Decisions like that bite you in the end. He has a contract until 2020, would you keep him? NZ kept Graham Henry after the 2007 disaster and it paid dividends.
Rugby World Cup 2015 | Reminiscing Thread
- Thread starter unchanged_lineup
- Start date
Having my money on Argentina going all the way with the manner this World Cup is panning out. You heard it here first.
Yup. But this is the Internet and a football forum.
Difficult one, we've played some really good stuff but I don't like this soft centre we seem to have developed.
England played there best rugby in the warm up games, talk about peaking too soon, i couldnt be bothered about them beating us in that warm up game it was only a tune up for the cup and with our group you could count it as a big tune up period.
Yeah but we're not a rugby country.
On a serious note, England aren't bad, they lack direction, they lack a solid gameplan, they have extremely talented players and with the right manager they should be able to do great things.
The current australian team is based on Jack White and Michael Cheika Super Rugby teams, they are just repeating what they do with their Franchises and the Brumbies and Waratahs are very good teams. England and France need to follow that example.
The current australian team is based on Jack White and Michael Cheika Super Rugby teams, they are just repeating what they do with their Franchises and the Brumbies and Waratahs are very good teams. England and France need to follow that example.
Didnt realize this until now, but whoever comes 2nd in Group d faces the All Blacks..Fra-Ire will be a one hell of a game then.
True, also if Tualgi didn't be a twat, Lawes and Billy V weren't injured. Even if we didn't mess up a 10 point lead vs a week Wales side then who knows, anyway everyone is playing for 2nd, nobody is beating the All Blacks anytime soon
The All Blacks have won ZERO world cups away from home...its knockout rugby, you just need to show up on the day.
Agree with that.
The problem is that it's much easier for a national side to follow their club models when there are 4/5 sides. England has so many teams wth such a variety of styles that it's difficult to merge with one consistent gameplan.
There is a good group of players there although they need to find a back row which can give those backs a proper platform.
I still think Australia are going to do it.
They look quite assured ..but no team has won the Southern Hemisphere title and won the world cup in the same year...but silly omens aside, they are a very good side.
So basically, you're only here in this Rugby thread because England lost, not as a rugby fan … which is kinda my point!!
Don't know what happened to change Lancaster's mind. Scoring the most try's in 6N to this, he abandoned his attacking Rugby for this. His squad was a mystery to begin with and his selections during the World Cup have been even worse. Dropping Ford for Farrell, moving Joseph to wing, playing Barritt and Burgess at centre. It's bad call after bad call and I haven't even got to the forwards. I was a fan of Lancaster but this World Cup has been a disaster for him.
Ah I am "fan" but, I wouldn't follow it as much as football or feel passionate about it like music.
I enjoy it when it's on
Aussies were just better at everything today.
They were impressive.
Sadly the rugby World Cup is a poorer place without us as hosts but we deserved what we got.
We play far too cautiously until we are right up against it and we pay for it. I've seen us play the same way since we won it in 2003. We've not really developed since then. And yet we've actually got the players to play a much better brand of rugby..
We try and play through the forwards until we are in need of tries. Problem is we don't quite dominate in the forwards like we used to. In fact tonight Australia owned us!
The manager has to go it's quite simple. The team is much better than what they've shown in this World Cup. There are some really good promising players in this squad and on the fringes who need a manager who will get the best out of them.
Farrell has been a good player for England and has a role as back up but the number 10 jersey belongs to Ford. Barritt at 12 has had his day. The Burgess experiment hasn't been a disaster but it's not been great! And it's held back the talent of Trinder. Why on earth was Lawes dropped today? OK he's not been amazing but he's a hugely talented player. And the RFU need to look again at this rule to not select players playing in France. The Armitage brothers are too good to be left out.
We play far too cautiously until we are right up against it and we pay for it. I've seen us play the same way since we won it in 2003. We've not really developed since then. And yet we've actually got the players to play a much better brand of rugby..
We try and play through the forwards until we are in need of tries. Problem is we don't quite dominate in the forwards like we used to. In fact tonight Australia owned us!
The manager has to go it's quite simple. The team is much better than what they've shown in this World Cup. There are some really good promising players in this squad and on the fringes who need a manager who will get the best out of them.
Farrell has been a good player for England and has a role as back up but the number 10 jersey belongs to Ford. Barritt at 12 has had his day. The Burgess experiment hasn't been a disaster but it's not been great! And it's held back the talent of Trinder. Why on earth was Lawes dropped today? OK he's not been amazing but he's a hugely talented player. And the RFU need to look again at this rule to not select players playing in France. The Armitage brothers are too good to be left out.
The AB's were far from convincing against Georgia. An awful lot of basic errors. The AB's are there for the taking.
i was at twickenham and england were shite.
Completely agree with you mate. It's wide open and although I'd have NZ as the favs it wouldn't be with any confidence. Against Georgia they admitted that there were too many handling errors and they need to look at that.
Australia, South Africa and Argentina could have a say whilst Ireland and France now carry the European hopes... Sadly I'd love to say Wales do and of course in knock out rugby you never know. But given all their injuries? Hmm! It would make for a great story though and sometimes in the face of adversity.
Who thought it would be a good idea to give launchbury MOTM over Foley or even Pocock
Injured, wasn't he?
feck off is lawes not talented. he'd get in any side in the world. one of england's only decent players.
What a game 
. England played nervously, the Wallabies were confident. England out scrummaged at Twickenham , by the Wallabies?! Never thought I'd see that happen.
. England played nervously, the Wallabies were confident. England out scrummaged at Twickenham , by the Wallabies?! Never thought I'd see that happen.It may not mean much now, but I am still convinced that this England side arent as bad as they showed in this tournament..the management team has a lot to answer to.
