Wales since November 2010 v World cup

I've done a little bit of research to try and establish how good this world cup was in terms of results for Wales. I thought I would go back over the past 12 monts worth of results to give a benchmark.
Since November 2010 and EXCLUDING the WORLD CUP fixtures Wales played 13 games. Of these Wales won just 5 games giving them a win ratio of a terrible 38%! When you look at the world cup results on the surface Wales have improved, Wales played 7 games and won 4 giving them a win ratio of 57%. However I don't believe things are that clear cut as that included 3 games against tier 2 and tier 3 sides. If you anaylise the results against tier 1 teams in the world cup Wales played 4 games and only won once giving them a win ratio of 25%.
I believe that the above figures show that Wales are overhyped, to go into the world cup with a 38% win ratio is bad enough but to leave the world cup with a 25% win ratio against tier 1 nations is frankly dissapointing to say the least.

Over the same period since November 2010 and EXCLUDING the WORLD CUP fixtures ENGLAND played 12 games.Of these England won 8 times giving them a win ratio of 67% which although not great isn't to bad.When you look at the world cup results on the surface England have improved, England played 5 games winning 4 giving them a win ratio of 80%. However this does include wins against tier 3 teams. When looking at the results against just tier 1 nations England played 3 and won two giving them a win ratio of 67%, thats the same win ratio as what they had achieved over the past year.

In summary England have accepted that they want to be the best in the world so have accepted a 67% win ratio in the world cup and over the past year isn't good enough. Wales on the other hand seem happy to not be a very good side as their win ratio of 25% against tier 1 teams or 57% if you include tier 2 and 3 teams is terrible and MUSH worse than England yet they will land in Wales as hero's.

I remember being slated for saying we came joint second in the 6N when we were fourth on points difference.

So what, you beat Argentina and Scotland. The better indicator of Wales' progress is points difference against tier 1 nations and the way that gap is closing. But it will all be academic in Dublin in February.

The Welsh team will land in Wales as heros, with a Nation incredibly proud of them, because they played some great rugby and got to the semi finals of the World Cup...!

Glas a du wrote:I remember being slated for saying we came joint second in the 6N when we were fourth on points difference.

So what, you beat Argentina and Scotland. The better indicator of Wales' progress is points difference against tier 1 nations and the way that gap is closing. But it will all be academic in Dublin in February.

Yes I remember that the RFU changed it to a points difference league back in the early nineties. Before that we had drawn championships, you only won by beating more teams than anyone else.

That would make Wales France and Ireland joint for 2011 on 6 points and England France and Wales joint in 2009 on 6 points.

wrfc1980 wrote:I've done a little bit of research to try and establish how good this world cup was in terms of results for Wales. I thought I would go back over the past 12 monts worth of results to give a benchmark.
Since November 2010 and EXCLUDING the WORLD CUP fixtures Wales played 13 games. Of these Wales won just 5 games giving them a win ratio of a terrible 38%! When you look at the world cup results on the surface Wales have improved, Wales played 7 games and won 4 giving them a win ratio of 57%. However I don't believe things are that clear cut as that included 3 games against tier 2 and tier 3 sides. If you anaylise the results against tier 1 teams in the world cup Wales played 4 games and only won once giving them a win ratio of 25%.
I believe that the above figures show that Wales are overhyped, to go into the world cup with a 38% win ratio is bad enough but to leave the world cup with a 25% win ratio against tier 1 nations is frankly dissapointing to say the least.

Over the same period since November 2010 and EXCLUDING the WORLD CUP fixtures ENGLAND played 12 games.Of these England won 8 times giving them a win ratio of 67% which although not great isn't to bad.When you look at the world cup results on the surface England have improved, England played 5 games winning 4 giving them a win ratio of 80%. However this does include wins against tier 3 teams. When looking at the results against just tier 1 nations England played 3 and won two giving them a win ratio of 67%, thats the same win ratio as what they had achieved over the past year.

