Minnows XV

[ZeFrenchy]

A definition that fits Aedaphon's original squad would be nations that have won a major international tournament lately. That leaves Scotland and Italy out, and strictly it leaves Argentina out as well. The difference is that Argentina only plays the world cup, which seems a bit too much to ask.

Could have Argentina won the 6N or the 3N at least once in the last, say, ten years if they were participating?

 

[Melhor Time]

What on earth do you mean by that? In a lot of peoples opinion he played pretty damn well for Leinster and by general consensus either him or Foden was fullback of the H C up. Williams is good but not as good as Nacewa.

Whether he is the best in the business or not matters not as he is not an international player and only ever played one match for Fiji back in 2003 as a replacement. Therefore when putting together a Minnows XV there is no place for him as he simply has not played for a ´minnow´team, assuming that minnows are second and third tier sides.

An example of a differnt kind is Brock James who should be in Australia´s RWC squad. No question about it. The fact is he cannot as he plays for Clermont, a French side and by law to be elligiblie for Australia you must play there.

ZeFrenchy

The Argentina side from 2004-2007 could indeed have been a Six Nations champion. Consider this - 2004 Argentina defeat France in Marseilles. 2005 Argentina defeat Scotland in Edinburgh and Italy in Genoa. 2006 Argentina defeat England in London and Italy in Rome. Even earlier. In 2001 Argentina defeated Wales in Cardiff and Scotland in Edinburgh then lost on fulltime to New Zealand in Buenos Aires. A few conclusions can be made. The first is Argentina are not a minnow side. The second is they were a strong side well before 2007 but had no tournament to demonstrate this clearly to everybody.

 

[psychic duck]

My Minnows XV (teams not in the World Cup)

15.

Silvère Tian (Agen & Côte d'Ivoire)
14.

Martin Jágr (Mont-de-Marsan & Czech Republic)
13.

Henari Veratau (Bourgoin & Papua New Guinea)
12.

Garth Ziegler (Bayonne & Zimbabwe)
11.

Tim Visser (Edinburgh & Netherlands)
10.

César Sempere (Northampton & Spain)
09.

Cédric Garcia (Bayonne & Spain)
01.

Arnauld Tchougong (Lyon & Cameroon)
02.

Pieter Dixon (Bath & Zimbabwe)
03.

Stan Wright (Stade Français & Cook Islands)
04.

Erik Lund (Biarritz & Norway)
05.

Robins Tchale-Watchou (Perpignan & Cameroon)
06.

Eugène N'Zi (Lyon & Côte d'Ivoire)
07.

Julien Bardy (Clermont & Portugal)
08.

Abdelatif Boutaty (Bayonne & Morocco)

I'm sure somebody would be able to find better backs than that, this team is poor in my opinion which reflects the strength of the lower nations, would qualify for the World Cup though as the tight five is okay

 

[psychic duck]

An example of a differnt kind is Brock James who should be in Australia´s RWC squad. No question about it. The fact is he cannot as he plays for Clermont, a French side and by law to be elligiblie for Australia you must play there.

debatable, Giteau and Cooper are better, Brock James has struggled to regain his 2007-2009 form after that Leinster match

 

[Seaton]

These are the sides that we class a victory over the sides I exempted as truly exceptional. Between NZ, Aus, RSA, England, Ireland, France and Wales, there would almost certainly be favourites for every match, but it wouldn't go down as a historic moment when the underdog scored a victory over the favourite.

You post this, yet most likely knowing that Wales have beaten SA once and New Zealand a handful of times, none of which remotely recently
With Ireland it is the opposite scenario, albeit victories over SA have come recently, and England haven't beaten either of these teams in the past 5 years

You would seriously say, that if one of these teams beat SA/ NZ, that it wouldn't be an 'historic moment'? Less so with England I think, but a win over NZ/ SA for Ireland or Wales respectively would be a pretty big thing I imagine.

