[2018 Rugby Championship] Round 2: New Zealand v Australia (25/08/2018)

[Icemn]

dafuq am i reading, AB domination ruining the game and making it boring...

what where these people saying when the AB didn't win a world cup post-87 and pre-2011? Probably laughing and mocking with the rest of the world...

People love it when a dominant 'force' fails, when it doesn't happen they complain...

NZ didn't lose those WC post-87 and pre-2011, they gave the world a chance to clinch it for a last time...

payback is a beach...

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Nice strawmen

No one is saying they're ruining the game just that it's boring watching them win so easily. It's up to everyone else to step up, no one is denying that, but that doesn't mean I'm getting up in the wee hours of a Saturday morning to watch the rugby championship.

Saying that club comps are more competitive ergo more interesting (for non-SH fans) is simply fact.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

dafuq am i reading, AB domination ruining the game and making it boring...

what where these people saying when the AB didn't win a world cup post-87 and pre-2011? Probably laughing and mocking with the rest of the world...

People love it when a dominant 'force' fails, when it doesn't happen they complain...

NZ didn't lose those WC post-87 and pre-2011, they gave the world a chance to clinch it for a last time...

payback is a beach...

That is the very nature of being top dog. If any side or individual is too dominant in a sport then people will inevitably ask is the opposition just too weak or is the top dog just too good? At the moment it's both.

But every top dog needs a true rival. We haven't had a truly great RC game where the ***le was at stake since the 2013 SA v NZ game. Even AB fans must be crying out for a challenge.

 

[All Black]

We are talking a country that lives and breaths rugby football competing with countries where rugby union is perhaps 4th or 5th in terms of popular sport interest among "natives", if any at all.

I'll also add a small country with a population of only 4 million where Soccer has more playing numbers.

COUNTRIES AND THEIR PLAYING NUMBERS
New Zealand – 148,483
Australia – 230,663
France – 291,202
England – 340,347
South Africa – 342,316

source = https://www.ruck.co.uk/top-20-country-registered-rugby-players-world/4/

 

[TRF_heineken]

We are talking a country that lives and breaths rugby football competing with countries where rugby union is perhaps 4th or 5th in terms of popular sport interest among "natives", if any at all. I'd say darts is possibly bigger than Union in the UK at present. Many countries where there is no professional rugby presence at all. Rugby Union, as a world concern, gets very little appreciation. Certainly in my quarter of the world. In the USA, the world largest sporting economy, rugby gets effectively zero national interest. Competes with high paying sports like nfl, nhl, nba, mlb to name but just 4. What athlete, in their right mind, would chose to play rugby.

So this is what competes with a country where, upon birth, a rugby ball is place in your hands, and your are told to go and run. Male or female.

Top athletes in other countries do not get the same introduction as New Zealanders do, and if they are determined to be athletic, at an early age, then it's likely to be in a different sport than rugby, to which they are likely never exposed in the first place. While putting a potentially narrow view on the situation, the national sides of many countries are formed with what is essentially the best of the rest, in terms of athletic ability.

Ask yourself what are the top sports in any countries who have a chance of upsetting the ABs in a match. England, Argentina, Ireland, oz, France, etc. Rugby is likely well down the pecking order of sports interest for many of their people. New Zealand, it's the reverse. Everyone plays rugby, and those who do not excel, play something else.

My own rugby experience started out of chance, and against personal wish to play at a footballing "grammar" school in the uk. I was 11 before I even kicked a rugby ball. I already had 8 or 9 years to make upon my New Zealand counterpart. Plus I still had an urge to play football, so my time was split between two sports. Even while playing rugby at a decent level. Even then, All the rugby players I knew had other sports interests. Which might not be so unique in of itself.

In developing rugby nations, like the USA, I bet most rugby players don't start till their teens. And the best will likely face competition from much more lucrative pursuits than rugby union.

What did this essay have to do with what I said? Or did you just quote someone to get into the conversation?

 

[ncurd]

Playing numbers never tell a full story....England's (and by in large Britains) top athletes are spreads far wide across other sports. TBH considering the emphasis on Football it is wonder how we don't excel at that but everything else it is entirely.about making sure you pick up the best of the rest.

