Winners of the 6ns based on the Ais.

First topic message reminder :

Should be Ireland in first place.

England/Wales/Wales/England fighting it out for 2nd 3rd place.

Have not seen any of the France games or Scotland games for that matter.

Will their be a GRAND SLAM next year? probably not.

But it will be very exciting to see if the Ais have any bearing on the 6ns.

Your thoughts.

Execution I guess.  Maybe these things are tried in training but faith in execution (in a hot game) maybe puts them on the endless backburner

But variety is the spice though. Too much of anything gets adapted to.

Biltong wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Biltong wrote:

Comfort wrote:South Africa - We finally saw variation in the play, Roberts used as a decoy, the ball going through the hands and smart tactical kicking from the midfield. This came as a result of having a 9 holding the defence and gving the 10 time, and the 10 making the right decisions with decent execution.

The tactical kicking on the day we very well executed, those little chips and dinks in behind the defence was very well executed.

Gatland said he was watching how Ireland worked it.

So that's our weakness now.  Joe has become the Go To man on bloody tactics.  Then everyone says: 'Oh we always knew that was the way to do it'
I hope Joe saves some new tactics exclusively for us for next year.  It's a long one!

I can never get that, the All Blacks have been doing for about 4 years now, how long does it take coaches (including our own) to see it works?

Interesting. A lot of the good stuff from the last 6N where the England backs played well was down to Care being on such good form and running the show. He was always a threat, and could pass to either Farrell or 36. There were options

Having a decent 9/10 axis makes all the difference no matter what standard you are playing at, New Zealand have always had that, even when we think they are struggling in that dept. they always have decent options, when you have a scrum half, or an outside half, who can take the pressure off the forwards or the players outside them it make a world of difference, I have never seen the All Blacks struggle in that dept.

Depth wise England always look strong, an England 3rd and 4th XV would do pretty well against other 6 Nations team equivalents (especially with Lancaster's recent selection policy, as you'd probably end up with a stronger side than the 1st XV), but you can only have 15 on the field at the same time and that's where the likes of Wales and Ireland have been effective at marshalling resources and providing better direction to their players.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Depth wise England always look strong, an England 3rd and 4th XV would do pretty well against other 6 Nations team equivalents (especially with Lancaster's recent selection policy, as you'd probably end up with a stronger side than the 1st XV), but you can only have 15 on the field at the same time and that's where the likes of Wales and Ireland have been effective at marshalling resources and providing better direction to their players.

There is the thing about having to perservere with a player until the come good if you dont have the resources vs chopping and changing and hoping the new guy slots straight in if you do.

I should also add that I think the Welsh and Irish (and Scottish as a matter of fact) second string group of players has been slowly improving. Scotland is certainly better placed to withstand injuries than we have been at any time in the last decade.

If you look at the side that just beat Argentina pretty comfortably, you could create the following Scotland A side to illustrate how far we've come (and LDs list above shows the same for Wales):

1.Ryan Grant 2.Scott Lawson 3.Geoff Cross 4.Grant Gilchrist 5.Jim Hamilton 6.Kelly Brown 7.John Barclay 8.Johnnie Beattie 9.Chris Cusiter 10.Rhuriadh Jackson 11.Tim Visser 12.Matt Scott 13.Duncan Taylor 14.Dougie Fife 15.Greg Tonks

I'd wager that Scotland A side would have beaten Matt Williams and Frank Hadden's first choice Scotland sides.

LordDowlais wrote:

beshocked wrote:Lorddowlais it wasn't the last 10. it was the last 20.

Wales were winning with ten minutes to go, so it was the last ten, thank you very much, then what killed us was, our bench was nowhere near the qlty of the AllBlacks bench, and we were not as fit as them.

beshocked wrote:Yes you could argue the scoreline flattered England but it wasn't a thumping like Wales-NZ..

The scorline flattered the AllBlacks in our game as well if you ask me, at least wew were in the game with them, England were never anywhere near the AllBlacks in any part of the game.

Okay fine you were leading by 1 point before NZ took the lead back swiftly. I was backing NZ to win because they just looked stronger than the fatigued Welsh team.

It was NZ's 2nd try in the 63rd minute when they started to up their intensity.

Inevitable that NZ would get one more at least.

Don't think the scoreline flattered the ABs - it was combination of ABs piling on the pressure and Wales running out of steam.

If you are in a race you have to pace yourself - Wales didn't, in the end ABs won at a canter because they absorbed the Welsh pressure then went on the attack. Wales had to work so hard to keep up with the ABs that in the end they couldn't which led to a try burst for the ABs.

Matching someone for 60 odd minutes isn't good enough in a 80 minute match.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/rugby-union/29726120

I never had the feeling that Wales would beat the ABs even when they were ahead.

I am not bickering over the All Blacks anymore, both England and Wales were not good enough to beat them, lets just leave it at that.

My original point was, when somebody was trying to say that England would do the best in the 6N because of their pack, but that pack still could not help England beat the Springboks or the All Blacks, so perhaps a side with a decent pack MIGHT be able to beat England in the six nations, and since ALL the 6N sides have a decent pack, then they all MIGHT beat England. Or then again, the MIGHT not.

Comfort wrote:

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:

The Saint wrote:

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:Ireland were more consistent & got the results they deserved.

England's pack kept them in all the games & were consistently excellent. England were creating chances in all the games and finished convincing winners against Australia in the end.

Wales were awful against Fiji (sorry MM can't agree that Wales were consistent) probably the worst performance I've seen from Wales for a while & even against SA, where the result was more important for sure both teams were pretty bad & the game was full of mistakes from both sides.
Wales only looked good going forward in the first game & then regressed into Warrenball.

