Rugby internationals 2004

james_ · Post by **james_** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 3:27 am

2004 TRI NATIONS SERIES
Sat 17 July - New Zealand v Australia - Westpac Stadium, Wellington
Sat 24 July - New Zealand v South Africa - Jade Stadium, Christchurch
Sat 31 July - Australia v South Africa - Subiaco Oval, Perth
Sat 7 August - Australia v New Zealand - Telstra Stadium, Sydney
Sat 14 August - South Africa v New Zealand - Ellis Park, Johannesburg
Sat 21 August - South Africa v Australia - ABSA Stadium, Durban

Oh well, no Tri-Nations matches for Brisbane in 2004. I can’t complain though, given that Suncorp may host the RWC final re-match next year.

This from The Courier Mail (November 25, 2003)

Wallabies, England set for blockbuster Test clash next year - Rematch of cup final at Suncorp

“JONNY Wilkinson and his wonderboot will headline a Test blockbuster in Brisbane next year with a World Cup final rematch against England mapped out for Suncorp Stadium.

“The Australian Rugby Union's schedule for 2004 is yet to be made public but The Courier-Mail can reveal that Suncorp Stadium has been pencilled in ahead of Sydney and Melbourne.

“Snaring the rematch against the Wallabies is a coup and the ideal spectacle to capitalise on the bumper roll-up at Suncorp Stadium during the World Cup when more than 400,000 fans descended on the nine matches.”

Also, in light of John O’Neill’s resignation, I hope he wasn’t making false promises (to Queenslanders) when he said this about future Bledisloe Cup series:

The Courier Mail (December 3, 2003)

Rugby's Santa rates Suncorp - More major games for new stadium

“THE return of Jonny Wilkinson in a World Cup final replay, a regular Bledisloe Cup match, possible guest appearances by a Pacific Island Super 12 team and big fixtures featuring the Queensland Reds . . . rugby boss John O'Neill was at Suncorp Stadium yesterday and Christmas was weeks early.”

“When O'Neill announced that a regular Bledisloe Cup match at Suncorp was a definite maybe for 2005 and beyond -- if the sums added up -- Premier Beattie put up his hand on behalf of the government. "We'd like to help," he said.

“He will have to. If the Bledisloe was big business when the Victorian government lassoed it seven years ago, it is even bigger now. The World Cup has emphasised the financial benefits of bringing top teams to town and, with the government desperate to keep Suncorp's turnstiles ticking over, the Australian Rugby Union holds the whip hand.”

In any event, with the ARU coffers full, it's time to stock the trophy cabinet.

PS. AUS v RSA in Perth – looks like the Springboks are getting three home games in the Tri-Nations series next year! jj

my eagle eye · Post by **my eagle eye** » Thu Dec 18, 2003 9:55 pm

I'd rather watch lawn bowls. But thanks anyway.

Jeffles · Post by **Jeffles** » Fri Dec 19, 2003 1:19 am

You cannot asay that and get away with it My Eagle Eye. They'll have you for breakfast

While we're on the subject of Rugby Internationals the Kangaroos will be playing NZ sround Anzac Day in Brisbane. They will also play the Kiwis in NZ the week after next year's NRL Grand Final before heading off for the Tri Nations in the UK.

AndrewM · Post by **AndrewM** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 12:33 pm

It would be nice to see New Zealand play in Perth rather than South Africa - haven't seen NZ live since they last toured here in the late 80's. But, I am not complaining - I will be first in line to get my tickets!

perthsmike · Post by **perthsmike** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 10:57 pm

hmmm... last international rubgy game i saw was Australia vs New Zealand in 2002, for a crowd of 39,000 the atmosphere was about as exciting as a wet tea towel

but ill be going this year - hopefully those loud suth ufricunz can make it fun!

mike

james_ · Post by **james_** » Tue Jan 06, 2004 2:18 am

perthsmike wrote:hmmm... last international rubgy game i saw was Australia vs New Zealand in 2002, for a crowd of 39,000 the atmosphere was about as exciting as a wet tea towel but ill be going this year - hopefully those loud suth ufricunz can make it fun!

mike

Is the game you refer to, the Wallabies 2002 season opener against NZ Maori? I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the game.

By all reports it was a cracker of a match:

"Australia led 27-6 and the Wallabies looked as if they were to exert a stranglehold over the match and outclass the NZ Maori.

"But to the delight of the 33,053 crowd the exact opposite occurred and a thrilling finish brought them to the edge of their seats.

