Paul Ackford says "The best two teams in the world at the moment? No debate. New Zealand and Leinster. The rest are playing catch-up..."!

First topic message reminder :

By Paul Ackford

The reason is simple. Both outfits are set up to play, which sounds simple, but isn’t. It requires intention, fitness, understanding, organisation, unbelievably high skill sets across the entire squad, a positive attitude to risk, and courage. It also assumes a commitment to be multidimensional in approach rather than the one-trick pony nonsense which some teams get by on.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/9576371/England-must-look-to-the-flair-players-if-they-want-to-mix-it-with-the-All-Blacks-at-rugbys-top-table.html

anotherworldofpain wrote:If it had, would you consider it worthy of comparison?

Kind of irrelevant as it hasn't happened so is therefore a pretty ridiculous supposition around which to phrase your argument.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:It must have been awful confusing for New Zealanders when Leinster played Leicester in the Heineken Cup final in Edinburgh a few years ago.

"Why are an English team playing against themselves in Scotland for a European Cup?"

Nah not confusing at all, you guys do some pretty crazy things at the best of times.

Yes, like the way Berwick-on-Tweed is still at war with Russia, for instance. That is more confusing.

Actually they're not...but you'll believe anything your told...

GeordieFalcon wrote:Actually they're not...but you'll believe anything your told...

How about that it is illegal not to tell HMRC anything you don't want them to know, but acceptable to not tell them anything you don't mind them knowing.

Only the British could make this kind of law.

Well if you dont like it...feel free to leave

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:If it had, would you consider it worthy of comparison?

Kind of irrelevant as it hasn't happened so is therefore a pretty ridiculous supposition around which to phrase your argument.

Yes, my point exactly. It would be ridiculous to compare my planter to Babylon, just as comparing some club team to the worlds #1 ranked international side is ridiculous.

Jeez Geordie you ruined it.

I was picturing Migs flying sorties over the English country side and bombing the krap out of Berwick-on tweed, and people in the neighbouring towns, watching on and saying " Nay nothin to do with us, its a private war between Berwick-on-Tweed and Russia".

It's actually true Laurie, Geordie's just a bit ashamed that I brought it up.

anotherworldofpain wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:If it had, would you consider it worthy of comparison?

Kind of irrelevant as it hasn't happened so is therefore a pretty ridiculous supposition around which to phrase your argument.

Yes, my point exactly. It would be ridiculous to compare my planter to Babylon, just as comparing some club team to the worlds #1 ranked international side is ridiculous.

Lol you need to work on your English comprehension skills.

Morgannwg wrote:Nutella is the best spread on toast.

yes and with Camenbert* on top (or below actually) its even better !

(*quite common type of french cheese, similar-ish to brie but more smelly)

Ermm Camenbert and nutella- wtf

I suppose it is a very mild cheese. but still- drop me out.

Camembert apart from being very well known** is best fried or on french bread.

Personally I prefer the blue brie.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:If it had, would you consider it worthy of comparison?

Kind of irrelevant as it hasn't happened so is therefore a pretty ridiculous supposition around which to phrase your argument.

Yes, my point exactly. It would be ridiculous to compare my planter to Babylon, just as comparing some club team to the worlds #1 ranked international side is ridiculous.

Lol you need to work on your English comprehension skills.

Lol you need to work on your logic skills.

anotherworldofpain wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:If it had, would you consider it worthy of comparison?

Kind of irrelevant as it hasn't happened so is therefore a pretty ridiculous supposition around which to phrase your argument.

Yes, my point exactly. It would be ridiculous to compare my planter to Babylon, just as comparing some club team to the worlds #1 ranked international side is ridiculous.

Lol you need to work on your English comprehension skills.

Lol you need to work on your logic skills.

What does that even mean,you obviously don't understand the nuances of the language yet and I don't know any other languages so this conversation is going nowhere.

I understand the nuance, you just don't get the logic.

The idiom we are examining here is "to mention in the same breath".

It is frankly highly insulting to NZ to compare them with Leinster in this way, however much it props up the flagging ego of a certain geographically contained demographic of fans.

But there is a certain geographical but assymetric counterpoint to the concept.

I'm wondering whether its geometrically symetrical or asymetrical?

anotherworldofpain wrote:I understand the nuance, you just don't get the logic.

The idiom we are examining here is "to mention in the same breath".

It is frankly highly insulting to NZ to compare them with Leinster in this way, however much it props up the flagging ego of a certain geographically contained demographic of fans.

He doesn't compare them he is saying NZ are the best international team in the world and Leinster the best club side,now I don't agree Leinster are the best club side but that's beside the point.

You are not understanding the article.

Thing is, NZ are the undisputed best international team.

