A
Ashton
Guest
alrite then sanzar you boys keep winning the meaningless matches for the four years leading up to the world cup and we'll keep winning where it matters then?
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
S
sanzar
Guest
Is that a promise that if you win again you'll make sure to carry on being the worst performing world champions in the history of the cup?
A
Ashton
Guest
Is that a promise that if you win again you'll make sure to carry on being the worst performing world champions in the history of the cup?
[/b][/quote]
yep you keep winning the freindlies if we win the cup?!
A
aussie_pride
Guest
I thought it was another typically dogged performance from England tonight. Englands forwards are absolutely top class and youd have to say its them that beat both Australia and France. Johnny Wilkinson is not in the best of form in terms of his attack but defensively I think hes probably one of the best five eights going around. His goal kicking is still very unconvincing for mine but while hes playing behind such a dominant forward pack then England could well win the world cup.
The problem with France was that they should have started with Michalak. Beauxis is more of a defensive five-eight who specializes in territory and gaining field position. Michalak would have added a bit more flair and potency to split England open. For mine France were too defensive, they gave away territory and potential attacking opportunities by constantly resort to drop goals. Kicking drop goals doesnt win you games; scoring tries wins you games.
The problem with France was that they should have started with Michalak. Beauxis is more of a defensive five-eight who specializes in territory and gaining field position. Michalak would have added a bit more flair and potency to split England open. For mine France were too defensive, they gave away territory and potential attacking opportunities by constantly resort to drop goals. Kicking drop goals doesnt win you games; scoring tries wins you games.
J
j.simpson-daniel
Guest
Mate, did you just write that from your mobile phone?
Anyway, to your point - yes New Zealand did choke against France. But no, whoever wins the final is not the greatest rugby playing nation just because they win. The point of the tournament is indeed to anoint one country with the ***le of "world champions" but doesn't mean that they are the greatest rugby playing nation - rather that they could be consistent enough for the 7 weeks of the RWC to win. The All Blacks have lost 5 games in 4 years and won every single trophy on offer except this one. Which makes calling them chokers is a bit rich, even if it's been true at World Cups. Do you remember the Lions tour of 2005? that was considered the single most important trophy outside of the world cup to NZ, and did they choke then?
You can call us bitter, but equally you can't expect us all to give you respect as a rugby nation after 4 years of (and I'm putting this nicely) sub-standard rugby which has seen you drop almost off the radar in world rankings... the fact that you have played well enough in this tournament does not balance that out like it or not.
[/b][/quote]
lol i been smokin a few cones
and had more than a few pints so excuse the poor english lol been celebrating and all dat im sure u understand nehow heres my argument for y whoever wins the WC is the best rugby playing nation, whether that is Eng, Arg, or SA....the WC is a snapshot in time, so in the future ppl can look back and c who the 'world champs' r... IMO whoteva happens inbetweenthose 4 years is all good and well with ur argument about consistency, no doubt NZ dominated all round, but my question is does it truely matter? i mean who cares we've been beaten by prob every team i can think of at sum point or other since 2003 (lets not even discuss the **** poor management, injuries and retirements which have f***ed the team up)...fact is the most important matches in any players career IMO is the WC, its what ppl who dont even watch rugby r goin to watch, its got every single rugby nation of a high standard playin and is surely the pinnacle of rugby achievement..surely u can't dispute this? followin on from this...u wont be able to simulate this type of atmosphere and pressure in any other tournament, and its the reason y NZ have failed every WC, how else can u explain NZ losing to a french side (who u put 45 points on last yr) after being 13 points up with like 70 percent possession, playing 26 phases of up the jumper rugby? choking plain and simple. pressure lad, thats wot pressure does to a side, when it really matters, when its all on the line and one team has to say do or die that shows whcih team truely is the greatest rugby nation....
lol and brignin up the lions....a bunch of squabbling home nations with hardly ne time to develop and bond is hardly gonna provide a challenge to the best team in the world at the time...but theres no denying u shitted all over the lions and u can only beat whos infront of u
if u cant show respect to an aging team whos been wirtten off by everyone except the 30 player sin the squad themselves, yet through sheer guts and determination have got to the WC final, then u really are a truely bitter individual, no offense LOL
the look on carters face at the end of the match was worth watching that match alone...neways 4 more years boys...4 more years :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
S
shtove
Guest
You do realise your all getting ****** off because we refuse to celebrate the fact that you won?