In summary England have accepted that they want to be the best in the world so have accepted a 67% win ratio in the world cup and over the past year isn't good enough. Wales on the other hand seem happy to not be a very good side as their win ratio of 25% against tier 1 teams or 57% if you include tier 2 and 3 teams is terrible and MUSH worse than England yet they will land in Wales as hero's.

England have accepted they want to be the best in the world eh? Is that why they sent Chipperfield's circus to a Rugby World Cup?

You shoudl say you have dome a little research and want to compare England with Wales because that is what this thread quickly descends to
There is no comparison between England and Wales right now, its extremely boring.

Wrfc, your statistics reveal only the size of your mind.
A truer indication of where our rugby nations stand is in the 60000 who turned out at the Millennium for the semi final and the number who proudly turned up at Heathrow to meet their heroes.
And what of the pleasure the Welsh team has given the nation. It brought friends and family and fans together. I will never forget my semi final weekend in Cardiff.

The only pleasure you can take is cooking up some spiteful little point scoring thread.

Unfortunately, percentages mean nothing. The fact remains that Wales got to the semi finals and were a hairs breath from the final. They ended up finishing 4th at a RWC. Thats what is impressive.

No shame in loosing 3 matches agains Australia, SA and France with a margin of 5 points collectively. They played some of the most attractive rugby at the tournement and certainly got many other countries fans willing them to glory.

They and their fans can be dead proud of their achievments.

Thats my way of looking at it anyway.

60000 turning up at the Millenium isn't bad, the millions that lined the street of London and Tragalfer Square when England brought home 'Billy' in 2003 was just a wee bit better

How was my opening post point scoring, facts are facts Wales LOST 3 games out of 7 which is hardly a good record!!

wrfc appears to be another idiot to put on the ignore list until the mods delete his account...!

Our boys did us proud.your lot didnt.Get over it.

maest, he is not abusive and he does generate a debate so he cant be all that bad

Billy i dont know why you even communicate with these people. This is a forum for opinions. Certain posters- especially maest are as insular as they come- if you mention anything about walesdand are not welsh yet dont say they are the best thing since sliced bread he does this. He is a child and acts like one.

I actually like maest Mysti. He is passionate about his country and team much the same as you are and i see nothing wrong with that. I can see how you two will collide but thats also half the charm of a forum

The op has made points based on facts. Wales have seemingly done better than there win ratio and i admit that. But they have been very guilty of what they would say is a classic english trait and that is over hyping. Wales may be on a road to good things- but they are far from it at present. Time to get real here, If england had that sort of win ratio yet were claiming good things- You welsh would be on us like a pack of gypos holding onto dale farm!

But Mysti, Wales have played some of the best rugby at this world cup and in my eyes lit it up somewhat. They really got me behind them after they beat Ireland because of that. They may have lost thos matches but no one can take away just how well they did perform at this RWC.

There are some sad little England fans (not representative of the majority thankfully) that simply can't accept that Wales had a decent WC whilst their team failed to perform, win any friends, acted like spoilt brats and were anything but a credit to their nation.

What do we get, pointless posts dressed up as interesting opinions that are supposed to merit real discussion? All you do is display your deep prejudice and small minds. Get over it.

Ok billy just letting some steam off. The hypocsry of certain posters gets to me,

Usually the way that you construct a debate is that you paraphrase both sides of an argument, justify both cases and then leave it open to the floor to find conclusions.

You can later summarise a collective of both sides, giving those taking part a chance to re-cap on what has just been posted. This often spurns new ideas and creates an organic and interesting thread.

How about we look at the either side of the debate?

Wales just came fourth in the RWC. They exceeded the expectations of their own passionate nation, they impressed the rest of the world with a style of adventurous and skilled rugby.

Though Wales narrowly failed to beat France, SA and Australia to make a better account of themselves, they were narrow defeats and with a large number of young and inexperienced players in their first team and squad, a red card in the semi finals and a few key player injuries, they did do very well to achieve what they have and with better luck and beter goal kicking they would have been finalists at worse.

