SF1 - Match Thread - ENGLAND v NEW ZEALAND - 26/10/19 - K/O 09:00 BST

[Guest]

First topic message reminder :

Again, making these early for the sake of ease and consistency.

ENGLAND

Team:Daly; Watson, Tuilagi, Farrell (capt), May; Ford, Youngs; M Vunipola, George, Sinckler, Itoje, Lawes, Curry, Underhill, B Vunipola.

Replacements: Cowan-Dickie, Marler, Cole, Kruis, Wilson, Heinz, Slade, Joseph.

NEW ZEALAND

Team: Beauden Barrett; Sevu Reece, Jack Goodhue, Anton Lienert-Brown, George Bridge; Richie Mo'unga, Aaron Smith; Joe Moody, Codie Taylor, Nepo Laulala, Brodie Retallick, Sam Whitelock, Scott Barrett, Ardie Savea, Kieran Read (capt).

Replacements: Dane Coles, Ofa Tuungafasi, Angus Ta'avao, Patrick Tuipulotu, Sam Cane, TJ Perenara, Sonny Bill Williams, Jordie Barrett.



Venue: Yokohama
Referee: Nigel Owens
AR1: Romain Poite
AR2: Pascal Gauzere
TMO: Marius Joncker

[Pie]

Why are we using rankings now - which are worth double, and where some teams, like Australia, have lost twice - to determine who was favoured and/or 'the best' pre-tournament?

So far, the RWC has gone almost exactly to form. Everyone expected NZ to be hot favourites with SA the dark horses - nothing suggests that's not still the case. England were the other solid favourites, and I think everyone gave Wales and outside shot if injuries and luck fell their way - they've not really had much of either, all told, considering the rest periods other teams have had, and the higher injury rate than most, although cashed in some 'moral victory change' from 2011 in the QF v France.

Ireland? Everyone was very much unsure about how they'd play. Very good last year, very poor in the 6Ns. Generally thought to be 'holding back' for the WC, but that thumping at Twickenham put things in perspective. England were now firmly a rung ahead of them as favourites. They were, at best, on par with Australia, who were similarly an 'unknown' in that they clearly had/have immense talent, had just beaten the ABs, before being stuffed by them in the return.

That seems to be the pre tournament consensus as I understood it. The Boks drawing with NZ meant they were just narrowly ahead of England to many peoples' minds, with Wales a sort-of distant 4th, and Ireland and Australia fighting it out for 5th due to volatile form.

Really? Do you not think Wales have had some luck?
Even Biggar said ‘ we got lucky’ & everyone including Gats knows that France were by far the better side on the day.
Even the final ‘try’ was a 50/50 call re. The ball going forward & they got the benefit of the ref on field decision.
I would say that they have used up all the luck that should come a teams way so far.

Good teams make their 'luck'

[Guest]

Why are we using rankings now - which are worth double, and where some teams, like Australia, have lost twice - to determine who was favoured and/or 'the best' pre-tournament?

So far, the RWC has gone almost exactly to form. Everyone expected NZ to be hot favourites with SA the dark horses - nothing suggests that's not still the case. England were the other solid favourites, and I think everyone gave Wales and outside shot if injuries and luck fell their way - they've not really had much of either, all told, considering the rest periods other teams have had, and the higher injury rate than most, although cashed in some 'moral victory change' from 2011 in the QF v France.

Ireland? Everyone was very much unsure about how they'd play. Very good last year, very poor in the 6Ns. Generally thought to be 'holding back' for the WC, but that thumping at Twickenham put things in perspective. England were now firmly a rung ahead of them as favourites. They were, at best, on par with Australia, who were similarly an 'unknown' in that they clearly had/have immense talent, had just beaten the ABs, before being stuffed by them in the return.

That seems to be the pre tournament consensus as I understood it. The Boks drawing with NZ meant they were just narrowly ahead of England to many peoples' minds, with Wales a sort-of distant 4th, and Ireland and Australia fighting it out for 5th due to volatile form.

Really? Do you not think Wales have had some luck?
Even Biggar said ‘ we got lucky’ & everyone including Gats knows that France were by far the better side on the day.
Even the final ‘try’ was a 50/50 call re. The ball going forward & they got the benefit of the ref on field decision.
I would say that they have used up all the luck that should come a teams way so far.

In the France game, yes, but relative to the other groups, it appears they had the toughest. You could make a case Scotland got a tougher draw with Japan - that would probably be fair - but Fiji, Georgia, and Uruguay were all probably better than just about any other 3rd, 4th, and 5th ranked team bar Japan and possibly Argentina. We simply didn't see enough of Italy. In any case, of the QFists, only 2 teams had a less 'luck' in the draw - and they both got knocked out, handsomely.