I've been happy enough to see England progress but as a neutral observer and a fan of rugby, I cant really be happy to see them in the final. Its nothing personal, so no need to make is so.
[/b][/quote]
well whatever the simple fact of the matter is that if it was ireland in the final the vast majority of england fans would be supporting you (same would be the case with wales or scotland), the fact that it is never recipricated is what gets on my nerves [/b][/quote]
**** off - we're just looking for some decent rugby. If you'd bothered to turn up earlier you might have contributed to the following thread two months ago: Irish fans were ridiculed for talking up England's chances, while cowering English fans pretended to be "polite" by deserting their own team: http://www.therugbyforum.com/lofiversion/i...php?t23560.html
Not just dull, but also thick as planks.
J
j.simpson-daniel
Guest
i disagree... i was preety happy to c michelak come on the field...it was always going to be a ***e game and beauxis was always more likely to pin us back and get those drop goals than michelak...michelak to me is a confidence player and also had the added pressure of being squeezed out of the semis in 2003, and as long as we kept his mercurial style on a leash i thought we cud squeeze another win
A
aussie_pride
Guest
Well the thing was back in 2003, Wilkinson's kicking and play making abilities got you guys through. Your forwards were good but they weren't outstanding. The facts of the matter are that on his day Wilkinson is arguably the best five eighth in the world in terms of what he offers. In 2007, it has been the complete opposition, Englands forwards have been sensational - Wilkinson has been mediocre in attack, his kicking has been rusty and the backline (with the exception of Robinson) doesnt play with flair. In saying that, you dont play world cups to play beautifully - you play to win!
B
Brodizzle
Guest
When my non-rugby friends watch a game of rugby the way England played today is why they will never get into the game...shouldn't have expected more however...
A
AllezWasps
Guest
Is that a promise that if you win again you'll make sure to carry on being the worst performing world champions in the history of the cup?
[/b][/quote]
Two finals in a row. You are spouting shite.
A
aussie_pride
Guest
i disagree... i was preety happy to c michelak come on the field...it was always going to be a ***e game and beauxis was always more likely to pin us back and get those drop goals than michelak...michelak to me is a confidence player and also had the added pressure of being squeezed out of the semis in 2003, and as long as we kept his mercurial style on a leash i thought we cud squeeze another win
[/b][/quote]
Yeah I see what you mean. But the thing is though, that I believe if you attack England right from the onset then you are forcing them back into their shell. Thats the game that they dont like to play where the opposition is constantly spinning the ball an executing brilliant set pieces; they struggle to keep up with the pace. As soon as you turn the game into a war of attrition, England immediately have the upper hand. I just feel that by play Beauxis, the French were doing just that.
F
fcukernaut
Guest
I think most of you are misunderstanding what we neutrals are saying. We're not dismissing your team, or not giving credit for winning with sheer guts and determination. All we are saying, is that the way your nation is currently playing is putting us to sleep and is not a display of how rugby should be played. We're not disputing that playing 10 man rugby might be the way to win knockout games, we're just saying that it shouldn't be that way. The World Cup final is when you have the greatest world wide audience at anypoint in time. So your game is on display for world to see. We're not talking simply about loyalists and the hardcore rugby fan who will watch the final regardless. We're talking about casual fans and non-fans. To get those people to become fans of the game you need to put on a show. Arial pingpong and players who lack creativity is not how you get people interested. No one wants to see a 15-12 game where the ball is in the air as much as it is on the ground.
