One view of next years World cup chances...

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11370175

Fair on most accounts without being to specific in any particular area.

I think that is about the fairest one I have seen, objectively speaking.

I think the general consensus is no one can pick this one easily Biltong. There's enough teams that can cause that one off blow (like Argie vs Oz and the few from the AI's) and every tournament seems to have them. Next year will be no different, possibly more so.

Yes, I think there are too many unknowns at this point.

Well, like guys are saying... its a rough guestimate of probability based on the latest evidence that's as good as any other out there.

The only one I'd have a mild issue with is the continuing underplaying of Wales.  Yes, they are whatever ranking they are now, yes they seem to have a tough time getting past Australia (I don't think it's psychological, it's just simply not getting there each and every time - but it will happen one day and that day is therefore getting closer), and yes England beat them out the door of Twickenham the last 6N.
But these guys will be extremely well prepared physically come the WC (better than during the AIs) and they'll be fired emotionally, not by Gatland but by a rabid Edwards.  And when a Welsh team is super fit (which they will be) and emotionally on fire, they're dangerous to any side and a handful that can't be tamed by teams not prepared for the surge. Last World Cup wasn't a fluke, it was Wales going for it and perhaps only a red card stopping their surge to a final.

They have I think two games at home in the Millennium?  They'll be used as momentum driver games for them.  They'll be intent on getting a head of steam up and they thrive on that growing energy of confidence - it hones their game and cuts out errors.  So they'll be up for the pool.  
It's a genuine three way show that could go anyway.  If I saw any side dropping below the standard required for that pool right now, it would be Australia and that's even with Cheika in charge and having a year to work on things.  I don't think Australia will fully respect the challenge Wales can bring and it might be costly.

I think this article is a bit optimistic with regards England and Ireland and underestimates Wales, France and Australias chances a bit.

NZ are out there on their own at the minute, with England and SA best placed to capitalise if they screw up - followed by Australia, Ireland, Wales and France in that order I think...

SecretFly wrote:Well, like guys are saying... its a rough guestimate of probability based on the latest evidence that's as good as any other out there.

The only one I'd have a mild issue with is the continuing underplaying of Wales.  Yes, they are whatever ranking they are now, yes they seem to have a tough time getting past Australia (I don't think it's psychological, it's just simply not getting there each and every time - but it will happen one day and that day is therefore getting closer), and yes England beat them out the door of Twickenham the last 6N.
But these guys will be extremely well prepared physically come the WC (better than during the AIs) and they'll be fired emotionally, not by Gatland but by a rabid Edwards.  And when a Welsh team is super fit (which they will be) and emotionally on fire, they're dangerous to any side and a handful that can't be tamed by teams not prepared for the surge.  Last World Cup wasn't a fluke, it was Wales going for it and perhaps only a red card stopping their surge to a final.

They have I think two games at home in the Millennium?  They'll be used as momentum driver games for them.  They'll be intent on getting a head of steam up and they thrive on that growing energy of confidence - it hones their game and cuts out errors.  So they'll be up for the pool.  
It's a genuine three way show that could go anyway.  If I saw any side dropping below the standard required for that pool right now, it would be Australia and that's even with Cheika in charge and having a year to work on things.  I don't think Australia will fully respect the challenge Wales can bring and it might be costly.

I dont think its underestimating Wales , more like underestimating their chances of pulling together three big games to win the World Cup . The Aussies never dissapoint come world cup time unfortunately for group A . I can see them losing one game in the pools at best but they wont lose to both England and Wales that much is near certain . Imo the team with the higher chance of dropping out is Wales simply because of Fiji. I dont doubt Wales can and I think will beat England in the pool game based purely on unrelenting passion which will overcome most .But they wont put up a big score v Fiji as they've proved time and time again . England has an equal chance of beating the Aussies which leaves it at 1 all for the three teams and puts it down to points difference in which case the Aussies will top the group . I'm probably wrong to be sure but i doubt any of the three teams will leave the pool games undefeated .

Bullsbok wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Well, like guys are saying... its a rough guestimate of probability based on the latest evidence that's as good as any other out there.