Obviously not classing Wales/ Ireland as 'minnows', just saying that the reason you have provided for the classing of minnows, has a wee hole in it

 

[Thingimubob]

As a defence I call these teams 'minnows' because they have never been sides that truly look in contention to win the RWC. Call it as disgraceful a call as you like but I'd stand by my decision to class them as such.

These are the sides that we class a victory over the sides I exempted as truly exceptional. Between NZ, Aus, RSA, England, Ireland, France and Wales, there would almost certainly be favourites for every match, but it wouldn't go down as a historic moment when the underdog scored a victory over the favourite.

The recent victories of Italy over France and Samoa over Fiji edit: AUSTRALIA, and the massive upset they've caused in 'established' nations, those are the reasons I'd term these as 'minnow' sides.

I'm afraid I have to agree with Melhor Time here, just really don't see Italy, Scotland and Argentina as minnows. You say that they're classed as 'minnows' if they haven't really looked in contention to win a RWC? Well Ireland have never made the semi-finals, surely that makes them a 'minnow' if Scotland (who have made the semis) are? Wales have only ever had one successful world cup, where they came 3rd in '87, yet aren't considered minnows when Argentina who came 3rd in 2007 are considered minnows? Very harsh call Italy a minnow too, considering their performances in recent 6 Nations, with wins against Scotland, Wales and France (with a few tight losses to England, Ireland and even Australia!) over the past 4 years.
EDIT: Agree with LordHope, Wales aren't minnows yet a win against NZ would be HUGE, seeing that we havent beaten them since the '50's, as would a win against the 'Boks who we only beat in '99 (though we've been knocking on that door a fair bit recently...)

 

[Melhor Time]

My Minnows XV (teams not in the World Cup)

15.

Silvère Tian (Agen & Côte d'Ivoire)
14.

Martin Jágr (Mont-de-Marsan & Czech Republic)
13.

Clemens von Grumbkow (Cavalieri Prato & Germany)
12.

Garth Ziegler (Bayonne & Zimbabwe)
11.

Tim Visser (Edinburgh & Netherlands)
10.

César Sempere (Northampton & Spain)
09.

Cédric Garcia (Bayonne & Spain)
01.

Arnauld Tchougong (Lyon & Cameroon)
02.

Pieter Dixon (Bath & Zimbabwe)
03.

Stan Wright (Stade Français & Cook Islands)
04.

Erik Lund (Biarritz & Norway)
05.

Robins Tchale-Watchou (Perpignan & Cameroon)
06.

Eugène N'Zi (Lyon & Côte d'Ivoire)
07.

Julien Bardy (Clermont & Portugal)
08.

Abdelatif Boutaty (Bayonne & Morocco)

I'm sure somebody would be able to find better backs than that, this team is poor in my opinion which reflects the strength of the lower nations, would qualify for the World Cup though as the tight five is okay

Good, balanced team. But you forgot Rodrigo Capó Ortega or Castres and Uruguay. I´d keep Lund and Tchale_Watchou in the secondrow and put Capó at 8. Also Fernando Portugal (Bandeirantes & Brazil) would be my inside centre. I´ve seen him play and he is as good as centres in many pro teams in Europe. He played in Italy for 2 years an now captains the Brazilian sevens side who defeated Argentina this year. Hooker should be Fabien Rofes (Spain) who was Montpellier´s hooker in the Top 14 final but will play for Bordeaux next season.

 

[DuncTheDoodle]

There's no way I could manage a side of non-World Cup players, but I'd include Italy, Scotland and Argentina as top-tier nations and do a team based on the rest:

15. Artmeniev (Russia)
14. Tim Visser (Netherlands)
13. Albert Vulivuli (Fiji)
12. Selelina Mapasua (Samoa)
11. Alesana Tuilagi (Samoa)
10. Kurt Morath (Tonga)
9. Khan Fotuali'i (Samoa)

1. Soane Tonguih'ia (Tonga)
2. Marius Tincu (Romania)
3. Kisi Pulu (Tonga)
4. Jamie Cudmore (Canada)
5. Erik Lund (Norway)
6. Jaques Burger (Namibia)
7. Todd Clever (USA) for the sake of inclusion. Not the best 7 avalible, but I left Ngwenya out.
8. George Stowers (Samoa)

 

[Peat]

Peat

Without doubt.

