Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MiracleJnr1 t1_iw2ukfb wrote

Reply to comment by Iron_Maniac in New Zealand 34-31 England: Hosts win Rugby World Cup with dramatic victory over Red Roses in Auckland by dappersporty

England played with 14 tho, compared to Nz 15

−26

davo_nz t1_iw2v50t wrote

Yeah because the player illegally took out arguably New Zealands best player who couldn't continue. Deserved red.

42

Halfcaste_brown t1_iw3f0vr wrote

Girls? Their forwards are frickin mini steam rollers.

7

MiracleJnr1 t1_iw3fy0p wrote

Ill change it to women. Is that why im getting downvoted? Not sure

1

Halfcaste_brown t1_iw3mpgr wrote

Lol no, i suspect your downvotes are because it seems you're suggesting that England only lost and NZ only won because England were down a player. But um can we all just agree that there is no possible way to know what the outcome would have been with a full team.

10

MiracleJnr1 t1_iw3nban wrote

Well it definitely gives a big advantage to Nz, but yes its impossible to know if england would have won even with 15 players.

2

Halfcaste_brown t1_iw3pozh wrote

An advantage yes.

And think about it, if we start attributing the win/loss to the fact that England only had 14 players, then you end up heaping the blame for the loss squarely on the red-carded player, and thats not fair.

4

brett1081 t1_iw3udvq wrote

NZ was done 14-0 and getting crushed when it happened. They absolutely were not going to be in it.

0

Halfcaste_brown t1_iw4tn81 wrote

Lol how on earth do you know that though? So you would blame England's loss on that one red-carded sheila? Rude.

−2