1st time RWC Glory

First topic message reminder :

Will any of these teams win the Webb Ellis Cup for the 1st time within the next five RWC Finals?

please take your ow advice hersh!!!

HERSH wrote:They'll know what I mean.

i think you need to stop pretending you follow this sport

LADBROKES - RWC 2015
Wales most likely from among the virgins, France virgins behind them @ 8:1
Argies surprisingly long, for any gamblers with an eye for a price.

New Zealand 7/4 Susp.
Australia 5/1 Susp.
England 6/1 Susp.
Wales 6/1 Susp.
South Africa 6/1 Susp.
France 8/1 Susp.
Ireland 20/1 Susp.
Argentina 100/1 Susp.
Samoa 125/1 Susp.
Scotland 150/1 Susp.
Italy 200/1 Susp.
Fiji 200/1 Susp.
Tonga 200/1 Susp.
Russia 500/1 Susp.
Canada 500/1 Susp.
Georgia 500/1 Susp.
USA 500/1 Susp.
Japan 500/1 Susp.
Romania 1000/1 Susp.
Spain 5000/1 Susp.
Uruguay 5000/1 Susp.
Namibia 5000/1 Susp.
Portugal 5000/1 Susp.

emack2 wrote:England deserve respect as the only side to have made back to back finals,

Australia 1999 and 2003.

gowales wrote:

Duigers wrote:

gowales wrote:?

The title says 1st time RWC glory Dulgers. England obviously can't be on that list.

I never said they could. I inferred that they will never win it again?

Random

Sorry dude, I can dumb it down any more than that for you...

Though to be fair the odds are dictated by the size of the fan base in each country, and how popular the team is as well as how much chance they actually have

Guys the game has moved on, if you big and powerful and can catch a ball you can be coached into being a good rugby player.

The Russians are starting to take rugby very seriously you'd be a fool not to think they could be a force in the rugby union world.

It's taken more than 20 years for 5 of the 6 Nations teams to develop to what they are now. USA and Russia given their sizes, need some really good plan in place for RWC glory. And I'm actually starting to question Italy's inclusion in the 6 Nations, I think it may be time for a first and second tier european comp with relegation/promotion in the next 10 years.

Smirnoff
yes, fair point on the population / fanbase size affecting prices.
Plus all the SANZAR fans in London alone.
I guess this might make non-English speaking countries good value-for-money bets at the bookies.

I cant believe so many people are still feeding the monkey !!!

Well some people unfortunately find it difficult to meet that special someone.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Well some people unfortunately find it difficult to meet that special someone.

I'm starting to think this isn't even a proper dating site

HERSH wrote:Guys the game has moved on, if you big and powerful and can catch a ball you can be coached into being a good rugby player.

The Russians are starting to take rugby very seriously you'd be a fool not to think they could be a force in the rugby union world.

well if they are taking it seriously!!!!!! plus its really really big.

Big population too.

see you're learning.

Population doesn't necessarily mean you will be succesful at sport. Uruguay's population is smaller than Ireland's yet they came 4th in the recent world cupiin soccer/football and are current Copa America champions. It's about having decent structures in place to harness the talent.

HERSH wrote:Big population too.

see you're learning.

have you considered China winning the world cup???

Which Russia are starting to do.

Uruguay have also won the wendyball world cup

caoimhincentre wrote:

HERSH wrote:Big population too.

see you're learning.

have you considered China winning the world cup???

But they're not in the top 25 teams in the world, far too much ground to make up for the next 5 RWC's!

You're beginning to look silly now.

80 years ago, when a lot of the top teams at the time didn't play. In 1950 the standard had come on somewhat, but there were still some decent sides missing.

A wins a win.

When did Wales and Ireland last beat NZ?

I don't see what that has to do with anything. England haven't beaten NZ recently either.

1953 and never, strange seeing as the standard of rugby union is better these days

Okay then, thanks for that.

Thomond wrote:80 years ago, when a lot of the top teams at the time didn't play. In 1950 the standard had come on somewhat, but there were still some decent sides missing.

You de-valued Uruguays wins.

i have a great idea for Hersh's next article.

Why only the big 4 (NZ, Aus, SA and Eng) France and Russia will only ever win the world cup.

This is the key to the thread though. Give no explanation!!!!!

Good idea eh?

France will win it within the next 5 RWC.

Please re-read the article.

Have you some other agenda other than to discuss rugby?

HERSH wrote:France will win it within the next 5 RWC.

Please re-read the article.

Have you some other agenda other than to discuss rugby?

Hang on i'll edit the title for you.

I did, doesn't mean I'm wrong does it? Their first came when France were the only top European side to travel. The beat what's in front of them and that's all that matters.

caoimhincentre wrote:

Why only the big 4 (NZ, Aus, SA and Eng) France and Russia will only ever win the world cup.

+1

But only for the next 5 RWC's, after that Italy might come on as will Romania.