As to ABs winning so much it massively harms the RC as a brand. The ABs in general....it's overrated currently. They struggled against the Lions, AIs last year they played France, Wales and Scotland (only the Scotland game was a tight score). And they've not played SA this RC

So what have they actually done? Beaten an Australia side that is very much been on a slide and showed little course correction like SA. And beaten not the best NH teams.

Ireland are the team they need to measure themselves against and to a lesser extent England (who need to get their act together fast), SA, Scotland and Wales. Honestly giving Australia a right kicking is nothing to brag home about.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

The Kiwis, as ever, do the simple things well and with intensity. It's really not rocket science.

I only watched the 2nd half, but some of the Australian defence was embarrassing.

So all we know so far is that the ABs are quite a lot better than a mediocre Aussie team.

As Olyy said it's up to others to up their game.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Playing numbers never tell a full story....England's (and by in large Britains) top athletes are spreads far wide across other sports. TBH considering the emphasis on Football it is wonder how we don't excel at that but everything else it is entirely.about making sure you pick up the best of the rest.

As to ABs winning so much it massively harms the RC as a brand. The ABs in general....it's overrated currently. They struggled against the Lions, AIs last year they played France, Wales and Scotland (only the Scotland game was a tight score). And they've not played SA this RC

So what have they actually done? Beaten an Australia side that is very much been on a slide and showed little course correction like SA. And beaten not the best NH teams.

Ireland are the team they need to measure themselves against and to a lesser extent England (who need to get their act together fast), SA, Scotland and Wales. Honestly giving Australia a right kicking is nothing to brag home about.

Exactly this, it's what I've been saying but more eloquently.

I'm seeing a lot of "NZ beat Aus by X and Ireland only scraped by so NZ are X much better than Ireland". First of all, sport has never worked like that it discounts form and style of play among other things, secondly, it ignores what Olyy pointed out earlier in that the odds for summer tours are stacked in SH sides' favour, even more so than the reverse in the EOYT. (At least there the SH players are staying with the international squad whereas our players go from a vigourous end to the club season straight to a plane!)

I'd be close to throwing SA out of the equation too, I'll wait and see how they do but I'm convinced they're still trash relative to what they've been in the past, if Rassie is as smart as I think he is 2023 is his target. England need to come back, Wales and Scotland need consistency and Ireland need to prove themselves v NZ, South Africa and Australia need so much of an overhaul of sport in the countries that Argentina really poses the biggest medium term threat to NZ in the RC. NZ right now aren't doing anything different from the past, they're good at rugby, Australia and South Africa dropping to the level of average 6n sides is the problem.

 

[All Black]

Playing numbers never tell a full story....

If you're trying to make a point about how many playing numbers there are in certain countries then they tell exactly that story.

The ABs in general....it's overrated currently. They struggled against the Lions, AIs last year they played France, Wales and Scotland (only the Scotland game was a tight score). And they've not played SA this RC

You make it sound like the Lions are nothing. Yes we struggled against the Lions but thats because they're a fantastic side. We should actually lose to the Lions when you look at where the players are picked from and their level of playing ability.

Playing France, Wales and Scotland last year was who we got. Im not sure who's responsible for that but unfortunately, it sounds like they weren't your best.

So what have they actually done? Beaten an Australia...And beaten not the best NH teams...Ireland are the team they need to measure themselves against...

This year so far, we have continued our usual 100% winning record. We might lose one or two by the end of the year. It's business as usual.

Ireland who lost to Australia a few months ago, will tell ya that the Wallabies are not too bad a side.

 

[ncurd]

The SAffer's are definitely on an upward trajectory a year ago they would not of won that series against England even if England played that poorly.
How much they are improving we can only judge with more games. I don't think they'll be legit contenders come the RWC, honestly apart from NZ I think Ireland are the only team there at the moment. England can be but it'll take being back on form in the AI's and next 6N to do so .

