One view of next years World cup chances...

First topic message reminder :

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11370175

Fair on most accounts without being to specific in any particular area.

Well in fairness Fiji have got a win and a draw whereas Wales havent won in the last 10 games. The difference for me is that Wales shouldnt really lose games v Fiji and they really should have a handful of wins v Oz by now. Of the last 10 games v Oz 7 were won by less than a score. That really suggests Wales are good enough to win but something is going wrong.

I think a lot of people (not all) acknowledge that Pool A could well be decided on bouns point and/or points difference. With England opening against Fiji then they could well lay down a marker or on the flip side the whole emotion of the day and opening ceremony might get to them and they just win, by just winning I mean not rack up a big score as don't for one minute think they will lose.

From a Welsh point of view with Uruguay first up and then a good 6 day turn around between the England game I just hope Gatland goes and sets his stall out from the start and puts his strongest availabe XV out against Uruguay and really goes for the bonus point and to rack up the points.

Are there bonus points for world cup group games?

It could go down to points difference sure but I don't think it will. Also I don't think it's a good attitude to have - relying on points difference to sneak through.

I think one of England,Australia or Wales will lose two matches. I personally think it will be Wales losing to Australia and England - they will be the underdogs in both games and rightly so.

As for Wales-Fiji - Wales will be heavy favourites though complacency could be their downfall. You would expect Wales would be Fiji's biggest opportunity to topple one of the big three in the group.

Also Fiji have only a 5 day turnaround vs Australia, much nicer turnaround for the Wales game.

Another advantage of being the host is a very favourable schedule in terms of recovery time!

Interesting to note 'benefit' of home advantage

7 wc's

3 won by hosts. NZ in 1987 & 2011, SA in 1995
2 runners up. ENG in 1991 & AUS in 2003
1 4th place. France in 2007
1 out in QFs. Wales in 1999

LordDowlais wrote:Here you go, here's Wales record against Fiji:-

9th Nov 1985 Wales 40 v 3 Fiji
31st May 1986 Fiji 15 v 22 Wales
18th June 1994 Fiji 8 v 23 Wales
11th Nov 1995 Wales 19 v 15 Fiji
9th Nov 2002 Wales 58 v 14 Fiji
11th Nov 2005 Wales 11 v 10 Fiji
29th Sept 2007 Wales 34 v 38 Fiji
19th Nov 2010 Wales 16 v 16 Fiji
2nd OCT 2011 Wales 66 v 0 Fiji
15th Nov 2014 Wales 17 v 13 Fiji

Now considering we have been putting out weekend sides for most of those games our record against Fiji aint to bad either. Why is it that Wales record against Australia is looked at as a bad record, when the same record for Fiji against Wales is looked at as "not to bad" ?

What I'm saying is that I think fiji is a chance against Wales. Why?
1. A win and a draw in 6 games in the professional era.
2. 4 of those games in Cardiff, involve under strength Fijian sides who often have very limited time together. Fiji often still have players coming into the team the Wednesday prior to a test.
3. Assuming they have all their players available and get time together they could be the best prepared Fijian since 2007. It looks like the big split between players and management that occurred in 2011 is a thing of the past.
4. I think the itinary could allow them to target the Wales game. In 2011 they were out. Even if they are eliminated this time they still get a chance to try and peak against Wales. They will see Wales as their best chance of a win. The need to win 3 games to qualify for round 2. One of those games is Wales. The schedule means targeting both england and Australia is probably unrealistic.

I'm in no way suggesting they are favourites, but I think if things go their way they are capable of an upset. Wales would be team I'd pick as being most likely.

So Wales are the dark horse of the pool to England and Australia...and Fiji are the dark horse to Wales and one of either England or Australia?

It's getting even more complex now! This might become the most famous pool in world sporting history. The Pool of Intrigue, the Pool of the Apocalypse, the Pool of Oblivion.

Wouldn't that be some media circus though if Fiji came and had a stormer of a pool - overcoming all predictions and going through at the expense of the three lads that had all the column inches before the event began.

The furore and media meltdown fun would be delicious!

SecretFly wrote:The furore and media meltdown fun would be delicious!

If you are not Welsh it would be yes, I am bricking it for just that very occurrence.

LordDowlais wrote:

SecretFly wrote:The furore and media meltdown fun would be delicious!

