Scotland's World Cup Chances

[LittleGuy]

@Lordhope yeah all quarterfinalists and third place finishers automatically qualify for thw 2015 World Cup it has been the same since the 2003 WC I beleive. I don't see Scotland having trouble with finishing third in their pool.

 

[Seaton]

@Lordhope yeah all quarterfinalists and third place finishers automatically qualify for thw 2015 World Cup it has been the same since the 2003 WC I beleive. I don't see Scotland having trouble with finishing third in their pool.

Ah yes, it was the seedings I was confusing myself with

 

[Melhor Time]

Japan will have a pretty sharp side alright but "Respectable" isn't the word i would use. They are stacking their team with overseas players qualifying on residency.
Shaun Webb, James Arlidge, Sione Vatuvai, Micheal Leitch, Daniel Quate, Phillip O'Riley, Luke Thompson, Ryan Nicholas, Bryce Robins, Touetsu Taufa, Alisi Tupuailei, Jack Tarrant and Christian Loamanu have all been brought in, most have been poached from New Zealand. The rumor is that they are putting huge amounts of money into getting as many young NZ players over as possible and handing them caps to increase their depth and claim players as a matter of urgency incase the residency rules change.
Its pretty low really, but the on-field results should come on regardless because these are some very handy footballers. I know that Canada have been improving steadily, but my money is on Japan when they play eachother.

Actually, Japan is very home grown and not overrun by imports at all. John Kirwan has really done a good job with the Japanese team and set up. Japan is in no way doing what you say there are. You said:

"Respectable" isn't the word i would use. They are stacking their team with overseas players qualifying on residency.

You are wrong. 12 of the 15 players in the team which defeated Samoa, who were at full strength, were Japanese. I would not call 3 players out of 15 being a stacked team of imports. Rather, I would call it far more than respectable. I would call it utter progress. Japan defeating Samoa and Tonga is not becuase of mercenaries, not at all. Instead, it shows that Japan are a much improved international side because the level of the players has increased and the level of the domestic championship is obviously better than many people think.

The team that defeated Samoa 31-23 in Samoa was:

15 Maouru Matsushita
14 Kosuke Endo
13 Hirotoki Onozawa
12 Ryan Nicholas (New Zealand)
11 Alisi Tupuailei (Samoa)
10 James Arlidge (New Zealand)
9 Fumaki Tanaka
8 Ryu Holani
7 Touetstu Taufa
6 Takashi Kikutani
5 Toshizumi Kitagawa
4 Hitoshi Ono
3 Kensuke Hatakeyama
2 Shota Horie
1 Naoki Kawamata





In fact, Japan are favorites to finsh third in the group. They have not lost to Tonga sinve 2007 but have won three times and have won two vs Canada without losing.

In contrast one of the worlds best hisotrical teams and the team that this discussion is about, Scotland, had 5 imports in their teas that defeated Ireland in Ireland in this years Six Nations. Is this respectable? Is this stacking a team with imports? Obviously Japan deserve credit not criticism.

15 Hugo Southwell (England)
14 Sean Lamont
13 Nick de Luca
12 Graeme Morrison (Hong Kong)
11 Max Evans
10 Dan Parks (Australia)
9 Chris Cuisiter
8 Johnnie Beattie
7 John Barclay (Hong Kong)
6 Kelly Brown
5 Alaistair Kellock
4 Jim Hamilton (England)
3 Euan Murray
2 Ross Ford
1 Allan Jacobson

[video=dailymotion;xcnyti]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xcnyti_irlande-vs-ecosse-6-nations-2010_sport[/video]

 

[Shaggy]

Actually, Japan is very home grown and not overrun by imports at all. John Kirwan has really done a good job with the Japanese team and set up. Japan is in no way doing what you say there are. You said:



You are wrong. 12 of the 15 players in the team which defeated Samoa, who were at full strength, were Japanese. I would not call 3 players out of 15 being a stacked team of imports. Rather, I would call it far more than respectable. I would call it utter progress. Japan defeating Samoa and Tonga is not becuase of mercenaries, not at all. Instead, it shows that Japan are a much improved international side because the level of the players has increased and the level of the domestic championship is obviously better than many people think.

