"No team in the world would have lived with them on Saturday" - S Barnes

Would that performance have been enough to beat NZ?

Source:

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/rugbynation/rugby-news/2013/03/18/stuart-barnes-says-wales-would-ve-beaten-the-all-blacks-on-saturday-91466-33014559/

In a word no

but you would have scared the bejesus out of them.
NZ would never have played as bad as we did on Saturday, the times we had the ball we were clueless as what to do with it. NZ always look composed even when being beaten.

If you had played like that in Oz you would have come back with 3W to your name

The intensity Wales showed in that game is the same intensity the SH show in every single game.

Knackeredknees wrote:NZ would never have played as bad as we did on Saturday, the times we had the ball we were clueless as what to do with it. NZ always look composed even when being beaten.

Unless they had food poisioning or a winter vomiting bug perhaps?

Can only raise their tempo & that special attitude for playing their favourite Sais 'enemy' at the gates. Wales need a strong England as their perpetual spur. (not strong enough at mo BTW)

Agree with Barnes here, all 16 of them were unstoppable.

"Agree with Barnes here, all 16 of them were unstoppable." -- Were there 16 when we beat you at HQ last year too?

Yes, you cunningly put a Welshman in Courtney Lawes' shirt and got him to hand the ball to Williams to give you your try. No other explanation as to why a big lump of a forward would have the ball ripped off him by a back.

Wales were very good, but against NZ, all the NH teams generally tend to be slightly in awe of them and struggle to bring their A game until they are already chasing the match.

Conrad smith would have caught the pass Tuilagi dropped of course...

The article is a hypothesis if a non event.

They didn't play the All Blacks and there for it is pie in the sky.

You could also say they would have beaten Mars.

We will never mnow.

Another unknowable, hypothetical, pointless discussion - yes this thread has the potential to run and run!

I predict an escalation of bickering, verbal abuse, moderator intervention, cautions and maybe even a ban. 606v2 at it's best.

That 14 man line out was an effective weapon last time.

Ospreydragon wrote:"Agree with Barnes here, all 16 of them were unstoppable." -- Were there 16 when we beat you at HQ last year too?

Guess who the ref was that day...

Knackeredknees wrote:In a word no

but you would have scared the bejesus out of them.
NZ would never have played as bad as we did on Saturday, the times we had the ball we were clueless as what to do with it. NZ always look composed even when being beaten.

If you had played like that in Oz you would have come back with 3W to your name

I think actually NZ played worse when they lost to England. Would you not agree?

I totally agree Biltong -- but I thought it was worth discussong where Wales would have to change their game to beat the ABs. Having said that, I've long thought that Wales have a mental problem when they play the ABs. We blew a great chance to beat them in Nov 2004, and have had a few close ones since. I think Wales has to improve their back play -- and that will only come with some changes in selection.

That guy is an idiot... how did he get a job in the public eye off the back of being rob andrews minion for 10 years.

"
Guess who the ref was that day...." -- I see -- it was the ref, for example, that stripped the ball, chipped and regathered, beating the covering defence to score? I must get some special glasses.

Apparently Wales preformance caused the 1p reduction in beer and the freezing of petriol duty in the budget. The dvd of the game is on is way to Damascus to end the Syrian crisis too...

Breadvan

fa0019 wrote:That guy is an idiot... how did he get a job in the public eye off the back of being rob andrews minion for 10 years.

Harsh. He was a decent out half IMO. Quite like him as a pundit too even if he does get a little over excited sometimes. At least he isnt a complete wall flower like Wood and Wallace.

Wales did not look that good for most of the game. What they did do was kill England off when a hint of a crack appeared. That was very NZ like - killing the game off with two quick tries while the opponents are shellshocked.

Ospreydragon wrote:I totally agree Biltong -- but I thought it was worth discussong where Wales would have to change their game to beat the ABs. Having said that, I've long thought that Wales have a mental problem when they play the ABs. We blew a great chance to beat them in Nov 2004, and have had a few close ones since. I think Wales has to improve their back play -- and that will only come with some changes in selection.

i think you are on the money when you say mentally.

I just don't think they have the belief, if you consider their record with SA over the years and then compare it with the lasr 5 or so years, how does a team not beat the Springboks now and then if they consistently compete and end within 7 points.

