Women's Rugby League World Cup - Thoughts and Network Diagrams

This is what the network diagram for the group stage of the Women's Rugby League World Cup 2021/2 looks like.  

Even if you don't know anything about rugby league, you can probably guess which teams are the major forces in international rugby. 

The Cook Islands are the national team closest to the centre with a number of club teams possibly being closest to the centre. 

The club teams with the most players represented are: 

12 - Brisbane Broncos 

11 - St Helens 

10 - Gold Coast Titans, Deesses Catalanes (who might win best name) 

More of the national teams have players in just a few teams than in the men's competition. 

Other things you might have noticed: 

1 - There are only 23 Brazilian players. Like some of the smaller men's teams, the Brazilian team is made up of several players borrowed from rugby union, and I think that was as many as they could bring together. 

1b - Note the NZ player who's club team is the NZ Sevens national team. 

1c - Even the juggernaut that is the Jillaroos (Australian Women's Rugby League team) had players that couldn't turn up because of work commitments. 

2 - Canada only gave information about the region the players play for, not the team the players play for. For the two players playing outside of Canada, the information give was the country they played in. Those players are both labelled as "other". One I am reasonably sure plays for London Broncos. 

What were my views of the women's group stage? 

Franciny Amaral of Brazil tackles like a demon. I would welcome her on any Saints team. 

Yes, I wanted England to win, but some part of my heart will always belong to the PNG Orchids. 

Now, a brief side step before we continue on through to the rest of the women's tournament - why is there no wheelchair World Cup diagram? 

There is no data available. 

At the last World Cup (which was men's and women's running at the same time) I had the same problem with a lack of data on the players in the women's world cup. Having seen how much the women's game has grown since then I am hopeful that next time, I'll be able to have three sets of diagrams. 

Women's Semi-finals 

Not unexpectedly, the 4 semi-finalists were from that central cluster of 5 teams in the group stage diagram. The semi-final diagrams look like this:  

No national team is definitely closest to the centre while Newcastle Knights are the club team closest to the centre. 

Brisbane Broncos remain the club team with the most representatives (12), followed by St Helens (11).  The Cook Islands players being removed from the diagram mean there's now 5 club teams with 8 players left in the competition (Leeds Rhino, Newcastle Knights, St George Illawarra, Sydney Roosters, Gold Coast Titans). 

Much like the men's tournament, women's international rugby league needs to reduce the gap between the good teams and the not-good-yet teams, but I think more NRLW and Women's Super League (damn it soccer it was our name first) expanding and going professional will help that. 

As is traditional, the Black Ferns's haka is significantly more terrifying than that of the menfolk - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuZ1ExXUgFY 

I did like Amy Hardcastle's look of "well bring it" in response. Unfortunately, New Zealand then did bring it and beat England (bah humbug). 

If anyone ever wants the best "image of dejection" I think Jodie Cunningham, pigtails drooping with sadness, with two black eyes, apologising for the loss, takes some beating. Don't worry, you'll get them next time. 

On the other hand, Mele Hufanga, playing for New Zealand in the absence of a Tongan team, is absolutely lovely and I love her.

 <3 diagrams="" final.="" for="" her.="" lj-cut="" moving="" on="" text="Two last network diagrams" the="" to="">  

<3 diagrams="" final.="" for="" her.="" lj-cut="" moving="" on="" text="Two last network diagrams" the="" to="">Both teams equally close to the centre, somewhat obviously, with Brisbane Broncos or Gold Coast Titans the nearest club team to the centre. 

Brisbane Broncos have the most players representing them in the final with 12, followed by the Sydney Roosters and Gold Coast Titans on 8 and Newcastle Knights and St George Illawarra on 7. 

As you can imagine, all the English teams got wiped out when England got knocked out - the women's game hasn't reached the stage where the Super League is the NRL's retirement home. 

People were looking forward to this final because the group stage match between New Zealand and Australia had been so close, 2 points in it, same number of tries, the difference being a penalty. 

It might be close this time ... 