Former AB coach, Graham Henry, had an interesting spin on it. He feels the England team have been trying too much to emulate the AB's but despite giving it all lacked the skill set to be successful.
They did come across as very systematic..almost overcoached.
But on Graham Henry, England can learn a thing or two from NZ. Especially after the 2007 debacle, when NZ kept faith with Henry. An interesting line from the mail and it is one I agree with :
Although management have a lot to answer to, their previous work shouldn't be forgotten .
I watched it in the fanzone here, twas a very strange experience. I don't think I've every watched a major sporting event of another country in that country before. The fanzone was packed to the hilt, turning people away, and it was quite despondent. Even when England had their little burst in the second half, there wasn't any belief that they could sustain it. I've no love for Australia at all either to be honest, so unusually enough for once I wouldn't have minded England getting something from it.
A very talented backline let down by sheer raw nerves and inexperience and forwards who can't hack it and have awful discipline. The whole team has pretty poor discipline, to be honest.
A very talented backline let down by sheer raw nerves and inexperience and forwards who can't hack it and have awful discipline. The whole team has pretty poor discipline, to be honest.
I think one of the other things which gets lost a lot is how important the quality of players are to a coaches success. The England Football team is a great example of blaming managers year after year when for a decent chunk of the last 40 years the players simply havent been good enough to win a world cup. However the punters just blame the manager and a new face comes in only to be tripped up by the same fundamental issue.
Are this group of England rugby players good enough to win a WC?. I dont think they are.
Certainly good enough to make it of the group stage though.. a semifinal spot would have been seen as decent..They made it to the world cup final in 2007 with a weaker side ...They are certainly not as talented as the Southern Hemisphere big 3, but surely with their resources, they should be comfortably the best team in the North.
You certainly dont need to be the best team in the world to win a world cup( SA in 2007 certainly wasnt), you need BMT. I thought this England team did, I was wrong.
England have some decent players but this rule of not picking players playing abroad needs to be scrapped.
I agree with your statement but to say the Springboks weren't the best team in the world when they won it in 2007 is plain silly. They had test rugby's finest back row at the time in Burger, Smith and Rossouw; their locks in Matfield and Bakkies Botha were in top form and their backs were flying: Habana with his speed on the wing, Fourie with his hard, straight runs and Montgomery and Steyn with their boots. They were a magnificent side and I can't think of a more worthy RWC winner than SA that year.
I think we also need to remember though that while it's maybe not fair to destroy Lancaster this is a guy who in 4 attempts hasn't won a six nations title.
So yes the players need to take as much stick as the coach but the decision from the RFU needs to be to remove him.
This is a talented bunch of players who can achieve great things. But under this cautious coach they won't do that.
England need a distributor at 12 not just a crash ball option. They need a player who can give Joesph space but also do some of the creative damage himself. Imagine in the backs we had Ford, Trinder, Joesph and then May Brown and Watson. Would it always be successful? No of course not but that's why you have a squad.
See part of the problem in this country is the inability to accept maybe going one step back to go several forwards. The immediate call now will be to bring in player x, y and z for the six nations. But if that goes badly then the fans will scream for the tried and tested players.
What happened last night was brought about by us stepping back to old tactics. Kick from hand a lot and be cautious. Heading in to the tournament though we seemed to be going down a more expansive route so why go back on that?
So yes the players need to take as much stick as the coach but the decision from the RFU needs to be to remove him.
This is a talented bunch of players who can achieve great things. But under this cautious coach they won't do that.
England need a distributor at 12 not just a crash ball option. They need a player who can give Joesph space but also do some of the creative damage himself. Imagine in the backs we had Ford, Trinder, Joesph and then May Brown and Watson. Would it always be successful? No of course not but that's why you have a squad.
See part of the problem in this country is the inability to accept maybe going one step back to go several forwards. The immediate call now will be to bring in player x, y and z for the six nations. But if that goes badly then the fans will scream for the tried and tested players.
What happened last night was brought about by us stepping back to old tactics. Kick from hand a lot and be cautious. Heading in to the tournament though we seemed to be going down a more expansive route so why go back on that?
They werent weak, but were no. 2 at least that year...Remember that less than a year previously on the Northern Hemisphere tour after defeat to England , Jake White had to fly back home and explain the poor perfomances.
NZ were as dominant as they are now going into the world cup, and had beaten SA home and away in the tri-nations that year too, and were world no. 1 by a significant margin. What South Africa did have though was BMT, they were almost knocked out by Fiji in the quarters(Who were outplaying SA with a man down) , and almost beaten by a Tonga. Good side but that is easily forgotten.
Here is the Fiji game:
Here's the moment when SA almost looked down and out :
With a different, more brave ref, France could have won the last World Cup. It's a case of If this, if that. In 2007, they were good enough to win when it mattered. Australia, New Zealand and France the three sides who may have had their measure weren't. If you want the best team to win the World Cup without fail, have a league style competition where everybody plays each other once and the team on top after all that wins the whole thing.
You never know with France..they lost the 3rd place match quite badly against Argentina. Think that SA side coulod have beaten France, Australia werent that great either and got beat by a poor England side.
The problem with that format is that the tournament starts to feel like the cricket world cup which just drags on and on. Knockout rugby is a massive draw for viewers.
Just finished watching the NRl League Grand Final and it just shows how exciting sudden death games are. That said it was probably the best final in living memory with a equalising try on the buzzer. A conversion from an insane angle just missing off the inside of the post and then a field golden goal win. I'm not a league fan but that was the best game of sport I've seen since in a long long time.