Kudos to the so called RWC minnows!

Ever since the tier 1 nations went professional, traditional test minnows who stayed amateur began to slip away from the game.. point gaps that were 20-30 in the 80s/90s became 50-60 as 6N/3N sides got fitter, more organised etc.

But as a rugby fan it was great to see the likes of Namibia, Romania, Japan and in some ways Argentina not only produce great performances but all come close to beating the more established sides they were facing.

Even NZ only putting 40 odd points to Tonga with a full strength side was amazing... even 4 years ago it would have been more like 80.

Its great to see a more competitive world cup though and hopefully we will see some real intense matches in the pools... not just the KO stages.

These guys are often amateurs, poorly funded and play in leagues which wouldn't rank with perhaps the first 3 or 4 in Europe/SA yet they somehow standing toe to toe with players who are recognised as some of the finest players on the planet.

I can imagine the USA & Italy will be looking at these matches and saying... if Namibia, Romania & Japan can do it so can we... lets go one better.

Lets hope the IRB look at these games and realise that these sides have not only earnt their place at the RWC but also that something needs to be done to maintain the momentum that Fiji & Georgia started in 07 and today's losers (but not in spirit) have continued.

In 50 years time if the QF of the RWC continues to inc. 7 teams from the 6N/4N as standard then it will have been a wasted opportunity.

fa,

Is it a case that they have caught up or as Pienaar said the traditional 'big guns' have hit they stride yet or taking the 'lesser' teams to lightly.

NZ def took foot off gas at half time yesterday whilst Scotland, France and England should really be beating their opposition more convincingly.

BW

Both I think.... but make no mistake in past RWC these sides would have just rolled over and let the bigger nations take their win.... now they are telling them... you have to work for it.

I caught the 2nd half of the Namibia match as my baby son had other ideas about my planned morning lie-in and I was amazed by the skill levels of these guys.. playing a running game against the Fijians and competing.

In terms of the Scot-Romania match... sure you can take your foot off the gas but those guys were dominating the Scotland pack all day.

i wouldnt say argentina is a lesser nation so a win is a win for england, wales did pretty well to beat argentina so comfortably and the english squad and fans should be satisfied (sp) with a win, it could and imo should have been different

The main thing that annoys me about RWCs is the seeding system,no matter how it is done.Because it means that same cosy few have all the advantages.
People have great fun calling NZ chokers,BUT does`nt that apply equally to Ireland,Scotland,France,Wales,even England as well ?
There REALLY should be a shield ,and plate to give other teams something to play for too.

I believe there is a 3rd place play off emack.

Why are you so suprised the gaps are closing?

Most of the Romanians play professionally in France.

The islands boys are all over the world, having come through the New Zealand rugby system, which is the best of all...

Japan has the richest league in the World.

Namibia play as a club in the South Africa system.

Italy play week to week in the Celtic League and Internationally in the 6 Nations, with a smattering of players in France.

Hell, even Russia have a professional league and the game is part of their school curriculum! Their now starting to export their better players, and don;t be suprised to see a lot of them head to France and England after the World Cup.

No excuses for these sides anymore to be honest, they have the advantages of professionalism like everyone else.

emack2 wrote:The main thing that annoys me about RWCs is the seeding system,no matter how it is done.Because it means that same cosy few have all the advantages.
People have great fun calling NZ chokers,BUT does`nt that apply equally to Ireland,Scotland,France,Wales,even England as well ?
There REALLY should be a shield ,and plate to give other teams something to play for too.

No offence to the teams mentioned but none of them go into World cup as clear cut favourites .NZers are expected to win at all costs which is why we take pleasure in callim them chokers

Argentina are the top seeds in Pool B with England second seeds - so arguably the result was an "upset".

However it does highlight that indeed the seedings were a problem. To "enable ticket sales" they were done about 3 years ago when Argentina were in the top 4 in the world.

argentina werent the top seeds, england are higher in the rankings as are scotland

Argentina were 4th when the pools were formed

ah right my bad

But they are about 7th(?) now

[quote="HammerofThunor"]But they are about 7th(?) now[/quote]

9th. Its there lowest ranking yet appearently.

Kudos....why?

It is easy and misleading to admire uncompromising displays as we have seen in the last 48 hours but the truth is not a point between them, I know what you are getting at but no W in tournament means all that passion is just that.