The other slice of luck - or lack - is the cancelled games, which I believe had a significant impact in the groups, the knockouts, and will in subsequent games, too. Of course, injuries play their part, and Wales have lost out to injury where other teams have not. SA have lost Kriel, England have lost...no one? And NZ have likewise lost no one? Wales were struggling pre tournament massively, and have lost Cory Hill, Josh Navidi, and have major doubts over JD2.

The France game was 'lucky', but I'd also say Wales got some rough officiating in that game - I rewatched it and Peyper was awful. Wales were playing against 14 men for 22 minutes - they played with 14 themelves for the final 10 minutes of the first half where they held France out admirably.

Yes, there was fortune to that game, but it had been coming, and I don't believe Wales got any more 'lucky' than most teams do on a world cup run. People say France were the better team - but for the full 80 minutes? Had Wales taken one of the few good chances they created in that final 20, and hadn't relied on the try as it was, perhaps the 'luck' argument would be less emphatic, but I doubt it. If Wales didn't have a ridiculous knack for winning gmes in the final 10 minutes despite playing pretty dour stuff, I'd be more inclined to agree, but overall, no, I don't think Wales were lucky v France. Ultimately, they were playing a well rested, well prepared, and well pumped - over pumped - team that did well first half, but Wales are usually confident and good enough to pull back and beat them, as happened 7 months ago.

[Guest]

Have either team been named yet?

Hang on I'll focus my long lens and let you know in a minute

1. Phil Vickery.......

A bit late in Phil 'Raging Bull' Vickey's career to move across to loosehead, no? I know he's done well to stay at the top of the professional game this long, but he's a world class scrummager and I don't think I've ever seen him get taken apart on the tighthead. Would be a foolish move to drop Mako for Big Phil at this stage imo.

[BigTrevsbigmac]

Why are we using rankings now - which are worth double, and where some teams, like Australia, have lost twice - to determine who was favoured and/or 'the best' pre-tournament?

So far, the RWC has gone almost exactly to form. Everyone expected NZ to be hot favourites with SA the dark horses - nothing suggests that's not still the case. England were the other solid favourites, and I think everyone gave Wales and outside shot if injuries and luck fell their way - they've not really had much of either, all told, considering the rest periods other teams have had, and the higher injury rate than most, although cashed in some 'moral victory change' from 2011 in the QF v France.

Ireland? Everyone was very much unsure about how they'd play. Very good last year, very poor in the 6Ns. Generally thought to be 'holding back' for the WC, but that thumping at Twickenham put things in perspective. England were now firmly a rung ahead of them as favourites. They were, at best, on par with Australia, who were similarly an 'unknown' in that they clearly had/have immense talent, had just beaten the ABs, before being stuffed by them in the return.

That seems to be the pre tournament consensus as I understood it. The Boks drawing with NZ meant they were just narrowly ahead of England to many peoples' minds, with Wales a sort-of distant 4th, and Ireland and Australia fighting it out for 5th due to volatile form.

Really? Do you not think Wales have had some luck?
Even Biggar said ‘ we got lucky’ & everyone including Gats knows that France were by far the better side on the day.
Even the final ‘try’ was a 50/50 call re. The ball going forward & they got the benefit of the ref on field decision.
I would say that they have used up all the luck that should come a teams way so far.

In the France game, yes, but relative to the other groups, it appears they had the toughest. You could make a case Scotland got a tougher draw with Japan - that would probably be fair - but Fiji, Georgia, and Uruguay were all probably better than just about any other 3rd, 4th, and 5th ranked team bar Japan and possibly Argentina. We simply didn't see enough of Italy. In any case, of the QFists, only 2 teams had a less 'luck' in the draw - and they both got knocked out, handsomely.

The other slice of luck - or lack - is the cancelled games, which I believe had a significant impact in the groups, the knockouts, and will in subsequent games, too. Of course, injuries play their part, and Wales have lost out to injury where other teams have not. SA have lost Kriel, England have lost...no one? And NZ have likewise lost no one? Wales were struggling pre tournament massively, and have lost Cory Hill, Josh Navidi, and have major doubts over JD2.

The France game was 'lucky', but I'd also say Wales got some rough officiating in that game - I rewatched it and Peyper was awful. Wales were playing against 14 men for 22 minutes - they played with 14 themelves for the final 10 minutes of the first half where they held France out admirably.

Yes, there was fortune to that game, but it had been coming, and I don't believe Wales got any more 'lucky' than most teams do on a world cup run. People say France were the better team - but for the full 80 minutes? Had Wales taken one of the few good chances they created in that final 20, and hadn't relied on the try as it was, perhaps the 'luck' argument would be less emphatic, but I doubt it. If Wales didn't have a ridiculous knack for winning gmes in the final 10 minutes despite playing pretty dour stuff, I'd be more inclined to agree, but overall, no, I don't think Wales were lucky v France. Ultimately, they were playing a well rested, well prepared, and well pumped - over pumped - team that did well first half, but Wales are usually confident and good enough to pull back and beat them, as happened 7 months ago.

