Home nations team of the tournament so far

by Glas a du Tue 04 Oct 2011, 8:03 am

First topic message reminder :

15-9 Foden, North, BOD, Tuilagi, Earles, ROG, Phillips
1-8 Healy, Best, Ross, POC, AWJ, Ferris, Warburton, O'Brien
16-22 Jenkins, Thompson, Gray, Faletau, L Williams, Jones, Scott Williams.

by Glas a du Wed 05 Oct 2011, 7:08 am

Byrne? Byrne!

by **Biltong** Wed 05 Oct 2011, 7:34 am

Jamie roberts must be there, he is in the form of his life.

by Gatts Wed 05 Oct 2011, 7:46 am

Too many English

by Glas a du Wed 05 Oct 2011, 7:47 am

This thread could run and run

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Wed 05 Oct 2011, 8:24 am

Too many Welsh

by Gatts Wed 05 Oct 2011, 8:26 am

Too many Scots

by Luckless Pedestrian Wed 05 Oct 2011, 8:31 am

No Matt Banahan?!

by 21st Century Schizoid Man Wed 05 Oct 2011, 8:33 am

Or Sheena Hape or whatever his dumbass name is ?!

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Wed 05 Oct 2011, 8:44 am

luckless_pedestrian wrote:No Matt Banahan?!

That would be too many Channel Islanders

by Glas a du Wed 05 Oct 2011, 8:51 am

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:
luckless_pedestrian wrote:No Matt Banahan?!

That would be too many Channel Islanders

by The WarLord Mashaka Wed 05 Oct 2011, 9:44 am

@maestegmafia

Tonga are actually ranked above Scotland due to the win over France and fair play I say. Canada Ranked above Georgia and Japan above Fiji but did not play any home nation teams hence are not in the list…you should have noticed the numbers in brackets missing 13 and 15.

The point I am making is that Scotland are as tough if not a tougher test than Samoa/Italy. Georgia are ranked above Fiji and USA and these teams seem on the same level. While Romania are higher ranked than Namibia and Russia.

by maestegmafia Wed 05 Oct 2011, 9:47 am

The WarLord Mashaka wrote:@maestegmafia

Tonga are actually ranked above Scotland due to the win over France and fair play I say. Canada Ranked above Georgia and Japan above Fiji but did not play any home nation teams hence are not in the list…you should have noticed the numbers in brackets missing 13 and 15.

The point I am making is that Scotland are as tough if not a tougher test than Samoa/Italy. Georgia are ranked above Fiji and USA and these teams seem on the same level. While Romania are higher ranked than Namibia and Russia.

Is the point you are making that you think Pool B was more difficult to qualify from than Pool D and therefor you think England are a decent team and will do well in the RWC 2011.

Where as Wales, France and Ireland who were in the weaker Pools A, C and D, therefor had a much easier time and that they will now struggle against teams like Pool B winners England....?

by RuggerRadge2611 Wed 05 Oct 2011, 9:54 am

My team would look like this :

1. Healy
2. Ford
3. Ross
4. POC
5. Lawes
6. Ferris
7. Warburton (C)
8. O'Brian

9. Blair
10. Flood
11. North
12. Roberts
13. O'Driscoll
14. Ashton (one silly dive and he would be dropped)
15. Kearney

16. Heartly
17. Stevens
18. Gray
19. Lydiate
20. Youngs
21. Earles
22. Bowe

A reasonable balance of strength, pace and a mix of all the home nations. No token players since I feel everyone included in the team is there on merit.

by The WarLord Mashaka Wed 05 Oct 2011, 10:10 am

maestegmafia

No again my point is to disprove a misconception from a comment about Ireland and Wales having to play far superior teams in their pools.

I am not deluded to think that England are performing to their ability and have been impressed with some of the Welsh and Irish play. But tell me which of those teams Wales/Ireland beat are superior to those England beat? For me it is just Australia other wise the rankings seem about right.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Wed 05 Oct 2011, 10:42 am

Too many pointless circular arguments

by tomathy Wed 05 Oct 2011, 10:57 am

Glas a du wrote:Brand is not close to the bench either. Stokosch and Hines would take the nod before him.

Seriously?

Glas a du wrote:Yes, but Earles has scored against tougher opposition.

Italy and Russia?

As it happens I wouldn't have Foden in there, but Tuilagi and Ashton would be in mine and I'd have Haskell on the bench. Cole and Ross are pretty close as well and were it not for the first half against Scotland then I'd poosibly have him in there.

by formerly known as Sam Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:03 am

Brand is not close to the bench either. Stokosch and Hines would take the nod before him.