On the other side...

Wales again failed to beat France, SA and Australia at the RWC. They have a trend of not being able to go the final hurdle and beat teams ranked regularly higher than them. This is most likely due to the small size of their player pool, something they need to increase in all positions 1 to 15 to be competitive against the regular top five in World Rugby.

For a team that reached the last four in Rugby Unions biggest competition they still failed to beat more than one side ranked above them. Something they have repeated throughout their Rugby History. Never able to beat the top teams, only able to come close, which is not enough.

No probs Mysti but maest really is s decent chap. Read his post above, very open and honest assement.

I would have swapped positions with Wales in a heartbeat

Stats dont tell the full story, Wales have played dreadfully since 2010 until the warm up games, played fantastically against a strong SA side, took a confident Ireland to the cleaners and lost in exceptional circumstances to the French who never threatened our try line even with 14 players.

Sorry Y I Man but i just dont get your reactions at times. Seriously.

I really think that Wales were a credit to this RWC. I honestly thought that after Ireland beat Australia and Italy playing decent rugby that they might just have a bit too much for Wales but Wales, to their credit playe sublimly in winning. Still absolutely gutted that they didnt get to the final.

My reaction?

by maestegmafia Today at 9:18 am
wrfc appears to be another idiot to put on the ignore list until the mods delete his account...!

by mystiroakey Today at 9:49 am
Billy i dont know why you even communicate with these people. This is a forum for opinions. Certain posters- especially maest are as insular as they come- if you mention anything about walesdand are not welsh yet dont say they are the best thing since sliced bread he does this. He is a child and acts like one.

I think im quite entitled to ask for bickering to stop.

i have had some pretty decent discussions with maest and yes its a decent post that time around(why didnt he start with that), just recently it got to boiling point, alot of it to do with another poster that i wont mention. Anyway i will add to this discusssion by stating.

Stats are important and records are very important- they define us as sporting teams.

England supporters and myself have been guilty of measuring our selfs on previous world cup performnaces rather than general recent win/loss records.

We got hit for this by the same posters that have now had an impressive world cup and it seems like hypocrsy- perhaps from all sides but still. It is what it is.. All posters can be gulity of bias- some posters discount anything if your from a certain country.

personally i cant wait for the 6n's



and YI no disrespect because your right your the boss lol- its just that billy is possibly a beter mediator

Sorry Y I Man but i didnt think that it was too bad, there has been much worse the last few days.

The posts where reported, so I red penned.
If you dont agree, pm the admin team who will look into it for you.

Well i did'nt report them, cant remember ever reporting a post so if you think action had to be taken then fair dues.

Why would i pm the admin team? Because of you? You have lost me again.

maestegmafia wrote:

Glas a du wrote:I remember being slated for saying we came joint second in the 6N when we were fourth on points difference.

So what, you beat Argentina and Scotland. The better indicator of Wales' progress is points difference against tier 1 nations and the way that gap is closing. But it will all be academic in Dublin in February.

Yes I remember that the RFU changed it to a points difference league back in the early nineties. Before that we had drawn championships, you only won by beating more teams than anyone else.

That would make Wales France and Ireland joint for 2011 on 6 points and England France and Wales joint in 2009 on 6 points.

The RFU unilaterally changed it and it wasn't decided by the IRB and competing nations, catching up with how almost every other competition in the world is decided? Must have missed that one.

How is it unfair to class teams that have scored more and conceded less as better? The only reason you're begrudging the system is beacuse you've been on the wrong side of it more than a few occasions.

No, not at all. The point I was making is win ratio over tier one nations is pretty much as meaningless a statistic in the context of a WC as you can get.

Consider that going into the last day of the final game of the six nations last season Wales or England could have won it.

THat displays a very even competition which it was. England were the best team, they had the most wins, but France Ireland and Wales were a mixed bag, winning and losing equally to different teams.

Both the modern system and the old has both positives and negatives when you reflect on a tournament and how it went.