Discussion
TheGreatSoprendo said:
IIRC they're precisely what led to the group of death in the first place. In the 2011 WC, we lost to France in the semis (in the infamous Warburton red card game), then lost to Oz in the meaningless 3rd/4th place play off and those defeats combined with the fact that RWC games count double dropped us to an artificially low position just in time for the draw for this RWC.
I think that dumped us to 8th... Lower than some teams who had left at pool stage...vetrof said:
It was losing all 4 Autumn internationals to Aus, NZ, Samoa and Argentina in Nov 2012 that sealed Wales' slide down the rankings. The last loss was on 1st Dec, the RWC draw was 3rd Dec.
Some say it was all part of the WRU masterplan to see England booted out at the group stage...
TheGreatSoprendo said:
London424 said:
What's the obsession with the rankings? Who cares, they are pretty meaningless, same as the football ones.
IIRC they're precisely what led to the group of death in the first place. In the 2011 WC, we lost to France in the semis (in the infamous Warburton red card game), then lost to Oz in the meaningless 3rd/4th place play off and those defeats combined with the fact that RWC games count double dropped us to an artificially low position just in time for the draw for this RWC.I'm surprised that England are out but not as shocked as the majority of their supporters are.
There is an unrealistic level of expectation on England which needs to be addressed. They are not up there with New Zealand. They are not significantly better than Wales, Ireland or France.
Since they won the World Cup in 2003 they have won the 6 Nations once. They haven't won any Grand Slams in that time either. Given that performance over that length of time why would they be seen as serious contenders now?
I can fully understand the frustrations. England has more registered players than all of the other 6 nations countries AND NZ, SA, AUS and ARG combined. They have more funding than NZ, AUs & SA combined.
They can start by getting shot of people like Rob Andrew.
There is an unrealistic level of expectation on England which needs to be addressed. They are not up there with New Zealand. They are not significantly better than Wales, Ireland or France.
Since they won the World Cup in 2003 they have won the 6 Nations once. They haven't won any Grand Slams in that time either. Given that performance over that length of time why would they be seen as serious contenders now?
I can fully understand the frustrations. England has more registered players than all of the other 6 nations countries AND NZ, SA, AUS and ARG combined. They have more funding than NZ, AUs & SA combined.
They can start by getting shot of people like Rob Andrew.
Welshbeef said:
Derek Smith said:
It has always been a problem for Wales, this lack of strength in depth. It has an effect in the 6N so bring in the RWC with big sides to face and injuries will take their toll. Can't see any way around it. Playing players out of position is just a symptom of the problem.
England too now seem bereft of talent in depth. ...One reason put forward by a friend, although it is not one I support fully, although I see the argument, was that the choice of players is a problem for England. There is little consistency. Mix and match is no way to run a team. The argument over Cipriani is a case in point. If, as seems the case, there is competition for one spot, all being much of a muchness, then make that choice by toss of a coin but then stick with it. If a player goes off the boil for a period, then OK, deselect him, but going back over the last three matches seems so silly. It is as if the belief is that the team is made up of players on top form. I've yet to see any team like that. Even the great Irish team of - my god! has it been that long - that England beat in the 6N by standing in the wrong place had variable players. But there was consistency.
One of the best sides that lasted over a long period I've seen. You never had to look at the programme to work out their names though. Sometimes a player would have a bit of a mare of a match, but be playing the next international.
Rugby, its strength for me, is that it is a team game. The RFU seem happy to continue to have the same blokes at the top all the time, and that despite their performance. Perhaps they should follow their own example with the team.
vetrof said:
Looking at that and then the rankings on selection date It identifies two key moves1. England fk up and drop from a tier 1 team to tier two
2. Wales fk up and drop from tier 2 to tier 3
3. Samoa beat Wales away moving them up to 8th from 10th
So if we correct and had the draw on the 1st Nov2012 and had the mapping of positions it would have looked like this for the first 3 sides in each group.
Pool A
SA
France
Scotland
So it would take something special for the first 2 not to go through
Pool B
Oz
Ireland
Tonga
Again nothing to suspect the top two will go through
Pool C
NZ
Pumas
Italy
Ditto
Pool D
Eng
Wales
Samoa
Ditto.
And for fun if the draw was today's rankings
Pool A
Wales
Ireland
Scotland
Pool B
Oz
Puma
Tonga
Pool C
NZ
England
Japan
Pool D
SA
France
Fiji.
I think again on this snapshot it would be very unlikely the top two of all groups will progress.
So England went out this time because Wales screwed up previously so did England and then even with all the bad luck on injuries Wales managed to pull out the victories to progress.
epom said:
Well we (Ireland) are still going anyhow. Slowly but surely.
Yesterday was all part of the masterplan, just don't tell the French In all seriousness, I believe having Kearney back at 15, and a dedicated centre to replace Earls will make a huge difference. And I'm sure Schmidt has a few new tricks up his sleeve
As an aside, Nigel Owens made me laugh when telling off Hogg on Saturday (at Newcastle's football ground): "Dive like that again, then come back here in two weeks and play, not today" Reminded me of his "This isn't football" rant from a few years ago in Italy
Derek Smith said:
...<clip> Rugby, its strength for me, is that it is a team game. The RFU seem happy to continue to have the same blokes at the top all the time, and that despite their performance. Perhaps they should follow their own example with the team.
