Should NH teams be concentrating on 2015?

Ireland apart who must be piling all their chips on their fading golden generation, and France who are capable of anything, you can't seriously look beyond the ABs vs Oz/Saffers for the final.

England are in development, Wales are seemingly perennially thin in depth, Ireland have aspirations for renewal on the same lines of the past ten years but so far have produced Sexton and SOB, Scotland are always promising to promise and France will continue to be enigmatic,

But let's agree to give up any realistic hopes of any success in NZ.

No problem, think I might just give up on sport as well.

I guess I will just burn all my Irish fan paraphenalia.

Certainly the NH teams aren't favourites. But the favourite doesn't always win* (look at how England made it through to the final last time around). And the 2012, 2013 and 2014 6 Nations would be awfully boring if the teams were just building for 2012.


*also look at what happened to Australia in 1987, England in 1991, Australia and England in 1995, NZ in 1999, and NZ in 2007

Kiwireddevil wrote:Certainly the NH teams aren't favourites. But the favourite doesn't always win* (look at how England made it through to the final last time around). And the 2012, 2013 and 2014 6 Nations would be awfully boring if the teams were just building for 2012.


*also look at what happened to Australia in 1987, England in 1991, Australia and England in 1995, NZ in 1999, and NZ in 2007

England made it through to the finals despite their management (which is why Ireland may go somewhere special this time around). Core players with a mindset.

Ireland have a decent coach I don't know if Smal is earning his keep though

Thomond wrote:Ireland have a decent coach I don't know if Smal is earning his keep though

Uniquely in the NH, Ireland have a brilliant coach.

Kidney is great I would have doubts about some of his backroom team.

It comes down to the players on the pitch.

Like England 2007.

Portnoy wrote:But let's agree to give up any realistic hopes of any success in NZ.

Port, I find I agree with many of your posts. But never this. I don't care what the odds, never give up. Rather than quote Sir Winston Churchill about giving up, I'd suggest looking no further back than the RWC 2007. An admittedly pedestrian England team makes the final and was competitive for much of the match. A few lucky bounces, or unlucky depending on one's point of view, of this oddly shaped ball and they could have won.

Of course, we are only fans, and really don't matter. But there is no possible way any of our players (from whichever top 8 country) are going out there thinking they have no chance.

Nah, Portnoy, Scotland have a record of getting thru to every RWC quarter final to uphold, not to mention the importance of IRB ranking points for seeding in 2015, altho thathasnt wirked out too badly for us this time around. It's definitely not all about world cups either, I'd just really like to see Scotland makin progress. Hey, let's go wild, perhaps even a try or ten?!

Thomond wrote:Ireland have a decent coach I don't know if Smal is earning his keep though

Neither you could say is Gaffney, though if Kidneys back room staff are not doing their job then perhaps kidney isn't that great either as it is up to him to make sure everyone is pulling their weight.

I think he is a great coach at what he does. However, I get the feeling his methods may be a little dated. If he gets us to the semis he will be our greatest ever manager and I won't care what his methods are.

doctor_grey wrote:

Portnoy wrote:But let's agree to give up any realistic hopes of any success in NZ.

Port, I find I agree with many of your posts. But never this. I don't care what the odds, never give up. Rather than quote Sir Winston Churchill about giving up, I'd suggest looking no further back than the RWC 2007. An admittedly pedestrian England team makes the final and was competitive for much of the match. A few lucky bounces, or unlucky depending on one's point of view, of this oddly shaped ball and they could have won.

Of course, we are only fans, and really don't matter. But there is no possible way any of our players (from whichever top 8 country) are going out there thinking they have no chance.

It's not about professional rugby players Doc, It's about realistic punters' expectations.

I take on board As' comments about never failing to disappoint their fans in terms of their limited aspirations, but really they haven't ever shaken the world like the Portuguese did last time out.

Of the NH teams only Ireland and France can shake the SH hegemony realistically.

As fan I hold very few hopes for any great success, but I'd hope that my professional playing representatives fulfil their commitment a bit better than they did last Saturday at the MS

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:Nah, Portnoy, Scotland have a record of getting thru to every RWC quarter final to uphold, not to mention the importance of IRB ranking points for seeding in 2015, altho thathasnt wirked out too badly for us this time around. It's definitely not all about world cups either, I'd just really like to see Scotland makin progress. Hey, let's go wild, perhaps even a try or ten?!

I have been on teterhooks for fifteen years to see the promised Scottish advance As. That's the problem.

