I mention how the SA teams fare??? Cricket is a family favourite and my brother played for Northens (mid 80's) where he became good friends with Eric Simons - now the SA Coach, so we eagerly watch to see how the team is doing. They are more consistant winners than the rugby team, so easier to support. Australia is our greatest rival, they beat us everytime (cricket, rugby, hockey - whatever!) NZ, well, can I take you back to the 1996 rugby World Cup which SA won over NZ with a drop goal in the last minute? Ever since then, we can only beat you at Cricket. By the way the 16-52 loss to NZ was a joke, Seriously, 1652 was the year South Africa was founded by Van Riebeek, and that's when our rugby problems for the above game started.

Last comment before I hit the sack (1.AM here). I do not follow Grandprix, so you will have to enlighten us. I usually do not follow rugby much but my family hosted a friend from Canada in the summer and early autumn, so I am starting to get used to it a bit more and am more accepting it's place in New Zealand. That said, I favour cricket and netball. Cricket because I grew up playing it and my Dad went to school with former Kiwi pace bowler Sir Richard Hadlee. I have been to several internationals at Jade Stadium (hosts cricket in the summer and rugby in the winter) against Australia (2x), Pakistan, India, and the West Indies. I started following netball when Christchurch hosted the 1999 World Championships, whose final New Zealand lost by one point with about 3 seconds on the clock against Australia. 2000 was a rebuilding year but we won a tri-nations series against Australia and South Africa in the latter part of that year. 2001 saw the shock dumping of the coach, and several Silver Ferns retire. In 2002 we played Australia and lost against them in double extra time 57-55. I think the tide in international netball changed with that game. Australia started making mistakes and (shock, horror)got beaten by the Jamaicans, barely survived a tight series against England, and did not dare play New Zealand. New Zealand ran in the opposite direction. We got beaten by the Jamaicans only because of biased umpiring, put away the English comfortably and drowned one of the South Pacific nations by about 80 points. I will tell the rest of the story later. Cheers Rob

Kia Ora If you get the time here is what I would like you to say for the Netball topic: "Netball" - A 7-aside game similar to basketball Thanks Rob

South Africa and Australia meet on Saturday for a Tri-Nations game. Both teams have been thrashed by New Zealand in the last two games of the series. South Africa is going in with a whole 'new look' team in the hopes of trying to win a match against Australia.

Are you in one of these countries Leah?

Yes, South Africa

Wow, we used to have a regular here from SA (Riette), what's life like for you there?

Okay. (Usually). I live in a suburb of the capital, which is your average westernised city. Last night our power was cut for 3 hours because someone (takes more than one person) stole an underground electricity cable, but other than that life is normal. Electricity is a luxury, and most of the black townships don't have - therefore theft of cables to make illegal link-ups to the main grid, results in deaths - as the cables are then 'live' and lie in the open.

That's pretty scary that folks are stealing live electric cables. Do you have backup power? How frequent are these man caused outages?

Do you have backup power? Not power, but we resort to a gas bottle if need be. How frequent are these man caused outages? This year there has been 6, just in our city. Around the country it happens at least once a week. It hits the news when someone dies, as then the authorities try to send an educational advert out saying please don't do it. I think many people here underestimate the power of electricity.

What size city are you in? Is it more prevalent (wire theft) in the larger cities?

What size city are you in? Pretoria is about the equivalent of Dallas (of what I can remember from the TV program) , with a population of 1.5 million Is it more prevalent (wire theft) in the larger cities? Mostly in the smaller regions or outlying areas. In the main cities, the cables are usually protected in secured areas.

So are you a rugby player yourself? Do you hang around with rugby players?

No, I definately do not play rugby!! Very rough macho sport, but I'm married to a dedicated fan, who played on a provincial level in the 80's, for the Blue Bulls.

So you do hang around with a rugby fan who's not a player? What is the appeal of the sport for you?

We're a sports mad country! Saturday afternoons are traditionally spent watching TV or attending a game. In order to spend time with my husband, I've had to adapt to supporting sporting events.

