RWC 2011 POOL C SPECULATION...!

Pool C RWC 2011

Australia - 86.65

Ireland - 82.51

Italy - 73.54

USA - 66.78

Russia - 61.93

Australia are the highest ranked team in this Pool but I actually personally think Ireland are the strongest team. I would place them as favourites, due to their consistency over the last ten years with a settled side. The Aussies are viciously creative in attack but are rather unproven in the heat of the cauldron, something that Ireland are good at.

Italy caused their annual upsets in the Six nations and are a consistently improving force, never to be taken lightly as Ireland know full well. An O'Gara drop goal was the only thing preventing Italy's season looking fortuitous last winter, they also beat France.

I am afraid I don't know much about either America or Russia other than Russia are a rising force and America would be undoubted world champions if they took rugby as seriously as gridiron.

I was surprised, for no reason whatsoever really, that what with the press and reports on Russia's emergence that they were behind the USA in the rankings, I presumed they were impressing their skills on the rankings far more. Russia have performed amicably in their recent internationals and have a couple of quite formidable players, and Phil Kingsley-Jones is their coach.

America have a great winger in Takudzwa Ngwenya who strode on to the scene with wonderful tries against SA in RWC 07. There are a couple of other notable players like fullback Chris Wyles of Saracens and formerly Saints, long haired flanker Todd Clever who plays for Suntory in Japan but has formerly played for the Lions in SA in the Super 14, infact he played for the against the B&I Lions in 09.

i find it somewhat short sighted how some people convert the fact that Australis beacause it has had a weak front row throughout the last 10 years that their forwards are incompetent in all aspects of forward play..
Sorry Maestag but the Australian forward pack at the moment is very capable and competitive,I doubt whether ireland could gain parity with them as it is quite some time since ireland has played a team like Australia.

Ireland go into this world cup playing England, I would say that will be a pretty formidable test of their forwards.

I dont think Australia have a problem in their side other than experience compared to Ireland. Which as I said above tips it in Irelands favour for me.

I have to disagree with you there about Australia being 'rather unproven in the heat of the cauldron'. Quite a statement.

Ireland also has an inconsistent record against Italy and has struggled to put away a team like Georgia in the last 10 years. True, the EP match could go either way but I'd say that the Wallabies have more chance of running away with it than Ireland based on team line-up, current form and RWC approach.

I think we'll get an idea next week where oz are at.
For me they are a little thin in terms of depth and rely a bit on their 5 or so gamebreakers.
Their pack is their weakest attribute but as you say laurie good enough to handle ireland.
Ireland certainly dont posess the same attacking options of this oz backline. Mind you neither does anyone else.
Ireland have a show if they execute their gameplan at a high level.that one will be worth watching.

true Australia is a very young side but they are about 10 miles an hour faster than England or Ireland.

I dont know whether you will learn a lot from the game with England,Martin johnson wont be putting everything out there then...

Linebreaker wrote:I have to disagree with you there about Australia being 'rather unproven in the heat of the cauldron'. Quite a statement.

Ireland also has an inconsistent record against Italy and has struggled to put away a team like Georgia in the last 10 years. True, the EP match could go either way but I'd say that the Wallabies have more chance of running away with it than Ireland based on team line-up, current form and RWC approach.

Its not that Audacious a statement.

My point being that the core of this Ireland team has been around a hell of a lot longer than the the similar in the Aussies team. Unequivocally the Australians are fast and sharp in attack. But Ireland are good at dealing with teams. Citing their shortcomings against Georgia or Italy in my opinion is not as prevalent as their successes against SA and Australia, the recent Six Nations where they started slowly and built to play at their full potential against England.

maestegmafia wrote:
Australia are the highest ranked team in this Pool but I actually personally think Ireland are the strongest team. I would place them as favourites, due to their consistency over the last ten years with a settled side.

Thanks for the vote of confidence but no Australia are the strongest side. I think we do have a chance though but certainly we are underdogs against them. Italy will be no push overs either but I don't think they are the same side away from home. The USA and Russia will be physical but I can't see them taking any scalps although I am a little concerned about playing the USA 1st up on September 11th.

Another facet you could throw into the arguement is that Ireland have arguably one of the best defences in world rugby.