France should have one that game at a canter. Ntamack hit the post twice & they created a lot more chances than Wales.
Yes Wales defence was good but the critical ref decision went their way.
Against Australia the Kerevi yellow card turned the game again & that was at best a 50/50 call.

Playing the extra game would be more relevant if Wales started with their first team against Uruguay but 13 were rested....& it showed!

[LondonTiger]

Do we really have to fill this thread with talk of Wales v France?

[Duty281]

Have either team been named yet?

Hang on I'll focus my long lens and let you know in a minute

1. Phil Vickery.......

Andy Goode at fly-half, Flutey and Noon the centre pairing...

[majesticimperialman]

Have either team been named yet?

Hang on I'll focus my long lens and let you know in a minute

1. Phil Vickery.......

Andy Goode at fly-half, Flutey and Noon the centre pairing...

Mathew Taite at full back.  

[Pie]

Have either team been named yet?

Hang on I'll focus my long lens and let you know in a minute

1. Phil Vickery.......

Andy Goode at fly-half, Flutey and Noon the centre pairing...

Or as Austin Healey calls him Andy Food

Whoever said its too late for Phil to cross to loosehead doesn't understand he is in the prime of his career

[majesticimperialman]

Have either team been named yet?

Hang on I'll focus my long lens and let you know in a minute

1. Phil Vickery.......

Andy Goode at fly-half, Flutey and Noon the centre pairing...

Or as Austin Healey calls him Andy Food

Whoever said its too late for Phil to cross to loosened doesn't understand he is in the prime of his career

Hope he as gad plenty of Kobe Beef.

[Taylorman]

Why are we using rankings now - which are worth double, and where some teams, like Australia, have lost twice - to determine who was favoured and/or 'the best' pre-tournament?

So far, the RWC has gone almost exactly to form. Everyone expected NZ to be hot favourites with SA the dark horses - nothing suggests that's not still the case. England were the other solid favourites, and I think everyone gave Wales and outside shot if injuries and luck fell their way - they've not really had much of either, all told, considering the rest periods other teams have had, and the higher injury rate than most, although cashed in some 'moral victory change' from 2011 in the QF v France.

Ireland? Everyone was very much unsure about how they'd play. Very good last year, very poor in the 6Ns. Generally thought to be 'holding back' for the WC, but that thumping at Twickenham put things in perspective. England were now firmly a rung ahead of them as favourites. They were, at best, on par with Australia, who were similarly an 'unknown' in that they clearly had/have immense talent, had just beaten the ABs, before being stuffed by them in the return.

That seems to be the pre tournament consensus as I understood it. The Boks drawing with NZ meant they were just narrowly ahead of England to many peoples' minds, with Wales a sort-of distant 4th, and Ireland and Australia fighting it out for 5th due to volatile form.

Really? Do you not think Wales have had some luck?
Even Biggar said ‘ we got lucky’ & everyone including Gats knows that France were by far the better side on the day.
Even the final ‘try’ was a 50/50 call re. The ball going forward & they got the benefit of the ref on field decision.
I would say that they have used up all the luck that should come a teams way so far.

In the France game, yes, but relative to the other groups, it appears they had the toughest. You could make a case Scotland got a tougher draw with Japan - that would probably be fair - but Fiji, Georgia, and Uruguay were all probably better than just about any other 3rd, 4th, and 5th ranked team bar Japan and possibly Argentina. We simply didn't see enough of Italy. In any case, of the QFists, only 2 teams had a less 'luck' in the draw - and they both got knocked out, handsomely.

The other slice of luck - or lack - is the cancelled games, which I believe had a significant impact in the groups, the knockouts, and will in subsequent games, too. Of course, injuries play their part, and Wales have lost out to injury where other teams have not. SA have lost Kriel, England have lost...no one? And NZ have likewise lost no one? Wales were struggling pre tournament massively, and have lost Cory Hill, Josh Navidi, and have major doubts over JD2.

The France game was 'lucky', but I'd also say Wales got some rough officiating in that game - I rewatched it and Peyper was awful. Wales were playing against 14 men for 22 minutes - they played with 14 themelves for the final 10 minutes of the first half where they held France out admirably.

Yes, there was fortune to that game, but it had been coming, and I don't believe Wales got any more 'lucky' than most teams do on a world cup run. People say France were the better team - but for the full 80 minutes? Had Wales taken one of the few good chances they created in that final 20, and hadn't relied on the try as it was, perhaps the 'luck' argument would be less emphatic, but I doubt it. If Wales didn't have a ridiculous knack for winning gmes in the final 10 minutes despite playing pretty dour stuff, I'd be more inclined to agree, but overall, no, I don't think Wales were lucky v France. Ultimately, they were playing a well rested, well prepared, and well pumped - over pumped - team that did well first half, but Wales are usually confident and good enough to pull back and beat them, as happened 7 months ago.