Tonga played hard but were impotent, Romania likewise took it to a Scottish team that seemed about to bend over but then closed them out well, Namibia's game plan whilst cunning was never going to last 80 minutes, Japan attacked the French with all their usual enthusiasm even bowing their collective heads but couldn't capitalise, and last but not least the Argentines destroyed Eng up front and lost a game that was theirs for the taking again and again

This is tournament rugby and nothing but the win matters, whilst i admire the sentiment the reality is none of the challengers were skilled enough , fit enough or clinical enough to close out the favourite.

Having said all that Eng really were bad

LondonTiger wrote:Argentina are the top seeds in Pool B with England second seeds - so arguably the result was an "upset".

However it does highlight that indeed the seedings were a problem. To "enable ticket sales" they were done about 3 years ago when Argentina were in the top 4 in the world.

? argentina 9th, england 5th right now...where did you read that about enabling tix sales?

[quote="Gatts"]Kudos....why?

It is easy and misleading to admire uncompromising displays as we have seen in the last 48 hours but the truth is not a point between them, I know what you are getting at but no W in tournament means all that passion is just that.

Tonga played hard but were impotent, Romania likewise took it to a Scottish team that seemed about to bend over but then closed them out well, Namibia's game plan whilst cunning was never going to last 80 minutes, Japan attacked the French with all their usual enthusiasm even bowing their collective heads but couldn't capitalise, and last but not least the Argentines destroyed Eng up front and lost a game that was theirs for the taking again and again

This is tournament rugby and nothing but the win matters, whilst i admire the sentiment the reality is none of the challengers were skilled enough , fit enough or clinical enough to close out the favourite.

Having said all that Eng really were bad[/quote]

Thats a bit harsh dont you think I mean not so long ago these teams would have lost by 50, 60 or even more points but now they are coming close to winning them. Romania were beating scotland with 10 mins to go and they were still level with 5 to go! How many people would have thought that before the match. Not many.

If they had better fitness some of these matchs would have been won by them.

Gatts

Dude you are being beyond harsh. So none of the teams won.... well they are all amateurs competing against seasoned professionals and have a history of taking 50-100 point batterings by the same sides years before.

Are these teams failures because the didn't win under impossible odds? Sport isn't all about winning, perhaps it is for tier 1 nations but not for anyone else.

Most of these teams have had to fund raise just to get the squad to the RWC, they have taken leave from work and given up more than the pro's have for sure.
Fitness wise how can these guys compete... they all do a 50hr week like the rest of us and then they start training... there is no way they would be able to last 80mins with guys who train 24/7 for rugby. Its no wonder the pro nations pull away after 60 mins.

Its about progress for these guys, exceeding their potential.. by your account Georgia, England, Fiji, Argentina were all failures in the last world cup... but we all know that is far from the truth. Argentina's performance convinced the IRB & the 3Ns to inc. them in their SH competition off the back of that performance.

Even now without Pichot, Hernandez, Coletto & Contepomi (for 60 mins) they still took the best team in the NH all the way.

I love your bullish sentiments... 'nothing but winning counts'... well from that I can tell you for sure... Wales, Ireland, Scotland, Italy, Argentina, South Africa, France & England all all destined for failure.... its probably better that they stayed at home because none of these teams will walk away victors come the end.

look, i am not saying these teams didn't play out of their skins, i acknowledged that their uncompromising styles were admirable but certainly for Argentina these were far from impossible odds and to put it like that is naive.

what i am saying is this is tournament rugby....their tenacity is admirable bu they don't have diddly to show for it apart form the respect of all that witnessed it.

Contrarily we are all dissing France, Scot and Eng for lamentable failures, even NZ got a slating...but the fact is all of these teams have the points and, i repeat, in a tournament THAT is all that matters

Win ugly or lose...Jonners nailed it, they found a way to win and the W is all that matters

That is true but do you expect them to be winning like!? If these teams continue to play like this then by the time next World Cup or the one after that come around then thats what they could reasonable be doing but for now matchs like this are probably all they can do although I think there could be one shock alright but for now it is highly unlikey.

You have a point gatts but what it does indicate is the tournament is once again proving to be a leveller.
Teams are all playing out of their comfort zone.
Playing teams they would hardly ever play. Up to 7 matches in one country within 6 weeks, some at venues theyve never seen.
What the close results so far mean is upsets in terms of the seedings are certain.
I picked about 6-7 and i think it will be at least that.
Even Nz had a poor start by their normal world cup standards but i can see home matches becoming a real advantage for us in terms of prep as others standards are also lower.
After yesterday SA i think will find it tough against wales as all higher seeds have struggled in some way and the ages just might tip it wales way. Age and recent lack of gameplay.
By age i dont mean actual birth ages. I mean playing time. Some boks i believe probably can't believe they are still in the team and have just 'found themselves there' knowing themselves they arent at their best.
So wales 'could' take them tonight such is the tone set so far.

