A bit early perhaps but it’s just over a month until the Rugby World Cup starts so I figured I’d get a thread going. Wikipedia has a reasonable summary here. Here’s my take on the teams and their likely fates:
Five teams in each pool, top two go through to the quarterfinals. Listed by my prediction of final rankings.
Group A New Zealand - always a contender but haven’t made the final since 1995 and haven’t won since 1987! Have an embarassment of riches in the outside backs but look a bit brittle at half-back and first-five. If Carter plays well and isn’t injured have a great chance to win at home. France - very hard to pick how they’ll go - second in this year’s six nations but have done reasonably well in past tournaments. I think they’ll make the semis. Canada - came second in the Churchill Cup this year (behind England B) strong chance of third in the group but won’t progress. Tonga - will play some physical rugby but lack the talent and forward power to upset the big two in the group, might pick up a win against Canada or Japan. Japan - entertaining and inventive at times but lack the players to go through in a fairly tough group.
Group B England - the reigning Six Nations champions, likely to play France in the quarters and lose. Argentina - can be a threat at times but will probably be knocked out by the All Blacks in the quarters. Scotland - poor of late but should be able to beat the remaining two teams in the group. Romania - haven’t seen them play for a long time, memories of a pedestrian team with a decent forward pack but not much out wide. Georgia - at their third world cup in a row, may get a win against Romania.
Group C Australia - have IMHO the best half-back/first five combination around at the moment, a good chance to make the final if they aren’t racked by injuries. Ireland - solid performers will make the quarters and then lose to the Springboks. United States - yes the US has a rugby team, no they won’t get out of their group but I think they’ll beat Italy and Russia. Italy - more than a decade in the Six Nations hasnb’t lifted them out of the second tier, may go close to losing against Russia. Russia - a team I’ve never seen, but unlikely to make much of an impact.
Group D South Africa - once the 21 ‘injured’ players return the Springboks will make the semis and then face Australia. Fiji - will win their last game against Wales (who have an awful draw) and sneak into the quarters. Wales - opening matches against South Africa and then Samoa will take their toll. Samoa - might qualify if they beat Wales in their second match, recently beat Australia at home. Namibia - will be crushed by all the other teams in the group.
The international game. It really is an impressive thing.
One of the great ironies in sport is that North America is largely a Rugby wilderness, and yet both Canadian and American Football can trace their genesis directly to Rugby.
I’m an Aussie but I have to say, when I watched the Wallabies play England at Twickenham last November, I was just blown away with how incredibly athletic every member of the England squad looks these days… they really do look like most of our Rugby League players down here nowadays… unbelievably lean and athletic and professional.
That being said, that’s largely true now of NZ, AUS, and S.A. too… slightly less so of the French.
My money’s on a semi final quartet of England, New Zealand, Australia, and South Africa - in no particular order.
Given how wonderfully the Kiwis can play the game - seemingly on a plane that no one else can match at times - I think they deserve a win at long last.
Of course, if that happens, we can assume they’ll become unbearably monotonous for the next 4 years. They can hardly talk about anything at all these days except Rugby, and that’s even without winning the World Cup for 20+ years!
I don’t disagree very much at all with Lisiate’s projections to be honest.
My thoughts are:
NZ will win. I know we all say this everytime the RWC rolls around but this time, they will not drop the ball (so to speak). They are at home, they’re clearly the best side in the world and they have a relatively easy path to the semis, as France are no great shakes at the moment and they’ll be matched up with the runner up of Group B in their quarter. If it’s Scotland or Argentina, they’ll probably stick 40-50 points across them. France will qualify but they’re not much good at the minute and i don’t reckon they will be until Lievremont is replaced and they start to play more to their traditional strengths.
Group B could wind up with a situation where Scotland beat England and lose to Argentina, whilst England beat Argentina thus giving all the teams the same record. I think England should win the group, but the Scots will be a tough match up (they ran England close in the 6N, although England were very poor). I’d like to see the Scots go home early - but that could be the fact that I grew up just on the English side of the Scottish border. No one likes their neighbours. If England avoid coming second in the group, I reckon they will probably beat France in the quarters before getting thrashed in the semis. Whoever comes 2nd will have lost a game they could have won. Whoever they may be will be hammered by the All Blacks.
