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

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.

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

Hmm Romania ranked 18th have never beaten England
USA ranked 17th never beaten Ireland
Samoa ranked 10th have beaten Wales every time tehy have faced them in a world cup. There is a major difference in quality between this samoa side and the USA or Romania

That was a very good game for wales were showing some very good form building up to this game with Fiji. If we beat them convincingly as I expect we will have put to bed two of our bogey teams, and got a record score against a minnow. Whilst we should have won the game against teh boks its looking like a blessing in disguise as we avoid the southern hemisphere teams now, except maybe argentina of course

senghenydd1913 wrote:

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

oh ffs we've got a right one here...day pass from the care home is it laddie?

aye

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 .

This is a good example of 'it doesn't matter if we get beat as long as the English do too' mentality.

I guess it's a variation on a theme. Not much of a life though.

3 bald men fighting over a comb

this care home is fantastic-full of interesting rugby folk with a great knowledge of rugby-not may saes tho-strange that.

I meant specific, quoted examples. Clearly just some ill-informed stereotyping then.

EnglishReign wrote:I meant specific, quoted examples. Clearly just some ill-informed stereotyping then.

pedant!-look now I cannot be held responsible for any of my posts as in this place of confinement(care home) I just quote the "yuman rites " act and get away with everything

England have the best chance and will beat France. I think Wales have the nuts to beat Ireland in the quarters regardless of previous history. I also think that if Wales and England face each other in a semi then Wales will have come through harder games and will be battle hardened. I think it would be a brutal match but Wales would come out on top. If it's France Wales would lose. By the way SA will be in the final

I think it is very amusing that the same people who measure RWC pedigree so highly also probably consider New Zealand as favourites this year even though they lack the "pedigree" of three times finalists..

"I think it is very amusing that the same people who measure RWC pedigree so highly also probably consider New Zealand as favourites this year even though they lack the "pedigree" of three times finalists.."

How is that amusing- factors need to be weighed up. NZ are at home and are so good it tips the balance,

life isnt black and white- remeber that- to be considered you need to take all the information- process it and come out with a conclusion

Italy

maestegmafia wrote:I think it is very amusing that the same people who measure RWC pedigree so highly also probably consider New Zealand as favourites this year even though they lack the "pedigree" of three times finalists..

No but I do consider 2 grandslams in how ever many decades it was as evidence of 6 nations pedigree

And if I'm honest I think 8 out of 10 Cats prefer Whiskas but Im not quite sure of the validity and reliability factors associated with the study.

RubyGuby wrote:And if I'm honest I think 8 out of 10 Cats prefer Whiskas but Im not quite sure of the validity and reliability facors associated with the study.

8 out of 10 owners who expressed a preference stated that their cats preferred....its like 8 out of 10 welshmen who express a preference say " so long as we beat England" doesnt mean their team doesnt care about winning other games equally

You must have been bullied biscuit, is everyone picking on you - Beating England used to be about as much fun as eating rice pudding - For a while you then had a decent side and became the team to beat in the UK - Now its all back to evens again. You shouldn't be so paranoid.

RubyGuby wrote:You must have been bullied biscuit, is everyone picking on you - Beating England used to be about as much fun as eating rice pudding - For a while you then had a decent side and became the team to beat in the UK - Now its all back to evens again. You shouldn't be so paranoid.

So long as we beat Wales Im fine with that.

It should be four out of five rather than eight out of ten.

Come on chaps enough of the anglo-welsh nonsence .....besides it will be an Ireland - France SF..

roddersm wrote:Come on chaps enough of the anglo-welsh nonsence .....besides it will be an Ireland - France SF..

Surely Scotland Italy?

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

roddersm wrote:Come on chaps enough of the anglo-welsh nonsence .....besides it will be an Ireland - France SF..

Surely Scotland Italy?

Wouldn't surprise me Peter. OK no more QF talk from me until after the Italy game . Thats a KO game for us and I ain't for looking past it

To be honest from what we've seen and heard so far i would say that the French are possibly the least likely at the moment as they dont seem a happy camp

I've re-read this discussion and found some of the "points" made hilarious.