Indeed, being much more of a soccer chap I remember the words of Alf Ramsey who said of his team selection in the run up to '66, that he had a method of play in mind and would select the players to fit that method and to form one cohesive team. Not necessarily the best English player who wore that particular numbered shirt. Although I can't be specific I believe he was referring to Jackie Charlton and Nobby Stiles. jack was the perfect foil to Bobby Moore and Nobby was his mid-field destroyer who would kick lumps out of people in contrast to the more elegant football of Peters, Charlton (Bobby) and co.Welshbeef said:
Tam_Mullen said:
Not using a quote cause I'm on the st mobile site but,
Tonker you can't spout the 'bigoted Scotland fan and ABE' quote after two seperate posters have also said they support anyone but us.
Really there are extreme anti-supporters against every country within every country, as has been pointed out England aren't exactly popular in the eyes of the Welsh, Irish and us Scots (blame the media for that!) or even the French.
Utter rubbish. Tonker you can't spout the 'bigoted Scotland fan and ABE' quote after two seperate posters have also said they support anyone but us.
Really there are extreme anti-supporters against every country within every country, as has been pointed out England aren't exactly popular in the eyes of the Welsh, Irish and us Scots (blame the media for that!) or even the French.
For the Welsh it is part of the fun and gamesmanship.
The amount of England v Wales I've been to nothing has ever been more than friendly banter. That is all its given and that goes both ways.
Apologies, Tam Mullen, if you're one of the majority of normal, decent Scots, but I'm afraid the minority of really unpleasant people amongst your compatriots when it comes to the vitriol against the English is just too big to ignore.
Whenever England take to the pitch, there will always be a significant sensation of "anyone but England" from all of the other original Five Nations fans, but we take it as banter, and to be honest, we'd probably be more upset if it stopped, as that would indicate that English rugby really had dropped to such a point that we were being pitied!
So, if we receive those sorts of comments from every other home nation, ask yourself why it is, if you look back over all the previous pages of this thread, that we're taking it from every other home nation, but only giving it out to any significant extent to the Scots?
I wouldn't personally take my wife to any rugby match, as she wouldn't thank me for the experience, but - as others have also stated - I'd happily take my kids to see England play anyone except Scotland. This is because I know that no matter who else the opposition is, the banter will remain light-hearted, and even when well on the way to falling over, the vast majority will also respect the presence of kids and know when to tone it down. I've seen Scotland play at Twickenham twice, and on both occasions, I witnessed more than enough to know that the same could not be said of travelling Scots.
I can understand you not liking me and other posters singling out the Scots, but you need to look to your countrymen for the reasons, not to us.
Welshbeef said:
London424 said:
Welshbeef said:
IRB rankings due out within the next hour or so.
Where do you think England will slip ? I wonder if they will drop to 8th or worse.
What's the obsession with the rankings? Who cares, they are pretty meaningless, same as the football ones. Where do you think England will slip ? I wonder if they will drop to 8th or worse.
Let me guess your English? I suppose if you've been 1st once then yea who cares if another team is now the highest they have ever been ranked. To lots of people KPI's mean a lot and indicates your doing the right things. England are not.
Winning is all that I'm interested in, if England did ranked 10th I wouldn't be worried.
London424 said:
Winning is all that I'm interested in, if England did ranked 10th I wouldn't be worried.
I don't get your logic. The rankings reflect exactly that - whether you're winning or losing. If England dropped to 10th it would be because they hadn't been winning much (or at all) lately. If they then started winning again, they wouldn't stay at 10th for very long!dav123a said:
League fan dropping in , how has Sam got on ? The Thought was when he left South's it was just for the World cup and then he would be back.
So far, he's been the latest in a long and rarely interrupted line of league converts who've failed at Union, so hopefully you're right and he'll go back to the simpler code. If you speak to him, please could you ask him to take the Farrell family with him? dav123a said:
League fan dropping in , how has Sam got on ? The Thought was when he left South's it was just for the World cup and then he would be back.
shall we just say the jury's still out - he hasn't been a roaring success (a la Billy Whizz, Tuqiri, Rodgers etc) but then again he hasn't been a washout (Chev Walker, Joel Tomkins etc). I hope that he does try for 2019 because I do think that with some time behind him (rather than being 'fast tracked') he could have something to offer.Kermit power said:
dav123a said:
League fan dropping in , how has Sam got on ? The Thought was when he left South's it was just for the World cup and then he would be back.
So far, he's been the latest in a long and rarely interrupted line of league converts who've failed at Union, so hopefully you're right and he'll go back to the simpler code. If you speak to him, please could you ask him to take the Farrell family with him? Oh well at least the WRU will be debt free within the next 3 years. Totally debt free stadium paid off etc.
Now even more investment st grass roots can commence
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff