12/21/24
October 27, 2003
England scrape victory: in the rugby world cup, but they didn't look at all convincing against minnows Samoa. Meanwhile, the tournament is progressing much as people expected - the teams from the tri-nations and six nations flattening the minor nations in their path. Australia managed a record breaking 142-0 against poor Namibia. Is it time for a rethink of the rugby world cup format?
What a top-notch first try by Samoa! Got me on my feet straight away and set up a great contest. Our defense were nowhere near ready for the level of their running game and they gave us a nasty shock. It's a shame that everyone is already talking about how poor England were, and not recognising that it was probably the greatest game those guys have ever played. Just hope Fanaloa (sp?) is fit again for the match against the boks. Samoa could have easily beaten us if he hadn't taken a knock in the first half, and if they start like that again, then South Africa won't be able to stop them either. Personally, this can only make England stronger. We needed a bloody good shakeup as our defense hasn't had any real work to do before this match. As I said to my g/f when we were 10-0 down after not touching the ball in the first fifteen minutes: stop worrying ... if we don't get a game against these guys, how can we possibly be ready for Australia or the All Blacks in the final? We already know we can stuff the likes of Wales and France, but we have some work to do if we don't want to give this trophy away in the last game, and it IS still within our grasp. We've got three games now to get our shape right, and then we can go into the final with the same sort of form that allowed us to stuff the antipodean nations on their home territory just before this competition. I know it will be tough, but as long as the Aussie press keeps writing us off I believe we will come through it ok.
posted by walrus at 05:59 AM on October 27, 2003
Do we know that we can stuff France? I seem to remember France beating England in the 6 Nations to win the Grand Slam only a couple of years ago. Based on how France and England have played so far, if they do indeed meet in the semis, I would fancy France to win.
posted by salmacis at 06:08 AM on October 27, 2003
Also, USA have finally won a game, beating the Cherry Blossoms(!) of Japan.
posted by salmacis at 06:08 AM on October 27, 2003
"Do we know that we can stuff France?" Oh yes I think we do.
posted by walrus at 06:10 AM on October 27, 2003
France likes to be stuffed, I have it on very good authority. But lets not pass so quickly over that US victory. Woohoo, finally off the zero-for-forever schneid!!! Go USA!
posted by billsaysthis at 12:40 PM on October 27, 2003
Walrus: You know, there was a team that was a shoo-in for the 1999 World Cup that thought that way, too. They just had to, you know, turn up to get through France. You may wish to glance at some tapes to see how that one turned out. In face, France have a been a great spoiler in the World Cups. Treat them lightly at your own peril - though I doubt the Woodward and Johnson show are as silly as some of their fans. "Stuffing the antipodeans"? You must have missed that win scored through the grace of crappy goalkicking. And in that vein, interesting to see Wilkinson lose it in a minor way with his kicking game. Missing 11 points must count as a very bad day by his high standards. As far as angst over the minor nations goes, let's get real. In WC 99, we had multiple 100+ point romps against all manner of teams, including Tonga. This time round, we've thus far had only one 100 pointer, and we're almost at the end of pool play. Moreover, many minor teams - I'm looking at Georgia, Japan and the USA in particular - have improved dramatically. But for seeding, we'd see more up and comers in the semis; a seeding that practically ensures Wales get through but shuts teams like Argentina and (likely) Samoa out is a joke, and it's not hard to see why people wonder if the Home Nations dominated IRB are unfairly organising the pools. I like the idea of a plate fought by the 3rd and 4th place getters in each pool, though. I doubt you'll see a move back to a 16-team Cup; it would be construed as a loss of face. Finally, something needs to be done about French and English clubs refusing to release players; literally dozens of the best players theoretically available to countries like Fiji, Tonga, and Georgia have been forced to do without their best. Match to look forward to: South Africa v Samoa. Samoa shooting for a chance at the quarters and a crack at the All Blacks (something which coaches Boe and Jones have a chip on their shoulders about). South Africa desperate to remain part of the "big five" club; a loss here would confirm their fans' worst fears they're going the way of Wales.
posted by rodgerd at 04:16 PM on October 27, 2003
I don't think the groups themselves were too unbalanced. Wales had probably the easiest group, but had to get past Italy, who have beaten them in the 6 Nations. By that measure, you could also argue that Italy had a comparitively easy draw. Argentina had to beat Ireland, and historically, that matchup can go either way. No, the real problem was with the scheduling, which meant that Argentina had played their 4 games before England had played their third. A 16 team world cup would not be a bad move - we'd be unlikely to see the sort of huge scores which are an embarrassment. However, I'd only support this move if there was a parallel 16 team competition for those teams ranked 17-32. After the group stages, we then have 4 set of quarter finals. Of course this would require some funding from the IRB, so it will never happen...