The team that defeated Samoa 31-23 in Samoa was:

15 Maouru Matsushita
14 Kosuke Endo
13 Hirotoki Onozawa
12 Ryan Nicholas (New Zealand)
11 Alisi Tupuailei (Samoa)
10 James Arlidge (New Zealand)
9 Fumaki Tanaka
8 Ryu Holani
7 Touetstu Taufa
6 Takashi Kikutani
5 Toshizumi Kitagawa
4 Hitoshi Ono
3 Kensuke Hatakeyama
2 Shota Horie
1 Naoki Kawamata





In fact, Japan are favorites to finsh third in the group. They have not lost to Tonga sinve 2007 but have won three times and have won two vs Canada without losing.

In contrast one of the worlds best hisotrical teams and the team that this discussion is about, Scotland, had 5 imports in their teas that defeated Ireland in Ireland in this years Six Nations. Is this respectable? Is this stacking a team with imports? Obviously Japan deserve credit not criticism.

15 Hugo Southwell (England)
14 Sean Lamont
13 Nick de Luca
12 Graeme Morrison (Hong Kong)
11 Max Evans
10 Dan Parks (Australia)
9 Chris Cuisiter
8 Johnnie Beattie
7 John Barclay (Hong Kong)
6 Kelly Brown
5 Alaistair Kellock
4 Jim Hamilton (England)
3 Euan Murray
2 Ross Ford
1 Allan Jacobson

[video=dailymotion;xcnyti]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xcnyti_irlande-vs-ecosse-6-nations-2010_sport[/video]

While I get your point about Japan, I don't think you can call some of the Scottish players imports, the two players listed as Hong Kong both appear to have gone to school in/been brought up in Scotland, and Jim Hamilton looks to have a Scottish father at least ... this is a little different from players, qualifying for a country by residency, after being brought up in another country, such as Arlidge and Nicholas

A small list of Gaijin playing for the Japanese national team in an article I found from May this year included locks Daniel Quate and Luke Thompson; flankers Michael Leitch and Philip O'Reilly; number eight Sione Vatuvei; centres Ryan Nicholas, Bryce Robins and Alisi Tupuailei; and flyhalves James Arlidge and Shawn Webb ... even so, i'm pleased to see that Japan mostly have Japanese born players, and if they need a few overseas players to raise the standard, that's got to be good in the long run

 

[ranger]

Actually, Japan is very home grown and not overrun by imports at all. John Kirwan has really done a good job with the Japanese team and set up. Japan is in no way doing what you say there are. You said:



You are wrong. 12 of the 15 players in the team which defeated Samoa, who were at full strength, were Japanese. I would not call 3 players out of 15 being a stacked team of imports. Rather, I would call it far more than respectable. I would call it utter progress. Japan defeating Samoa and Tonga is not becuase of mercenaries, not at all. Instead, it shows that Japan are a much improved international side because the level of the players has increased and the level of the domestic championship is obviously better than many people think.

The team that defeated Samoa 31-23 in Samoa was:

15 Maouru Matsushita
14 Kosuke Endo
13 Hirotoki Onozawa
12 Ryan Nicholas (New Zealand)
11 Alisi Tupuailei (Samoa)
10 James Arlidge (New Zealand)
9 Fumaki Tanaka
8 Ryu Holani
7 Touetstu Taufa
6 Takashi Kikutani
5 Toshizumi Kitagawa
4 Hitoshi Ono
3 Kensuke Hatakeyama
2 Shota Horie
1 Naoki Kawamata





In fact, Japan are favorites to finsh third in the group. They have not lost to Tonga sinve 2007 but have won three times and have won two vs Canada without losing.

In contrast one of the worlds best hisotrical teams and the team that this discussion is about, Scotland, had 5 imports in their teas that defeated Ireland in Ireland in this years Six Nations. Is this respectable? Is this stacking a team with imports? Obviously Japan deserve credit not criticism.

15 Hugo Southwell (England)
14 Sean Lamont
13 Nick de Luca
12 Graeme Morrison (Hong Kong)
11 Max Evans
10 Dan Parks (Australia)
9 Chris Cuisiter
8 Johnnie Beattie
7 John Barclay (Hong Kong)
6 Kelly Brown
5 Alaistair Kellock
4 Jim Hamilton (England)
3 Euan Murray
2 Ross Ford
1 Allan Jacobson

[video=dailymotion;xcnyti]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xcnyti_irlande-vs-ecosse-6-nations-2010_sport[/video]

All those players i named have been brought into the Japanese national team recently, are you disputing that? sure, they didn't send the majority out in the pacific nations cup (noone sent out their top sides), but i would be very surprised if a large number of them weren't named in the world cup squad. I'm family friends with one the NZers that has been capped by Japan on residency, and he said that there is a real emphasis on getting young guys over there that could potentially play for Japan later on.

