Rugby - See You In Ten!

[ravagon]

Sshhhh! Havak doesn't need to know that!

[finbar]

Havak's not a dill. Even he can tell that the imposter has a command of English.

[st_swithin]

Sewer rat might taste like pumpkin pie, but I'd never know because I'd never eat the filthy beasts.

[Andydog]

Originally posted by finbar
Okay, call me a pedant again, but given that he's more often than not flat on his back on the bar floor, I'd've said ceilings rather than roofs.

That's precisely what I meant of course. And everyone knows the only way to get puked pork pie in the eye is to heave it up on the parallel.

I see that NZ captain Reuben Thorne thinks France pose a bigger threat to the All Blacks' chances of winning the World Cup than England.

[England are] very professional and very efficient at what they do and a very strong and powerful side but I think France is going to be extremely dangerous because they're so multi-talented.

People are also talking Australia down but playing at home with the talent they've got, they're a real contender.

Doug Howlett also nominated France as the team to beat because of their 'unpredictability', saying England's forward-based game was easier to read:

I look at the French with their style of play and type of play and I think they'll be a real threat.

With the English, you know exactly what they're going to do, so you can prepare for what they're going to do in this part of the field or another part of the field.

Sounds like we’ve got England pegged Havak!

[edit: spelling]

[Frozzy]

Sorry, but Doug and Rueben need to look at the results in the previous 12 months, and redirect their priorities. If they think they should be preparing to beat France than England, then it looks like Thorne and John Mitchell with be having an Uber long Aussie holiday.

England > France, England > All Blacks.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by finbar
Even he can tell that the imposter has a command of English.

If I had a command of English I might realise that I'd just been insulted. As it is though ...


I don't much like the sound of planning to beat France while letting beating England take care of itself. That's what this new attitude sounds like to me.
That might've been applicable a few years ago but the English today are, all jokes aside, a much more capable outfit.
True they've always bolstered their own chances, (hasn't everybody?) but this time they do seem to be a real contender.
France I could see pulling off an upset or two but to actually win the RWC itself would take an effort they have not yet demonstrated.

[Andydog]

It sounds to me like they have already done the planning and know what they must do against England, but are worried about France because they can be unpredictable and can pull it off when they want to, as was demonstrated in the last world cup against NZ in the semi. Which I was at btw.

Anyway, the draw shows that England will likely face France before we face either team and I agree that it will more likely be England beats France. This weekend's game between the two will be worth watching.

[Havak]

knowing full well that it'd been almost 4 years since they'd last faced off.

Old news.

Try that we have beaten you twice in seven months. There is no wriggle room in that – whatever you Kiwis try to say that remains a fact.

More worrying for you is that despite what you may have convinced yourself we didn’t play very well in either victory.

perhaps a little more accepting of the concept of losing after electing to field a second string side ... ?

The quote isn’t from an Englander worth the name – I suspect a foreigner in disguise - and the Kiwis did not field a second string side in June – boy do the kiwis love to revisit history with their own unique (all black) spin. Reminds me of me in fact.

We fielded an under strength side and paid for it. I took some positives from the performance but I’m not sitting here saying “we won the game really” am I?

To quote Ming - "Case closed!"

Twelve out of a squad of thirty plus he used? Hardly closed!

But to stop us being side tracked here I’ll admit my (rather pointless) baiting on this one will stop. It’s hardly necessary given even their ‘first’ team can’t beat us – should they ever admit to fielding one that is

*is this subtle enough Finbar?*

Sounds like we’ve got England pegged Havak!

Filed away ready to beat you over the head with should you fail to beat us – for that’s the only test that counts isn’t it?

France are a good side – and their mercurial schizo nature is well documented – but do you really buy they are a bigger threat, baiting aside?

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by Havak
France are a good side – and their mercurial schizo nature is well documented – but do you really buy they are a bigger threat, baiting aside?

I fear that saturday's test match at Twickenham will show that the French threat is largely overestimated... IMO we are on for a "déculotée" (come on Finbar, have fun with this French colloquialism).

Havak, I hope I will have the opportunity to show you the Frog and Rosbiff ceiling this year.

[Havak]

I hope to take you up on that Tamerlin.

Lets put it this way for England - they are a damn good side and can beat anyone in the world. Doesn't mean they will. What I am prepared to stick my neck out and say is that NZ are no better - they too are a damn good side capable of beating anyone but they don;t necessarily do so...

[finbar]

Originally posted by Tamerlin
IMO we are on for a "déculotée" (come on Finbar, have fun with this French colloquialism).

Sounds a bit like our "de-pantsed" and equivalents.

[Andydog]

Originally posted by Havak
Lets put it this way for England - they are a damn good side and can beat anyone in the world. Doesn't mean they will. What I am prepared to stick my neck out and say is that NZ are no better - they too are a damn good side capable of beating anyone but they don;t necessarily do so...

Agreed. But how capable would England be of beating anyone in the world without their two star players? We came within 3 of beating the number 1 team in the world with none of our star players.

(dammit my brain was saying "don't say it! don't say it!" but my fingers carried on typing and pressed Submit anyway!)

[Havak]

heh no problem.

How quickly we forget that England second and third strings have beaten everyone they faced except France over the last two years. In fact only France have beaten England at test level in two years - and only in France at that. We've lost three games in the last three years - how about you?

On a more serious note we are perfectly capable of beating teams without either Jonno or Wilko - but we tend to look a lot better with both on the field that is for sure.

France have named a fairly understrength side for the return game - so I'm not sure you'll see the 'big two' for us even on Saturday now.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Havak
More worrying for you is that despite what you may have convinced yourself we didn’t play very well in either victory.

...and New Zealand played slightly worse than England...we must have played horribly!!

If you are prepared to admit that getting points on the board despite being down two players cannot be described as "not playing very well", then I will concede that the AB team England played this year was not "second string".

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
But to stop us being side tracked here I’ll admit my (rather pointless) baiting on this one will stop. It’s hardly necessary given even their ‘first’ team can’t beat us – should they ever admit to fielding one that is

*is this subtle enough Finbar?*

*sighs, shakes head at hours of tuition wasted*

Edit. It's nice to see the IRB has looked after England by giving them 3 SH refs out of 4 for the pool matches. The fourth being a Welshman! And I wonder how many of England's stars will feature in the match -v- Uruguay in Brisbane on November 2nd? None, I hope. The temp will be in the 30s with 85% humidity. It's sheer madness asking anyone to play rugby in those conditions.