Are Wales currently better than England?

If Nottins was a cat then this article would be the catnip,

Based on the warm up matches, would you say Wales are currently better than England or are England currently better than Wales?

TWICKENHAM:

England 23 - 19 Wales

England - 2 Tries
Wales - 3 Tries

CARDIFF:

Wales 19 - 9 England

Wales - 1 Try
England - 0 Tries

AGGREGATE:

Wales 38 - 32 England

Wales 4 Tries - England 2 Tries

What, no "they're about even" voting option?

No time to be diplomatic when it's a W v E debate!

Like i tried to say on other threads it is not always the team that score the most trie that win the game......It is the team that SCORES THE MOST POINTS.

wales currently look the more confident team going to the wc with 5 wins from last 7 matches. also their backs look more threatening and their defence is very good.

one thing for england is however is a strong set piece- they have a big pack who love trying to boss other teams around and with players like ashton then if there is a break he will be in support.

Which team finished higher in the 6 nations? Which team won the latest 6 nations match between the two sides? Which team performs better in world cups?

Last time I checked the title of the article was "currently".

If you want me to make a "Which country was better back in March" then I can do that too?

Good question....i think Wales are fitter and more confident than ever and i hope that SA don't destroy that...it is great that the camp think SA are doable but wales always talk it up and then mostly have failed to produce. They have real momentum going into RWC, on the back of a superb defence and clinical finishing in Cardiff. Momentum is not quite so crucial for england as i think they will sweep their group. They have found a cutting edge and can close out a game which has been a problem recently but Wales have less strength in depth and seem to be pretty fragile with a weaker pack - the lineout is very poor. But they are definitley more clinical right now, more likely to score, have found a great skipper who leads from the front...the last one who did that was alfie and i am not sure he knew where he was leading the team most of the time.

But England are much better equipped to deal with RWC and not just because they have a comparatively easy group. They have had real success at RWC and know their attritive style works well to get the ugly W. Wales ran them close in 2003 and if they meet this time....possible in the semi...Wales will have beaten Samoa, Fiji and Aus or Ire to get there.

Gatts the big difference now is that it's not the management thats doing all the talk.
I think we have a confident Welsh camp that maybe thinks they don't need to use mind games.

krusty wrote:Last time I checked the title of the article was "currently".

If you want me to make a "Which country was better back in March" then I can do that too?

Wales and England are "currently" not playing.

Yes, i hope that someone in the management team tells gatland to wind his neck in and not talk up the SA game...he is the worst WUM in World rugby and frankly is starting to look like a chump to the extent that if we fail to get out of our group I hope the WRU send him his stuff and let him stay in nz.

Let the players do the talking if necessary, that is fine, it's a challenge. Even better let them do it on the pitch.

welshy824 wrote:wales currently look the more confident team going to the wc with 5 wins from last 7 matches. also their backs look more threatening and their defence is very good.

Oi. We have 5 wins from 7 matches as well.

I'd say it's about even, but we've been a bit luckier with the draw. We've got a lot of really strong players, but a couple of obvious areas of real weakness (midfield, back row). Wales are a bit stronger in those areas, but overall it's roughly equal I'd say.

With both teams at full strength on neutral territory I'd say Wales just nicks it - but then I am TOTALLY BIASED!

But based on the top tier of players I'd say England are definately the stronger nation. A lot more strength in depth.

Wales have shown they have a better defence than England

England had a better attack in the 6N, but Wales were better in the Summer

England have stronger set pieces, but would that be the same if Wales had had the Lion front row playing?


So, id say, roughly even.

If both teams met, fully fit on neutral territory, I would back Wales to win as the English scrum would be neutralised and Englands attack wont improve untill they get decent centres.

beshocked wrote:Which team finished higher in the 6 nations? Which team won the latest 6 nations match between the two sides? Which team performs better in world cups?

So if we're only counting six nations matches does this mean the 2007 warm up match is null and void?