It is purely parrochial conjecture that Leinster are the best club team.

And at any rate there is no reason to compare the best Internation team and best club team other than to aggrandise further the unqualified claim about Leinster.

I understand the article. You are not comprehending the insulting subtext because you are not suitably objective. The switch comes in "the rest" you see, it is bundling "the rest" of international and club teams together which cements the logical grouping and qualified comparison of the initial subjects.

anotherworldofpain wrote:Thing is, NZ are the undisputed best international team.

It is purely parrochial conjecture that Leinster are the best club team.

And at any rate there is no reason to compare the best Internation team and best club team other than to aggrandise further the unqualified claim about Leinster.

I understand the article. You are not comprehending the insulting subtext because you are not suitably objective.

You're making mountains out of molehills again AWoP.

Nice try though.

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:Thing is, NZ are the undisputed best international team.

It is purely parrochial conjecture that Leinster are the best club team.

And at any rate there is no reason to compare the best Internation team and best club team other than to aggrandise further the unqualified claim about Leinster.

I understand the article. You are not comprehending the insulting subtext because you are not suitably objective.

You're making mountains out of molehills again AWoP.

Nice try though.

Only because Ackford is a small burrowing mammal with a rodentesque muzzle, and small beady eyes.

If we can't agree on toast spreads we've got no hope of agreeing on who's the best rugby team at the moment. The pool is too deep to see clearly enough. So I can see AWOP's argument. The ABs are the best and for all the rest there's Marmite.

anotherworldofpain wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:Thing is, NZ are the undisputed best international team.

It is purely parrochial conjecture that Leinster are the best club team.

And at any rate there is no reason to compare the best Internation team and best club team other than to aggrandise further the unqualified claim about Leinster.

I understand the article. You are not comprehending the insulting subtext because you are not suitably objective.

You're making mountains out of molehills again AWoP.

Nice try though.

Only because Ackford is a small burrowing mammal with a rodentesque muzzle, and small beady eyes.

Geometrically symmetrical (small islands on opposite sides of a globe etc etc) but rugby wise assymetrical. Ok, I know Llanelli once beat the All Blacks according to myth & legend songs, but an AB score against Leinter today, would be pretty assymmetrical.

anotherworldofpain wrote:Thing is, NZ are the undisputed best international team.

It is purely parrochial conjecture that Leinster are the best club team.

And at any rate there is no reason to compare the best Internation team and best club team other than to aggrandise further the unqualified claim about Leinster.

I understand the article. You are not comprehending the insulting subtext because you are not suitably objective. The switch comes in "the rest" you see, it is bundling "the rest" of international and club teams together which cements the logical grouping and qualified comparison of the initial subjects.

I'll keep trying,he doesn't compare the 2 teams.Read the article again you are misinterpreting it.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:Thing is, NZ are the undisputed best international team.

It is purely parrochial conjecture that Leinster are the best club team.

And at any rate there is no reason to compare the best Internation team and best club team other than to aggrandise further the unqualified claim about Leinster.

I understand the article. You are not comprehending the insulting subtext because you are not suitably objective. The switch comes in "the rest" you see, it is bundling "the rest" of international and club teams together which cements the logical grouping and qualified comparison of the initial subjects.

I'll keep trying,he doesn't compare the 2 teams.Read the article again you are misinterpreting it.

Of course there is an implicit comparison. It just suits your ego to pretend it makes sense to write an article about NZ and Leinster. It's just egotistical pish.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:If we can't agree on toast spreads we've got no hope of agreeing on who's the best rugby team at the moment. The pool is too deep to see clearly enough. So I can see AWOP's argument. The ABs are the best and for all the rest there's Marmite.

Seems this toast spread debate could bring a lot of controversy . rather eat cat food than touch marmite let alone vegimite. that said I can easily agree that ABs are the best at rugby.

Precisely. And we'll leave it at that. Leave Marmite and the rest out of it.

anotherworldofpain wrote:
I'll keep trying,he doesn't compare the 2 teams.Read the article again you are misinterpreting it.

Of course there is an implicit comparison. It just suits your ego to pretend it makes sense to write an article about NZ and Leinster. It's just egotistical pish.[/quote]

Nope,you just don't understand English very well.Mentioning two teams in the same article is not the same as comparing them.This is really basic stuff.

mystiroakey wrote:Ermm Camenbert and nutella- wtf

I suppose it is a very mild cheese. but still- drop me out.

Camembert apart from being very well known** is best fried or on french bread.

Personally I prefer the blue brie.

I recently had Cambrizola in Italy. Give that a go. Very tasty.

