Who do SANZAR fans want their teams to meet in the final from NH?

First topic message reminder :

With a strong possibility of a NH v SH RWC, it would be nice to know who our Southern cousins would want facing their team if they're lucky enough to make the final. No need to be coy about this one and go all "shucks, let's take it one game at a time, etc, etc." Let's assume your team is in the final come end of October. So who do you - as a SH fan - want your team - NZ, SA, or Australia - to meet in the final if it's an NH team? And who's most likely in your view?

State your preferences and why. One of the bookies has the following finalists in order of odds. No odds were provided for Italy.

England v NZ 3/1
Fra v NZ 10/3
Irl v NZ 9/2
Wal v NZ 15/2
Sco v NZ 225/1

Eng v Aus 16/1
Irl v Aus 17/1
Fra v Aus 17/1
Wal v Aus 30/1

Eng v SA 22/1
Irl v SA 25/1
Fra v SA 25/1
Wal v SA 40/1

For the record, they still have odds on all-SH final.
Aus v NZ is 20/1
Aus v SA 25/1
NZ v SA 35/1

Anyway on the subject of switching balls. was johnny Wilkinson trying to take the conversions with a different ball,to the one that the try was scored with on saturday????

That's what I heard aukland, not sure how much truth there is to it but as I understand it JW liked a particular ball and it was the water carriers job to provide him with the correct numbered ball.

Bit naughty isn't it?

PJH
We got got it in the NZ commentary,apparently the English kicking coach was checking where a particular numbered ball was amongst the ballboys.then bringing it out with the kicking tee.

i dont understand why leinster is getting annoyed about that decision- it was months ago and if we talk about that misjudgement by the ref then you also need to take into account the forward pass which the ref missed and ended getting ireland a penalty which they got so in that case the score would be 10-9 to wales.

but anyway leinster whats done is done Poopie happens move on

I think Leinster brought it up because someone else brought up the fact that Wales won the last test (when comparing odds for the quarter final), and he mentioned the match was lost on a poor decision.

aucklandlaurie wrote: PJH
We got got it in the NZ commentary,apparently the English kicking coach was checking where a particular numbered ball was amongst the ballboys.then bringing it out with the kicking tee.

Is that even legal? I'm not sure what the Laws state now, but it used to be that you had to use the ball the try was scored with.

I guess Johnny wanted to use someone elses balls.

You're thinking of Zara Tindall Biltong...

Oooh.


sorry

Not as sorry as Mikey is

Is the story true that he was a bit naughty after the last test?

biltongbek wrote:Is the story true that he was a bit naughty after the last test?

Depends what you define as "naughty" boss, his missus is a hell of good rider and enjoys liberal use of the whip...

Taylorman wrote:

Presently Englands rugby looks awful but so did it last time. I just think they've more to call on when it counts

Really? Because last time i checked theyd won 9 of their last 11 games scoring 34 tries with a run of 18 in a row from the backs ( broken by croft ending a move on the wing)
If their rugby looks awful what does that say about the rest of the NH?

I still dont get why so many people have such a boner for the French all the time. They have been distinctly average for some time now and really gone backwards since their grandslam win. The impression I get form them is that morale is poor and I cant imagine the players have great confidence in the roulette team selections. If anything they are more like England in 2007.

biltongbek wrote:

Going on the last few test matches between these countries Ireland and england should come through and face each other in the semi.

Ireland based on previous recent history should win.

Based on the draw Ireland in my opinion should make the final.

It is irrelevant going in a circle of who's beaten who and back again.

I assume thats why you based your opinion on looking at whos beaten who then

Let`s just say a lot of what has been said is speculative at best.
The mathematical permutations are such that Scotland,Ireland,Wales,
England,Argentina ,could all fail to reach the knockout stages.That Australia
could still top there group.
6Ns ,and 3Ns form means little head to head,sudden death,the weather,
injuries,the Refs all could mean defeat.
There is also a mathematical possibility two NH sides could meet in the final.
Better to take it one stage at a time,you can only beat te side in front of you.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Presently Englands rugby looks awful but so did it last time. I just think they've more to call on when it counts

Really? Because last time i checked theyd won 9 of their last 11 games scoring 34 tries with a run of 18 in a row from the backs ( broken by croft ending a move on the wing)
If their rugby looks awful what does that say about the rest of the NH?

I still dont get why so many people have such a boner for the French all the time. They have been distinctly average for some time now and really gone backwards since their grandslam win. The impression I get form them is that morale is poor and I cant imagine the players have great confidence in the roulette team selections. If anything they are more like England in 2007.

Well aside from trying to be pleasant to one of our vistors who's team had just lost a very tense game I'm referring to pool play only where England have won well on the scoreboard but given the opposition also have their problems, as have many teams. They're not clinical, they're giving away far too many penalties and could be better than they are at this point in the tournament, AND that I think they'll get stronger at knockout time.

Please be realistic,only England vArgentina,Scotlandv Argentina,Ireland v Australia,Wales v Samoa,Wales v South Africa,and France v New Zealand.
Most of the second round matches have just been tier I sides being flat track bullies13,12,11,10 tries against tiriing tier2 sides means zilch.
The only two matches that like for like comparisons can be made forNH was
England and Scotland versus Argentina.One in a dry inside arena,the other in wind and driving rain.all that can be said is one narrowly won,the other narrowly lost.Try fests they were not !!!!

leinsterbaby wrote:

EnglishReign wrote:No way are France the best NH team. What recent results are you referring to?

