Irish victory consequences.

[Black Heart]

^They only really beat the AB forwards for the first half and it was a really understrength ab's back row with thompson and reads injury early on and kaino at home and the ab's general disintrest in the game by the time henry gave them the wake up call the game was won.
Kaino would be a huge loss for us if he went down him and kahui are our form players atm.

I honestly think and hope that the AB tight five has been holding back this year in the scrums so as not to give the game away if they were to face Aussie. I think they've known for some time they could destroy the aussie pack up front like the irish did. I dont know if will be proven right about that now that ireland have pretty much proven to everyone else that australia arent that great if you put the forwards under real pressure.

Remember the first test ab's vs ireland last year in NZ the irish were well up for that game against us and we still beat them with room to spare.

They beat the All Blacks in every quarter bar the third. Weakened or not, the Wallabies showed an overpowering desire to smash the all Blacks up front. It's their mental ability that is being argued here.

 

[nix0000]

Um, if the All Blacks can't beat Australia or South Africa in a semi final then obviously they don't deserve to win the world cup because they would not be in the final would they? Make sense?

Losing against France would presumably allow for an easier run to the final and I think if you ask, most New Zealanders would be perfectly happy for the All Blacks to throw a pool match if it meant winning the world cup. Winning the tounament is, after all, the goal.

What's this perceived 'easier run' everyones talking about. At the moment, we're set to play Argentina in the quarters, SA/Aus in semi's and a northern team-possibly england in the final. Now if we go down the other road, we'll play eng in the quarters, ireland/wales in semi's, and either Aus/SA in the final. Given that Ireland/Wales are better than Argentina/Scotland and that we're likely to meet Eng and either SA/Aus anyway, the other road is actually a little tougher game by game wise. The other thing is, wouldn't you rather play the winner of Aus/Sa after they've battered themselves to a standstill in their quarter then to wait for them in a world cup final.

In regards to your other comment you're being too smart; what i was trying to say was that the best team always wins, and if the ABs are the best team they'll go out there and win it. Talk of throwing games to play easier teams up to the final sounds like we're scared of playing in big games, and it seems like most NZer's are paranoid that we'll choke agian. If we're prepared to lose the choking tag then we must be prepared to play whoever we have to. If that means meeting the Aus/Sa a week earlier, on a slightly lesser stage then so be it.

 

[Black Heart]

What's this perceived 'easier run' everyones talking about. At the moment, we're set to play Argentina in the quarters, SA/Aus in semi's and a northern team-possibly england in the final. Now if we go down the other road, we'll play eng in the quarters, ireland/wales in semi's, and either Aus/SA in the final.

The way I see it:

The Wallabies and Springboks are the biggest threats to the All Blacks in this competition. That extra semi allows for a greater probability that we may not have to play either of them in the final. Even if that wasn't the case, a Wallaby/Spring Bok side having played two knockout games by the time they meet us should present more injury problems for them which can only benifit us.

You've already mentioned that we would most likely play England anyway which changes nothing. But as for an Ireland/Wales semi final concept, you'd be stupid to suggest that this matchup wouldn't be slightly more appealling than having to face the Boks or Wallabies. In addition, Ireland has never beaten the All Blacks and Wales havn't won a match for so long that most people can't even remember it.

The other thing is, wouldn't you rather play the winner of Aus/Sa after they've battered themselves to a standstill in their quarter then to wait for them in a world cup final.

They're going to batter themselves anyway and I've already covered why it would benifit us to take the other route.

In regards to your other comment you're being too smart; what i was trying to say was that the best team always wins, and if the ABs are the best team they'll go out there and win it. Talk of throwing games to play easier teams up to the final sounds like we're scared of playing in big games, and it seems like most NZer's are paranoid that we'll choke agian. If we're prepared to lose the choking tag then we must be prepared to play whoever we have to. If that means meeting the Aus/Sa a week earlier, on a slightly lesser stage then so be it.

Yes I know what you were saying and yes I was being smart. I personally don't care either way as long as they win.

 

[nix0000]

The Wallabies and Springboks are the biggest threats to the All Blacks in this competition. That extra semi allows for a greater probability that we may not have to play either of them in the final. Even if that wasn't the case, a Wallaby/Spring Bok side having played two knockout games by they meet us should present more injury problems for them which can only benifit us.

Your injury debate is flawed as it works both ways. We could lose Dan Carter in a semi agianst Ireland and have to play Slade agianst Aus/SA in a final. Or it could be the other way round in which case I would feel a lot more comfortble with Slade playing agianst northern foes in a final.

From everything you've stated, you sound exactly like everyone else i've spoken to today who seem so desperate to win a world cup and so scared of another loss to our tri nations brothers that the possibility of losing to France is all of a sudden not such a bad option. This is a sad mentality to have, and won't win us anything. If the players want to win, they have to be fearless, and have to be prepared once and for all to face their demons; that is to not long for an easy route to the final and rather take every game as it comes.

