Which is the poorest performing team to make a final

A lot has been made of the French team making the final after playing some terrible rugby. But is this the worst team to make a WC final. Have other teams been worst, but stilled made it to the final

Also, what makes a terrible team, is it playing ugly but scraping wins, poor handling skills, forward dominated, weak pack, kicking games or just one that looks darn naff

its a stupid topic really, a bad team getting to a final- is more a reflection on the other teams not the one that got to the final. its just a pointless discussion in fairness. although i will add to it lol and say that farnce havent looked great

in 2007 England got beaten 36 nil, and made it to a final,thats pretty bad,...

Funny...i knew England would appear here at some point.....

surely what this wum post is for

Yup thats what i suspected Myst..

Hold on a second - not a WUM post, just a discussion on a discussion board.

And how is it a silly post. Is the French team a bad team, because they played bad in a few games, but still managed to scrape to the final

You mentioned England, were they a bad team or did they have one terrible game and improved as they went along

If you are so parnoid that is your problem

Can any team be considered a truely bad team for making a World Cup final? I dont think that anyone can say that a poor team has made it to a WC final. They came out on top of the best teams in the world to be there.

Who cares?

France beat England and Wales to get there, surely this isn't more sour grapes?

Pre-RWC Lievremont made a statement,should he throw the AB pool game,or make a point by winning it.
Think back,for the first 15 minutes it was all France a drop goal attempt hit the post,a cross kick just failed.to score.
Cory Jane and Kaino avoided penalties,or even cards that in other matches were Yellow and Red respectively.
They scored the points they needed versus Tong a with contempous ease.
We all in the NH know,France have a good setpiece,defence,goal kickers,and backs who can score from anywhere.
France in 2007 in the pool stage were poor,but they reached the semi`s by targetting NZ.
The All Blacks lost not because of the Ref,or the injuries,it was due to selection and inexperience.
McCaw could`nt believe his side would`nt get a kickable penalty attempt second half.
Aron Mauger was the backline brains in 2007 after Carter,with him on the field .
In my Opinion the Drop goal option would have been tried and executed by him.He`d done it before but they were blinded by the boy wonder McAlister instead.
England after the pool games to every ones surprise made it to the Final,a debateble decision may even of cost them the match [Cueto`s try?].
People who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.France have only done what they needed to.
Maybe Lievremont is crazy like a fox,one things for sure the stuff going around about France.
Will have them coming out firing on Sunday,it will be a lot more than a one horse race.
For a AB supporter like me,much as I dislike RWC`s I want this one,I may never see another sweaky bum time indeed.

England 07 weren't THAT bad. They still had class in the side like Vickery, Wilko, Robinson, Lewsey, Dallaglio, Kay, Shaw, Corry, Moody. Even the SA coach admitted he was worried on seeing the England team sheet, as a lot of the starting XV had won the final only 4 years earlier. SA would've beaten anyone the way they played in the 36-0 win, so out of this 07 Eng side and the current France one, I'd say France are the worst to make a final. They were better in 07.

JDandfries wrote:Who cares?

France beat England and Wales to get there, surely this isn't more sour grapes?

Not likely as I am Scottish (and if we made it to the final, I would expect we would be the worst team to make it - but I would take it)

England in 1991. It should have been us

FES NZ beat England in the first game of the Cup, and even though Australia were easily the best side that tournament I'd say NZ were the second best-and England were fortunate to have them in their pool.

Gotta feel sorry for Big Gav though.

FeS

Wasn't so much we were a poor team (great pack with an OK to good backline who rarely had to do anything), but we got a little lucky in that SF.

France have had plenty of luck getting through this time, and have really only played well for about 45 minutes all tournament (about 15 minutes against the ABs and 30 minutes against England). They have though shown some strength in defence in maintaining a lead in the knock-out games.

England in 07 were a team that improved during the tournament - the only really lucky break was that France saw off the All Blacks in the round before we'd have had to play them.

Other than those, I don't think you can argue with many (if any) of the teams that made RWC finals.

Riskysports wrote:Hold on a second - not a WUM post, just a discussion on a discussion board.

And how is it a silly post. Is the French team a bad team, because they played bad in a few games, but still managed to scrape to the final

You mentioned England, were they a bad team or did they have one terrible game and improved as they went along

If you are so parnoid that is your problem

its been mentioned plenty on these boards allready- and many have been out in force knocking final acheivements(france this time, england 2007)- as i said previously its more about the other teams not the teams that got to the finals.

I am happy to suggest there is a similarity between 07 england and 11 france. Neither team have looked there composed fluid best, but that also makes it a big acheivemnt.

I will suggest that france are worse than england- but that proof will only be after the final game and if they dont give NZ a good game- England gave SA a good game- therefore cant be considered bad- if france can give NZ a good game again they cant be considered bad- if they get hammered then its more about wales or englands problems not knocking a struggling french team out.

I should add that I was only kidding.

Yes, sometimes teams get lucky draws and fortunate results, but that's just tournament rugby. It would be grim if everything just went to form and the best sides progressed.

All I can say is if a misfiring French side can make it to the final then heaven help the side playing them when they do fire. That's why the All Blacks won't leave anything to chance. It'll either be a French nailbiter or an All Black massacre.

disney have faith my friend, All Blacks by 20+

They will go into this match to play a celebration match. I expect them to run the toffee out of france.

and then next year we will beat you.

disneychilly wrote:All I can say is if a misfiring French side can make it to the final then heaven help the side playing them when they do fire. That's why the All Blacks won't leave anything to chance. It'll either be a French nailbiter or an All Black massacre.

...it's an All Black massacre. They really are a very very limited side.

Sure this has all been said before somewhere, oops what happened then!!

Yet another wum designed to have a go at England.

this is getting stupid.

Similarities between England in 2007 and France this time in the pool stages, both pretty unimpressive, with France managing to lose 2 matches. England definitely stepped up in the knock out rounds in 2007 though, it took some big performances to beat Aus and a French side that had beaten the ABs, few teams would have managed that, whereas I think several teams could have beaten the dire England and 14 man Wales that France faced this year.

Top 3 poorest finalists would be:-

1991 - England
2003 - England by a far margin. Wales should have nocked them out if not for a p!ss poor ref.... who was he again.... oh yes I remember Alain Rolland

2007 - England...

.... think there is a pattern there, but I'll be dammed if I can find it

Biggles, you're a twait without the i.

Listen I didnt start this thread, I just responded in the way the OP expected with his WUM...

Get yourself a humour will you...

...and I think your nickname says all it needs to about whose a twait...

Maybe, but I'm still yet to post anything that isn't a fact.

EnglishReign wrote:Biggles, you're a twait without the i.




Maybe, but I'm still yet to post anything that isn't a fact.

...that's not a fact, its an insult...

EnglishReign wrote:Maybe, but I'm still yet to post anything that isn't a fact.

Funniest thing I've read in weeks