The only one I'd have a mild issue with is the continuing underplaying of Wales.  Yes, they are whatever ranking they are now, yes they seem to have a tough time getting past Australia (I don't think it's psychological, it's just simply not getting there each and every time - but it will happen one day and that day is therefore getting closer), and yes England beat them out the door of Twickenham the last 6N.
But these guys will be extremely well prepared physically come the WC (better than during the AIs) and they'll be fired emotionally, not by Gatland but by a rabid Edwards.  And when a Welsh team is super fit (which they will be) and emotionally on fire, they're dangerous to any side and a handful that can't be tamed by teams not prepared for the surge.  Last World Cup wasn't a fluke, it was Wales going for it and perhaps only a red card stopping their surge to a final.

They have I think two games at home in the Millennium?  They'll be used as momentum driver games for them.  They'll be intent on getting a head of steam up and they thrive on that growing energy of confidence - it hones their game and cuts out errors.  So they'll be up for the pool.  
It's a genuine three way show that could go anyway.  If I saw any side dropping below the standard required for that pool right now, it would be Australia and that's even with Cheika in charge and having a year to work on things.  I don't think Australia will fully respect the challenge Wales can bring and it might be costly.

I dont think its underestimating Wales , more like underestimating their chances of pulling together three big games to win the World Cup . The Aussies never dissapoint come world cup time unfortunately for group A . I can see them losing one game in the pools at best but they wont lose to both England and Wales that much is near certain . Imo the team with the higher chance of dropping out is Wales simply because of Fiji. I dont doubt Wales can and I think will beat England in the pool game based purely on unrelenting passion which will overcome most .But they wont put up a big score v Fiji as they've proved time and time again . England has an equal chance of beating the Aussies which leaves it at 1 all for the three teams and puts it down to points difference in which case the Aussies will top the group . I'm probably wrong to be sure but i doubt any of the three teams will leave the pool games undefeated .

Apart from the last time we faced them in a World Cup (the last one) when we beat them 66-0?

But still, I don't see us getting to the quarters. Just a gut feeling.

SecretFly wrote:Well, like guys are saying... its a rough guestimate of probability based on the latest evidence that's as good as any other out there.

The only one I'd have a mild issue with is the continuing underplaying of Wales.  Yes, they are whatever ranking they are now, yes they seem to have a tough time getting past Australia (I don't think it's psychological, it's just simply not getting there each and every time - but it will happen one day and that day is therefore getting closer), and yes England beat them out the door of Twickenham the last 6N.
But these guys will be extremely well prepared physically come the WC (better than during the AIs) and they'll be fired emotionally, not by Gatland but by a rabid Edwards.  And when a Welsh team is super fit (which they will be) and emotionally on fire, they're dangerous to any side and a handful that can't be tamed by teams not prepared for the surge.  Last World Cup wasn't a fluke, it was Wales going for it and perhaps only a red card stopping their surge to a final.

They have I think two games at home in the Millennium?  They'll be used as momentum driver games for them.  They'll be intent on getting a head of steam up and they thrive on that growing energy of confidence - it hones their game and cuts out errors.  So they'll be up for the pool.  
It's a genuine three way show that could go anyway.  If I saw any side dropping below the standard required for that pool right now, it would be Australia and that's even with Cheika in charge and having a year to work on things.  I don't think Australia will fully respect the challenge Wales can bring and it might be costly.

Nah, no games at the Millenium stadium for us Fly. That wouldn't have been fair as its not our World Cup. Something I completely agree with. (Don't believe we should get any other games either, but hey ho).

Griff wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Well, like guys are saying... its a rough guestimate of probability based on the latest evidence that's as good as any other out there.

The only one I'd have a mild issue with is the continuing underplaying of Wales.  Yes, they are whatever ranking they are now, yes they seem to have a tough time getting past Australia (I don't think it's psychological, it's just simply not getting there each and every time - but it will happen one day and that day is therefore getting closer), and yes England beat them out the door of Twickenham the last 6N.
But these guys will be extremely well prepared physically come the WC (better than during the AIs) and they'll be fired emotionally, not by Gatland but by a rabid Edwards.  And when a Welsh team is super fit (which they will be) and emotionally on fire, they're dangerous to any side and a handful that can't be tamed by teams not prepared for the surge.  Last World Cup wasn't a fluke, it was Wales going for it and perhaps only a red card stopping their surge to a final.

They have I think two games at home in the Millennium?  They'll be used as momentum driver games for them.  They'll be intent on getting a head of steam up and they thrive on that growing energy of confidence - it hones their game and cuts out errors.  So they'll be up for the pool.  
It's a genuine three way show that could go anyway.  If I saw any side dropping below the standard required for that pool right now, it would be Australia and that's even with Cheika in charge and having a year to work on things.  I don't think Australia will fully respect the challenge Wales can bring and it might be costly.