"Australia dropped off the pace and the NZ Maori scored three stunning tries (with two to Bruce Reihana and one to Rico Gear) in the final 15 minutes to get within four point of the Wallabies at 27-23.

"It was a thrilling final 10 minutes of the match as the Wallabies desperately hung on, missed two penalty conversions, and the Maoris put the Wallaby defence under a severe test - particularly in the final passage of play when the Maoris mounted over 21 phases of play."

If this match at Subiaco is the one you saw, then I might add that it was the NZ Maori that turned out against the Aussies and not the NZ All Blacks.

If your apathy is representative of the Perth public, then it makes for a good argument against playing Test rugby in the West, and we might as well sign up Victoria for the expanded Super 12 straight away!

I doubt this is the case, and IMO rugby should continue to broaden its horizons, rather than contract into the east coast.

perthsmike · Post by **perthsmike** » Tue Jan 06, 2004 7:20 pm

yes that was the game but trust me from an outsiders perpective in terms of not knowing the rules or how the game worked it was rather dull. the end was ok i guess, however the stadium was too empty to create and electric atmosphere and i can assume a significant amount of those didn;t know the rules and what was going on. wat i recall is a game where in one half one team was pathetic and didn;t even put up a fight making it boring and predictable then the thing repeated oppositely the next half. tho yes the final minutes were tense

but in relation to the super 12 thingo - games at ME Stadium not Subiaco would be far better and have an amazing atmosphere so there's a reason y it should come here!

mike

tom · Post by **tom** » Tue Jan 06, 2004 8:58 pm

Seeming that International League doesn't pull large crowds. Could it hurt that much if the Kangaroos took their games to Perth and Adelaide.
Sydney and Brisbane get league week in and week out. Many people would want to see the best of the best play in these games seeming that we're starved of NRL action. I'm an AFL fan and prefer Union over league but I miss the Western Reds and I'd go to an game that came to Perth.

Jeffles · Post by **Jeffles** » Tue Jan 06, 2004 9:24 pm

Tom I would love to see the Roos taking games outside Sydney. The problem is that we play Tests on an ad hoc basis. Lots of one offs. In this situation the major cities (Syd and Bris) want prefernce for Tests. fair enough. If the Wallabies only had 2 games a year you could bet where they'd be played.

If there was an expanded international calendar with tours and 3 match series, I think it would be crazy not to go to Adelaide or Perth.

the guy · Post by **the guy** » Tue Jan 06, 2004 9:30 pm

but in relation to the super 12 thingo - games at ME Stadium not Subiaco would be far better and have an amazing atmosphere so there's a reason y it should come here!

I dont think the feild at ME stadium is big enough to host union, cause a union feild is about 15-20 metres longer than a soccer feild and looking at pictures of ME during soccer match it certainly doesnt look as though union will fit, it is only just big enough for a soccer pitch.

the guy · Post by **the guy** » Tue Jan 06, 2004 9:32 pm

There are plenty of reasons why S12 should not go to perth, one of them is Melbourne.

Jeffles · Post by **Jeffles** » Tue Jan 06, 2004 9:33 pm

Not necessarily. Union has an in-goal that can go for a maximum of 20 metres (I think). But this is discretionary. Many Union grounds have small in goals where big ones do not fit. They are mainly club grounds such as North Sydney Oval and overseas club grounds. So you could play Union at ME.

the guy · Post by **the guy** » Tue Jan 06, 2004 9:48 pm

I dont think the Super 12 will compromise on ground length, especially if the in-goal area only extends for 5 metres.

Jeffles · Post by **Jeffles** » Tue Jan 06, 2004 9:50 pm

I've seen ME on TV. You could easily get a 10 metre in goal. That's plenty.

james_ · Post by **james_** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 1:55 am

perthsmike wrote:but in relation to the super 12 thingo - games at ME Stadium not Subiaco would be far better and have an amazing atmosphere

Agreed.

the guy wrote:I dont think the feild at ME stadium is big enough to host union, cause a union feild is about 15-20 metres longer than a soccer feild and looking at pictures of ME during soccer match it certainly doesnt look as though union will fit, it is only just big enough for a soccer pitch

The pic (borrowed from austadiums.com) shows that ME Stadium pitch is 132m long. So that leaves room for 16m deep in-goal areas. IRB laws require that in-goals don't exceed 22m, so ME Stadium is suitable for rugby.