All Blacks v France...

First, before expanding on my title, need to say Wales / Samoa today was too tight for comfort. I'm as hopeful as most that we will see a Wales / Ireland QF with the prospect of meeting another of the 6 Nations sides in the Semis, as we (Wales) have beaten these sides and as such wont have the physiological problems that we get when meeting SH sides, but there is a long way to go yet and discussed on other threads. So just going to leave my fingers crossed and wait and see.....

...but back to the title.

Some posted that the All Blacks may decide to throw the game against France to ensure an easier passage through to a final. If France think the same, we could end up with the most boring (yet humorous maybe) game ever in a RWC. Can just see it know.... Ma Nonu creeping up behind Carter and tying his boot laces together for a laugh.... you may even see McCaw staying on side at the breakdown... Can you believe that. How ridiculous is that going to be.

Actually, I don't think either side will go out to loose a game on purpose, but it must be in the back of their minds.

Any thoughts....

The All Blacks are at home and this is a massive tournament for them. There is NO chance they will even consider playing any sort of weakened team for this one. They'll want to avenge their prior two exits to France, and thump them, and they should. France are a disorganised mess at the moment, and have been outplayed by Japan and Canada for fairly significant periods of their first two matches. The All Blacks should win this one. They'll face either Argentina or Scotland in the QF, and (it saddens me to say) neither of those teams have the fire power to beat the All Blacks. Not sure how that really equates to an easier draw than playing England in the QF. Yes, there's a potentially easier semi-final to play, but both Wales and Ireland have played some great stuff this tournament, and both have pretty formidable packs. I don't know how much easier playing Ireland would be than playing South Africa or Australia (the side Ireland have just beaten).

The draw shouldn't matter to the All Blacks. They should just go out and wallop France.

Anyone else feel that France may be targeting a win over NZ? I thought if anything they'd rest players for the All Blacks game and concentrate on the rest to secure 2nd. However, they rested players for Canada instead so will we see a full strength France for the NZ game???

Regardless of whether France rest players this French squad is not good enough to get close to NZ.

Griff wrote:Anyone else feel that France may be targeting a win over NZ? I thought if anything they'd rest players for the All Blacks game and concentrate on the rest to secure 2nd. However, they rested players for Canada instead so will we see a full strength France for the NZ game???

They did it not so long ago and they looked very fluent today. Definitely will have the AB's taking notice...!

France had better not do anything silly, like beat NZ. Don't fancy the All Blacks next round!

Strange how some think France played really well today. I thought they were very patchy against a decent (and hardworking) Canadian side. Don't forget Canada are about on a level with Fiji, Georgia, Japan and Tonga.

I don't think NZ (or anyone else) will be losing much sleep over their performances so far.

As ive said several times on these boards nz will likely dispatch france easily.
There will be no throwing of games as thats not the nz way.
Some have said france may topple nz based on previous knockout matches.
Here the scenario is different. France will know that by winning their last they are in.
They know they can usually muster one big match each world cup- usually the abs.
Then they tend to drop off.
They wont waste that big one on a pool match.
Plus when looking at the recent media events around them they dont appear settled.
ABs are back at eden park and a statement will be made against france.
Partly as redemption for 2007. Partly as a way of 'marking their territory' so to speak.
It will be our only real hitout against a top team before the quarters so if france arent prepared then i think theyre going to cop it big time.

Really can't see France doing anything against the ABs this time. Which is often (but not reliably) when France are at their most dangerous.

ABs by lots or France by less than 7...

Cowshot wrote:ABs by lots or France by less than 7...

Is that what is called "edging your bets"


I wasn't suggesting that either side will go out to lose, was trying to paint an amusing picture if they did

Lets be realistic people this is not a knockout stage game ,the AB are under no pressure they could lose and possibly win the WC by losing but new zealand wouldnt forgive them for chucking a game .France are going to get hammered simple as that.

You can chuck hypothetical stories in the air all you like but the reality is NZ is too good too clinical and have too much class. End of story next question

Is that what is called "edging your bets"

Well, sort of. (I think it's "hedging", btw)

NZ look miles better. But are you 100% sure the French won't beat the ABs?

