England V Wales: A Friendly, Who Are You Kidding.

Yes, best of luck to both teams on saturday, but dont kid yourself, there is no such thing as a friendly between these two teams. At best their is a grudging respect for each other, but for most Welshmen there is no bigger scalp than Englands (NZ apart and that is because it has been so long - no other reason). For all English, take that as a compliment and not a WUM.

I for one will not be looking for a good workout, new combinations, promising stuff etc. etc.

A defeat of England is the mimimum requirement to take confidence into the next game and then the World Cup. Wales need to put their marker down and go on a massive upward curve. Its now or never time, right here right now.

Bring it on.

Red how do you see next week panning out if england do win tomorrow, as we'll be likly to bring out srongest side to the MS and gatlands already said that this is the strongest welsh side?

I would still say that France, SA or NZ are much bigger scalps for Wales than England. I don't like this focus on beating England so much. In fact I think having England as warm ups could be detrimental to our world cup.

I think Gatland meant this is our strongest side possible at the moment due to our injuries, otherwise no way could you consider this our strongest team. Not a chance.

rugbydreamer wrote:I think Gatland meant this is our strongest side possible at the moment due to our injuries, otherwise no way could you consider this our strongest team. Not a chance.

Do you know if those will be fit for next weekend?

Not really sure but I'd expect Hook, Adam Jones & Geth Jenkins to get game time next week. Their injuries didn't sound quite so serious. Not sure about 1/2p or Byrne.

From the neutrals perspective, may rugby be the winner on the day, and may the best team win. Failing that a draw, and if that isn't possible then I suppose an England win will have to do.

What?! Have you hit yourself over the head GG? You would rather England win than Wales?!

I need a lie down.

That's not what he said is it? He said may the 'best' team win, then a draw then an England win. Intimating in a humorous way that perhaps England aren't the best team. Oh what a card!

Which of these three scenarios would you take though?

1. A convincing win for your team, but 2 key players are lost to injury, ruling them out of the tournament

2. A tight win in a scrappy game, with nothing really learned and no one playing particularly well

3. A narrow defeat, but some combinations go really well, and much is learned

Gethin Jenkins and Adam Jones are our 2 best props, and Rees is our best hooker and captain. All are out of the England game, so straight away the front row is 2nd string, but still capable at scrum time IMO. Therefore, this cannot be called our strongest team, but our strongest available team as rugbydreamer says.

mr_stonelea wrote:Which of these three scenarios would you take though?

1. A convincing win for your team, but 2 key players are lost to injury, ruling them out of the tournament

2. A tight win in a scrappy game, with nothing really learned and no one playing particularly well

3. A narrow defeat, but some combinations go really well, and much is learned

You missed:

4. A heavy loss in which the only stand out players were injured and ruled out the RWC.

But if England win and bring the first team next week will those returning make that much of a differance as it is only 4-5 players?

And the strengh in depth will be needed for your 3 very physical pool games, and do you have enough quality back-up?

GG - don't think anyone would choose that option! Not a positive to take from that at all, fingers crossed that doesn't happen to any team.

KK - I think the returning players could make a huge difference, especially in the front row. Don't forget we're starting with Bennett, England are going to have a field day in the line out

And the strengh in depth will be needed for your 3 very physical pool games, and do you have enough quality back-up?

Very true. Our depth will certainly be tested in the next 3 games then our pool matches. Personally I think we are still quite weak in some areas but I live in hope!

mr_stonelea wrote:Which of these three scenarios would you take though?

1. A convincing win for your team, but 2 key players are lost to injury, ruling them out of the tournament

2. A tight win in a scrappy game, with nothing really learned and no one playing particularly well

3. A narrow defeat, but some combinations go really well, and much is learned

The coaches will be looking for :

1: Players trying to do what they have been coached to do
2: The players executing what they were trying to do
3: A win

The point of these games is to help develope the side, not bragging rights. Of course they want to win, but its not the primary concern A lot of BS will be spouted to hype the game up and be seen to be satying the right things of course, but if they were really entirely focussed on winning these games as the sole and primary objective then you wouldnt have fringe players starting.

To the fans its very different of course. Doubly so because of the internet. England will be looking for a win so that they can be accused of arrogance rather than being rubbish.

I think the Welsh XV, when all are fully fit are a team that will give all sides (even the AB's on an average day for them) a hell of a run for their money.

