The death of NH international rugby.

by Meister Sat Mar 17, 2012 10:59 pm

First topic message reminder :

Slightly melodramatic I know, but I can't help but feel underwhelmed by the quality of rugby in this season's 6 nations. I do not remember a game that produced any real excitment, interest or sustained attacking play. The constant need to play by a certain 'game plan' meant that any creativity or individuality was stifled, nay choked at birth. International rugby has become a series of set plays, players scared, or unable to light up the game with their undoubted skill. The game as a spectacle has gone; nothing to cheer, nothing to inspire. What did the matches today produce to inspire anyone to take up the 'real' beautiful game? Ireland are scared to do anything, France are deflated, England haven't used their backs all tournament, Wales won by default (producing a dreary brand of rugby based on grunt), Scotland and Italy were true to form.

Nothing to talk about, nothing to inspire, nothing to hope for. Seriously, this was awful.

by Super D Boon Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:36 pm

Actually it wasn't the most riveting of tournaments but it was far far worse in the 90s when England were dominant. They played an excruitatingly dull form of 10 man rugby that made watching jelly set interesting. The 90s were truly awful just check out Youtube.

by hugehandoff Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:37 pm

"Call it as you see fit by all means. I just think england fans need to be more optimistic. You have the makings of an excellent team there. 18 months of rugby will see Wales and England at their prime I believe. Good times ahead for both nations!" Totallybiasedscarlet

I only hope you are right. I suppose I am too down on England and only think we are 2nd due to the failings of others rather than any good play by us. I seemed to have spent this 6Ns watching England screaming at the TV - my kids are now concerned for my state of mental health.

Well played Wales! I think you got dragged down by the rest of us, but hopefully you will raise your game this summer. That would be great to see. thumbsup

by hugehandoff Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:43 pm

"Actually it wasn't the most riveting of tournaments but it was far far worse in the 90s when England were dominant. They played an excruitatingly dull form of 10 man rugby that made watching jelly set interesting. The 90s were truly awful just check out Youtube.
Super D Boon

You are right. The problem was the 90 GS defeat by Scotland. Eng were playing open running rugby and their displays in 90 were awesome....then the GS defeat and Eng decided they could improve their chances by playing 10 man rugby. V boring and back to back GS's followed.

by english warrior Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:48 pm

I totally agree with one of the posters who said that 'If Wales win a G.S. then NH Rugby is in a poor state.

I actually agree because if the 'Big boys' namely England and France aren't winning it then something is very wrong, or lacking and that is what is happening with the Welsh G.S.

All credit to them, but a good French or English side would have them for Breakfast. Wales aren't even in the top 4 and haven't beat a SH side in a long time so yes, i agree, NH Rugby is poor, but not totally dead just yet.

by thebluesmancometh Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:53 pm

All credit to them, but a good French or English side would have them for Breakfast.

I'm not sure what your trying to say? You mean a side along the lines of 2002/2003 would have the Welsh team for breakfast?

I think this was a good England side, they far exceeded expectations and won 4 of 5, the same as the team last year! How is this a poor England side?

If what you are trying to say is England are best in the world but have been poor since their world cup, and will win another when they sort themselves out I would argue that the Welsh team of the 70's were better than them, and we have been rubbish since so all of Englands accomplishments were because Wales were just going through a lowly period.

Thank god neither of us are that stupid though eh?

by mr-bryns-attitude Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:58 pm

english warrior wrote:I totally agree with one of the posters who said that 'If Wales win a G.S. then NH Rugby is in a poor state.

I actually agree because if the 'Big boys' namely England and France aren't winning it then something is very wrong, or lacking and that is what is happening with the Welsh G.S.

All credit to them, but a good French or English side would have them for Breakfast. Wales aren't even in the top 4 and haven't beat a SH side in a long time so yes, i agree, NH Rugby is poor, but not totally dead just yet.

i would hate to be you. Laugh

by Super D Boon Sun Mar 18, 2012 5:04 pm

english warrior wrote:I totally agree with one of the posters who said that 'If Wales win a G.S. then NH Rugby is in a poor state.

I actually agree because if the 'Big boys' namely England and France aren't winning it then something is very wrong, or lacking and that is what is happening with the Welsh G.S.

All credit to them, but a good French or English side would have them for Breakfast. Wales aren't even in the top 4 and haven't beat a SH side in a long time so yes, i agree, NH Rugby is poor, but not totally dead just yet.

