Jump to content
IGNORED

Rugby World Cup Thread

Super

By Super
in General Chat

Recommended Posts

PHILINFRANCE

PHILINFRANCE

Posted
Posted

22-10 to NZ. Georgia playing pretty well here. Great to see the improvement in many of the tier 2 and 3 nations at this World Cup. Great for the game.

Not rugby related (apologies), but what a shame that cricket's World Cup thinks differently and has chosen to dispense with the 2nd and 3rd tier nations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MichaelRobartes

MichaelRobartes

Posted
Posted

Not rugby related (apologies), but what a shame that cricket's World Cup thinks differently and has chosen to dispense with the 2nd and 3rd tier nations.

Well said. I was moaning about that throughout the whole Cricket World Cup. Not that I'm biased or anything...

I still think we need to get Georgia into the Six Nations asap. No messing about with promotion/relegation, one team gets a week off and every team gets three games at home so it'd actually be a bit more balanced than the current format in that regard. No more excuses, we need to follow SANZAR's example with Argentina and now Japan. Get them in and grow the game.

Big day today. I still think that Aussie will have too much for England but can't wait for the game later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Super

Super

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well said. I was moaning about that throughout the whole Cricket World Cup. Not that I'm biased or anything...

I still think we need to get Georgia into the Six Nations asap. No messing about with promotion/relegation, one team gets a week off and every team gets three games at home so it'd actually be a bit more balanced than the current format in that regard. No more excuses, we need to follow SANZAR's example with Argentina and now Japan. Get them in and grow the game.

Big day today. I still think that Aussie will have too much for England but can't wait for the game later.

saw a bizarre write up from Cipriani saying not one Aussie player would make the england team?! What's that all about?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Esmond Million's Bung

Esmond Million's Bung

Posted
Posted

England are shocking, far too slow all over the park, the Aussies chase everything down as if their lives depend on it, our players amble around, England make a mistake and 3 Aussie players are there to ensure the maximum advantage is taken, the Aussies make a mistake and nobody in a white shirt anywhere near, England's ball handling is piss poor and the scrum and line out's are a joke, the good news is at least that should sound the death knell for the woeful Lancaster, totally out of his depth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MichaelRobartes

MichaelRobartes

Posted
Posted

In general I don't think England played that badlly. At 20-13 I thought that England were on top and looked like they could get back into it. A brainless no-arms hit from Farrell (his trademark) not to mention a high tackle from Burgess which could easily have resulted in a yellow card totally killed their momentum and effectively ended the contest.

The problems were that Poite finally picked up on Marler boring in at the scrum, I don't know how he's gotten away with it for so long. Seeing that the ref had his number, someone should have had the intelligence to tell him to drive straight. What was Rowntree doing at half time, for instance?

I also thought that not having a utility back on the bench, someone who can play wing or full back, was a huge error. You don't have much wiggle room with a stand off and a (sort of) centre on the bench, especially when Farrell can play centre himself. Surely you'd have Goode or Nowell or even Slade there. Joseph looked a threat for England, but we hardly saw him once he had to go to the wing.

Finally, dropping your stand off whom you've been building the team around for 18 months before the two biggest games you've played in four years. Absolutely crazy stuff.

Even so, had England played to their best, it would have been tough, Aussie are a superb side now that they've got a proper coach. I feel sorry for Lancaster and especially Robshaw - a very nice bloke, but no openside, and certainly no captain - they're both going to get hung out to dry by the media for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MichaelRobartes

MichaelRobartes

Posted
Posted

We were dreadful today, lucky to get out of there intact. The positives were Henderson, O'Mahony, Best and Bowe but collectively we were dreadful. Not helped by Garces letting Italy do what they liked at the breakdown but that doesn't come close to accounting for how poor that was. Even Murray was off the pace. We kicked bloody everything away.