But of all the teams to come up against - The Boks, the Fijians and the Samoans, well, any victories have the possibilities of being phyrric. It would be just your luck to get through the pools and then have to play the quarters with everybody on crutches.

Stick wheels on the bottome of wee Shanes crutches and watch him jink down the wing.....

To be honest, I don't think there's really such a thing as a 'friendly' in international rugby now. However, I do see this game as a stepping stone where the result is maybe less important than what it tells us about the possible teams for the forthcoming tournament.

As such, I don't mind MJs selection of a team to look to answer various squad questions rather than our best available side (which would change at least 4 of the selected pack and 2 of the back 3, with the inside back positions being up for grabs). If we can still beat a fairly strong Wales side (as said elsewhere, best that could be selected from the available members of the squad) with this team AND learn what we need to about the squad, it will be a very successful day.

Oh, and just a quick question for the Welsh posters - What exactly is the hold that Hugh Bennett has over Gatland that means he keeps getting selected? Photos of Gatland in a compromising situation with Flossie?

TrailApe wrote:I think the Welsh XV, when all are fully fit are a team that will give all sides (even the AB's on an average day for them) a hell of a run for their money.

lost 0 6 -6 0 3 v New Zealand Cardiff 21 Dec 1963 Details
lost 6 13 -7 0 8 v New Zealand Cardiff 11 Nov 1967 Details
lost 0 19 -19 0 13 v New Zealand Christchurch 31 May 1969 Details
lost 12 33 -21 6 14 v New Zealand Auckland 14 Jun 1969 Details
lost 16 19 -3 3 13 v New Zealand Cardiff 2 Dec 1972 Details
lost 12 13 -1 12 7 v New Zealand Cardiff 11 Nov 1978 Details
lost 3 23 -20 0 11 v New Zealand Cardiff 1 Nov 1980 Details
lost 6 49 -43 0 27 v New Zealand Brisbane 14 Jun 1987 Details
lost 3 52 -49 0 24 v New Zealand Christchurch 28 May 1988 Details
lost 9 54 -45 - - v New Zealand Auckland 11 Jun 1988 Details
lost 9 34 -25 6 12 v New Zealand Cardiff 4 Nov 1989 Details
lost 9 34 -25 6 20 v New Zealand Johannesburg 31 May 1995 Details
lost 7 42 -35 0 25 v New Zealand Wembley 29 Nov 1997 Details
lost 17 43 -26 10 9 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 23 Nov 2002 Details
lost 3 55 -52 3 17 v New Zealand Hamilton 21 Jun 2003 Details
lost 37 53 -16 24 28 v New Zealand Sydney 2 Nov 2003 Details
lost 25 26 -1 14 13 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 20 Nov 2004 Details
lost 3 41 -38 3 13 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 5 Nov 2005 Details
lost 10 45 -35 3 28 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 25 Nov 2006 Details
lost 9 29 -20 9 6 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 22 Nov 2008 Details
lost 12 19 -7 6 6 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 7 Nov 2009 Details
lost 9 42 -33 9 15 v New Zealand Dunedin 19 Jun 2010 Details
lost 10 29 -19 3 13 v New Zealand Hamilton 26 Jun 2010 Details
lost 25 37 -12 9 13 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 27 Nov 2010 Details



To be fair, that is a hell of a run.

The next fixture is the one that really counts.

Won 24-26 V New Zealand Eden Park 23 Oct 2011.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

TrailApe wrote:I think the Welsh XV, when all are fully fit are a team that will give all sides (even the AB's on an average day for them) a hell of a run for their money.