Scotland have definitely moved on & should be a challenge for most teams at home.

Italy are still struggling.

France same old same old - horribly inconsistent.

I see 3 distinct groups in the 6Ns

Ireland/England

Scotland/France/Wales

Italy

While you've spoken a fair bit of sense in this post, you gotta love these unbelievable bonehead comparisons.

So I spoke sense but you didn't like the conclusion
Play like you did against Fiji & it's the spoon

Trev, I agree with some of what you wrote, like Wales being awful against Fiji, but it doesnt worry me too much because that side was a bit of a mish mash of players who werent goign to be starting against NZ/SA in the main. Sounds strange but every year when we have the AIs we have 1 game where we change the side compeltely and as usual, the games a mess and we struggle.

I'd also disagree with the Warrenball comment. I'd go as below:
Australia game - Some variation, halfbacks established themselves as a threat, speed of delivery from the 9 was much improved
Fiji- mess of a game, trying to run fom anyhwere, not setting a platform anywhere
New Zealand - Warrenball tactics
South Africa - We finally saw variation in the play, Roberts used as a decoy, the ball going through the hands and smart tactical kicking from the midfield. This came as a result of having a 9 holding the defence and gving the 10 time, and the 10 making the right decisions with decent execution.

I'm actually pretty happy with the development in the attacking play, especially off 1st phase from set piece. For the last 4 years we've just given it to Roberts, now we're  finally starting to play off him and use him as a decoy and our 9 is giving the backs time to play some rugby. Im hoping its the start of some real development in that, I think we've got all the raw tools in the backline to cause any team in the world problems but the philospohy obviously hinders that.

I'd say the categories for the 6 nations are 2 mini groups of England/Ireland/Wales and Scotland/Italy. France are in a group of their won but 1 more Poopie 6nations and they join Scotland/Italy imo.

Thanks for the feedback Comfort.
We are of course all guessing & trying to predict without even knowing who will be available. I maybe persuaded towards agreeing with you because of the MS factor & Wales will undoubtedly raise their game.
However, I just think our pack is so strong with very strong back up that if we play to that strength and kick well it will be enough.
On the subject of scrums that last one against SA. If you watch it, contrary to many reports, SA had the nudge on and went straight forward. The scrum is then wheeled round on the blindside & your hookers head pops up.
It was game defining and could imo should been a pen to SA. Compare that to England's pack against SA & NZ & we had the upper hand.
Anyway as I said previously I am still glad Wales won & that is all that counts for the players and most welsh fans.

That's the beauty of the ABs - you're probably damned if you do, and certainly damned if you don't.

The idea is that the All Blacks will destroy you if you don't stand up to them and make them work for everything.  If you stand off them, they'll do the cricket score.

So every opponent simply knows they can't approach the ABs in any degree of comfort or feeling they'll have ample opportunity for little rest breaks when the ABs take the foot off the gas.
If the ABs see no obstruction, they'll score, at any point in a game. If the opponent isn't imposing a pace, they will.  
But if they face obstruction and a strong and furious defensive set up, they also consider that a bonus.  It means the opposition are in a mood to try their damnedest to run themselves into the ground.  So ABs keep the faux pressure on, allow the opponents to deplete all stocks of nervous-energy, allow the opposition the belief that they're still in the game (thus adding more incentive to try even harder)...... and wait for the inevitable fatigue to set in.

 Oh them boys.  Every trick imaginable.

What is this about the England pack all the time ? The English pack did not help England beat New Zealand or South Africa did they ? If any team gets parity with the English pack then for me they could beat them, if anything I think the Irish have the best pack in the 6N, but I do not see any player in the English pack that put's the fear of God into me, not like the 2003 vintage anyway. I am sure the rest of the 6N forwards will not all be living in fear when they square up against England either.

Well its like this. Most fans tend to rate their own players up a little bit, anything from the SH up a bit more, anything in a Black shirt a lot more and most of the local opposition down a bit.

For some fans read 'a lot' for 'a bit'

lostinwales wrote:Well its like this. Most fans tend to rate their own players up a little bit, anything from the SH up a bit more, anything in a Black shirt a lot more and most of the local opposition down a bit.

That should be the Maxim in a title bar over all 606 rugby threads. It's the truest thing that's ever been said here.

PLUS, knowing the fact won't ever make any fan more meek about declaring their 9 Potentially the Best in't'world!!!!!!!! - IF he gets a good run of form and has the right 10 around him, and IF gets a lucky break now and then in a tough game, and IF he isn't curtailed by an unadventurous coach, and IF the fans lay off him, and even IF he makes mistakes, they often look good in playbackl.........

I have to be honest, I think some of the comments regarding Scotland are either very poorly informed at best or just wrong at worst.

Vern Cotter is a coach with a proven track record, and at his disposal are a very gifted group or players.

Anyone who has seen pro 12 rugby this year or the ERC will know that Glasgow are the real deal.

I expect Scotland to win all their home games this year to be honest. England will be too strong at Twickers and who knows what kind of team France will have. However I think Wales in particular will get nasty surprise at Murrayfield this year. This isn't the same hapless team coached by numpties.

As for Ireland, they are the best team in the 6N IMO, however were overcome in their last match at Murrayfield by a much poorer Scotland side than the one we have at present.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:I have to be honest, I think some of the comments regarding Scotland are either very poorly informed at best or just wrong at worst.

Vern Cotter is a coach with a proven track record, and at his disposal are a very gifted group or players.