Then, with all due respect, you're a bit nuts. Hernandez is the only one of the backs anyway near the World Class monkier (hard to tell since he's not been consistently fit for a while). Then you've got a fantastic pair of props and Parisse... and... well... don't get me wrong, a really good pack, but then so do most nations.

Then again, this lot would be less likely to choke...

 

[Melhor Time]

Then, with all due respect, you're a bit nuts. Hernandez is the only one of the backs anyway near the World Class monkier (hard to tell since he's not been consistently fit for a while). Then you've got a fantastic pair of props and Parisse... and... well... don't get me wrong, a really good pack, but then so do most nations.

Then again, this lot would be less likely to choke...

Peat,

I simply don´t think the All Blacks are what they are cracked up to be - a world class side who could win the RWC. Not unbeatable though and Argentina will defeat them in the new Four Nations within five years. Every RWC is the same. In the years leading up to the event most sides use the time to prepare for the RWC while NZ keep it in the back of the mind as the team is under so much pressure to win every match and play entertaining rugby. A 15 point win over Italy is deemed disaster. A home loss unthinkable, etc. One of the consequences of this is that the All Blacks always have players who, rather than stick to the responsibilities of their position, try to go beyond what the position entails and as such lack some of the fundamentals. The props in 2003 were below par. Picked for their mobility more than anything else.
In 1999 trying to be as attacking as possible rather than winning games. Playing the best fullback of the time at centre and the best winger at fullback to have Umaga and Lomu on the wings which meant two big guys but not great defensive players as wingers (tackling aside) and what do you know, France took Umaga apart in what must be the worst game of his life.

The 2011 team has issues in the frontrow. The props are not bad at all. Solid players but its familiar in that they are playing all over the park rather than doing text-book work for props. This is the eternal NZ trap of playing entertaining rugby. Props are there for the purpose of winning scrums, lifting in lineouts, tackling, rucks and being a ball carrier in close contact. Seeing props as recievers in midfield to try to scatter the defence may be good for playing attacking, beautiful, entertaining rugby but its a trap. Teams can take you apart as has happened to NZ at previous RWC´s. Carl Hayman in 2007 was at the top of his game and was not like this. I can´t say the same for Dave Hewat and Greg Sommerville from 2003. The current players are like the 2003 props.

This time around the NZ side is not as strong as from the three previous RWC´s. For me they can be defeated. France and South Africa have won there recently. This is not normal.

 

[Darwin]

Peat,

I simply don´t think the All Blacks are what they are cracked up to be - a world class side who could win the RWC. Not unbeatable though and Argentina will defeat them in the new Four Nations within five years. Every RWC is the same. In the years leading up to the event most sides use the time to prepare for the RWC while NZ keep it in the back of the mind as the team is under so much pressure to win every match and play entertaining rugby. A 15 point win over Italy is deemed disaster. A home loss unthinkable, etc. One of the consequences of this is that the All Blacks always have players who, rather than stick to the responsibilities of their position, try to go beyond what the position entails and as such lack some of the fundamentals. The props in 2003 were below par. Picked for their mobility more than anything else.
In 1999 trying to be as attacking as possible rather than winning games. Playing the best fullback of the time at centre and the best winger at fullback to have Umaga and Lomu on the wings which meant two big guys but not great defensive players as wingers (tackling aside) and what do you know, France took Umaga apart in what must be the worst game of his life.