We've had someone compare relative performances from home nations against romania/USA/Samoa - yes a clear indicator of relative form.

People using Englands world cup win from 2003 and final appearance of 2007 as an indicator of their world cup pedigree. What happened 8 years ago is irrelevant to the extreme, the last world cup I'll give you. But how many of the players were in the playing squad then?

I dont get this pedigree thing, its non-existent to any player who hasnt played in a world-cup, as we've been unable to judge their pedigree, chum. (not a pot-shot at England, but the fans using that history as some sort of evidence to their current teams chances?!)

English/Welsh slanging in a thread about the whole of the NH teams chances of progression in the WORLD cup.

Wont someone think of the children?!

For what its worth, theres so many variables to consider for all of the teams, their final pool games for example. Say Ireland win by a great score but POC/SOB/Sexton go off injured? (highly unlikely but possible nontheless). Or Scotland go into their game fired up and one of them remembers that he heard somewhere scoring tries is a good thing and they put a nervous England to the sword? (again unlikely, but possible).

So anything could happen before we even know who'll be playing who in the quarters and who'll be available for each team. Reported france are an unhappy camp and especially so with Lievremont, this is their blessing in disguise, the weakest part of Frances game IS Lievremont.

England/France = France
Ireland/Wales = Ireland

Ireland/France = France

thats what I think will happen.

Pot Noodle Miner wrote:To be honest from what we've seen and heard so far i would say that the French are possibly the least likely at the moment as they dont seem a happy camp

Beware a wounded coq!!

.......seriously....

so now France are the best side beacuse they are rubbish?

England have handled coqs easily enough in the past. They love playing (with) them.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:so now France are the best side beacuse they are rubbish?

Emphatically.

Does it really matter,the wrong results at the weekend and you could have the Boks and Australia.
In that side of the draw,Wales have 2 Grandslams,Ireland one since 2003
for whatever validty that is.
France on there day can take ANYONE,it`s just a matter of WHEN.
I doubt any SH side will be bricking it against ANY NH team come final time.

Comfort wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:so now France are the best side beacuse they are rubbish?

Emphatically.

it is funny how people claim that when france are rubbish they are more dangerous, doesnt really make sense- what about when they are playing well?

Is it an association from the lack of consitancy within the NH teams. England,france,wales and ireland are allways going through 1 game great, 1 game poor, then great again.

it must by mental and physical fitness from one game to the next, and i cant see any difference from france to the other NH teams in terms of consitancy.

Should we back the NH team to win the one after if they put a rubbish one in before!

Its not coz France are rubbish its more coz when France click they will beat any and everyone .And they've proved that over the years more than any other NH team .

I don`t quite know what to think,in 2003 England had a 14 match win record versus SH so they thought they could win the RWC
SH and NH know each others game back wards,few NH sides expect to beat
the All Blacks anywhere.let alone a RWC.
Of all the NH sides France have the best record against them,and 2 wins in a RWC.
The effort of beating the the All Blacks,was such they did`nt turn up for the next round.
IF they could put 7 games together consistently France could win a RWC,trouble is,no two games are the same with them.
The only time I can remember when they were really consistent,they cut out the flair.
Played forward dominated Rugby,and the boot of Guy Camberebero ,and his son[or nephew not sure which]or 1950`s under captaincy of Lucien Mias.

If, and it remains to be seen if it happens, Ireland beat Italy, Wales beat Fiji and England win a very tricky game against Scotland then -

I think it'll be so close it will depend on a lot of things especially which players make it through unscathed.

But ignoring all that I'd say Ireland and Wales are much the same but think Ireland with their older heads and better ability to take points when on offer will probably squeeze through.

With the probable tie of England vs France, going on past form, and France's disarray, then I'd say England to win as they seem to have a good record against France and also tend to do well in knock out competitions (while I know many of their players won't have played in a WC before, the structure, some coaches, training methods and mentality should be the same) as a result I say England to win.