HERSH wrote:

caoimhincentre wrote:

Why only the big 4 (NZ, Aus, SA and Eng) France and Russia will only ever win the world cup.

+1

But only for the next 5 RWC's, after that Italy might come on as will Romania.

good you remembered not to give any justification at all. Thats key to your arguement,

Is it an arguement?

I thought it was a rugby discussion forum?

HERSH wrote:Is it an arguement?

I thought it was a rugby discussion forum?

by arguement i really should have said discussion. thought you would understand what i saying.

It has to be Chile, i mean c'mon, no one else knows how to play the game... and you know... it's Chile!

sugarNspikes wrote:

Kiwireddevil wrote:

sugarNspikes wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:I'd like to vote for England but it's not on the list.

England, along with NZ, SA and Aus are looking down like Olympian gods on all these young pretenders

Nah, England have only won the thing once - the others twice . Given England's track record with major sporting world cups it's be another 50 years or so before they manage another . I assume that's why HERSH left England of the list ...

NZ won it at home twice which is only worth 1/4 of a cup. Only diet ambrosia for you

And they used up their lucky charm in the last final, so now are destined to be knocked out by Scotland on their way to World cup glory - or so our goals and objectives say

I voted for France to be the next NH team to win a rugby world cup.

Assuming the US hold the tournemount in either 2023 or 2027 (more likely 2027) and remember this has already been suggested by the head of the irb, then I believe they will have a real chance of winning in the next 25 years.

The question for the US is if they can develop a professional competition.

Obviously thay have real potential, the trick is how to realise it? More inward tours would help, even tier one sides playing one off games there. For example if England or Ireland played the All Blacks or whoever then the media opportunity would be massive. I really believe it is to Rugbys advantage to invest in the US.

I can see where Hersh is coming from: A little local example may help illuminate matters (yes I can only give a local example because I don't get much international coverage in my gold-fish bowl.) About 25 years ago the Natal Sharks were a second-rate, second-tier SA side in the Currie cup, having made the final only twice in 100 years (and winning neither). From 1990 onwards however, things changed, to the point where they are serious Currie-cup contenders - having won it several times - and serious Super-Rugby contenders - having made the final several times (and, while we're into predictions, winning it in 2012 ). Meanwhile the Eastern Province used to be an SA rugby power-house, who are now the laughing stock of SA rugby.

The point of all this: the mighty can fall and the humble can improve over time...

caoimhincentre wrote:

HERSH wrote:Is it an arguement?

I thought it was a rugby discussion forum?

by arguement i really should have said discussion. thought you would understand what i saying.

Is this the 5 minute argument or the full half hour?

gonna have to say none of them

Japan's a populous country and they're not threatening greatness in either football or rugby. Just a question, are there any countries that have come late to any 'team' sports code, that have excelled to become the near best team? If they have, it's taken much longer than 20 years I'd have thought.

HERSH wrote:France will win it within the next 5 RWC.

Please re-read the article.

Have you some other agenda other than to discuss rugby?

What article? All I see is a lot of country names and a tiresome poll question. The quality of the "article" invariably matches the quality of the responses. You'd know it was mid summer just by looking at the title.....

EBOP wrote:Japan's a populous country and they're not threatening greatness in either football or rugby. Just a question, are there any countries that have come late to any 'team' sports code, that have excelled to become the near best team? If they have, it's taken much longer than 20 years I'd have thought.

While not quite a 'team' sports code, middle distance running is a case in point: The Kenyans and Ethiopians came late to the game, but once there was national commitment to, and backing of, these events, from the 1980's onwards, they have dominated, and no one else really gets a look in!

The greatest two british golfers of the modern era are in the box. Great to see faldo and jacklin

wrong thread again- i am losing the plot ffs- but it can stay there- you rugby lads need to a bit of culture now and again

EBOP wrote:Japan's a populous country and they're not threatening greatness in either football or rugby. Just a question, are there any countries that have come late to any 'team' sports code, that have excelled to become the near best team? If they have, it's taken much longer than 20 years I'd have thought.

Maybe New Zealand in cricket - I don't know much about crickets history, but didn't they come to it later than other countries? and didn't they finish quite highly in one of the WCs?

We almost always make the WC semis. Nothing higher though.

Smirnoffpriest wrote:

EBOP wrote:Japan's a populous country and they're not threatening greatness in either football or rugby. Just a question, are there any countries that have come late to any 'team' sports code, that have excelled to become the near best team? If they have, it's taken much longer than 20 years I'd have thought.

Maybe New Zealand in cricket - I don't know much about crickets history, but didn't they come to it later than other countries? and didn't they finish quite highly in one of the WCs?

NZ cricket, you're having a bubble Smirnoff. Nah, the mighty black caps don't count, cricket's been played here for many moons.

ahh apologies, like I say I don't know that much about cricket history - I just have a passing interest in whose big at any given time

Japan are very close to becoming quite a threat in world football. Give them another twnety years or so and they could be serious world cup candidates. They have done incredibly moves to imporve infrastructures there in 15 years.