 

[Melhor Time]

All those players i named have been brought into the Japanese national team recently, are you disputing that? sure, they didn't send the majority out in the pacific nations cup (noone sent out their top sides), but i would be very surprised if a large number of them weren't named in the world cup squad. I'm family friends with one the NZers that has been capped by Japan on residency, and he said that there is a real emphasis on getting young guys over there that could potentially play for Japan later on.

What I am disputing is clear. Japan, has imports but far fewer than you would have people believe. You listed 13 players and said they had been brought in - suggesting they were signed to be mercenaries rather than be signed to play for clubs. You said they had been poached from New Zealand when none were in line for All Black duties. In fact New Zealand has fielded more imported players during this period than Japan as has Scotland and many other sides.

You listed 13 yet Japan defeated Samoa with only 3, as I pointed out. In addition, at Rugby World Cup Japan had imports and 23 Japanese players. The imports were Thomson, Vatuvei, Makiri O'Reilly, Oto, Robins and Loamanu. Is seven a lot? It is the number that New Zealand had at the same tournament. As Collins, Lauaki, Masoe, Muliaina, Rokocoko, Sivivatu and Toeava are all from Fiji, Samoa or Tonga.

If you want to point fingers do so at Samoa who had 14 New Zealand born players - double the number of imports Japan had at France 2007.

All teams sent their top sides to Apia for the Pacific Nations Cup. Look at the players picked. Samoa had all of their stars but lost to Japan. You should re-read what you initially said. The players were certainly not poached.

Shaun Webb, James Arlidge, Sione Vatuvai, Micheal Leitch, Daniel Quate, Phillip O'Riley, Luke Thompson, Ryan Nicholas, Bryce Robins, Touetsu Taufa, Alisi Tupuailei, Jack Tarrant and Christian Loamanu have all been brought in, most have been poached from New Zealand. The rumor is that they are putting huge amounts of money into getting as many young NZ players over as possible and handing them caps to increase their depth and claim players as a matter of urgency incase the residency rules change.

If what you are saying is true then Todd Clever, Stephen Larkham, George Gregan and Tamati Ellison wouldn´t have ever been signed to play in Japan because they have already played test rugby for the USA, Australia and New Zealand and they are not the youngest players on the market. If you are corect then it wouldn´t be these players but the likes of Aaron Cruden and Colin Slade. Ryan Nicholas, for instance, moved to Japan after playing for the Highlanders from 2002-2004. He debuted for Japan in 2008 at age 29.

If they had the money then they would be signing young Dan Carter´s not guys rated far inferior like those on this list. The fact is the guys get signed and go, Japan does not target them to play as mercenaries. If a player happens to be elligible and is playing very well then he may be approached, not earlier. Japan are winning tests with some imported players, but they are not stacked with imports like you said. Nicholas is like the majority, he was not wanted in Super Rugby and so took an offer somewhere else.

Its pretty low really, but the on-field results should come on regardless because these are some very handy footballers. I know that Canada have been improving steadily, but my money is on Japan when they play eachother.

Firstly, the results won't come because of these handy footballers. To the contrary it is the Japanese players who, as I said made up 12 of the 15 players in the team that got Japan's first ever win vs Samoa. Japan has improved very much and in the future less players from offshore will be in the team.

Secondly, its not low, its common practice. To repeat, New Zealand had the same number of players born in other countries as Japan did at the alst Rugby World Cup. In New Zealands current squad I can point to Muliaina, Rokocoko, Stanley, Kaino and Ben Franks as players born in other countries. Unlike the players playing for Japan these guys could all make their country of birth´s team. Is it low that they play for New Zealand? No. Above all else they meet the rules just like Luke Thomson at co and therefore it is 100% valid. Were they poached? No.

Thirdly, Canada have not been improving steadily at all. The United States has been thanks to more players getting pro contracts and a great administration. the national team has been getting better international results in recent years. Canada, on the other hand, has not. Canada were good in the 1990´s. They defeated Fiji and Romania and lost 19-13 to France in Rugby World Cup 1991 but claimed second spot in the pool and then faced New Zealand in the Quarter Final, losing 29-13 - a much better scoreline than their match at Rugby World Cup 2007 or their friendly in Hamilton in 2007.