Wales ran a so called great and exteremly lucky England side close in 2003. It's always far better for the state of NH rugby if Wales is a powerhouse as it adds enormously to the Lions side. When Wales were great in the 70s so were the Lions.

Now fast forward to the 90s you had the terrible England side that bored the pants off even English rugby fans and the Lions, well they weren't very good were they? So the complete opposite is true. if there is a strong England side then usually NH rugby is in a bad way.

by Ospreydragon Sun Mar 18, 2012 5:19 pm

Underwhelmed? I do wonder what some people expect.

The ultra-professional world of top-flight inbternational rugby demands so much of teams to get that win. For everyone, for example, who wants a greater insight into the level of performance/video analysis that is an inegral part of match preparation in the pro age, see Alun Carter's wonderful book "Seeing Red".

It was only about 4 months ago that NZ clinched the WC by 1 point against France. 1 point. I thought France were very unlucky and were the better team on the day, but they lost. The margin of victory at this level is often very, very small.

I think Wales, from the World Cup onwards, have developed greatly. The defence is excellent, and Gatland and co have increased the depth of players available to Wales. The only weakness, like Ireland's (though not quite as bad perhaps) is a replacement for Adam Jones at TH. And maybe at flyhalf. Wales have 4 - yes 4 - very good locks. When was the last time we had that? As for the likes of Hook (and dare I mention him, Henson) - he doesn't make the starting 15. Very talented players like Morgan Stoddart, currently injured, have been forgotten.

I think Wales can play better than they have, but the building blocks are there -- great defence, professionalism on and off the field, tremendous fitness, a great team spirit, and a never-say-die attitude. I would like to see more variety and so-called "creativity" from Wales' midfield, and the likes of S Williams or Henson can provide that. Or maybe Gatland should use the centre partnership a little differently, encouraging a greater varierty of play.

I thought France, against Wales, were defensively excellent. They need to choose better playmakers at 10 and stick with them. Fofana is a tremendous plyer, and the likes of Hogg for Scotland looks like he could be a mainstay in a Scottish backline that needs strengthening. England have made great strides. Farrell appears nerveless, Corbisero and Cole are excellent props, but if Lancaster has made any mistakes, it's been about selection -- picking the likes of Ashton, when there are better-performing wingers around. Ireland have some great players, but need to unearth a few more props, especially at TH, and maybe they should change their back row and use a genuine openside.

For Wales, it was all about being professional and winning. They did. And I'm sure they've learned a lot as a team from the WC and 6N experiences. My only concern is for Warburton -- he was injury-prone at age-grade level and is suffering with injuries again now. It's just great to have the likes of Tipuric available, who should have been on the bench.

All in all, there was plenty to admire. All these teams will develop, and the lineups will change. England certainly exposed Ireland's lack of strength-in-depth at TH, and that is something Ireland will have to work on.

by offload Sun Mar 18, 2012 5:40 pm

english warrior wrote:I totally agree with one of the posters who said that 'If Wales win a G.S. then NH Rugby is in a poor state.

I actually agree because if the 'Big boys' namely England and France aren't winning it then something is very wrong, or lacking and that is what is happening with the Welsh G.S.

All credit to them, but a good French or English side would have them for Breakfast. Wales aren't even in the top 4 and haven't beat a SH side in a long time so yes, i agree, NH Rugby is poor, but not totally dead just yet.

Oh dear....it must be very difficult being you. Try and get out more and broaden your perspective Nice choice of name by the way- suggests an open collaborative approach.

by english warrior Sun Mar 18, 2012 7:38 pm

As to all those people saying how boring, 10 man English rugby is well, look at who is the greatest try scorer over the last 10 years in the 6 nations and its England by a mile.

So put that in your collective, and as for the English side being 'So called great' well what do you have to do but be great? because by any criteria that team were great. Won the world cup , beat SH nations home and away on 17 consecutive occasions, won GS and won the 6 nations on several occasions (ok not GS) and were Number 1 over a 2 year peiod. In fact that team alone beat the SH more often than the 3 Celtic nations have managed combined throughout History!!!

There, thats Great, and not a team who came 4th in last years 6 nations and who lost 4 games out of 8 before this years competition!! and who haven't beaten a SH team for years.

I thank you. thumbsup

by thebluesmancometh Sun Mar 18, 2012 7:42 pm

Really?

