Rugby Union World Cup 2007

[kookaburra69]

Congrats to South Africa,they really deserved the win.

 

[ZexyZahid]

Congratulations to South Africa. Normally I don't watch rugby, but the rugby got hyped up during the World Cup on various TV channels, so you tend to watch it.

 

[aussie1st]

That's because his foot dabbed the line before his leg went into the air, before he put the ball down - therefore, in touch... it doesn't matter about putting the ball down, his foot clearly dabbed the line just before he crossed the line.

Exactly what I thought that one replay that showed his foot crossing the line was enough for me.

 

[The Spin]

England can be proud, a good effort and were unlucky in the end.

The try. I watched it over and over again and from the angle which really mattered, behind Cueto along the line, I watched it and he was in-field, then he lifted his foot, which hovered over the touchline and then he put the ball down. I was in a room with mostly S African fans and even they couldn't believe it wasn't given. This theory that his foot dabbed the line before he lifted it just doesnt look like it happened to me.

 

[w3lshrugby]

Well, if I get to look at it several times then I'll make a judgement, but in the end, history is history now. Let's put it to bed.

 

[Stephen Bailey]

Not particularly good quality in the picture, but that is the point that he just touches the line. They say rugby can be about inches, but that's not even inches!!

 

[Highlander999]

The moment it happend I said it wasn't a try. While everyone else was screaming about it being a bitter Australian I think the images in the Sunday Times prove it wasn't a try. I do think though that the ref did make a few bad calls, but SA did deserve the win. England's line-outs were terrible.

 

[Will_NA]

We were denied a couple of in-range penalties too but Saffa were definitely the better side. At least we tamed Habana :cool:

 

[Stephen Bailey]

We were denied a couple of in-range penalties too but Saffa were definitely the better side. At least we tamed Habana :cool:

We did that when we lost 36-0.

 

[Leicester Fox]

we lost, oh well I think Ashton was always going to be judgd on the next world cup given the fact he must only be about 15 (?) games into his England career. Just a shame it was probably one of the worst world cup finals ever, not a try (although some would beg to differ).

 

[The Spin]

I can't make my mind up from that picture above, his foot cannot be seen enough to see if it is in the air, it could just be above the ground

 

[CortezTheKiller]

Can anyone clear this up for me? I've tried googling it, but got nowhere: Why is it called a 'try' when someone grounds the ball behind the opponent's line?
What's the history behind it?

I'm not 100% on this, but this is what I've always believed: when the game was first codified scoring what we now know as a "try" didn't carry any points as such, but it did mean that the attacking team got to kick for a goal. So the grounding of the ball in the opponent's in-goal area meant a team got to "try" for a goal and hence "try".

& fair play to the saffers. They've been the best team throughout the tournament and deserved the win. It was a try from Cueto for me, but it didn't really have any affect on the game. A worse decision was actually the final SA pen when Cueto burst through past Sackey and Kay and Rolland gave a penalty for obstruction!

 

[evertonfan]

@MasterBlaster;

There's a ludicrous story that many people believe the term 'try' derives from. A bloke was playing football in a school PE lesson, decided to pick it up and run the ball into the goal. His teacher said to him, "No goal, but a good try; now to convert it into a goal you need to kick it in instead".

Hence, try and having to convert it for 3 more points. Or 2 in the proper form of the game.

Complete tosh, but it's a nice story.

 

[MasterBlaster76]

Nice story!

How about this theory on the origin of the scrum? That's what happened to the first guy to pick up the ball and run with it during a game of football when his team-mates saw what he was doing!

Unlikely to be true, but a bit of a laugh all the same!

I'm not 100% on this, but this is what I've always believed: when the game was first codified scoring what we now know as a "try" didn't carry any points as such, but it did mean that the attacking team got to kick for a goal. So the grounding of the ball in the opponent's in-goal area meant a team got to "try" for a goal and hence "try".

& fair play to the saffers. They've been the best team throughout the tournament and deserved the win. It was a try from Cueto for me, but it didn't really have any affect on the game. A worse decision was actually the final SA pen when Cueto burst through past Sackey and Kay and Rolland gave a penalty for obstruction!

Thanks for that and I agree with you, it was a try and that referee just didn't want to give us a single decision. Funny that, my nephew was saying that he thought the referee might be biased against us when he saw that he was Irish and my nephew's only ten!

Whatever happens next, England have got to make sure of one thing and that is they keep up to that standard. After the last World Cup, the team just went out of the window and we have got to make sure it doesn't happen this time and that we keep up the intensity we demonstrated in the latter stages of the World Cup. Let's get the Six Nations back and then go from there!

 

[Notts til i die]

yes well done to SA you really deserved it but you were Dam! lucky that that try was not given!