Australia had apparently lulled us all into a false sense of hope because the final was an annihilation. 

Even with Ali Brigginshaw suffering from the same problems that every Australian and New Zealandish kicker seemed to have had. 

Ali Brigginshaw winning player of the match in a World Cup final for the second time has gone remarkably under-remarked upon, which might also demonstrate how all conquering this Jillaroos side is. We can only hope that someone gives them more of a fight next time (I might want that to be England, but I would be happy with anyone giving them more of a fight).

Film Review - Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw

Spoilers throughout, along with guest commentary from L (in purple).

This film does not hang together well.

If that's a problem for you; this is not the film for you.

This said, if you came into a film co-billing Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson & Jason "The Stath" Statham, and were really needing a film that hangs together well…you have unreasonable expectations, and need to have a word with yourself.

No, run along and have a word with yourself; the rest of us have other business to which to attend.

Whether by accident or design, it feels like an otherwise unrelated film, a buddy cop film along the lines of Tango and Cash was shoehorned into a Fast & Furious shape.

Add to this the first half an hour or so where we have two unpleasant characters being unpleasant to each other and generally acting like they've got testosterone poisoning and you've got a film that quite quickly teeters over onto the "no" side of the "yes/no" pile.

Sudden unexpected Ryan Reynolds does not help its standing.

It does settle down after the first half hour and becomes watchable if your pleasures are CGI action adventure-y.

There are some nice character touches. Vanessa Kirby and Helen Mirren are their usual excellent selves, and Eddie Marsan's not-so-evil scientist going HAM with a flamethrower stirs something deep in my soul, but the film's basically a waste of Idris Elba which is a terrible shame.

Come to think of it, when was the last time Idiris Elba wasn't wasted? Thor 3? Maybe?

Having read up on the film to write this, I have discovered that the film was David Leitch-directed goodness which explains why the fight scenes are so good.

The stunt people earned their money, there's a motorbike stunt towards the start in particular that is just *chef's kiss*.

The continuity department did not earn their money. I'm not just talking about the part of the film where the characters are said to be landing in one country but the on-screen sign is for a city in another country, but also mid-scene watch switches that are so obvious even little old me, infamously oblivious to that sort of thing, notices.

There's lot of little moments that destroy believability, not least that Hobbs & Shaw takes place in a post-apocalyptic hellscape of augmented super soldiers, nanoviruses, and Samoa apparently never having discovered rugby.

One of these things is more unbelievable than the others, and it's not the super soldiers.

Now probably part of that is that none of the film was filmed in Samoa, it was filmed in Hawaii. While I am aware that the concept of Samoan brotherhood espoused by the film's characters is about people not places, and the large Samoan diaspora in Hawaii, if you're going to have characters spend so much time talking about the glory of Samoa, at least help their economy out by filming there.

Overall, the bits that don't work are the bits that connect it to Fast and Furious, which I think strengthens my feeling that it was based on an unrelated script and they've just smooshed it in.

The main problem is [Jason Statham's character's name] Deckard Shaw He gets a name when he stops basically being Jason Statham. I will never forgive him for killing Han, and I don't care how they have since retconned that. At the time, he was still responsible and it remains unforgivable.

If you like mindless explosions, it's not bad, but even in that genre, it's at best mid-range.

If you want to watch The Rock, watch "The Rundown/Welcome to the Jungle"; if you want to watch Jason Statham, watch "Hummingbird" (which proves he can act if he's bothered to).

In neither of those films are we subjected to a hellscape where Samoa doesn't have rugby.

My top 9 films of 2022 - Once more, with explanations

You'll notice this top 10 is lacking one film.  That's because I didn't see 10 new releases in 2022.  The cinema had two things working against it in summer, excellent weather and the Commonwealth Games, and then the end of November/start of December when I would normally have caught up, I was taken out by the cold that knocked me sideways for 3 weeks (yes, it was just a cold, no, I have no explanation).

