• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

England v France,23/02/13

I agree and I have high hopes for the development of this England team, providing the selections improve. But world-class potential doesn't even come into it at this point. We are decent now, and I have high-hopes that we could be "great" and compete with SANZAR on a regular basis with the right development in the next year. But to throw around a world-class tag as if we are in a uniquely superior position to that which the Welsh or Irish have been in over the last 10 years just screams arrogance to me. Especially when its done mid-6N.
 
Oh well, yes, that. Yes, not really my cup of tea that argument. Whether other teams had or even have the potential to be World Class or not, well, not really a topic for here in my book. We do, and that's enough. I will gladly tell everyone how wrong they are in another thread before despairing of the inanity of it all and going off in a huff.
 
I agree and I have high hopes for the development of this England team, providing the selections improve. But world-class potential doesn't even come into it at this point. We are decent now, and I have high-hopes that we could be "great" and compete with SANZAR on a regular basis with the right development in the next year. But to throw around a world-class tag as if we are in a uniquely superior position to that which the Welsh or Irish have been in over the last 10 years just screams arrogance to me. Especially when its done mid-6N.

It`s not arrogant to talk of potential when England has a recent history of being world class and the Welsh and Irish have`nt despite being the best they`ve ever been.
 
I don't think Eng have been world class for a good 10 years personally. I mean sure we have shown blips of it, but never consistency. At the minute we're simply showing signs we have to potential to become a world class team, but not yet.

We've been pretty much just as unsuccessful as the other NH teams down south.
 
Spot on Peat!

Who am I, Who am I,
I am the dust of the glorious dead that will not settle,
I am a triumphal echo born of Crecy, Poitiers and Agincourt
Where my enemies knew too well my mettle,

I am the pull on the yew bending longbow
The victory roll on Drake's defiant drum,
The divine wind that blew the Armada through the channel
And onwards then to kingdom come,

I am the powder and the shot
Of brave Horatio's bold broadside,
That dispatched his foe homeward bound
As flotsam on the returning Trafalgar tide,

I am the sorrow of battle won
On the blood soaked field at Waterloo,
I am the bugle call for the valiant fallen
That never made it through,

I am the sunlight on the six hundred sabres
Charging through the valley to open up deaths door,
I am the ghostly jingle of bit and bridle
From a broken brigade that rides on for evermore,

My Father's Father took a bullet at the slaughter that was passchendaele
Yet denying his wounds lived on to fight again,
My Father stood fast with the Durham's and held the line
Before the guns rolled back from Sedjenaine,

My standard is the bloodied cross of Christ
To which my patron saint did give his name,
It denotes a way, of truth, and of liberty
Of which no other can proclaim,

The world speaks my language,
And it is set in stone,
I serve my Queen and Country
With every loyal ounce of flesh and bone,

I am the thin red line that will not yield
I am that far off corner of a foreign field
I am an Englishman!

J. Armstrong
Yeah well I'm Liam Neeson, Jog on.
 
It`s not arrogant to talk of potential when England has a recent history of being world class and the Welsh and Irish have`nt despite being the best they`ve ever been.

Oh so if that's ok ... might as well talk of the World Class Welsh sides of the 60s and 70s.
 
If we were playing a drinking game, the last 3 posts would have certainly resulted in the consummation of an alcoholic beverage
 
Oh so if that's ok ... might as well talk of the World Class Welsh sides of the 60s and 70s.

Were they world class though? NZ are always the barometer. No wins against them in that period.

The past always seems better than it actually was.
 
Were they world class though? NZ are always the barometer. No wins against them in that period.

The past always seems better than it actually was.

The typical response I was expecting to hear right there ...

Oh they were World Class. Don't you doubt yourself.


... Then again, why am I bothering to get into this petty argument that has been started by a troller? :(
 
Last edited:
Just quickly to step in here, because this talk of who could or couldn't become 'world class' is a tad pointless. If you haven't yet seen the Ireland Scotland game for some reason, look away now.

That game highlighted one point that was discussed earlier relating to England and the way they're playing. Ireland totally and utterly dominated that game. Close to 75% of possession and territory, all the running, all the line breaks, all the Rugby. Yet at half time they went in only 3 points up and ended up loosing the game. How in the blazes did they do that? Given the same game I'd have put England up by 15 points at half time, maybe more. Arrogant? No, I'll explain myself. Scotland gave away what 12 odd penalties in the first half, many of which were in their own half. Had the dull team in the white been on the pitch, our captain would have been pointing at the sticks every other minute. It would not have been entertaining, it would not have been great for the neutral (me in this case) but it would have won the match. I'm not saying England would have got themselves into that position but if they had, no way they would have blown it like Ireland did. They are playing rugby to their strengths. Still as a neutral, quite enjoyed the Ireland Scotland match.

Right I'll let you all go back to bickering over who is, was or maybe world class, whatever that means. :)
 
But normally Ireland would have had Sexton available and would have done exactly the same as what you suggest.
 
Were they world class though? NZ are always the barometer. No wins against them in that period.

The past always seems better than it actually was.

Isn't questioning those gods-among-men teams pretty much rugby heresy?

They were good. Bloody good.
 
Were they world class though? NZ are always the barometer. No wins against them in that period.

The past always seems better than it actually was.

If the "past always seems better than it actually was" then maybe we should reconsider how good England actually were in 2003?

:p

Mwuhahahahaha!
 
But normally Ireland would have had Sexton available and would have done exactly the same as what you suggest.

But doesn't the captain make those decisions and isn't that based on a game plan given by the coach? It's not that their 10 missed loads of kicks, he didn't get to take them. First ball into the corner was after 2 minutes, wasn't it? First ball between the sticks for England not so long ago, about 2 minutes. Different approach. Ireland tried to land a killer punch at the start, England would have notched up the points. Boring? Yes. But it can make the difference between winning or being on the end of the most one sided game I've seen in a while where the side on top lost. Even the Scottish coach said they shouldn't have won.
 
Top