Anyone who has seen pro 12 rugby this year or the ERC will know that Glasgow are the real deal.

I expect Scotland to win all their home games this year to be honest. England will be too strong at Twickers and who knows what kind of team France will have. However I think Wales in particular will get nasty surprise at Murrayfield this year. This isn't the same hapless team coached by numpties.

As for Ireland, they are the best team in the 6N IMO, however were overcome in their last match at Murrayfield by a much poorer Scotland side than the one we have at present.

I like the positivity but be careful with that last statement. I was at the last two Ireland games, last year where we were crushed at the Aviva with Ireland playing in second gear, and the year before where Ireland were the only team playing rugby and but for Paddy Jackson having an off day with the boot and Jim Hamilton playing a storming spoiling match we would have been trounced.

I do think we can beat Wales. You know what's coming, you just have to be able to work away around it and front up well in defence. They lack magic and a slickness to their back play. But Ireland these days are a trickier bunch to face, and if not as physical as Wales they are streetwise - something you cannot say about Scotland. We are still not smart at the breakdown, an area where Ireland can be ruthless.

I'm hugely encouraged by Cotter's work so far, in a short space of time he's identified the right players and combinations and made us look like a coherent rugby team once more, but I can't see us finishing higher than Ireland, Wales or England in the 6 Nations. We should target that first away game against the French. The same Argentina side we beat made them look very ordinary.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:I have to be honest, I think some of the comments regarding Scotland are either very poorly informed at best or just wrong at worst.

Vern Cotter is a coach with a proven track record, and at his disposal are a very gifted group or players.

Anyone who has seen pro 12 rugby this year or the ERC will know that Glasgow are the real deal.

I expect Scotland to win all their home games this year to be honest. England will be too strong at Twickers and who knows what kind of team France will have. However I think Wales in particular will get nasty surprise at Murrayfield this year. This isn't the same hapless team coached by numpties.

As for Ireland, they are the best team in the 6N IMO, however were overcome in their last match at Murrayfield by a much poorer Scotland side than the one we have at present.

I know the Pro12 and I know how much the real deal Glasgow are and I know Cotter and what he has the potential to bring to Scotland.  So yes, I've very much said that Scotland is a player and might have a central part to play in what the final leader board looks like.

BUT....................  I also know the difference between considered 'best' now and what Ireland very much weren't two seasons ago when we still had our Old Coaching personel, who were shot of ideas; when we had players who weren't liking that coaching and were misfiring under it (some might say 'downing tools' under it), and we not only lost to Scotland in Murrayfield, we also lost to England at home and to Italy! (for the first time in our 6N history).  And we finally crawled in second from the bottom - only consolation being that somehow or other France still managed to be beneath us!

So we weren't exactly at the races that year, Rugger.  But yes, Scotland have improved.  Ireland too have improved.  Should be an exciting game as two ex-Clermont guys fight it out to see who was real top dog back in the day.

I actually like what I saw from Scotland this autumn. OK it wasn't extraordinary, but they beat a decent Argentina side fairly comfortably (who went on to beat France a couple of weeks later) and gave an admittedly weakened NZ team a stern test. Certainly much better than the shambles of the last few years. I think they could spring a "surprise" or two this 6N, and while I'm not sure I can see them winning at Twickenham a home win vs Ireland and/or Wales or a win in France seem like distinct possibilities to me.

Ireland at the moment seem the strongest. They also have the advantage of home matches vs England and France, but those being their only two at home may mean they'll need the slam to win the tournament.

England have the advantage of being at home to Italy and Scotland so will be hoping to rack up big scores there (though I expect Scotland to be tougher than last year, obviously). However, I'm not sure I can see them winning in both Wales and particularly Ireland, so they may need other teams to slip up.

In any case, Wales vs England is a massive massive game you feel. Whoever comes out on top will have all the momentum. Worth remembering that the last two occasions England have won in Wales they've ended up winning the tournament (03 and 11).

France, well, who knows? They looked a bit better this autumn, with good wins against Fiji and Australia before slipping back to their old habits in the last game. They're helped by a more cohesive team and finally picking a decent 10, but you never really feel confident betting on them. Can't see them winning the tournament, but they may spring a surprise which will throw the tournament wide open.

Italy look dead certs for the wooden spoon.

I'm not saying Ireland aren't good. They are hands down the best in the 6N... however the fact remains we were rancid (and I do mean RANCID) under SJ and still beat them.  

I really hope the Glasgow ethos translates to Scotland in the 6N.

Once again it's our modest Irish cousins that seem to be keeping their feet on the ground. They are the reigning champs and rightly 6N favorites. It's Ireland's championship to lose provided Sexton stays fit. (I jest, btw I know how good Madigan and Keatley)

However a lot of people not having even seen Scotland play are pretty dismissive about our chances which is perhaps unfair?  

I've seen pretty much all of the AI games (Italy Aside) and year and for me Ireland look the best with England (despite Lancaster's best efforts to sabotage them) and Scotland next.

Wales are my second team and I love to see them do well, however their performances in the AI's were poor, especially when compared to Ireland. I really think Gatland has taken them as far as he can. They Ospreys and Scarlets are playing much better rugby than the National Side suggests.

Why Tipuric hasn't been getting game time is a mystery to me.

Well guys, if Scotland beat Wales for the first time in seven years, eight by the time they play each other, then I will take my hat off to you. I really will. Scotland beat Argentina, letting in four tries in the process and you beat the world powerhouse of rugby that is Tonga, yet you lot are waxing lyrical about the loss to a 2nd string New Zealand side. Yes Glasgow are pulling up trees, but how good would they be without their Fijians, they have not looked good over the AI period. I will admit that Scotland are looking better, but you only had one way to go, as you were at rock bottom, I would suggest that Scotland will beat Italy and should try and put a performance in against the other nations, after all you still have the same players as you had last year, and that didn't go to well either.