The tries they conceded this tournament include a poor try against italy. That was a mishap. Apart from that Scotland was a cleansheet, France only got about two line breaks, both through D'arcy and lead to Medards try. Wales got their try through eh, speculative means and England had to get their try through a sloppy interception. 2009 Six nations we ended up conceeding 3 tries i think if my memorys correct.

Then again the AB's stuck four against us, but part of it i think is the fact they got a try before half time when we were at the top of the game - we just seemed to deflate when that happened, resulting in them putting two against us in quick succession in thes second half.

We'll need every irish fan to bring one brick and the coach's to bring a bit of mortar if were going to stop the aussies.

They're also a bit long in the tooth now mm and maybe some of them have been around too long! The Wallabies also have a better balance of youth and experience I would say.

Australia is even better at 'dealing with teams' than Ireland in RWCs and in my opinion they'll most likely prove that once again... until they meet the ABs who surely are the favourites.

maestegmafia wrote:Australia are the highest ranked team in this Pool but I actually personally think Ireland are the strongest team. I would place them as favourites, due to their consistency over the last ten years with a settled side. The Aussies are viciously creative in attack but are rather unproven in the heat of the cauldron, something that Ireland are good at.

Australia are the strongest as well as the most creative and highest ranked. Record in world cups is very good, but won't necessarily have an impact on this years tournament; but it could. What consistency do you speak of about Ireland, their consistentcy at finishing 2nd in the 6 Nations? Nobody would put them as favourites because of that.

USA vs Russia could be interesting. Those guys hate each other!

Linebreaker wrote:
Australia is even better at 'dealing with teams' than Ireland in RWCs and in my opinion they'll most likely prove that once again... until they meet the ABs who surely are the favourites.

This "in world cups" argument for a variety of cases falls flat on its face in my opinion, I disregard it as it can be used so easily to back up fortuitous claims either way.

I disagree that Australia are as settled a side as Ireland, I would say Australia are a more exciting prospect though.

DaDubs1 wrote:Another facet you could throw into the arguement is that Ireland have arguably one of the best defences in world rugby.

The tries they conceded this tournament include a poor try against italy. That was a mishap. Apart from that Scotland was a cleansheet, France only got about two line breaks, both through D'arcy and lead to Medards try. Wales got their try through eh, speculative means and England had to get their try through a sloppy interception. 2009 Six nations we ended up conceeding 3 tries i think if my memorys correct.

All of that is true but I don't think we can hope to defend against the likes of Australia and NZ. If they get enough possession and quick ball then they WILL make like breaks and if so then they WILL score points. We can be pretty sloppy at times with our handling and are not the most clinical team when it comes to scoring points when we create opportunities. Two area were we must improve from the 6N is retaining the ball and taking points when get the opportunity.

If Ireland can slow down Aus quick ball at the base they may be able to stop the Aus attacking speed.

So, the real question is,

6. SOB/Ferris
7. Wallace
8. Heaslip

Or,

6. Elsom
7. Pocock
8. ?

Australia are undoubted and deserved favourites.

To beat them, Ireland will have to....

A/ Have no or very few injuries. They talk about Aus lacking depth, we have even less. (In certain positions especially)

B/ Be at the absolute top of their game.

C/ Stop Aus being at the top of theirs.

D/ Have a bit of luck and the bounce of the ball.

If we are missing ANY of these factors, we will come off 2nd best. By somewhere between a few points and a total hiding.

I think the last time Ireland beat Aus south of the equator was 1979.

Considering that between Beale, Ioane, O'Connor, Adam Ashley Cooper, Cooper and Genia they have 150+ tests under the belt and collectively 50+ tries, they are a very dangerous back line.

Not sure who will be their number 12 at the RWC.

Their tight five has never been the strongest, yet they have been in the top 3 for a very long time consistently.

Sharpe and Horwill are solid at line out, Pocock and Elsom strong at the breakdown.

They are perhpas the only team that can go toe to toe in the try scoring stakes with New Zealand.

Yep true. Under the old rules Ireland really could of done a number on the Aus defence. That was arguably the best part of our gameplan. The Munster forwards were magicians in it, BOD was an actual flanker then in his wrapping of players. Now with the stand up, do a star jump Poopie its harder but we're getting there.