lost 0 6 -6 0 3 v New Zealand Cardiff 21 Dec 1963 Details
lost 6 13 -7 0 8 v New Zealand Cardiff 11 Nov 1967 Details
lost 0 19 -19 0 13 v New Zealand Christchurch 31 May 1969 Details
lost 12 33 -21 6 14 v New Zealand Auckland 14 Jun 1969 Details
lost 16 19 -3 3 13 v New Zealand Cardiff 2 Dec 1972 Details
lost 12 13 -1 12 7 v New Zealand Cardiff 11 Nov 1978 Details
lost 3 23 -20 0 11 v New Zealand Cardiff 1 Nov 1980 Details
lost 6 49 -43 0 27 v New Zealand Brisbane 14 Jun 1987 Details
lost 3 52 -49 0 24 v New Zealand Christchurch 28 May 1988 Details
lost 9 54 -45 - - v New Zealand Auckland 11 Jun 1988 Details
lost 9 34 -25 6 12 v New Zealand Cardiff 4 Nov 1989 Details
lost 9 34 -25 6 20 v New Zealand Johannesburg 31 May 1995 Details
lost 7 42 -35 0 25 v New Zealand Wembley 29 Nov 1997 Details
lost 17 43 -26 10 9 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 23 Nov 2002 Details
lost 3 55 -52 3 17 v New Zealand Hamilton 21 Jun 2003 Details
lost 37 53 -16 24 28 v New Zealand Sydney 2 Nov 2003 Details
lost 25 26 -1 14 13 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 20 Nov 2004 Details
lost 3 41 -38 3 13 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 5 Nov 2005 Details
lost 10 45 -35 3 28 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 25 Nov 2006 Details
lost 9 29 -20 9 6 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 22 Nov 2008 Details
lost 12 19 -7 6 6 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 7 Nov 2009 Details
lost 9 42 -33 9 15 v New Zealand Dunedin 19 Jun 2010 Details
lost 10 29 -19 3 13 v New Zealand Hamilton 26 Jun 2010 Details
lost 25 37 -12 9 13 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 27 Nov 2010 Details



To be fair, that is a hell of a run.

Yes but Seabuscuit, they've clearly never been fully fit.

deadfred wrote:The next fixture is the one that really counts.

Won 24-26 V New Zealand Eden Park 23 Oct 2011.

Thats what I love about the Welsh, finish 2 points behind and they still see it as a win.
3-1 and all that.

Id love to see you chaps wipe the smirk of GreyGhosts face though ...do us proud !

Wouldn't they have to beat England first to get the opportunity?

I just put the home teams score first - isn't that how it normally works?

TheGreyGhost wrote:Wouldn't they have to beat England first to get the opportunity?

Have to beat France in the Semi as I cant see France loosing to England again in the Qs - they've had too much pain against England for it too carry on.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

TrailApe wrote:I think the Welsh XV, when all are fully fit are a team that will give all sides (even the AB's on an average day for them) a hell of a run for their money.

lost 0 6 -6 0 3 v New Zealand Cardiff 21 Dec 1963 Details
lost 6 13 -7 0 8 v New Zealand Cardiff 11 Nov 1967 Details
lost 0 19 -19 0 13 v New Zealand Christchurch 31 May 1969 Details
lost 12 33 -21 6 14 v New Zealand Auckland 14 Jun 1969 Details
lost 16 19 -3 3 13 v New Zealand Cardiff 2 Dec 1972 Details
lost 12 13 -1 12 7 v New Zealand Cardiff 11 Nov 1978 Details
lost 3 23 -20 0 11 v New Zealand Cardiff 1 Nov 1980 Details
lost 6 49 -43 0 27 v New Zealand Brisbane 14 Jun 1987 Details
lost 3 52 -49 0 24 v New Zealand Christchurch 28 May 1988 Details
lost 9 54 -45 - - v New Zealand Auckland 11 Jun 1988 Details
lost 9 34 -25 6 12 v New Zealand Cardiff 4 Nov 1989 Details
lost 9 34 -25 6 20 v New Zealand Johannesburg 31 May 1995 Details
lost 7 42 -35 0 25 v New Zealand Wembley 29 Nov 1997 Details
lost 17 43 -26 10 9 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 23 Nov 2002 Details
lost 3 55 -52 3 17 v New Zealand Hamilton 21 Jun 2003 Details
lost 37 53 -16 24 28 v New Zealand Sydney 2 Nov 2003 Details
lost 25 26 -1 14 13 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 20 Nov 2004 Details
lost 3 41 -38 3 13 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 5 Nov 2005 Details
lost 10 45 -35 3 28 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 25 Nov 2006 Details
lost 9 29 -20 9 6 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 22 Nov 2008 Details
lost 12 19 -7 6 6 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 7 Nov 2009 Details
lost 9 42 -33 9 15 v New Zealand Dunedin 19 Jun 2010 Details
lost 10 29 -19 3 13 v New Zealand Hamilton 26 Jun 2010 Details
lost 25 37 -12 9 13 v New Zealand Millennium Stadium 27 Nov 2010 Details



To be fair, that is a hell of a run.