Rugby is popular as a local team sport here in Austin. But you rarely see it on tv. So there it has the status of football in the US?

Kia Ora from another sports mad country.... I hear Makhaya Ntini and Graeme Smith made a mess of the English batting in the cricket test? 2 double centuries is something I think even Sir Donald Bradman from Oz had trouble getting. The media made it sound like SA merely went for a stroll in the park and hit some big scores along the way... :o) From Terry in the previous message: "So there it has the status of football in the US?" Rugby is to NZ, Australia, England, France and South Africa what NFL is to you. Difference is rugby (or at least the Southern Hemisphere style)is a more free flowing game rather than the set piece plays of the NFL. I am not a rugby fan, though I will watch occasionally, but my Dad watches most games along with Mum (my brother usually watches it with his mates). Rob

South Africa has had a mixed weekend with the cricket and rugby. We have excelled on the cricket pitch!. We are very proud of our team and are just sorry that they have only managed this level of excelence AFTER the world cup, but that was anyway a different game - 1 day matches. But on the other end of the scale is the fiasco of a rugby game we tried to play. Not only did we lose, but dirty play was involved. The Tri-Nations has turned into Cry-Nations tournament for us. We still have to face New Zealand again on Saturday and many SA supporters just wish it was behind us - how much worse can it get. Of course, the management etc say that they don't want to 'peak' before the World Cup - what a joke!!

Kia Ora The Aussies as I understand the state of affairs with the dirty claims, have yet to show evidence. Was there evidence of eye gouging and the like? I cannot say because I was at my brother Craig's 21st birthday and was not near a TV screen all night. 682/6 is a HUGE score. Be warned England can hit big responses when under pressure, but the likelihood of them matching the deficit is low I would imagine given how test pitches invariably deterioate over the course of the game. Now, anyway. I was wondering about how much of this following assessment you would agree with 2 months out from the World Cup? It is a ranked list of where I think the teams are likely to end up in the finals: For the Quarter Finals: New Zealand, England, France, Australia, South Africa, Argentina, Fiji, Italy For the Semi Finals: New Zealand, Australia, England, South Africa For the Final: England, New Zealand For the World Cup: Not willing to call a shot. It is not that I do not have confidence, or am taking the easy way out, but it is too soon to tell what might happen. Rob

Don't know so much if SA will reach the Semi's,(this based on current performance). I'd like to see Scotland and or Wales in the Quarters. I haven't seen much of Fiji lately.

Kia Ora What do South Africans do in the stadium when the All Blacks perform the Haka? Aussies start singing Waltzing Matilda, and the English I think sing God save the Queen. In New Zealand for obvious reasons we do not do anything: we want you to hear it LOUD AND CLEAR. Rob

What do South Africans do in the stadium when the All Blacks perform the Haka? I know that once the players started walking towards the All Blacks - I think it was in the rugby world cup final which we won. In the stadium we sing 'Shosho losa' which is an African miners working song. We also have a Zulu Warrior (in full traditional dress) that stands on the field to protect our players, but he seems very ineffectual...

Kia Ora So, Leigh. If you make time to spend with your husband watching sport, does he reward you in return for faithfully sitting next to him while the footy or other sports are on? Mum and Dad both watch the rugby, and we have been to see a couple of the Crusaders games. Saw the Crusaders play the Bulls in 2000 who got beaten by something like 40 points, and the New South Wales Waratahs. Dad and I sometimes go to see the Black Caps play during the NZ cricket season (last time I think was when Australia came over and had a run-fest at Jade Stadium - scored 340 or something like that in an ODI, and we scored about 310 in response). Rob

does he reward you in return for faithfully sitting next to him while the footy or other sports are on? Yes, he knows as much about Colin Firth (see Drool) as I do!

I see that the All Black team for Saturday's game at Duneden against the Springboks has 5 or 6 changes. Is this good or bad for New Zealand to change a team that has won it's last few matches as a walkover?

Wow, there a team named Springboks? That sounds good! Tell me more about that team, ok?