So what would I expect from Scotland next year ? Well, a more organised outfit, and a harder team to beat, not the push overs of times gone by, but a team that is going to cause problems for others, but I think the Scottish fans might come away from most games a little disappointed.

SecretFly wrote:

I know the Pro12 and I know how much the real deal Glasgow are and I know Cotter and what he has the potential to bring to Scotland.  So yes, I've very much said that Scotland is a player and might have a central part to play in what the final leader board looks like.

BUT....................  I also know the difference between considered 'best' now and what Ireland very much weren't two seasons ago when we still had our Old Coaching personel, who were shot of ideas; when we had players who weren't liking that coaching and were misfiring under it (some might say 'downing tools' under it), and we not only lost to Scotland in Murrayfield, we also lost to England at home and to Italy! (for the first time in our 6N history).  And we finally crawled in second from the bottom - only consolation being that somehow or other France were still managed to be beneath us!

So we weren't exactly at the races that year, Rugger.  But yes, Scotland have improved.  Ireland too have improved.  Should be an exciting game as two ex-Clermont guys fight it out to see who was real top dog back in the day.

Les Kiss, Greg Feek, Richie Murphy are all still Ireland coaches.

The 2013 6Ns started off very well with a very good win over Wales.

a) Paul O'Connell was injured and Jamie Heaslip was a pathetic captain.
b) Donnacha Ryan was carrying an injury which he is still paying for.
c) The Scotland game was Paddy Jackson's first cap as Sexton had got injured in the 2nd game against England.

Take out two key players like O'Connell and Sexton and I wonder what kind of an AI would Joe Schmidt had?

Sin é wrote:
Take out two key players like O'Connell and Sexton and I wonder what kind of an AI would Joe Schmidt had?

Well they weren't key players under Deccie - we were rubbish whether they were there or not .....

Sin é wrote:
Les Kiss, Greg Feek, Richie Murphy are all still Ireland coaches.

That's the question to put to them (IRFU) then - because certainly I'm on record as asking it........  
Why, if Kidney wasn't considered good enough, are his hand picked men still there?   Is it because Kidney shipped the blame, like all Captains of ships should do (unless you're a South Korean one) - OR, are they there because somehow everyone knew they were good coaches but for some reason or other they were misfiring/willfully holding back!? to get poor Kidney sacked?  
And, if Kidney was merely a motivator and not a hands on coach like Schmidt, then what possible reason was he being sacked for when the hands on coaches he hired were proving incapable of coordinating a gameplan between them?

So yeah, good question Sin.  I suggest you put it in an envelope and send it to the IRFU.

Sin é wrote:

Take out two key players like O'Connell and Sexton and I wonder what kind of an AI would Joe Schmidt had?

Those two were in plenty of substandard games too.  So the question is a question but it doesn't compute in logical terms.  The problem was never the players but the schemes and coaching - fact.

PS AND...and!... 2013 wasn't the only year we were having bad times Sin.  Players in, players out, players in-form, players out of form - post-2009 was a downhill journey to 9th, regardless injuries.

Irelands 6 Nations to lose I think. Hard ask in the MS, but they show time after blydi time they can beat us there. Wales 2nd, France or England 3 & 4, Scotland and Italy. Although I may be disrespecting Scotland, I am just going on the last few 6 Nations and not their current excellent form.

Who is Jamie Smith, Dowlais? Also, Nicky Smith over Bevington and you've forgotten Hallam Amos. Could probably put him in over Jamie Smith.

Who'll win the 6N based on the AIs?

Surely Wales must be favourites for not only the 6N but also the WC now that they finished their Autumn on a high against SA??

MunsterMac wrote:Who'll win the 6N based on the AIs?

Surely Wales must be favourites for not only the 6N but also the WC now that they finished their Autumn on a high against SA??

You are right, on both counts. I recall 2011 and being written off, that bloke Phillips can half score some tries when he needs to aye

Yeah Phillips and Bazil Ballboy are a fantastic unit for any side to have at their disposal Energy, drive, ambition, slight of hand - the works

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:

The Saint wrote:

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:Ireland were more consistent & got the results they deserved.

England's pack kept them in all the games & were consistently excellent. England were creating chances in all the games and finished convincing winners against Australia in the end.

Wales were awful against Fiji (sorry MM can't agree that Wales were consistent) probably the worst performance I've seen from Wales for a while & even against SA, where the result was more important for sure both teams were pretty bad & the game was full of mistakes from both sides.
Wales only looked good going forward in the first game & then regressed into Warrenball.

Scotland have definitely moved on & should be a challenge for most teams at home.

Italy are still struggling.

France same old same old - horribly inconsistent.

I see 3 distinct groups in the 6Ns

Ireland/England

Scotland/France/Wales

Italy

While you've spoken a fair bit of sense in this post, you gotta love these unbelievable bonehead comparisons.

So I spoke sense but you didn't like the conclusion
Play like you did against Fiji & it's the spoon

Your comparisons based on your own conclusions about each team is what's daft. What on earth makes you think England were consistently excellent? They were far from it and probably not as good as they were in last year's series. Also a few teams were creating chances, some finished more than others. How do you base your own team being better than 4 others on the basis of losing to NZ and SA, and creating chances?