Nah, no games at the Millenium stadium for us Fly. That wouldn't have been fair as its not our World Cup. Something I completely agree with. (Don't believe we should get any other games either, but hey ho).

Sorry Fly, ignore that. Just did some research. It turns out we do have 2 home games. I could have sworn that was not the case for my reason above. I still don't agree with it, but seems we have a small advantage over the other non-hosts on the group.

I see that Scotland and 'dark horses' are yet again in the same sentence

As for France 'They are an ordinary side with limited ability.' Probably a fair although simplistic assessment  hopefully we get more of these in the press come the rwc it tend to wake up the players.

Griff wrote:

Bullsbok wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Well, like guys are saying... its a rough guestimate of probability based on the latest evidence that's as good as any other out there.

The only one I'd have a mild issue with is the continuing underplaying of Wales.  Yes, they are whatever ranking they are now, yes they seem to have a tough time getting past Australia (I don't think it's psychological, it's just simply not getting there each and every time - but it will happen one day and that day is therefore getting closer), and yes England beat them out the door of Twickenham the last 6N.
But these guys will be extremely well prepared physically come the WC (better than during the AIs) and they'll be fired emotionally, not by Gatland but by a rabid Edwards.  And when a Welsh team is super fit (which they will be) and emotionally on fire, they're dangerous to any side and a handful that can't be tamed by teams not prepared for the surge.  Last World Cup wasn't a fluke, it was Wales going for it and perhaps only a red card stopping their surge to a final.

They have I think two games at home in the Millennium?  They'll be used as momentum driver games for them.  They'll be intent on getting a head of steam up and they thrive on that growing energy of confidence - it hones their game and cuts out errors.  So they'll be up for the pool.  
It's a genuine three way show that could go anyway.  If I saw any side dropping below the standard required for that pool right now, it would be Australia and that's even with Cheika in charge and having a year to work on things.  I don't think Australia will fully respect the challenge Wales can bring and it might be costly.

I dont think its underestimating Wales , more like underestimating their chances of pulling together three big games to win the World Cup . The Aussies never dissapoint come world cup time unfortunately for group A . I can see them losing one game in the pools at best but they wont lose to both England and Wales that much is near certain . Imo the team with the higher chance of dropping out is Wales simply because of Fiji. I dont doubt Wales can and I think will beat England in the pool game based purely on unrelenting passion which will overcome most .But they wont put up a big score v Fiji as they've proved time and time again . England has an equal chance of beating the Aussies which leaves it at 1 all for the three teams and puts it down to points difference in which case the Aussies will top the group . I'm probably wrong to be sure but i doubt any of the three teams will leave the pool games undefeated .

Apart from the last time we faced them in a World Cup (the last one) when we beat them 66-0?

But still, I don't see us getting to the quarters. Just a gut feeling.

True buts thats more of an anomaly than anything . since 2000 there've been two blowout victories for Wales then a loss a draw and multiple tight wins

I honestly think that Australia won't get out of the group. I think wales might finally overcome their hoodoo against them this time, think england will top the group (after a narrow win against Wales and a slightly more comfortable one against oz) with Wales coming in second.

NO idea why i feel this, but it is a feeling i have....

belovedfrosties wrote:I honestly think that Australia won't get out of the group.  I think wales might finally overcome their hoodoo against them this time, think england will top the group (after a narrow win against Wales and a slightly more comfortable one against oz) with Wales coming in second.

NO idea why i feel this, but it is a feeling i have....

Wales to break the Aussie hoodoo but to come 3rd due to losing to Fiji, again in an epic and managing to beat Uruguay by only 20 points.

Key pool games seem to be Ireland v France to avoid NZ quarter, Scotland v Samoa for RU Pool B and whether Wales, England or Australia will survive Group A. Winning that group and avoiding an SA quarter is the aim.

I think Wales are capable of beating Australia and did show well last time round at RWC but in terms of big game mentality the Aussies have it. Of course Wales could beat England in Twickenham and whatever Dallaglio says i am banking on that result with England to beat Aus and it to come down to PD. A lot of confidence will be earned by the 6 Nations winner in February.