Still a surprising amount of players in the squad that did so well in 2004. We very nearly won that day.

deadfred wrote:I just put the home teams score first - isn't that how it normally works?

well not in the way the stats i poresented above go no

but its a cheap shot anyway

TGG...if they had to beat England to get there Id take it, I just want to see your lot beaten that badly. At least if Wales do it then you cant claim it was the B team beating the A team.

I would like to point out that I did qualify the remark with 'an average day for the AB's'.........

it's just that the AB's don't have many 'average days'.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

deadfred wrote:I just put the home teams score first - isn't that how it normally works?

well not in the way the stats i poresented above go no

but its a cheap shot anyway

TGG...if they had to beat England to get there Id take it, I just want to see your lot beaten that badly. At least if Wales do it then you cant claim it was the B team beating the A team.

What? you'd rather see NZ lose to Wales than England do well at the RWC? You sir, are a schadenfreudoholic and need help.

TrailApe wrote:I would like to point out that I did qualify the remark with 'an average day for the AB's'.........

it's just that the AB's don't have many 'average days'.

You mean if the all blacks played like an average international team then Wales at full strength would have a chance? That I can accept.

TheGreyGhost wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

deadfred wrote:I just put the home teams score first - isn't that how it normally works?

well not in the way the stats i poresented above go no

but its a cheap shot anyway

TGG...if they had to beat England to get there Id take it, I just want to see your lot beaten that badly. At least if Wales do it then you cant claim it was the B team beating the A team.

What? you'd rather see NZ lose to Wales than England do well at the RWC? You sir, are a schadenfreudoholic and need help.

No Im just not always entirely serious.


Who cares about world cups anyway, certainly not the english

Why, when talking about the current welsh team and players, would you dredge up results from 1906??? Nothing to do with this crop of players. All he said was if wales were at full strength and the ABs played a bit average then we'd give them a game. He didn't say we'd beat them, just competitive.

Griff wrote:Why, when talking about the current welsh team and players, would you dredge up results from 1906??? Nothing to do with this crop of players. All he said was if wales were at full strength and the ABs played a bit average then we'd give them a game. He didn't say we'd beat them, just competitive.

1) I dredged up the reulsts to take a cheap pot shot at Wales
2) I didnt mention 1906, just the ones up till the last time they actually m,anaged a win
3) the average performance of the all blacks has been enough to see off any wales side for the last 50 years. That doesnt suggest Wales are suddenly going to be comeptitive when they are at one of their lowest ebbs and New Zelaand are on a high.
Id say the same for England even though they have a better side and could actually field a first choice lineup of fit players if they so chose.
4) Wales arent full strength and arent likely to face New Zealand any time soon, so its as pointless and argument as the rest of this thread.
5) Go read the article about being realistic.
6) The real enemny here is The Grey Ghost (boo)

6) The real enemny here is The Grey Ghost (boo)

What on Earth are you talking about?

All he said was if wales were at full strength and the ABs played a bit average then we'd give them a game. He didn't say we'd beat them, just competitive.

Thanks Griff, at least somebody is taking notice, and not just firing from the hip.

TrailApe wrote:

All he said was if wales were at full strength and the ABs played a bit average then we'd give them a game. He didn't say we'd beat them, just competitive.

Thanks Griff, at least somebody is taking notice, and not just firing from the hip.

Not really - that was what (at least I) was taking issue with. Are you saying that the All Blacks throughout history have always played above their average against Wales? or that Wales have never been at full strength?

TheGreyGhost wrote:

TrailApe wrote:

All he said was if wales were at full strength and the ABs played a bit average then we'd give them a game. He didn't say we'd beat them, just competitive.

Thanks Griff, at least somebody is taking notice, and not just firing from the hip.

Not really - that was what (at least I) was taking issue with. Are you saying that the All Blacks throughout history have always played above their average against Wales? or that Wales have never been at full strength?

Exactly the point I was trying to make.

If you give enough Welshmen enough typewriters theyll write some Dylan Thomas poetry but apparently it doesnt mean they'll beat the all blacks any more often than Ireland win a grand slam.