Kia Ora With due respect Drool is not my cup of tea - hence my deafening silence there. If you were to go to Geo, you would find that I am very active there because earth sciences and in particular earthquakes and volcanoes have interested me since I was little. Rob

Me again I think some of the changes may be for the better. Our kicking department is lacking a person who can play the tactical game, and while Andrew Mehrtens would be preferred to Carlos Spencer I think because Mehrtens is an old hand, Mitchell wants to find someone to replace him when he retires. He has not announced it yet, but what is there to say he will not? Rob

Wow, there a team named Springboks? That sounds good! Tell me more about that team, ok? Springboks = South African national team, named after a buck (bokkie) found in abundance in all our National parks. When apartheid ended, attempts were made by the new government to change the name from Springboks to Proteas, but this has failed, as in international rugby, the Springboks are recognised as South Africa. (Same as New Zealand is known as All Blacks)

Kia Ora Leah, the media here are saying that the Boks are headed for oblivion and silly things like that all because they are in a bad patch. They seem to have forgotten all teams have a bad period from time to time - the All Blacks were ridiculed in the late 1990s for their Bledisloe Cup and Tri-nations form yet now they are one of the hot favourites for this years World Cup. If you want my take: I do not buy the garbage for one second. South Africa is a formidable outfit to take on even on the best of days, and he who writes them off this early is dead wrong on all accounts. All teams have their bad days - South Africa will be back. Rob

All teams have their bad days - South Africa will be back. Have to agree with you, but Saturday is another 'test' for us. The headlines today are still reporting on the 16-52 loss. Remember, this loss was a home game for us, this weekend we are playing in Dunedin. It is going to be a tough game for us. We will be watching on Saturday morning (I think our time 09:30) and hoping that the team can at least play a proper game of rugby!

Hi all Starts about 1930 hours here, and it is clear and cold in Dunedin I understand from listening to the weather report. At the time of typing this it was 1904 hours. Good luck Rob

Good game Leah? I thought SA played well. Dad, who is more into the game than I, was impressed with the try scored by SA in the first half. I think (and hope)that this game silenced a few critics of the SA team, who Justin Marshall recognised as having made significant inroads since the 52-16 scoreline. Have a good weekend. Rob

We did play well, but we still lost! (at least 11-19 is better than 16-52)

Kia Ora It was a good reality check for the "experts" who like to think that they know about the game and all the technical aspects. Why? Because I am a self confessed novice in rugby gameplay, teams, positions and everything else and I was correct in my prediction that SA would play better. Rob

That makes me a subnovice!