QF 1
Wales v Samoa
QF 2
England v SA
QF 3
NZ v Fr (Barnes to ref!)
QF 4
Ireland v Arg

SF
Wales v NZ
SF
Ire v Eng

F
Wales v England

Wales by at least 42 points

QED

Gwlad wrote:Key pool games seem to be Ireland v France to avoid NZ quarter, Scotland v Samoa for RU Pool B and whether Wales, England or Australia will survive Group A. Winning that group and avoiding an SA quarter is the aim.

I think Wales are capable of beating Australia and did show well last time round at RWC but in terms of big game mentality the Aussies have it. Of course Wales could beat England in Twickenham and whatever Dallaglio says i am banking on that result with England to beat Aus and it to come down to PD. A lot of confidence will be earned by the 6 Nations winner in February.

Could not agree more

Bullsbok wrote:

Gwlad wrote:Key pool games seem to be Ireland v France to avoid NZ quarter, Scotland v Samoa for RU Pool B and whether Wales, England or Australia will survive Group A. Winning that group and avoiding an SA quarter is the aim.

I think Wales are capable of beating Australia and did show well last time round at RWC but in terms of big game mentality the Aussies have it. Of course Wales could beat England in Twickenham and whatever Dallaglio says i am banking on that result with England to beat Aus and it to come down to PD. A lot of confidence will be earned by the 6 Nations winner in February.

Could not agree more

Do you think SA will be in better shape by next year. I loved beating you guys but actually put little weight on the victory due to the absence of key players and a palpable feeling of tiredness being evident amongst the team. I did think they looked weaker than usual out wide though, feel they have stagnated a bit and whereas I used to know who owned certain shirts i have started to lose track….and i really hope De Villiers recovers because he is the heart of the side and classy. I think Matfield is too long in the tooth though. Is Meyer using too many combinations?

My concern is what progress the 3 Kiwi coaches will bring to the 3 NH sides within 12 months.

They all had good AI's and two haven't been there long so I've a hunch that feeling's going to turn into an awful itch soon...

Remember folks it England at Home and probably England with Tualangi back in midfield who they missed badly in AIs

IMHO by far the best bet would be England to go through and one of Wales or Aus to be knocked out.

I still think Wales, England and Australia will all beat each other which means it will come down to the games against Fiji/Uruguay and the points diff etc to split this group.

I have nothing to back this up just a feeling I have. The pressure will undoubtedly be on England with it being their WC and playing at home, from a Welsh perspective I am glad our two big games are not in Cardiff (wouldn't play any here if my choice) as for me that eases the pressure some what.

Gotta say I do agree with the sentiments above...why do Wales keep getting put down.

Wales, England and Australia are all capable of beating each other. Why then if (by the report) England are possible winners and Australia are....are Wales not?

Even saying Argentina's chances are favorable???

I don't get the logic.

GF,

My current thinking is

England v Wales - England win

Wales v Australia - Wales win (yes even given our poor record)

England v Australia - Australia to sneak it

Like said nothing to back it up just a feeling, the way the fixtures fall going into the last round of pool games England would have played both us and Australia and have a 'relatively' easy game against Uruguay and the potential to rack up some points.  Where as Australia and Wales face each other with both knowing what they need to do to (more than likely) get out of the group.

The other factor with this group is if as I think it may well be decided on points difference then coaches may not rotate the squad as much as they would have liked for the 'lesser' games meaning they risk more injury and will have to at least start their 1st choice XV in every game to try and maximise the points they get.

You have to consider bonus points in the group of death.

Losing bonus points and try bonus points.

Who are most likely to rack them up?

Bil,

Agreed and racking up the points against Fiji and Uruguay specifically (sorry any Uruguay fans in ) will be important.  I don't think there will be much in it between the big 3 but if they get anywhere near comparity up front then the Aussie backs can rip anyone apart so even the losing side will be trying to get at least that all important lbp.

Wales' chances have been downplayed because they are in the same group as England and Australia. Any other group and they would have a much better chance.

Both England and Australia will start favourites vs Wales.

Australia because of the hoodoo they hold over Wales, England because of home advantage.

I expect both England and Australia to beat Wales to progress with England topping the pool.

Wales have the capability to progress but they still start as the underdogs.

Yep Bedfordwelsh.

Look, I think only a brave or foolish man is going to predict what is going to happen in that pool, there are simply too many variables to consider.

You first have the historical factors. Historically England should beat Australia, Australia should beat Wales, and Wales vs England is 50/50

So right off the bat, I would suggest if history is anything to go by Wales is the dark horse.

