Messages

[All Blacks change 11 for Portugal]

All Blacks change 11 for Portugal


New Zealand coach Graham Henry has made 11 changes for their second World Cup Pool C match against Portugal in Lyon on Saturday.

Jerry Collins, Ali Williams, Chris Jack, and Mils Muliaina, who moves from centre to full-back, are the only men left from the 76-14 win over Italy.

Andrew Hore, Greg Somerville and Neemia Tialata play front row with Nick Evans and Brendon Leonard at half-back.

Aaron Mauger and Conrad Smith will feature in the midfield.

Fiji-born Joe Rokocoko will play on one wing, while Isaia Toeava, normally a centre, starts on the other wing.

Hooker Keven Mealamu provides back-row cover, while Henry admitted that prop Carl Hayman could also provide cover for lock.

"We wanted to give every member of the squad a run during these first two pool matches and that's been the major consideration in naming this team," said Henry.

"We have also talked about raising our standards from week to week and that's the challenge for this Saturday. We want to find the mental strength to play better for longer than we did against Italy."

Of the 30-man squad, only locks Keith Robinson and Reuben Thorne were not considered for selection due to injury.

But Henry said they were both making good progress and should be available for selection when the All Blacks meet Scotland in Edinburgh on 23 September.

New Zealand: Mils Muliaina; Isaia Toeava, Conrad Smith, Aaron Mauger, Joe Rokocoko; Nick Evans, Brendon Leonard; Neemia Tialata, Andrew Hore, Greg Somerville, Chris Jack, Ali Williams, Jerry Collins (capt), Chris Masoe, Sione Lauaki.

Replacements: Anton Oliver, Tony Woodcock, Carl Hayman, Rodney So'oialo, Keven Mealamu, Andy Ellis, Leon MacDonald

Just about to finish The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini.

Blurb - The Kite Runner tells the story of Amir, a well-to-do Pashtun boy from the Wazir Akbar Khan district of Kabul, who is haunted by the guilt of betraying his childhood friend Hassan, the son of his father's Hazara servants. The story is set against a backdrop of tumultuous events, from the fall of the monarchy in Afghanistan through the Soviet invasion, the mass exodus of refugees to Pakistan and the United States, and the Taliban regime.

Best i've read since Arthur and George.

Probably shouldn't be advising this given my poor first round, but I'm not sure if Carter will play this weekend. I was reading where NZ management talked of not humiliating Portugal and may play second string. May that is.

[Hoofs]

AFTER FIRST ROUND OF GAMES:

Hoof Hearted   134
All Cacks   127
The Intimidators    111
Screen's Exiles 109
Cill Dara RFC   104
The Hard Stations   98
MAIGHEO 95
Doylers Destroyers   94
The Scrummies   86
O'Neill 78
Fermanagh Harlequinns   74
The Up & Unders   60
Shortso On Tour   55
blood n guts   43

A great start for the Hoofs. He was the only man with double figures for tries scored, notching a dozen in the process. Habana (4) Collins, McCaw and Sivivatu (all 2) did the damage with Carter adding 19 in kicks. Most importantly, all his players played. Not full of wind in week 1. Close on his heels are the wonderfully titled All Cacks. Habana again, McCaw and Latham top scored with Carter adding the finishing touches. All players played. He top scored with 10 assists, six players in total contributing to this column. Cack they certainly aren't and his all-round team are perhaps the one to watch. The Intimidators are 23 off the lead, and will regret playing Rokocoko who failed to play. What might have been. Just behind is Screen, again one player short with Nyanga of France letting him down. Rather thoughtless of the French man and certainly will not be a welcome visitor to Draperstown this autumn. Dinny Breen is 30 off the lead with the non-appearance of Pienaar hurting his tally. Perhaps if he spent less time attending his horses and copter pad, Dinny would be challenging at this early stage. Hard Station was just a couple short of a ton, having 2 duds. His inclusion of Elsom was a masterstroke for a man short on confidence. Maigh Eo had a full panel of players on duty but missed out on top try scorers, but his tally of assists was second highest. More of a giver this man. Doyle also had a full turn-out and will not lose hope of catching Hoof although Hickie may take an enforced sickie next time out. The Scrummies had all 15 playing but were let down by an absence of quality try scorers. His saving grace was the immaculate kicking and two tries of SA's Montgomery (32). Inspired. I had two non-starters and made an error of judgement by going with O'Gara who only tallied 8 points. I longingly thought of Eric Elwood. Fermanagh lost out on Rokocoko with Williams of Wales his top try scorer. The Up and Unders were also let down by the now-annoying Rokocoko and only managed one try in his line up. Less of the Garryowens next time I suspect. Shortso were 2 short and could only get one 5-pointer through Argentina. Late-comer blood n guts did remarkably well considering he had nine non-starters. Still managed 3 tries. Dangerous man.