Hopefully Joe is trying to lull the French into a false sense of security, otherwise we'll be playing NZ in a quarter final. If we play like that again France or Argentina would slaughter us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chipdawg

chipdawg

Posted
Posted

I think what England's World Cup debacle comes down to is the lack of leaders on the pitch. The only 'leader' they have is Robshaw and he is very much a lead-by-example type player rather than a lead-with-your-brain type. Time and again throughout Lancaster's reign we've seem them choke when the pressure of an occasion ramps up (think Wales in 2013 6 Nations) and Saturday (and to extent the week before) was more evidence of that. This England team is as talented as pretty much any other, but it lacks character and nous, something that I think us England fans- and most importantly the England management- have been glossing over for too long

I think it's also apparent that England have been hamstrung by not being able to put their best team out. Some of that is down to the idiocy of the players themselves (Tuilagi, Hartley) for which Lancaster can't be blamed. Some is injuries (Corbs, Morgan coming back from a broken leg). Some if it is down to the obstinacy of the RFU- arguably the best open side in the northern hemisphere is excluded from selection because he lives in France. Partly down to injuries, partly down to indecision, I think Lancaster still doesn't know his best 15 and that lack of assurity filters down.

One thing that's been all over the press that I can't really agree with is the argument that somehow the selection of Sam Burgess cost England. Burgess played ok against Wales (we were better while he was on the pitch) and the game had already gone when he came on against the Aussies. And if anyone thinks Luther Burrell would have made the difference in either game you're a lunatic. What might have made a difference was better use of the squad. Slade was the man in form going in to the tournament and never even made the bench. Ford had made England tick in a much more dangerous way and after one dodgy game (behind a dodgy pack) he was dropped. Again, this comes down to Lancaster never quite knowing who his best team is

Lancaster is a nice guy who has improved the style of the England team no end, but he's surely now finished as England boss. You wonder whether Robshaw can continue as captain and if so, is he likely to continue as no7? Probably not

Oh well, nothing doing now. I was always mainly a Canada fan anyway... Not sure who I'll root for the rest of the tournament, maybe I'll hope for Carter to get the WC final he should have had 4 years ago. I think I may adopt an 'anyone but Wales' approach

Link to comment
Share on other sites
'Orns

'Orns

Posted
Posted

Is anyone else still seeing Michael Hooper in their sleep? What a performance, he was everywhere. I'd say England were poor, but that takes credit away from Australia. Quicker, stronger, smarter - they showed us up all around the pitch

Mallinder for Lancaster, anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Welcome To The Jungle

Welcome To The Jungle

Posted
Posted

I think what England's World Cup debacle comes down to is the lack of leaders on the pitch. The only 'leader' they have is Robshaw and he is very much a lead-by-example type player rather than a lead-with-your-brain type. Time and again throughout Lancaster's reign we've seem them choke when the pressure of an occasion ramps up (think Wales in 2013 6 Nations) and Saturday (and to extent the week before) was more evidence of that. This England team is as talented as pretty much any other, but it lacks character and nous, something that I think us England fans- and most importantly the England management- have been glossing over for too long

I think it's also apparent that England have been hamstrung by not being able to put their best team out. Some of that is down to the idiocy of the players themselves (Tuilagi, Hartley) for which Lancaster can't be blamed. Some is injuries (Corbs, Morgan coming back from a broken leg). Some if it is down to the obstinacy of the RFU- arguably the best open side in the northern hemisphere is excluded from selection because he lives in France. Partly down to injuries, partly down to indecision, I think Lancaster still doesn't know his best 15 and that lack of assurity filters down.

One thing that's been all over the press that I can't really agree with is the argument that somehow the selection of Sam Burgess cost England. Burgess played ok against Wales (we were better while he was on the pitch) and the game had already gone when he came on against the Aussies. And if anyone thinks Luther Burrell would have made the difference in either game you're a lunatic. What might have made a difference was better use of the squad. Slade was the man in form going in to the tournament and never even made the bench. Ford had made England tick in a much more dangerous way and after one dodgy game (behind a dodgy pack) he was dropped. Again, this comes down to Lancaster never quite knowing who his best team is

Lancaster is a nice guy who has improved the style of the England team no end, but he's surely now finished as England boss. You wonder whether Robshaw can continue as captain and if so, is he likely to continue as no7? Probably not

Oh well, nothing doing now. I was always mainly a Canada fan anyway... Not sure who I'll root for the rest of the tournament, maybe I'll hope for Carter to get the WC final he should have had 4 years ago. I think I may adopt an 'anyone but Wales' approach

Although England have been chokey at times, their performance against France when they had to rack up the points in March was just epic.