If you are not Welsh it would be yes, I am bricking it for just that very occurrence.

It wouldn't be all darkness, Lord.  You'd go down with some good company.  Remember, my idea is that Fiji would knock out all three of you.  So the Aussies would be waiting with nooses for Cheika's return home, the Welsh would be rioting on the streets with burning effigies of Gatland and Biggar ...and the English  - their own Home World Cup? - on their soil? - knocked out by a rampant Fiji? - the BEEB? - The Guardian - The Times - Stephen Jones?  

You'd be part of the biggest sports story in the history u'deh Woyld!!!!!  The three of you would never be forgotten.  The Pool of Three Choaking Musketeers!  I wouldn't mind some of that action.  Notoriety can often be a blessing in disguise.

SecretFly wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

SecretFly wrote:The furore and media meltdown fun would be delicious!

If you are not Welsh it would be yes, I am bricking it for just that very occurrence.

It wouldn't be all darkness, Lord.  You'd go down with some good company.  Remember, my idea is that Fiji would knock out all three of you.  So the Aussies would be waiting with nooses for Cheika's return home, the Welsh would be rioting on the streets with burning effigies of Gatland and Biggar ...and the English  - their own Home World Cup? - on their soil? - knocked out by a rampant Fiji? - the BEEB? - The Guardian - The Times - Stephen Jones?  

You'd be part of the biggest sports story in the history u'deh Woyld!!!!!  The three of you would never be forgotten.  The Pool of Three Choaking Musketeers!  I wouldn't mind some of that action.  Notoriety can often be a blessing in disguise.

Think England would actually pack up the world cup and tell everyone to go home

SecretFly wrote:So Wales are the dark horse of the pool to England and Australia...and Fiji are the dark horse to Wales and one of either England or Australia?

It's getting even more complex now!  This might become the most famous pool in world sporting history.  The Pool of Intrigue, the Pool of the Apocalypse, the Pool of Oblivion.

I think BC touches on an important point about being successful in World cups- targetting matches. Hansen has been dabbling with it this year after nearly losing both last EOYT matches in the last two years. For the ABs targetting isn't really needed until the knockouts but some freeing up of players can be done in the pool nonetheless.

For the England et all  group this is definitely one where targetting has its advantages, knowing any approach has its risks, going all out every match a biggie, as even if they get out of that group any side will be burnt out by the time of the final. That's the reason I don't think England or Oz will be in the final, nor anyone from that group- particularly with an all out approach.

So that leaves targetting matches.

For me, Wales have it better than England and Oz in terms of Fiji, who will very likely be out before meeting Wales, having met England and Oz already. as will Uruguay.

So regardless of the England Wales match result, Wales will very likely have to beat Oz to either qualify or top the pool. Based on that, I would target the oz match if I were Wales.  I don't think they will beat both England and Oz, and even if they do, post section play will be too much, with matches getting tougher. After a light start for all 3 England will be ready for Wales, Oz may not be later on.

How 'target' is defined isn't clear, but there may be subtle things that can be done during the pool. Perhaps keeping a couple of key players off from the Uruguay and yes, even, Fijian match. Wales must assume the stance that 1- they won't lose to Fiji, and 2- Fiji won't qualify. The point here is those players selected have to own that match and dig deep, similar to how the lighter AB side beat Scotland this year.

Gatland should use the 6N, like it or not, to put his wider squad players under the pump, particularly versus Italy.

No side will win next years World cup playing its top side for 7 straight matches. Some strategy must be deployed, some risks taken at some point.

Taylorman wrote:

No side will win next years World cup playing its top side for 7 straight matches. Some strategy must be deployed, some risks taken at some point.

Very good point that often gets overlooked, especially when talking about that specific group/pool.  

I think people would be conscious of it on one level but when debating the pool they tend to overlook the idea that these sides might not necessarily be all facing each other with all their best players.  
And then it becomes even more a lottery than it already is - as which coach decides which game to give their best players to? Obviously, they'll be thinking ahead and hoping they get through the pool stages.  So therefore there will always be considerations about keeping best players as fresh and 'safe' as possible for play-off stages. 

That desire to be selective and to pace the main players would also then theoretically influence how the main three then play the other two sides in the group.  And those can be the iffy games in a big plan, when you think you have enough to be comfortable against the less backed sides but pay the price of resting one too many of your better players.

