Rugby - Hands Off White!

[Havak]

Great quote from White. Not quite the sane, steadying influence he originally promised is he?

It still surprises me Harrison went to Ulster as they tend to trail behind the bigger two provinces. He will certainly get the European Cup exposure he was after as they are in a group with not just Treviso but Saracens and Biarritz as well. That will be a tough group to qualify from.

[child of Thor]

Originally posted by Havak
edit.......

Well set aside the fact a struggling England side handsomely beat the Boks last autumn the fact still remains that South Africa are the reigning Tri-nations champs and absolutely no one should take them lightly in South Africa – they are building an awesome home record.

NZ should beat them – but I’ll not bet my house on it.

If you are being fair you have to concede that LDiCesare has a good point. The last decade is full of examples of rampant NZ optimism being brought crashing down to earth.

You simply need to hope that this time it is not another ‘false dawn’. Only the Welsh have had more of them (sorry CoT – could not resist!).

I can’t see either side from last Saturday troubling the ABs in the slightest – but I have been wrong before.

My feelings about SA as being a surprise included that last Tri-nations. I think its been their poor away form(or my impression of one ), and since their world cup victory they seemed to wallow in the mire of mediocre results against the better teams. Then The Tri-nations, then this current run of mostly hot form at home.

I just feel a little surprised, especialy with AUS+NZ being touted as the hot southern hemisphere sides(and each favourites for the next world cup).

As for Wales' false dawns - its become a running joke hasn't it. I always feel sorry for the poor sod who(every six-nations) sells the roof of his house to buy tickets to mostly see Wales loose against you.
There just isn't the money in wales to buy our way out the situation imho. So we have to rely on the rare occourance of a bunch of brilliant guys coming along at the same time(like in the 70's).
Still i would say the whole rugby ambiance in wales is so much more than in england, in that the majority of people eat/drink and sleep it. That has a special feel to it, even if we have been often biterly dissapointed in last 20-30 years.
Still Grand-slam does have a nice ring to it (even if the only grand-slam deserving win was the one against france in paris)

[ravagon]

Originally posted by finbar

Just think. While I was lazing through a 5-hour lunch under a pergola on a Tuscan olive farm, 35C but cooled by a gentle breeze, the Wallabies were letting me down on the other side of the world. B*stards!

That's karma for you. The price of a winning Wallaby side might just be a return to the land down under?

I expect I can pencil in an Australian win for their next game then.

Originally posted by Havak
The last decade is full of examples of rampant NZ optimism being brought crashing down to earth.

It's a fair point although I take issue with the word 'crashing'.
I would submit that even though they have had a tendency to lose the odd title-related game, perhaps a mite too frequently, they haven't had any long-term form slumps that seem to plague most of the other top sides.
Aside from that there is the general expectation that they are going in as the favourites - an expectation held by many outside the land of the long white cloud too, I might add.

[Havak]

Oh they are certainly going in as favourites - based on the Lions tests they should destroy both the Boks and the Aussies. Can you honestly put your hand on your heart and say you are 100% confident that they will?

And again you are right - no long term slumps (although finishing bottom of the tri-nations is a relative disaster for the ABs I would argue?) but whilst 'crashing' may seem harsh if applied to the team itself I would argue that it is a valid description in the context I used it - the sudden deflation of wildly expectant fans hopes?

I think in terms of the last two world cup exits - both of which involved losing games that should never have been lost. And lets not touch on that 95 final and 'poison-gate'.

(even if the only grand-slam deserving win was the one against france in paris)

I may enjoy a bit of banter against the dai's but in all honesty I have to say the Slam was thoroughly deserved as they were the best team. You can only play what you come up against. I will even admit all the wins deserved the Slam - even the narrow one against a Turnip led England.

Can I phrase my cynical views a little more generously therefore and say that only the win against France was an absolutely 'World Class' performance in the winning of the Slam (the rest of the games not reaching great heights)?

[ravagon]

Finishing at the bottom of the 3N, given that each team won both home games and lost both overseas games you mean?
ie: With the title going down to point difference and that being decided by a rare AB 'shocker' in the RSA.

[Andydog]

Originally posted by Havak

If you are being fair you have to concede that LDiCesare has a good point. The last decade is full of examples of rampant NZ optimism being brought crashing down to earth.

Hang on, LDiCesare said "Being who they are, NZ will get too comfortable". Did he mean the team or the fans?

If the team then I would totally disagree. The ABs have often said they feel a great deal of pressure from the fans to perform, and this means that more often than not they go into critical games feeling anything BUT comfortable.

If he meant the fans then yes, we have a tendency to be optimistic, the AB's have always been at the top of the tier and so there is nothing wrong with being optimistic in the slightest. I think "crashing down to earth" is a bit OTT. The kiwi fans are only too aware that no game should be taken for granted. We may act optimistic but certainly we are also realistic. And that realism means that losses don't bring us all crashing down to earth in a heap of shock and misery.

