Talk:1995 Rugby World Cup

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Rugby union High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rugby union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rugby union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rugby unionWikipedia:WikiProject Rugby unionTemplate:WikiProject Rugby unionrugby union articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. South Africa High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

What has food poisoning got to do with the World Cup, this was totally unsubstantiated. I think the AB are sore losers 1995 - food poisining, 1999 - French Goughing, 2003 - Fire the coach.... seems like bad sportmanship. There was a good coach for the Springboks Kitch Christie and by insuating that the South Africans (Suzie) gave food poisoning is an insult to this man. 24.84.213.110 (talk) 22:43, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The food poisoning just before the final was disgusting. If the Springboks really wanted to stop the All Blacks from getting their hands on a second title, they could have just used Ebola - there was a reservoir of the stuff in nearby Zaire (as it was called at the time.) Scott Gall 04:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Given recent events, I guess there was no need, LOL 122.57.179.18 06:31, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is the completely unsubstantiated food poisoning claim relevant? The relevant section reads like a tabloid article. Surely if anyone (other than conspiracists) really believed the All Blacks had been poisoned an investigation would have taken place. This shouldn't be included in an encyclopaedic work.

Sounds like a case of sore loser to me! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.142.101.172 (talk) 16:51, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No it's an important part of the history of the world cup. They did suffer from food poisioning that is well known (27 out of the 35 man squad) weither it was done on poupose by the south africans or it was just a frak accident we'll never know but it happened anyone who saw that game will remember Jeff Wilson and Andrew Merthans throwing up through out the game --Dog777 (talk) 08:48, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Twelve French team members were also sick the night before the semi-finals as said again recently by Pierre Berbizier on French radio. Vomiting all night long. How can the two last opponents of South-Africaans suffer from the same sickness just before their match against the host country? When sometimes you have a convenient event happening twice, it's not being a sore loser to question it.

It would seem relevant to determine wether other teams in the RWC 95 also suffered from Food Poisoning. RSA is a underdeveloped nation in many measures, and teams coming from other parts of the world often find themselves needing to adjust to conditions. While one can impute ill motives to the hosts, it's also quite possible that the conditions were just poor. The US Suffers tremendous salmonella issues with poultry and very careful cooking is required to prevent massive outbreaks.

--Patbahn (talk) 14:57, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed some of the pro springbok bias in the Final section. As the food poisoning issue was not proved one way or the other, a simple mention of it without exclamation empowered perspectives is adequate :) Also a comment there about how the springboks should have won more decisively doesnt seem appropriate either, so I removed that to. --Havoc8844 07:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a lot of opinion on this page rather than hard fact. A French person has clearly written the biased comments about Derek Bevan's refereeing of the semi-final. I think this should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbailward (talk • contribs) 15:10, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but we could quote this article of the Guardian http://sport.guardian.co.uk/rugbyworldcup2003/story/0,13904,1048813,00.html about Derek Bevan and his "neutrality" and more generally the behaviour of the south-africans hosts... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lobolafcadio (talk • contribs) 10:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? What on EARTH are you on about? If you bothered to read the article you'd not bother libelling Derek Bevan. I'm removing half the section on the final because it is completely unreferenced. The Angel of Islington 04:05, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The location of Stellenbosch on the map is hopelessly inacurate - Stellenbosch is about 50km from Cape Town. Graaf1 20:13, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Found this article dating back to 1987 of Argentina putting their hand up for the 1995 RWC (as other countries were looking only as far forward as 1991). While it may only serve as a footnote, it speaks volumes of the success of the 1987 RWC and the eagerness to host future cups. Argentina wants 1995 RWCSauliH (talk) 20:07, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

C'est marrant, l'article semble n'évoquer vraiment que très brièvement l'épidémie de gastro-entérite qui s'est soudain emparée de la majorité des joueurs néo-zélandais juste avant la finale, et semble ne pas évoquer du tout les doutes importants que l'on peut très légitimement soulever à propos de l'arbitrage de la demi-finale Afrique du Sud-France. Je pense que cela mériterait d'être mentionné, car cela entraîne que l'on peut avoir de sérieuses réserves sur la victoire de l'Afrique du Sud lors de cette coupe du monde. Ces réserves étant notoires et sourçables, l'article se doit à mon avis d'en faire état 81.64.105.233 (talk) 14:23, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The to do list was invisible in mobile view so I copied it here.

• Add section on hosts
• Summarise Results section, create links using "see main article"
• Add section "Impact on professionalism"
• Add records section

(Mobile mundo (talk) 00:05, 26 June 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Mobile mundo (talk) 00:05, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]