Hi all Rugby has not always been popular in New Zealand, especially in 1981 when the Springbok Tour as it is known here caused massive civil disorder. Many people including current MPs led campaigns of peaceful civil disobedience like blocking roads and bridges. There were violent demonstrations in every city that the South Africans toured, and as the tournament moved up the country protests got progressively bigger with thousands marching by the time it reached Wellington. Why? South Africa's Apartheid meant the SA team was only of white people whereas New Zealand included players of many heritages from around the South Pacific. Basically like other nations peoples New Zealanders resented Apartheid, and especially the decision of Prime Minister Robert Muldoon to permit the tour. Let me give you a run down, city by city of what was happening during that fateful tour in a country normally known to be peaceful and friendly. The tour started in Dunedin at Carisbrook (known also as the "House of Pain")where hundreds marched in protest. The game went ahead I think, but there was widespread anger voiced in all centres. Dunedin has a population of 110,000 people and with the exception of Hamilton was the smallest of the cities where games were played. In Christchurch at what was then known as Lancaster Park (now Jade Stadium), thousands marched. Police set up barricades around the park and shuttled people in and out to prevent disruption of the game. Protests turned violent when marchers met supporters of the game outside the stadium and police had to intervene. I am not sure of what coverage this received overseas (Leah? what coverage was available in SA?). With a population of 310,000 people then, Christchurch was an ominous indicator of things to come - if barricades were being needed after only two games what would happen when the tour reached Auckland? Trouble escalated further in Wellington. By now protests were an almost daily event, and in Wellington the protest became running battles with objects being thrown at the police who were unlucky in that they were merely charged with keeping the peace. Thousands descended on Parliament and hundreds more went to try to disrupt the game at Athletic Park. With a population of 450,000 there was plenty of potential trouble. But now things really really heated up. Police in Hamilton were told to take a no holds barred approach and the protesters began wearing motor cycle helmets and carrying cricket bats. In the inevitable clashes that followed letter boxes were ripped out, scores were injured. The game started, stopped when the crowd became hostile, started again and then stopped for good when riot police entered the grounds because word had leaked of a pitch invasion impending. Finally the tour reached Auckland, and most agree albeit for different reasons that the tour should have been called off by now. If Hamilton was a shambles, Auckland was an utter nightmare. The civil disobedience was peaking and a no go zone around Eden Park had to be constructed to keep the riots that everyone knew were going to come from reaching the stadium. Even before the game started, it was in trouble. A light aircraft had been circling the stadium dropping leaflets into the crowd, and when it flew off, the crowd became noisy and angry. The game started for reasons as no one quite knew why because trouble was just around the corner... The light aircraft that had been circling the stadium dropping leaflets, now came back with something more troublesome - flour bombs. The aircraft circled the stadium once before several bombs were dropped out of the aircraft onto the field. At that stage the crowd roared their approval and people from both the pro and anti factions began entering the field enmasse. Riot police had been deployed but they struggled to contain the seething mass that was entering the field. The tour was off. There was no point in playing the remaining games when the host country had virtually gone to war with itself. For 20 years few spoke about the Springbok tour, though now we are finally coming to terms with those few crazy weeks in 1981 when for a time NZ was almost at war. Rob

Yeah, I remember the 1981 tour the Springboks took to NZ. It was news headlines on TV and newspapers. Politics vs sport and politics IN sport - a debate South Africa hasn't managed to get over yet.

Kia Ora I think we found Apartheid repulsive because we were conscious of the history behind the colonisation of New Zealand by the British and the potentially destructive effects, opening old wounds from that time would have on NZ. There is rigorous debate today and which will possibly always go on forever about Maori indigenous rights and ownership of natural resources. The Government needs to legislate to avoid alienating the European population, but to avoid falling out with Maori they have to be seen to be supporting their claims to ownership. Sport is a bit different. I think we have grown up since the crazy days of 1981 or at least I HOPE we have grown up from that sort of lunacy. Given our tolerance of other cultures I think it would be a damning indictment if we have not learnt the lessons. Nelson Mandela was immensely popular when NZ hosted the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, and most see him as a symbol. New Zealanders are not well known for turning out en masse to see politicians and figureheads, but a lot of people went to Auckland to see Mandela. Just wondering. Does having Mugabe's Zimbabwe on your border cause any concern given his utter contempt for all things democratic and/or Western? Rob

Kia Ora Been a great weekend for New Zealand rugby. We have now taken the Bledisloe Cup off the Australians as well, and next stop is Australian Rugby Union in November to get the Holy Grail of Rugby: THE WORLD CUP. Ka rita (rising voice)... KA RITA (rising voice) .... Rob

Congrats on winning the Rugby. You're right that your next stop will be the trip to pick up the World cup. No team is going to beat NZ in their current form. Good luck from a Bok supporter

Kia Ora I would not write off the other teams yet. They might be struggling to match the All Blacks at the moment but I have haunting memories of when we let France off the hook in 1999 - it cost us the Semi-final. I mean we played like madmen said one Australian, and then for reasons as god only knows we just slacked off big time in the second half. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid... Rob

Kia Ora Leah, did you get my response to that e-mail you sent? Rob

Hi Rob Yes, I got your last email, and have just replied. - Sorry for the delay.