An expected performance in the RWC means nothing if there is no all-round improvement.

wales short in depth, portnoy what planet are you on??

if you have seen the squad changes over the past 3 weeks from 1st england match to 2nd match to argentina match, you can see the change or personall and the squad this week still looks as strong as any of the other weeks despite 9 changes. (bar back row, i think we will miss warbs on saturday)

No they should not because it means NZ/OZ/SA will almost certainly win in that case.
As the wc is in England in 2015 could this incourage teams that extra bit just so they can say they won it in england? Just a thought as teams like Ireland always up their performence playing the English.

Who did the portuguese shake?

The real question is; should Russia be concentrating on 2047?

Portnoy wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:Nah, Portnoy, Scotland have a record of getting thru to every RWC quarter final to uphold, not to mention the importance of IRB ranking points for seeding in 2015, altho thathasnt wirked out too badly for us this time around. It's definitely not all about world cups either, I'd just really like to see Scotland makin progress. Hey, let's go wild, perhaps even a try or ten?!

I have been on teterhooks for fifteen years to see the promised Scottish advance As. That's the problem.

An expected performance in the RWC means nothing if there is no all-round improvement.

Right now, Scotland rank 8th in the world, so getting thru to the quarters again would technically be advancement. But of course it doesn't end there. Our travails in the pro-era are well documented so I won't rehash old ground, so progress for us could simply come in the form of backs scoring tries, a return to the fast rucking and recycling game for which we were once renowned - you see, I don't think we have to win it for our presence there to havebeen a success, we just have to achieve some goals that mean something to us Scots

There is such a thing as enjoying the ride. If we were to take the scalp of the Aussies or Boks I would see reason to celebrate.

[quote="Notch"]The real question is; should Russia be concentrating on 2047?[/quote]

There are more than 3 teams in the SH. If NZ, Oz and SA are favourites for this world cup like you say, then shouldn't the other SH teams like Argentina, Namibia, Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, etc. be concentrating on 2015 as well, not just the NH teams that your article title stipulates?

[quote="Griff"]There are more than 3 teams in the SH. If NZ, Oz and SA are favourites for this world cup like you say, then shouldn't the other SH teams like Argentina, Namibia, Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, etc. be concentrating on 2015 as well, not just the NH teams that your article title stipulates?[/quote]

In fairness alot of people (not me) act as if only those three are in the SH. You make a fair point though.

Notch wrote:There is such a thing as enjoying the ride.

Amen to that. England's last world cup was one heck of a ride. At 36-0 down to the Boks I wanted to get off

Five out of six finals have had a 6N team in it.
Does that answer the post?

Port,
I gotcha. Stand corrected.
However, I truly believe, based upon the matches I have seen, that a number of teams do have a shot. To me, it ain't just wishful thinking. And I ain't sniffing the nitrous oxide either, though maybe I did get a whiff this morning.

I do agree the All Blacks look quantifiably better than everyone else. No doubts. But, the Boks and Wallabies don't look scary. Gobs of potential and talent, yes, but their recent performances are not intimidating. Do Ireland, France, England and possibly Wales have the ability and reasonable chances to turn the Boks and Wallabies over? Absolutely. Odds against? Yes, but not by much and not long odds at all.

So that leaves the All Blacks. Can they be beaten by anyone? At home? That's the big question. CAN they be beaten? No question. Even assuming no one imports a chef from South Africa. Longer odds, perhaps much longer? Absolutely that! But, I can honestly say I feel all the top teams are at the minimum in their class and have at least a puncher's chance, some better chances than that, especially with a few fortunate bounces. Recent RWC history bears that out.

I don't think any European team (except an inspired France) can beat New Zealand in New Zealand. But the 6 Nations won't be afraid of the Boks or Wallabies. They are ranked 2nd and 3rd in the rankings on merit, but both are beatable.

Here's one interesting scenario. All the groups go according to the rankings, except Ireland beat Australia. This puts 4 southern hemisphere teams on one side of the draw and 4 northern hemisphere teams on the other side. No inter-hemisphere match ups in the quarters or semi's. New Zealand slip up against the Boks or Wallabies. France or England or Ireland or Wales sneak into the final and nab the trophy against a battered, injury ravaged Australia or South Africa.

Unlikely, but possible.

feckless one problem with that is how the teams are situated in the pools.

the two quarters from a and b will be most likely made up of New zealand and france against scotland and england. most likely

NZ v scotland
france V england


then pool c and d you will most likely have Aus, ireland, wales and s.a
most likely

Wales v AUS
ireland v S.A

Answering the question of the OP - Yes.