So yep.... there are always those concerns in all pools of course, but no doubt it'll be a big factor in that Welsh/English/Australian group

SecretFly wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

No side will win next years World cup playing its top side for 7 straight matches. Some strategy must be deployed, some risks taken at some point.

Very good point that often gets overlooked, especially when talking about that specific group/pool.  

I think people would be conscious of it on one level but when debating the pool they tend to overlook the idea that these sides might not necessarily be all facing each other with all their best players.  
And then it becomes even more a lottery than it already is as which coach decides which game to give their best players to (obviously they'll be thinking ahead and hoping they get through the pool stages.  So therefore there will always be considerations about keeping best players as fresh and 'safe' as possible for play-off stages.)  
That desire to be selective and to pace the main players would also then theoretically influence how the main three then play the other two sides in the group.  And those can be the iffy games in a big plan, when you think you have enough to be comfortable against the less backed sides but pay the price of resting some of your better players.

So yep.... there are always those concerns in all pools of course, but no doubt it'll be a big factor in that Welsh/English/Australian group

yeah its a pool of death for two reasons. One of the 3 won't make it regardless, and those that do go from the frying pan to the fire, where they must be lucky with injuries.

And that again confirms the importance of the wider group, who either carry the can for injuries, and if not, for those starting players who will by then be feeling it.

Taylorman wrote:For the England et all  group this is definitely one where targetting has its advantages, knowing any approach has its risks, going all out every match a biggie, as even if they get out of that group any side will be burnt out by the time of the final. That's the reason I don't think England or Oz will be in the final, nor anyone from that group- particularly with an all out approach.

So that leaves targetting matches.

For me, Wales have it better than England and Oz in terms of Fiji, who will very likely be out before meeting Wales, having met England and Oz already. as will Uruguay.

So regardless of the England Wales match result, Wales will very likely have to beat Oz to either qualify or top the pool. Based on that, I would target the oz match if I were Wales.  I don't think they will beat both England and Oz, and even if they do, post section play will be too much, with matches getting tougher. After a light start for all 3 England will be ready for Wales, Oz may not be later on.

How 'target' is defined isn't clear, but there may be subtle things that can be done during the pool. Perhaps keeping a couple of key players off from the Uruguay and yes, even, Fijian match. Wales must assume the stance that 1- they won't lose to Fiji, and 2- Fiji won't qualify. The point here is those players selected have to own that match and dig deep, similar to how the lighter AB side beat Scotland this year.

Gatland should use the 6N, like it or not, to put his wider squad players under the pump, particularly versus Italy.

No side will win next years World cup playing its top side for 7 straight matches. Some strategy must be deployed, some risks taken at some point.

Interesting analysis but I am not at all sure I agree. Burnout is a risk - but I think the risk of it will vary by team and by player. In England's case, I think the backs are mostly young enough that they need playing time together more than they need to be rested. The forwards are more at risk of burnout - but England's second string pack is good enough that they could start it against Uruguay and Fiji and still have a very strong chance of winning. Depending on whether England's backs get continuity from the 6N to the RWC, there may be an option to rest a couple of players, but if Ford is the chosen fly half, he will benefit more from playing more games with the chosen centre pairing than from time off.

For Wales, the problem is rather different. I think that Gatland gets his players into such a high state of tune that they pick up injuries more easily than their peers - and his gameplan is more dependent on having his first string fit than most. Wales seem very likely to have to play at least a couple of matches with more than one key player unavailable, and I think in an RWC that will cost them.

They are also probably the team that Fiji and Uruguay will target for a win (unless Cheika's strategy fails to improve Australia). The minor nations generally don't have a hope of qualifying - their aim is to come away with a major scalp and historically Wales have been the easiest target.

The path of the group winner to the final is actually pretty straightforward and (barring some bizarre results) avoids both NZ and SA. Anything can happen in knockout rugby, but the payback for a group of death is that winning the group gives you an easier ride. Whoever tops the group has a great chance to make the final.

Problem is that no one knows what their squad will look like until the tournament
begins. All will be effected by injuries to a greater or later extent, and with only 31
players available.

Player management both before and during the tournament will be vital. Given all
teams will field there strongest possible squads. There will be surprise results but
NZ and SA will almost certainly win their groups.