For all the paly Wales have made against SA they have only beaten us once. That is a worse record than against the All Blacks.

Their last fouor matches ended within 5 points, that tells me there is a mental block.

Biltong... The reason is gears. Countries like SA have them. They may not be playing well but they are able to up the intensity when it matters.

This leads to close matches between the 2 sides.

When Wales have come close to SA its mainly been matches in Wales. If they come to SA you could add 10+ points onto that diff.

If you put a full strength bokke team out against a full strengh Wales team at a neutral venue I'd back the bokke every time.

Not trying to be disrespectful to Wales, they are a good side... but the teams play a very similar game (bar the backrow being more like England) and the bokke would simply neutralise Wales' attacking prowess.

True, I forgot about the home advantage thing. But then they did come close in the RWC.

The reality is SA haven't played good rugby for some time, I have forgotten what it is like to watch a game where we are on fire.

Must be the coaching that atifles our exuberance, I don't know.

1st half of the ENG 2nd test in the summer came close... the last time the boks played with real intensity.

I always myself think the boks play best at Loftus. That stadium has a way of generating a manic aggression in the boks.

I actually think Wales can compete and beat the boks... but I think they do so the wrong way, that they get their tactics wrong.

You can't get into an arm-wrestle with a superior sized guy who can physically match you hit for hit... and then some. Its like a challenge no team can resist.

The team that has the best record vs. the boks in recent years is AUS (even better then NZ) ... because they're the only ones who avoid this frenzy.

Wales have the players to impliment this sort of game... they just don't use them.

Its why I also think the Lions will lose the series in AUS this year. AUS can play route 1 direct rugby with their eyes closed.... 15 out of 17 matches in last 4 years vs. Wales and SA (the 2 most direct sides in world rugby).

Ahh...the old "No team in the Wyold Could'a Lived with'em' salutation.

Brings back the memories and a tear to moi oi. Oh how the years roll by.....

Biltong, I'm sure there is a mental problem with Wales playing the top SH sides. Our record against SA is v poor. However, Wales, under Gatland, is getting consistently closer to beating the top 3, and so many matches in the last years or two have been very close affairs -- against Aus and SA. If Wales can turn over one of the top sides, that mental block might start to erode. It doesn't make sense that Wales can regularly beat France and Eng, and both sides have had wins in the last decade against top SH opposition.

I think Wales has changed. It is now a truly professional setup, and I don't think Wales really became professional until the early noughties. Gatland has brought a real steel to the side, and they are getting mentally tougher. The physicality is now there too, which was a big problem in the past. Wales still relies on some key players, though, and when they're injured (and they often have been in the last few years, as they age and with the brutal demands of top pro sport) Wales suffers. But I think Wales are also starting to develop some depth. Against the tiop 3, to win, we'll have to have our best players availble, in good from, and we'd need to vary the selection to improve our attack, without losing any strength in defence!

ha,ha,ha. Try telling that to the 8 teams that reamed em out up to, and including the first game of these 6 nations, because well though Wales played they are mere journeymen, who lose a lot more than they win, and anomalies happen, especially when aided by the ref and by foul play, i.e, dropping the scrum on 6 occasions etc.

So take away the walsh factor and the England factor and Wales are ordainary, because when have the AB's ever lost 8 on the trot.


Keep believing Wales, because everyone knows its a Flash, or even a 'Walsh in the pan'.

english warrior, That's pathetic I'm afraid. 4 6N titles since 2005 is not a flash in the pan. Give credit where it's due. Why is it that with some English fans, that every time Wales wins the 6 Nations that it's always a flash in the pan, or devalued? Woodward, Moore, Probyn, Guscott, Dawson, Barnes -- to name just a few former top internationals/coaches, have said that Wales comprehensively dominated England and throughly deserved the win. I've watched the match 3 times and I have no doubt whatsoever that the best team won.

If we beat you at Twickenham next year, like last, what will your excuse be then? Another flash in the pan no doubt. Perhaps if Tuilagi could pass, the margin of victory would not have been so great, but you can't blame Walsh or Wales for that!

Wales do really need to make sure they can hit that level of intensity in games more frequently. They managed it in the RWC in 2011, but have struggled to do so since.

Whether we would have beaten the ABs playing that well depends on the ABs really doesn't it. Saying that though I am still "Hypothetically Confident" we would have given them a tough game.

Barnes is a Muppet. Was here during the world cup for commentary and spoke as if he was an authority on the game. Talking down to kiwis most of the time.

Most of the time we just laughed as did the commentators through the sides of their mouths. Good win by Wales Stuart, but stay in your little corner...thats a good lad,

Ospreydragon wrote: Perhaps if Tuilagi could pass, the margin of victory would not have been so great, but you can't blame Walsh or Wales for that!

Ah you could. You could, dragon. In all seriousness now, you could.

Like, the script was given to your guys in Plenty of time. They had about a week an a half to read it, to learn their lines and to see that Tuilagi was the star. But no, your lot weren't even bright enough to read the damn script. Yis didn't know your own lines and yis destroyed Tuilagi's part!!!!!

Read the bloody script next time!!!! That movie was bloody ruined!

english warrior wrote:ha,ha,ha. Try telling that to the 8 teams that reamed em out up to, and including the first game of these 6 nations, because well though Wales played they are mere journeymen, who lose a lot more than they win, and anomalies happen, especially when aided by the ref and by foul play, i.e, dropping the scrum on 6 occasions etc.

So take away the walsh factor and the England factor and Wales are ordainary, because when have the AB's ever lost 8 on the trot.


Keep believing Wales, because everyone knows its a Flash, or even a 'Walsh in the pan'.

we should put you and rainbowwarrior in a room together, then switch on the cctv, that would be a treat.

english warrior wrote:ha,ha,ha. Try telling that to the 8 teams that reamed em out up to, and including the first game of these 6 nations, because well though Wales played they are mere journeymen, who lose a lot more than they win, and anomalies happen, especially when aided by the ref and by foul play, i.e, dropping the scrum on 6 occasions etc.

So take away the walsh factor and the England factor and Wales are ordainary, because when have the AB's ever lost 8 on the trot.


Keep believing Wales, because everyone knows its a Flash, or even a 'Walsh in the pan'.

Glag you agree warrior...thats what we said in November..and it proved right then as well. What comes around...After the way England scored tries against NZ to get 1 try in the last 320 minutes of rugby against lesser ranked sides confirms the one off in no better way I can think of

Wow people really don't like Tuilagi

yappysnap wrote:Wow people really don't like Tuilagi

No, this one of the 'people' is just having fun. Tuilagi will be reborn on another day, I'm sure of it.

yappysnap wrote:Wow people really don't like Tuilagi

I disagree, I think he seems a really nice lad, just not quite as well rounded and invincible as many people had judged him previously in the press and on 606V2.

Ospreydragon wrote:"
Guess who the ref was that day...." -- I see -- it was the ref, for example, that stripped the ball, chipped and regathered, beating the covering defence to score? I must get some special glasses.

keep your powder dry osprey......last play of the game remember

english warrior wrote:ha,ha,ha. Try telling that to the 8 teams that reamed em out up to, and including the first game of these 6 nations, because well though Wales played they are mere journeymen, who lose a lot more than they win, and anomalies happen, especially when aided by the ref and by foul play, i.e, dropping the scrum on 6 occasions etc.

So take away the walsh factor and the England factor and Wales are ordainary, because when have the AB's ever lost 8 on the trot.


Keep believing Wales, because everyone knows its a Flash, or even a 'Walsh in the pan'.

which, bearing in mind just how bad Wales really are, makes England's ignominious defeat look even more embarassing

i see, it's ok for English WUMs to post drivel

maestegmafia wrote:Wales do really need to make sure they can hit that level of intensity in games more frequently. They managed it in the RWC in 2011, but have struggled to do so since.

Whether we would have beaten the ABs playing that well depends on the ABs really doesn't it. Saying that though I am still "Hypothetically Confident" we would have given them a tough game.

Maes the most significant thing seems to be time in camp


at RWC they had been together for weeks before the tourney and as this one has gone on they have got better and better, Howley even remarked how they were getting in top shape. I noticed v England how they srated playing rugby at the start of the game not , as per usual, after they have shipped 5-10 points.