Group C: I reckon it will go as Lisiate suggests, except Italy will beat the US. Russia could be a major surprise - at least for their standard, if not for their victories (they will probably go home with 0 wins with an chance of 1). I think they may run Italy close (though they lost to Italy B in the recent Churchill Cup, so they are unlikely to win that game) and even hang in there with Ireland for a bit before getting blown away. There is a chance that they could beat the USA (they lost to them by a converted try in the Churchill Cup in a cracking game). Difficult to see passed Australia winning the group with Ireland 2nd.
Wales could be in some serious shit. I suspect that they are a tad under-rated, as their first choice pack is pretty decent and will not be bullied plus they have some danger in the backs (though a lot will depend on the service from the scrum half - a major failing in the recent 6N). The order of their games is horrendous though, with SA first up then Samoa, where they will have to trot the first team line up out again, as if they lose the game, they’re basically out. Samoa just beat an under-strength Australia and Fiji knocked Wales out in 2007 in the best game of the tournament. This group is not to be taken lightly. About the only certainties are that South Africa will top it and Namibia will finish bottom.
I reckon it will be an Australia v New Zealand final. NZ will win by about 15 points.
From an Irish perspective our group should be very interesting. On paper yeah its the Wallabies, then us, then the Italians. But we seem to always struggle against the Italians, Australia struggle against us (some of the time at least) and the current head coach of the US was our last coach and is one of the most polarising people in the history of Irish rugby.
Hard to get away from the All Blacks winning this, given home advantage. If the French manage to beat them in the group stages thought and send them into the other side of the draw I’m rooting for Italy in our last group match!
I had some serious concerns about the wallabies leading into this year, but the performance of the Reds this year has me thinking that they are a genuine shot. If the pack can hold it’s oWn in the scrum, and they start to pick Higginbotham to start, they have 5 world class game breakers in the back line to do some real damage - Genia, Cooper, O’Conner,Beale and Ioane. Pick a couple of reasonable defenders in the centers and they are looking good.
Of course if the ABs finally get over their choking habit, I won’t be too disappointed. That’s because Brad Thorne has probably the greatest record in both codes, and deserves a world cup to go with his extensive achievements.
I had the pleasure of watching the whole GPS First Fifteen season this year in South East Queensland - and for those who aren’t aware that’s the elite schoolboy level down here in my region where a lot of professional players are culled from.
I saw this one guy playing for the opposition - my team is The Southport School - and let me tell ya, this guy had S.T.A.R. just dripping from him in every way.
He was a flyhalf, and for those of you who know what I mean, this is no crap, he was Wally Lewis dripping all over. Literally a 17 year old Captain’s Captain, just dripping with ungodly amounts of talent coming out the wazoo.
He slotted a penalty place kick, with a two step run up, from 40 meters out into a 20 knot head wind. He set up tries with deep chip and chases from 40 meters out. He setup tries with cut out passes to his outside centres or wingers from 30 meters out. He’d run into his forward’s huddle and scream at 'em, winding 'em up with his next 6 plays in advance - he’d be screaming for the ball to his half back just revving the game to maximum pace because he’d already had the vision to set up the play he knew was gonna score.
Every single connosieur of the game who was with me that day watched this kid in disbelief.
He played for Brisbane State High. Don’t know what his name was, but man… truly… Wally Lewis all over. He could smash guys in tackles. He was fast, really fast and he could just do magic, any time he wanted… torpedoes, drop punts, drop goals, 25 meter passes… place kicks… everything.
Oh, I just wanted to add that I’m 49 years old. I was there with all the other dads, if you know what I mean… I wasn’t one of the school kids playing on the day!
One more thing… the referees… Holy Fuck they can ruin a game by being too pedantic.
I wish, more than I can put into words, that we could design a computerised hologram “perfect referee” that is identical for every team in every match. One who is studiously fair to both sides, at all times, above all else.
The Southport School eh, flash, (We went past on a river cruise last year while visiting some friends in Aussie). Reminded me of King’s and Christ’s colleges here in NZ.)
A lot of the rugby fans I know follow college and club grade rugby here, as the local Super rugby franchise has no real local connection and it’s fun watching the young up and comers for free rather than somewhat jaded professionals in yet another meaningless contest. It’s become so popular that the Rugby Channel even screens one or two first XV matches a week.
I agree that refereeing is a real issue in rugby, and has been for some time - the inconsistencies between referees and the frankly byzantine rules at the breakdown are a real barrier to casual fans. I’ve no doubt that this year’s tournament will throw up the usual number of howlers. I do have some sympathy for the refs though - they have a huge job with a vast number of rules to administer on the fly and the pace of the modern game just keeps getting faster.