You can chuck hypothetical stories in the air all you like but the reality is NZ is too good too clinical and have too much class. End of story next question

That's what lots of sensible people said last time...

I'm not saying the French will win. I'm saying they are French.

France is the Abs boogey team, it seems that alot of the times when it comes to RWC's France have knocked NZ out of the tournament.

However it should be a cracking game.

I would not however like to predict what the score would be.

i agree if this was the last 8 then it'd be 50/50 on both sides maybe 51/50 in favour of France thanks to the bogey team factor

Games at Eden Park.

ONLY team to beat the AB's at Eden Park since 1986 is.........France. In 1994.

So they don't just do it in World cups.

In saying that...they wont win this one...wrong dynamics...

They've also lost the last 9 from 11 since the 2007 win so its not all one sided...

The Ireland result has really sealed the French match against NZ.

Like Scotland in 2007 they'll drop the match for longer term reasons- this time to go into the easier side of the draw with the familiar England, Wales and Ireland rather than the Oz, SA side.

So NZ ends up with a fizzer pool again... wish teams would just play to their rankings sometimes!

I can see France playing a weakened side for this match and resting other players, but as for the All Blacks I am not sure they would want to lose again to France in front of their home crowd, whether it gives them an easier run to the final or not..

NZ won't lose this weekend. Well it took all their efforts with their very best side to get a narrow win in 2007 so they're hardly likely try and win at Eden Park when a better draw results from a loss.

We could throw on all our seconds and take whatever falls but that means no play at all for our top side other than Canada.

Just makes a mockery of 'pool' rugby for us again where we effectively have no opposition again. Tonga I suppose gave us a bit of a run.

Do the All Blacks get Read back against France? And McCaw/Carter.

I think all the talk about these teams deliberately throwing the match, or at least playing second string players, is nonsensical. Both teams will throw everything they have into the match. Why? Because they both know they are good enough to win, both know they can win, both want to win, and because it is the right thing to do. They are in the RWC to win, not to play silly games to manipulate themselves into what might be percieved as preferered draws. Upsets can happen anywhere and any time. So losing has no value (never does). No teams know this better than the ABs and the French. So both will be on their guard and will go balls-to-the-wall to win. As they should.

And, not for nuthin', I can't wait for this one.

Don`t you?history `s against you,S14 was devalued 2007,RWC 2007,
Lions 2009,3Ns 2011.
They are in it to win a RWC,not just a pool match,If you were France would
you rather face SA or AUS.and NZ again,or Wales ,Ireland ,England, Scotland, or Argentina.
IF you are in the right side of the draw you could win a RWC without mee
ting any of the favoured sides as in 2007.
That does`nt devalue it for theream concerned,they can only beat those in front of them.
My ethos is you play your best available side All The time BUT I am probably in a majority of one.

doctor_grey wrote:I think all the talk about these teams deliberately throwing the match, or at least playing second string players, is nonsensical. Both teams will throw everything they have into the match. Why? Because they both know they are good enough to win, both know they can win, both want to win, and because it is the right thing to do. They are in the RWC to win, not to play silly games to manipulate themselves into what might be percieved as preferered draws. Upsets can happen anywhere and any time. So losing has no value (never does). No teams know this better than the ABs and the French. So both will be on their guard and will go balls-to-the-wall to win. As they should.

Yes but thats not our reality Doctor.
In 2007 Scotland were in the same position. To qualify, they made sure their top players were not injured so they would qualify in their last match and put out a second team who got thrashed 40-0.

France sent a second team to NZ 3 months before the World cup because they saw it as a waste of time and got beaten 61-10. SA sent a complete second string team to NZ during the 3N in order that they give World cup players as chance. So you tell me?

Where does this sentence fit in in reference to the above scenarios...when the reality is its actually more common that not.

"I think all the talk about these teams deliberately throwing the match, or at least playing second string players, is nonsensical."

Sorry, mate. I think we will have to disagree on this. We are talking about the RWC so the Super 14 doesn't come into it. Not the same thing. By the same token, I don't recall the Lions devaluing any of the tests in 2009. Thought they went full out in each.

