Just a thought ................... who's dull idea was it to set the kick off in the evening?

this time of year when temperatures are always likely to tumble, surely you raise the odds that the ground will freeze. Why not kick off earlier in the day?

Forget blaming the ref.... plenty of pundits who walked on the pitch agreed with the decision. Why is an international sport being played on a pitch which is relativey new, which doesn't have undersoil heating?

Having a go at the ref is a bit shallow to be honest.

Its the REF's job. he was aware of the situation. And its his job to make the judgement, the pitch inspection, to corolate the information and make a call on it. Blaming the Kickoff time is valid but dim. the bloody weather forecast has been predicting this since Wednesday. every day they said it was going to be -5 well in reality it was -3 but pearson let it go until everyone was sitting in the stands. ANd he knew the game was not suitable for play. he knew since yesterday morning when the captains run was cancelled for the same reason.
He waited until 10 mins AFTER the game was suppose to start and 70k+ were sitting in the stands freezing and out of pocket.

He is a failure. and he didn't do his job. and make no mistake, kicking off at that time was silly but he had the control for days and didn't make a decision on it.

Just as he slunk away without a word to the media to explain himself.

Here's a crazy idea, play the game today in the afternoon before the temperatures tumble.

But it'll never happen, there's literally one or two problems with that idea.

hazsa19
Na mate there are probably about 70 thousand problems... The guys who came from all over france and ireland to see the game.
not to mention the other millions problems with TV viewers. Sponsorship, TV rights, TV schedules and a whole lot more

Bet most of the Irish has hotels and are still in Paris today.

Oh no, the tv people are gonna have to show Rugby instead of Coast or Antiques Roadshow, what a shame.

hazsa,

Seriously. that couldn't happen mate. what u want to do fill the stadium with 2 or 3K irish fans.

And how do you contact that 70 thousand plus people to tell them the game is on?

Its no about what program is being interrupted. Its about TV rights, sponsorship. MONEY!

FFS, look im not getting into it with you. But just know that there is no scenario ever that would see the game played today. I'm just annoyed, not with u mate. This situation was a farce and should never have occurred.

But just know that there is no scenario ever that would see the game played today."

I know

do the french not have undersoil heating at their national stadium? if not that's a disgrace

cheese eating surrender monkeys as groundskeeper willie expertly called them

I don't think Twickenham has undersoil heating either Polbethian.

unbelievable if that's the case mondieu. even small football clubs like livingston and kilmarnock have undersoil heating.

thing is though with the stade de france, that is their national stadium for both sports. surely in this day and age it should be installed.

maybe the rfu will think twice after that farce the other night

really is cheating the public.

"really is cheating the public."

nothing could be done about the situation, these things happen. Sometimes games get cancelled.

But it should have been announced Thursday or Friday morning AT THE LATEST when they cancelled the captains run.

They said the pitch was unusable on friday for the captains run and the bloody weather forecast told them it was going to be even colder the next day and indeed much colder Saturday night.

Shane Horgan summed it up perfectly today on the TV
"Everyone was saying it was going to be fine all week long but in reality everyone was just hoping it would be fine" And they didn't man up and cancel the game like they should have.

And then Pearson ran out of the stadium within minuets of calling the game off. and they sent that frumpy woman out to take the flak from the crowd.

A bloody farce! the FFR should be bloody ashamed of themselves

as a casual rugby fan though ding what about the undersoil heating situation? do you not think as a winter sport it should be compulsary, especially in the 6 nations.

maybe i'm wrong but i believe the sru has it installed at murrayfield

hear is the thing about the under-soil heating. you can get away with it (im assuming) in football.

But Rugby, no it should indeed be mandatory. a frozen pitch in a rugby game is extremely dangerous. So ye i totally agree.

It also brings up another option. if they didn want to cancel that game why didn't they try to re-fix the game at a stadium where under soil heating was available. I dont know for sure but im reasonably sure that there is another stadium in Paris with that facility.

Also, one last thing. even without under soil heating, the pitch shroud have been cover in straw. not plastic. Straw would have prevented the pitch freezing.

Just ask any munster fan.

Dingbat .... to blame all of the situation on the ref is ludicrous. It also hints that you've a predisposed dislike of the actual ref himself perhaps?

From what i could see there was at least a dozen people huddled round, including the ref. You had both coaches and several other officials. I'd suggest the concensus was to postpone - it just needed the ref to formally announce it. But, hey don't let the TV pictures cloud your judgement - life always needs a scapegoat.

L11ds - The Referee makes the decision to pospone. The match should have been posponed a day earilier given weather forcasts and the state of the pitch. Who decided not to make the decision and instead decided to practice his ostrich impression?

The Referee makes the decision to pospone.
---------------------------------------------------

Ultimately yes he does, because thats the process - but after consultation with all parties. Show me the quotes where Declan Kidney or St Andre have criticised the decision. I was watching on TV and Philip Matthews clearly agrees with the call. He cited the pitch as dangerous in places. How do you know that for the 24/48 hours leading up to kick off that the French Organisers weren't telling the ref that they'd have the pitch ready?

You're shooting the messenger i'm afraid.

Apparently French TV were willing to bring the game forward but the French RU disagreed. Their defence is that the game went ahead in Rome with a French ref.