I expected Argentina to win once i saw the intensity with which they were playing....injuries aside, they let Eng back in having been given numerous opportunities to finish them off

Japan too could have done it...don't know their game well enough but kirwan being kirwan he will be just as happy with their perf even in losing...yes they will be competing n 10 years, i have no doubt

Romania, no they were never going to win and only Scotland could bend over so far to let them take a shot

Tonga...never

Namibia...they deserved it but their pack wa snever going to maintain parity with Fiji....the territorial drop goal game works...Janne du beer....but Fiji would always have won this

Gatts

No one gave Argentina a hope, they have won 6 matches since the last RWC... thats it (4 of which were against Italy & Scotland.. and they have lost as many to those two as they have won).

Would you have said the same if Italy had taken Eng this far tonight (a team who have never beaten ENG and had 60 odd points put on them earlier in the year) because thats Argentina's current level.

Don't think that the objectives for all are the same.... for Eng, Fra & the 3N then yes winning supercedes everything.. because its a realistic objective.

For others performance is just as important... its about building as a team, perhaps not for today but for the future when one day they will be able to come back and get to that winning post first.

I remember watching an ENG test match in the late 90s in SCW first season in charge. They didn't go on to win that match but I like many others saw it as a turning point, a match where they said to their opponents.... we may not have beaten you but just wait as we will conquer all one day.

That game was the 26-26 draw against NZ, there players like Hill, Back, Johnson, Dillaglio have been quoted in saying they began to believe that they could one day become world champions after that performance.... it was the spark which ended in RWC glory 6 years later.

I lied, Arg got a point

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/tables/4776337.stm

All very interesting but my point is and will always be, at RWC, W is all that counts

Only for teams who can actually win the thing not for teams like Tonga, Romania etc.

Irish Curry wrote:Only for teams who can actually win the thing not for teams like Tonga, Romania etc.

With that attitude we are all stuffed....this is borne of the 'it's the taking part that counts' culture that makes me want to hurl

So applying your own logic gatts im assuming you give wales very little chance tonight? faves being what they are and all? Or is the story different for the team you support?

Its like talking to a bobbejaan it really is.. I get more sense out of my son and he is 5 months old.

You can fill your side with bullish so called alpha's with your 'winning mentality' as much as you want yet if you are from one of the lesser rugby nations you ain't going to get victory over the likes of ENG, FRA, SA, AUS & NZ... thats a fact.

If teams like Wales haven't beaten NZ in 60 years inc. players like JPR, Edwards, John, Bennett, Davies, Gibbs, Howley, Quinnell then what chance do others have?

Yep its amazing that the so called greatest player of all time Gareth Edwards never beat NZ in a Welsh jersey... by your accounts a complete loser. I think many would tend to disagree on that point.

So why do you think these teams play then,do Romania have ambitions of lifting the World Cup?

fa and T man

You must be dumber than you look.

ITS A TOURNAMENT!! POINTS MEAN PRIZES!!

i am not surpsied you get sense out of your 5 month old, you are clealry intellectual equals...your arguments are impotent and you clealry don't get it.

I have reiterated my point and stand by it, not labouring the point anymore, can't have a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

T man...yes i completely retract my argument just to fit Wales....they have no hope of winning whatsoever but as long as they score a hundred tries i will be happy if they lose ..JESUS!!!!

The fact is the minnows can play with gay abandonement, there is no fear of losing, because they are going to lose, 99 times out of a 100, but this is good experience for them and exposure, in the past they scored very little points, but these days they seem to be able to beat defences of top teams, and that they must find encouraging, even if their first win may only come in another 50 years.

"i am not surpsied you get sense out of your 5 month old, you are clealry intellectual equals"

hmm, this was written by someone who is apparently mentally superior to most.... by chance were you the economic advisor to Northern Rock?

I agree no point debating any longer with you, as we come from two differing schools of thought... you in disneyland, the rest of us in the real world.