If I was coach I would peronally want my team to face the Aussies in the semi, and i would encourage my team to want to face them. Think of the motivation someone like Mccaw would have to go out there and send them home, i mean quade cooper cheap shots aside, he's been forced to go through the pain of losing super 15 finals and tri nation deciders to Aussie opposition in the last few months alone.

From there I would want us to face France agian in the final, where we can finally banish the horrors of 99 and 07 by sending the french into a world cup dressing room as the defeated team for the third time in three attempts.

Enjoy the world cup, and what will be will be.

 

[nickdnz]

Don't agree with this at all.

Scotland can take England.

If France want to win the RWC they must take the ABs in the pool game.

Everyone's dreaming about avoiding the SH teams, but Ireland just spanked the 3N champions. Wake up - they're not that good!

The RWC champions of 2011 should come from the NH because set piece and defence are more advanced. Someone just has to figure out how to beat the ABs at home. Difficult, but possible. So who wants it? Please not SA!

Lol. Just lol. Yes Ireland managed to beat an average Australia, but they also only managed a 10 point win against USA. Fact is, they bet Australia because they were more competitive in the forwards and stopped Australia getting quick ball to the backs. Against South African and New Zealand forwards Ireland would have been spanked, just like every other time they've played them.

 

[Black Heart]

Your injury debate is flawed as it works both ways. We could lose Dan Carter in a semi agianst Ireland and have to play Slade agianst Aus/SA in a final. Or it could be the other way round in which case I would feel a lot more comfortble with Slade playing agianst northern foes in a final.

From everything you've stated, you sound exactly like everyone else i've spoken to today who seem so desperate to win a world cup and so scared of another loss to our tri nations brothers that the possibility of losing to France is all of a sudden not such a bad option. This is a sad mentality to have, and won't win us anything. If the players want to win, they have to be fearless, and have to be prepared once and for all to face their demons; that is to not long for an easy route to the final and rather take every game as it comes.

If I was coach I would peronally want my team to face the Aussies in the semi, and i would encourage my team to want to face them. Think of the motivation someone like Mccaw would have to go out there and send them home, i mean quade cooper cheap shots aside, he's been forced to go through the pain of losing super 15 finals and tri nation deciders to Aussie opposition in the last few months alone.

From there I would want us to face France agian in the final, where we can finally banish the horrors of 99 and 07 by sending the french into a world cup dressing room as the defeated team for the third time in three attempts.

Enjoy the world cup, and what will be will be.

The All Blacks chances are near terminal if we loose Dan Carter at any stage. I don't think you have much of an argument there. He could get injured 5 minutes into a semi final against the Boks in which case we'd have a 75 minute kicking war between Morne Steyn and Colin Slade (you pick the winner)

Then if for argument sake we managed to beat the Boks, he'd be leading an All Black backline in a world cup final against (most likely) Johnny Wilkinson. Again, you pick the winner.

 

[lucky number 7]

Lol. Just lol. Yes Ireland managed to beat an average Australia, but they also only managed a 10 point win against USA. Fact is, they bet Australia because they were more competitive in the forwards and stopped Australia getting quick ball to the backs. Against South African and New Zealand forwards Ireland would have been spanked, just like every other time they've played them.

To be fair Nick I have been at three occassions in the last few years where Ireland have beaten SA. three wins from four encounters in the last 7 years is hardly a spanking.


And as regards to Irish defence , I did not watch the TRI Nations but when was the last time a team kept Australia without a try?

 

[Seaton]

And as regards to Irish defence , I did not watch the TRI Nations but when was the last time a team kept Australia without a try?

2009 I think, remember the All Blacks 33-6 hiding, and think the Boks beat them without conceding a try in Aussieland

 

[Shaggy]

I really don't think France or New Zealand should worry what side of the pool they end up on ... whoever wins the pool match will gain a physiological advantage, and carry momentum into the next round.

I doubt that the All Blacks would throw a match anyway, but as one of the main criticisms of the 2007 effort was the ABs being underdone due to lack of hard games, i think it would be a huge mistake to throw a match ... better to go hard, and send a message to all the other teams IMO.

I think the current tournament has already shown that they'll be no easy matches from the quarter final stages anyway

 

[McTallshort]

Really? That's what you took out of that?

You made the comment that the Wallabies "lack the physicality to threaten at this world cup." That is ******. Your basing your opinion on one game where "the Wallabies played like crap." If you want to deny that fact then that's fine and I've already acknowledged that Ireland played exceptionally well so don't drag the whole NH vs SH debate into it.