Idiots

In defense of Mr Pearson.

Now there's something I never thought I'd type.

Yes, he inspected the pitch on Thursday, and again on Friday, and again on Saturday afternoon.

However the pitch had been covered and the heating in the stadium was on full blast so when he looked the pitch was, in all probability, playable.
It was only when they took the covers off at 7:30 on Saturday the it froze.

l11dsu4ever

Your completely wrong.
It was his decision alone. HTats the job of the REF and the group of people around him that night were there not asking for the match to be cancelled but were there because he requested them to come so he could show then the frozen areas and tell them he was going to cancel the game. And as for me not liking him, well i dont know much about Pearson the man but as a Ref he is sub standard as anyone who watches rugby week in week out. The man has not got a clue

Taras

There is no defence for him and here is why. Friday morning 9am the teams went to the stadiun for the captains run and for the kickers practice.

It was cancelled because the pitch was unplayable. It had been -1 that night.

They knew it was going to be even colder the next night. Pearson above all knew it and they crossed there fingers and hoped for the best.

He has no defence. Friday morning was the proof and he should have cancelled the game then and there.

I guess there are a few questions here.

First of all, does the Stade de France have undersoil heating - though cold sub zero temperatures are not unusual in Paris, undersoil heating is standard in Premiership football grounds, so it would seem odd if the French national stadium didn't have it.

Secondly, how early can the refereee postpone a game - weather forecasts were available - with good accuracy - 4 days in advance, but how early is a referee allowed to call the game off?

To answer my own question (Part 1)

It doesn't

Apparently Pearson was concerned about the pitch, but an inspection two hours before showed the pitch as being playable, and he was assured that the blowers would ensure it was ok

It sounds like he wanted to give it every chance of going ahead, and was assured it would be, but then it wasn't.

Realistically he could have called it off earlier, but probably only half an hour or so, which wouldn't be of much help

To add a bit more - and apologies for the dribs and drabs

The reason the Stade de France does not have undersoil heating is it was built on the site of a form gasworks, and they feared installing undersoil heating might set off an explosion

If they'd played earlier in the day - any time before around 20:00 it would have been fine. It seems the problem was the FFR were determined to have it at 21:00 for TV revenue - though how much of this is the fault of the FFR, the Six Nations and its sponsors I don't know. Either way it sounds like Pearson was doubtful, but couldn't call the game off on a pre-supposition

Your completely wrong.

It was his decision alone. HTats the job of the REF and the group of people around him that night were there not asking for the match to be cancelled but were there because he requested them to come so he could show then the frozen areas and tell them he was going to cancel the game.
-----------------------------------------

Unless you have a full transcript of the conversations that took place, then you're making assumptions. You're basing your condemnation of the ref on utter guess work. Had the others in the conversation had opposing views, then they'd have said so. Both coaches or officials would have said that in their opinion the match could've been played - no one has stated that. Therefore (and i'm assuming here) ALL parties agreed the game should be postponed - Pearson then in his position of ref, made the formal decision.

I'll reiterate .... the ref announces the decision - but anyone with eyesight can see there was a full debate involving multiple interested parties before the announcement.

Whatever the decision, it wasn't taken lightly and i'm sure the interests of the travelling fans were high on the list of priorities - as well of course was the safety of the players.

Don't worry though, nothing like a scapegoat to make you feel better....

l11dsu4ever
The french have stated publicly that they wanted to play.

I can assume with a degree of certainty that the debate you refer to was more likely the people arguing with him.

As for being a scapegoat.. he ran away... He put himself in that position.

Thats frumpy woman from the IRB came out to give the announcement.

If you like the scapegoat concept so much! you should direct it at that lady. Who was served up for the public.

SARS.
I see your points perfectly.
But there is no escaping the simple fact that the captains run was cancelled the day before and the game should have been cancelled also. That decision lay with Pearson on he cocked it up

DBM,

A couple of things.

1) The weather was even worse than you imagine.
I live about 20k from St Denis and it was -7 when I set off to work on Friday morning.

2) The captain's run was cancelled but, from what I've heard on the radio here, that was a precautionary measure to avoid damaging the pitch.

3) You say the French have stated publicly that they wanted to play, but which French and when?
Vincent Clerc came out last Wednesday or Thursday saying he didn't much fancy it and in an interview after the cancellation he said he thought it was the right decision.
Philippe Saint André has also stated that, all in all, it was the right decision.
Indeed French television have been saying that it was the Irish who were the keener on playing.
As for Pierre Camou jumping onto his soapbox to pour blame on Pearson, well, he would, wouldn't he.

4) You say Pearson ran away. But did he? Once the decision had been taken to call the game off it was announced that Pearson would be making a statement. Then it was announced that a rep of the Six Nations committe would be making a statement.
Did Pearson run away? I seriously doubt it. I would suggest that the powers that be took it out of his hands.
But I suppose we'll never really know.

Another thing we'll never fully know about is how much pressure was put on Pearson by the Six Nations Committee to delay any decision.


So, all in all, I still don't think Pearson's much of a ref but it this instance I'll stick to my belief that he's being made the scapegoat where the real blame lies firmly at the door of the Blazer Brigade.