As for not picking players abroad, it is a policy that the all blacks have and they're alright.

Sam Burgees just built unnecessary hype and media attention and was a distraction. This as well as not being good enough (although not as bad as some will make out).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chipdawg

chipdawg

Posted
Posted

Although England have been chokey at times, their performance against France when they had to rack up the points in March was just epic.

As for not picking players abroad, it is a policy that the all blacks have and they're alright.

Sam Burgees just built unnecessary hype and media attention and was a distraction. This as well as not being good enough (although not as bad as some will make out).

 

I'm not disputing that there haven't been great performances under Lancaster- England have for the most part been far better to watch over the last 4 years than at any time in the recent past (the win against New Zealand was brilliant). But can you honestly say that 4 2nd places in the 6 Nations isn't the mark of a team that choke when the big games come around? It's not a talent thing, it's a mentality that they don't have are is too fragile

It's an entirely different situation- the All Blacks won't pick players who are 11 time zones away, if they had someone at an Australian Super 15 franchise they probably would. We're talking about someone who wasn't playing that much further from Twickenham than Keiron Brookes was last season. I actually have a lot of sympathy with the idea and it's not like Armitage or Abendanon didn't know the rules when they moved to France, but it's a fact that it's left two players who've improved massively since moving kicking their heels

I don't disagree with that, but Burgess being there or being on holiday didn't have anything to do with the poor showing. If players were distracted by it, it just further demonstrates the lack of mental strength that squad has. A player like Burrell would have made no difference, Henry Slade might just have done and he could have been on the pitch 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Welcome To The Jungle

Welcome To The Jungle

Posted
Posted

I'm not disputing that there haven't been great performances under Lancaster- England have for the most part been far better to watch over the last 4 years than at any time in the recent past (the win against New Zealand was brilliant). But can you honestly say that 4 2nd places in the 6 Nations isn't the mark of a team that choke when the big games come around? It's not a talent thing, it's a mentality that they don't have are is too fragile

It's an entirely different situation- the All Blacks won't pick players who are 11 time zones away, if they had someone at an Australian Super 15 franchise they probably would. We're talking about someone who wasn't playing that much further from Twickenham than Keiron Brookes was last season. I actually have a lot of sympathy with the idea and it's not like Armitage or Abendanon didn't know the rules when they moved to France, but it's a fact that it's left two players who've improved massively since moving kicking their heels

I don't disagree with that, but Burgess being there or being on holiday didn't have anything to do with the poor showing. If players were distracted by it, it just further demonstrates the lack of mental strength that squad has. A player like Burrell would have made no difference, Henry Slade might just have done and he could have been on the pitch 

Good points, however the All Blacks will not take players from Oz. Blues, Hurricanes, Chiefs, Crusaders and Highlanders only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
'Orns

'Orns

Posted
Posted

Just read that Hooper has been cited for the 'challenge' on Brown towards the end of the first half. Thought he was a little lucky to not get binned for that one at the time, not saying it would've made a massive difference, but would've been a help, that's for sure

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Portland Bill

Portland Bill

Posted
Posted

Point taken, I assumed anyone in the Super 15 competition was eligible. Seems that the same debate goes on about it over there though

New Zealand have 'never' picked anyone that plays outside of the country.

A lot of players will leave NZ when they realise they won't get in the All Black squad and come to Europe or Japan for the bigger money.

In fact there are 63 NZ born players playing in this World Cup! They go abroad to play and end up getting residency in other countries.

There was uproar in NZ when they put the AIG sponsorship on the AB shirt, the only reason it was done was to use the money to pay the top players to keep them in NZ.

They can earn loads more in Europe and a fair amount of the current squad are to play in Europe after this World Cup.

They realise their All Black career will be over ( unless they are young enough to play again in NZ in the future).

The All Black squad for the 2017 Lions tour could be very much changed from the current one!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...