who has the best chance in the WC out of the NH teams?

First topic message reminder :

Ok so if all did go according to plan and Wales play Ireland in one quarter final with England against France in the other there'd be a NH route to the final

so i was just wondering from what we've seen so far who would you're money be on to make the final?

England have always done well at World Cups and they've once again got a chance to make the final and if they face France in the quarters im sure they would really fancy themselves to at least make the semis as they always seem to beat the frogs

I think this Welsh side is very young and talented, full of athletes capable of competeing with the best but with a lot to prove, they would fancy their chances against the Irish although they'd know that they'd have to be on top of their game, Ireland have a lot of old heads in their side and it would be a case of Youth vs Experience

France.. well if they turn up on the day against England and come away with a win they could go all the way, who knows? but their French anything could happen really

i would imagine for the Irish many of their great players over the years such as BOD, POC and ROG now know that this is their last chance to acheive at a World Cup so they will be desperate to go out with a bang where as possible Quarter final opponents Wales have many players just starting out on the international scene

mystiroakey wrote:are the irish trying to say that the last loss against england doesnt matter?

if it makes you feel more confident i suppose crack on!

It did matter to me and probably mattered a lot to the team at the time. However, Drico wasn't playing and he is our captain and talisman so I would be confident they could turn it around in the semis if the scenario presented itself.

mystiroakey wrote:are the irish trying to say that the last loss against england doesnt matter?

Didn't I just suggest that it did?

It is certainly every bit as significant as Englands last result against Wales .

roddersm wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:are the irish trying to say that the last loss against england doesnt matter?

Didn't I just suggest that it did?

It is certainly every bit as significant as Englands last result against Wales .

But not as much as the next one vs Scotland :/

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

roddersm wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:are the irish trying to say that the last loss against england doesnt matter?

Didn't I just suggest that it did?

It is certainly every bit as significant as Englands last result against Wales .

But not as much as the next one vs Scotland :/

all of which pale in significance to the corner they've just turned against romania

We all agree again

Can someone stop this merry go round I'm getting dizzy - Here's a few pints of Pedigree for the England fans:Ale:

Comfort wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

roddersm wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:are the irish trying to say that the last loss against england doesnt matter?

Didn't I just suggest that it did?

It is certainly every bit as significant as Englands last result against Wales .

But not as much as the next one vs Scotland :/

all of which pale in significance to the corner they've just turned against romania

Romania's 2nd team thanks very much. But hey, dont let me throw a stick in the chariots spokes...

Sorry which of these four teams are unbeaten in the world cup so far?

beshocked wrote:Sorry which of these four teams are unbeaten in the world cup so far?

England and Ireland. But England haven't played any team in the top 7 of the rankings yet. Ireland have.

Feckless Rogue wrote:

beshocked wrote:Sorry which of these four teams are unbeaten in the world cup so far?

England and Ireland. But England haven't played any team in the top 7 of the rankings yet. Ireland have.

Wales and France have played South Africa(lost by 1) and New Zealand(played a lot of 'fringe' players) respectively.

Ireland beat Australia.

Sorry, England have done what to make them look dangerous?

Comfort wrote:

Feckless Rogue wrote:

beshocked wrote:Sorry which of these four teams are unbeaten in the world cup so far?

England and Ireland. But England haven't played any team in the top 7 of the rankings yet. Ireland have.

Wales and France have played South Africa(lost by 1) and New Zealand(played a lot of 'fringe' players) respectively.

Ireland beat Australia.

Sorry, England have done what to make them look dangerous?

I agree. I haave seen nothing from England which makes them a threat. I see them being sent packing next week by the French. That ABs game will stand to France, and Elngland will have Georgia, Romania's 2nds, a rusty Argie team and Scotland.

Hardly the best prep for knock out rugby.

Yawn.

EnglishReign wrote:Yawn.

+ 1

Comfort

reality check to all those who think FRA played fringe players against NZ... 12 of those who started against NZ will start against Tonga in their final pool match.

Surely FRA won't send in their "top" side in against ENG cold?