Its too easy to build up sides as something they arent then to only find excuses when reality doesnt bear that out. Wales are not a good side currently, if they were they wouldnt have had such a p*ss poor run of results against New Zealand or any other opposition.

Once in recent history a near full strength side when Wales were at the top of their game came close to beating an understrgenth New Zealand side playing badly in what was a poor year for them. To state that an average all blacks side could be beaten by the current Welsh squad is silly in light of that, considering theres no evidence that they will have improved noticeably.

Wales could turn over sides like England on their day, no question. To suggest that they have or would now give the all blacks a hard time on an average perfromance is a daft as this argument.

Did Wales not give New Zealnd a hard time the last time they met at the millenium stadium in November? We were 13-9 up at the break. New Zealand scored two late tries to seal the match. Wales were at one of their strongest, New Zealand put in an average perfomance. Result was that we 'gave them a game', it was competitive, and they didn't wipe the floor with us, but they did win.

This is a ridiculous argument. I'm in awe of the All Blacks, my second team as I love the way they play, the rugby tradition in NZ, etc. But, to say that if they play averagely and Wales play their best that we won't give them a game (i.e. be competitive) then that just ignores the most recent match, which is the one most likely to contain the most players in the current scquad, which is what we're looking to compare!

Griff wrote:Did Wales not give New Zealnd a hard time the last time they met at the millenium stadium in November?

Only in the minds of welsh supporters, as was the idea that that was a New Zealand side playing their average game. Wales lost this game by 12 points and only then because of a late consolation try. There were even some trying to claim they gave New Zealand a hard time in the summer tour on the grounds the games were close untill the point where New Zealand scored loads of points ( as if theat somehow isnt part of the game).
The Wales side in that match was pretty much Gatlands first choice, not many notable absentees I believe aside from SWilliams. You can argue he shouldnt have picked certain players of course.

Ill concede that they gave Samoa a hard time.

Why go back to the Samoa game in 2009? Seems silly to me, 2 years ago is a long time in rugby. We can all pick games over the years where we've struggled, like England v Argentina recently. Nothing to do with this argument though.

Also, if it was New Zealand playing their top game then they would have hammered us by 50 points as they have in the past, surely? Hence why i said they had an average game by their standards. Or are you saying that Wales up their performance when they play the all blacks???

It's true that the MS NZ v Wales game was the closest game on tour. But say they put up more opposition than Scotland's 50-0 drubbing or whatever it was is hardly saying much. Aside from which NZ was questionably penalised from the get-go (such great calls as "Penalty Wales! Stephen Jones has fallen over!") by the ref who notably hasn't been selected for RWC duties.

Why start blaming refs GG? You won, and it was a friendly. Poor banter.

The All Blacks policy seems to always be when when playing away to give penalties rather then allow home team tries. This stops the home teams and fans momentum.

Come the game in the WC Final it won't be the same as they will believe they can't possibly loose to Wales so will not plan on cheating - which will be there undoing.

Funny I thought this was an England Wales thread

Well it gets confusing what with the costumes being worn

Harking back to an earlier post...

"Oh, and just a quick question for the Welsh posters -What exactly is the hold that Hugh Bennett has over Gatland that means he keeps getting selected? Photos of Gatland in a compromising situation with Flossie?"

Possibly 'that tackle' on Sackey at Twickenham in 2008. Right on h/t and Sackey looks certain to score until Bennett got under him in the tackle. No try awarded, which would have given England a large psychological lead. For me that tackle sent Wales into the 2nd half with their tails up and left England frustrated. And thus a 'Slam' was launched, and the deification of Gatland in Wales.

Just a thought.

Bennett is there to show how good the Dragons hooker is when the replacement is made!

The_Hound_of_Harrow wrote:Harking back to an earlier post...

"Oh, and just a quick question for the Welsh posters -What exactly is the hold that Hugh Bennett has over Gatland that means he keeps getting selected? Photos of Gatland in a compromising situation with Flossie?"

Possibly 'that tackle' on Sackey at Twickenham in 2008. Right on h/t and Sackey looks certain to score until Bennett got under him in the tackle. No try awarded, which would have given England a large psychological lead. For me that tackle sent Wales into the 2nd half with their tails up and left England frustrated. And thus a 'Slam' was launched, and the deification of Gatland in Wales.

Just a thought.

surely Hound you would have been Barking back...........