Kia Ora All Blacks have announced their 30 man "Win the World Cup or else" squad. Big names are missing like Andrew Mehrtens, Jonah Lomu, Taine Randell, Anton Oliver, among others. Captain is Reuben Thorne, and the Vice Captain is Tana Umaga. Justin Marshall, Ben Blair, Corey Flynn, Joe Rokocoko, Doug Howlett, Daniel Carter, Carlos Spencer are all in. Spencer is someone I would have left in on the condition that Andrew Mehrtens went as a stand in because his kicking is second grade, and my fear is that if crucial games in the semifinals and (I assume)the final came down to kicking goals then we would lose. Rob

Me again When will SA name it's squad for the World Cup? Rob

The SA team is on a training camp this week, and on Saturday the squad will be announced. Already there is speculation as to who will be picked, as the government has laid down a few criteria for the team, and it seems performance is not top on their list. (performance is not on the players list either, but that is an issue our current SA team and management doesn't seem to bother about!)

Kia Ora No matter Leigh. New Zealand will if we have any sense go into the RWC assuming South Africa is saving it's best for the World Cup competition. The World Cup is make or break for NZ, Australia and South Africa because our countrymen will accept nothing less than a world cup victory. Bit like walking a tight rope over an alligator pit or a den of hungry lions... Rob

Hi all The Aussies have named their squad to defend the trophy that they won in 1999 against France. Interesting to note a few people missing, but that other big names are in there are still some relative unknowns in the team. Leigh, if the Kiwis do the Haka, the Aussies "Waltzing Matilda" (which some rugby kill-joy tried to get banned from the 2003 cup), what do South African supporters do? For those in the States and elsewhere who are not familiar with patriotism at rugby, the mood or atmosphere of big rugby matches is often defined culturally. For example the Australians LOVE singing "Waltzing Matilda", and to hear 50,000 voices in the stands all singing the same tune at once is a very powerful sound. To hear the All Black captain winding up the team before they perform the Haka and the ferocious chant that follows is spine tingling for any opposition, and it is what makes rugby so immensely popular. A variant of the Haka that former captain Taine Randell introduced in 1998 is particularly powerful. Just before they start, he turned towards the players and gave them the following call in Maori: "Ka rita.... KA RITA...." Rob

The South African team was announced on Saturday, but what drama ! Two players had a "disagreement", and the press picked up on it. Unfortunately one player was black and one white, so the government, rugby officials, press etc all assumed it was a racial 'disagreement' and both players were excluded from the team. Now there are enquiries and allegations by lawyers from both sides, as to be labeled a 'racist' in South Africa will end your career in sport (and anywhere else) immediately. Oh what joy we have when sport has to endure political pressure. Our team has enough to worry about without outside influences. The only player who will make 2003 his 3rd world cup is Joost van der Westhuizen.

Kia Ora You are right. The media swooped on it like a vulture, and it made the sports news here for two nights running. Question. I assume South Africa has a rigorous punishment system for lunatics like the moron who attacked the referee in that All Black-SA game last year? In New Zealand I think morons like him would be photographed, and mugshots distributed to security at all international venues. Alcohol cannot be bought onto the grounds and on site food and drink vendors are told to turn away drunks. ---- Have you heard, aside from by me, that a kill joy official tried to ban Waltzing Matilda from being sung at the World Cup. How is that for lunacy? Believe me Leigh, I would sooner join the Aussies singing Waltzing Matilda at an international rugby match against New Zealand than I would let someone ban the song. Rob

Only now seen the above post. The moron became a 'national hero'. Seriously, he has paid the fine that was set against the crime, and has stated that he has bought tickets for the World cup, and is on his way to Australia. I just hope that he behaves himself, as the world will once again be watching. However, I do hope that the referees are going to be fair and consistant in their games - South Africa needs all the help they can get. After all the political/racial problems facing the Boks in the past few weeks, they have been rated No 4 by one of the sponsors - so there is hope for us still.

Is there some kind of rugby world cup going on in Australia?

Not yet - starts on 10 October, and the final will be on 22 November, with LOTS of games inbetween. South Africa is rated No 4, but who knows what happens in these tournaments.