posted by salmacis at 02:50 AM on October 28, 2003
rodgerd: I'm fully aware of how France CAN play. But we won't let them. I'm supremely confident about this, and fully prepared to eat any amount of crow a l'orange if I'm wrong. If Wilkinson has all his bad days in the group matches, I will be perfectly happy with that. Write him off at your own risk though. We beat both the antipodean teams on their own territory within a month, just before this tournament. It's very rare to administer a complete thrashing, but they won't have liked it, I can tell you. It proves that we can do it, and we definitely get bragging rights for it, even if "stuff" was perhaps too strong a verb. I agree we have looked poor in the three games so far, but that gives us an opportunity to improve. And I realise that I'm being bullish, but we're the only northern hemisphere team to have a chance to win this in living memory, so we're going to have to do it. We have the best squad we have ever had and can play any game of rugby thrown at us. We will sort out the basics before the big matches, and we'll get our defence pumped up so that they aren't so anonymous as they were for the first twenty minutes of the Samoa game. I can't believe how dire our defence has been. That's one of the things you could always be proud of with our squad in previous cups! But we will get it back working again: I'm confident in Clive Woodwards ability to motivate these players. They just have to stop thinking they're superstars and remember how to play rugby. Get the hell out of Wilkinsons channels for a start ... Australia or New Zealand have to be slight favourites to beat us in the final based on the performances in this tournament so far (although neither have met strong opposition yet and we beat them both pre-tournament), but if you look at how our team steps up the pace late in the game against strong opposition, then you have to admit that if we are within fifteen points with ten or twenty minutes to go then it's going to be very tight.
posted by walrus at 04:36 AM on October 28, 2003
I hope England are so busy looking forward to beating the All Blacks in the final that they fail to notice (until it's too late) that Ireland have beaten France in the quarters and are about shove your sweet chariot somewhere it doesn't fit in the semis. Idle fantasy aside - it would be a travesty if England don't win this Rugby World Cup - but then, it would have been a travesty if the England football team had failed to qualify for the 1994 Football World Cup... oh wait
posted by JJ at 10:03 AM on October 28, 2003
Heh. Had that coming eh?
posted by walrus at 11:30 AM on October 28, 2003
By the way, I've been following international rugby union for over twenty years now, and this is the first England team about which I've been able to say, hand on heart, that we COULD do it. As a football (soccer) fan, banter is a part of how I approach watching sport, but that doesn't mean I don't respect other teams deep down, so I apologise for any offence I've caused here, or if I've made myself look "silly". I want this so badly that I can't help being bullish. On their day, Ireland can knock any team for six and France too, but I believe this will be our day. If I'm wrong I'll get over it and cheer on whichever northern hemisphere team is in the final. Maybe not quite so loudly as I would cheer England, mind. If a southern hemisphere beats us with a good game I will even enjoy their tries as they tear my heart out. But what is the point of watching sport if you can't feel strongly about it? Good luck to all, and may the best team win.
posted by walrus at 12:03 PM on October 28, 2003
God forbid Ireland should get to the final. The only team that can stop the All Blacks winning the World Cup is England. Whether or not they will largely depends on whether or not Clive Woodward can get a discount on 15 labotamies before the final. The only team in the tournament that can beat England is England.
posted by JJ at 05:09 AM on October 29, 2003
England are a little too reliant on Jonny Wilkinson for my liking - if he has an off game or gets injured, we could be out before we know it.
posted by BigCalm at 08:28 AM on October 29, 2003
Barry John, David Campese and Jonny Wilkinson are standing before God at the throne of Heaven. God looks at them and says; "before granting you a place at my side, I must first ask you what you believe in." Addressing Barry John first he asks, "what do you believe?" Barry John looks God in the eye and states passionately, "I believe Rugby to be the food of life in Wales. Nothing else brings such unbridled joy to so many people from the Valleys and Vales. I have devoted my life to bring such joy to people who stood on the terraces of the Cardiff Arms Park supporting their country." God looks up and offers Barry John the seat to his left. He then turns to David Campese , "and you, David , what do you believe?" Campo stands tall and proud, "I believe courage, honour, passion and flair are the fundamentals to life and I've spent my whole playing career providing a living embodiment of these traits." God, moved by the passion of the speech offers Campese the seat to his right. Finally, he turns to Jonny Wilkinson , "and you, Jonny , what do you believe?" "I believe" says Jonny "you're sitting in my seat."
posted by BigCalm at 08:29 AM on October 29, 2003
LOL
posted by billsaysthis at 12:38 PM on October 29, 2003
Now the big southern teams have suffered a bit of heart arrythmyia too, does this mean that when Hill is fit we'll be in with a chance again by the way? Nice job Ireland and Wales ...
posted by walrus at 12:20 PM on November 05, 2003
It was a thoroughly enjoyable weekend of rugby. I particularly enjoyed the Ireland-Argentina match. Samoa did brilliantly. I am looking forward to their game with South Africa. On what I've seen so far, the Boks will be favourites, but should be worried. I think there should be some changes to the format. For a start, there should be only four teams in each group. This would enable every team to play on the same day, eliminating the sceduling concerns of Italy and Argentina. Secondly, there should be Plate and Shield competitions in the knockout stages. It's good for teams like Georgia to get to play two of the best teams in the world, but it would be even better if they had the opportunity to go and win something. The likes of Namibia will not improve by playing Australia, but games against the likes of Uruguay would be beneficial to both countries.