11/23/24
March 11, 2007
Choking allegations : and referee apologies mean that all the talk about Saturday's Six Nations competition is more about the controversy rather than the rugby.
Fence, by my reckoning, we need to beat Italy by five more points than France beat Scotland (and hope that England don't beat Wales by 40 odd), is that right? I'm suddenly rather pleased that I'm going to be at home next weekend. It could turn into a very messy night out on Saturday. I too have to confess to having bellowed "Come on, England!" at the TV twice yesterday.
posted by JJ at 03:34 AM on March 12, 2007
Yup, 5 more points to win it. And although we'll be missing Paulie I'm pretty sure we can do it (fingers crossed, touch wood etc etc). Only problem is that France have the advantage in that they play after us so they'll know exactly what they have to do against the Scots. As for the fact that you bellowed "come on England!", well I was almost singing "Swing Low" First time for everything I guess :)
posted by Fence at 03:58 AM on March 12, 2007
I don't think that's a problem. I think the French are at their worst when they have something specific in mind. I think you saw that yesterday a bit. They pretty much knew that to beat England yesterday was to win the Grand Slam and that really only a loss would open the door in any viable way for Ireland (and, I suppose, England). To some extent, they choked. If we can beat Italy by, say, 15 points, France go into the Scotland game knowing they need to win by at least 11 and are, in my opinion, more likely to choke than if they had to just go and play and were not able to think about what it meant (which is the position they would be in if they were playing first). Of course, the first part of that equation is no certainty - least of all that we beat Italy, let alone beat them by a margin. They have proved for several seasons now that they aren't the whipping boys by any stretch. I think Ireland need to (and will) go into the game with the attitude that the only objective is to win, and let the margin take care of itself. If you need to turn up the heat in the last five or ten minutes, then do so, but if they go out there trying to score try after try from the start, they risk losing the match.
posted by JJ at 06:07 AM on March 12, 2007
I certainly saw Italy's win over Wales. Italy's pack is as good as anyone's in the competition, while Wales have probably the worst. Wales were always going to struggle to get enough possession. Before I claim to have amazing prediction skills, I should point out that I did not see Scotland nearly beating Ireland, and I thought France would absolutely mullah England. It's good for the tournament that things seem so even. It's not so many years ago that there were genuine fears that England and France would perpetually be on top in the professional era. Ireland and Wales have proved that is not the case, but Scotland and Italy still have to improve. If there's anybody who will be pleased about how this Six Nations has gone, it will be New Zealand. Not one European team looks capable of challenging the All Blacks. I thought before the tournament started that Ireland and France could possibly do it, but they will have to massively raise their game in the World Cup to do so.
posted by salmacis at 11:33 AM on March 12, 2007
And there's the rub for sure, sal. I was thinking just that last night when the commentators on the BBC were rubbing their hands about how exciting it all was now - ignoring the fact that All Blacks will be rubbing their hands thinking that no one in the northern hemisphere looks likely to challenge them in the RWC.
posted by JJ at 11:39 AM on March 12, 2007
Although to be fair, nobody in the southern hemisphere looks likely to challenge them either..
posted by salmacis at 02:15 PM on March 12, 2007
*L* Also true, unless they let the All Black reserves enter as a separate team.
posted by JJ at 03:12 PM on March 12, 2007
I think I can get a sense of it from the comments above, but does anyone want to chime in with a quick run-down of who is still in the running to win it and under what scenarios? I'd also take a link -- I just can't seem to find anything.