Jennings is back from injury isnt he? Ive been out of the rugby loop for the past month and converted to GAA again. I vote we go for the Leinster backrow in that game for sheer balance. Wallace can get turnovers but not on the scale of Jennings based on this year atleast.

maestegmafia wrote:I disagree that Australia are as settled a side as Ireland, I would say Australia are a more exciting prospect though.

Well Ireland are the more settled side. Does that automatically give them the advantage though? Btw Aus will be more than settled when the tri-nations is over. SH teams need just 2 or 3 games to become a 'settled side.'

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:Australia are undoubted and deserved favourites.

To beat them, Ireland will have to....

A/ Have no or very few injuries. They talk about Aus lacking depth, we have even less. (In certain positions especially)

B/ Be at the absolute top of their game.

C/ Stop Aus being at the top of theirs.

D/ Have a bit of luck and the bounce of the ball.

If we are missing ANY of these factors, we will come off 2nd best. By somewhere between a few points and a total hiding.

I think the last time Ireland beat Aus south of the equator was 1979.

Last time we went South Cooper, Beale and the gang (Literally, Cooper nearly got arrested last week) only managed to beat us by around 6/7 points in Sydney. We had a team consisting of players ranging from the first team to the fourth team! We did something right that game, who's to say we won't do it again.

maestegmafia wrote:

Linebreaker wrote:
Australia is even better at 'dealing with teams' than Ireland in RWCs and in my opinion they'll most likely prove that once again... until they meet the ABs who surely are the favourites.

This "in world cups" argument for a variety of cases falls flat on its face in my opinion, I disregard it as it can be used so easily to back up fortuitous claims either way.

I disagree that Australia are as settled a side as Ireland, I would say Australia are a more exciting prospect though.

It's more pertinent than using 6N as a reference though - that argument falls flat more often than not. I disagree with the 'start slowly then build up' approach too. That seems to me to be an irrelevant remark since all the RWC winners hit the tournament running. No successful team would ever take the field (even against Namibia or Uruguay for example) with that attitude. Rest players for those group matches, sure... but that is not to be confused with starting slowly.

biltongbek wrote:Considering that between Beale, Ioane, O'Connor, Adam Ashley Cooper, Cooper and Genia they have 150+ tests under the belt and collectively 50+ tries, they are a very dangerous back line.

Yeah, well....so does Shane Williams and Stephen Jones combined, doesnt mean Wales are going to beat SA though....

To anyone that says we should be favourites against Australia in the world cup I'll make a very simple point. Less than one year ago Australia hammered France 59-16 in Paris. We haven't even beaten France in Paris since BOD scored his hat trick in the year 2000.

That said, are we capable of beating Australia? Absolutely and I would fully expect the team to believe so and be targeting nothing less than coming top of pool C.

Without doubt the australian and Irish clash will be the decider of this pool, and nothing should be taken for granted, I do however think australia would be favorites, they have many of their players in top form, whereas with Ireland we'll have to wait for their warm up matches to assess what form their players are in.

mrsuperclear wrote:To anyone that says we should be favourites against Australia in the world cup I'll make a very simple point. Less than one year ago Australia hammered France 59-16 in Paris. We haven't even beaten France in Paris since BOD scored his hat trick in the year 2000.

That said, are we capable of beating Australia? Absolutely and I would fully expect the team to believe so and be targeting nothing less than coming top of pool C.

I didn't want to bring up the Paris match... but France were away with the pixies that day, surely?

Of course, Ireland is capable of beating Australia. We are very similarly matched teams with similar hopes/anxieties.

Jennifer McL's list above could equally be applicable for the Wallabies - substituting 'Ireland' for 'Oz', of course.

mrsuperclear wrote:To anyone that says we should be favourites against Australia in the world cup I'll make a very simple point. Less than one year ago Australia hammered France 59-16 in Paris. We haven't even beaten France in Paris since BOD scored his hat trick in the year 2000.

That said, are we capable of beating Australia? Absolutely and I would fully expect the team to believe so and be targeting nothing less than coming top of pool C.

Exactly mrsuperclear. The only side who will be favourites against Australia is New Zealand. They do have some weakness though and if we can dominate posession and territory and get our tactics right then I have no doubt that we can beat them. It will be a big ask to do this though and if we get things wrong then they could certainly put us to the sword. I think the key players for us will be Reddan and Sexton and they will have to take the right options at the right times. Our back row will have a big task in combating Pocock too. If we can hold onto the ball though I don't think the Australian will like defending against us though and I believe we can open them up if we can get quick ball.