Outside bets
Scotland if they can legit compete for the ***le in the 6N year they'll be an outside shot. Otherwise its too much for them right now.
Argentina....they always have a good RWC but honestly they always seams flash in the pan I don't think they can string together enought results for a RWC win.
Wales....never shown the consistency especially against SH sides they'll pull of the odd great result but a RWC win usually requires 2-3 good wins a row against top sides I don't think they are capable of that.

 

[All Black]

Ireland need to prove themselves v NZ...

Agree with this and with your syntax. Ireland are the ones that need to prove, that their first ever win against us in America, is something they can do on a regular.

Ireland is a very good side and I look forward to the challenge but its them that needs to prove something.

 

[ncurd]

If you're trying to make a point about how many playing numbers there are in certain countries then they tell exactly that story.

No because just posting player numbers is a nonsense game where it doesn't factor in several other points to how money is spent and the actual player pool available to you. Its constantly used (as well as money) to 'prove' everyone punches above their weight except England.

You make it sound like the Lions are nothing. Yes we struggled against the Lions but thats because they're a fantastic side. We should actually lose to the Lions when you look at where the players are picked from and their level of playing ability.

The Lions played poorly with bad tactics and made poor team selection decisions. They were only close due a red card incident early in one match and telling the attacking coaches to go sod themselves. A well managed Lions squad would of won the series.

Playing France, Wales and Scotland last year was who we got. Im not sure who's responsible for that but unfortunately, it sounds like they weren't your best.

Mainly NZ from the sound of things refusing to take normal wages to play top sides. I don't know how its worked out that England have not played NZ in 3-4 years because its stupid. Fair enough though you can only play those in front of you. But when England were beating everyone 2 years ago we wanted the tough games, we wanted to prove ourselves and we beat everyone (except NZ but thats because they refused to play us because they wanted vastly inflated pay for the game) what you can't say is your beating the best teams because your not even playing them.

This year so far, we have continued our usual 100% winning record. We might lose one or two by the end of the year. It's business as usual.

A 100% record after 5 games (one series against France)....played 4 at home....1 away vs Australia. Look when you've played more than two teams brag about it but c'mon its disingenuous to brag about that. This would be like England bragging they beat Wales and Scotland in the first two 6N games at home (which would likely be harder games). Its not anything other than expected results.

Ireland who lost to Australia a few months ago, will tell ya that the Wallabies are not too bad a side.

Eh....as noted the NH season is bloody long its not real a surprise when teams loose at that point no matter how good they are. Its the same when SH teams lose in the AI's sometimes your not quite a good as you actually are. The wins for the home side are good no doubt but its away wins that really count.

 

[All Black]

No because just posting player numbers is a nonsense game where it doesn't factor in several other points to how money is spent and the actual player pool available to you. Its constantly used (as well as money) to 'prove' everyone punches above their weight except England.

We definitely punch above our weight IMO. Former All Black coach Graham Henry has mentioned that the European sides will rise in the future some years back and thats because he saw the playing numbers over and there and he was impressed.

Mainly NZ from the sound of things refusing to take normal wages to play top sides...what you can't say is your beating the best teams because your not even playing them.

I didn't know it was our fault we didn't play England. We in NZ wanted to see that game too. England was doing well in that time you guy were on a roll. We did play and beat Ireland in that time but I think they were on the rise. England, at the same time, cant say what Ive put in bold as well. I think we play this year anyway so it should be good.

A 100% record after 5 games (one series against France)....played 4 at home....1 away vs Australia. Look when you've played more than two teams brag about it but c'mon its disingenuous to brag about that.

Nah I'm not bragging. I'm just saying that we're starting off our international season and winning as usual. Some teams have already lost.

The wins for the home side are good no doubt but its away wins that really count.

True that. Not many NH teams do well over here in NZ, especially at Eden Park. We do well playing away. Not bragging, just stating the facts.