But then by your standards the Wales side of the 70's are great, 3GS and 6 championships in about 10 years states greatness, it's not their fault there was no world cup back then.

So Wales back then were great, and have been poor since so your GS side weren't great because Wales were poor.

I thank YOU Laugh

by TycroesOsprey Sun Mar 18, 2012 7:42 pm

english warrior wrote:As to all those people saying how boring, 10 man English rugby is well, look at who is the greatest try scorer over the last 10 years in the 6 nations and its England by a mile.

So put that in your collective, and as for the English side being 'So called great' well what do you have to do but be great? because by any criteria that team were great. Won the world cup , beat SH nations home and away on 17 consecutive occasions, won GS and won the 6 nations on several occasions (ok not GS) and were Number 1 over a 2 year peiod. In fact that team alone beat the SH more often than the 3 Celtic nations have managed combined throughout History!!!

There, thats Great, and not a team who came 4th in last years 6 nations and who lost 4 games out of 8 before this years competition!! and who haven't beaten a SH team for years.

I thank you.

seeing Wales as the best side in teh North is really killing you isnt it EW. All that bitterness and delusion wrapped up in the salty tears of realisation that yet again wales have won a grand slam and England have won nothing. laughing

by english warrior Sun Mar 18, 2012 8:05 pm

Tycoes- Well how childish, and good luck to Wales, but you must be a slow learner, i'm sad because of the paucity of skill and talent in the NH, as eveinced by Wales winning a GS, and jolly good luck to them, no sour grapes from me.

I merely stated that things must be bad in our Hemi-sphere if Wales are the best we've got, because a good English/French side is better than a Good Welsh side. Thats all, because England have won the World cup and been in 2 losing finals.
France have been in 3 losing finals.

Wales, Scotland and ireland haven't got pst semi- territory, and i was also remaking that the English WC winning team were something special, 4 GS, and numerous titles in the period from 91 to 03.

So i'm not slagging off the Wales team, who are deserved champions, i'm just saying that its de-valued, because its not England or France!! Doh

By the way, didn't England win the 6 nations last year and came second this year ?

But in all honesty, who are the SH sides more wary of playing, England/France, or Wales Ireland, Scotland, the answer of which is why this GS is good for Wales but not good for NH Rugby. thumbsup

by maestegmafia Sun Mar 18, 2012 8:16 pm

english warrior wrote:Tycoes- Well how childish, and good luck to Wales, but you must be a slow learner, i'm sad because of the paucity of skill and talent in the NH, as eveinced by Wales winning a GS, and jolly good luck to them, no sour grapes from me.

I merely stated that things must be bad in our Hemi-sphere if Wales are the best we've got, because a good English/French side is better than a Good Welsh side. Thats all, because England have won the World cup and been in 2 losing finals.
France have been in 3 losing finals.

Wales, Scotland and ireland haven't got pst semi- territory, and i was also remaking that the English WC winning team were something special, 4 GS, and numerous titles in the period from 91 to 03.

So i'm not slagging off the Wales team, who are deserved champions, i'm just saying that its de-valued, because its not England or France!!

By the way, didn't England win the 6 nations last year and came second this year ?

But in all honesty, who are the SH sides more wary of playing, England/France, or Wales Ireland, Scotland, the answer of which is why this GS is good for Wales but not good for NH Rugby.

That is the most pathetic post I have ever read

by MajorRoadWorks Sun Mar 18, 2012 8:28 pm

What a complete an utter load of tosh....

Pathetic WUM.

Why cant people just give credit to a brilliant Welsh Grand Slam.

And yes the team didn't play to their best..... So just wait till they do.

The next few years look good for Wales... (as it does for England).

by maestegmafia Sun Mar 18, 2012 8:31 pm

MajorRoadWorks wrote:What a complete an utter load of tosh....

Pathetic WUM.

Why cant people just give credit to a brilliant Welsh Grand Slam.

And yes the team didn't play to their best..... So just wait till they do.

The next few years look good for Wales... (as it does for England).

Well said...!

Though I don't think Wind Up Merchant really conveys the initial intent.

by Morgannwg Sun Mar 18, 2012 8:37 pm

english warrior wrote:

By the way, didn't England win the 6 nations last year and came second this year ?

Does anyone care about last year? And quite frankly it's pathetic that you are celebrating 2nd place, I repeat 2nd place. You must have a short memory, as seeing as you lost to Wales at HQ just cemented your place on the bottom of the GRAND SLAMMERS boot (a boot you aren't fit to lace btw).