France or Ireland will then meet NZ barring the most unusual result and runners up
Group A play SA. It will be VERY foolish to assume as the press did just a few weeks
ago.

That as the home side England will win Group A and that all the sides they then meet
would be easy prey to the Final. For once France will need to fight to avoid NZ and IF
you think NZ would be easy meat for them the RWC tally is 4-2 AB`s.

Group A means you won`t be able to rest players v the other big two sides and Fiji
full strength become a problem too. Ireland too won`t exactly be easy for any side
if they go thru too.

Teams will have to counter the driving maul especially,yellow cards for contest in
the air seems flavour of the month and the weather.

Could be the survivors of group A will either be battle hardened or easy beats those
crowing over. Of the so called chokers ABs versus France that the latter didn't turn
up in the next round the effort being to much.

The RC and AI's proved that the teams are as close as they've been down to Scotland and Argie for probably 'ever', and that means the likelihood of upsets, which happen every tournament anyway, are even higher. One offs 'on the day' contribute more to that than any analysis a year out, or even 24 hours out.

There will always be one off performances.

Wales had no better chance to beat SA this year and in spite of SA being at their worst struggled to beat them.

Even with Meyer's stupid selection policies the Springboks will be a different kettle of fish next year.

Hansen's has some weird selections this year as well and hopefully all due to some cunning plan.

Oddly we had more depth this year and I think better players than last year. Retallick was nowhere near as good as this year, Coles was still nailing his position, we had no one for Conrad Smith where we at least had Fekitoa this year. Our 10's bat deeper this year as well so going into next year there are no real weaknesses in this side.

The squad just about picks itself so its really about getting back that continuity we had last year. The loss to SA, draw to Oz and several unconvincing wins is certainly a better headspace to be in than a 100% winning record where you don't learn a lot (we gained nothing from last year for this year).

So Hansen's got something planned I'm sure of that. Just can't pick it...

Taylorman, I dont know if you saw Hansen and McCaw being interviewed at the rugby Awards last night.

When they were asked about next year and the World cup, Richie replied "Personally I cant wait".

aucklandlaurie wrote: Taylorman, I dont know if you saw Hansen and McCaw being interviewed at the rugby Awards last night.

When they were asked about next year and the World cup, Richie replied "Personally I cant wait".

Yep that was great I thought. Somethings cooking I'm sure of it. They were completely happy with the way the year went when it simply wasn't as good as last year.

On the awards...I'm sure they all go to the same modesty school or there's a 'who can downplay our success the most' trophy going in the team. Retallick wins his award and doesn't even want to hog the limelight with Hansen and McCaw in the photoshoot.

I like the top women's award chat (Rawinia I think in the crutches) saying that's the goal for next year- to get onto table 9 with Ritchie McCaw AND John Key...hard case.

Biltong wrote:There will always be one off performances.

Wales had no better chance to beat SA this year and in spite of SA being at their worst struggled to beat them.

Even with Meyer's stupid selection policies the Springboks will be a different kettle of fish next year.

I hear this a lot since the game, and it's true. But it's often written as if Wales played at their best and still only just managed to beat them. Wales played appallingly in my opinion. We were gash. The Boks were just worse on the day. I think if we'd played the Boks like we played against Aus of NZ then we would have won by more. We played against the boks like we did against Fiji, and therefore the wins in both those games were a struggle. We butchered opportunities on your try line, butchered overlaps, kept turning the ball over. Hell, we even gave you a 5 metre scrum right at the end by knocking the ball back into play after we had been down your end of the pitch.

So yes, SA will improve. You probably won't see such a poor Boks at the WC. But then so will Wales on that performance. I personally think Wales were a bag of nerves and almost buckled under the pressure of getting that elusive SH win. Their skills and decision making went to jelly. So come world cup Eng, Aus, Fiji, Uruguay won't be facing such poor opposition from Wales. In my opinion.

Griff wrote:

Biltong wrote:There will always be one off performances.

Wales had no better chance to beat SA this year and in spite of SA being at their worst struggled to beat them.

Even with Meyer's stupid selection policies the Springboks will be a different kettle of fish next year.