It looks like this is near to their first XV... and they didn't look impressive.

Boyne and Comfort England might not have looked great so far but they haven't needed to. They are just going through the motions. Picking up two try bonus points and beating Argentina who are dangerous.

Don't forget Argentina helped knock out Ireland out of the 2007 world cup and who have beaten Scotland in this world cup. Argentina came 3rd in the 2007 world cup.

England are always dangerous in world cups. Ask the Aussies and French in particular.

Beating Australia might be a huge deal for Ireland but not for England.

Wales lost again to South Africa, it was a heroic and brave loss but still a loss.

Ireland and Wales might be puffing out their chests over one or two good performances but till they show they have what it takes in proper knockout world cup matches and consistency I will reserve judgement.

England aren't performing well but they are tough to beat.

beshocked wrote:England are always dangerous in world cups. Ask the Aussies and French in particular.

Well apart from Georgia's 2nd team, who else would you ask.....

beshocked wrote:
Beating Australia might be a huge deal for Ireland but not for England.

Really then why was there such a fuss made when you beat them last summer and in November?

fa0019 wrote:Comfort

reality check to all those who think FRA played fringe players against NZ... 12 of those who started against NZ will start against Tonga in their final pool match.

Surely FRA won't send in their "top" side in against ENG cold?

It looks like this is near to their first XV... and they didn't look impressive.

the thing with france is their "fringe" players arent any less individually talented on the whole than the "1st choice" players.

Frances problem at the moment stems from having a mental person at the helm not giving any time to ANY combination to settle.

Im not saying the "1st choice" players would have made a difference against NZ, who looked delicious at times, yes, delicious. But stating a fact that they played a fair few fringe players, which, is quite true? Playing the best scrum half in the NH at 10? Sums up Lievremont for me.


Also, BeShocked, I dont get this, the most important players in this welsh side haven't been to a world cup, so we wont know about their "pedigree" but having watched all of Wales games and Englands games at the moment Wales do look more threatening.

Whether thats through tinted glasses or not is up to debate. But im not the sort of fan who see's things through one eye.

Anyway the big deal is beating them in the SH,while it a was a neutral ground it's still something we haven't done much.Neither have England so they'd be just as happy.

Comfort

Parra is starting again at 10 and unless the world comes down on him he will surely therefore start the QF.

You may call it a fringe side but Lievremont does not.

I think Wales have a good chance myself but before people say Wales England blah blah blah they have the IRE match where they will probably go in a under dogs... they baulked at the pressure vs. SA, IRE held their nerve. In KO games I'd go with the team who generally do not flinch... that means goodbye France, goodbye Wales.

Scotland - who else - yawn !!!!!!!!!

Guys can we save the My dads bigger than your dad(England vs Ireland) thing til we are actually going to play each other?

Could be France vs Wales for all we know, both good teams!

Comfort it doesn't really matter if Wales look more threatening than England in the pool stages. You don't get style or performance points. You get points for winning and scoring 4 tries.

Roddersm it's funny you mention Georgia as they almost beat you in 2007.

asoreleftshoulder firstly it was back to back wins. 2ndly in the match at Twickenham England hammered Australia - they didn't just beat them in a tryless match.

Basically it's much bigger and more surprising than England beating Australia as England have defeated Australia 3 times in world cups.

Apologies I should have worded it better - it isn't as big a deal for England but it would still be very good.

Your right on that beshocked us English were pretty chuffed at the Australia result in their backyard.. But we were over the moon about the result at Twickenham.. I would know as I was there, never seen Twickenham so alive! An rightly so I think, England were fantastic that day.

A 17 point win at home versus a 9 point win on neutral territory in wet weather.I don't see much difference to be honest.

Yes that wording I'd agree with,it's a bigger deal for us but more for the fact that we've never done anything of note in a WC before than for beating Australia.

asoreleftshoulder that's what I mean. Again I apologise for the wording. As good results go of course they are similar but it is more of a big deal to you Irish. Rightly so too!