1 - Corbisiero
2 - Hartley
3 - Stevens
4 - Kitchener
5 - Lawes
6 - Croft (C)
7 - Robshaw
8 - Narraway
9 - Youngs
10 - Ford
11 - Sharples
12 - Farrell
13 - Tuilagi
14 - Ashton
15 - Foden

16 - Webber
17 - Cole
18 - Attwood
19 - Wood
20 - Simpson
21 - Twelvetrees
22 - Goode

This is cup rugby and as always there will be some upsets. NZ look so good that at home it's hard to see them loosing but it could happen.

England, France, Australia, SA and possibly Ireland are capable of getting to the final. (I wish I could add Wales to that list but my head says no).

Anyway, it's WC time and it only comes every 4 years. Time to enjoy the moment not plan ahead!!

I see the old Irelands fading generation myth is being wheeled out again.

Ireland have only 2 areas where older players retain positions - 2nd Row and centre.

For the later we have a wealth of talent coming through and for the former the guys will last a couple of more years yet. David Wallace you say ? - Heaslip, Ferris, SOB will do me thanks

But hey lets continue with the myth


As to the original question - what adaft idea

offload

Totally agree, now is not the time for teams to be planning ahead. Now is the time to focus and throw everything at winning this time around. In November, the head coaches of all teams need to sit down, be ruthless about whose international careers are at an end, and put plans in place both to be strong in the short term and plan long term for 2015. Seemples!

doctor_grey wrote:I do agree the All Blacks look quantifiably better than everyone else. No doubts. But, the Boks and Wallabies don't look scary. Gobs of potential and talent, yes, but their recent performances are not intimidating. Do Ireland, France, England and possibly Wales have the ability and reasonable chances to turn the Boks and Wallabies over? Absolutely. Odds against? Yes, but not by much and not long odds at all.

So that leaves the All Blacks. Can they be beaten by anyone? At home? That's the big question. CAN they be beaten? No question. Even assuming no one imports a chef from South Africa. Longer odds, perhaps much longer? Absolutely that! But, I can honestly say I feel all the top teams are at the minimum in their class and have at least a puncher's chance, some better chances than that, especially with a few fortunate bounces. Recent RWC history bears that out.

Doctor Grey I agree with your thoughts.

New Zealand since the last world cup has lost 7 tests, 1 at home to France and two at home to SA, the others were away losses.

Overall you can't ignore the fact that SA and France has a realistic chance of upsetting the All Blacks. Even though the Wallabies have had a bad run against the All Blacks they have won two tests at home, and going to the world cup, they should have plenty of supporters to spur them on.

Australia and SA are beatable.

From a NH perspective, Australia has lost two tests vs England, one being at home, one vs Wales and one vs Scotland. Overall they had a 75% win rate against the six nation teams, but did not record a win against Scotland in the last four years.

SA has lost one test to Scotland, Ireland and France respectively. They have had an 82% win rate vs the Six Nation teams, but only a 50% win rate vs Ireland, the team they most likely will face in the quarter final.

I think one fator that needs to be remembered though, and that is SA and Australia's performances are currently measured on performances against the All Blacks, and in anyones book looks bad. Since the last world Cup Sa has a 40% win rate vs the All Blacks and Australia a 17% win rate.

They do however look much better vs the six Nations.

Portnoy wrote:have aspirations for renewal on the same lines of the past ten years but so far have produced Sexton and SOB.

Once again showing your complete lack of rugby knowledge, especially when i comes to ireland.

You say we have only developed SOB and Sexton,
think you might be forgeting one or two. let me help just incase you havent heard of one our two of our other players.

TOL, Murray, Earls, Fitz, Trimble, Bowe, Kearney, Jones, Ferris, Heaslip, Healy and they are only the ones to break into the national team,all under 27 too. Actually your right this team is aging.

If Portnoy thinks Sexton and SOB are the only players to emerge from Ireland in the past 10 years he is a fool.

Portnoy wrote:It comes down to the players on the pitch.

Like England 2007.

like every team ever, anywhere

No we shouldn't target 2015 before this tournament has been played, and it is clear that MJ and the selectors are not doing so - only Tuillagi looks likely to make the 30 man squad out of the 'players for the future' (OK, maybe Simpson as well now, but caused by the injury to Care).

Other than at 12, I think we've picked a good squad with a balance of talented youngsters and more experienced players, and I expect us to go out with the intention of winning every game.

Yes, the ABs are the most talented team around at the moment, are playing at home and are rightly favourites, but they are not blessed with superhuman powers (other than McCaw's invisibility to refs) - even the best teams lose on occasion, and it is the job of every other of the top flight teams to maximise their opportunity should the ABs suffer a surprising reverse.

I agree that at least on paper the England side going forward to 2015 has the potential to gain strength, but there are many things that could happen between now and then that prevent this full potential being realised.

geoff998rugby wrote:If Portnoy thinks Sexton and SOB are the only players to emerge from Ireland in the past 10 years he is a fool.