France should have one that game at a canter. Ntamack hit the post twice & they created a lot more chances than Wales.
Yes Wales defence was good but the critical ref decision went their way.
Against Australia the Kerevi yellow card turned the game again & that was at best a 50/50 call.

Playing the extra game would be more relevant if Wales started with their first team against Uruguay but 13 were rested....& it showed!

Yeah some teams get more luck than others, there’s generally one that stands out, this time it’s Wales. Looks like they’ve needed every bit of it though, winning the purported easiest quarter by a point, with help, where the others cruised in. SA got their revenge on Japan, and with four losses v Wales get to do the same.

Usually the eventual winner  ‘looks like’ a World champion by now.

Of the four Wales are the only side that don’t. But who knows. Miracles can happen.

[Guest]

Disagree with every point Trev makes, but for the sake of LT and other mods' health, will let it drop.

Who's wanting For at 10 and Tuilagi at 13, and who wants more of the same with Farrell 10, Tuilagi 12?

[Taylorman]

Teams are out today. What’s the consensus Ford is back at 10? I say it’s a must if England are going to be able to create an attacking game plan of their own. They must have variation and Youngs will be under so much pressure as it is.

They won’t win off the back of a punishing defence and ‘scoring’ of AB mistakes. They will have to create something of their own, or they just be defending all night.

A Ford, Farrell combination gives them options and makes the ABs think.

A Youngs/ Farrell 9/10 limitation will be suffocated out of the match...in my opinion. ABs know you get Farrell, you get England.

[mikey_dragon]

France should have one that game at a canter. Ntamack hit the post twice & they created a lot more chances than Wales.
Yes Wales defence was good but the critical ref decision went their way.
Against Australia the Kerevi yellow card turned the game again & that was at best a 50/50 call.

Playing the extra game would be more relevant if Wales started with their first team against Uruguay but 13 were rested....& it showed!

Shoulda, woulda, coulda... did not . 
Which critical ref decision? You need to look at the laws if you’re still talking about the try. You were also the one who said that Wales’ try in the warm-up vs England shouldn’t have stood when it didn’t even break any laws or rules! Your rugby knowledge is severely lacking. 
Kerevi didn’t get a yellow card against Wales. 

Are you this worried about playing the all blacks that you jump back on the hate-Wales train already? You’ve already been warned for trolling over on our thread, so I suggest relaxing a little.

[mikey_dragon]

Teams are out today. What’s the consensus Ford is back at 10? I say it’s a must if England are going to be able to create an attacking game plan of their own. They must have variation and Youngs will be under so much pressure as it is.

They won’t win off the back of a punishing defence and ‘scoring’ of AB mistakes. They will have to create something of their own, or they just be defending all night.

A Ford, Farrell combination gives them options and makes the ABs think.

A Youngs/ Farrell 9/10 limitation will be suffocated out of the match...in my opinion. ABs know you get Farrell, you get England.

It’s not a bad idea having Ford, Farrell, Tuilagi. Also with Curry playing then you can’t really go through any of those channels- it’s a really good defence. If England get to the corner and attack via the maul, cross field kick then I think that’s their best chance to get points.

[Taylorman]

Don’t think it’s a hate train though. Fact is, Wales got lucky with the win. In a match where they were 82/18 chances of winning it they almost made a meal of it, regardless of anything that happened. Some fans can’t even concede that much.

If NZ won by one in a World Cup I would say we were damned lucky. We won vs France in 2011 when based on their cup effort we should have won more easily we were over the moon lucky. The ref cheating comments aren’t something we can control but believe me, we were relieved.

Welsh fans would have no doubt, absolutely no doubt been cringing in disbelief that the Welsh could be looking at going out in that last ten minutes. Many said so here on the thread.

Then for a dominating view, not all, but by volume, to come out reflect that they deserved it, no luck in it, no forward pass lucky decision etc etc just lacks credibility.

Just say you were lucky and move on. France could very well have won that had they put a bit more scrutiny into the pass which was marginally forward. Not clearly forward but certainly within the range of passes rules forward before.

The real outcome from this game is that based on that match it appears Wales form isn’t strong, so theyll need to be much better vs SA, or they’re going home.

The fact that they’ve also had the weakest World Cup record suggests that’s already played a part in the knock out nerves.

Gatland said it himself, the best team lost.

I mean, he would know wouldn’t he?

[Taylorman]

Teams are out today. What’s the consensus Ford is back at 10? I say it’s a must if England are going to be able to create an attacking game plan of their own. They must have variation and Youngs will be under so much pressure as it is.

They won’t win off the back of a punishing defence and ‘scoring’ of AB mistakes. They will have to create something of their own, or they just be defending all night.

A Ford, Farrell combination gives them options and makes the ABs think.

A Youngs/ Farrell 9/10 limitation will be suffocated out of the match...in my opinion. ABs know you get Farrell, you get England.