I don't recommend the Casu marzu, or Sardinian maggot cheese. Sometimes they make a joke by not mentioning what it is.

anotherworldofpain wrote:I don't recommend the Casu marzu, or Sardinian maggot cheese. Sometimes they make a joke by not mentioning what it is.

can only agree with that, pretty extreme stuff to taste or even look at in my book.

whocares wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:I don't recommend the Casu marzu, or Sardinian maggot cheese. Sometimes they make a joke by not mentioning what it is.

can only agree with that, pretty extreme stuff to taste or even look at in my book.

Casu Marzu, tried it on holiday in the costa smerelda, more of a local institution rather than a delicacy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CGseBM85gc

maestegmafia wrote:

whocares wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:I don't recommend the Casu marzu, or Sardinian maggot cheese. Sometimes they make a joke by not mentioning what it is.

can only agree with that, pretty extreme stuff to taste or even look at in my book.

Casu Marzu, tried it on holiday in the costa smerelda, more of a local institution rather than a delicacy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CGseBM85gc

Although from what I've heard it is preferable to some of the prematch food you get in parts of South Africa

Oh yeah Cambriozola is lovely- Havent tried it in italy mind- Things allways taste better there.. I can remeber taseing food from Italy from when I was 8 years. Thats how good it is!!

Taylorman wrote:Odd comparison...what about the Chiefs?

Only because you probably havent seen Leinster play?

I'm order to genuinely make a comparison between the ABs and Leinster you first have to analyse a few things:

1. An Atlas is a big book with coloured pictures that represent things called countries.
2. Europe is a big place.. New Zealand is just far away.
3. France is not in London
4. London is not in Buckingham Palace
5. Rome is not in Harrods
..... em, Geography is all about how to read the book that's called an Atlas...and.... oh forget it. ABs are the best golfers by far, Leinster score goals but can't beat the ABs for touchdowns.

You're not meant to come off your medication fly.

I read the article on Sunday and I certainly did not read it as Ackford putting Leinster and NZ on the same level.

He was merely saying that they are currently the best in their respective domains because they both play the best all round rugby. Both have a tough to beat defence and incisive attacking play, especially off turnover ball.

You can argue the case for other S15 teams, but they are not as defensively sound as Leinster.

The last time NZ played an Irish Province (Munster a couple of years ago) it was pretty close. NZ were not at full strength, but neither were Munster.

Hound_of_Harrow wrote:

You can argue the case for other S15 teams, but they are not as defensively sound as Leinster.

So whats the Leinster 2011/12 winning season comparison for this Hound? In 2012 the Chiefs record:

Played 18, won 14, lost 4 at 77.8% wins
Points for/against: 501/ 381 at average of score of 28-21
Tries For/ against: 53:31 at 3:2 a match

Cant find a similar table on the net that allows for this analysis.

This ones at:
http://www.lassen.co.nz/s14mat.php

Taylorman wrote:

Hound_of_Harrow wrote:

You can argue the case for other S15 teams, but they are not as defensively sound as Leinster.

So whats the Leinster 2011/12 winning season comparison for this Hound? In 2012 the Chiefs record:

Played 18, won 14, lost 4 at 77.8% wins
Points for/against: 501/ 381 at average of score of 28-21
Tries For/ against: 53:31 at 3:2 a match

Cant find a similar table on the net that allows for this analysis.

This ones at:
http://www.lassen.co.nz/s14mat.php

I don't know that it proves anything as Leinster had different opposition but I did the math.

All Rabo and HC games included.

Leinster
Played 33 Won 27 Drawn 2 Lost 4 at 81.8% wins
Points for/against: 884/ 462 at average of score of 28-14
Tries For/ against: 80:41 at 2.4:1.2 a match

Fair enough, thats a superior rate all round. The opposition is probably not as strong all round but thats beside the point. You can only play who's in front of you.

I'd expect the Chiefs to beat Leinster but thats because I'm barking from this side of the planet.

Taylorman the reason the Leinster team last year is so special is because they are only the second team to win back to back Heineken cups, the first team to do it unbeaten and they have won three Heineken cups in four years. No team has ever done the Heineken cup and Rabo double yet though Leinster have been in both finals twice and came within a whisker of doing it last year.

I do think Leinster are going through a dip in form now as Schmidt is attempting to blood new talent and I don't think this year is going to be fruitful as a result.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Hound_of_Harrow wrote:

You can argue the case for other S15 teams, but they are not as defensively sound as Leinster.

So whats the Leinster 2011/12 winning season comparison for this Hound? In 2012 the Chiefs record:

Played 18, won 14, lost 4 at 77.8% wins
Points for/against: 501/ 381 at average of score of 28-21
Tries For/ against: 53:31 at 3:2 a match

Cant find a similar table on the net that allows for this analysis.