Well I can't deny that I'm a fool. But that is not what I said.

Portnoy wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:If Portnoy thinks Sexton and SOB are the only players to emerge from Ireland in the past 10 years he is a fool.

Well I can't deny that I'm a fool. But that is not what I said.

"have aspirations for renewal on the same lines of the past ten years but so far have produced Sexton and SOB,"

maybe you should explain this sentence so?!?

It means that Sexton and SOB are the emergent class acts (especially SOB) that have emerged in the past two years or so.

There is a sort of an assumption that Ireland have created a never-ending generation of greats on the wake of ROG and BOD and the other tri-letter accronyms.

But in reality this fantastical thinking - like the supposed stream Swedish and German tennis stars - it's wishful dream.

so you have gone now from 10 years to 2 years.

I take it from this that you don't rate the likes of heaslip, ferris and bowe?

caoimhincentre wrote:so you have gone now from 10 years to 2 years.

I take it from this that you don't rate the likes of heaslip, ferris and bowe?

Heaslip is good. THe others are standard international players.

Portnoy wrote:

caoimhincentre wrote:so you have gone now from 10 years to 2 years.

I take it from this that you don't rate the likes of heaslip, ferris and bowe?

Heaslip is good. THe others are standard international players.

with a comment like that i wonder how often you actually watch irish players

Portnoy wrote:

caoimhincentre wrote:so you have gone now from 10 years to 2 years.

I take it from this that you don't rate the likes of heaslip, ferris and bowe?

Heaslip is good. THe others are standard international players.

You are hilarious Portnoy.....

Still cant stop talking about Ireland I see.

A bit of tune changing there Portnoy

Its 2 years not 10 now.

An assessment that Ferris and Bowe are standard Internation players. Well both were good enough to make the last Lions tour and both would walk into the England team.

As for 'asperations for renewal' - that implies that the standard can be maintained. Well the quality of players coming through gives every indication that this is a logical claim.

We will remain solid at hooker.
We are producing better props than the last 10 years
2nd row is the biggest worry but a couple of years to sought that out
Ferris, Heaslip, SOB give us a top backrow and some good talent coming through
Murray will probably be a big improvement at 9
Sexton is successfully replacing O'Gara, as O'Gara did for Humphreys, also some real talent in the wings
No shortage of talent at centre coming through. Yes we will be weaker at 13, but I am certain we will be stronger at 12.
Back three - plenty of class on the way.

So overall the evidence is Ireland can very reasonably expect to maintain the standard of the last ten years and if anything are likely to improve.

As previously stated we are not an old side - other than 2nd row and Centre and the later has plenty of contenders in the 'wings'

By the way I cant wait to see who Ferris is up against in the warm-up against England.

He's handed Haskell his ass on a plate several times already and was preferred to Croft in the Lions up until injury

Whoever it is my money is on Ferris to have a stormer against England after gettin 20 mins against France.

In 2015 you can be pretty much certain the top 3 teams in the world will be NZ, Oz and SA. So there's no real point in concentrating on 2015, either.

Or 2019... or 2023... 2027... etc etc

Nope. Just responding to questions about Ireland. As I implied in my OP, only they and France are the only teams worthy of consideration from the NH for worthy consideration in the upcoming RWC.

But also I asked the question whether the NH teams should realistically concentrate on 2015?

as implied???
you stated that ireland had not produced players in the last ten years. then it was two.

geoff998rugby wrote:A bit of tune changing there Portnoy

Its 2 years not 10 now.

An assessment that Ferris and Bowe are standard Internation players. Well both were good enough to make the last Lions tour and both would walk into the England team.

As for 'asperations for renewal' - that implies that the standard can be maintained. Well the quality of players coming through gives every indication that this is a logical claim.

We will remain solid at hooker.
We are producing better props than the last 10 years
2nd row is the biggest worry but a couple of years to sought that out
Ferris, Heaslip, SOB give us a top backrow and some good talent coming through
Murray will probably be a big improvement at 9
Sexton is successfully replacing O'Gara, as O'Gara did for Humphreys, also some real talent in the wings
No shortage of talent at centre coming through. Yes we will be weaker at 13, but I am certain we will be stronger at 12.
Back three - plenty of class on the way.

So overall the evidence is Ireland can very reasonably expect to maintain the standard of the last ten years and if anything are likely to improve.

As previously stated we are not an old side - other than 2nd row and Centre and the later has plenty of contenders in the 'wings'

Time will tell geoff. Time will tell in the drifting sands of rugby...