I must confess as an All Blacks fan I am pleased to see the general consensus here that they’re the favourites, while at the same time worrying that 2011 might go down as yet another year of diappointment. Only five weeks to go before we start to see how things will shape up.
That is no small reason why Rugby League is so popular here in Australia. Non Rugby folks constantly make the comment that they can understand Rugby League referee decisions much, much easier than Union decisions. In short, a pedantic Rugby Union referee can ruin a Test Match, really ruin it. Seemingly, that’s a harder thing to do in Rugby League.
I have always cheered for the All Blacks on their European tours down through the years. I find myself sitting on the couch and screaming “Take that Northern Hemisphere. THAT is how you play Rugby the right way! Take that, too!”
They say that Australia punches above it’s weight in sport on the world stage, but on a per capita basis, New Zealand does too, even more so. And that’s great. Ecxept that 150,000 of your countrymen live in my home town nowadays and the gloating can get a little teeny bit irritating at times.
Heh, the old kiwi diaspora. Higher wages and open entry mean that we’re basically your Poland. I’d never seen a vehicle with a stick on silver fern until going to Queensland - I don’t think you can even get such a thing here in NZ.
Yes there’s no doubt that the stripped down rules of rugby league make for a simpler game - by cutting out rucks, mauls and lineouts most of the problem areas are gone. But to my mind it removes too much of the complexities of the game. Don’t get me wrong - I like watching a good game of league but it all seems a bit one-dimensional at times.
Hey, don’t get me wrong. I would LOVE to see the line out reintroduced into Rugby League. Given that Rugby League scrums aren’t contested scrums anymore, their primary purpose is to temporarily remove 6 players per side out of the game, which is what a line out does too. It would certainly add a much needed extra dimension to the 13 man game.
But that being said, the 15 man game could certainly do with some clearer direction in the rucks and breakdowns. Interestingly however, the two games would start getting close again! And perhaps there are some vested interests who might object, moving forward.
As for the Kiwi Diaspora? Yes, that is true, isn’t it? I’m born here in Southport and it really has been quite an invasion over the past 30 years. I’m pretty sure the figure is 1 in 4 residents are Kiwi born nowadays, which is an extraordinary statistic - but by and large your countrymen are hard working and very good citizens.
Presumably a line out would present a greater opportunity for the team that puts it out to regain possession.. how often do line outs go against the throw? Also in league, there’s no need to clear the line out, it’s just a matter of getting the ball.
My guess would be that at set’s end, 30m-50m out, there’d be a lot more booting it sideways into touch rather than keeping it in play. Big incentive to give up a few metres to get a repeat set 20-30m out.
So the result might be more dull kicks, followed by a stoppage for the lineout, and then possibly another stoppage as the opportunity for more penalties in presented.
Actually, my understanding is that in Union unless you’re given a penalty kick for touch, all kicks for the touchline result in a lineout which is fed by the non kicking team. That is the way I would introduce the lineout back into Rugby League - with the caveat being that a penalty kick for touch would still result in the existing League tap and go. My thinking being that a lineout is easier to police than a scrum, but it’s still a possible win against the feed, especially if you’ve got a good lineout.
Interestingly, my research into the history of American football shows the Rugby lineout was a traditional part of American college football in the 1850’s etc, however due to poor grounds and muddy sidelines etc the lineout was moved to the centre of the field sometime in the 1880’s and the American “line of scrimmage” was born as we know it today.
That was my reservation. If you have a useful chance at a repeat set, just booting it out sideways (if field position allows) will become a viable, but dull option.
Neither Rugby code really rewards that sort of play however. It’s all about repeat sets of phases whilst also maintaining forward momentum and pressure - in both codes. The moment you’re not on the go forward, even if you do have posession, the momentum swings the other way.
New Zealand are wonderful exponents of the relentless momentum game in the Union code. It’s the main reason why counter-attack is so hard against the All Blacks.
If we introduced the lineout back into the 13 man code as per my proposed rule change, I personally could’t see the coaching staff opting for a sideways kick to touch at the end of a set of six, in the hope that they might win against the throw in, when the far safer option would be a roost deep into the opposition corner, again in the hope that they might win against the throw in. The former is clearly too risky, given that they’d be giving up possession without territorial gain if they don’t win against the throw in, which is a great probability. Whereas the latter would still net a territorial gain even if they don’t win the line out.
