Paul Ackford says "The best two teams in the world at the moment? No debate. New Zealand and Leinster. The rest are playing catch-up..."!

First topic message reminder :

By Paul Ackford

The reason is simple. Both outfits are set up to play, which sounds simple, but isn’t. It requires intention, fitness, understanding, organisation, unbelievably high skill sets across the entire squad, a positive attitude to risk, and courage. It also assumes a commitment to be multidimensional in approach rather than the one-trick pony nonsense which some teams get by on.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/9576371/England-must-look-to-the-flair-players-if-they-want-to-mix-it-with-the-All-Blacks-at-rugbys-top-table.html

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:What are you talking about? At least you finally recognise and admit Leinster do rely on retIred and not good enough SANZAR players! We are making some progress!

I agree with Clive Woodward. You can't call a team great until they've won a world cup. Nz just have, so Leinster don't belong in their company until they have a world cup of their own!

Are you trying to wind us up or are you just that clueless?

Seriously?
Literally all he ever does is try to wind you up. This penny is taking a long time to drop..

anotherworldofpain wrote:What are you talking about? At least you finally recognise and admit Leinster do rely on retIred and not good enough SANZAR players! We are making some progress!

I agree with Clive Woodward. You can't call a team great until they've won a world cup. Nz just have, so Leinster don't belong in their company until they have a world cup of their own!

The point I was making was they don't rely on overseas players at all. Would you say the Highlanders rely on overseas players because Haskall plays for them or the Sharks because Freddy plays for them?

For someone who lives in England you have a fairly limited understanding of rugby outside your narrow Kiwi centric focus.

anotherworldofpain wrote:What are you talking about? At least you finally recognise and admit Leinster do rely on retIred and not good enough SANZAR players! We are making some progress!

I agree with Clive Woodward. You can't call a team great until they've won a world cup. Nz just have, so Leinster don't belong in their company until they have a world cup of their own!

I disagree the bar has been set by the likes of England, SA and Oz as they have all won world cups away from home. NZ aren't quite at that level yet having only managed wins at home.

anotherworldofpain wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:There must be a reason why Leinster are the second best team in the world, but Ireland suck though!

All I can think is it must be all those retired and "not good enough" ex-SANZAR players that bolster Leinster...right?

Who are these players you are talking about and who are they not good enough for?

Well to begin with Isa Nacewa. Tried for years to get an AB call up...gave up, played for Fiji, then found himself in the cold Super rugby-wise because of all the competition for eligible AB players so took himself off to leinster to earn some Euros. He must be fully bummed that the euro is worth diddly arse now...

You should ask Kirk Lazarus for some advice.

http://www.theblues.co.nz/Players/122-Isa-Nacewa.aspx

GunsGerms wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:What are you talking about? At least you finally recognise and admit Leinster do rely on retIred and not good enough SANZAR players! We are making some progress!

I agree with Clive Woodward. You can't call a team great until they've won a world cup. Nz just have, so Leinster don't belong in their company until they have a world cup of their own!

I disagree the bar has been set by the likes of England, SA and Oz as they have all won world cups away from home. NZ aren't quite at that level yet having only managed wins at home.

Empirical evidence suggests the opposite as fewer teams have won home tournaments and fewer tournaments were won by the home team.

Just logic and maths again sorry.

It doesn't aid the claim of Leinster either way though:) you really are digging a hole for yourself now

By that logic then if NZ were any good they would have won the world cup away from home because to do so is easier. Is that what you are saying?

I'm sure they would have if not for food posioning 1995 and Wayne Barnes in 2007 GG!

anotherworldofpain wrote:I'm sure they would have if not for food posioning 1995 and Wayne Barnes in 2007 GG!

you were better at this when you were a little more subtle,now you just look like a fool.

I disagree. I'm merely being to the point in replying to GG's very to the point questions. I prefer just not to play the subtle hiding game, because people can get confused and wound up sore.