Now accept your place in life thumbsup

.

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Sun Mar 18, 2012 8:53 pm

Congratulations EW and Morgan on your attempts to live up all those tired stereotypes about English and Welsh rugby fans. Enough of the bickering.

by Cymroglan Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:00 pm

I have EW on ignore. I just wish that their Quotes could also be blocked.

by HERSH Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:19 pm

It was a poor 6 nations quality wise, I guess it was to be expected as the RWC was also a non event in terms of quality and drama.

What can we do to make Rugby exciting again, as I know several people who I work with who aren't big rugby fans say they find the game very dull nowadays compared to the 1990's and early 00's and don't watch it anymore, which is a shame for the game not just the 6 Nations.

I for one would like to see the end of the hit at the scrum, far too much time is wasted on resets etc... I also like to see prop shirts have an area that is a bright colour so that the refs can see the players binding in the correct area.

by MajorRoadWorks Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:28 pm

HERSH wrote:It was a poor 6 nations quality wise, I guess it was to be expected as the RWC was also a non event in terms of quality and drama.

What can we do to make Rugby exciting again, as I know several people who I work with who aren't big rugby fans say they find the game very dull nowadays compared to the 1990's and early 00's and don't watch it anymore, which is a shame for the game not just the 6 Nations.

I for one would like to see the end of the hit at the scrum, far too much time is wasted on resets etc... I also like to see prop shirts have an area that is a bright colour so that the refs can see the players binding in the correct area.

Still with WUMs Hersh.....

Let me see, Rugby is very boring since the 90s and EARLY 00s. Is that between 1990-2004. Now, that does say that Rugby has become boring, OR. That rugby is now boring as England are rubbish and since Wales have won 3 Grand Slams....

Hersh. Ok, we get it. You hate Welsh rugby and everything to do with Welsh success..... Now I suggest you get used to it or you're going to have serious emotional issues.....

by HERSH Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:37 pm

Call me a wum if it makes you feel better, but lets be honest rugby over the last couple of years has taken a dip in quality as too much empathise is placed on defence rather than attack, I have already said that Wales deserved to win the 6 nations this year in other posts.

But the team of 2005 was far superior than 2012 in terms of entertainment, I even own the dvd of that years grand slam as it was good rugby to watch.

International rugby is dull, players seem to lack basic ball handling skills and look clueless in attack, I said the same thing last year.

Something needs to be done.

by nobbled Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:46 pm

Closest 6 Nations for sometime - not always the highest quality but the commitment was of the highest order.
I was on the edge of my seat for most of the games. Tight games decided in many cases on one throw of the dice.
I know some of our Welsh posters can be a little sensitive - so please, I don't think the GS was devalued because it was so close, rather the opposite. If its worth having you have to fight for it, and Wales were made to fight in every game and came out on top. Well done lads! The harder it is to achieve the more it should be valued. thumbsup

by Cymroglan Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:47 pm

nobbled wrote:Closest 6 Nations for sometime - not always the highest quality but the commitment was of the highest order.
I was on the edge of my seat for most of the games. Tight games decided in many cases on one throw of the dice.
I know some of our Welsh posters can be a little sensitive - so please, I don't think the GS was devalued because it was so close, rather the opposite. If its worth having you have to fight for it, and Wales were made to fight in every game and came out on top. Well done lads! The harder it is to achieve the more it should be valued.

Agreed

by maestegmafia Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:50 pm

Cymroglan wrote:
nobbled wrote:Closest 6 Nations for sometime - not always the highest quality but the commitment was of the highest order.
I was on the edge of my seat for most of the games. Tight games decided in many cases on one throw of the dice.
I know some of our Welsh posters can be a little sensitive - so please, I don't think the GS was devalued because it was so close, rather the opposite. If its worth having you have to fight for it, and Wales were made to fight in every game and came out on top. Well done lads! The harder it is to achieve the more it should be valued.

Agreed

Well said. I agree the lads fought hard for that, glad we didn't fall at the final hurdle, showed a hell of a lot of character by the squad to do that.

by HERSH Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:52 pm

The commitment was great don't get me wrong, but every game was painful to watch as players at that level should be able to think for themselves when plan A and plan B doesn't work.

Too many players from all home nations and France are over coached, they think like machines nowadays rather than showing the spark and a little bit of imagination that made these guys standout when they were playing rugby at younger age levels.