The 2011 team has issues in the frontrow. The props are not bad at all. Solid players but its familiar in that they are playing all over the park rather than doing text-book work for props. This is the eternal NZ trap of playing entertaining rugby. Props are there for the purpose of winning scrums, lifting in lineouts, tackling, rucks and being a ball carrier in close contact. Seeing props as recievers in midfield to try to scatter the defence may be good for playing attacking, beautiful, entertaining rugby but its a trap. Teams can take you apart as has happened to NZ at previous RWC´s. Carl Hayman in 2007 was at the top of his game and was not like this. I can´t say the same for Dave Hewat and Greg Sommerville from 2003. The current players are like the 2003 props.

This time around the NZ side is not as strong as from the three previous RWC´s. For me they can be defeated. France and South Africa have won there recently. This is not normal.

I can't believe anyone could possibly think NZ's props are a weakness. If you watched the Crusaders (which will provide 2/4 if not 3/4 props that will be in NZ's RWC squad) this season you would have seen props that had huge work-rates around the field, lifted well in lineouts, tackled brilliantly, and were strong ball carriers. As well as this they were part of the most powerful scrum in the whole competition! If you think NZ's props are going to be a weakness you are in for a surprise...

I also don't understand how you think this NZ side is not as strong as the side in the previous RWC's. The AB's are clearly the top ranked team in the world, having only lost a single game last season (a last minute loss to Australia). I think this NZ side is equally as strong as 2007 (where they were huge favourites), but much stronger than 1999 (where they were ranked below Australia) and 2003 (when they were clearly ranked behind England). I'm not saying they can't be beaten - far from it - but they do deserve to be big favourites going into the Rugby World Cup.

 

[tomred]

Melhor watch this video and tell me New Zealand's scrum is as weak as you say: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7dn9rBHvhI
Remember the Crusaders forward pack contains 6 starting All Black

 

[ranger]

Definitely agree with you there Darwin. Melhor could make a case that there are quite a few "showboating" props (2003 props as he puts it) playing in NZ competitions. Schwalger, Lemalu and Aulika are examples, but none of them are in the All Black side.. Anyone that watches Owen Franks play a game and still thinks he is neglecting core duties in favour of "attractive" rugby doesnt know what they are talking about.

 

[Aedaphon]

Heh, taken a lot more flak for starting this than I thought I would, was just a spur of the moment thing...

In a slight defence, Argentina were most certainly a world class side last world cup (as evidenced by their result) but have since droppedsignificantly (solely judging off their international performances). Perhaps a bit rushed to class them as a minnow, but it was written at about 2am, so apologies for any offence caused.

As to the other team posted, very impressed, my knowledge of non-RWC cup teams is very limited but from the players I do know I would certainly agree that it's a very solid side.

 

[Larksea]

NZ's props are very very strong

The franks brothers are a very rare couple of guys who have actually managed to convert impressive lifting results at the Gym to superior performance on the rugby park, Wyatt Crockett has a big workload around the park and uses his 1.93cm to be one of the best lineout lifters around. And he's much better in the scrum than Stuart Dickenson will ever know.

The impressive thing about these Guys is they show up all over the park and make cover tackles as well as performing all their Core roles, not at the expence of the core roles.

If NZ has a weakness in the front row it's lineout throwing. Which is why I'm a bit sore about the fact Hika Elliot is not in the team I think he's a better thrower than any of the current AB hookers.

 

[AfakasiAssasin]

1 Tonga Lea'aetoa (Bayonne & Tonga)

Tonga Lea'aetoa as your loosehead? Im sorry Melhor but He is RUBBISH at international level. He's not that great in the scrum, gave away alot of silly penalties in his recent outings for Tonga and his fitness sucks. I would definitely have Alisona Taumalolo or Soane Tonga'uiha before Lea'aetoa as starters for Tonga let alone a Minnows XV. These two players ALONE are better than Lae'eatoa by a country mile as well as Sakaria Taulafo of Samoa. Even Graham Dewes of Fiji is a better option IMO.