Wales performances were pretty consistent in that they were played with high intensity and a solid defence. Against Fiji we were pretty poor, we had the worst halfback combo in NH rugby dictate things, but in that game still matched your try count against Samoa. Against NZ we unloaded a weak bench at a point in the match when NZ are at their best, that was horrific to watch. We finished by beating the No.2 ranked side in world rugby. England lost to teams above them in the rankings and beat teams below them. So again, how you group England up there with Ireland I don't know. England aren't on that level yet and they certainly haven't improved.

Risca Rev wrote:Who is Jamie Smith, Dowlais? Also, Nicky Smith over Bevington and you've forgotten Hallam Amos. Could probably put him in over Jamie Smith.

There you go, so we have more depth than I first thought, I was just using players off the top of my head to be honest, so I apologise if I have forgotten anybody. Also, sorry I meant Richard Smith:-

http://www.cardiffblues.com/rugby/index.php?player=95269&includeref=dynamic

Is 'Depth' ever 'Depth' though - OR - is Depth something you hope you never have to rely on too much? And if that's the emotion, is it ever genuine Depth?

Even New Zealand get a little jumpy when they have to test too deeply into their 'Depth'

SecretFly wrote:Is 'Depth' ever 'Depth' though - OR - is Depth something you hope you never have to rely on too much?  And if that's the emotion, is it ever genuine Depth?

Even New Zealand get a little jumpy when they have to test too deeply into their 'Depth'

Yeh, there is a difference between depth and quality depth, but when you consider the age of most of our depth, I suppose they could become qlty depth. Good God there is a lot of depth in this reply alone.

You are right, on both counts. I recall 2011 and being written off, that bloke Phillips can half score some tries when he needs to aye Smile

In all seriousness I wouldn't be putting any money on Ireland winning the 6N next year, not because I don't think Ireland aren't good but because I think both Wales and England showed that they are more than decent sides in the AIs.

Wales should have beaten Aus, put in a very good 70 minutes against NZ and beat SA.

England put it up to NZ, lost by 3 to SA and beat Aus.

I don't think there's anything between Ireland , England and Wales and while I don't think Scotland will win the 6N I think they will show a vast improvement on previous years and cause the others problems.

I would never discount France but the fact that they have England and Ireland away won't make it easy for them.

If England win first up against Wales, I think we'll take some stopping. Beat Wales and I think we'll roll into Week 2 with our tails up and get a big score at home against Italy. Our pack is much better than their pack, and their pack is their strength.

Even if we lose in Dublin, I think the advantage of having the three home games means we could really rack up a good points difference. I'm not convinced by France, I don't think they'll be in the title picture and I think on the last day at Twickenham they may be there for the taking.

Ireland's draw makes me think it's Grand Slam or nothing for them. They've got Italy away and then England and France at home. They're capable of getting 3 from 3 there, but I can't see them scoring masses of points in those 3 games. As the tournament gets into March (and usually opens up a bit), Ireland would be looking to close down two away wins. If Ireland and England are both on 4 wins, then I'd fancy England to have the better points difference.

Wales have a similar kind of draw to Ireland. They have the two strongest teams (in my opinion) at home, and then 3 away games. Again, they could win all 5, but I'm not sure if 4 would be enough. Away in Italy on the last day may swing it if they're in contention, and can put in a big final-day score as they did last year, but I can see them losing a couple along the way and finishing third.

Scotland and France I can see getting a couple of wins a piece. Scotland are improving under Cotter, but I don't think they'll get anything away from home and don't think they'll turn over both Ireland and Wales at home. I think they'll get a good score against Italy though, and may sneak above France on points difference.

France, I can't see much from them. Yes, they beat Australia, but I don't think this was a good Australia side. Wales played an open game against them and lost, but if you beat them up in the forwards they were there for the taking. I don't think France have the pack to go and win in Dublin or London (or the game changing backs of the France of yesteryear) and although I'd back them to beat Scotland first up, I think they could be vunerable at home to Wales. I think they'll beat Italy, because they've been embarrassed there in the past, but I can't see them putting a big score on them, and can see them having another bad tournament.

Italy will be fodder. Ireland should beat them in Italy and can't see them getting any joy at Twickenham or Murrayfield. Might win one of the last two at home, but that would depend on the other side having lost interest in the tournament and being caught cold. Could be torn apart every game.

My predictions (who they lose to in brackets)
England (Champions) W4 L1 (Ireland A)
Ireland W4 L1 (Wales A)
Wales W3 L2 (England H, Scotland A)
Scotland W2 L3 (France A, England A, Ireland H)
France W2 L3 (England A, Ireland A, Wales H)
Italy W0 L5 (Ireland H, England A, Scotland A, France H, Wales H)

robbo,

That's pretty sound reasoning and I think you even have our (Wales) win/lose ratio right but I think if we lose one at home it will be the Ireland game and away it will be the France game. I know we start slowly but I think we will sneak it at home against England on the Friday night.

The Saint wrote:

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:

The Saint wrote:

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:Ireland were more consistent & got the results they deserved.

England's pack kept them in all the games & were consistently excellent. England were creating chances in all the games and finished convincing winners against Australia in the end.

Wales were awful against Fiji (sorry MM can't agree that Wales were consistent) probably the worst performance I've seen from Wales for a while & even against SA, where the result was more important for sure both teams were pretty bad & the game was full of mistakes from both sides.
Wales only looked good going forward in the first game & then regressed into Warrenball.

Scotland have definitely moved on & should be a challenge for most teams at home.

Italy are still struggling.

France same old same old - horribly inconsistent.

I see 3 distinct groups in the 6Ns

Ireland/England

Scotland/France/Wales

Italy

While you've spoken a fair bit of sense in this post, you gotta love these unbelievable bonehead comparisons.

So I spoke sense but you didn't like the conclusion
Play like you did against Fiji & it's the spoon

Your comparisons based on your own conclusions about each team is what's daft. What on earth makes you think England were consistently excellent? They were far from it and probably not as good as they were in last year's series. Also a few teams were creating chances, some finished more than others. How do you base your own team being better than 4 others on the basis of losing to NZ and SA, and creating chances?

Wales performances were pretty consistent in that they were played with high intensity and a solid defence. Against Fiji we were pretty poor, we had the worst halfback combo in NH rugby dictate things, but in that game still matched your try count against Samoa. Against NZ we unloaded a weak bench at a point in the match when NZ are at their best, that was horrific to watch. We finished by beating the No.2 ranked side in world rugby. England lost to teams above them in the rankings and beat teams below them. So again, how you group England up there with Ireland I don't know. England aren't on that level yet and they certainly haven't improved.

Saint , I'm saying England's PACK were consistently excellent not the whole team. But our performance never fell as low as Wales did against Fiji. Everyone seems to have forgotten how bad Roberts & Jenkins were amongst others!
Wales v SA was almost a ' friendly' international with so many players missing, a very dubious yellow card and both teams making mistake after mistake. Yes it is good to take the win but beyond that there won't be much satisfaction taken from the performance.

If they were as good as you think how come they didn't get more wins? You're not on Ireland's level at all. I see Ireland as the only NH team capable of mixing it with the best 2 in world rugby.

Didn't think Roberts was that bad, unless two dropped balls suddenly makes you the worst player in the world. I just explained one of the reasons why our performance against Fiji was bad, it's a mistake that won't be repeated in the 6 nations. So don't get your hopes up about winning in Cardiff just yet. Like it or not, we beat SA and you didn't. Get over it. Stop crying and bigging up your team to something they're not.

England to win on points difference.

The saint - Scotland have more victories over SH teams than Wales have over the last few years. does it make them a better team?

The facts of the matter are neither England nor Wales will ever get more than the occasional win against SH teams playing the way they did to get the win in this AI series. I think thats Wales first win for ages?

The Saint wrote:If they were as good as you think how come they didn't get more wins? You're not on Ireland's level at all. I see Ireland as the only NH team capable of mixing it with the best 2 in world rugby.

Didn't think Roberts was that bad, unless two dropped balls suddenly makes you the worst player in the world. I just explained one of the reasons why our performance against Fiji was bad, it's a mistake that won't be repeated in the 6 nations. So don't get your hopes up about winning in Cardiff just yet. Like it or not, we beat SA and you didn't. Get over it. Stop crying and bigging up your team to something they're not.

I'm hardly crying just trying to be realistic. You are exaggerating what I am saying. Roberts was poor not 'the worst player in the world' and aside of Williams & possibly Cuthbert everyone else was pants against Fiji.
Yes you beat an under strength SA but we beat Australia.
However, that performance against Fiji cannot just be dismissed & wasn't down to just the half backs. Incidently, who do you think will be your half backs on the bench in the 6Ns?

Ireland unfortunately didn't play NZ & SA produced a moment of magic against England they never looked like doing against Wales as both teams were devoid of any decent attacking prowess or cohesiveness.

TJ wrote:The saint - Scotland have more victories over SH teams than Wales have over the last few years.  does it make them a better team?

The facts of the matter are neither England nor Wales will ever get more than the occasional win against SH teams playing the way they did to get the win in this AI series.  I think thats Wales first win for ages?  

I'm not too sure where you're coming from this. I'm trying to talk to a delusional fan who thinks england are THAT much greater than WALES based on this autumn.

To answer your question, most certainly not. Scotland's record is poor against not only Wales, but most other teams in the past decade or however many years you prefer. You haven't been anywhere near better than Wales in years. And vs the SH, don't you have like one more win than us? Well done...

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:

The Saint wrote:If they were as good as you think how come they didn't get more wins? You're not on Ireland's level at all. I see Ireland as the only NH team capable of mixing it with the best 2 in world rugby.

Didn't think Roberts was that bad, unless two dropped balls suddenly makes you the worst player in the world. I just explained one of the reasons why our performance against Fiji was bad, it's a mistake that won't be repeated in the 6 nations. So don't get your hopes up about winning in Cardiff just yet. Like it or not, we beat SA and you didn't. Get over it. Stop crying and bigging up your team to something they're not.

I'm hardly crying just trying to be realistic. You are exaggerating what I am saying. Roberts was poor not 'the worst player in the world' and aside of Williams & possibly Cuthbert everyone else was pants against Fiji.
Yes you beat an under strength SA but we beat Australia.
However, that performance against Fiji cannot just be dismissed & wasn't down to just the half backs. Incidently, who do you think will be your half backs on the bench in the 6Ns?

Ireland unfortunately didn't play NZ & SA produced a moment of magic against England they never looked like doing against Wales as both teams were devoid of any decent attacking prowess or cohesiveness.

It struck me as odd you singling out one of our improved performers there. And how is thinking your team is that good based on this series alone being realistic? Feel free to carry on the english trend of crying and attempting to negate any win that team Wales gets. Just makes me laugh in this instance considering you haven't beaten SA in a long time!

Halfback subs hopefully Gareth Davies and one of Rhys Patchell/Owen williams/Gareth anscombe.

beshocked wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

beshocked wrote:Lorddowlais it wasn't the last 10. it was the last 20.