It’s not a bad idea having Ford, Farrell, Tuilagi. Also with Curry playing then you can’t really go through any of those channels- it’s a really good defence. If England get to the corner and attack via the maul, cross field kick then I think that’s their best chance to get points.

Yeah Ford Farrell Tuilagi is a team sheet I’d least like to see from a NZ view. Brains skill and brawn across them all.

It does mean putting a midfielder out as they were both good but Jones plan of ‘Ford will finish the game at 10 for us’ although working perfectly vs Oz...I thought that was a master stroke given the way Oz played, won’t work.

This has to be all about the start. I don’t see Ford finishing for them so much as having to rescue them this time.

For me it’s the biggest call of the semis. A Farrell only playmaker selection will for me put England in the same predictable position Jones so nicely put Oz in.

[Cyril]

I’m still not really going with this idea that Australia gifted England points and NZ had to create everything on their own versus Ireland. Both Ireland and Australia were poor and limited in their own ways against their respective opponents, some of this poor play caused by pressure from their opponents and some because they aren’t great sides. I’d argue that neither has had a good World Cup, but that Australia are currently better than Ireland.

Not that any of this will have a great bearing on Saturday’s game, but I would put England’s win over Aus at least as impressive as NZ’s over Ireland.

[mikey_dragon]

T-man, I said we were a bit lucky myself and I honestly believe that. Hopefully that’s our awful game out of the way, the only way is up now! I was replying to that particular poster who loves to spread their bitter resentment of Wales with a few other English - they have a history of it. I also don’t see how it’s not embarrassing to jump on inaccuracies when the laws clearly state otherwise, and to keep on doing it. Embarrassing.


Onto the England game... all combo’s have worked well for England. If one doesn’t seem to be working then Eddie can change it up and voila. Hard to find a weakness in either team, but exploiting a weakness is usually what wins tight games. England’s weakness is Daly at full-back, sorry folks. The All Blacks greatest strength for me right now is their back 3, and then their No.9’s.

[BigTrevsbigmac]

Don’t think it’s a hate train though. Fact is, Wales got lucky with the win. In a match where they were 82/18 chances of winning it they almost made a meal of it, regardless of anything that happened. Some fans can’t even concede that much.

If NZ won by one in a World Cup I would say we were damned lucky. We won vs France in 2011 when based on their cup effort we should have won more easily we were over the moon lucky. The ref cheating comments aren’t something we can control but believe me, we were relieved.

Welsh fans would have no doubt, absolutely no doubt been cringing in disbelief that the Welsh could be looking at going out in that last ten minutes. Many said so here on the thread.

Then for a dominating view, not all, but by volume, to come out reflect that they deserved it, no luck in it, no forward pass lucky decision etc etc just lacks credibility.

Just say you were lucky and move on. France could very well have won that had they put a bit more scrutiny into the pass which was marginally forward. Not clearly forward but certainly within the range of passes rules forward before.

The real outcome from this game is that based on that match it appears Wales form isn’t strong, so theyll need to be much better vs SA, or they’re going home.

The fact that they’ve also had the weakest World Cup record suggests that’s already played a part in the knock out nerves.

Gatland said it himself, the best team lost.

I mean, he would know wouldn’t he?

Wise words Mr T.

Looking forward to our game Saturday

[Guest]

I’m still not really going with this idea that Australia gifted England points and NZ had to create everything on their own versus Ireland.

Particularly as you cannot get more glaring than this for a 'gimme' 7 pointer. This is a 14 point swing. NZ just had to hack it on and plop on the ball.

1. Sets up the attack.
2. Recycled ball, Henshaw dummy, ALB (?) bites in on Henshaw (?) leaving Sexton in space on the wrap around.
3. Sexton beats the ABs defender who doesn't have time to readjust. Kearney is hitting the line straight.
4. Sexton can go through the gap and doesn't need to pass, but Kearney holds his line. They're about to run in to each other instead of having an easy 2 on 1 v ABs defender - possibly ALB actually, so not sure who the first defender is.
5. Instead, they make an absolute mess of it and run in to each, instead of taking the two options which were Sexton through the gap, or draw and pass with Kearney forcing Barrett to scramble, as Kearney bears down on Bridge (?) as last man in the 15 position, with Stockdale outside him. Sexton forces the pass not wanting to botch the move and end up flattened in midfield, but the ball goes loose - a botched tryscoring chance becomes something much worse...

6. All Black gets boot to ball - believe it was Mo'unga, which means it was ALB who bit in. Mo'unga hacks ahead, Barrett races up from left wing and obviously has the pace to score.


About as much of a gimme or an own goal as you can possibly see in rugby.