TRANSFER REMINDERS:

Round 1: Between 20:00 BST on Friday 7th September and Tuesday 18th September (inclusive)
MAX 10 TRANSFERS IN THIS PERIOD
Kicker changes can only be made between 00:00 BST on Monday and the first scheduled kick-off time each week (usually Tuesday evening). That last one is probably just for me!!!

Same crackpot as before.

Can I just confirm that I'm O'Neills Chargers and not shaneoneills. May be paranoid here but is there a chance that this is a dud team (going by the username)- have they been active?

Where did I say this was reported? This is a possibility, nothing more, nothing less

It's when people start to say 'this happened' or was 'reported' that things become annoying and childish.

So am i to take it from all this that anything that is reported in the press is an impossibility in your opinion whereas your stated opinions are possibilities ?
I think we are all aware there is very little hard evidence in this case and that 99% of the stuff that is reported in the press regarding this case is a possibility based on the opinion of the reporter (regardless of whether there is an unofficial source or not) and that a lot of it is untrue. This is the same as you presenting your opinions. They are as you say, possibilities.
So how you can take some high moral ground here and rubbish anyone who repeats the possibilities as presented by reporters and then come out with your own 'possibilities' in almost the same breath ?!!

Simple really. Some are taking what a reporter writes as 'fact'.

Here are some of POG's facts -

The were inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the parent's stories;
They also lied about the amount of drink they had;
realising Maddie had gone returned to the restaurant LEAVING THE TWINS ALONE AGAIN! Saying "they've taken her they've taken her";
The twin boys slept through everything, their mothers reaction and the 20 or so people the mccanns took back to the apartment – they were carried out, asleep, by police when they arrived;

Where's the evidence for this? These are not opinions...these have been used on this board as fact. That's the difference. Understand now?

There is a strong possibility, in order to dampen the outrage at their perceived neglect, that they underplayed times/routine etc out of sheer pride and arrogance when first questioned.

On the one hand you give out to POG for presenting 'reported' stories, theories, possibilities, etc and then you come out with the above ......   

Where did I say this was reported? This is a possibility, nothing more, nothing less. However, I'd never claim it was said, written or reported. Explain where I said this was something reported or something I believe in?

But surely everyones opinions are a possibilty,But your very quick to dismiss them because you think they are being brain washed by the media,But yet its ok for you to give a opinion that also may or may not be true.
Just because you don't agree with everyone it us very unfair to say that you think posters are being led by the media give people more credit.
What makes you so sure they are innocent?

I wouldn't lambaste anyone's opinions. It's when people start to say 'this happened' or was 'reported' that things become annoying and childish. If you can pinpoint where i dismissed an opinion, I'll accept it. I simply detest the way some take tabloid gossip as gospel.

As for their innocence - if there was a pendulum for my thinking, it would sway from innocence to not sure. My feeling is that they couldn't have kept this quiet for so long, as a number of people would need to have been involved. However, anything's possible.

Circumstantial evidence convicted Rachel O'Reilly's husband. His mobile phone was used to contradict his alibi.

I don't know whether circumstantial evidence can be used as a basis for a case in Portugal but either way they would not want to be proved as having lied about that night.

That's the big one, Muppet. There is a strong possibility, in order to dampen the outrage at their perceived neglect, that they underplayed times/routine etc out of sheer pride and arrogance when first questioned. A lot of us do that. When the actual truth is discovered, be it a matter of 30 -40 mins, the police will start the alarm bells.

A sweeping statement, but two things about doctors, esp English doctors (having had experience - as you have I think - from living over there). Firstly, they can be incredibly arrogant. Secondly, they can be extremely cold in nature and demeanour (something that seems to be a side effect from their career). Both of these characteristics do not endear them to the police and public.

You would think the loss of a child would bring emotion from even the coldest of hearts??

Yes. However, do you know what anguish and emotion they're experiencing behind the scenes? Are you basing this on arranged media Q&A?

There is a strong possibility, in order to dampen the outrage at their perceived neglect, that they underplayed times/routine etc out of sheer pride and arrogance when first questioned.

On the one hand you give out to POG for presenting 'reported' stories, theories, possibilities, etc and then you come out with the above ......   