 

[nickdnz]

New Zealand having a weak front row is over now. Woodcock is New Zealand's most experienced prop, but his scrummaging has in some cases made New Zealand's scrum look weak. Tialata is just an average prop, who has alright scrummaging. Against France, Wales and England New Zealand's scrum has been pretty average. I believe that is at an end. We now have the Franks brothers, who as I like to describe them, are like a peice of meat with legs, as they just put their bodies on the line (the head clashes with Owen Franks, where the others have been bloodied up and injured, while Franks is at the next ruck is crazy). We also have Wyatt Crockett who has been one of the best scrummaging props the All Blacks have had since Carl Hayman. The front row is certainly not a weakness. I agree that the weakness would be with lineouts. Flynn and Hore are pretty poor throwers, though Mealamu is all good.

 

[Melhor Time]

I can't believe anyone could possibly think NZ's props are a weakness. If you watched the Crusaders (which will provide 2/4 if not 3/4 props that will be in NZ's RWC squad) this season you would have seen props that had huge work-rates around the field, lifted well in lineouts, tackled brilliantly, and were strong ball carriers. As well as this they were part of the most powerful scrum in the whole competition! If you think NZ's props are going to be a weakness you are in for a surprise...

I also don't understand how you think this NZ side is not as strong as the side in the previous RWC's. The AB's are clearly the top ranked team in the world, having only lost a single game last season (a last minute loss to Australia). I think this NZ side is equally as strong as 2007 (where they were huge favourites), but much stronger than 1999 (where they were ranked below Australia) and 2003 (when they were clearly ranked behind England). I'm not saying they can't be beaten - far from it - but they do deserve to be big favourites going into the Rugby World Cup.

Nothing wrong with the Crusaders scrum but overall the level of Super Rugby is below that of Europe. NZ may do fine in the 3N but this will merely be another trap which could open up against other teams. The worlds leading props are in Europe not Super Rugby. Cursaders vs Reds is one thing. I´d like to see it against a side with good props. A case in point being the Top 14 final. Toulouse were hammered at scrumtime by Montpellier who had an Argentine loosehead and a Georgian tighthead prop. Juan Figallo dominated Census Johnson who had been considered amongst the best going around. Figallo is the Pumas´ third choice for the #1 shirt.

 

[big ginger 8]

Census Johnson has never being considered a good scrummager. Saying the 3n isn't as good at scrummaging isn't fair S.A. have always been strong scrummagers.

One of the best scrummaging tightheads is a New Zealander it's just unfortunate he plays in France. Franks and Crocket are two of the most capable scrummagers and with Mealamu will only be stronger. Of course involves 8 men and the secondrows and backrow are all strong scrummagers.

 

[nickdnz]

Nothing wrong with the Crusaders scrum but overall the level of Super Rugby is below that of Europe. NZ may do fine in the 3N but this will merely be another trap which could open up against other teams. The worlds leading props are in Europe not Super Rugby. Cursaders vs Reds is one thing. I´d like to see it against a side with good props. A case in point being the Top 14 final. Toulouse were hammered at scrumtime by Montpellier who had an Argentine loosehead and a Georgian tighthead prop. Juan Figallo dominated Census Johnson who had been considered amongst the best going around. Figallo is the Pumas´ third choice for the #1 shirt.

Of course your assertion that the best scrummaging props are in France, has nothing to do with all of Argentina's best props have always played in France...

I think you're way off about SH props, especially regarding the Crusaders. Crockett and the Franks brothers are two of the best scrummagers in the world, and their performances against the Sharks all international front row highlighted this. To a certain extent Australia has always had a pretty poor front row, but New Zealand and South Africa have consistantly produced props that are up there with the best. I think most would agree that players like Carl Hayman, Tony Woodcock and Kees Meeuws have been considered up there with the best props in their positions in the last decade. There are certainly different interpretations of the scrum between the T14 and the S15, but to say the best front rows are all in Europe is puzzling considering the French keep on buying Super Rugby props. Enjoy Dunning and Tialata.