I would say that all four teams are close in terms of ability. England hold the slight edge because of previous world cup performances. You might call previous world cup performances unimportant but they are generally a good benchmark.

If they weren't you wouldn't have seen England,France, Australia,South Africa and New Zealand frequently at the business end of the world cup.

beshocked wrote:
England are always dangerous in world cups. Ask the Aussies and French in particular.

Beating Australia might be a huge deal for Ireland but not for England.

Wales lost again to South Africa, it was a heroic and brave loss but still a loss.

Ireland and Wales might be puffing out their chests over one or two good performances but till they show they have what it takes in proper knockout world cup matches and consistency I will reserve judgement.

England aren't performing well but they are tough to beat.

Not picking sides anymore but thats a fair point ,England have indeed beaten the Wobblies not once but twice in the last 12 months ,home and away (my beloved Boks havent even done that this year or last year for that matter ) So yes while the feat was impressive by Ireland i doubt England will be overly worried

Whats good about the split is the NH get to ponder over the king of the castle on the NH side and for our side, well, last man of the 3N standing after the semi final is the SH rep for the final.

Kieran Read is back this week so AB's other than some needing a bit of rest from the last game are now at full strength.

So at this point in time Henry's management of the team through the 3N and to this point has to be applauded.

So does SA's. Although they could have handled the Pacific leg a little better by limiting those home to genuine injuries- clearly not all were injured- but given there were several- they've now come out of it well also.

My only reservation with SA is that Wales have been their only test since the AB match in Port Elizabeth and for them they only just got through it. The concern is whether the relative weaknesses of Fiji- hammered by all teams in the group so far (bar Namibia) and Namibia has given them a false sense of where they are. Samoa will be a better pointer for SA's form and SA can't relax as if Samoa win with tries SA could at a pinch be going home.

Oz have just proved that the combination of playing all their players and having no back ups was always going to derail if injuries hit. I posted that constantly through the 3N and now its been realised.

Unfortunately Deans had no choice, but they did get a 3N title out of it. The road for them is the toughest, but for SA and NZ thats the worst position we probably want them in. They'll come back firing given half a chance.

Losing Palu is huge, but at least Ioane, Mitchell and Pocock are back next game or two- the 'famous five' back on the field makes a real difference to this team.

Well taylor the same could be said bout the AB tho? They've only played France of late and even then they werent given a thorough testing . If anyone hasnt been roughed up properly its the AB .

Bullsbok wrote:So yes while the feat was impressive by Ireland i doubt England will be overly worried

But they might be worried by the fact that they were beaten by Ireland in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010 and 2011.

Yep (Bullsbok) , although we did have the 3N final at full strength as well. But yes fair comment- We also could have it turned on on us next two weeks- a fired Samoa and then Oz compared to Canada and Argie is certainly going to put SA both under pressure and test them fully whereas we should really canter through both.

Problem with that is- I don't know which is better. For SA tough matches are guaranteed but so is the possibility of a loss. For us we should get a good run plus some resistance from Argie given its knockout, and theyre not too bad.

Injuries probably make the real difference. Both our teams I feel are carrying little ticking bombs around in them I that they've injuries just under the surface ready to pop again.

Which scenario would you prefer Bullsbok, other than the potential to lose of course. Probably something more in the middle I suppose?

Canada is yet to play us Bullsbok. The lumberjacks will give Kieran Read a good comeback game in terms of physicality and Argentina will also provide a stern test up front. Samoa and Australia are infinitely much tougher prospects but the cumulative effect must be a tiring one. How much will either have in the tank for the semi?

The draw before the Ireland match meant we were most likely to meet SA in the semis. Nothing really has changed with either Australia or SA in the semis. What has pleased me is that the ABs have grown throughout the tournament and have played better in each game with still a lot of room for improvement.

To be well done, or underdone, that is the question. As a man who likes his steak bloody, I´ll plump for the latter. What is more important for me is our attitude. If we enter the breakdown battle focused and aggressive, I don´t think any team can live with us. If we are bullied or pressured on and off the ball, we suddenly look very beatable.