Maybe it is just my view of competition, but I have never seen value in losing deliberately. I know it sounds trite, but I truly believe winning and losing are habits, and have a momentum all their own. Losing, especially deliberately, builds questions within a team and doubts about what a team is all about.

If I am France, I would rather face the Boks or Wallabies after beating the ABs, than to face a more familiar opponent after giving a match away. And if I am the ABs, I would be happy to face the Boks or Wallabies especially if I have a big win over France in my pocket. Besides, losing deliberatrely in these pool matches guarantees nothing.

So Doctor Scotland in 2007 at EXACTLY the same match bears no resemblance?

Taylor, didn't think I hit a chord. Not my intent. Right now, we are in the RWC, the biggest competition and winning it is the ultimate goal (at least for the major nations). The reality in Rugby right now is that everything is subordinate to winning the RWC. All other competitions are sometimes sacrificed for the RWC. Thats how big it has become. Unfortunately this includes club/franchise competitions, the June/November Internationals, and just recently the Six and Tri Nations.

But in the RWC, the only goal is to win and there is nothing to save the players for, and no reason to run the risk of losing one's edge. This is why winning each and every match is vital. Fall off one's horse even once and it becomes harder to get back on. Not that it can't be done - England in 2007 the most recent example. But they didn't lose to the Boks on purpose. They were soundly beaten and used that as part of their motivation.

I remember when Scotland sacrificed their match against the ABs in 2007. Didn't gain them anything in the end, did it? Just one extra RWC match. So there was no real benefit.

No probs. Just waiting to see whether France will do the same. I guess with us whether its world cup or not teams are always sending seconds. We've had so many teams tour here where the better players are left at home its just annoying. The we get the 'well you shouldnt be so good then...be thankful with what youve got etc...' comments.

Anyway, I think the relative strengths of the teams these days will give us some good competition- even Georgia looked the real mccoy- if I'd put Black jerseys on them they looked as though they wouldnt look out of place so perhaps its not so bad anymore.

Plus I believe GH has taken this into account in his prep so should have something for it.

Didn't mean to rant as its not as bad as that.

I just wish for ONCE we would get a tough pool game. Since 1987 only one has come within 6 points. England in 91.

Now on this we absolutely agree. I believe it is a travesty that the ABs don't see more full strength teams. Especially visiting NZ. Most of the time the excuses are simply that - excuses. But now in this RWC I am sure France will send out their best players and go for the win.

To me the Scotland example doesn't work becasuse they felt they weren't going to beat the ABs whether they had their best players in the match or not. So they had already mentally cashed out of wining the RWC and were only looking to get out of the Pools. Which they probably would have done anyway. The difference now is that France always feel they have a shot to win the RWC and probably have their own historical baggage about not winning it yet. So, back to the start of our discussion, this is why I believe France will want to win at all costs.

I hope so...as then we get the best of both worlds. A tough win or loss would mean we get our tough pool match and/ or the (relatively) easier draw.

I'm good with that...

cool.

France are due one and i think NZ will get their tough pool game. France will raise their game as they always do on big occasions.
There seems to be serious unrest amongst the coaches and France will be either at their mercurial best or outgunned and outclassed.

Cool.. looking forward to it anyway.

Still recovering from a great weekends rugby. I never really realised how good some teams are. Previous world cups the gulf was so obvious with some but the individual and collective talent of some of the players and teams is mind boggling.

If this is what the world cup does for some nation's rugby the the sports in a very good shape.

Doctor Grey,the Lions 2009 was devalued,because NO Boks or Prospective
Boks played until the test matches.The intinary instead of the traditional
Provincial warm up games,interspersed with test matches previously done on tours.ALL the Provincial matches were played PRIOR to the test matches.
Then Lions weakened by injuries,faced a Boks side fully fit,even then it was a close run thing.
It is no longer playup.play up and play the game,the end justifies the means.
There was a time it would be unthikable for international sides not to field there best available sides.
I am accused of of rose tinted glasses.,and living in the past because I deplore the methods employed.
Of course now with 22 men teams,player workloads,etc everything is different.I fully understand that ,but it seems now players who are supposedly superfit.
Or sustaining niggling injuries are unable to play a full game,I have written before about cancelling 6N and 4Ns in a RWC year.
To stop these shenagans,or Mind games when 21 players are stricken with injuries then recover overnight just before a RWC.
Or players named to start a match,then withdrawn overnight to save them for big games etc.
Whatever France side runs out it willbe a good one,and it looks that NZ [Carter aside] will be in contention for selection.