Thats what made players like Shane Williams and Jason Robinson so exciting to watch

by Super D Boon Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:56 pm

The 2003 world cup was a bad world cup for the sport, and kicking your way to glory shouldn't really count. Anyway let's keep to modern times, there are two things on my mind:
England 12 - 19 Wales

Grand Slam winner 2012: Wales
2nd place : England

by HERSH Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:58 pm

When was this about England vs Wales?

Grow up!

by Super D Boon Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:02 pm

Since English Warrior made it that way. So I decided to use counter-wumming.

Anyway, agreed that the 2005 team were better, they actually knew how to throw quick passes out wide, something this lot of giants can't seem to do. Despite people foaming at the mouth at the likes of Cuthbert and North I prefer Shane anyday and don't really rate this Welsh team as highly as others. Still, they won a grand slam so they can't be that bad.

Am I the only person who finds Mike Phillips to be overrated? How many times does he pass the ball to the blind side. He's as predictable as a grandfather clock .

by HERSH Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:04 pm

by maestegmafia Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:09 pm

Super D Boon wrote:
Am I the only person who finds Mike Phillips to be overrated? How many times does he pass the ball to the blind side. He's as predictable as a grandfather clock .

That says more about the opposition that fall for it an lose to the teams Phillips plays for.

by ChequeredJersey Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:11 pm

Super D Boon wrote:The 2003 world cup was a bad world cup for the sport, and kicking your way to glory shouldn't really count.

Yeah, that England team never scored any tries, didn't have any attacking players and players like BOD and Umaga and Larkham were not playing in 2003. Everything you have said is true

by nobbled Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:11 pm

maestegmafia wrote:
Cymroglan wrote:
nobbled wrote:Closest 6 Nations for sometime - not always the highest quality but the commitment was of the highest order.
I was on the edge of my seat for most of the games. Tight games decided in many cases on one throw of the dice.
I know some of our Welsh posters can be a little sensitive - so please, I don't think the GS was devalued because it was so close, rather the opposite. If its worth having you have to fight for it, and Wales were made to fight in every game and came out on top. Well done lads! The harder it is to achieve the more it should be valued.

Agreed

Well said. I agree the lads fought hard for that, glad we didn't fall at the final hurdle, showed a hell of a lot of character by the squad to do that.

Absolutely. I think Wales of old would have choked at least once in similar situations. Their self belief and sheer determination are for me the most impressive thing about this side, especially when coupled with the fact that this is only a new team (12 months?) which I am sure will only improve with time. Yeah, Wales have sacrificed flair for power, but that can be developed now that they are in the habit of winning, and some of the off-loads from these "giants " have been sublime.
Good luck on Oz. clap

by flyhalffactory Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:25 pm

Meister wrote:Slightly melodramatic I know, but I can't help but feel underwhelmed by the quality of rugby in this season's 6 nations. I do not remember a game that produced any real excitment, interest or sustained attacking play. The constant need to play by a certain 'game plan' meant that any creativity or individuality was stifled, nay choked at birth. International rugby has become a series of set plays, players scared, or unable to light up the game with their undoubted skill. The game as a spectacle has gone; nothing to cheer, nothing to inspire. What did the matches today produce to inspire anyone to take up the 'real' beautiful game? Ireland are scared to do anything, France are deflated, England haven't used their backs all tournament, Wales won by default (producing a dreary brand of rugby based on grunt), Scotland and Italy were true to form.

Nothing to talk about, nothing to inspire, nothing to hope for. Seriously, this was awful.

This is a poster totally lacking in rugby experience, knowledge or awareness

The teams are much fitter, stronger, faster, and much more aware of the skill set as individuals and as a team unit. The games in general was played in attacking mode with play set out trying to avoid the negative drift defence.

Both England and Wales played a brand of rugby that was backs driven not forward controlled, and to state that Wales won by default based on grunt is quite amusing your transparency screams MASSIVE CHIP ON MY SHOULDER

Poor effort at being a WUM...... 2/10 for writing your name on the answer sheet

by Meister Sun Mar 18, 2012 11:00 pm

Touchy! The post was a general assessment of the tournament, in my clearly deluded opinion. I thought this was a forum for debate between people who love the game of rugby. Obviously any criticism of the welsh demi-gods isn't allowed. I actually was pleased that you won the slam. However I clearly should keep my opinions to myself in future, in case I upset those of a delicate nature.

by ultra Sun Mar 18, 2012 11:29 pm

Yup.....just read through all of this thread, the usual bickering etc etc, just to come to one conlusion....the OP is wrong. This has been a tense, bloody battle of a tournament. NH rugby looks harder, fitter and more phyical than ever before.The best side won and will ruffle a few feathers darn sarf and the second third and fourth placed sides will fancy their chances against anyone but the blacks. Until they change the rules again that is,

by Totallybiasedscarlet Sun Mar 18, 2012 11:44 pm

english warrior wrote:I totally agree with one of the posters who said that 'If Wales win a G.S. then NH Rugby is in a poor state.