Canada were a very promising team in the 1990´s. They defeated Wales in Cardiff in 1993 and France in Toronto in 1994. Their two other great performances were defeating Ireland in 2000 and Scotland in 2002. Since this time, there are no notable wins to speak of. Canada were strong in Rugby World Cup 1999, leading France in the second have and demolishing Namibia but Fiji got the better of them and they were eliminated. Canada today have a team that is a shadow of the team of 1991-1994. Results since France 2007 have not been so good. Canada toured Japan with a full strength side and lost both tests in 2009. They were badly beaten. They have some talented players but they are not looking as good as they were 5 or so years ago. Jamie Cudmore is the sole ace in the pack. Gone are Mike James, Al Charon, Colin Yukes and Rod Snow.

We agree on one thing: Japan vs Canada will see the Asian side winning the match.

 

[ranger]

What I am disputing is clear. Japan, has imports but far fewer than you would have people believe. You listed 13 players and said they had been brought in - suggesting they were signed to be mercenaries rather than be signed to play for clubs. You said they had been poached from New Zealand when none were in line for All Black duties. In fact New Zealand has fielded more imported players during this period than Japan as has Scotland and many other sides.

You listed 13 yet Japan defeated Samoa with only 3, as I pointed out. In addition, at Rugby World Cup Japan had imports and 23 Japanese players. The imports were Thomson, Vatuvei, Makiri O'Reilly, Oto, Robins and Loamanu. Is seven a lot? It is the number that New Zealand had at the same tournament. As Collins, Lauaki, Masoe, Muliaina, Rokocoko, Sivivatu and Toeava are all from Fiji, Samoa or Tonga.
If you want to point fingers do so at Samoa who had 14 New Zealand born players - double the number of imports Japan had at France 2007.

Whether they were in national contention is beside the point, a poach to me is when one country takes established rugby players off another. Although i feel if James Arlidge had stuck around he would have been capped by now. We also obviously have very different interpretations of the word "imported". Every overseas born player the All Blacks have fielded for quite a while have moved to the country as small children, with the exception of Sivivatu who came over at around 15. If Mr and Mrs Muliaina decide that there are better job opportunities in Invercargill and decide to emigrate from Samoa, then i don't see a problem with that. If they then decide to take their 4 year old son Mills with them, then i don't see a problem there either. Then, after that kid grows up in NZ, learns how to play rugby there and progresses through the system, if he then comes into All Black contention i dont have a problem with him being selected.
The Japanese imports have all been established, proven rugby players, with no previous ties to Japan, who are only there because they are getting paid. I find that pretty low. If they weren't getting paid to play rugby, there is no way that Arlidge, Nicholas, Quate etc would be living in Japan, yet they are representing that nation? I also don't see the same moral problem with the Samoan players, they have strong ties to that country and despite being born in New Zealand they have strong Samoan identities. In contrast Bryce Robbins had no ties to Japan before he went there to earn money, and as soon as his playing career ends hes moving the hell out of there.

All teams sent their top sides to Apia for the Pacific Nations Cup. Look at the players picked. Samoa had all of their stars but lost to Japan. You should re-read what you initially said. The players were certainly not poached.

Well we will just have to wait for the World cup squads to be announced to compare and see if you're right

If what you are saying is true then Todd Clever, Stephen Larkham, George Gregan and Tamati Ellison wouldn´t have ever been signed to play in Japan because they have already played test rugby for the USA, Australia and New Zealand and they are not the youngest players on the market. If you are corect then it wouldn´t be these players but the likes of Aaron Cruden and Colin Slade. Ryan Nicholas, for instance, moved to Japan after playing for the Highlanders from 2002-2004. He debuted for Japan in 2008 at age 29.

If they had the money then they would be signing young Dan Carter´s not guys rated far inferior like those on this list. The fact is the guys get signed and go, Japan does not target them to play as mercenaries. If a player happens to be elligible and is playing very well then he may be approached, not earlier. Japan are winning tests with some imported players, but they are not stacked with imports like you said. Nicholas is like the majority, he was not wanted in Super Rugby and so took an offer somewhere else.

Obviously the clubs make some purchases based on their own desire for results, but there is also a recent directive to try and select players that could become Japanese national players. I never said they sought them out exclusively. When Nicholas got capped, that wasn't because they got him over to play for Japan. He was playing for a club and gained residency. The move to recruit promising players is a pretty recent one, and i don't think we will see those players reaching the national team for a few years. They wouldn't go after Cruden and Slade because they would never leave knowing that they could conceivably make the All Blacks. They instead go after young, very talented players who aren't as high profile as Cruden. Young guys like Hamish Gard and Hayden Hopgood, they had junior super rugby contracts but were lured away by lucrative Japanese contracts on the proviso that they stay for 3 uninterrupted years in that country. I wonder why that is..
Just because Japan isn't luring players of Dan Carters level doesn't make the practice any less abhorrent to me.

Firstly, the results won't come because of these handy footballers. To the contrary it is the Japanese players who, as I said made up 12 of the 15 players in the team that got Japan's first ever win vs Samoa. Japan has improved very much and in the future less players from offshore will be in the team.

Secondly, its not low, its common practice. To repeat, New Zealand had the same number of players born in other countries as Japan did at the alst Rugby World Cup. In New Zealands current squad I can point to Muliaina, Rokocoko, Stanley, Kaino and Ben Franks as players born in other countries. Unlike the players playing for Japan these guys could all make their country of birth´s team. Is it low that they play for New Zealand? No. Above all else they meet the rules just like Luke Thomson at co and therefore it is 100% valid. Were they poached? No.

You think there will be less offshore players in future, i think there will be more. We will just have to wait 5 years to see whos right. We obviously draw moral distinctions in different places, i don't care so much where players were born, i care where they grew up, who put the time into developing them as rugby players when they were growing up, and what country they identify with. If James Arlidge was born in Auckland and then moved to Japan when he was 3 and lived his life there until now, then i wouldn't think that was low at all, but thats not the case.
You can't seriously compare the likes of Benson Stanley and Ben Franks to James Arlidge and Tupuailei and think they are the same. Both Stanley and Franks were born overseas to Kiwi parents and promptly moved back and grew up in New Zealand. Its the same situation as Ronan O'Gara being born in USA. James Arlidge and Tupuailei both grew up and went to secondary school in New Zealand, where they were identified as top flight rugby players and played professional rugby in the country.
Also, as i've said, whether they would play for the national team is beside the point. Japan took established rugby players out of another country, hence, poach.

 

[Charles]

The team that defeated Samoa 31-23 in Samoa was:

15 Maouru Matsushita
14 Kosuke Endo
13 Hirotoki Onozawa
12 Ryan Nicholas (New Zealand)
11 Alisi Tupuailei (Samoa)
10 James Arlidge (New Zealand)
9 Fumaki Tanaka
8 Ryu Holani
7 Touetstu Taufa
6 Takashi Kikutani
5 Toshizumi Kitagawa
4 Hitoshi Ono
3 Kensuke Hatakeyama
2 Shota Horie
1 Naoki Kawamata

You forgot these two...

It really is highly hypocritical from Japan to poach these guys when you see how difficult it is to actually integrate in the country...

 

[Finerz]

It would probably be worth starting a new topic, as you have probably written more about Japan than Scotland.

 

[Ayrshire Warrior]

In my opinion the best we can hope for is 2nd as England have improved and sadly are a good bit better than us atm. We should be definately looking to win our first two games,it would be a disaster if we didnt. The big game will be trhe ones against Argentina who i would say we are on par with if not a bit better.

 

[seopackages]

England Johnson veered to the extreme of extremes of Team Coaching this year has stepped up and show real progress has been made and sustained. Argentina have not seen the whole team together for a long time and I think there may be different propisition and a toilet - and no mention of injuries that can really tilt things one way or another.

 

[SavageLez]

Scotland to go through to the Quarter Finals and give NZ a tough game but World Cup dream should end there unless they do what Argentina did in 2007.

 

[Seaton]

Arg, the OP was not about Scotland's chances of winning the tournament, but about their chances of reaching the knock-out stages.

 

[Faatau82]

They'll get there, but make a bloody hard time of doing so!

 

[markshaw]

Scotland to go through to the Quarter Finals and give NZ a tough game but World Cup dream should end there unless they do what Argentina did in 2007.

really?

 

[cardassian]

It all depends on the game v Argentina, winner of that gets 2nd with England winning the pool easily.