posted by holden at 05:04 PM on March 12, 2007
No one looks like challenging the All Blacks, no. But there's always the French. No one knows what the hell they're going to do in any given game.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 05:13 PM on March 12, 2007
The All Blacks will win the World Cup. Unless they stick to their usual form of messing up at some stage. The rest is still up in the air. France can be great, but then you see the team that played against England. Australia and South Africa are always dangerous, but who knows. Ireland are in with the vaguest of chances. But somewhat similar to the French it depends on who turns up, the players or the fumblers. And of course on how long we can go without injury. As for the Six Nations, I'm going to go with my heart and say Ireland can do it. Paul O'Connell is a big loss against a pack like the Italians, but they may be missing one or two keys players, and seeing as they've achieved their aims of winning two matches they might be a little switched off for the next match. I can't see Scotland beating France, but then again, I couldn't see England winning either, and look what happened there. A differential of four points is all that is between Ireland and France, who knows what'll happen, but it will be a fantastic St. Patrick's if we win the Championship
posted by Fence at 04:30 AM on March 13, 2007
holden - you mean the 6 Nations? If so, the table looks like this. Four teams can still win in theory, but the odds are pretty slim on two of them. 1. Italy can win if they beat Ireland by at least 68 points, and then France lose to Scotland and England lose to Wales. 2. England can win if they beat Wales by at least 30 more points than France beat Scotland, and by at least 26 more points than Ireland beat Italy. 3. Ireland can win if they beat Italy by at least 5 more points than France beat Scotland, as long as England don't beat Wales by at least 26 more points (than Ireland beat Italy). 4. France can win if they beat Scotland and ireland fail to beat Italy by at least 5 more points and England fail to beat Wales by at least 30 more points. Confused? Don't blame you. Mathematics aside, either France or Ireland will win. I would have France as slight favourites because they have a slight (4 point) lead in terms of points difference and they are playing at home. Ireland and Italy play first (at 13:30 UK time in Rome), so we'll know much more after that game. France play Scotland (at 15:30 UK time in Paris) and by the time that one finishes, we'll know which of Ireland or France will be most annoyed if England can beat Wales by 40-odd points (at 17:30 UK time in Cardif). I think they should go back to the old system that permitted the thing to be shared. If you meant the World Cup, then everyone still has a chance - it doesn't kick off until 7th September!
posted by JJ at 08:41 AM on March 13, 2007
Why don't they use the same scoring system that the Premiership and the Magners League (and I think the Heineken Cup groups) use? I.e., 4 points for a win, 1 point for 4 tries, and 1 point for losing by 7 points or less. How would the table look with that scoring system? It does seem patently unfair to decide the Championship on points difference if the final round matches don't kick off at the same time.
posted by salmacis at 11:41 AM on March 13, 2007
*sigh* And then I check out JJ's link above and find the answer to my question..
posted by salmacis at 11:46 AM on March 13, 2007
holden - you mean the 6 Nations? JJ -- yes, that's what I meant. Who's still in it to win the 6 Nations (overall title, I guess?)? Thanks for the links, the second was particularly helpful. One additional question. Is the tie-breaker based solely on point differential? It seems like results in teams' head-to-head matches should factor in, but perhaps that approach reflects a more American perspective (head-to-head record is typically the first or second tie-breaker in a number of American sports). I guess under that approach, France would have a leg up on Ireland as a result of defeating the Irish in the head-to-head match-up.
posted by holden at 02:58 PM on March 13, 2007
Yeah - the tie breaker goes first on point differential. If that is tied, then they go to number of tries scored. At the moment, France and Ireland have nine each, England have eight and Italy have seven. I like your idea (holden) for having the head to head encounter be a factor. I also like the idea salmacis put forward that was also in the BBC article of having a bonus point for not losing by too much or for scoring a load of tries. Incentives for the winning and the losing teams in the closing minutes. I think one thing only is for sure - I don't like how they do it now! And, as an Irishman, may like it even less after Saturday's games!
posted by JJ at 11:55 AM on March 14, 2007
From my perspective as a Kiwi the dangerous northern teams are: France Ireland ... And yeah, that's about it. England are a bloody shambles, alternating between a guy who is never going to be fit enough to play top-level rugby again, and a guy who's at retirement age (and it says a lot about the pitiful state of English rugby that Mike Catt is their best bet at the moment). Perhaps English rugby should spend less money on importing has-beens from the Southern Hemisphere and more on developing local players. Oh, that's right. That would require the clubs to give a fuck about anything except the clubs. I'm pleased to see Italy stepping up with home and away wins.
posted by rodgerd at 04:06 PM on March 17, 2007
But the results this weekend are what make the Six Nations such a great competition. Who'd've thought Ireland would almost be beaten by Scotland? Who saw Italy's win? And who would have put any money on England today. First time I've ever cheered on the boys in white, and am I ever delighted. Roll on St. Patrick's day and the Championship deciders.