Wales have always been slow starters, they need to find a way to optimise their training to maximise camp time and achieve these levels of intensity much earlier on

100%beefy, Yes, that does seem to be the case. Roger Lewis and the regions have got to get together, and the WRU has to do much more to support the regions -- with finance and marketing, and regions have to be fully compensated for supplying players to Wales. Any new agreement should include the time players will need to spend in camp in preparation for matches. This time around, perhaps its also helped that the u20s "played" against the senior team as part of the training/prep.

Maes, I am genuinely not trying to wind the Welsh camp up but you've seen as many new dawns as we have and just like England all the hype and expectation has to go on hold until those kind of performances are the rule not the exception. Wales on song can be a joy to watch even when it's against England and I want to see them live up to what they offer glimses of as I do England. I do agree that that performance would have given anyone a game but I couldn't call a win for sure.

Biltong wrote:

english warrior wrote:ha,ha,ha. Try telling that to the 8 teams that reamed em out up to, and including the first game of these 6 nations, because well though Wales played they are mere journeymen, who lose a lot more than they win, and anomalies happen, especially when aided by the ref and by foul play, i.e, dropping the scrum on 6 occasions etc.

So take away the walsh factor and the England factor and Wales are ordainary, because when have the AB's ever lost 8 on the trot.


Keep believing Wales, because everyone knows its a Flash, or even a 'Walsh in the pan'.

we should put you and rainbowwarrior in a room together, then switch on the cctv, that would be a treat.

What, face to face? No keyboard? They'd just sit there smiling coyly at each other.

Not sure if we would beat a full strength all black side with that performance on Saturday, but we would definitely make it a lot harder for them.

We still had some defensive errors that wernt capitalised on by England, The All Blacks are perhaps the most clinical side in the world and would have taken their chances.

Fact is however, that is the sort of intensity we need to play at if we want to stand toe-to-toe with the SH sides.

The AB's would win any game against Wales at a canter, we know it, they know it and most of all the Welsh fans know it. Besides they couldn't have Steve walsh officiating as he's a Kiwi, whoops sorry, an Aussie, well whatever he is he's useless, oh, except for when wales are deliberately dropping the scrum!!!


Wales and Walsh , both cheats and both a disgrace to the game of rugby.

english warrior wrote: The AB's would win any game against Wales at a canter, we know it, they know it and most of all the Welsh fans know it. Besides they couldn't have Steve walsh officiating as he's a Kiwi, whoops sorry, an Aussie, well whatever he is he's useless, oh, except for when wales are deliberately dropping the scrum!!!


Wales and Walsh , both cheats and both a disgrace to the game of rugby.

Sorry but I'm not having that. Walsh is a disgrace no argument there, but Wales played the ref beautifully, they saw what he was about and England would have done exactly the same if they thought the ref had it in for Wales. Wales played good rugby and the ref even better and fair play to them for that.

It is axtually sad to think we can now comment on the fact that one team team played the referee better than another team, don't you think?

It suggests that rugby is no more just rugby, the hits, the physical battle, the skills and everything else that is part of this great game, is now sullied by the impact referees have on a game, whether it is marginal or enough to change the course of a game is irrelevant.

Biltong wrote:It is axtually sad to think we can now comment on the fact that one team team played the referee better than another team, don't you think?

It suggests that rugby is no more just rugby, the hits, the physical battle, the skills and everything else that is part of this great game, is now sullied by the impact referees have on a game, whether it is marginal or enough to change the course of a game is irrelevant.

But Biltong...is it really the case that refs are now more compromised and 'workable' by certain teams who know their ways or is it just that in the good old days nobody had an opinion on refs because 1 - they didn't have the outlets to talk about them like we do now and 2. we couldn't see much or hear much of what they were doing as TV was pretty basic?

Is reffing troubles really a new phenomenon or just an old one that we've finally been given the tools to discuss it with?

Whoa whoa whoa, lets get this straight, no part of that Walsh performance was a disgrace in any shape or form!!

A bested scrum got pinged once or twice maybe unfairly, but they were clearly bested and thats the way it goes sometimes!!

The breakdown was a bit more loosely contested than other games, but easily for both sides.

I'm starting to find a fair few comments as really poor taste now!