Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Greatest Blunder - Golden Spurs vs Agincourt (Round 1)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Greatest Blunder - Golden Spurs vs Agincourt (Round 1)

    Battle of the Golden Spurs 1302



    Why?
    The professional French force believed that they could easily take on this Flemish rabble, largely composed of infantry. This overconfidence cost them dearly...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_golden_spurs

    The Battle of the Golden Spurs (Dutch: Guldensporenslag, French: Bataille des éperons d'or, or Battle of Courtrai) was fought on July 11, 1302, near Kortrijk in Flanders. After the Flemish unsuccessfully tried to take Kortrijk on July 9 and 10, the two forces clashed on July 11 in an open field near the city. The layout of the field, crossed by numerous ditches and streams, made it difficult for the French cavalry to charge the Flemish lines. Hindered by their own infantry and the tactically sound position of the Flemish militia, the French cavalry were an easy target for the heavily-armed Flemish.


    Battle of Agincourt 1415



    Why?
    Not only did the French make the mistake of charging their cavalry at archers across an open field, but they chose terrain that worked against them. The newly ploughed field was still muddy from the rain, so that the wet soil made it harder for the more heavily armored French to move. Naked overblown arrogance and reckless courage caused this blunder. The French should have learned from The Golden Spurs, Crécy and Nicopolis.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_agincourt

    The Battle of Agincourt was a major English victory against a larger French army in the Hundred Years' War. The battle occurred on Friday 25 October 1415 (Saint Crispin's Day), in northern France. While Henry V led his troops into battle and actually participated in hand to hand fighting, the French king of the time, Charles VI, did not command the French army himself as he suffered from severe, repeating illnesses and moderate mental incapacitation. Instead the French were commanded by Constable Charles d'Albret and various prominent French noblemen of the Armagnac party. The battle is notable for the use of the English longbow, which Henry used in very large numbers, with English and Welsh longbowmen forming the vast majority of his army.
    89
    Battle of the Golden Spurs 1302
    51.69%
    46
    Battle of Agincourt 1415
    48.31%
    43
    Last edited by Stratego; 16 May 10, 04:33.
    Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily.- Napoleon

    It is better to fail in originality than to succeed in imitation.- Herman Melville

    Aut viam inveniam aut faciam

    BORG

  • #2
    Golden Spurs - French Defeat against Militia.

    Agincourt - French Defeat against Well-trained Longbowmen

    I Feel the Humiliation to losing to a militia army is a greater blunder than against well trained archers.
    God didn’t create evil. Evil is the result of when man does not have God's love in his heart.It's the cold when there is no heat.The darkness that comes when there is no light

    Comment


    • #3
      Ok I admit! If one looks at the amount of troops engaged during both battles, it is obvious that Agincourt was a slaughter and the Golden Spurs was just a shtkicking. However, this tourney is not about the amount of troops engaged, nor about the results...

      Like Jay217 said it is a greater blunder IMO because the French were defeated by an army largely composed of militia - peasants, pastors and townsfolk - not about to give up their rights without a fight.

      Also the fact that the French paid no attention to the difficult land they were to cross before being able to engage the rabble is an extra point for Golden Spurs. By having to cross two ditches the knights were barely able to attack in force - instead they were forced to engage slow. Knights in the backlines had to wait until the knights before them had crossed, so that the cohesion was immediately broken.

      Another point for the Golden Spurs is the fact that the French infantry was sent in in the first wave, but having engaged the Flemish for only 10 minutes, they were ordered to return in line so that the French knights could have the honor of butchering the rabble. Of course, the knights were impatient and soon the infantry and the knights were mixed up along the ditches...

      I'm going for the Golden Spurs !

      If one takes away the numbers and one looks at the greatest blunder...it's the Golden Spurs - although the blunders done at Agincourt are almost strinkingly identical...



      Greets,
      Stratego
      Last edited by Stratego; 16 May 10, 17:09.
      Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily.- Napoleon

      It is better to fail in originality than to succeed in imitation.- Herman Melville

      Aut viam inveniam aut faciam

      BORG

      Comment


      • #4
        Golden Spurs just but I would have preferred to be able to pick both. Ahhh, you wonderful French. Another day of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
        Matthew 5:9 Blessed are the cheesemakers

        That's right bitches. I'm blessed!