Hi all England has the Lion as it's symbol, the Aussies have the Kangaroo, the South Africans the Springbok, the Kiwi have as the name suggests... so what do France have? Terry, msg #83 "Is there some kind of rugby world cup going on in Australia?" It has not started yet as Leah mentioned, and it is THE Rugby World Cup - the ONLY Rugby World Cup. This is a truly international competition as my next post will make very clear. October 10 is the day. Rob

Kia Ora It has started. The Rugby World Cup 2003 is underway. I think Fox is showing coverage of the competition on their sports channel. 20 nations, one trophy. http://www.foxsportsworld.com/rugby Who will win the 2003 Rugby World Cup competition: Will the dark horse of France emerge? Will the English Lion roar? Will the Wallabies give their opponents an over dose of "Waltzing Matlida"? Will the Springboks run wild? OR Will the night go All Black? Rob

Hi The All Blacks have a tough game (which they should win) tomorrow against Italy, and later in the day... The Boks are going to tackle Uruguay - which should be a win for South Africa ! We will watch and wait to see what happens, because weaker teams than this have beaten us.

Hi all That was a fairly straight forward match. NZ won 70-7 to Italy. John Kirwan is coaching the Italian team - you might recall his name from the early 1990s and late 1980s when he was holding the No. 14 jersey for the All Blacks. When are the Boks going for Uruguay? I know a couple from Uruguay who did their post graduate degrees at Canterbury University where I am doing a degree in Geography. I did not know that Uruguay played rugby (though with Argentina just across the River Plate from them I suppose that that is not so surprising), just I was unaware that Romania played it until I arrived at Grandma's place where she and a cousin of mine that I was visiting were watching the opening moments of Romania-Ireland. Ireland won if you did not see it and France plays Fiji shortly. THAT will be interesting. Rob

South Africa played Uruguay just after the New Zealand game, and we WON ! also by a huge margin, but it was expected. (if we had lost this game, our team would have flown home already) What happened to Carlos Spencer? He missed so many kicks. But apart from this NZ had a good game.

Kia Ora That is Carlos living up to the doubt many including myself cast on him when Mitchell picked the team several weeks ago. I think Mitchell should have gone with Andrew Mehrtens who has a consistently good record kicking the ball for penalties and goals. I am more interested in Tana Umaga, skipper of the Wellington Hurricanes and All Black Vice Captain - he has a bad knee injury and may miss the rest of the tourney. This would be troublesome because Umaga is a consistently good player and has values that all sportsmen and women should uphold - great sportsmanship and fair play. To be fair we have a powerful squad for the World Cup, something about which few have any doubts. But, I would have preferred to give Christian Cullen, Anton Oliver and Mehrts spots in place of some of the people that have currently gone. The most powerful team is the team that wins when all the players are on song. This is something the Silver Ferns demonstrated to the world at the Netball World Championships. Rob

Kia Ora Terry. I was wondering if you would be so good as to create the following topic for the Sport conference. TITLE: "Rugby World Cup 2003" BLURB: "20 Nations, 48 games in 44 days. There can be only ONE WINNER..." I would appreciate it if you could do that, thanks. Rob