Wales were winning with ten minutes to go, so it was the last ten, thank you very much, then what killed us was, our bench was nowhere near the qlty of the AllBlacks bench, and we were not as fit as them.

beshocked wrote:Yes you could argue the scoreline flattered England but it wasn't a thumping like Wales-NZ..

The scorline flattered the AllBlacks in our game as well if you ask me, at least wew were in the game with them, England were never anywhere near the AllBlacks in any part of the game.

Okay fine you were leading by 1 point before NZ took the lead back swiftly.  I was backing NZ to win because they just looked stronger than the fatigued Welsh team.

It was NZ's 2nd try in the 63rd minute when they started to up their intensity.

Inevitable that NZ would get one more at least.

Don't think the scoreline flattered the ABs - it was combination of ABs piling on the pressure and Wales running out of steam.

If you are in a race you have to pace yourself - Wales didn't, in the end ABs won at a canter because they absorbed the Welsh pressure then went on the attack. Wales had to work so hard to keep up with the ABs that in the end they couldn't which led to a try burst for the ABs.

Matching someone for 60 odd minutes isn't good enough in a 80 minute match.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/rugby-union/29726120

I never had the feeling that Wales would beat the ABs even when they were ahead.

It wasn't a lack of Welsh fitness or first XV ability so much as a lack of an equally talented bench. They brought on Slade, who started probing the Welsh defence with short kicks behind the fast and flat defence. That's how they got tries. That and Mike Phillips being complacent when clearing to touch and getting charged down.

As I mentioned elsewhere, with a few more fit players returning Wales will have a good bench with good options and their fortunes will look very good.

Wales biggest conundrum is whether there is a better option to play inside centre. A skilled ball player, alternative to Roberts, maybe Scott Williams? Even the mercurial Henson has been mentioned.

Similar issues effect england. Back line looks so much better without Farrell and with a half decent lad like Twelvetrees.

maestegmafia wrote:

beshocked wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

beshocked wrote:Lorddowlais it wasn't the last 10. it was the last 20.

Wales were winning with ten minutes to go, so it was the last ten, thank you very much, then what killed us was, our bench was nowhere near the qlty of the AllBlacks bench, and we were not as fit as them.

beshocked wrote:Yes you could argue the scoreline flattered England but it wasn't a thumping like Wales-NZ..

The scorline flattered the AllBlacks in our game as well if you ask me, at least wew were in the game with them, England were never anywhere near the AllBlacks in any part of the game.

Okay fine you were leading by 1 point before NZ took the lead back swiftly.  I was backing NZ to win because they just looked stronger than the fatigued Welsh team.

It was NZ's 2nd try in the 63rd minute when they started to up their intensity.

Inevitable that NZ would get one more at least.

Don't think the scoreline flattered the ABs - it was combination of ABs piling on the pressure and Wales running out of steam.

If you are in a race you have to pace yourself - Wales didn't, in the end ABs won at a canter because they absorbed the Welsh pressure then went on the attack. Wales had to work so hard to keep up with the ABs that in the end they couldn't which led to a try burst for the ABs.

Matching someone for 60 odd minutes isn't good enough in a 80 minute match.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/rugby-union/29726120

I never had the feeling that Wales would beat the ABs even when they were ahead.

It wasn't a lack of Welsh fitness or first XV ability so much as a lack of an equally talented bench. They brought on Slade, who started probing the Welsh defence with short kicks behind the fast and flat defence. That's how they got tries. That and Mike Phillips being complacent when clearing to touch and getting charged down.

As I mentioned elsewhere, with a few more fit players returning Wales will have a good bench with good options and their fortunes will look very good.

Wales biggest conundrum is whether there is a better option to play inside centre. A skilled ball player, alternative to Roberts, maybe Scott Williams? Even the mercurial Henson has been mentioned.

Similar issues effect england. Back line looks so much better without Farrell and with a half decent lad like Twelvetrees.

The Welsh players looked pretty stuffed to me. But its a bit of both and depends on how you interpret 'impact'. Our incoming players are told to go on and do something to win the game, or advance the score. They don't come on to 'relieve tired bodies, or maintain the current pattern'....'fit in where they're needed'

These are the center stage guys now. They run the show and are selected to steal it no matter how. They mix it up, they do things differently...they provide impact. That's why a Slade can come on and try a high risk play on the 22 on attack- because that's the job- to make a difference. The starting side take the stuffing out of the opposition and the impact players come in and clean up the mess. World cup year these guys are going to be the key, and why the AB's are trying to expose so many to test rugby/ pressure this year.

The Saint wrote:

TJ wrote:The saint - Scotland have more victories over SH teams than Wales have over the last few years.  does it make them a better team?

The facts of the matter are neither England nor Wales will ever get more than the occasional win against SH teams playing the way they did to get the win in this AI series.  I think thats Wales first win for ages?  

I'm not too sure where you're coming from this. I'm trying to talk to a delusional fan who thinks england are THAT much greater than WALES based on this autumn.

To answer your question, most certainly not. Scotland's record is poor against not only Wales, but most other teams in the past decade or however many years you prefer. You haven't been anywhere near better than Wales in years. And vs the SH, don't you have like one more win than us? Well done...

Well, let's see, shall we, before you get too moist with excitement:

Number of times Wales have beaten South Africa: 2 times in 30 attempts (6.67% success)
Number of times Scotland have beaten South Africa: 5 times in 25 attempts (20% success)

Number of times Wales have beaten Australia: 10 times in 38 attempts (26% success)
Number of times Scotland have beaten Australia: 9 times in 28 attempts (32% success)

Wales managed to scape past the poorest South African side I ever recall seeing at the end of a season where they were already crippled with injuries. As I mentioned at the time, well done with that and you should enjoy the victory.