I hear this a lot since the game, and it's true.  But it's often written as if Wales played at their best and still only just managed to beat them.  Wales played appallingly in my opinion.  We were gash.  The Boks were just worse on the day.  I think if we'd played the Boks like we played against Aus of NZ then we would have won by more.  We played against the boks like we did against Fiji, and therefore the wins in both those games were a struggle.  We butchered opportunities on your try line, butchered overlaps, kept turning the ball over.  Hell, we even gave you a 5 metre scrum right at the end by knocking the ball back into play after we had been down your end of the pitch.  

So yes, SA will improve.  You probably won't see such a poor Boks at the WC.  But then so will Wales on that performance.  I personally think Wales were a bag of nerves and almost buckled under the pressure of getting that elusive SH win.  Their skills and decision making went to jelly.  So come world cup Eng, Aus, Fiji, Uruguay won't be facing such poor opposition from Wales.  In  my opinion.

You are correct, I didn't mean that Wales were at their best and struggled, as I said a number of times after thematch, it was a woefull performance by both teams, in fact I mentioned the result was like a lottery, the one who got to kick at goal the most won.

I agree both teams will improve.

It reminded me of that Porridge episode where Godber's boxing fight was rigged by both sides - just a question of who could go down first.

emack2 you talk about depth.

In Pool A I believe England will find it easier to absorb injuries than their rivals because of superior depth.

England will be in a very strong position if they can beat Fiji, Wales and Australia because they'll be able to rest their frontline players against Uruguay and the 1st choice players would be fresh for the quarter finals.

Big if admittedly.

Neither Wales or Australia would have that luxury as their last game is against each other.

aucklandlaurie wrote: Taylorman, I dont know if you saw Hansen and McCaw being interviewed at the rugby Awards last night.

When they were asked about next year and the World cup, Richie replied "Personally I cant wait".

Well he is 33 so I'd expect that he literally can't wait....

rodders wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote: Taylorman, I dont know if you saw Hansen and McCaw being interviewed at the rugby Awards last night.

When they were asked about next year and the World cup, Richie replied "Personally I cant wait".

Well he is 33 so I'd expect that he literally can't wait....

Since when has being in your thirtees meant you are on the scrap heap ? I am 37 and I am still running rings around the young twenty year olds in 5 a side.

LordDowlais wrote:

rodders wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote: Taylorman, I dont know if you saw Hansen and McCaw being interviewed at the rugby Awards last night.

When they were asked about next year and the World cup, Richie replied "Personally I cant wait".

Well he is 33 so I'd expect that he literally can't wait....

Since when has being in your thirtees meant you are on the scrap heap ? I am 37 and I am still running rings around the young twenty year olds in 5 a side.

May be, but you hurt more for the next 5 days

Biltong wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

rodders wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote: Taylorman, I dont know if you saw Hansen and McCaw being interviewed at the rugby Awards last night.

When they were asked about next year and the World cup, Richie replied "Personally I cant wait".

Well he is 33 so I'd expect that he literally can't wait....

Since when has being in your thirtees meant you are on the scrap heap ? I am 37 and I am still running rings around the young twenty year olds in 5 a side.

May be, but you hurt more for the next 5 days

I try telling the youngsters this all the time, we had our annual Christmas football do last weekend, I was trying to tell them, that when they kick me, and I have a knock, I stay kicked and knocked for about a month.

LordDowlais wrote:

rodders wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote: Taylorman, I dont know if you saw Hansen and McCaw being interviewed at the rugby Awards last night.

When they were asked about next year and the World cup, Richie replied "Personally I cant wait".

Well he is 33 so I'd expect that he literally can't wait....

Since when has being in your thirtees meant you are on the scrap heap ?

Not the scrap heap, just circling the drain and getting perilously closer to the plug hole - unless you brad thorn maybe and you've never even been in the sink.

rodders wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

rodders wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote: Taylorman, I dont know if you saw Hansen and McCaw being interviewed at the rugby Awards last night.

When they were asked about next year and the World cup, Richie replied "Personally I cant wait".

Well he is 33 so I'd expect that he literally can't wait....

Since when has being in your thirtees meant you are on the scrap heap ?

Not the scrap heap, just circling the drain and getting perilously closer to the plug hole - unless you brad thorn maybe and you've never even been in the sink.

Brad has the benefit of being to big to fit in the sink, he probably doesn't fit into most bathtubs

Brad Thorn played the smart one in being born a sink.