Discussion
I've been out most of the day. I've just seen the tremendous Japan victory. Their commitment was awesome. They threw off the Scots first try and went for it. Their first three tries were brilliant. I thoroughly enjoyed the battle all the way through. It was a shame that their fourth try all but secured it. There was no way the Scots would have fought back from that deficit. I was working out what they'd have to do at the start of the second half and then had to start again.
Great day for the hosts.
Great day for the hosts.
El stovey said:
BlackWidow13 said:
You’re using hindsight. Pre RWC (9th Sept) Japan were ranked 10th. With the exception of Argentina, all of the teams listed above, plus Scotland, were ranked above Japan.
The idea that Scotland would have had a better chance of beating SA, Fra or Aus than they had of beating Japan is very odd. SA and Aus were ranked above Scotland, and Fra were ranked one spot below Sco (vs 3 spots below for Japan). By any objective assessment Sco had the easiest group to have a run at finishing in P2.
It’s not odd. You seem to be confused about how the draw worked.The idea that Scotland would have had a better chance of beating SA, Fra or Aus than they had of beating Japan is very odd. SA and Aus were ranked above Scotland, and Fra were ranked one spot below Sco (vs 3 spots below for Japan). By any objective assessment Sco had the easiest group to have a run at finishing in P2.
Scotland were band two. They could only be drawn with band 1 and 3 teams. Japan were the hardest band 3 team by far and thus group A was the hardest for Scotland a band 2 team to qualify from.
"Japan were the hardest band 3 team by far", in spite of them being ranked below Argentina (who were also Band 3) consistently since the RWC2015?
The same Argentina who beat France, South Africa AND Japan themselves in that 4-year period?
Hyperbole doesn't really help discussions like this.
Edited by C70R on Sunday 13th October 17:23
C70R said:
I'm just a bit confused by your leap of logic.
"Japan were the hardest band 3 team by far", in spite of them being ranked below Argentina (who were also Band 3) consistently since the RWC2015?
The same Argentina who beat France, South Africa AND Japan themselves in that 4-year period?
Hyperbole doesn't really help discussions like this.
Would you rather be playing Argentina or japan in this competition?"Japan were the hardest band 3 team by far", in spite of them being ranked below Argentina (who were also Band 3) consistently since the RWC2015?
The same Argentina who beat France, South Africa AND Japan themselves in that 4-year period?
Hyperbole doesn't really help discussions like this.
Edited by C70R on Sunday 13th October 17:23
Jasey_ said:
schmalex said:
Time for Japan to replace Scotland in the 6N?
Their style of play is a real test for any Tier 1 team
Maybe Italy Their style of play is a real test for any Tier 1 team
El stovey said:
C70R said:
I'm just a bit confused by your leap of logic.
"Japan were the hardest band 3 team by far", in spite of them being ranked below Argentina (who were also Band 3) consistently since the RWC2015?
The same Argentina who beat France, South Africa AND Japan themselves in that 4-year period?
Hyperbole doesn't really help discussions like this.
Would you rather be playing Argentina or japan in this competition?"Japan were the hardest band 3 team by far", in spite of them being ranked below Argentina (who were also Band 3) consistently since the RWC2015?
The same Argentina who beat France, South Africa AND Japan themselves in that 4-year period?
Hyperbole doesn't really help discussions like this.
Edited by C70R on Sunday 13th October 17:23
It means that Argentina have underperformed horrendously, relative to expectations.
Derek Smith said:
I've been out most of the day. I've just seen the tremendous Japan victory. Their commitment was awesome. They threw off the Scots first try and went for it. Their first three tries were brilliant. I thoroughly enjoyed the battle all the way through. It was a shame that their fourth try all but secured it. There was no way the Scots would have fought back from that deficit. I was working out what they'd have to do at the start of the second half and then had to start again.
Great day for the hosts.
Thier first try was a forward pass that the TMO didn’t... ahem... pickup... The side on and overhead angle were only looked at in the half time review.Great day for the hosts.
Aside that, thier victory was fully deserved.
Stella Tortoise said:
irocfan said:
full time professionals vs semi-pro would have a fair bit to do with it....
b
ks, you people keep blurting about how lucky the Welsh team have been yet they keep winning.You are full of s
t.irocfan said:
Stella Tortoise said:
irocfan said:
full time professionals vs semi-pro would have a fair bit to do with it....
bks, you people keep blurting about how lucky the Welsh team have been yet they keep winning.You are full of s
t.Cocknose said:
I've been there too! The pitches are quite close to the river in York, and the Ouse is quite fond of flooding! I hope your kids get to play today, and that they get a good result. 
They did! 
The absolute rugby highlight of my day was watching my lad counter ruck two larger kids to win the ball. In fact, no matter what happens, that's probably going to be my rugby highlight of the next month!
Gargamel said:
Like a number if the so called Tier Two sides, what they need is inclusion in things like the Autumn internationals and tours where they can play three four tests in six weeks.