I actually agree because if the 'Big boys' namely England and France aren't winning it then something is very wrong, or lacking and that is what is happening with the Welsh G.S.

All credit to them, but a good French or English side would have them for Breakfast. Wales aren't even in the top 4 and haven't beat a SH side in a long time so yes, i agree, NH Rugby is poor, but not totally dead just yet.

Good lord! Did he actually write this? Are you from a public school by any chance?

Your whole reasoning is why I made the sarcastic statement above. You and people like you cannot give credit where it is due. You can only conceive that England must be fantastic or there's something wrong in the world and if Wales win then it's because everyone else was crap that year. Somebody here accused me of having a chip, then you come along and make the post above. Mate, do some traveling, learn a language or something, anything just to get a grip and some perspective in life.

Or is your name Dick Best?

by Totallybiasedscarlet Sun Mar 18, 2012 11:49 pm

ChequeredJersey wrote:
Super D Boon wrote:The 2003 world cup was a bad world cup for the sport, and kicking your way to glory shouldn't really count.

Yeah, that England team never scored any tries, didn't have any attacking players and players like BOD and Umaga and Larkham were not playing in 2003. Everything you have said is true

THat England team was outstanding. You had Cohen, Robinson and Greenwood scoring tries, Catt pulling the strings and Wilkinson kicking everything in sight. All built on top of a very traditional english pack who would sit on you and squeeze the life out of you. Pointless criticising them. They achieved a RWC. Only 4 countries have managed that!

by Taylorman Sun Mar 18, 2012 11:54 pm

I see you're new to the boards if number of posts is the measure so welcome Meister.

As a SH poster who often (harshly and otherwise) comments on NH rugby I certainly didn't view the recent 6N in that light. For me there were the usual mixture of good and bad games but in general made the following observations:

1 Despite their unpopularity in some quarters Wales did confirm their abilities as a force to be reckoned with after their world cup showings last year and consistency in form since. They also played some fast, exciting stuff at times and at others rushed things rather than opting for stability and control.

2 England by 6N end proved they are on the right track to improvement after a somewhat poor year last 12 months, both on and off the field. In Lancaster they seem to have found a coach that is doing the right things and has potential fort he future.

3 Ireland will be disappointed with their performance overall. They reached a peak against Australia in pool play at the world cup and largely havn't gone on from there since. Some players have lost form and there are signs all is not happy with the coach. They have the toughest job in the Summer tour against NZ (but then I would say that) and on current form will struggle. Urgent work is required with this one I'm afraid.

4 France are France and will be disappointed but again I put in down to the extreme highs and lows only France can produce...a bit like Aucklands weather- 4 seasons in one day.

5 and 6 Scotland and Italy finished last as expected with Italy finishing higher on the honour's list in the match that was destined to sort the wooden spoon.

I thought Wales displayed a huge amount of attacking play so I'm a bit surprised at that comment. In fact they do it obsessively and they need to add some stability if they're to continue the momentum, or compete down under. Down under its about the breakdown and they'll be turned over big time if they try to run everything at Oz.

England have shown they could be a threat to a SA who are rebuilding. Ireland will need to find something extra in a very short time.

So that's my take as a neutral, probably more leaning towards Wales as of the 6 they attacked more, much more than the other 5 sides.

Overall, I enjoyed it and look forward to the Summer series.

So we hope you wont be lost to these boards as new poster views are refreshing in amongst all the scratching that sometimes goes on here.

by flyhalffactory Mon Mar 19, 2012 12:10 am

Meister wrote:Touchy! The post was a general assessment of the tournament, in my clearly deluded opinion. I thought this was a forum for debate between people who love the game of rugby. Obviously any criticism of the welsh demi-gods isn't allowed. I actually was pleased that you won the slam. However I clearly should keep my opinions to myself in future, in case I upset those of a delicate nature.