But then you have Australia who has the potential of being completely pummeled in the scrum, something both England and Wales have shown to have the ability to exploit to the fullest, regardless of the history between these teams that is the major failing of Australia.

BUt, then CHeika has had a timely reminder that he cannot go to the RWC with a pack performing like they did in November, so technique and personnel will be severely assessed over the Super XV.

Wales also have their issues, their attack is predictable, England has the same problem, their attack is predictable.

Which coach has the ability to improve his team's weaknesses the most?

I would suggest CHeika has a better chance than Lancaster and Lancaster a better chance than Gatland.

Unless Gatland brings in a specialist on attack.

Structure wise England plays the most structured game of the three, with Wales not far behind, Australia will have to break down that structure to really be at their best.

Then you also have to consider how each of these teams perform at RWC's, who is the better finals team, because essentially England, Wales and Australia will have 5 knockout matches instead of 3.

If anyone is brave enough to consider all these factors and make a prediction, well you are a much braver man than I am.

Biltong wrote:
If anyone is brave enough to consider all these factors and make a prediction, well you are a much braver man than I am.

Well I'm going to plump for Australia to top that pool on points. I think if you look at the 3 teams they have the most scope for rapid improvement under Cheika and have an incredible pool of talent.

They've won 10 or so on the bounce against Wales and should be able to rack up a few points againts Fiji.

Wales and England have players to come back but I think at this stage what you see is what you get with these sides, under their current coaches.

England may beat Australia but I have a suspicion that Wales may turn England over. I don't think anyone will go through that group unbeaten, but if one team can do it I think its the wallabies.

Biltong
If it was Wales vs England then it would favour Wales.

It's England-Wales it is not 50/50 at Twickenham.
You talk about history - it's 36 wins, 18 losses and 8 draws at Twickenham for England.

Against the Aussies - 13 wins, 10 losses, 1 draw at Twickenham. Again England will be favourites.

England have home advantage and that's significant. They've also defeated their two world cup rivals in their previous trips to Twickenham so there will be no shortage of belief.


England and Australia have never failed to make at least the quarter finals - it would take a brave man to bet against either of them IMO.


At Twickenham only two away sides would start as favourites currently - the ABs and South Africa.

I can't see AUS improving. They have the best attacking backline in world rugby... but they've had that for the last 4 years. Hell they've near had the best backrow too. Yet if they can find a decent functioning front 5 they are impotent.

Who wins the group will probably be down to who has the least injuries, which team is on form the most.

Typically poor NZ article. Very little substance but at least reasonably impartial for once.

Firstly on Ireland, Play at pace and with width Ireland havent played with much width all year so not sure where they get that.

Samoa: Like Scotland, they could be a surprise package in the last eight if they

If they what? If the NZ Herald gets an editor.

GunsGerms wrote:Typically poor NZ article. Very little substance but at least reasonably impartial for once.

Firstly on Ireland, Play at pace and with width Ireland havent played with much width all year so not sure where they get that.

Samoa: Like Scotland, they could be a surprise package in the last eight if they

If they what? If the NZ Herald gets an editor.

In some ways I think Scotland could be a surprise banana skin. I do expect them to qualify for the RU spot to face either AUS or ENG. Scotland look like they are turning into a decent outfit and at Twickenham if the weather is poor then their chances rise tenfold. I don't expect them to but in poor conditions they only team I would say they have zero chance against would be vs. NZ. The rest, they've proven they can beat the rest come their day.

The weather was poor this year, who knows what it will be like next Oct/Nov.

fa0019 disagree Scotland's chances of beating England at Twickenham are very slim even it pours it down. Haven't beaten England at Twickenham since 1983 and haven't looked like changing that trend.

Don't agree :- if everything goes to form then I see the SF line up being

NZ, SA, Eng, Ire

The teams that can throw the cat amongst the pidgeons are Australia, France and Wales.

Don't see anyone else going beyond the QF.

beshocked wrote:fa0019 disagree Scotland's chances of beating England at Twickenham are very slim even it pours it down. Haven't beaten England at Twickenham since 1983 and haven't looked like changing that trend.

Yea yea we get it - fortress twickenham is inpregnable  -especially to peasants, celts and ex colonists.

rodders wrote:Don't agree :- if everything goes to form then I see the SF line up being

NZ, SA, Eng, Ire

The teams that can throw the cat amongst the pidgeons are Australia, France and Wales.

Don't see anyone else going beyond the QF.