It's probably worth remembering that since Australia's emergence as a major rugby power Irelands only managed a couple of wins (both or which were in Ireland). Whilst it doesn't mean they can't win, it does indicate the scale of the problem (i.e. 2 wins in the last 20 games). Given that almost every member of the current team has lost more games against Australia than they have won I doubt they'll see themselves as favourites. Wont stop me cvheeering for the men in green though.

Why bother the France match. Any team that loses to Samoa doesnt have the right to bring up past games to boast about their capabilities.

Ireland lost to Samoa as well... 25-40.

Linebreaker wrote:Ireland lost to Samoa as well... 25-40.

My memory serves me bad, how many of that team are going to the world cup again?

The All Blacks lost to Munster in the 70's, therefore we'd still beat them now!

DaDubs1 wrote:Why bother the France match. Any team that loses to Samoa doesnt have the right to bring up past games to boast about their capabilities.

The France match is a point of comparison between the two sides. We've both played them in the last year. Australia hammered them away and we lost at home. Added to that, we've played France in Paris every second year since 2000 and lost every time (and you can throw in the world cup game in 2007 as well while you're at it). I'm not hyping up Australia at all, I'm just demonstrating that they should certainly be favourites. You want to throw in games against Somoa as comparisons? Fair enough. We beat them last November and they lost at home recently. But look at the sides that were out in fairness. Somoa always are stronger closer to the world cup and the Australian side was not the best. In saying that, the Somoan game is certainly a factor in accessing Australia's form but I feel we'll have a bigger picture after their New Zealand tests and SA away. I don't even think it's debatable who's favourite. As Roddersm said, the only team who should be favourites against them (at this moment in time) are New Zealand.

Linebreaker wrote:
Jennifer McL's list above could equally be applicable for the Wallabies - substituting 'Ireland' for 'Oz', of course.

I don't agree. Aus could beat us with 35% possession, and about 5 linebreaks.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we have no hope, just that if both teams play their best game, they will win.

If we can keep them quiet and have a really good day at the office, we can win.

It will come down to tactics and execution on the day.

Actually I should add that one to my list E/ Have superior tactics, that can contain their threat, while opening them up at the same time.

If Ireland can play the type intense game that Leinster played in the HC, with multiple points of attack and secure possession, we have a chance.

However the EXACT same game will not work at intl level. Nor will it suit the team.

DaDubs1 wrote:Why bother the France match. Any team that loses to Samoa doesnt have the right to bring up past games to boast about their capabilities.

That loss to Samoa was a wake up call to Aus, and will hurt Ireland more than help us.

Well I think more or less your list is applicable to us as well, Jenifer.... except your last line:

"If we are missing ANY of these factors, we will come off 2nd best. By somewhere between a few points and a total hiding."

I can't see Ireland winning by too many... Australia have the potential to rack up some serious points if it goes pear-shaped for Ireland.

"E/ Have superior tactics, that can contain their threat, while opening them up at the same time."

Ditto for the Wallabies - that will be the plan obviously and we saw them do it well for about 3/4 of the match against SA... then they dropped off - which is a worry, not only for the upcoming Ireland RWC match but also BC v ABs next Saturday.

The Australian first choice pack will have a a solid front row,especillyif the can get Benn Robinson out of Rehab in time.not sure what the current situation is probably needs an op.brave man to wait.
Sharpe and Vickerman will be there starting locks,plus a very good back row.plus outstanding backs as usual.O `Connor is now a competent goal kick.
They have weaknesses in as much of depth ,Geniaand Cooper as a pivot is probably the worlds best.
But lose one or both and they are distincly in trouble,this weekend we will
see two SH giants fighting it out.Expect a home win but a close one.

DaDubs1 wrote:Why bother the France match. Any team that loses to Samoa doesnt have the right to bring up past games to boast about their capabilities.

Wish we'd known that 100 years ago, we could have saved ourselves the effort.

I think we've got the Aussies worried, bringing up past performances (like Georgia) is usually what you get from England fans who cling to the past.

I think our pack can easily match Australia's and I think Sexton is a more intelligent player than Cooper, maybe not as naturally gifted, but I think the dual between those two will be key and I think Sexton will have more intelligence and control in his game.