However, you may wish to know that in the eyes of most neutrals I know, Wales are not currently on a par with England or Ireland. I believe that both the 6 Nations and the RWC will bear this out, but you are of course free to sneeze your antagonistic prose all over these boards in the meantime.

I just wish that you would write with a little more balance and a little more respect for other people here.

Just for people to know, the South Africa side that Wales beat, had 11 players that beat the All Blacks a few weeks before, so they were not that stripped of players.

LordDowlais wrote:Just for people to know, the South Africa side that Wales beat, had 11 players that beat the All Blacks a few weeks before, so they were not that stripped of players.

Quite right. 

Why deal in the cold waters of the real world by acknowledging the usual Bok squad members who were injured (Warren Whiteley, Jannie du Plessis, Frans Malherbe, Marcel van der Merwe, Fourie du Preez, Ruan Pienaar, Schalk Brits, Flip van der Merwe, Pieter-Steph du Toit, Francois Louw, Siya Kolisi, Arno Botha, Pierre Spies and Willem Alberts) or those based in Europe and Japan whose clubs wouldn't release them for the game (for example, Jano Vermaak, Johan Goosen, Bryan Habana and JP Pietersen).

George Carlin wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Just for people to know, the South Africa side that Wales beat, had 11 players that beat the All Blacks a few weeks before, so they were not that stripped of players.

Quite right. 

Why deal in the cold waters of the real world by acknowledging the usual Bok squad members who were injured (Warren Whiteley, Jannie du Plessis, Frans Malherbe, Marcel van der Merwe, Fourie du Preez, Ruan Pienaar, Schalk Brits, Flip van der Merwe, Pieter-Steph du Toit, Francois Louw, Siya Kolisi, Arno Botha, Pierre Spies and Willem Alberts) or those based in Europe and Japan whose clubs wouldn't release them for the game (for example, Jano Vermaak, Johan Goosen, Bryan Habana and JP Pietersen).

George, you see comments on here that are targeted at a certain countries posters, comments like they are having snide digs and the what not, then you get posters like yourself having an opinion, which is fine, but that rule should go for everyone, it's almost as if, because I am Welsh, I am not allowed to have an opinion. It's always the same, I complain about a referee, it's just the Welsh complaining again, I dare say that Wales will beat Scotland, then I am being Welsh again, I am allowed my opinion, you or nobody else cannot take that away from me, I read the Scottish banter thread all the time, and all it is at times is ref bashing, but that's OK because you are not Welsh ?

If I went on to say that I think Wales will win the 6N because they have the best pack in Europe, then guess what, I would have stats and arrows fired at me before I could bat an eyelid, but when an English poster does it, and I dare to counter it, what do I get, a jar full of flack, there is a trend on this forum, that if you are Welsh, then you are either a WUM or you are a troll, I am fed up with this, just because I do not think what Scotland has achieved in the AI is nothing to wax lyrical about, so what, it is my opinion, I do not expect everyone to agree with me, I am getting very tired of this forum, before long there will be NO Welsh posters left on here, some of you might think it will be a good thing, so what, but just remember, people are allowed to have an opinion, weather it be about a referee a player or a team, I am just fed up of being made to look like a troll because of firstly my nationality, and secondly for my opinions.

I would like to interject here, and I'll do so on dual nationality on both teams in question. I'm a Scotland fan but I'm very fond of Wales too.

Wales were not great this Autumn (my Welsh dad fully agrees). He basically said Wales again almost bottled it against South Africa but the difference was South Africa bottled it more. He's not a happy camper as far as Wales goes and he blames the management.

I think the problem isn't the players but the fact that Gatland has taken the team as far as he can. I have already said the Scarlets and the Hairsprays are both playing better rugby than the national side.

Scotland on the other hand for the first time in years are playing good try scoring rugby. we scored 11 tries in 3 games. I think that's more than we scored in the 6N and the AI's combined last year. No doubt Scotland are in ascendancy whilst Wales appear to be regressing.

A lot of the credit has to be laid at Townsend and the Great Unwashed Warrior's door.

Also the fact that Vern Cotter has correctly looked at our crop of players, and asked them how they want to play and adopted a game plan to suit his players and the way they want to play.

Wales have played a physical game for a while now but serious questions have to be asked how effective that physical game is when the fitness of the players is questioned. These rumored "beastings" can't be good for player moral or their bodies. It's little wonder they looked jaded.

Ireland should be slight favourites for the 6N's following the Autumn series - but it looks to be quite an open contest. As ever momentum after round 1 will be important and the Wales v England contest as an opener will be interesting.

I'm probably in a small minority of Welsh fans who are not euphoric after our last match. Yes we beat a weakened SA and it was important for these players to get over the line - celebration fully justified. I'm left thinking that we showed great courage in defence, were solid at the breakdown and our line speed was good. However over the series we under performed in the set piece, showed nothing in attack and the lack of quality depth was again exposed. I've seen nothing that suggests we will threaten at the WC. No team that aspires to WC glory should have the sort of "day at the office" that we had against Fiji.

The reality is that we have played our best players - we have no returning cavalry. Talk of the likes of Henson returning to somehow give us a spark is laughable. As ever we are going to need our best XV to be on the form of their lives to make a WC impact. When we all celebrated coming 4th last time - the only team of any note we beat was Ireland! We lost to SA, Australia and France.

Anyway, I've just noticed that I've more in my glass than makes me comfortable...