T's point would be a bit more relevant if things like this ^^^ hadn't happened v Ireland. You can't even say that came from specific defensive pressure as NZ were beaten, that would almost certainly have been a try to Ireland had Sexton got the ball to Kearney, as it's then at worst a 1 on 1 with Stockdale v Bridge, and Stockdale has history of finishing those. This was two players - experienced players, Sexton and Kearney, multiple test Lions - panicking despite the 'picture' on the field. They were playing the scoreboard, the game, the blac shirt, and not the immediate situation. What's to say Australia and Beale didn't do exactly the same v England?

[Taylorman]

[maestegmafia]

Don’t think it’s a hate train though. Fact is, Wales got lucky with the win. In a match where they were 82/18 chances of winning it they almost made a meal of it, regardless of anything that happened. Some fans can’t even concede that much.

If NZ won by one in a World Cup I would say we were damned lucky. We won vs France in 2011 when based on their cup effort we should have won more easily we were over the moon lucky. The ref cheating comments aren’t something we can control but believe me, we were relieved.

Welsh fans would have no doubt, absolutely no doubt been cringing in disbelief that the Welsh could be looking at going out in that last ten minutes. Many said so here on the thread.

Then for a dominating view, not all, but by volume, to come out reflect that they deserved it, no luck in it, no forward pass lucky decision etc etc just lacks credibility.

Just say you were lucky and move on. France could very well have won that had they put a bit more scrutiny into the pass which was marginally forward. Not clearly forward but certainly within the range of passes rules forward before.

The real outcome from this game is that based on that match it appears Wales form isn’t strong, so theyll need to be much better vs SA, or they’re going home.

The fact that they’ve also had the weakest World Cup record suggests that’s already played a part in the knock out nerves.

Gatland said it himself, the best team lost.

I mean, he would know wouldn’t he?

Wise words Mr T.

Looking forward to our game Saturday

And the two teams we might play in the final are ranked higher than wales, better teams and we keep getting lucky.

Or do we make our own luck?

Someone once said “Rather be lucky than good”.

[Taylorman]

I’m still not really going with this idea that Australia gifted England points and NZ had to create everything on their own versus Ireland.

Particularly as you cannot get more glaring than this for a 'gimme' 7 pointer. This is a 14 point swing. NZ just had to hack it on and plop on the ball.

1. Sets up the attack.
2. Recycled ball, Henshaw dummy, ALB (?) bites in on Henshaw (?) leaving Sexton in space on the wrap around.
3. Sexton beats the ABs defender who doesn't have time to readjust. Kearney is hitting the line straight.
4. Sexton can go through the gap and doesn't need to pass, but Kearney holds his line. They're about to run in to each other instead of having an easy 2 on 1 v ABs defender - possibly ALB actually, so not sure who the first defender is.
5. Instead, they make an absolute mess of it and run in to each, instead of taking the two options which were Sexton through the gap, or draw and pass with Kearney forcing Barrett to scramble, as Kearney bears down on Bridge (?) as last man in the 15 position, with Stockdale outside him. Sexton forces the pass not wanting to botch the move and end up flattened in midfield, but the ball goes loose - a botched tryscoring chance becomes something much worse...

6. All Black gets boot to ball - believe it was Mo'unga, which means it was ALB who bit in. Mo'unga hacks ahead, Barrett races up from left wing and obviously has the pace to score.


About as much of a gimme or an own goal as you can possibly see in rugby.

T's point would be a bit more relevant if things like this ^^^ hadn't happened v Ireland. You can't even say that came from specific defensive pressure as NZ were beaten, that would almost certainly have been a try to Ireland had Sexton got the ball to Kearney, as it's then at worst a 1 on 1 with Stockdale v Bridge, and Stockdale has history of finishing those. This was two players - experienced players, Sexton and Kearney, multiple test Lions - panicking despite the 'picture' on the field. They were playing the scoreboard, the game, the blac shirt, and not the immediate situation. What's to say Australia and Beale didn't do exactly the same v England?

I’ll answer that. And what about the other six? If you are going to make a point that we didn’t need to create to win the test then you need to cover all seven tries, then come to a reasonable conclusion. Picking out a selective try and using it as a broad argument is poor analysis.

So now you’ve started. Produce the same for all the AB tries, and then all the English tries, then come to a conclusion.

Happy to be corrected in that basis. But one try in seven.

Sorry, incomplete. Because then we are just dealing with semantics where mine was a broad theory on the overall match.

[Guest]

Why the f has this become a discussion on Wales v France and 'luck'? This began by tallking about the relative 'favouritism' each side had pre-tournament. I meantiong the L word in relation to Wales and them winning - that they would need few to no injuries and luck to fall their way if they were to take the next step and lift the trophy. That's not contentious. Yes, they had some fortune v France, that's clear - but in the grand scheme of things, with Howley's suspension, pre and mid tournament injuries, a tougher group than any other contender, and the absence of a rest week, the luck they had v France pales in comparison to those instances. Particularly as Wales 'earnt' things like the red card - Big V doesn't elbow Wainwright unless France are getting frustrated at his efforts; France don't succumb to the late pressure unless Wales put the ball 10m from their goal line.