Should be an interesting game on Saturday. Any predictions? SA won a good, tight test match last weekend, but:

1. They showed no flair in midfield. If the ABs close down Hanbana and Paulse the backline isn't a big threat.

2. The SA scrum is never as strong on the pitch as it looks on paper.

3. JW needs to play Burger. Until he came on Aussie had the upper hand at the breakdown.

Unless the AB lineout goes tits-up, I think the ABs will win by 10.

[child of Thor]

Havak your comments on the welsh performances(especialy against france) are very fair

As for NZ vs SA, i will go with a tough but comfortable win for NZ. Still i'm prepared to be surprised

[Havak]

it should be very comfortable unless SA can really step up their performance - Andydogs three points are pretty fair ones.

Andydog, I missed that nuance in LDiCesare's quote - he will have to speak for his intent himself. I can only say my comments were supposed to reference the fans.

I also think, based purely on what I saw last weekend, that your predication may be too conservative.

I'm not sure Pretorius is the right choice against the ABs either given how unsuccessful a kicking game was against the ABs recently - I'd throw VD Westhuyzen in I think.

I need to save a final word for Ravagon:

Finishing at the bottom of the 3N

Yes thats what I meant. Wasn't the rest of your sentence rather like Sir Clive's "we won every aspect of play except the scoreboard"?

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Havak

Yes thats what I meant. Wasn't the rest of your sentence rather like Sir Clive's "we won every aspect of play except the scoreboard"?

I would respond very eloquently but the autocensor probably wouldn't pass it.
Suffice to say, I think, that it's more like a nil-all draw at the end of extra time coming down to penalties - to put it in language that you may be better able to appreciate?


I'm not 'sure' about a comfortable win, or even necessarily a win at all. My (original) point was that even in away games against other top international sides the AB's are frequently the favourite. And not just among AB supporters either.
There's a reason for this.

[Edit: To illustrate my point there is a PR poll on the 3N. At present ~51% think NZ will take it, as opposed to 34% for the RSA and 15% for Aus.
You're not suggesting that 51% of the votes come from NZers are you? ]

[Havak]

Suffice to say, I think, that it's more like a nil-all draw at the end of extra time coming down to penalties - to put it in language that you may be better able to appreciate?

Well we have thrown some low blows in our time but you win hands down here by implying I am a soccer fan. Is there a worse insult?

Frankly I still think I won well before the whistle – the ABs came third in the last tri-nations (a simple fact) and talk of points difference and a ‘shocker’ is just attempted mitigation that doesn’t alter that fact. Teams often lose tournaments when they have a shocker (or shockers). Just ask Andy Robinson and Clive Woodward (and John Mitchell of course).

As an aside I don’t think the ABs had a shocker in South Africa – as I recall the Bok rush defence contained them well on the day and the loose forwards got the upper hand at the break down too? In short the Boks played really well on the day?

Did I mention by the way that a poor England side blew away the Boks that November?

You're not suggesting that 51% of the votes come from NZers are you?

I’m not suggesting it – most of the Pacific Islands will vote for the side their boys play for too I imagine - but it wouldn’t surprise me at all if they were all kiwis. The polls on that site can be most interesting at times. But you really ought to look at the number of votes cast before using it to make a point – just 5000 votes makes it perfectly possible that 2500 Kiwis are flying the flag!?

Anyway I voted for South Africa just to bring some balance to the poll.

But I take your point – that some third parties also rate the ABs quite highly. And frankly we all enjoy watching them at their best. I think secretly that a lot of people also enjoy watching them fail too? Would you agree?

Still the ABs are lucky they don’t attract the Universal vitriol that England do. As CoT will no doubt confirm the other home nations hate watching us play well and throw parties when we fail. I think the only ones who do that with New Zealand might be the Aussies? On the whole the English would not do so (unless it is us you fail against).

I think the ABs just got a huge boost anyway – as White has admitted he has called Sir Clive for advice. When you think about it that is rather funny?

So Finbar - Larkham slightly crocked and being rested ready for next season? wtf? How old is he now? 32? What odds he leaves Australia for the Uk in the autumn despite having a year left on his ARU contract?

[Havak]

An exchange I found interesting between a paddy and an Englishman:

Paddy

Wilkinson. Has been always overrated - hell no holding back the most overrated player ever. Anyone who could kick would have looked good in the 10 man rugby/one dimensional rugby played by England over the last five or so years.

Englishman

Total drivel - you are either being obtuse or have a short memory. Have you forgotten all the tries England scored in successive 6N from 2000 to 2003 ? How many they scored against SH opposition in that time ? How Wilkinson took apart the Irish defence in 2002 when we put 50 points on them ? You don't rack up the points England did against ALL opposition by playing 10 man rugby. It's a myth that England haters like to perpetuate. They tightened up for the RWC03, but that's about it - even in the game against Aus just before the RWC they scored 3 tries through running rugby.

A good answer to the usual anti-English blinkered nonsense I felt. He could also have pointed out that Hodgson, who can kick and did play in the same period, never looked so good.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
So Finbar - Larkham slightly crocked and being rested ready for next season? wtf? How old is he now? 32? What odds he leaves Australia for the Uk in the autumn despite having a year left on his ARU contract?