I didnt say anything about the aussies perhaps you should look at who posts what, but why can you lot down in there except a better team won? like England and France were the better teams in 2007? its sad that you cannot take losing to NH teams. Ireland played like a test team Austrailia tried playing like the Barbarians and got beat. Aus and NZ still have not got the concept of knockout rugby......you need to win not entertain

 

[McTallshort]

2009 I think, remember the All Blacks 33-6 hiding, and think the Boks beat them without conceding a try in Aussieland

Didnt you keep the Aussies try less at Murryfield last year or the year before?

 

[Black Heart]

I didnt say anything about the aussies perhaps you should look at who posts what, but why can you lot down in there except a better team won? like England and France were the better teams in 2007? its sad that you cannot take losing to NH teams. Ireland played like a test team Austrailia tried playing like the Barbarians and got beat. Aus and NZ still have not got the concept of knockout rugby......you need to win not entertain

O.K. Well let's get something straight. As a Kiwi, I was 100% behind Ireland. The fact that they were obviously the better side should go without saying (if I havn't said it already) which I have.

You are arguing a fact that I was not arguing against.

 

[McTallshort]

O.K. Well let's get something straight. As a Kiwi, I was 100% behind Ireland. The fact that they were obviously the better side should go without saying (if I havn't said it already) which I have.

You are arguing a fact that I was not arguing against.

you said...."I'm not taking anything away from Ireland because they played superbly well. But Australia played like crap last night." in other words if Austraila had been bothered they would have won because there is no way that Ireland are actually a better team...I mean come on Austraila are tri nation champions making them the best team in the world as there are only 3 teams in the world worth bothering with, its not like the NH teams ever make a difference in the WC is it? apart from 1999, 2003,2007 oh wait.

Perhaps you might want to think the impossible and except that the 6 nations and the HC produce good players not only in the normal teams but also in the likes of Georgia (top overseas player in the French league), Romania

 

[Seaton]

Didnt you keep the Aussies try less at Murryfield last year or the year before?

Nah, score was 9-8, with the Aussie score coming on the hooter.

 

[Larksea]

pretty happy about the Ire win mostly because if the results all when with actual form/ability then the All Blacks would have had to go through both AUS and SA (2nd and 3rd ranked teams) to get the cup. Stark contrast to SA in '07 who got through the whole tournament without having to face any of the other main contenders (NZ, AUS or France) - not just because they are the next biggest threat, mainly because the All Blacks play SA and AUS 3-4 times every year already and games against teams like France, England & co. would be more interesting as a NZ supporter anyway.

But I've been saying it for a long time that not all the results will go as expected and it only takes one or two surprise results in the pool stage to change the whole complexion of the playoffs. Now like '07 we should have a massive battle in the quarters.

As far as Aussie goes, seems the Eden park hoodoo for them is not only valid against the AB's but other teams can jump aboard too. The crowd looked fantastic. A HUGE amount of support for Ireland any team that plays Australia will get support in NZ, only exception being maybe the springboks

 

[Dizzy]

Put it this way, I'd much rather face England in the Grand Final than Aus or SA. So taking the winning route to the finals is the only way for me.

 

[Surefire]

I understand the above posts, and on paper it may look like an easier route for France to lose to the ABs, but I just can't accept it. Maybe this is why I would never make a good coach or why I suck at strategy games, but I feel you have to throw everything at the ABs and try to win the pool. My reasons why;

1. It is dangerous to look to far ahead and not focus on the game at hand. You start outthinking yourself and before you know it we lose to ABs and lose to Tonga, Canada gets a defensive bonus against the ABs, offensive bonus against Japan. France never sees the quarters. (not likely but why not?)

2. If France do reach the quarter finals every team we could face has more than a good chance of beating us. And why do we want to play England?! England has a great record against us in the WC?

3. If France want to win a world cup you have to beat good teams for the last three rounds. I say kick this reputation that we cannot win big games in a row!

I know that my reasons are pretty weak, but I think it won't matter in the end. There is NO WAY EVER the ABs would gift a game away! And besides France record against ABs might be the best of the NH teams but is still pretty crappy. No matter who Freance sends out there I will be rooting for them, they will need it!

 

[Kiwiwomble]

If we took the "easy" way there is no way anyone would let us live it down, there is no way the AB's will throw the match. Beating everyone in front of us is the only way to really get this monkey off our backs otherwise we'll have on and a half world cups.

and the way i look at the ireland aussie game is the pack won it for them, plain and simple. The aussie backs may not have sparked but their pack made mistakes because the Irish made them make mistakes..."full credit".

 

[Dizzy]

Full credit to Ireland. Anyone not giving them full credit because of a weakened Aussie side is just showing poor form. They deserved it more than Aussie did and that's all there is to it.

 

[Larksea]

highlight for me was the Irish Loosies carrying the ball. The Aussie forwards, loosies in particular (who were hardly in the game) just couldn't stop them before the advantage line so they went all day. Also the Irish loosehead and scrum over all was very strong.