Stop boiling things down to the most trivial, partisan points. It's boring.

It's also not relevant to the thread if you're no longer talking about the teams remaining, and just want to WUM Welsh posters...

[Guest]

Sorry, incomplete. Because then we are just dealing with semantics where mine was a broad theory on the overall match.

Broad theory = aimless sweeping statement to make a false dichotomy of 'NZ work for their tries' v 'England just score from mistakes'.

Glaring evidence that this sweeping statement is lazy and incorrect, particularly following on from the SA where the same scoring pattern emerged is 'incpmplete' for you? I'm not the one asserting anything - you are. And clearly you're wrong.

Pay me if you want more analysis...

Anyway, thought you'd foe'd me, cuz?

[Cyril]

I thought you two had set each other to ‘foe’? That didn’t last long. Please don’t ruin this thread as well with your arguing. It’s every, single thread on here now and there’s no point anyone else posting between your sniping as it all gets lost.

[Guest]

I'm the one discussing the topic and the rugby, Cyril, and also the one trying to get it back on track and not see it become an aimless Welsh-bashing thread. If you're being fair, you'd see/accept that.

And I don't foe anyone, never have, doubt I will.

[Taylorman]

Cyril, that post was about rugby. I have ignored most of the childish ones, and have avoided being personal myself.

Miaow put up a well researched, eloquent argument, and I responded why I thought it had merit, but thought was also incomplete.

There was no name calling, sniping, in that exchange. As long as it remains that way, I’m happy to discuss rugby. If it descends from that, I’ll disengage.

Fair?

[Taylorman]

I'm the one discussing the topic and the rugby, Cyril, and also the one trying to get it back on track and not see it become an aimless Welsh-bashing thread. If you're being fair, you'd see/accept that.

And I don't foe anyone, never have, doubt I will.

Snap!

[SecretFly]

Jaysus... I'm beginning to think it was best to cut out of this contest in the QF stage... I think the few guys remaining are getting cabin fever.

[LondonTiger]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[LondonTiger]

Oh and thanks for thinking of me Mikey, but as you can see I think my sNity bubble has been well and truly smashed.


To everyone else, how about we try and focus on the upcoming game.

Please.

Pretty please.

[Collapse2005]

Jaysus... I'm beginning to think it was best to cut out of this contest in the QF stage... I think the few guys remaining are getting cabin fever.  

Haha

[Scottrf]

Jaysus... I'm beginning to think it was best to cut out of this contest in the QF stage... I think the few guys remaining are getting cabin fever.  

I think your guys cut out of the contest before that.

[SecretFly]

Oh and thanks for thinking of me Mikey, but as you can see I think my sNity bubble has been well and truly smashed.


To everyone else, how about we try and focus on the upcoming game.

Please.

Pretty please.

Has you got any footage of tries scored in any of the upcoming games? I'm writing a book on Predictive Stats as the apply to SH coaching in NH weather conditions.

[SecretFly]

Jaysus... I'm beginning to think it was best to cut out of this contest in the QF stage... I think the few guys remaining are getting cabin fever.  

I think your guys cut out of the contest before that.

Handsomely paid by a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who knows Howley

[majesticimperialman]

Secretfly.

Now Ireland are out of the RWC. Who are supporting in the SF? England-Wales?

If both team's get knocked out, who would you support in the final? NZ-SA for the Final.

[Taylorman]

”If it descends from that, I’ll disengage. ”

“The few guys remaining are getting cabin fever”

Geez,
Sounding more like a bad Tom Cruise movie.
I mean even a Farrell makes a better Shogun.

Alright back to the game...

the 606 commentary on the 80...I’ll start the commentary but have to pop out so feel free to chip in...

Hakas great, swing low hits a new high...Owens says Roit luddies, no punching, pulling hair...or something like that.

We’re off...

3 minutes....England lineout, clean take by Itoje who offloads to May on the wing who runs around to score behind the post. Read is fuming. Hansen’s snoring. Jones is hanging from the rafters, swing low has hit a new high!

4 minutes...Farrell misses the conversion ( couldn’t resist)

England, 5-0

.(popping out now, can someone take over for a while, the dog needs feeding):

8 minutes:

[Scottrf]

Tryless first half actually, neither team has conceded then.

[SecretFly]

Secretfly.

Now Ireland are out of the RWC. Who are supporting in the SF? England-Wales?

If both team's get knocked out, who would you support in the final? NZ-SA for the Final.

A part of me likes all four teams for different reasons but even though you leave this competition, the more diehard rugby fans still think strategically about the future and so results in the next few weeks have ripple effects.