No you see when you were pretending to have broken English it was plausible that something was lost in translation.

For the record: of you're on the wind uP it's more insulting to just compare NZ to Leinster than to attack the world cup recor of the most successful team in RWC history;)

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:What are you talking about? At least you finally recognise and admit Leinster do rely on retIred and not good enough SANZAR players! We are making some progress!

I agree with Clive Woodward. You can't call a team great until they've won a world cup. Nz just have, so Leinster don't belong in their company until they have a world cup of their own!

Are you trying to wind us up or are you just that clueless?

if you really need to ask that question you need to get out more

mowgli wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:What are you talking about? At least you finally recognise and admit Leinster do rely on retIred and not good enough SANZAR players! We are making some progress!

I agree with Clive Woodward. You can't call a team great until they've won a world cup. Nz just have, so Leinster don't belong in their company until they have a world cup of their own!

Are you trying to wind us up or are you just that clueless?

if you really need to ask that question you need to get out more

How would that mean, i need to get out more?

anotherworldofpain wrote:For the record: of you're on the wind uP it's more insulting to just compare NZ to Leinster than to attack the world cup recor of the most successful team in RWC history;)

Nobody attacked South Africa's record.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

mowgli wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:What are you talking about? At least you finally recognise and admit Leinster do rely on retIred and not good enough SANZAR players! We are making some progress!

I agree with Clive Woodward. You can't call a team great until they've won a world cup. Nz just have, so Leinster don't belong in their company until they have a world cup of their own!

Are you trying to wind us up or are you just that clueless?

if you really need to ask that question you need to get out more

How would that mean, i need to get out more?

oh ffs, likewise if you need to ask that question you definitely need to get out more.

mowgli wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

mowgli wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:What are you talking about? At least you finally recognise and admit Leinster do rely on retIred and not good enough SANZAR players! We are making some progress!

I agree with Clive Woodward. You can't call a team great until they've won a world cup. Nz just have, so Leinster don't belong in their company until they have a world cup of their own!

Are you trying to wind us up or are you just that clueless?

if you really need to ask that question you need to get out more

How would that mean, i need to get out more?

oh ffs, likewise if you need to ask that question you definitely need to get out more.

Huh?

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:For the record: of you're on the wind uP it's more insulting to just compare NZ to Leinster than to attack the world cup recor of the most successful team in RWC history;)

Nobody attacked South Africa's record.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_World_Cup#Performance_of_nations

South Africa are third. But nice try!!

S.A. 2 wins from 5 attempts at a 40% success rate.
N.Z. and Oz joint 2nd with 2 wins from 7 attempts.

Nice try but S.A. are far more successful

Not really, they failed to even qualify for '87 and '91 due to their politics. So they are 2 from 7 tournaments. But let us face facts: They were handed 1995 on a plate for "political" reasons too by getting away with poisoning NZ, so you can't have it both ways.

Otherwise you can say Lithuania have a 100% record of 0 from 0.

anotherworldofpain wrote:Not really, they failed to even qualify for '87 and '91 due to their politics. So they are 2 from 7 tournaments. But let us face facts: They were handed 1995 on a plate for "political" reasons too by getting away with poisoning NZ, so you can't have it both ways.

Otherwise you can say Lithuania have a 100% record of 0 from 0.

Lol you're going full special on this now

anotherworldofpain wrote:Not really, they failed to even qualify for '87 and '91 due to their politics. So they are 2 from 7 tournaments. But let us face facts: They were handed 1995 on a plate for "political" reasons too by getting away with poisoning NZ, so you can't have it both ways.

Otherwise you can say Lithuania have a 100% record of 0 from 0.

And you are 1/1 in the World WUM championships awop

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:Not really, they failed to even qualify for '87 and '91 due to their politics. So they are 2 from 7 tournaments. But let us face facts: They were handed 1995 on a plate for "political" reasons too by getting away with poisoning NZ, so you can't have it both ways.

