Who DESERVES to win the RWC 2011?

First topic message reminder :

Just on contribution to recent and historic performance over the past 100+ years.

So excluding all but the 'chokers' RWC winners, which country has earned an RWC win just on contribution to the game?

And to confess my own prejudice I include NZ in the vote.

(But I haven't voted for them - I went for Wales)

Edit I changed my mind - I'm now for France. Sorry.

Thanks for bringing back some sanity Robbo.

Nice post.

But ironiclly, a victory in the WC, however unlikely, would be a bad thing, since that would reinforce the RFU's opinion (I imagine that it is) that everything is going well.

robbo277 wrote:Saying they're better than us isn't a mitigating circumstance that makes it acceptable. Why are they better than us?

Because they have better players.

I think England get too carried away by this idea that having a larger player pool and superior financial resources means they should have a better national team.

It doesn't work like that in any sport. Brazil are the dominant soccer team, Jamaica have the best sprinters, Kenya the best distance athletes, Mexico the best boxers, china the best gymnasts, poland and iceland the best strongmen, Ireland the best jockeys etc.

OK I'm generalising a bit but there are all sorts of cultural, socio-ecenomic and genetic factors which helps a country be successful at a given sport and NZ clearly have a good mix to be very successful at Rugby despite not having the largest player pool. At RL they've been better than GB in recent times despite having only one top level side (and the RFU poaching their players .

Every side can only have a squad of 30 for the RWC and a match day squad of 22 so the fact that England and France have a lot more hung-over, fat blokes rolling around the pitch every weekend isn't really that relevent.

roddersm wrote:

robbo277 wrote:Saying they're better than us isn't a mitigating circumstance that makes it acceptable. Why are they better than us?

I think England get too carried away by this idea that having a larger player pool and superior financial resources means they should have a better national team.

On the contrary, it seems that its everybody else that accuses England of underperforming given their apparent resource.

"the fact that England and France have a lot more hung-over, fat blokes rolling around the pitch every weekend isn't really that relevent. "

France are the best team never to win it, I voted for them.

roddersm wrote:

robbo277 wrote:Saying they're better than us isn't a mitigating circumstance that makes it acceptable. Why are they better than us?

I think England get too carried away by this idea that having a larger player pool and superior financial resources means they should have a better national team.

Err, I'm pretty sure it's every other country using this fact to argue that England should be world number 1. Never seen an Englishman bring it up.

I'm glad you agree that sport doesn't work like that, though. Mystery solved.

I voted for France cos they've proved over the years that pure flair and abandon can overcome discipline and tactics when it clicks. Just magic to watch when it happens.

Great White wrote:

TheGreyGhost wrote:Great White, your point borders on ignorance.

No it doesn't. Its simply a response to your constant and repetetive xenophobic and hypocritical remarks. Of course, I expect you've also failed to realise that your constant, obsessive and repetetive xenophobia is indicative of inherent ignornace, as is all forms of racism. So, not only are you a xenophobe, you're hypocritical AND rather dull too.

Ouch! Ding! End of Round Two.

Can you open up a separate thread to continue this bout?

Better still can you both get a room

Lads do you really want this site to go the same way as the old 606 ?

roddersm wrote:Sorry Portnoy I can't vote for any of them because you only deserve a RWC trophy by winning the competition.

Agree. Well said.

Nice angle Portnoy.

I went for NZ.

I would like to see them win the WC and then not do the Haka again.

Ta very much.

TheGreyGhost wrote:Great White, your point borders on ignorance.

roddersm wrote:Sorry Portnoy I can't vote for any of them because you only deserve a RWC trophy by winning the competition.

roddersm wrote:
I think England get too carried away by this idea that having a larger player pool and superior financial resources means they should have a better national team.

I've never heard anyone from England mention this. It's usually the Welsh, Irish or Scottish that do.

It's really annoying people talking about 'deserving' to win something. Usually coming from someone on the England football team.

If you didn't win, you weren't good enough.

The RWC isn't a popularity contest, or beauty pageant, it's a competition. Best team wins. (despite what some kiwis will tll you)

mid_gen wrote:It's really annoying people talking about 'deserving' to win something. Usually coming from someone on the England football team.

If you didn't win, you weren't good enough.

The RWC isn't a popularity contest, or beauty pageant, it's a competition. Best team wins. (despite what some kiwis will tll you)

Rather flawed argument isnt it? First you say the word 'deserving' is annoying then you use the word best! Both as completely unmeasurable as each other. The team that wins is that that scores more points in each of its 3 knockout matches... now repeat after me... I will not...

I would say the team that wins is more deserving than the team that is the best...

Forgive me. I forget that not every shares the view that the best team is the one that wins!

nottins wrote:

roddersm wrote:
I think England get too carried away by this idea that having a larger player pool and superior financial resources means they should have a better national team.

I've never heard anyone from England mention this. It's usually the Welsh, Irish or Scottish that do.

Fair point, well the comment still applies to whoever keeps mentioning it regardless of where they hail from. Apologies for unfairly singling out the English .

roddersm wrote:Sorry Portnoy I can't vote for any of them because you only deserve a RWC trophy by winning the competition.

World cups are all about the 7 games.

I thought world cups were all about money. Surely its not about finding the best team isn't that what a ranking is about. The winner of the 100ms at the world champs wasn't the fastest man in the world only the man who ran that race the fastest.

Champions are remembered, not number 1s and rankings.

bathmad wrote:Champions are remembered, not number 1s and rankings.

Not necessarily. Listen to the amount of people who go on about the Welsh 1970s Golden Team there was no World Cup then. Personally the Kiwi team between the 2003 and 2007 World Cups was as good a team as I can remember and I'll remember them more than South Africa who won 2007 RWC

I only posted this article as a time-waster before the start of the RWC so 72 posts and 52 votes on I think that it's been worthwhile.

Going back to the OP - it's not about who will win or should win or can win

It's about which country has contributed so much to the rugby tradition that it should be recognised by the ultimate gong.

And I'll defend my decision to exempt the ABs from the other previous RWC winners.

bathmad wrote:Champions are remembered, not number 1s and rankings.

Best team I've see was the AB's from 1995-7. Far better than any of the WC winning sides I've seen as were the recent allblacks sides.

Rodders, you seem to forget the Springbok team from after the Lions series to end of 1998 won 17 tests in a row, including a whitewash of the tri nations.

With Nick Mallett at the helm? A fine, fine side.

luckless_pedestrian wrote:With Nick Mallett at the helm? A fine, fine side.

I'd be a very happy man if he can coach the Boks again.

No team to win the World Cup yet has not deserved to win the Webb Ellis trophy and the same can be said for this year´s winner. If you win all your games against all the teams that come up against you, then you deserve to win.

I think if you were to look at a sentimental favourite who deserves to win the World Cup, then you´d see France, Ireland, Argentina and any Pacific Island side at the top of the list in no particular order.

Who deserves it? Simple. Its the team that prepares the best, plays to their strengths and wins 7 or so matches on the trot.