I'd like to see NZ prove that they're as good as they look and as good as their fans here seem to think they are.  If anything it would reduce our red faces a bit if they cruised into the final and won it with style.  
Then again, I've kinda taken to SA too.  Rassie coached Munster most recently, appeared a very nice man when there.  I kinda didn't like the way they seemed to be reffed much harsher than Japan in their QF, and even though I admired the tenacity of Japan through this WC, I found myself willing SA to push through despite the constant shrill whistle in their ears.
Wales for never say die spirit - we could do with a few drops of it!
England well....just seems a perfectly created machine.  It just turns on and does business. When in the zone - ruthless, like the ABs. I like ruthlessness.

All four certainly deserve to be where they are.  Part of me wants SA to do it though on an emotional level, but NZ winning would lighten our load in selfish terms.  

NZ.

[mikey_dragon]

Fly supports two teams:
Ireland, and anyone playing England .

[robbo277]

Well this semi-final represents a key match in my life. Some idiot told my 5 year old son that New Zealand were the best team in the world and as he hates losing he's latched onto them. Need England to pull through so I can bring him back from the brink!

If NZ knock England out and win the cup he'll be doing the haka by the time the ABs come to Twickenham next November.

[SecretFly]

Fly supports two teams:
Ireland, and anyone playing England .

Not so Mikey I'm much more subtle, sly and strategic.... Sometimes I needs England to win.  Nothing personal, just biz.

[SecretFly]

Well this semi-final represents a key match in my life. Some idiot told my 5 year old son that New Zealand were the best team in the world and as he hates losing he's latched onto them. Need England to pull through so I can bring him back from the brink!

If NZ knock England out and win the cup he'll be doing the haka by the time the ABs come to Twickenham next November.

And to think the bloody politicians think Brexit is the big issue of the day. You're struggling to bring up a potential five year old traitor! Do you get any government supports? No!

[Scottrf]

Well this semi-final represents a key match in my life. Some idiot told my 5 year old son that New Zealand were the best team in the world and as he hates losing he's latched onto them. Need England to pull through so I can bring him back from the brink!

If NZ knock England out and win the cup he'll be doing the haka by the time the ABs come to Twickenham next November.

Can always put him up for adoption.

[Duty281]

Hearing that Jones is reverting to the Ford-Farrell-Tuilagi combo, which is the best one for this game. Kruis coming in for Lawes to boost the strength at the line-out, also.

In Eddie we trust, most certainly. Fingers crossed May is good to go.

[maestegmafia]

Hearing that Jones is reverting to the Ford-Farrell-Tuilagi combo, which is the best one for this game. Kruis coming in for Lawes to boost the strength at the line-out, also.

In Eddie we trust, most certainly. Fingers crossed May is good to go.

Yes I just read the same. Interesting, team announcement should be in four or five hours time

[stub]

Robbo, time for a fatherly chat!

[Taylorman]

Well this semi-final represents a key match in my life. Some idiot told my 5 year old son that New Zealand were the best team in the world and as he hates losing he's latched onto them. Need England to pull through so I can bring him back from the brink!

If NZ knock England out and win the cup he'll be doing the haka by the time the ABs come to Twickenham next November.

nah dont listen to them, the boys obviously a winner!

Thats pretty cool...

Some easy's:
Tama pai! (good boy)- tama as in drummer, pai as in pie)
Kia ora (Hello) Kia like the car brand, Ora like Rita Ora. but roll the r
Ka pai ! (good, all is good) - ka as in car- pai (as in pie)
Morena- Good morning (Moor- ren -a ( a as in 'a' bike)...roll the r


Ka mate: (Ka as in Cut, Mate - ma as in MUch, te as in TEn)

Ka mate, ka mate! ka ora! ka ora!
Ka mate! ka mate! ka ora! ka ora!
Tēnei te tangata pūhuruhuru
Nāna nei i tiki mai whakawhiti te rā
Ā, upane! ka upane!
Ā, upane, ka upane, whiti te ra!

'Tis death! 'tis death! (or: I may die) ’Tis life! ‘tis life! (or: I may live)
’Tis death! ‘tis death! ’Tis life! ‘tis life!
This is the hairy man
Who summons the sun and makes it shine
A step upward, another step upward!
A step upward, another... the Sun shines!

[maestegmafia]

Well this semi-final represents a key match in my life. Some idiot told my 5 year old son that New Zealand were the best team in the world and as he hates losing he's latched onto them. Need England to pull through so I can bring him back from the brink!

If NZ knock England out and win the cup he'll be doing the haka by the time the ABs come to Twickenham next November.

And to think the bloody politicians think Brexit is the big issue of the day.  You're struggling to bring up a potential five year old traitor!  Do you get any government supports?  No!

You have to teach kids it is ok to at the bad times reflect the good when they come around. My kids supported Wales and started watching at the tail end of the golden seventies, they saw some dire times. My grand kids have only really ever know Welsh successes of the last 15 years. One reflects the other. We learn far more about ourselves through a loss than a win.

[Sponsored content]