A lineout, in my view, is easier to police than a scrum - which is why contested scrums were essentially made redundant in the 13 man game. To be fair, there are many MANY purists who bemoan that particular policy - after all, a scrum really is a team within a team - but the core result is still the same regardless… 6 men per side are temporarily removed from the field of play by condensing them into one small spot. But the beauty of the unpredictability of the contest was lost to the 13 man game, and re-introducing the lineout would certainly add that “team within a team” to the contest which would be a good thing I rather think - especially if the one man throw in also came with it too!
I suspect that the League boys would probably tweak the line out rules just to “distinguish” the 13 man lineout from the 15 man lineout however.
I must say, I do like the 10 meter gap between the advantage line and the defensive line in the 13 man game, but I do prefer the opportunities to contest the ball more often in the 15 man game. This particular discussion rams home for me how close the two codes still are.
It would be an interesting thing to see what game would result by integrating the best of both worlds. As it is, the 13 man game is closer to the precise discipline of American football due to the lack of contested ball. Which is why it has a much narrower specific skill set, augmented by a slightly superior physical regime (in my humble opinion).
Whereas the 15 man game has the international game, the World Cup.
England’s team for their first warm up game (against Wales on Saturday) has just been announced.
England team to play Wales: D Armitage (London Irish); M Banahan (Bath Rugby), M Tuilagi (Leicester Tigers), R Flutey (London Wasps), M Cueto (Sale Sharks); J Wilkinson (Toulon), D Care (Harlequins); A Corbisiero (London Irish), D Hartley (Northampton Saints), M Stevens (Saracens), S Shaw (Unattached), T Palmer (Stade Francais), T Croft (Leicester Tigers), L Moody (Bath Rugby, capt), J Haskell (Ricoh Black Rams). Replacements: L Mears (Bath Rugby), D Wilson (Bath Rugby), M Botha (Saracens), T Wood (Northampton Saints), R Wigglesworth (Saracens), C Hodgson (Saracens), C Sharples (Gloucester Rugby).
In my view, there are a couple of guys there that need to have big games. Flutey, for one, spent much of last year injured, but when on form and fit exhibits more invention than Tindall and Hape did combined in the 6N. Manu Tuilagi outside him (a fine English name - though to be fair, he’s been over here since he was about 9 when his older brother brought the whole family over when he started playing for Leicester) is probably a fringe candidate, though was explosive at club level last year. And Matt “Sniffer” Stevens - back from his cocaine ban - could do with a big game too - prop is one of the areas England are reasonably strong and unseating the current occupiers will be tricky.
The rest of the starting XV will probably make New Zealand, I would have thought (though ideally I’d like them not to take Bananaman). Wigglesworth and Sharples probably won’t make the plane from the guys on the bench. A couple more of the guys in this XXIII will not make the plane - but it will probably be because they play badly on Saturday/are outplayed by their rivals for the positions.
Big reward for repeat sets in league, a major factor in fact. Particularly if in the opposition half.
As it stands now, if you end your set approx 30m out, the most used option is a high kick. Not unproductive, but will usually lead to the opposition starting their six 10-15m out.
But if you just hammer it out sideways at the 20, not much of territory loss but a huge gain if you can win the line out. Like the advantage of a 40/20, only to a lesser extent.
But my whole thesis hinges on how often the line out might go with the throw, which would have to be seen.
Anyway I’ve rather naughtily dragged this thread off-topic.
Just to be clear, I’m suggesting that the defending side gets the throw in, not the attacking side who kicks the ball into touch. If we are clear on that, and if we’re on the same page, I agree with you there on the bolded part. I suspect the answer lays in the fact that very few Union teams employ a sideways kick for touch for much the same reason - namely, the high risk of not winning the throw in is outweighed by the low risk of kicking for touch closer to the corner.
It should not be overlooked that Wally Lewis (Australian Rugby League Captain 1983-1989) was a fantastic exponent of kicking for touch with a high speed grubber, back in the days of contested scrums. The chance of a win against the feed made the grubber kick for touch much more common than it is today, and that’s what I’d love to see return via the line out, but not via the scrum.
Well to be fair, I’ve helped you a lot too! Given that the RWC is still a fair ways off, it’s not too inappropriate for now I reckon. But getting closer to the tournament it would be.
Given that the RWC is still a fair ways off, it’s not too inappropriate for now I reckon. But getting closer to the tournament it would be.