I think south africa took out of these games what they needed to and no more, it is a shame we couldn't play Wales after a few pool matches, we were not on form, Samoa we must aim not to give away tries and if we do I will feel confident about OZ

Yes, Oz proved that in Brisbane Kia. We looked annoyingly distracted an 'un-keen' while Oz were tearing in all around us. Just can't understand the mindset we had in that match. Hopefully it came at the right time for the boys, and Henry. If we have another of those efforst we'll get done.

Morning Biltong... man you're overusing some of your hours arent you. The missus wont be happy with you by the weekend.. fell asleep last night when RubyGuby got us all going. Crack up.

Feckless Rogue wrote:

Bullsbok wrote:So yes while the feat was impressive by Ireland i doubt England will be overly worried

But they might be worried by the fact that they were beaten by Ireland in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010 and 2011.

England will be praying Italy win and if not Wales. Ireland have big game players, a Lion core, and they have their tails up...they went from 4 straight losses to a win v the Tri Nations Champs in a RWC in a matter of weeks. England have had no real test at RWC, looked unconvincing against Romania, can take little from Georgia and despite their record of success at RWC are flattering to deceive. If they do not absolutely flatten Scotland the French will take them so this will all be academic.

Taylorman wrote:Yes, Oz proved that in Brisbane Kia. We looked annoyingly distracted an 'un-keen' while Oz were tearing in all around us. Just can't understand the mindset we had in that match. Hopefully it came at the right time for the boys, and Henry. If we have another of those efforst we'll get done.

Morning Biltong... man you're overusing some of your hours arent you. The missus wont be happy with you by the weekend.. fell asleep last night when RubyGuby got us all going. Crack up.

I agree i sensed NZ could have easily just woke up from the slumber and ripped Aus a new one int he space of 15min but they just never woke up

England are not pool specialists though Gatts. NZ are the Phelps of pool rugby and look how much that has served them. England prefer to splash and fumble around in the paddling pool and look boisterous but unconvincing.

Once the knockouts start, they suddenly seem focused. Wales have had to play well because of the opposition. The group of dearth has meant England hasn´t needed to raise its game yet.

What´s the difference between a bar and the England rugby team? The England team so far has more coasters. But that can change very quickly.

Morning Taylorman, hi Kia. Although we didn't start well we have shown a similar pattern to NZ in improving and building momentum with every game. Kia I wouldn't think fatigue should come into the picture for the Boks, since the semi finals of the Super XV most of them were off for in total more than 10 weeks, by the time we hopefully meet the AB`s the guys should all be well oiled and match fit, obviously barring injuries.

There are a few aspects of our game that is in good standing and all crucial for knock out matches, our discipline, our defence, and our goal kicking.

Our forwards are looking good, our subs seem to be working well, on attack we will be more conservative than Oz and NZ but I believe we have shown a different aspect in our execution of attack play

Difference between a bar and England rugby team gag very apt.

Agree they will focus but look who that focus is against. France. Then Ireland or Wales.

I think England look sloppy and cavalier....I think France are due one, Ireland are expecting one, and Wales, dare i say it with Fiji coming up, are building to one

biltongbek wrote:by the time we hopefully meet the AB`s the guys should all be well oiled

Would make it easier to break tackles.


Sorry.

What was unconvincing about England's win over Romania?! Wales and Ireland hardly set the tournament alight against Samoa and USA. France aren't looking great and SA were sluggish until they spanked Namibia. Only NZ have had a fully convincing start.

Not forgetting tri-nations champs Australia, who have stuttered their way along.

Given previous RWCs so too are England due one Gatts. I won´t deny it, it´s going to be very close. And what a great advertisement for rugby with all such even teams.

Agree Biltong, SA look good. Australia though are in the due one camp as well. The fatigue I had in mind was more from the Oz game. A big ask to play Oz and then, if all going well, play NZ the following week. Not impossible by any means but certainly daunting.