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Stratego View Post
          Ok I admit! If one looks at the amount of troops engaged during both battles, it is obvious that Agincourt was a slaughter and the Golden Spurs was just a shtkicking.
          So which blunder in this campaign includes Brits doing some Shtkicking instead of being either lucky to benefit for some opposing blunder or being on the receiving end to said shtkicking or being the instigator of a blunder?
          Flag: USA / Location: West Coast

          Prayers.

          BoRG

          http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8757/snap1ws8.jpg

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PtsX_Z3CMU

          Comment


          • #6
            Got to go with the Spurs. Any bookie laying on would of had the milita at 100 to 1 while the French against the Brits would of been a lot better odds.

            Comment


            • #7
              Golden Spurs.
              Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.

              Comment


              • #8
                Flip 'em off!

                Yup, concur. The fact that hubris again played a part in a defeat goes a long way in affecting my vote. As we say up heah in Noo Hamsha...'don't take nuthin' fer granite...'
                ...plus the fact that in the Battle of Agincourt we see the English longbowmen using the middle finger as a gesture of derision for the first time....



                Last edited by Jose50; 17 May 10, 07:54. Reason: ...early...mind too slow...
                ARRRR! International Talk Like A Pirate Day - September 19th
                IN MARE IN COELO

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by jose50 View Post
                  ...plus the fact that in the Battle of Agincourt we see the English longbowmen using the middle finger as a gesture of derision for the first time....
                  Point of order: It was the index and middle fingers. The reason being that they were the fingers that drew the bow and the fingers that the French would cut off sometimes if they captured them thus the made it a point to show the French they still had them and they still worked to devastating effect. The double finger "up yours" is still a pretty common salute in my part of the world.
                  Matthew 5:9 Blessed are the cheesemakers

                  That's right bitches. I'm blessed!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Hmm... Agincourt I see as being superior weapons and tactics - yes the mud helped, but the French didn't really have a longbow force to field so they used what specialized weaponry they had - the armoured lance.

                    The fact that the Longbow kept kicking the French around for years also points to this - a longbow armed yeoman was just plain scary.

                    The militia-man isn't... or shouldn't be as scary.

                    So Golden Spurs it is. Have got to agree with Rojik: Ahhh you wonderful French...
                    Captain Khryses, Silver Star Omnilift Wing

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Khryses View Post
                      Hmm... Agincourt I see as being superior weapons and tactics - yes the mud helped, but the French didn't really have a longbow force to field so they used what specialized weaponry they had - the armoured lance.

                      The fact that the Longbow kept kicking the French around for years also points to this - a longbow armed yeoman was just plain scary.

                      The militia-man isn't... or shouldn't be as scary.

                      So Golden Spurs it is. Have got to agree with Rojik: Ahhh you wonderful French...
                      Twice in a row agreeing with Khryses. What is this world coming to?
                      Another vote for Golden Spurs.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Agincourt, as the French should have known better by then.
                        How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                        Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                          Agincourt, as the French should have known better by then.
                          My thoughts exactly.
                          History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon. Napoleon Bonaparte
                          _________
                          BoRG
                          __________
                          "I am Arthur, King of the Britons!"

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            French really expected to win Agincourt when the ground was all muddy.
                            http://www.historynotes.info/wp-cont...of-Austria.jpg

                            Archduke Charles!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I have to come down on the side of Aincourt here. To dismiss the contest as being won by superior weapons completely ignores the fact that battle raged for 3 hours after the longbowmen had run out of arrows and joined the melee.

                              The French were ultimately undone because they chose to fight on the wrong terrain, then watched the English archers hammer in palings to further increase their defensive advantage. Far from learning the lessons of Crecy and Golden Spurs the French nobility were so blinded by a desire for revenge that they lost all common sense, tore up the battle plan that would have seen the nobility go in in the last wave and charged headlong into annihilation. The wave of men-at-arms following were further disrupted by wounded horses bolting back through their own lines.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X