This means I've not seen Black Panther 2 yet, which I aim to remedy shortly.  I doubt we're going to have excellent weather two years in a row, so hopefully 2023 will see me watching more films in the cinema.

I am applying my usual 4 criteria:

a – did the film do what it set out to do?

b – did it use its resources to its best ability? A £250,000 film is not going to have as good explosions as a £25,000,000 film, or it shouldn’t, and if it does, there’s something wrong with the £25,000,000 film. Basically, it's a technical merit score.

c – Intellectual satisfaction – does the film’s plot pull some really stupid move at the last moment? Does the plot rely on characters being more stupid than they are?

d – Does this work as a whole? Did it work for me? I am aware that this is the most subjective of subjective criteria!

1 - Cyrano

I cried for three quarters of this film.  I am not sure I can recommend it more than that (matters were not helped by me knowing what happens next).

Sure, I have opinions on some of the changes and the marketing, but it's a joy.

(Also, I will never forgive various awards ceremonies for not giving "Wherever I Fall" something - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHo3w5ORcdY)

2 - Parallel Mothers

The thing I like about Almodovar is he writes woman who are real in all the best, jagged ways.  I have no idea what they'll do next.

I know some people find him a little too much but this is one of his good ones.

3 - Bad Guys

This is an absolute joyous delight of a film.

I love Snake the most, of course I do, and this deeply stupid joke (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_inDxb7wQ-Q) got the second biggest belly laugh of the year out me.

I'm cheating slightly, because I saw this on an aeroplane, but despite a 24 hour delay to the flight, it still made me smile so much.  The lady who sat next to me would also like to add her vote.

That's how good it is - it makes jetlagged strangers talk to each other.

4 - Bullet Train

D wanted to see a stupid film to keep him amused for a couple of hours.  This filled that gap.

Is it good?  I don't know.  But it is enjoyable.

The Boomslang's character card got the biggest belly laugh of the year.

5 - Everything Everywhere All At Once

This one is actually probably me being the problem.  Like, I love the idea of it, and the execution of it (and the rock universe), but mindless positivity annoys me as much as mindless negativity.

6 - Dr Strange in the Multiverse of Madness

Skipping all my spoilery comments, this was a fun film, even if it's yet another example of Strange being used as the springboard for other people's films rather than getting one of his own.  (I still want Strange vs Mordo.  I am never getting Strange vs Mordo.  I refuse to accept this.)

7 - Spiderman: No Way Home

I am the problem with this.  Nine tenths of this is solid, it's just the remaining tenth annoys me to beyond reason.  And yes, it's to do with the not-quite-avunculicide.

8 - Thor: Love and Thunder

I appreciate Taika Waititi's attempt to do a Brechtian superhero film.  Even if it didn't work, I appreciate the attempt.  I am also deeply amused that, the things I didn't like about Thor: Ragnarok, that I got told I was being a spoilsport about, are the things everyone else who loved Ragnarok hated about Love and Thunder.

Also - killer bunny!

9 - Uncharted

This was just bad.  At some point, Hollywood will have to realise that a tragic backstory does not equal characterisation.

It's a film that features a battle between airborne pirate ships and it's still the worst film I saw in the cinema last year by some way, that is how bad it is.

My top 9 films of 2022

Normally I start with just a before posting the explanations a week later because I'm running out of the door to get home for Christmas.  Due to everything, this is a list only for the time being because I am rushing back from Christmas.

I am reasonably sure that when I write the full version, none of the numbers will change.  

I recommend everything down to 3.  4 and 5 require you to be in the mood.  6 is passable (actually enjoyed it more than Everything Everywhere All At Once but it's also a much easier film to watch).  7, I am probably the problem.  8, I know what they were going for, they missed.  9 is just appalling (except one bit).

1 - Cyrano

2 - Parallel Mothers

3 - Bad Guys

4 - Bullet Train

5 - Everything Everywhere All At Once

6 - Dr Strange in the Multiverse of Madness

7 - Spiderman: No Way Home

8 - Thor: Love and Thunder

9 - Uncharted