One things for sure, I have cancelled all social engagements for the coming weeks, my Spanish wife knows I am not to be disturbed in the mornings by any visitors and she regularly reminds me that Spain won last year´s World Cup and that this is the year of the kiwi in the Chinese calendar and if I were to ever have an accident, do I happen to have the number of Richie McCaw. She cried for a day when she found out Dan Carter got married. Other than that she can´t name any players but she does a mean haka when I don´t tidy away the breakfast dishes.

EnglishReign wrote:What was unconvincing about England's win over Romania?! Wales and Ireland hardly set the tournament alight against Samoa and USA. France aren't looking great and SA were sluggish until they spanked Namibia. Only NZ have had a fully convincing start.

Well if our performance vs Fiji was sluggish I can't wait to see us at full tilt

biltongbek wrote:

EnglishReign wrote:What was unconvincing about England's win over Romania?! Wales and Ireland hardly set the tournament alight against Samoa and USA. France aren't looking great and SA were sluggish until they spanked Namibia. Only NZ have had a fully convincing start.

Well if our performance vs Fiji was sluggish I can't wait to see us at full tilt

Until Fiji then, whatever. I hoped that would've gone unnoticed. Point is no team has had three excellent games.

OMG the saes are out in force with their delusionist theories again-get real -this aint gonna be your WC-nor might I add will it be ours .

EnglishReign wrote:

biltongbek wrote:

EnglishReign wrote:What was unconvincing about England's win over Romania?! Wales and Ireland hardly set the tournament alight against Samoa and USA. France aren't looking great and SA were sluggish until they spanked Namibia. Only NZ have had a fully convincing start.

Well if our performance vs Fiji was sluggish I can't wait to see us at full tilt

Until Fiji then, whatever. I hoped that would've gone unnoticed. Point is no team has had three excellent games.

Well you have promulgated my point into a point with no point.

Of course no team has had 3 excellent games. thats not the point.

my point was england are untested and look sloppy. Not talkign about wales but just so you know i think we look brittle and often witless.

senghenydd1913 wrote:OMG the saes are out in force with their delusionist theories again-get real -this aint gonna be your WC-nor might I add will it be ours .

Examples?

Gatts wrote:

EnglishReign wrote:

biltongbek wrote:

EnglishReign wrote:What was unconvincing about England's win over Romania?! Wales and Ireland hardly set the tournament alight against Samoa and USA. France aren't looking great and SA were sluggish until they spanked Namibia. Only NZ have had a fully convincing start.

Well if our performance vs Fiji was sluggish I can't wait to see us at full tilt

Until Fiji then, whatever. I hoped that would've gone unnoticed. Point is no team has had three excellent games.

Well you have promulgated my point into a point with no point.

Of course no team has had 3 excellent games. thats not the point.

my point was england are untested and look sloppy. Not talkign about wales but just so you know i think we look brittle and often witless.

I know England were poor in the first two but they were at least a bit convincing on Saturday. I decided to go off on one, just adding some perspective.

EnglishReign wrote:

Gatts wrote:

EnglishReign wrote:

biltongbek wrote:

EnglishReign wrote:What was unconvincing about England's win over Romania?! Wales and Ireland hardly set the tournament alight against Samoa and USA. France aren't looking great and SA were sluggish until they spanked Namibia. Only NZ have had a fully convincing start.

Well if our performance vs Fiji was sluggish I can't wait to see us at full tilt

Until Fiji then, whatever. I hoped that would've gone unnoticed. Point is no team has had three excellent games.

Well you have promulgated my point into a point with no point.

Of course no team has had 3 excellent games. thats not the point.

my point was england are untested and look sloppy. Not talkign about wales but just so you know i think we look brittle and often witless.

I know England were poor in the first two but they were at least a bit convincing on Saturday. I decided to go off on one, just adding some perspective.

excellent, random dummy spitting should be a national sport, NZ might win the World championship

EnglishReign wrote:

senghenydd1913 wrote:OMG the saes are out in force with their delusionist theories again-get real -this aint gonna be your WC-nor might I add will it be ours .

Examples?

you butty