Our back 3 isnt as much of a concern as many are making out, Bowe is still a class player and Trimble or Earls on the other wing is still a very good headache to have, FB is the only concern.

I'll also add, Deans is a very risky coach, I dont think his strategy is good enough to win a WC, the sort of team he has will put a team to the sword one week and lose through lack of structure the next.

Artful_Dodger wrote:I think we've got the Aussies worried, bringing up past performances (like Georgia) is usually what you get from England fans who cling to the past.

Does that still hold if you are the ones who bring it up?

But I didnt bring it up so I dont really see what you're getting at. If you're referring to someone mentioning the Samoa game a couple of weeks ago, well that was a couple of weeks ago, not 4 years ago.

I didn't say you personally brought it up. I assume you were referring to someone mentioning our result against France which was raised by an Irish poster.

Artful_Dodger wrote:I think we've got the Aussies worried, bringing up past performances (like Georgia) is usually what you get from England fans who cling to the past.

Unfortunately, I have nothing to do with the team Dodger...I'm just a poster on here. Just thought you should know.

I'd forgotten I'd mentioned Georgia - although it's still obviously on your mind.

No not until you brought it up. Its a bit like me bringing up 7 out of 8 wins against England,

SEVEN OUT OF EIGHT.

Ireland also has an inconsistent record against Italy

What, you mean not having lost to them since they joined the Six Nations 11 years ago?

Artful_Dodger wrote:No not until you brought it up. Its a bit like me bringing up 7 out of 8 wins against England,

SEVEN OUT OF EIGHT.

Well I'm happy with that stat!

Let's hope it's EIGHT OUT OF NINE soon.

I think that both Ireland and Australia are very evenly matched and while looking at past results help, since the last time we two met, both sides have moved on and changed quite a bit, especially in style of play.

I genuinely think this will be the most exciting game of the group stages and while I'll believe we'll win, I don't think anyone can truly predict either side will win without any doubt.

Ireland may have to try to play it tight to win, which would poo in the salad in terms of the game as a spectacle but may be the only way for them to take it.

The remaining point of O'Gara in the national set up is for the slamming of touchfinders into the corners, although I'd rather watch Sexton having a run.

George,

I'd be surprised if Ireland played that game. They won't be as open as some of the stuff Australia have been playing but they'll play rugby and won't play negative stuff.

There are some pretty odd claims on this thread. Or maybe they are just cliches.

Consistency over the last 10 years with a more settled side? Is this really a criteria for success at a RWC? 10 years? In that time frame Ireland have beaten Australia once - in Ireland - in atrocious conditions. Does the last 10 years count for anything in relation to one game? Do you think Ireland's record outside Ireland really stacks up? I don't.

Unproven in the heat of the cauldron. ? What cauldron are you referring to?

Ireland started the 6N slowly and built to its full potential against England at the end? I think you might be putting too much emphasis on that one game and probably how Australia went against England last year at Twickenam - where Australia missed more than 20 tackles that day. The other way of looking at it was Ireland had a great day out against England where simply everything fell into place during an otherwise poor 6N performance in a disappointing year.

One of the best defenses in world rugby? Unless you test that against the 3N defenses I find these types of comments more reflective of wishful thinking.

Despite its problems last year, the
Australian scrum will be much better this year even after taking into account the first choice front row are all out injured. And it doesn't have to be that much better to match Ireland. With 35% of the ball that will be enough to account for Ireland. With 50% of the ball there is a risk W will run away with it. W will simply have too much outrageous talent in the backline for Ireland to cope.

It will be a good game I think. Ireland and England always lift against W because they have belief against them. They always play bettr against W than do against ABs. As I have said before it is possible for Ireland to win against W in NZ. All the stars will have to be aligned, they will have to play out of their skin, plus some luck, plus a bad day for the W. That is a lot of if's.

W will simply have too much outrageous talent in the backline for Ireland to cope.

Well, wow!

In that time frame Ireland have beaten Australia once

Twice.

MBTGOG wrote:

W will simply have too much outrageous talent in the backline for Ireland to cope.

Well, wow!
Great response!!

In that time frame Ireland have beaten Australia once

Twice.

Right , twice - are you suggesting that changes things a lot with 2 wins at home in Ireland? If you want to talk history, which I think is quite pointless, how many times have Ireland beaten Australia outside Ireland in say, the last 30 years?