Kia Ora Leah, good luck in the Lion's den!!! Rob ---- World Sports - AFP Springboks and England ready to light World Cup touchpaper 2 hours, 21 minutes ago PERTH, Australia (AFP) - The first-phase phoney war of the Rugby World Cup is set for a bone-jarring interruption here Saturday when England and South Africa collide in a crucial heavyweight contest. After a week dominated by mis-matches and record scorelines, a sell-out crowd of 43,000 will pack into the Subiaco Oval for a long-awaited Pool C game where the World Cup aspirations of both sides are on the line. The stakes are high. The victors can start making hotel arrangements for a semi-final in Sydney on November 16. For the losers, a daunting quarter-final against the All Blacks awaits. England, who are seeking to become the first northern hemisphere team to lift the Webb Ellis Cup, will start as favourites against a Springbok side who they crushed by a record 53-3 margin at Twickenham last year. That game exploded into violence when South African lock Jannes Labuschagne was sent off for a dangerous late tackle on England fly-half Jonny Wilkinson. Both camps have been at pains this week to play down the chances of a similarly spiteful encounter this time around -- but are nevertheless preparing for a ferocious physical battle. "Rugby is a physical game -- and we're going to play a physical game," said South Africa scrum-half Joost van der Westhuizen, who wins his 86th cap. Springboks lock Victor Matfield, a 6ft 7in (2.01m) former chorister who is the workhorse of the South African engine room, knows what is needed for victory. "We have to dominate them physically," the 26-year-old said. "In any game against a big team, you have to beat their forwards. Against England its especially important because they have such a big pack." England's experienced pack -- which averages more than 40 caps per head -- will be ready to fight fire with fire. "They pride themselves on being big-hitters," said England's captain Martin Johnson. "We pride ourselves on being a physical side too," added Johnson, who will lead a full-strength XV after several players injured in the 84-6 opening win over Georgia recovered. No.8 Lawrence Dallaglio cast doubt on whether South Africa would resort to the tactics used at Twickenham last year. "There's been a lot of talk about the Twickenham game but that was a complete one-off in my opinion," said Dallaglio. "We know they're hard and physical but there's nothing wrong with that -- it's one of the reasons we all play the game." Dallaglio said neither team could afford to transgress, with each side possessing accurate goalkickers in Wilkinson and South Africa's Louis Koen who could be relied upon to convert penalties into points. "Self-discipline is something we speak about a lot," he said. "We like to play physical, we like to play tough -- but it's got to be within the law. "You cannot win matches at international level if you don't have discipline throughout your team. Teams that don't adhere to that run the risk of losing." South Africa captain Corne Krige echoed Dallaglio's warning. "Discipline is very high on our list and has been for a year," Krige said. "Our penalty count has come down this year. Team manager Gideon Sam defused talk of another bad-tempered match in more colourful language. "It will not be a Korean war, nor a Boer war, nor any other war," Sam said. The build-up has seen England's tactics questioned, with a furore over the legality of the favourites' successful rolling maul ploy and perceived tendency to slow down play at the tackle area. Springbok coach Rudolf Straeuli would not confirm if he planned to discuss the maul with referee Peter Marshall but said he planned to hold a wide-ranging pre-match meeting with the Australian official. "I will be raising a lot of issues with the referee, but I'm not going into details," said Straueli. Straueli has named a side containing just two players -- skipper Krige and flanker Joe van Niekerk -- who played in the trouncing at Twickenham. Krige returns to the team after missing the opening 72-6 win against Uruguay and Straeuli said he was encouraged that both his captain and van der Westhuizen looked sharp. "To topple the top team in the world they've got to be at their best and they need a bit of luck as well," Straeuli said. "But experienced players like Corne and Joost are starting to hit form which is a good sign." Van der Westhuizen, the sole survivor of South Africa's 1995 World Cup-winning team, meanwhile said the squad wanted to use the game to silence their critics. "We've said all along that we want to do our talking on the pitch," the 32-year-old van der Westhuizen said. "Saturday gives us the opportunity to be heard."

Thanks Rob, we're going to need all the luck we can get - an Aussie ref doesn't really help our cause! The game is going to be played at 13:30 (lunch time on Saturday) and a lunch time braai (traditional boere kos) has been arranged by friends - so we'll be about 20 adults acting like 2 year olds for the duration. For the losers, a daunting quarter-final against the All Blacks awaits. of course if the 'boks lose, we still would need to win our other matches (against Samoa and Georgia) for the quarter-final to become a reality ;-)

Hi all We won against Canada, but still cannot answer the critics when it come to reducing their error rate. http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,2697047a1823,00.html I hope that the game does not flare up like the last one between the Lion and the Bok did at Twickenham into open violence. That is not what the Rugby World Cup is all about or supposed to be about. I also hope that Pieter van Zyl (pot-bellied crank who attacked the ref last year)is not in any of the crowds, because he sullies South Africa's sporting name. ---- Dad was wondering if maybe this will be the year of the Kiwi in sport. After watching the Kiwi league players bet the Aussies in the annual match, and knowing that although they are most likely to get a draw the 630/6 we scored against India is possibly unbeatable things are looking up. This comes on top of Scott Dixon doing well in the Indy, the almighty goddesses of double scull rowing defending their crown, and the demolition of South Africa and Australia for the Trinations and Bledisloe Cups. Of course I cannot go past without mentioning the demise of Australian netball supremacy at the hands of the "Magnificent 7" Silver Ferns. Rob