Mi amigo,
I don't think we are that far off from each other. Rugby has changed. A lot. And, like many of us, there are parts of it we like, and parts we don't like. As a orthopaedic surgeon, I have treated Rugby players, and athletes in general, for a number of years. So I am able to see the changes in our sport of from their point of view as well as ours (club level player, kids coach, fan).

But as a fan, you are 100% entitled to have rose coloured glasses (especially if you support England - rose glasses!). And those of us who have memories do live a bit in the past - I think that's normal. And we don't have to like all the changes in the game. I also think having a historical perspective helps with any discussion. Not that it makes anything right or wrong, but perspective (life) is always important, eh?

From the players point of view, professionalism has cut out the nasty bit of the sham-amateur era. They have much better medical care, training facilities, playing facilities, and can earn a living for a while. All because there is money to enable that. On the other hand, having money in the game brings in a whole new set of issues. Exactly the things you are concerned about. Players playing or not playing, Tests being reduced in value, too many matches, TV driving the sport, and so on.

So, here we are, back to France - New Zealand. I fully expect France to go out with their top team and try to mash the ABs in their own turf. And, in return, I expect the ABs to go out and try to cut the baguettes off the French. Anything less will reinforce all the negatives you mentioned and is almost unthinkable for a top team in the RWC.

"As ive said several times on these boards nz will likely dispatch france easily."

I bet you said that in 2007 along with a lot of other kiwis.

I say win everything and to hell with who we have to beat. Once you go down the dark road of throwing tactically games, you open yourself up to losing unintentionally afterwards because you´ve lost momentum.

That quarter final of either Argentina and Scotland seems easier than the other one. Go for the win. We´ve beaten France just as many times as they have beaten us so flick the bogey into oblivion and send out a message of intent to the rest. Get Read back for the Canada game and then start playing the A squad from the quarterfinals. No SBW on the wing, no tinkering with finding your best players and trust in those you´ve selected to do the right job.

kia kaha

Yep im with you kia. Win at eden park this year and problem solved.
And yes englandgloryfornever i did say it in 07 and the 9 times out 10 eeve beaten france since. Your point being? that we can't win ever perhaps? gee. Hadnt realised that.

If the draw was to put Australia in NZs quarter with the Boks in the SF then I could see some reason for at least contemplating not giving the France game the full effort, but that's not the case - indeed, if anything this should make the ABs passage slightly easier as their SF opponents will have had to get through a much harder QF than was expected.

Kia
Surely the ABs normal RWC selection policy means that Mulliaina will be the one picked out of position - normally would be as a centre, but perhaps this time Henry will look for a different option and give him the numer 10 jersey?

Don´t get me started mate. Mils is a rock and I don´t think we´ll see Dagg take his place. I like the idea of Dagg on the left wing, Kahui, SBW and Weepu as back reserves and no room for Slade. That´s about as left field as I´d like to see.

You can´t split up Nonu and Smith but Henry wants SBW somewhere on the field. That scares me as wing is all there´s left for him to go and that is not his specialist position. Earle Kirton wanted him to play there so that alone should be a warning bell for Henry.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:I say win everything and to hell with who we have to beat. Once you go down the dark road of throwing tactically games, you open yourself up to losing unintentionally afterwards because you´ve lost momentum.
kia kaha

Exactly.

Yes kirton was the main instigator of the 15 at 13 run. Pops his ugly head up every 4 years and comes up with some left field remedy.
In saying that i think dagg will start and sbw will sub as wing. Mils had just not played well for a very long time.

Yes but I feel Dagg, despite being able to pull off an amazing play, still has a tendency to do something silly and get exposed and turned over. Mils is not in the best attacking form but defensively and inside the AB half he is usually Mr Reliable. McCaw is not in the best form either but you´ve got to have experience in the side in my view.