Otherwise you can say Lithuania have a 100% record of 0 from 0.

Lol you're going full special on this now

OK, Have it your way, SA are a better team than NZ...but that also defeats the author of the article. I'm glad you FINALLY agree!

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

mowgli wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

mowgli wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:What are you talking about? At least you finally recognise and admit Leinster do rely on retIred and not good enough SANZAR players! We are making some progress!

I agree with Clive Woodward. You can't call a team great until they've won a world cup. Nz just have, so Leinster don't belong in their company until they have a world cup of their own!

Are you trying to wind us up or are you just that clueless?

if you really need to ask that question you need to get out more

How would that mean, i need to get out more?

oh ffs, likewise if you need to ask that question you definitely need to get out more.

Huh?

If he gets it then he doesn't need to ask the question. If he gets it it's because he spends a lot of time on 606v2 and knows about AWOP. So if he gets it he needs to get out more. If he doesn't get it and so needs to ask the question then spends to much time out there. So he needs to stay in and spend more time reading 606v2. Get it.

nganboy wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

mowgli wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

mowgli wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:What are you talking about? At least you finally recognise and admit Leinster do rely on retIred and not good enough SANZAR players! We are making some progress!

I agree with Clive Woodward. You can't call a team great until they've won a world cup. Nz just have, so Leinster don't belong in their company until they have a world cup of their own!

Are you trying to wind us up or are you just that clueless?

if you really need to ask that question you need to get out more

How would that mean, i need to get out more?

oh ffs, likewise if you need to ask that question you definitely need to get out more.

Huh?

If he gets it then he doesn't need to ask the question. If he gets it it's because he spends a lot of time on 606v2 and knows about AWOP. So if he gets it he needs to get out more. If he doesn't get it and so needs to ask the question then spends to much time out there. So he needs to stay in and spend more time reading 606v2. Get it.

there's always one

Im confused

anotherworldofpain wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:Not really, they failed to even qualify for '87 and '91 due to their politics. So they are 2 from 7 tournaments. But let us face facts: They were handed 1995 on a plate for "political" reasons too by getting away with poisoning NZ, so you can't have it both ways.

Otherwise you can say Lithuania have a 100% record of 0 from 0.

Lol you're going full special on this now

OK, Have it your way, SA are a better team than NZ...but that also defeats the author of the article. I'm glad you FINALLY agree!

Again a total failure of reading comprehension.

Again, I don't think so. Is just about you can't understand my point because you are viewing from such a parochial perspective.

IF SA are better than NZ, then the best two teams in the world can't be NZ and Leinster.

I would have thought a school child with minimal reading comprehension a tenuous grasp on logic and a fleeting familiarity with reality could grasp that.

Leinster are clearly a superior team to NZ and until NZ have the cajones to turn up in the RDS and play us then I don’t see how anyone could claim otherwise.

When was the last time Leinster played NZ anyway? I seem to remember it happening in around the early 90s.

According to my sources (I certainly don’t remember) it was in 1989.

anotherworldofpain wrote:Again, I don't think so. Is just about you can't understand my point because you are viewing from such a parochial perspective.

IF SA are better than NZ, then the best two teams in the world can't be NZ and Leinster.

I would have thought a school child with minimal reading comprehension a tenuous grasp on logic and a fleeting familiarity with reality could grasp that.

Who said S.A. are better than NZ,I said they have a better record at World Cups.Only someone with a lack of reading comprehension could have thought otherwise

Mickado wrote:According to my sources (I certainly don’t remember) it was in 1989.

I was at that game.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:Again, I don't think so. Is just about you can't understand my point because you are viewing from such a parochial perspective.

IF SA are better than NZ, then the best two teams in the world can't be NZ and Leinster.

I would have thought a school child with minimal reading comprehension a tenuous grasp on logic and a fleeting familiarity with reality could grasp that.