With respect Gatts,I said Argentina had every chance of beating England an winning the group.I also said the 3 sides may well cancell each other out,had Lawrence issued a yellow in the first 2o minutes.We may have had a better game.Had Argentina not lost two key players,they may well have won,we`ll never know.
Prior to the matches played only Argentina had a realistic chance to win.,As you rightly pointed out brave tries but no cigar.
England and Scotland,found enough to win in the End,France tho pretty dire in the second half had enough points to win it.
All Blacks had the game won at half time,until Thorn and Woodcock went off they were well in,control up front.The Front row mafia of both sides were running rings around Clancy.he was working by guess work.
France v All Blacks is the key game,Dan Carter and Skrela both have injuries apparently.
Goal kicking in Dunedin,as I understand it is an enclosed stadium so weather conditions.Unlike at I nvercargill or Wellington is not effected by swirling winds or rain.
JW seemed to use his normal style,just seemed to miss them.Rodriguez just seemed to me,to kick and hope not being the regular kicker.
Someone on another thread blamed the ball,but presumeably they practice the same gilbert balls in training.

Gotta be the weirdest kicking scenario ever in test history though.
33 points left on the field by two seasoned experts. Combine that with a rare closed stadium match.
Only thing i can think of if it is something to do with the stadium is the contained air somehow affected the flight.
But to see wilko line them up one after the other obviously applying all of his corrective processes still splaying them that wide says to me as a former goal kicker something was amiss- the closed stadium being the only unique factor.
Weird.

I said before the tournament began that England can not afford to be complacent.

Argentina was i believe 4th in the world rankins before the tournament started.

England won what was a very error strune game from both sides.

England from now on must, must, up their game from now on, if they want a chance of winning the (WEB ELLIS) trophy. That is a very big a VERY BIG IF.

Gatts wrote:fa and T man

You must be dumber than you look.

ITS A TOURNAMENT!! POINTS MEAN PRIZES!!

i am not surpsied you get sense out of your 5 month old, you are clealry intellectual equals...your arguments are impotent and you clealry don't get it.

I have reiterated my point and stand by it, not labouring the point anymore, can't have a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

T man...yes i completely retract my argument just to fit Wales....they have no hope of winning whatsoever but as long as they score a hundred tries i will be happy if they lose ..JESUS!!!!

Well it was a genuine question actually. I would think the rules are different for the team you support.
I actually think they have a good chance of winning. They need to apply a heap of pressure and part of it will be the lack of SA matchplay and general unfamiliarity of world cup matches for all that could tip it, as we nearly saw yesterday.

In fact I thought yesterday showed exactly why thay can win, contrary to your opinion that the means didnt justify the end, so to speak.

As I said the WCup tends to act as a leveller, bringing teams closer together than the rankings suggest and as we know is the official breeding ground for upsets.

Gatts wrote:look, i am not saying these teams didn't play out of their skins, i acknowledged that their uncompromising styles were admirable but certainly for Argentina these were far from impossible odds and to put it like that is naive.

what i am saying is this is tournament rugby....their tenacity is admirable bu they don't have diddly to show for it apart form the respect of all that witnessed it.

Contrarily we are all dissing France, Scot and Eng for lamentable failures, even NZ got a slating...but the fact is all of these teams have the points and, i repeat, in a tournament THAT is all that matters

Win ugly or lose...Jonners nailed it, they found a way to win and the W is all that matters

would have to completely disagree. Yes winning is what matters in a tournament- and for the top sides in this WC that is true. however, the smaller nations from yesterday, Japan, Namibia and Romania WILL NOT win. this RWC could be played a million times and these teams wont win it, so great performances and improving is the same achievement as winning is for the big guns, imo. I agree winning is important and would have been amazing if Romania or Japan could have got it yesterday, but they were both in the shake up till near the end. also these teams really played like a team, something most of the 6 nations sides dont seem to be able to do half the time.would have loved it if wales could have played like this the last couple of seasons. They are just a little short on quality, but that is something that will surely come in the future as the sport grows in these places. Japan especially were unlucky i think- the score really didnt reflect the game, they were chasing a game to try and win it, and obviously the french can counter like like geniuses.
anyway i really enjoyed the games and hopefully it will carry on being a great WC, however there usually is an upset in sport and since it didnt happen yesterday hope it doesnt happen tonight and SA beat Wales.

sorry Gatts- quoted your different post-meant to do the earlier one but dont know how to change it

Gatts with your reasoning the World Cup should just be between 5 teams? In reality were I live these are the only teams who can win it in all honesty unless wales can do something. This is still the most importent event in these players lives no matter what team they are on.

Irish Curry wrote:Gatts with your reasoning the World Cup should just be between 5 teams? In reality were I live these are the only teams who can win it in all honesty unless wales can do something. This is still the most impotent event in these players lives no matter what team they are on.

Impotent...I couldn't agree more!!!

Me forgeting a letter in a word does not detract from the fact you dont get that these teams aren't going to the world cup to win but to give it their best shot and win the matchs they reasonably have a chance in.