Golden Age for a Nation's Rugby

First topic message reminder :

So one way of measuring the "greatness" of a team might be to take the winners of rugby world cups (the biggest stage, most pressure, most prestigious prize!), and look how well they maintained the legacy.

Often a team that wins the RWC will be part of a "golden age" that maintains some global dominance, rather than a "blip" where there is some "luck of the draw" or "bounce of the ball" or refereeing indiscretion that aids their victory in this one-off knock-out format!

So we might expect a rugby world champion team to go to earn some string of wins to maintain their legacy as "rugby world champions".

Who of the stats gurus out there can rank all rugby world cup winners in order of their subsequent streak of international victories following a rugby world cup win?

gregortree wrote:Group 4 to do the visitors' catering then.

They wouldnt put enough poison in!! there budget would run out after buying the potatoes

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:NZ's successful defence of the 2015 RWC is already in the tea leaves. France will be the opponent.

In 1987 NZ beat France in the final.

What was the score in the 2011 final between NZ and France? 8 - 7.

What's 8 + 7 ?

The 2015 RWC champions can already be proclaimed.

I already know the score, too. 16 - 3.

16 + 3 = 3...peat

Probably the most logical statement made here this year since the Octopus picked the Football winner.
By the way I've just switched to tea- I'm not going to miss a moment like that!

what was the point of this thread?

You want chapter and verse?okay this is the biggest controversy in NZ v Wales more so than the "Haden dive/Geoff Wheel penalised bit".There are two versions
the Ref Bob Dallas was behind the play when he caught up Bob Deans was short of the line.Rhys Gabe tackled him and held him back allegedly claiming Deans was "Rabbiting".A.C.Wallace could have scored himself but passed because Deans was in a position to score and make the conversion easier.
Wallace claims Deans scored,Deans himself claimed he scored and was pulled back into the field of play by Wales players.Hesaid on his death bed "I Scored"
Rhys Gabe claimed he felt Deans struggling and hauled him back.It is a case of whichever version you care to believe.As to where you can read about in 1960`s books by Sir Terence McLean,and possibly J.B.G Thomas or Vivien Jenkins.That is from memory I have over a 100 books of the era 1950-1995 but could`nt tell you exactly which one.

emack, we've both read the same article on the game by the looks of it. I might have watched a rugby programme on it too, it was about that All Black UK tour. I think calling it the biggest controversy is a bit much? It happened over 100 years ago. All you have is speculation, but others see the result that's recorded in the history books. After knowing this can you still claim your post is accurate?

Alan, I'm not sure Deans try was the most controversial area of that game at the time from an NZ perspective, It's become well known with time and grown into legendary status. I would say the refereeing of the scrum had a bigger effect on the game and on the NZ team at the time. For the only time in the history of the international game the referee essentially decided that one team (the All Blacks) wouldn't scrum and penalised them if they tried. These were the days of 40+ scrums a match, when you couldn't pick the ball off the ground, juggling the ball was a knockon and you could kick to directly to touch from anywhere. The All Blacks had to be talked into staying on the field and Gallaher told them to not bother competing in the scrum. The result was a huge wealth of posession and position to a good welsh team. It came close to derailing the tour. The players met after the game and had to be talked into staying. The closest modern equivelent might be know#ing you were 100% guarenteed to lose the ball if you took it into a ruck, and you had no chance of getting a turnover at the opposition ruck.

Wales also beat everyone else that year...

I have`nt read any article and my memory goes back to books I read over 40 years ago.I would put it to you that my statement is more relevant .Than the lack of yellow cards awarded against the AllBlacks statement etc.One does get a little fed up of the McCaw cheats,referees only penalise/card the other side conspiracy theory.It does really sound like sourgrapes or "yah boo and sucks to you"which frankly was my throway response to you.Every team in rugby tries it on it is up to the officials to call it.Wales have a very good side as I have commented on and wish them well.It really does`nt need conspiracy theories to defend them.IF i have offended you I apologise but stick by my post,incidentally
I believe I read Wales packed 2-3-2 in that match and that teddy Morgan scored the winning try from one.

Me mentioning the 20 penalties per yellow card was rubbish, but I thought that was obvious. But if you are going to respond don't do the outdated ones, as in, 100+ years outdated.

In terms of the 1904 tour we are lucky that it's well recorded and that a review was undertaken following the tour. Additionally, independent observors were adjacent to the Deans try. The review of the tour lead to direct and real changes to all future tours (including the following tours by the Springboks and Wallabies). The issues with Scottish referees at the time are recorded by welsh rugby historians, as is the reality that no other All Black side ever suffered from the same scrum interpretation before or since.

In terms of the yellow card vs penalty ratio. It's bunk and has been demonstratably shown that it can't be made with any certainty (for a start it assumes that there sahould be a relationship between penalty count and yellow cards). Like many rugby media stories it's a result of poor journalism. There are real issues with penalties vs offences. A sports scientist employed by SARU (who's name I forget) had published a series of peer reviewed papers on the subject. essentially (from memory) his take is that referees have a dominant effect on the game, that interpretation of offences varies between people (even experts), that is no consistency between with individual refs that he has been able to discern, and that their was a real need to actually analyse referees decisions in the game context to understand what is happening.

AWOP if your entirely inaccurate definition of legacy is a high number of wins after winning the WC. I guess the number 1 team is SA right?

If it's a legacy of winning a WC then doing well at the next one...England?

Nice try, but I think you may have just wound yourself up with this one. Still, NZ keep winning, the sun is shining in London, it's not all bad, right?

My definition of "world cup legacy" is entirely accurate. I think you are confused.

What I'm talking about is consecutive post RWC victories, but the actual statistics were provided already which revealed NZ in the lead by a large margin, then SA, AUS and in last place with just 2 wins was ENG. So really the topic is now answered and all other desperate pleading to change the rules to suit ENG will fall on deaf ears.

Morgannwg wrote:Me mentioning the 20 penalties per yellow card was rubbish, but I thought that was obvious. But if you are going to respond don't do the outdated ones, as in, 100+ years outdated.

We have to go back to "outdated" records to talk about Welsh wins over NZ is the problem - there are no accurate modern statistics unfortunately.

Hence why I didn't mention any Wales v NZ fixtures and hence why emacks post is inaccurate and ridiculous. Looks like Morg was right the moment he stepped foot into this thread, as always.

blackcanelion wrote:Alan, I'm not sure Deans try was the most controversial area of that game at the time from an NZ perspective, It's become well known with time and grown into legendary status. I would say the refereeing of the scrum had a bigger effect on the game and on the NZ team at the time. For the only time in the history of the international game the referee essentially decided that one team (the All Blacks) wouldn't scrum and penalised them if they tried. These were the days of 40+ scrums a match, when you couldn't pick the ball off the ground, juggling the ball was a knockon and you could kick to directly to touch from anywhere. The All Blacks had to be talked into staying on the field and Gallaher told them to not bother competing in the scrum. The result was a huge wealth of posession and position to a good welsh team. It came close to derailing the tour. The players met after the game and had to be talked into staying. The closest modern equivelent might be know#ing you were 100% guarenteed to lose the ball if you took it into a ruck, and you had no chance of getting a turnover at the opposition ruck.

Goodness! that sounds terrible! Thank goodness the standard of refereeing is so much better now and no international referee would turn a blind eye to one teams breakdown infringements for 60 minutes in a RWC knock out match! and even let them away with scoring tries from forward passes to boot!