As I said previously, I hope the ELV rule changes open up the game because it's been far too long since we've had this kick, defence, then wait for your opponent to make a mistake and counter attack style game. They're almost scripted. We need more athleticism in the game and we need to have the game allow skilled players to work their magic. That is currently not the case. I just want rugby to grow and be prosperous, but I fear that during the showcase that only happens once every four years will be marred by a team (or two teams) that refuses to use all the skills of rugby and choose to play the game close to the chest.
As I said previously, I hope the ELV rule changes open up the game because it's been far too long since we've had this kick, defence, then wait for your opponent to make a mistake and counter attack style game. They're almost scripted. We need more athleticism in the game and we need to have the game allow skilled players to work their magic. That is currently not the case. I just want rugby to grow and be prosperous, but I fear that during the showcase that only happens once every four years will be marred by a team (or two teams) that refuses to use all the skills of rugby and choose to play the game close to the chest.
R
Ripper
Guest
Is that a promise that if you win again you'll make sure to carry on being the worst performing world champions in the history of the cup?
[/b][/quote]
yep you keep winning the freindlies if we win the cup?! [/b][/quote]
Friendlies? This isn't Soccer - games between the World Cup's actually count, it wasn't like the English were holding back for the past 4 years and have been fooling us the whole time, the truth of the matter is that they have been utter cack.
The 6 Nations, Tri Nations, Grand Slam Tours and the Lions Series all count. But hey, what does it matter, we probably won't hear from again after the English bandwagon train crashes next week when you lose to the Boks and normal service is resumed soon enough, you'll just head back to Football and blissfully stick your head in the sand that the past 4 years don't count for anything.
He's spouting ****? I'm sure than you'll than gladly point out a team that has won the World Cup and has had such a dire 4 years afterwards as the English?
On the other hand, how can you claim to be the greatest Rugby Nation when you've lost to Argentina, Wales (x2), Ireland (x4), Scotland, France (x3), New Zealand (x4), South Africa and Australia (Both Multiple Times) in the past 4 years, in games which actually matter (like I said above, Rugby isn't Soccer, every test match means something). Sure, they can claim to be World Champions (Which is unlikely as they more likely than not will fall to the Bokke again, although probably a bit closer than 36-0) but not the Greatest Rugby Nation.
And I can explain the AB's loss - a Poor Gameplan, combined with Poor Handling, with a pinch of retarded referring.
R
richierude
Guest
I f***ing Love You England!!!!!
C
Canadian_Rugger
Guest
This reminds me exactly of the fight we get in over in North America when it comes to the NFL. We have a saying over here "Offence Wins Games, Defence Wins Championships" and this statement hold true to what is happening today in rugby. Baltimore Ravens are a prime example of this. They have the shittiest offence in the goddamn league but the end up winning every game 14-7 10-0 etc because nobody gets by their defence. They play boring uneventful football but what they do is effective. KC Chiefs go 15-1 in the reg season "yes friendly matches" with dynamite offence, Priest Holmes was an amazing rushing back and who do they get blown out by the NE Patriots whose blitz defence completely obliterated them. When the Patriots won their first superbowl they were not an amazing team. They were 8-8 in the season much like england were garbage going into the quarterfinals but they ran off pure emotion and played smart, tactically sound football, and they ended up winning.
Whats my point? It doesn't matter how you win it's if you win. I really like and admire the way England is playing. They aren't pretty but they have just beat two of the top teams in the world who supposedly should have walked all over them.
No one will remember how awesome the All Blacks were for four years just like nobody will remember how good the KC Chiefs were that NFL season, the point is the NE Patriots still won the Superbowl and England may yet do the same in this world cup.
Whats my point? It doesn't matter how you win it's if you win. I really like and admire the way England is playing. They aren't pretty but they have just beat two of the top teams in the world who supposedly should have walked all over them.
