Gasta

@Know-it-all: Marcato is injured...

In my opinion, Algol, if expressed differently, would better convey what he wants to say. If you mean to imply that the event did not have as much media coverage as the match against New Zealand, I completely agree. However, the review and numerous comments are phrased in such a way that it seems like you are belittling the people involved in this sport. Regarding the criticism that many people went to S. Siro just for the haka, I can agree with that (even though I hope that, at least in part, it might have been a way to approach rugby), but the tone and several expressions (which I have already mentioned earlier) give the opposite impression. Moreover - as Telespallabob points out - many considerations seem to be based on a (apparently) quite limited knowledge, thus proving to be inaccurate. @TELESPALLA: I agree with what you said about IT-SA. Is it possible that we always kick from the midfield, or that we can't find decent throw-ins?! The penalty kicks then... McLean's two shots were absolutely convertible. A really bad day for kicking (mostly for the opponents as well). The 10 minutes in the sin-bin for Favaro penalized us greatly; it was a stupid foul (though I don't think it was intentional). I completely agree with your comment 226. PS: Are you not reciprocating my de-love?! :)

And today everyone is in front of the television enjoying Italy - South Africa! Good or bad, we already know how it will end, but we must take into account that they are the reigning world champions and that - at the moment - they are in second place in the ranking, behind New Zealand. But in a rugby match, it's also important to evaluate how the game is played. For example, in IT-NZ we lost 6 to 20 (one of the closest margins to date), but in the scrum, we dominated them. And in light of this, the last 10 minutes make sense, where the referee reset the scrum multiple times, even giving a yellow card to one of the forwards, but not awarding the penalty try. Our superiority IN THE SCRUM was clear to everyone; the penalty try - even though it wouldn’t have changed the outcome of the match - would have meant acknowledgment from the referee of this superiority. But that did not happen. This is what the penalty try meant, which is why it was talked about so much. But of course, those who are not familiar with these mechanisms see it all as a waste of time, thinking "we would have lost anyway."

Yes, yes, there’s no doubt that a "primordial" and "animalistic" component is an integral part of a rugby player's personality. And Chabal... they call him the Ogre. But then we need to explain to those who see rugby from the outside that it’s not like that, that it doesn't mean being an "animal" or a mindless individual. In Anglo-Saxon countries, playing rugby even earns you merit points in college, if I remember correctly. Come on, I still hope that sooner or later this sport can gain a bit more space and consideration here in Italy. Just 15 years ago things were very different, who knows if they might improve even more. Otherwise, as a last resort, I’ll emigrate to Wales or Ireland: there, rugby is really in the air! PS: a little note on the de-gendering... "demented" seems to cross the line. But okay, let’s stop here. Bye...

Energumeno is one thing, caveman is another. Obviously, in the era of professionalism you need to have a certain physique, but do you know how many graduated rugby players there are at a high level? Enough with the equation rugby player=big guy with no brain. Put a brainless idiot in charge of the lineouts and then we'll talk… It’s also things like this that undermine the credibility of rugby in the eyes of the "laypeople."

The problem with Algol is that this view of rugby and rugby players is too deeply rooted here in Italy, and we really don't need any more examples like this, because they only contribute to sinking further what we are trying to achieve: introducing rugby to the people. I swear it discourages me to see how many people conceive this sport as something where headbutts are thrown and "the piles" are formed. We don’t need more clichés and heaps of ignorance. At this rate, no one will ever take an interest in it. And the media buzz might help attract new enthusiasts. I'm not saying we should be proud that so many people at San Siro on Saturday were ignorant of rugby (on this point, I partly agree with you), but it certainly helped to raise awareness of the sport a little more; maybe some of them will genuinely become passionate about it. That would already be something. As a lover (and unfortunately no longer a player for various reasons), I feel “suffocated” by individuals who continue to label us as "series Z fans."

Telespallabob, your contributions are definitely more measured and relevant than mine. Really, I apologize for my intervention, but with everything I’ve read and heard throughout this time, this was the straw that broke the camel's back. And I regret that so many people fail to appreciate all the work, effort, and passion behind "a man running past a line."

Forgive me, Algol, but that sentence does offend me: "Or who has ever known one of these hominids who loves to shove, puff, and grunt like a primordial boar eager to break its nose and have its ears reduced like a paper sheep?" Here you’re not analyzing media phenomenology; you’re spouting nonsense about rugby players (hominids, shoving, puffing, grunting, primordial boar...). And at the beginning of the review, you talk about 80,000 sheep; so EVERYONE, no one excluded. Do you know people from outside Milan and Lombardy went to San Siro? Do you think just because it was in Milan, only Milanese and the ignorant people in the field you claim to know went? Don’t disguise the purpose of this review; here, besides criticizing media power (which I can partially agree with), you’re also taking shots at those who follow and practice this sport; and that’s where I really lose my cool.

Now, however, make sure to stop, okay? I haven't offended you anymore, so put a brake on yourself too.

Yes Alcol, okay. The part about desecration wasn’t written by you, but by another user in one of the comments. I didn’t say that the audiences of other sports aren't civil; what I meant is that the things said about rugby fans are TRUE and not fantasy or self-promotion (and the redundancy of this is not created by us, but stated in the first person by "outsiders" of rugby). I take this opportunity to say - inspired by a comment above - that the things read sometimes regarding news events (like those involving the Australian national team, for example) actually concern RUGBY LEAGUE (or rugby at 13), WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM RUGBY UNION (the 15-man version), both in terms of federation (it has its own) and background (it originated as a professional sport and focuses on speed and "action spectacle"). So please, when reading such news in the Gazzetta (and they conveniently never specify the difference), make this distinction.