Both much of a muchness.They have an easier group.We have more try-scoring potential and they have Jonny.On balance and totally unbiased:I am glad to be Welsh!

beshocked wrote:Which team finished higher in the 6 nations? Which team won the latest 6 nations match between the two sides? Which team performs better in world cups?

That doesn't always mean much, we won our last game against the all Blacks, but noone I know is going to say we are better than the All Blacks.

In fact we won 5 out of our last 11 tests against the all blacks, which should make my argument even stronger and yet, everyone believes the all blacks are better than us.

Besides, England and wales are unlikely to meet in this RWC, so what is the point?

judging form on warm ups with changing units etc & then trying to compare teams is pointless & agree with biltongbek

But England are better.

biltongbek wrote:

beshocked wrote:Which team finished higher in the 6 nations? Which team won the latest 6 nations match between the two sides? Which team performs better in world cups?

That doesn't always mean much, we won our last game against the all Blacks, but noone I know is going to say we are better than the All Blacks.

In fact we won 5 out of our last 11 tests against the all blacks, which should make my argument even stronger and yet, everyone believes the all blacks are better than us.

Besides, England and wales are unlikely to meet in this RWC, so what is the point?

just wondering do they do maths in S.A because 11-5=6 which means the AB have won more matches so therefore they are better than you? also the fact you played a mainly b team NZ squad (still a quality team but not NZ best)

oh and i think if england lose ashton they will be in trouble much like if NZ lose carter or McCaw they are in trouble

Welshy just as information.

2008 tri Nation 2 tests in NZ 1 test in SA, went 2-1 in favour of NZ
2009 Tri Nation 2 tests in SA 1 test in NZ went 3-0 our way
2010 Tri Nation 2 tests in NZ 1 test in SA went 3-0 in favour of NZ
2011 Tri Nation 1 test both ways, our B team there, their B team here, 1 -1

If you want to be smart, then at least attempt to do sme research.

The point I was making was that based on the last test result we still aren't better than NZ, and if you read the post correctly, I said very clearly I do not know anyone that would say we are better than NZ.

krusty wrote:If Nottins was a cat then this article would be the catnip,

Based on the warm up matches, would you say Wales are currently better than England or are England currently better than Wales?

TWICKENHAM:

England 23 - 19 Wales

England - 2 Tries
Wales - 3 Tries

CARDIFF:

Wales 19 - 9 England

Wales - 1 Try
England - 0 Tries

AGGREGATE:

Wales 38 - 32 England

Wales 4 Tries - England 2 Tries

So based on that logic Wales would beat England 6-0 scoring 2 tries to 0 with the match being played at Twickendiff

Very good. Wales must be better.

wales currently look the more confident team going to the wc with 5 wins from last 7 matches

So the same as England then, yeah.

They're about equal, depending on which England team turn up.

Personally i feel that Wales, England and Ireland are all very similar. All of them can beat eachother on the day so i dont see a standout team amongst those 3.

Depends if we pick that useless Bananaman on the wing.

More seriously, I think a bit too much is being read into the performances in non-competetive warm-up games. The main point in the Twickenham and Cardiff games from England's point of view was that it led to the selection of Shaw rather than Fourie, and the loss of Care (and so the selection of 3 SHs and no place for Flutey).
Wales were probably the happier with their performances in the two games - showed very solid defence particularly at Cardiff, whereas England showed a few weaknesses in both games (wide defence at Twickenham, lack of attacking imagination in Cardiff), but I'd still reckon on paper England have the edge in both the first choice XV and particularly in the squad depth.

dummy_half wrote:Depends if we pick that useless Bananaman on the wing.

More seriously, I think a bit too much is being read into the performances in non-competetive warm-up games. The main point in the Twickenham and Cardiff games from England's point of view was that it led to the selection of Shaw rather than Fourie, and the loss of Care (and so the selection of 3 SHs and no place for Flutey).
Wales were probably the happier with their performances in the two games - showed very solid defence particularly at Cardiff, whereas England showed a few weaknesses in both games (wide defence at Twickenham, lack of attacking imagination in Cardiff), but I'd still reckon on paper England have the edge in both the first choice XV and particularly in the squad depth.