I am Scottish, and our side whilst making general improvements deserved the wooden spoon, we have unearthed some wonderful young individuals Rennie, Denton, Hogg, Jones and Italy have improved considerably and are not enduring the 30-40 point drubbings anymore

I am not Welsh but they got to the WC semis and won the Slam.............. and they didnt do it by grunt, thats certainly a disregard to the amount of fitness and conditioning (Poland camp), application of skill based techniques, the backs of Scarlets (North, Jon Davies, Priestland), and the Blues (1/2p. Cuthbert, Roberts) have been courted by French and English clubs

Its true that Ireland, Scotland, and France have underperformed but its not to say that they havent had some great moments, Scotland v Ireland first 40 mins was superb entertainment

Hey and you are correct this is a forum, and I am just saying that I think your thoughts are way off the mark, I think england, Wales, and Italy have improved over last season if you think they havent then tell us how they have regressed .............. however we can see how far every side has got by the SH markers

by Meister Mon Mar 19, 2012 12:37 am

Thanks Taylorman, Wellington is an awesome city, we spent three weeks there on the Lions tour in 2005. Debate is good; I take on board the views of the other posters. I just feel that if you were trying to introduce someone new to the international game, it isn't really that 'immediate' at the minute (I was afraid to use the inspiring word). Go watch a provincial game instead. No attempt at WAM in the initial post meant.

I do feel however, that Tom Jones would be a much better performer if he put on a few kilos and ran straighter:D

by aucklandlaurie Mon Mar 19, 2012 1:01 am

Meister
Do you not think the headline "The death of NH International rugby" is not only over the top but also over-emotive? And I can assure you that I am not of a delicate nature nor a defender of Welsh demi-gods.

by Cowshot Mon Mar 19, 2012 8:37 am

It's hard to be definitive about this 6ns so close to it, but here are my current impressions:

1) There was vast improvement by all sides over the competition. There's always some, but this time I thought it a stand out feature. It wasn't 100%: Ireland and Scotland had poor last games, but it felt like the quality each round went up a lot. Admittedly from a low base.

2) This Welsh team is much the best of the three that have won GS in the last few years. They have an edge to them the others imo did not. No guarantees of course, but I reckon they have a very good chance of beating the Aussies this summer.

3) England improved probably more than any of the other sides (again, starting from a low base helps) and there is a freshness and fizz about them which is I find very attractive.

4) Scotland actually came on quite a bit and have found some quality young new players. It's a shame that other teams were improving just as fast but it seems to me there's actually less reason for suicidal despondency north of the Border than there was before the start of this competition. Though I grant it doesn't feel like that now.

5) Hope to God the Irish can sort out their front row. They are far too good a team to have that sort of thing happen to them (much as I enjoyed it!).

6) If they do, and the French work out what on earth they are up to, then we have 4 NH teams all very close. Imo NH Rugby is not only alive and well, but stronger maybe than it has been for years, if not ever.

by slartibartfast Mon Mar 19, 2012 8:50 am

To be fair to the original OP, Tom crofts knock on did lower the tone of the tournament.

by gregortree Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:24 am

StartiFart
the OP is a bit of a WUM, and so are you, but your Croft comment did make me smile I confess.

(Knock ons - don't get me started - too many throughout from all sides, so maybe the OP has a point)

by RubyGuby Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:26 am

Just read the OP - I guess he missed the thrilling 9-8 RWC victory by the All Blacks thumbsup

by Glas a du Mon Mar 19, 2012 12:17 pm

gregortree wrote:StartiFart
the OP is a bit of a WUM, and so are you, but your Croft comment did make me smile I confess.

(Knock ons - don't get me started - too many throughout from all sides, so maybe the OP has a point)

To be fair it was a spectacular knock on. He took blind side wing forward knock ons to a new level, redefining them in the process.

by **Biltong** Mon Mar 19, 2012 12:20 pm

I wonder how he felt after that knock on, it was the most spectacularly unintentional fumble of a ball I have seen for ages. steam

by Glas a du Mon Mar 19, 2012 12:22 pm

But the pace at which he fumbled was the thing though, grease lightening.

by **Biltong** Mon Mar 19, 2012 12:24 pm

Yeah, his co-ordination between his left and right hand went AWOL for a moment there.

In fact you could compare it to a couple of three year olds trying to high five each other but missing by the proverbial mile.

by Sponsored content