More than slightly crocked. A shoulder reconstruction. Out for six months. I'll bet you Civ gold he doesn't go north.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Havak
Hodgson, who can kick

Mmmmmm. Must have my eyes tested. I obviously didn't see an England kicker either paralysed with fear in front of the goal posts or missing them from point-blank range in a recent NH tournament.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Havak

Well we have thrown some low blows in our time but you win hands down here by implying I am a soccer fan. Is there a worse insult?

Well, you can call me a soccer fan right back if it'll make you feel better?
I'll even pretend to be slightly offended.

As an aside I don’t think the ABs had a shocker in South Africa – as I recall the Bok rush defence contained them well on the day and the loose forwards got the upper hand at the break down too? In short the Boks played really well on the day?

See, now we're in agreement.
Or did I forget to give you the NZ definition of the AB's having a shocker?

But I take your point – that some third parties also rate the ABs quite highly. And frankly we all enjoy watching them at their best. I think secretly that a lot of people also enjoy watching them fail too? Would you agree?

I'll just go back to my earlier reference to the bookies. When serious money is at stake nationalistic pride tends to go out the window in favour of getting it right. The AB's are, from memory, the only one of the top tier who're frequently the favourite going into the game, as far as betting odds go, when playing an away game against another top tier side.

I'm not sure I would really agree with the idea of people wanting them to fail though. The haka generally gets a cheer of sorts even in away games in front of opposing supporters (who obviously don't want the AB's to win).
I will concede that I may be a little naive in this instance however.

Still the ABs are lucky they don’t attract the Universal vitriol that England do. As CoT will no doubt confirm the other home nations hate watching us play well and throw parties when we fail. I think the only ones who do that with New Zealand might be the Aussies? On the whole the English would not do so (unless it is us you fail against).

I think the ABs just got a huge boost anyway – as White has admitted he has called Sir Clive for advice. When you think about it that is rather funny?

Yes, well, I don't really pretend to understand the general attitude towards the English either. It's prevalent in Australia, notably, but I don't think NZ particularly shares in this sentiment. I imagine there's some sort of history there somewhere. Probably goes right back to Lord Watchamacallit not wiping his boots properly before entering Bruce Whojamawhatsits domicile in late-June 1729.

I think there was a quote circulating during the last RWC, originally from some ex-Wallaby bigwig, to that effect that, should it come down to an England-NZ final, Australia could console itself with the fact that at least one team would have to lose.

[Havak]

More than slightly crocked. A shoulder reconstruction. Out for six months. I'll bet you Civ gold he doesn't go north.

No bet. That makes him miss most of our season so it seems likely he will play Wallabies rugby next year then come north in August (he will be 32 then). Or Eddie could do what Graham is doing with Tana and wrap him in cotton wool until 2007? It’s misguided – both lads will either last until then or they won’t. Not playing them doesn’t seem particularly helpful?

I obviously didn't see an England kicker either paralysed with fear in front of the goal posts or missing them from point-blank range in a recent NH tournament.

You probably did. Did you also catch his kicking in NZ recently?

His kicking has been expensive I will admit – not only did it cost us the Wales, France and Ireland games it also let those damn Aussies beat us too. So England’s slip in the rankings is entirely Charlie’s fault really.

I'll even pretend to be slightly offended.

It actually really is the worst insult I can level at someone. So I’ll save it for when we really disagree on something.

Or did I forget to give you the NZ definition of the AB's having a shocker?

“the opposition playing well”?

You have a lot of shockers then?

I'll just go back to my earlier reference to the bookies

Can I just check that you understand how bookies work? When favourites win they normally lose money. When outsiders win they generally make money. Yes I know it is counter intuitive What I’m not sure therefore is how your argument balances in relation to this. One could argue the ABs are made favourites because the bookies are looking for the big payola when the ABs then lose.

It’s actually a tangential point to yours which I accept – the ABs are the only top side to frequently be made favourites in away games to other top sides – but it amuses me.

The haka generally gets a cheer of sorts even in away games in front of opposing supporters (who obviously don't want the AB's to win).
I will concede that I may be a little naive in this instance however.

Slightly perhaps.

Sardonic would best describe the ‘cheers’ that the haka receives at HQ for example.

Probably goes right back to Lord Watchamacallit not wiping his boots properly before entering Bruce Whojamawhatsits domicile in late-June 1729.

You may very well be right. I think it’s a classic manifestation of an inferiority complex myself. And we will see more of it today as the working class Aussie boys rip apart the public school lads in Birmingham - then accept victory with all the usual Australian tact and diplomacy (beats me how they haven’t started more wars with their ‘gracious’ victory speeches in sport).

The attitude of the home nations is easier to classify. It’s definitely an inferiority complex there. Over to CoT for the riposte.

That quote sounds very much like one Nick Farr-Jones uses at after dinner speeches. It is funny I guess.