No one will remember how awesome the All Blacks were for four years just like nobody will remember how good the KC Chiefs were that NFL season, the point is the NE Patriots still won the Superbowl and England may yet do the same in this world cup.
Y
YKNGR
Guest
thank you. That was exactly what i was thinking.
Now stop being angry about how england is in the finals, because u cant change the results. Its nearly as bad as us New Zealand chokers.
S
sanzar
Guest
Is that a promise that if you win again you'll make sure to carry on being the worst performing world champions in the history of the cup?
[/b][/quote]
Two finals in a row. You are spouting shite. [/b][/quote]
No, actually I'm not. And the fact that you can't see that makes me think you're probably some soccer bandwagoner who hasn't watched a minute of rugby since the last WC.
R
Ripper
Guest
Patriots were 11-5 and got a home game in Divisional Round of the Play-Off's (and even than, they still needed the tuck rule to get them past Oakland), then shut down Kordell Stewert a week later (hardly a hard task) when they won their First Superbowl... and the Ravens are all fine and dandy, except when it comes to play off time when they actually have to do something with the ball in hand, than they lose to the boot of Adam Vinateri after going 13-3 and getting Home Field.
The Chiefs also never got blown out by the Pats, they lost in a shootout to Peyton Manning the year they went 13-3, with both teams scoring in the 30's.
Analogy Failed
F
fcukernaut
Guest
As Ripper pointed out the analogy failed misserably. I think what would make a much better analogy would be a pre-lockout NHL as opposed to a post-lockout NHL. Before the game became dull and predictable. We would consistently see teams with huge guys who couldn't skate worth a lick, but it didn't matter because they could hook and grab and slow the game down, so that they could make up their lack of skill by simply bullying the other team. Post lockout it became apparent that if a guy couldn't skate, he couldn't play in the league anymore. We saw and increase in goals, excitement and entertainment.
Just because the game is being played the way it is, doesn't make it right.
C
Canadian_Rugger
Guest
Sanzar read my above post you are sounding more and more like a broken record. As a Canadian I totally feel for you at this tournament. We go through the exact problems every time our Hockey team plays. See Canada was kind of like New Zealand in that up until 2002 we had always been favorites too win but had not been able to do so whether it be to the Czechs, Swedes, Americans, Russians, Finns, Slovaks, Germans, Swiss, you name it we would always find a way to play the blame game. As a nation that is proud of its hockey tradition just like NZ, Australia, SA, England, France etc are proud of their rugby tradition we had a hard time figuring out why we could never win the tournament.
Unfortunately the sad truth is in hockey as in rugby when you get to the Elite level it really doesn't matter anymore because any team on any given day can win. Imagine how boring rugby would be if we didn't have these upsets and shocks. It would be a very stagnant boring game if test after test NZ destroyed all its opposition.
In Ice Hockey there is a system called the Trap which is much like 10 man rugby, it revolves around controlling territory and boxing out opponents much like England's ten man rugby revolves around territory and seizing oppotunities as they come. Many hockeu fans were outraged that Canada with all its skill and might could be defeated by such a system but it did get defeated and it goes to show that sometimes you don't need to be the most skilled to win and if you play with tact and heart you can overcome greater opposition.
Unfortunately the sad truth is in hockey as in rugby when you get to the Elite level it really doesn't matter anymore because any team on any given day can win. Imagine how boring rugby would be if we didn't have these upsets and shocks. It would be a very stagnant boring game if test after test NZ destroyed all its opposition.
In Ice Hockey there is a system called the Trap which is much like 10 man rugby, it revolves around controlling territory and boxing out opponents much like England's ten man rugby revolves around territory and seizing oppotunities as they come. Many hockeu fans were outraged that Canada with all its skill and might could be defeated by such a system but it did get defeated and it goes to show that sometimes you don't need to be the most skilled to win and if you play with tact and heart you can overcome greater opposition.