Where did I say this was reported? This is a possibility, nothing more, nothing less. However, I'd never claim it was said, written or reported. Explain where I said this was something reported or something I believe in?

Circumstantial evidence convicted Rachel O'Reilly's husband. His mobile phone was used to contradict his alibi.

I don't know whether circumstantial evidence can be used as a basis for a case in Portugal but either way they would not want to be proved as having lied about that night.

That's the big one, Muppet. There is a strong possibility, in order to dampen the outrage at their perceived neglect, that they underplayed times/routine etc out of sheer pride and arrogance when first questioned. A lot of us do that. When the actual truth is discovered, be it a matter of 30 -40 mins, the police will start the alarm bells.

A sweeping statement, but two things about doctors, esp English doctors (having had experience - as you have I think - from living over there). Firstly, they can be incredibly arrogant. Secondly, they can be extremely cold in nature and demeanour (something that seems to be a side effect from their career). Both of these characteristics do not endear them to the police and public.

I do suspect them but I will still be shocked if it turns out to be them.

Jaysus - it's gets worse.

And when you're finished, take the next sentence:

The mother reportedly went to check on the children at 10pm and realising Maddie had gone returned to the restaurant LEAVING THE TWINS ALONE AGAIN! Saying "they've taken her they've taken her".

Find this? POG says she said this, 'reportedly'!

This just sums up how the British way of swallowing what the media pass off as stories has spread to this island.

You only have to think about another of POG's statements to see how he deals in falsities - The twin boys slept through everything
!!!!!!!!!!!

No, actually I don't. I deal with what I hear said. POG stated:

The were inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the parent's stories about when they checked on the children and stories told about how they could see the apartment from where they ate when any map or picture shows different.  They also lied about the amount of drink they had.

OK, let's start here. Where can you, or anyone, find this? (i.e. where you saw the McCann say this?)

A cursory glance on this thread will see consistent references to their social class or status. This appears to be raised by those who are most conviced of their guilt. There are absolutely no facts in the public domain to indicate their guilt, and given their travel today with the authorities' blessing, I would suggest there is none within the investigation itself.

The references to their class are made by those angry at the attention they are getting when we all know if it was a single mother from housing estate she would be slaughtered by the media.  Can you argue different?

Now why do people here think they are guilty, without these facts?

Well rufus from day one the case stunk.
The were inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the parent's stories about when they checked on the children and stories told about how they could see the apartment from where they ate when any map or picture shows different.  They also lied about the amount of drink they had.  Of course this may be down to guilt for leaving their children but this is something they've barely expressed and continue to insist they're good parents!
The mother reportedly went to check on the children at 10pm and realising Maddie had gone returned to the restaurant LEAVING THE TWINS ALONE AGAIN! Saying "they've taken her they've taken her".  They were very keen to insist that the child had been abducted and refused to entertain the notion that she had wandered off.  Wtf?  Would she not entertain the notion that maddie way have wandered off and look for her before running back to the restaurant.  Can anyone tell me when police or anyone else was first contacted? 
They claimed and their family claimed that the shutters had been forced open when staff at the resort say they hadn't.  The police found that the shutter had not been forced form the outside but opened from the inside! Are we expected to believe the intruder opened the shutters from the inside?  No evidence of an intruder was found. 
The twin boys slept through everything, their mothers reaction and the 20 or so people the mccanns took back to the apartment – they were carried out, asleep, by police when they arrived. Amazing!
It was one of their own friends who reported a man taking a child from the apartment, days or even weeks? After the disappearance.  She must have forgot!  That's understandable as they've just recently remembered a friend went to check on the children at half 9. 
Then we've the parent's reaction to the whole thing.  Now apparently they have been told to show no emotion, I don't know why it would matter and, although I'm not a father, I know if it was a niece or nephew missing and some pervert doing God knows what I would not be fit to hold myself together whether police told me to or not. As a father I'm sure you'd be the same.  The McCanns on the other hand deserve Oscars!  But it's not just the lack of emotion, it's the touring around the world, the raising money, have you read Gerry McCann's blog, hardly a mention of Maddie!

None of us have all the evidence but people can and will make judgements. 

If ever there was an example of the power of the media to brainwash people, this is it. POG has regurgitated random stories reproduced in the Sun/Mirror/Star by journalists with little or no facts. 'Dish Monkeys' they call this type of analyst - someone who deals in the 'it was reported' information, without having the barest fact.

Absolute bullshit, without any weight whatsoever.