New Zealand v France= England v Romania??

A BIG QUESTION??

Did the result of these 2 games today show just how gfood New Zealand/England are?

Or was the quality of the opposition realy poor?

France Could have, Should have, Have indeed played better in the past(selections promblems maybe)

Romania, have not see that much of Romania to be honest, so cannot say if they Could have, Should have, Have indeed played any better than they did today.

A team can only play what is infront of them.

But does these results prove that New Zealand Ranked number 1 team in the world.

Or England ranked nuimber 1 team in the NH(6 nations champions) realy are that good?

It shows how relatively good they are. New Zealand are better than France and England are much better than Romania's 2nd team

HammerofThunor wrote:It shows how relatively good they are. New Zealand are better than France and England are much better than Romania's 2nd team

+ 1

France have so much depth that they can beat any other nation, the question is whether is clicks on the day.

Their not also helped by having a bad atmosphere in camp, and all the players know their coach is leaving after the tournament which isn't helping him at all, how can he control his players, with them knowing he is out because he isn't rated by him employers?

They're not the same.

The difference between the two results is a forward slash.




France were thrashed by New Zealand's superb AB team.

England thrashed a Romania A/B team.