Wales have every right to feel pleased with the victory. However their huge negative was the lack of ball they got which has been somewhat ignored with all the focus on the great defence. Get that little ball against SA or even Samoa and they are screwed. Yes they have tight 5 players to come back but a lot of pressure will be on some very rusty ex Lions to turn things around.

61% in favour of England.

thats backfired then!

Lions Schmions, the Boks took the last lot to school. Too much stock is put on the performance of players in the Lions in my opinion.

62%

mckay1402 wrote:

beshocked wrote:Which team finished higher in the 6 nations? Which team won the latest 6 nations match between the two sides? Which team performs better in world cups?

So if we're only counting six nations matches does this mean the 2007 warm up match is null and void?

Sure if it makes the last two warm up matches null and void. They are warm up matches for a reason.

England have left their best two inside centres (Barritt and Allen) out of the England squad.

England have a lot of players who aren't given a chance by the England manager.

The Boks hardly took the last Lions to school. They decimated the front row in the first test but had to deliberately injure our players in the second test in order to win.

Yeah we do that. next time send tougher players.

beshocked wrote:

mckay1402 wrote:

beshocked wrote:Which team finished higher in the 6 nations? Which team won the latest 6 nations match between the two sides? Which team performs better in world cups?

So if we're only counting six nations matches does this mean the 2007 warm up match is null and void?

Sure if it makes the last two warm up matches null and void. They are warm up matches for a reason.

England have left their best two inside centres (Barritt and Allen) out of the England squad.

England have a lot of players who aren't given a chance by the England manager.

Well that's nobodies fault but Englands. The warm up matches don't mean anything other than giving Wales a bit of confidence and I think that man on man Wales are better than England and with the confidence they have i think they would beat England on neutral ground.

biltongbek wrote:Yeah we do that. next time send tougher players.

You have to admit the way that Adam Jones was injured did look deliberate and it wouldn't have made a difference who it was anyone would have been put out of action by that

Bakkies have gone into rucks like that many a time, and if you are fair so has many other players, that was a fluke accident, and didn't happen only because it was Bakkies.

I didnt vote, im on the fence. They're much of a muchness. Overall, it tends to go with home advantage and luck of the bounce either way. Even looking at the overall W v E results arent they about even? I remember them being dead on a couple of years back.

Since 2004 Wales and England have been like 2 feet on the same body.

Adam Jones injury? Unfortunate, but an occupational hazard, nothing more. It was dealt with at the time. It's rugby! - we don't want elf & safety getting involved.

Or rugby players in tutu's

Hang on nobody mentioned elf and safety! All I'm saying is that Adam was clearly not involved in rucking and wasn't stopping the ball coming out. He had been a threat to the south african front row and I'm pretty certain that Bakkies saw him sitting there and thought it would be a good idea to take him out...

McKay, I suggest you take a tablet and call me in the morning.

If you are looking for an alterior motive you will always find one.

mckay1402 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

mckay1402 wrote:

beshocked wrote:Which team finished higher in the 6 nations? Which team won the latest 6 nations match between the two sides? Which team performs better in world cups?

So if we're only counting six nations matches does this mean the 2007 warm up match is null and void?

Sure if it makes the last two warm up matches null and void. They are warm up matches for a reason.

England have left their best two inside centres (Barritt and Allen) out of the England squad.

England have a lot of players who aren't given a chance by the England manager.

Well that's nobodies fault but Englands. The warm up matches don't mean anything other than giving Wales a bit of confidence and I think that man on man Wales are better than England and with the confidence they have i think they would beat England on neutral ground.

You are entitled to your opinion but I absolutely disagree. Wales don't have the front five to compete with England. We saw that in both warmup games.