 

[ncurd]

Some people blame the RFU for not caving to NZ's demands but the understanding is RFU did offer better than normal terms at which point it sounds like NZRU didn't want the game as much as the RFU/fans did.
Honestly its a tragedy the game didn't happen a year or two ago. I think England would of lost last year our downward slope had already started the year before I think England probably would of pipped it.
Still you had two teams that disregarding the ranking (because England were only not number 1 due to NZ not loosing games something they couldn't impact on except keep their perfect record going) could claim to best side in the world and they weren't playing each other.
...I'd like to see some kind of rule that states the top two ranked teams must play each other in the following year...if scheduled normally fine (either in tournament or just a EOYT) if not a neutral venue game must be played under rules setup by WR.

 

[smartcooky]

When England were on their 17 match winning run in 2016, all people could talk about was how they were looking forward to the England v New Zealand clash this year. With Ireland ending that run, and after Chicago later that year, most people are now seeing that match as the curtain raiser for Ireland v New Zealand the week after.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

When England were on their 17 match winning run in 2016, all people could talk about was how they were looking forward to the England v New Zealand clash this year. With Ireland ending that run, and after Chicago later that year, most people are now seeing that match as the curtain raiser for Ireland

Thanks SC. I've been trying really really hard to forget that match is scheduled.

 

[Nubiwan]

What did this essay have to do with what I said? Or did you just quote someone to get into the conversation?

Merely responded to your own essay on which hemisphere's countries offers the greatest threat to the ABs. The point I wanted to make is that no country does, or has done in my 50 plus years on the planet. Not for any appreciable span of years.

 

[Nubiwan]

I'll also add a small country with a population of only 4 million where Soccer has more playing numbers.

COUNTRIES AND THEIR PLAYING NUMBERS
New Zealand – 148,483
Australia – 230,663
France – 291,202
England – 340,347
South Africa – 342,316

source = https://www.ruck.co.uk/top-20-country-registered-rugby-players-world/4/

I never said anything about registered players, and don't believe that it is that important a statistic when trying to determine reasons for national success.

Your stat simply tells me that 3% of all New Zealanders are registered to play rugby. For every 100 people you walk past in New Zealand, 3 are registered rugby players. In England, every 500 people gets you a similar number. Per capita, you have 6 times as many registered players than in England and South Africa. This is not insignificant and speaks to the fact the Union is your national sport.

I am also betting that of those 148,000 registered New Zealanders, most have been doing so since the age of 5 or younger. Gone through a significant schools and club vetting processes, and benefit from a a highly structured coaching and training program, not available in places like the UK. At 15 or 16 years, most of your players future rugby path's has been fully outlined. In many other countries, kids are introduced to rugby at this age.

No such processing occurs in the UK, and I'd argue the great majority of players (Certainly in the past) were introduced to the sport at a much later age.

The mechanisms that New Zealand rugby has implemented into its development process (from a very early age) far outweigh any population factors some would think significant.

I'd compare rugby in NZ to Ice Hockey here in Canada. Canada has arguably produced the greatest ice hockey players in the world. The biggest hockey league in the world is the NHL and 47% of its players are Canadian, yet we live next door to the USA who have a population 10 times greater. Russia with an even greater population. But Hockey is Canada's national sport. You start skating right after you start to walk. By the age of 12 or 13, it is clear to see what players have a real chance of becoming stars, and those who will soon be playing other sports - like soccer, rugby, baseball, basketball etc.

In Canada, the NHL is the holy Grail for every father and son. In New Zealand, its the All Blacks. This is why you are far superior than all other countries and have been for decades.

 

[ncurd]

Thanks SC. I've been trying really really hard to forget that match is scheduled.

I'm already dreading the match thread. Unless England have a massive win against SA the week before no English fan in their right mind is going to predict an English win (might give us an outside chance if we win the week before).

Still I bet you we'll get called arrogant, that we said we'd win when we didn't, all looking back to one to two years when it was an actual possibility not now when we've had an extremely poor year.

That said I'm still looking forward to the game NZ V Eng is my favorite match up of international rugby and I can't think of a match they've played and I've watched that I didn't enjoy.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

That said I'm still looking forward to the game NZ V Eng is my favorite match up of international rugby and I can't think of a match they've played and I've watched that I didn't enjoy.

And made all the better by the comparative rarity.

Over a 13 year period McCaw played against Australia 37 times. Zzzzzzzz.

Sometimes less really is more.