The SF will be even closer and harder to split but I think England will just shade it because of their experience of winning big games (ignoring the Ireland 6 Nations game).

But again any of the games could go the other way easily

clearly the ironing is lost on you......

I've chosen France as the best placed as im a huge lover of conspiracy and rumour, and so far all the ones I've gambled on have been proved correct (to a degree).

Lievremont is the French weak link at the moment. theres no settled combinations, players playing out of position and its said the players are "rebelling" knowing hes gone at the end of the tournament regardless (which says a lot about what the FRU think of ML considering the talent at his fingertips).

If the french players find some togetherness/pride for their shirt and eachother and come out blazing, well, the first 10 minutes against NZ show what they can do to any team in the world.

thats my logic, thats not looking at Frances 8 year old pedigree chum or the Romanian corner England have turned, but based purely on how one man butters his bread.

[quote="Comfort"]clearly the ironing is lost on you......

That´s spooky. I deliberately buy crease-free shirts for that very reason.

I wish the ironing was lost on me I must admit...

[quote="kiakahaaotearoa"]

Comfort wrote:clearly the ironing is lost on you......

That´s spooky. I deliberately buy crease-free shirts for that very reason.

crease-free shirts?! what is this black magic?! if you dont want creases, just go out topless! unless you're on a farm in Ireland, even Rhianna got told to put her funbags away by a local farmer. what was he thinking.

He was misquoted. He actually told her to keep taking more off.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:He was misquoted. He actually told her to keep taking more off.

I've heard he was actually stopped by her security before he could get to her, he was running through the fields singing 'Another Level' lyrics.....

this was just a cover-up story

Wales V South Africa final with SA winning

For the Good of the World Cup i really hope either Wales or Ireland make the final because of the good brand of Rugby they have played and both teams really deserve it

it makes me sick when i watch ITV and there is a massive English bias, they havnt played as well as Wales or Ireland at the moment yet yesterday they claim England will beat France then Ireland because they are"too strong".
Im not saying they cant do it but on what basis can a pundit claim that?

Don't you know, Pot Noodle Miner? England have done well at previous World Cups so they'll do well in this one automatically. It's guaranteed.

England have shown very little form in this RWC so far bar putting a weak Georgia side to the sword and limping past average Argentina and Scotland sides.

However they are still unbeaten and it takes a good side to win when playing poorly. On form you'd expect them to beat this French side and once in the SF they'll take some beating.

Pot Noodle Miner wrote:For the Good of the World Cup i really hope either Wales or Ireland make the final because of the good brand of Rugby they have played and both teams really deserve it

If you told me you want either wales or Ireland to make the final so that it gives an opportunity for a different team to compete in a final I would agree with you, but saying one team deserves it more than another is in my opinion subjective reasoning.

It is the same principal saying we don't want SA, OZ or NZ to win becuase they have already won the trophy before, but to say for example SA doesn't deserve to be in the final becuase they don't play a specific brand of rugby is once againsubjective and biased.

Who ever reaches the finals will hopefully do so without any referee errors and becuase on the day they were the best.

Then becuase of that they deserve to be in the final, no other reasoning necessary.

Just my opinion.

The two teams that deserve to be in the final are the two who win the next two games.

The pool stages are irrelevent now and it's a clean slate for everyone.

Rodders, I agree with your first point. I understand what you say in your second point but disagree with it.

Yes good points but still i think for alot of spectators watching and there will be alot of new spectators they are'nt going to be attracted to the sport by watching a team play ugly rugby all the way to the semis where by they may have 1 good performance and then reach the final
seeing a team put the ball through the hands playing a nice brand is more likely to bring new supporters and grow the game in the long run with increased interest

Pot, not looking for an argument, but what is in your eyes ugly rugby?

biltongbek wrote:Pot, not looking for an argument, but what is in your eyes ugly rugby?

And who has been playing it?