If that is the Semi final line up I think Ireland would definitely fancy their chance v England in Twickers.

rodders wrote:

beshocked wrote:fa0019 disagree Scotland's chances of beating England at Twickenham are very slim even it pours it down. Haven't beaten England at Twickenham since 1983 and haven't looked like changing that trend.

Yea yea we get it - fortress twickenham is inpregnable  -especially to peasants, celts and ex colonists.

beshocked wrote:fa0019 disagree Scotland's chances of beating England at Twickenham are very slim even it pours it down. Haven't beaten England at Twickenham since 1983 and haven't looked like changing that trend.

They pushed a 2nd string NZ side (who would probably beat all bar say the top 3-4 sides comfortably themselves) all the way recently and beat an ARG side which then went on to beat France. They are not as bad as people say. Would they be favourites, no. Would victory be likely, no. Can I see England viewing them as a bit of a pushover, yes. Would the weather even the game up... under the right conditions yes. With rain and both sides being able to field a decent side I'd say it would be 70:30 to England.... but I'd bite your hand off for those odds. Its not as bleak as people make out.

I do wonder about this England team having the metal to win the games they need to. Outside of the NZ victory in 2012 if you had to say 1 word to describe them it would be "disappointing". They have talent, a top pack yet there is something not quite right about them.

I'd say this... Scotland's chance of beating England is as good as England's chance of beating NZ. I think both are unlikely yet both possible.

I know the points about Wales being super fit are constantly being made, but surely they must get taken with a grain of salt after NZ dominated them in the last 15?

France can and will throw the cat amongst the pigeons. It'll be one game. I doubt they're consistent enough to win the whole thing, but their ups are high enough to beat anyone. So if that's sending Ireland to a QF against NZ, or knocking NZ out in the QF, it'll be one of those two I reckon that France will really have a crack. NZ know now that they can beat an on-fire France in a big RWC game-do Ireland?

With points differential potentially huge in Pool A I think there's sod all chance of a Fijian boilover. They could get Wales on a day when Wales have to win, but the focus could be on Wales scoring as many points as possible, and in a way that takes the pressure off winning. So Fiji might be in line for a couple of hidings. But just how will the runner up react to a QF against the best RWC side of them all?

Glad Hansen had the US game before England and Scotland before Wales to simulate a RWC itinerary. If things blow out NZ could top 300 points in their pool again and be seriously undercooked.

rodders not impregnable, just not as easy to knock down as you seem to think. Home advantage is very much played down for some strange reason.

Generally most teams are harder to beat on their home turf - hard to believe I know!


Gunsgerms Ireland haven't exactly fared well vs England recently have they?

Also 42 wins, 17 losses, 4 draws - not going to be as easy for Ireland as you think.

fa0019 wrote:

beshocked wrote:fa0019 disagree Scotland's chances of beating England at Twickenham are very slim even it pours it down. Haven't beaten England at Twickenham since 1983 and haven't looked like changing that trend.

They pushed a 2nd string NZ side (who would probably beat all bar say the top 3-4 sides comfortably themselves) all the way recently and beat an ARG side which then went on to beat France. They are not as bad as people say. Would they be favourites, no. Would victory be likely, no. Can I see England viewing them as a bit of a pushover, yes. Would the weather even the game up... under the right conditions yes. With rain and both sides being able to field a decent side I'd say it would be 70:30 to England.... but I'd bite your hand off for those odds. Its not as bleak as people make out.

I do wonder about this England team having the metal to win the games they need to. Outside of the NZ victory in 2012 if you had to say 1 word to describe them it would be "disappointing". They have talent, a top pack yet there is something not quite right about them.

I'd say this... Scotland's chance of beating England is as good as England's chance of beating NZ. I think both are unlikely yet both possible.

Well put - also worth noting that a pretty average Scotland side effectively had England beaten at the last RWC.
They were leading by 3 but needed to win by 8 so were pushing for a try instead of closing the game down and gave away a very late try.

Scotland in fairness have a good record v Ireland lately. In the last 6 the record is 3-3. Ireland will be wary of the Scots especially given that they are improving ATM.

Well no side is going to be hoisting white flags, whether they're home or away.  So home advantage is always real but it certainly doesn't define a contest's conclusion before that contest has even begun.

There's not a lot of traction discussion-wise on constantly talking up home advantage.  It kills arguments stone dead if it's used too much.  So I'd prefer to simply see England as a threat in the sense that they're a damn good team, with good strength in depth and one that can play a number of ways to get the result they want against whatever opposition hits them.