Need to open up the fixtures, even if it means the T1 sides play second string squads
Agreed. For all the talk of Georgia joining the Six Nation, their warm up against Scotland in Tbilisi was the first time ever that they've had a home game against a T1 side.Need to open up the fixtures, even if it means the T1 sides play second string squads
T1 sides hosting T2 sides in autumn internationals isn't enough - it just highlights the inequality and greed in the current system. Ignore world cups and world cup qualifiers and look at just tour matches/warm ups where sides can choose their opportunities and the opportunities over the past 30 years for other T2 nations to host home games haven't been much better.
Take Japan, although they've had visits by all the T1 sides except England and France, only Argentina, Ireland, Italy and Wales toured Japan before they were award this year's RWC in 2009.
USA (and Canada by association) have hosted numerous tours over the years but there's no doubt that commercial side drives the attraction for T1 sides.
The Pacific Islanders are much worse off. Fiji have only hosted 2 visits each by Italy and Scotland since 2010, and just 6 other games since 1990.
Five matches against the Celtic nations and Italy for Tonga while only Samoa can count a visit from New Zealand.
Portugal and Russia have never hosted a T1 side. Spain just twice. Uruguay have only had Argentina three times in the '90s and Italy twice. Namibia a tour each from Ireland and Wales almost 30 years ago. Romania have struggled since 2000.
The contrast with pre-6 Nations Italy is stark - they had home games against all T1 sides except England and France between 1995-1999.
amongst the T1 sides, the only sides making a half-effort since 1990 are: Wales (20), Italy (18), Ireland (17), Scotland (15), France (14) and Argentina (10).
The records of the others are just disgraceful: New Zealand, Australia, England (all 4) and South Africa (2). It looks even worse when we consider that 3 of these 14 matches were v Japan in last 3 years (i.e. RWC familiarization visits), that New Zealand's 4 are all since 2013 and that England's last T2 tour was Canada/USA in 2001 with a just solitary game against Fiji in 1991 before that.
Time to insist that T2 countries are fully included in hosting autumn internationals and summer tours against T1 sides - even if that means no more 3 match tours between T1 nations.
El stovey said:
Would you rather be playing Argentina or japan in this competition?
Who cares? Am just glad the Scots are out.Particularly after their distasteful threat to challenge the tournament rules they’d signed up to as a result of a natural disaster that resulted in significant death, injury and property damage.
Classless ...
The JPN SCO game was excellent to watch, and surprisingly close by the finish. I didn't think Scotland played that badly overall but they were punished for a few key errors that Japan managed to capitalise on. Japan were the better side for most of the game though and only dropped off the pace towards the middle of the second half.
85Carrera said:
Who cares? Am just glad the Scots are out.
Particularly after their distasteful threat to challenge the tournament rules they’d signed up to as a result of a natural disaster that resulted in significant death, injury and property damage.
Classless ...
Yeah right, and England wouldn’t have done the same thing? I can just imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth if they’d been put in the position of not being allowed to play and didn’t go through as a result.Particularly after their distasteful threat to challenge the tournament rules they’d signed up to as a result of a natural disaster that resulted in significant death, injury and property damage.
Classless ...
The game going ahead was important for both Scotland and Japan. Whoever won got to progress on merit, not because the organisers took the opportunity to manipulate the outcome. At least now Japan know they deserve to be through.
Jader1973 said:
The game going ahead was important for both Scotland and Japan. Whoever won got to progress on merit, not because the organisers took the opportunity to manipulate the outcome. At least now Japan know they deserve to be through.
Manipulate the outcome? Japan didn't lose a game, before or after the Scotland game. To suggest that the organisers were trying to manipulate the outcome somehow, is pathetic. Before their game, Scotland and Japan had both played the same teams, with Japan ending up higher in the Pool than Scotland. If the game had been cancelled, they'd still have been going through on their own merit, and they'd still have deserved to have gone through, because they played better.
El stovey said:
Would you rather be playing Argentina or japan in this competition?
This is still hindsight though. In the Championship Arg held Aus and NZ to narrow wins. Japan won the Pacific nations cup but without mega scores against anyone else. Pre RWC it was fair to assume Arg were T2 or thereabouts and Japan weren’t. At that stage Scotland would have fancied their chances better against Japan even with their home field advantage. The way both teams have actually performed though has defied expectations, and it is fair to say now that Scotland would have preferred to have had Japan rather than Argentina.
It’s academic though because I’m not sure Scotland would have beaten Argentina either. They are well off where they ought to be in a WC year. They have looked like they lack fitness across the team, and plainly lack power up front. And they do t have the skills (or perhaps the conditions didn’t permit them) to play their fast and loose style that compensates for a lack of power.
ABZ RS6 said:
Scotland have been piss poor and got what they deserved today.
You cannot play this claimed fast, attacking game and have Laidlaw at 9. Everything comes to a grinding halt as soon as he is near the ball.
Oh and Ryan Wilson, up yours you gobshyte ??
Totally agree. In reality he should be 4th choice behind (in no particular order) Horne, Price and Pyrgos. You cannot play this claimed fast, attacking game and have Laidlaw at 9. Everything comes to a grinding halt as soon as he is near the ball.
Oh and Ryan Wilson, up yours you gobshyte ??
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff