I believe during the last Lions tour, Australia were ranked second. Over the last 20 years I think it's very safe to say Australia have been a top three team.
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
World Cup is overrated
- Thread starter Rugga-lad
- Start date
I believe during the last Lions tour, Australia were ranked second. Over the last 20 years I think it's very safe to say Australia have been a top three team.
Cavemeister
Academy Player
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2015
- Messages
- 6
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
I think that for the sport of rugby to grow around the world, we need a RWC. Its the third biggest sporting tournament after the soccer world cup and the Olympics. It draws many spectators who might not follow or play rugby but may well do after. It allows for smaller teams to test their grit against the bigger teams and ultimately, brings the fans together. I was in Australia for the 2003 WRC and was on of the best experiences of my life (apart from the Irish dismantling in the quarters by those pesky French)
Long live the Rugby World Cup
Long live the Rugby World Cup
valley commando
First XV
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2015
- Messages
- 1,277
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Yes completely agree with you, however I'd like to see a 2nd tier world comp, lets call it the shield for example, run in the same country at the same time as the main comp, this would give the lesser nations such as Spain, Holland, Germany, Korea, Zimbabwe, Poland, Paraguay etc a real we are at the party feel, whilst improving the game the support and structure in these countries.
Imagine it was in place now, and hosted by clubs at and below championship level, the RWC makes enough and its a cheaper way of spreading the word than anything else thought up.
- Joined
- May 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,708
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Reading through some of the bullsh¡t comments on here by trolls from both sides of the debate re the 2007 QF and 2011 Final, and the slagging off of Wayne Barnes and Craig Joubert, reminds me of why I don't post on this forum as often as I used to.
Yes, "that pass" was forward.
Yes Wayne Barnes was an inexperienced referee chucked in at the deep end who ended up like a possum in the headlights.
Yes, Craig Joubert has a loose management style around the breakdown
Yes, Joubert is slack in his enforcement of the offside Law.
But none of those things are the reason why the respective teams lost on the day. They lost because they had no Plan B. They had no plan to do something different when it became apparent that what they were doing wasn't working. There is an old saying that goes something like "if you always do what you're always doing, you'll always get what you're always getting". After the umpteenth time you try to move the ball forward around the fringes of the rucks only be thwarted by offside defenders who are not penalised by the referee, you have to start taking your fate into your own hands by looking at other tactical options. They should have been trying for a dropped goal a lot earlier than the 79th minute. It should have been apparent to the All Blacks' leadership by half-way through the second half in 2007 that Wayne was never going to award a penalty for offside. At this point, they should have started punishing the French offsides by kicking behind the defenders. Same applies to the French in 2011 when Craig was allowing some pretty dubious breakdown tactics to slow French ball down; kick the slow possession into the corners and apply attacking pressure. They saw what was going on, and failed to understand what they needed to do to change the course of the game, so they lost.
On a side note I also question the impartiality if that that Irish (Setanta?) analysis of the 2011 Final. IMO, it was a load of tosh. Never have I see a more cherry-picked, one sided analysis of a rugby game or a referee's performance. Those w@nkers decided before hand that Joubert was biased, and then went looking for any evidence that supported their preconceived notions, while completely ignoring anything that didn't support their view (for example, the blatant offside by Rougerie that led to the French try). They make G&GR look positively fair and balanced!!
Yes, "that pass" was forward.
Yes Wayne Barnes was an inexperienced referee chucked in at the deep end who ended up like a possum in the headlights.
Yes, Craig Joubert has a loose management style around the breakdown
Yes, Joubert is slack in his enforcement of the offside Law.
But none of those things are the reason why the respective teams lost on the day. They lost because they had no Plan B. They had no plan to do something different when it became apparent that what they were doing wasn't working. There is an old saying that goes something like "if you always do what you're always doing, you'll always get what you're always getting". After the umpteenth time you try to move the ball forward around the fringes of the rucks only be thwarted by offside defenders who are not penalised by the referee, you have to start taking your fate into your own hands by looking at other tactical options. They should have been trying for a dropped goal a lot earlier than the 79th minute. It should have been apparent to the All Blacks' leadership by half-way through the second half in 2007 that Wayne was never going to award a penalty for offside. At this point, they should have started punishing the French offsides by kicking behind the defenders. Same applies to the French in 2011 when Craig was allowing some pretty dubious breakdown tactics to slow French ball down; kick the slow possession into the corners and apply attacking pressure. They saw what was going on, and failed to understand what they needed to do to change the course of the game, so they lost.
On a side note I also question the impartiality if that that Irish (Setanta?) analysis of the 2011 Final. IMO, it was a load of tosh. Never have I see a more cherry-picked, one sided analysis of a rugby game or a referee's performance. Those w@nkers decided before hand that Joubert was biased, and then went looking for any evidence that supported their preconceived notions, while completely ignoring anything that didn't support their view (for example, the blatant offside by Rougerie that led to the French try). They make G&GR look positively fair and balanced!!
Last edited:
goodNumber10
International
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2014
- Messages
- 6,027
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Obviously i'm a little biased as i write for them but I think G&GR has got a lot better lately, and while you get the Queensland vs Tah's parochialism they've been great with my analysis work, i guess because i'm English they see me as impartial. Having said that I've found a lot of the feature writers that have come on board over the last year or so seem to be genuinely honest and critical of the real problems within the Aussie camp/systems - Matts break down of the issues in Aussie rugby a couple of months ago was excellent and they are really trying to step up on the fair and objective analysis front.
Just my opinion mind.
- Joined
- May 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,708
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Back in 2010/11, they weren't that flash. Lots of their analysis of the breakdown in NZ v Aussie matches boiled down to little more than "Pocock = angel, McCaw = devil". There was a lot of "woe-is-me" whining about how referees were biased against them and gave them more yellow cards than other teams (remember the Draw Mitchell affair - YC + YC = RC). Perhaps they had learned that particular whinge from KEO.
However, I agree they are a lot better these days. Pascops' analysis of the way the All Blacks dismantled the Wallabies at Sydney in 2013 was one of the best pieces of unbiased analysis I have seen from them.