If I see SBW pop up at fullback I´ll blow a new ring.

Fair enough re mils. Its really form versus tried and true. Id just hate to see in any aftermath that it was obvious mils was out of touch. Similar to howlett last cup. The form wing. Mils didnt do a lot against oz either.
Next two games will give us a better picture.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Yes but I feel Dagg, despite being able to pull off an amazing play, still has a tendency to do something silly and get exposed and turned over. Mils is not in the best attacking form but defensively and inside the AB half he is usually Mr Reliable. McCaw is not in the best form either but you´ve got to have experience in the side in my view.

If I see SBW pop up at fullback I´ll blow a new ring.

Mils has lost a yard of pace. It's affecting his defence and hampering his attack. I think this is just about one year too far for him, legend though he is. The problem with a sluggish Mils at FB is only made worse by a sluggish Kahui on one wing. We're missing the pacey straight runner for all the guile we've added. I read today that Fruean and Crockett were training with the AB squad, which is interesting in itself that Gear too is not filling the tackle bag roll and keeping in touch with the game plan. He's clearly been set out to pasture. Nonu all over again? That leaves us with only bad boy Guildford to bring in if the test run against France goes the shape of the pomaceous fruit.

Just the Christchurch thing I think GG.
I also think SBW coming on as a sub after half time on the wing will be key. Thats the periods where our rabbits get caught in the headlights and we have periods where nothing happens. Go back to every loss and that period after half time is practically scoreless.

With SBW on then something will happen. Whether its him, or room for those around him it will change the thinking and remove the headlights thing, add some edge so to speak. Not a great fan of his but he's the type that will ensure people will be on the toes, in the moment.

My fear is the 'nothing happens' period after a reasonable lead. Look at the start of the second halves against France 2007 and Oz 2003, France 1999- all periods we lost ground badly. 1995 and 91 as well. Even happened in 87 but we were well ahead at that point.

France look to be heading down the throwing the game route by playing an entirely new half back pairing of Yachvili and Parra, don't think I've ever seen Parra at 10 before, it could only happen with Lievremont...

Hope France and NZ go at it 100% and give us a cracker.Too close to call.If Carter doesnt make it I would edge towards France.Cannot wait.

Le XV de départ : Traille - Clerc, Rougerie, Mermoz, Médard - (o) Parra, (m) Yachvili - Bonnaire, Picamoles, Dusautoir - Nallet, Papé - Ducalcon, Szarzewski, Poux

Remplaçants : Servat, Barcella, Pierre, Harinordoquy, Trinh-Duc, Estabanez, Heymans

Very interesting. Expect Kaino and Nonu to run the inside channel all day. Dusautoir will have to replicate his 07 QF form to protect Parra from having Kiwi footprints all over him.

After all the talk of France throwing this one, they choose an entirely untested half-backs combo and we still can't tell if this is their best team! Class.

Based on form so far I feel it is their best side.

TheGreyGhost wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Yes but I feel Dagg, despite being able to pull off an amazing play, still has a tendency to do something silly and get exposed and turned over. Mils is not in the best attacking form but defensively and inside the AB half he is usually Mr Reliable. McCaw is not in the best form either but you´ve got to have experience in the side in my view.

If I see SBW pop up at fullback I´ll blow a new ring.

Mils has lost a yard of pace. It's affecting his defence and hampering his attack. I think this is just about one year too far for him, legend though he is. The problem with a sluggish Mils at FB is only made worse by a sluggish Kahui on one wing. We're missing the pacey straight runner for all the guile we've added. I read today that Fruean and Crockett were training with the AB squad, which is interesting in itself that Gear too is not filling the tackle bag roll and keeping in touch with the game plan. He's clearly been set out to pasture. Nonu all over again? That leaves us with only bad boy Guildford to bring in if the test run against France goes the shape of the pomaceous fruit.

Not sure how I feel about that to be honest if it's true. Other teams are banned from bringing players into training sessions who aren't part of the 30-man squad. If there's an injury to an All Black player and Fruean and Crockett come in they have an advantage over other nations injury replacements now.