It's a bit of a no brainer but I'll explain. Over the last ten years France have won as many or more 6 nations titles than the rest of the NH put together. They have won in NZ with a second string team and they have beaten SA. They have also knocked NZ out of two World cups. In fact before Saturday NZ hadn't beaten France in the WC since 1987 when they played out the final. If France had Galthie, Noves or anyother top French coach in place they would be a certainty for the final because they have man for man a much better squad than Ire, Eng and Wal.

Over the last ten years England have won away in NZ, Australia, and SA. They have reached to World cup Finals, winning one of them. So to describe your reasoning as a no brainer is a tad one eyed.

When France get it right or click, they can be the best side in the world buyt for you to ignore their results against England in the 6N or RWC is odd. We definitely have the upper hand over them in recent 6N and have knocked them out of the last two RWC's. In fact they have only beaten us once since 2006. I am not saying that we are much better than France but given recent results, I'd feel more comfortable playing against them than Ireland in the knock out stages. Its fair to say that there isnt much between Walesd, eng, Ire and france, Ireland got a huge win against Oz, wales another impressive "almost victory" against SA, and England have not faced one of the big boys yet but have averted a potential banana skin in Argentina, as did france against Japan.

For NZ France are easily our toughest. Out of the 6, 3 have never beaten nz and wales havnt since 54.
So its france or england for us.
Englands wins over nz have always been close affairs where france have beaten us by some good scores and in style. Its a no brainer for us.
France would be the first team we would pick not to meet. As they expose our gameplan better than the others.

Who would we rather play in a final? The lowest ranked of course. Who wouldnt want the easiest competition in a final.

damngoodOvalball wrote:Over the last ten years England have won away in NZ, Australia, and SA. They have reached to World cup Finals, winning one of them. So to describe your reasoning as a no brainer is a tad one eyed.

Not quite mate. You haven't won in SA since 24 June 2000, and your last win against NZ was in 14 June 2003 with a totally different team.

The only result you may want to use in this argument is your win vs australia in June last year and in november last year.

Biltong
My point was to use the same reasoning as leinster had done to show that France were massively superior to England by listing their notable results over the last ten years. Basically it's worthless. England have beaten France regularly since 2006 and yet this has limited baring on any future games.

I stand corrected re England in SA

@ leinsterbaby

I love the way you base one teams form over another…France gets the benefit of 10 years and England two weeks.

Brilliant

damngoodOvalball wrote:Biltong
My point was to use the same reasoning as leinster had done to show that France were massively superior to England by listing their notable results over the last ten years. Basically it's worthless. England have beaten France regularly since 2006 and yet this has limited baring on any future games.

I stand corrected re England in SA

Yes, i do also agree with you on england vs france, I actually said that earlier in the thread.

damngoodOvalball wrote:

leinsterbaby wrote:

EnglishReign wrote:No way are France the best NH team. What recent results are you referring to?

It's a bit of a no brainer but I'll explain. Over the last ten years France have won as many or more 6 nations titles than the rest of the NH put together. They have won in NZ with a second string team and they have beaten SA. They have also knocked NZ out of two World cups. In fact before Saturday NZ hadn't beaten France in the WC since 1987 when they played out the final. If France had Galthie, Noves or anyother top French coach in place they would be a certainty for the final because they have man for man a much better squad than Ire, Eng and Wal.

Over the last ten years England have won away in NZ, Australia, and SA. They have reached to World cup Finals, winning one of them. So to describe your reasoning as a no brainer is a tad one eyed.

When France get it right or click, they can be the best side in the world buyt for you to ignore their results against England in the 6N o

r RWC is odd. We definitely have the upper hand over them in recent 6N and have knocked them out of the last two RWC's. In fact they have only beaten us once since 2006. I am not saying that we are much better than France but given recent results, I'd feel more comfortable playing against them than Ireland in the knock out stages. Its fair to say that there isnt much between Walesd, eng, Ire and france, Ireland got a huge win against Oz, wales another impressive "almost victory" against SA, and England have not faced one of the big boys yet but have averted a potential banana skin in Argentina, as did france against Japan.

I don't deny you have a better recent head to head against France. Ireland have a better head to head v SA, Ireland have just beaten Australia. Don't think anyone would call Ireland better than SA or Oz would they? Are Ireland better than Wales and England because the head to head is very much in Irelands favour.

My point is man for man France are better than England. Yes they are not performing but they never put out the same team week to week as England did in the 6N. I would fancy England to beat France in the final yet ironically of all the NH teams I think France would have the best chance to win the final if they were to get there because they have better depth and better players in almost all positions than any other NH team IMO.

As we all know a lot of this head to head stuff is about different styles.
No question France give NZ more problems than any other NH team. So in terms of the Q asked.
NZ = France
Aus = England/Ireland
SA = Scotland ? ha ha ha

Scotland because they are crap - but for SANZAR it will not happen.

What do you mean? Do you think no SANZAR team will make the final?

If folk are talking about NH v SH then you should probably include the ref factor too. Ireland have done well when Lawrence is in the middle, England do ok with Owens, France with Rolland. England get hammered by pretty much all SH refs and the 50/50 calls make all the difference in the momentum of a game. What money on Barnes to ref a Nz match and if Wales get Walsh then put money on them....