How would taking a second row able of covering 6 be a better idea than taking the Brand (who I don't rate by the way) who can cover 6,7,8? Not sure Strockosh is a particuarly great choice either.

by Glas a du Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:10 am

Can anybody find a clip of Brand jumping in the air like a puppy and missing a dolly catch in the Scotch match?

by tomathy Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:15 am

Glas a du wrote:Can anybody find a clip of Brand jumping in the air like a puppy and missing a dolly catch in the Scotch match?

if it's the one i'm thinking of it was a rubbish pass and he caught it fine. popped it to croft who dropped it.

by 21st Century Schizoid Man Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:18 am

Radge,
Blair ? Are you serious ? Would rather have Cusiter or Lawson or Laidlaw any day, any time, any match. He did have a reasonable game against a dire Youngs on Saturday but that is really it for 4/5 years !

by maestegmafia Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:20 am

The WarLord Mashaka wrote:maestegmafia

No again my point is to disprove a misconception from a comment about Ireland and Wales having to play far superior teams in their pools.

I am not deluded to think that England are performing to their ability and have been impressed with some of the Welsh and Irish play. But tell me which of those teams Wales/Ireland beat are superior to those England beat? For me it is just Australia other wise the rankings seem about right.

Everyone knows the rankings mate.

It is the inclusion of the added top three team on top of decent sides like US, Italy and Samoa in Pool D and Pool C that made those harder groups.

Fiji also looked a strong team going into this world cup, they had been very competitive, a 16-16 draw in Cardiff, a good showing in the PI Nats Cup... They dwindled after the SA loss.

by Glas a du Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:30 am

You are never going to get even pools in these competitions.

Rankings are out of date by the time you need them.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:34 am

To Summarise :

Im English, Im pretty sure I can justify any mediocre player being in the side

Im Scottish, Cmon guys give us a sympathy vote ..I mean we did beat Romania

Im Irish/Welsh, anyone but the English

Im French, meh

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:34 am

Glas a du wrote:You are never going to get even pools in these competitions.

Rankings are out of date by the time you need them.

True, Fiji were far worse by the time the comeptition came around

by Glas a du Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:39 am

Exactly. Rankings tell you how teams have played and are a poor indicator of future performance as they are subject to so many variables, not least to do with the opponents on a given day.

by Glas a du Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:41 am

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:To Summarise :

Im English, Im pretty sure I can justify any mediocre player being in the side

Im Scottish, Cmon guys give us a sympathy vote ..I mean we did beat Romania

Im Irish/Welsh, anyone but the English

Im French, meh

by The WarLord Mashaka Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:42 am

maestegmafia
As I said the Boks and Oz being in those groups is fair enough, but Wales still lost that one, brave performance or not.

So you of the opinion that Italy, Samoa, Fiji the US are better than Scotland and Argentina? Granted unless these teams played each other all we could do is speculate but that’s why we have rankings.

Glas a du
These are actually the current rankings based on the pool results

by maestegmafia Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:43 am

Glas a du wrote:
Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:
Im Irish/Welsh, anyone but the English

The Irish and Welsh cant praise mediocrity....!

I would actually Align the English point of view more with the one you had composed for the Scotts...

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:
Cmon guys give us a sympathy vote ..I mean we did beat Romania

by RuggerRadge2611 Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:44 am

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:Radge,
Blair ? Are you serious ? Would rather have Cusiter or Lawson or Laidlaw any day, any time, any match. He did have a reasonable game against a dire Youngs on Saturday but that is really it for 4/5 years !

Cusiter should never have travelled and Lawson was poor against Argentina. In the RWC Blair scored a try and handed out a lesson on how to play Scrum Half to Youngs who has been widly tipped to be the form NH scrum half.

I Agree he has been off form but he as played well in the RWC, can't hide the facts mate.

by Glas a du Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:47 am

Scottish backline:

15-9 Blair, Gregor, Lawson, Laidlaw, Lamont, Blair, Cussiter

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:49 am

maestegmafia wrote:
Glas a du wrote:
Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:
Im Irish/Welsh, anyone but the English

The Irish and Welsh cant praise mediocrity....!

I would actually Align the English point of view more with the one you had composed for the Scotts...

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:
Cmon guys give us a sympathy vote ..I mean we did beat Romania

I mean c'mon guys we didnt beat South Africa

by maestegmafia Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:50 am

No one has beaten South Africa so far...?

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:54 am

maestegmafia wrote:No one has beaten South Africa so far...?

Sorry I shouldve prefaced that with " Ill ammend the Welsh view to "

by Guest Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:58 am

maestegmafia wrote:No one has beaten South Africa so far...?