Who said S.A. are better than NZ,I said they have a better record at World Cups.Only someone with a lack of reading comprehension could have thought otherwise

Ah! I see what you are saying! You've identified two different contexts: rugby world cups and outside of that and realised you can't make comparisons across those contexts!

NOW, please just apply that logic that you seem to have now grasped to "international rugby" versus "parochial european competition" and you will be ALMOST understanding my original argument!

anotherworldofpain wrote:

Ah! I see what you are saying! You've identified two different contexts: rugby world cups and outside of that and realised you can't make comparisons across those contexts!

NOW, please just apply that logic that you seem to have now grasped to "international rugby" versus "parochial european competition" and you will be ALMOST understanding my original argument!

Your original argument is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the article quoted in the 1st post,I agree with you that Leinster are not as good as NZ and have not said otherwise.However that comparison is not made in the article in question and you just look silly when you say it is.

The Leinster team to play Exeter in the first round of the HC is out. 1 non Irish qualfified player is starting, one more on the bench. 21 out of 23 in the squad are IQ.

Right. So Leinster are a subset of Ireland. Ireland are 60 points worse than NZ at the last count, so where does that leave Leinster? One of the two best teams in the world??

REALLY? If so, then rugby is over as a competition.

Ok bye!

Thanks for playing

Mickado wrote:Leinster are clearly a superior team to NZ and until NZ have the cajones to turn up in the RDS and play us then I don’t see how anyone could claim otherwise.

Oooh, nice one Mick.

NZ have the cajones? What do drawers have to do with anything?

I think you mean cojones.

Besides we sent one of our own - Brad Thorn - and now he's moved back to the Highlanders. Says everything.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Besides we sent one of our own - Brad Thorn - and now he's moved back to the Highlanders. Says everything.

What does it say? Explain please.

I don't know about catching up but I think the Ospreys certainly caught them up in the Rabo final on their hallowed turf

They did alright. Ospreys are a very good team on their day though. Didnt they win a grand slam in 2008?

Grand Slam 2008, Rabo, Magners - On their day eh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah they are definitely a formidable opponent and worthy champions. Showed a lot of hunger that day (Rabo final) and most impressive was their never say die attitude. A lot teams will just fold when Leinster start motoring.

I think there's a sense of realism there at the moment and with the salary cap those achievements might be just out of reach at the moment. Its good for bringing the youngsters on though

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:NZ have the cajones? What do drawers have to do with anything?

I think you mean cojones.

Besides we sent one of our own - Brad Thorn - and now he's moved back to the Highlanders. Says everything.

I like the way he popped over after the NZ season, walked straight into the team, picked a up a NH trinket and then went home, after famously reprimanding the forwards at Leinster for being too mouthy and too lazy.

RubyGuby wrote:I think there's a sense of realism there at the moment and with the salary cap those achievements might be just out of reach at the moment. Its good for bringing the youngsters on though

Absolutely. There is a good core group of players there too. Dan Biggar for example in my opinion is an excellent player and even a little underrated.

GG. It doesn't say anything. It's a joke.

Our friend AWOP is like the Duracell bunny. He just keeps going on and on and on and on. You can never win. You can only keep up with him. So you might as well enjoy yourself along the way.

If there's one person who can judge the relative merits of either side it must be Thorn. He's back with the Highlanders next year so once he's free to discuss things his comments will be interesting as he will be playing for neither at that point. Its inevitable the question will be asked.

What's really interesting is both won their respective highest possible events so the knowledge gained in what makes a winning side in completely different environments woud be invaluable- saders, ABs, Leinster, Broncos et all.

Thorn looks to me the type that will make a very successful coach. He's done it all...and more. He's a magnet to winning titles, commands respect as both person and player, and won't tolerate low standards. He's also evolved from the renegade, party up youth years into a very well rounded bloke, family man etc and most of all, just can't stay away from the game.