With Ashton back England will have a genuine threat on the wing. Tuilagi also scored a try in the first game. We could give England that impetus at outside centre.

If there was a 3rd match on neutral soil I would play this team with the current squad constraints.

1.Stevens
2.Hartley
3.Cole
4.Lawes
5.Deacon
6.Croft
7.Wood
8.Easter
9.Youngs
10.Wilkinson
11.Ashton
12.Hape
13.Tuilagi
14.Armitage
15.Foden

Didn't see this poll yesterday. Have people bothered to vote?

Yawn yawn...

Beshocked, sorry but you cant claim England would win a 3rd game if different players were there like Ashton, Wales would have Adam Jones back, if you hadnt already noticed, he steadies the welsh scrum on his own.

Its like saying " If banahan had just used his hand-off on shane....."

I dont buy it.

On neutral ground with full strength teams, its probably 60/40 to england atm, just.

As i said, england and wales for the last 7 years have been 2 feet on the same pair of legs, each nudging ahead, then falling behind.

I've seen nothing to dismiss that thought or to show they are clearly ahead as you suggest from either team.

Difficult to say. Wales suffer from the same "just as long as we beat England" disease as Ireland, so their game is raised far above that of any other opposition, hence results against other nations are mixed.

Wales were clearly the better team over the 2 recent "friendlies" though, and with the team/squad should be in a better place mentally than England.

Ireland have the "just as long as we beat every side other than France and New Zealand" disease

We often hear people talking about strength in depth yet when a couple of players are missing it then called a second string side.

I just don't get these types of articles.

You bring up statistics then someone argues it is either too little or too much.

You argue the quality of the teams that play last, then a huge debate is envoked.

I think the best way to answer a thread like this is to say.

If you believe they are better, then you believe that.

If the english believe they are better then they belieive that.

Next year with the Six nations, on that day you will find out.

To be honest what I saw at the MS was two very poor teams with the luckiest team winning on the day.

Come RWC time both teams will have to improve a lot to get anywhere near the Q/SF.

Both teams are disappointing at the moment

BATH_BTGOG wrote:To be honest what I saw at the MS was two very poor teams with the luckiest team winning on the day.

Come RWC time both teams will have to improve a lot to get anywhere near the Q/SF.

Both teams are disappointing at the moment

nothing to do with luck mate, welsh defended immensley and when they had the opportunity they attacked.
i wouldnt say wales are disapointing, i mean lack of possession is dissapointing but in all three matches wales have taken there opportunities and scored i mean look at the 1st 2 tries against the pumas, 1st off a messy scrum second one out of nothing.

i am much more enthusiastic with how wales are playing currently compared to at the 6n where they couldnt seem to score or defend, whereas now they are doing both and being clinical.

in comparison england have dropped back since the 6n where they were worthy winners, but just couldnt step it up when needed to. flood needs to find form and you need a fitter pack as your front row look rather large in comaprison to the welsh front row who look lean and fit.

i think for the WC wales are going to be confident however it is a harder pool compared with englands, however if england lose ashton i think they could see there attacking options disapear as his support play is excellent 9as we always here from guscott)

but in all honesty this poll doesnt matter, 1-1 during summer tests and will be unlikely they play against each other during the WC so...

BATH_BTGOG wrote:To be honest what I saw at the MS was two very poor teams with the luckiest team winning on the day.

Come RWC time both teams will have to improve a lot to get anywhere near the Q/SF.

Both teams are disappointing at the moment

Agree, to a (slightly) lesser extent than 'very poor'.

Also, I wouldnt say the luckier team won, more so the team that knew where the tryline was won. Englands attacking show was inept, however, we know they can attack a lot more intelligently.

On the showings I'd say both teams showed enough to suggest they'll get out of their pools but that theres plenty of room for improvement before the world cup.

In fact, I'd be shocked if both teams didnt get through their groups.

"In fact, I'd be shocked if both teams didnt get through their groups"

Yes - unfortunately I've been shocked before!