No one has beaten England either. Yet, the way some are going on you would think they had.

by The WarLord Mashaka Wed 05 Oct 2011, 11:59 am

Hypocrisy much “No one has beaten South Africa so far...?” so then all the undefeated teams are the ones to beat then?

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Wed 05 Oct 2011, 12:00 pm

SafeAsMilk wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:No one has beaten South Africa so far...?
No one has beaten England either. Yet, the way some are going on you would think they had.

Yes but we have already estalblished that those sides who didnt beat them must have been rubbish because they didnt beat them, whereas Wales are great because.
Please keep up man!

by HERSH Wed 05 Oct 2011, 12:02 pm

What a weekend in prospect

Knockout 6 nations without the two weakest teams.

Fantastic.

Maybe we should make it the 4 Nations from now on? Very Happy

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Wed 05 Oct 2011, 12:03 pm

HERSH wrote:What a weekend in prospect

Knockout 6 nations without the two weakest teams.

Fantastic.

Maybe we should make it the 4 Nations from now on?

I thought Wales were in the quarters? Whistle

by munkian Wed 05 Oct 2011, 12:06 pm

SafeAsMilk wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:No one has beaten South Africa so far...?
No one has beaten England either. Yet, the way some are going on you would think they had.

South Africa would have creamed you, I reckon Samoa would've taken you too.

by R!skysports Wed 05 Oct 2011, 12:10 pm

lol - another thread going down the 'my dad is bigger than your dad' road - how very original and mature Doh

I agree that I think Blair had been very good this World cup and is starting to look like the Blair of old - making breaks, fast passing and generally doing stuff well.

Murray is the form Tighthead so far by a country mile. So all games need to be on a Saturday. Thought Ford has started to realise he is big and can run, and his throwing has been excellent

Would possible have S Lamont and / or M Evans on the bench. In a terrible back line, makes breaks every time they have had the ball.

Try not to discount the Scottish forwards, just cos the backs can not score tries. They dominated the Argies and the English until we had to sub people off (then our bench showed or lack of depth)

by Guest Wed 05 Oct 2011, 12:11 pm

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:
SafeAsMilk wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:No one has beaten South Africa so far...?
No one has beaten England either. Yet, the way some are going on you would think they had.

Yes but we have already estalblished that those sides who didnt beat them must have been rubbish because they didnt beat them, whereas Wales are great because.
Please keep up man!

Ah, I must have been snoozing. You can't beat the 'because' argument. Losing to SA is better than beating Scotland and Argentina. It stands to reason! Laugh

by Guest Wed 05 Oct 2011, 12:12 pm

munkian wrote:
SafeAsMilk wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:No one has beaten South Africa so far...?
No one has beaten England either. Yet, the way some are going on you would think they had.

South Africa would have creamed you, I reckon Samoa would've taken you too.

Really? Well, I think Georgia would have had you for breakfast. Guess we'll never know, eh?

by munkian Wed 05 Oct 2011, 12:17 pm

True, we'll not know for certain, but going on England's form its fairly obvious you wouldn't have beaten SA unless you seriously uppded your game.

by Guest Wed 05 Oct 2011, 12:21 pm

munkian wrote:True, we'll not know for certain, but going on England's form its fairly obvious you wouldn't have beaten SA unless you seriously uppded your game.

Exactly, but who is to say that they wouldn't have. So many of the sides are inconsistent at the moment that we just don't know.

by EnglishReign Wed 05 Oct 2011, 12:36 pm

I don't know about that, the Saffers were awful in the first game. Scotland would've given them a run for their money.

by R!skysports Wed 05 Oct 2011, 12:37 pm

Guys - give it a rest. It is boring and takes away from the thread.

by Guest Wed 05 Oct 2011, 12:38 pm

EnglishReign wrote:I don't know about that, the Saffers were awful in the first game.

Yeah, they did look really off-colour. They seem to be back on form now though. Sign of a good side though, still winning when you play poorly.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Wed 05 Oct 2011, 12:53 pm

Riskysports wrote:Guys - give it a rest. It is boring and takes away from the thread.

Really? Am I missing the point where it had some worth or value?

by EnglishReign Wed 05 Oct 2011, 12:53 pm

Oh yeah, unquestionably they are back on form and with Bakkies returning they will get a lift and have the potential to hurt anyone.

by Glas a du Wed 05 Oct 2011, 3:40 pm

EnglishReign wrote:Oh yeah, unquestionably they are back on form and with Bakkies returning they will get a lift and have the potential to hurt anyone.

Yes but he'll get cited for that, will they win?

by Sponsored content