Hi The Boks entered the Rose Garden, and got stuck in the thorns - we could have won the game, but... South Africa lost ! (against England) Surprise, surprise. Not only that, but Samoa is top of our table. They are the surprise of the group and have put up a brave fight. We still have to play them and hope for a good win.

Kia Ora Johnny Wilkinson is dangerous - if we meet England, and it becomes a kicking contest then I fear that the first phone-call after the game will be for 30 airline tickets back to NZ. Send the men on ahead while the Coach and his crew figure what went so horribly wrong. Either that or whoever kicks for New Zealand puts in 110% effort. Carlos Spencer cannot kick with the consistency needed to win a kicking competition, and why I rue the fact that Andrew Mehrtens is not playing. Who kicks for SA? Rob

Hi Louis Koen kicked for us against England - he kicked 6 times but only 2 went over. Of the 4 he missed , 2 were RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE POSTS. (The commentators were saying that he could do it with his eyes closed, and lo and behold, his eyes were closed and he MISSED)... If we had gotten the points from his missed kickes, we would have/could have won the game - even England admitted this, so yes, kickers are of vital importance!

Kia Ora I am not taking much notice of the rugby at the moment because we are in India for a cricket triseries with them and Oz, and the test series that ended a few days ago was promising. Although we did not win either test, the batsmen did something I cannot EVER remember them doing: the openers plus first and third drop ALL scored centuries in the second test. We declared 630/6 against India after this effort, though I think personally we should have gambled and declared at say 530-550 and got started on the Indians earlier. Rob

Pool A Team P W D L F A Pts Australia 3 3 0 0 256 16 14 Ireland 3 3 0 0 125 39 14 Argentina 4 2 0 2 140 57 10 Romania 3 0 0 3 28 185 0 Namibia 3 0 0 3 21 273 0 Pool B Team P W D L F A Pts France 3 3 0 0 163 56 15 Scotland 3 2 0 1 80 77 10 Fiji 3 2 0 1 78 92 9 USA 3 1 0 2 72 84 6 Japan 4 0 0 4 79 163 0 Pool C Team P W D L F A Pts England 3 3 0 0 144 34 14 South Africa 3 2 0 1 124 50 10 Samoa 3 2 0 1 128 57 10 Uruguay 3 1 0 2 43 144 4 Georgia 4 0 0 4 46 200 0 Pool D Team P W D L F A Pts New Zealand 3 3 0 0 229 20 15 Wales 3 3 0 0 95 45 13 Italy 4 2 0 2 77 123 8 Canada 3 0 0 3 30 128 1 Tonga 3 0 0 3 39 154 1 Teams are awarded: Four points for a win. Two points for a draw. A bonus point for scoring four or more tries in a game. A bonus point for losing by seven points or fewer. The top two teams from each Pool qualify for the quarter-finals. If at the completion of the Pool phase two or more teams are level on points, the following criteria shall be used IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER until one of the teams can be determined as the higher ranked: 1. The winner of the match in which the two tied teams have played each other shall be the higher ranked. 2. The team which has the best points difference in all matches shall be the higher ranked. 3. The team which has the best difference between tries scored and tries conceded in all matches shall be the higher ranked. 4. The team which has scored most points in all its matches shall be the higher ranked. 5. The team which has scored most tries in all its matches shall be the higher ranked; 6. Should the tie still be unresolved, it shall be settled by the toss of a coin. England for the Cup Joe

(Joe) England for the Cup You may very well say this, but at least South Africa seems to have made it through to the quarter-finals, which is further than I had originally hoped for.