So it's the quality of England I'd worry about - not their home advantages.  Their home advantage won't buffer them from losses if they're not good enough on the day.

fa0019 wrote:

beshocked wrote:fa0019 disagree Scotland's chances of beating England at Twickenham are very slim even it pours it down. Haven't beaten England at Twickenham since 1983 and haven't looked like changing that trend.

They pushed a 2nd string NZ side (who would probably beat all bar say the top 3-4 sides comfortably themselves) all the way recently and beat an ARG side which then went on to beat France. They are not as bad as people say. Would they be favourites, no. Would victory be likely, no. Can I see England viewing them as a bit of a pushover, yes. Would the weather even the game up... under the right conditions yes. With rain and both sides being able to field a decent side I'd say it would be 70:30 to England.... but I'd bite your hand off for those odds. Its not as bleak as people make out.

I do wonder about this England team having the metal to win the games they need to. Outside of the NZ victory in 2012 if you had to say 1 word to describe them it would be "disappointing". They have talent, a top pack yet there is something not quite right about them.

I'd say this... Scotland's chance of beating England is as good as England's chance of beating NZ. I think both are unlikely yet both possible.

If the game was at Murrayfield I would say Scotland would fancy their chances, at Twickenham it's a different matter...

Twickenham might not be a daunting prospect for some sides but for Scotland in particular it is. In many of the games Scotland haven't even looked close to beating England.

England have a higher chance of beating NZ at Twickenham because they've done it only two years ago, Scotland in contrast haven't beaten England at Twickenham since 83.

The England side that lost this year in the AIs was not full strength, the wrong player was picked at 10. I feel that England can be a lot better than that.

You're right - England haven't clicked yet but if they do they will be very dangerous.

beshocked wrote:rodders not impregnable, just not as easy to knock down as you seem to think. Home advantage is very much played down for some strange reason.

Well statistically speaking 100% of NH RWC host nations have failed to win the tournament on home soil and only have a 33% chance of making the final, in which they historically have 100% chance of losing... so maybe its not as big advantage as you think.

malky1963 that was in NZ and Scotland still lost to a poor England side. It wasn't a particularly good world cup for England.

Scotland playing England at Twickenham is different to playing at Murrayfield or a neutral venue.

secretfly perhaps not but it gives you a good indication of what is likely to happen. I know you like to dismiss records but they do matter.

England have struggled with SA in the last few years and this run of losses has continued.

Ditto Wales with the Aussies.

Wales and England are capable of beating those two sides but they haven't for quite a while. Suggesting that these run of losses will continue to evidence to the contrary.

Equally Scotland struggle to beat England, particularly at Twickenhamso it's fair to come to the conclusion that this run will likely continue till we see some reason why Scotland will break their poor run. I have seen nothing as of yet to suggest Scotland will beat England at Twickenham.

beshocked wrote:
secretfly perhaps not but it gives you a good indication of what is likely to happen. I know you like to dismiss records but they do matter.

I like to dismiss Qualification and records, yes I'm a maverick me. On another thread I'm even mulling over the idea of no refs.

But back to reality for a bit - a strange strange world to me - Records DO mean something - but only to the Past, never the future. Everything out there that we're discussing is the future. Remember Exeter Always think about recordless records being written for a first time.

rodders wrote:

beshocked wrote:rodders not impregnable, just not as easy to knock down as you seem to think. Home advantage is very much played down for some strange reason.

Well statistically speaking 100% of NH RWC host nations have failed to win the tournament on home soil and only have a 33% chance of making the final, in which they historically have 100% chance of losing... so maybe its not as big advantage as you think.

Hosts - In 7 of the world cups 3 of them have been won by the home side. 2 have been finalists, 1 semi finalist and 1 quarter finalist.

In 3 of those world cups the host knocked out NZ - Australia,SA and France with NZ lifting the trophy twice on home soil.

Home advantage is significant actually.

I suspect it very much depends who the hosts are though.

Have to say it was a very nice and diplomatic put down of Irish chances. He has to mention them as we're 3rd in the world rankings but honestly;
- How many people think it will be another poor showing in the group stages?
- How many people think the hype will get away with itself and we'll end narrowly losing out in the QF with a couple of 'if only' moments to mull over?

Biltong wrote:I suspect it very much depends who the hosts are though.

Quite True, Japan will be dark horses soon enough!