This ones at:
http://www.lassen.co.nz/s14mat.php

I don't know that it proves anything as Leinster had different opposition but I did the math.

All Rabo and HC games included.

Leinster
Played 33 Won 27 Drawn 2 Lost 4 at 81.8% wins
Points for/against: 884/ 462 at average of score of 28-14
Tries For/ against: 80:41 at 2.4:1.2 a match

Forget the stats, I just know what I'm watching. I have seen Leinster annihilate sides (including my own lot), and win tough away out knock out games in the HC. Quins (bloodgate) in 2009 and the semi v Clermont last season.

They showed a will to win that was impressive, and sets them apart from the rest of Europe atm.

And I'm English.

The S15 teams aren't as defensively sound as Leinster? Perhaps NH club sides aren't as effective attackers. We're probably never going to know. What we do know ias that the AB's are generally more effective at scoring and defending against tries than their northern counterparts. The world 3 top sides have 5 teams each competing in a competition, which presumably is strong. The heinekin cup is made up of provincial teams from nations traditionally ranked 6-12, and the top club sides (from large competitions) from teams often ranked 4 and 5. Even with ex pat players it's hard to argue, from a logic anyway, that a heinekin cup side is better than a super 15 side.

(I do think that the Heinekin cup will overtake the Super 15 at some point. if this happens it may be a tipping point that drags SH players north and makes it difficult for the SH club competition to recover).

In all honesty, its something thats never easily resolved. SH fans will argue that the NH sides dont ever play teams that have players from the top 3 ranked nations, whereas 95+% of the SH test sides that beat their NH counterparts recently, perform in the sxv, the Blues for example in finishing bottom 3 or 4, had 10 past or present AB's on their books.

Logic alone says the competition is tougher, but it doesnt mean that the team beating all the other sides up there is necessarily weaker than the top SH side. All either side can do is win, and the above Leinster stats, were overall stronger than the Chiefs...so its not necessarily that convincing...

Kia, do you remeber this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaESxxvCCFk

Oh, and Syrop de Liege is the best thing I've ever had on toast. But you have to go to Belgium to get it.

bcl - Ackford is also making comparisons with two teams who have dominated their respective competitions in recent years. He is talking 'current' and not about several years ago. If I have an issue with the comparison, it is that I think Leinster would struggle to put in performances every week if the HC was played in one block, rather than two games each month in Oct, Dec & Jan in the pool rounds of the HC.

I suspect he is also writing from a point of view of what he's seen, either live or on TV*. Which is fair enough. At least he isn't spouting shoite about NZ rugby like Stephen Jones, who sounds like he doesn't actually watch much rugby.

Anyway, from some of the highlights I saw, The Chiefs were pretty impressive last term.


Imo the lure of wearing the national jersey, and the fact that the SH don't generally pick players who play outside their country, means you are not going to see an exodus of the best SH players to HC teams anytime soon. Unless they have a fit of pique after getting dropped - a la Giteau.

* Most of us here can't be arsed to get up at an early hour on a Saturday to watch the NZ S15 franchises in their home games. Especially if you've had a tough week at work, and have earned a few Friday night beers

Laurie I think you're showing your age there! I can remember Kiwi kids for Weetbix (the Aussie version was Aussie kids are Weetbix kids) but didn't know Vegemite had a song. Or indeed advertising.

Taylorman wrote:Fair enough, thats a superior rate all round. The opposition is probably not as strong all round but thats beside the point. You can only play who's in front of you.

I'd expect the Chiefs to beat Leinster but thats because I'm barking from this side of the planet.

Yeah the thing is thought that a lot of the Rabo games would have been played with and against weakened teams as we need to rotate over the season.I could try doing it over just the HC games which would give a more accurate reflection of our first team but we only play 9 games in that comp and there's a lot of luck involved in who you draw in your pool.

blackcanelion wrote:The S15 teams aren't as defensively sound as Leinster? Perhaps NH club sides aren't as effective attackers. We're probably never going to know. What we do know ias that the AB's are generally more effective at scoring and defending against tries than their northern counterparts. The world 3 top sides have 5 teams each competing in a competition, which presumably is strong. The heinekin cup is made up of provincial teams from nations traditionally ranked 6-12, and the top club sides (from large competitions) from teams often ranked 4 and 5. Even with ex pat players it's hard to argue, from a logic anyway, that a heinekin cup side is better than a super 15 side.

(I do think that the Heinekin cup will overtake the Super 15 at some point. if this happens it may be a tipping point that drags SH players north and makes it difficult for the SH club competition to recover).

I think the NH fans get impressed by watching Leinster, which is essentially Ireland bolstered by some retired or not quite good enough SANZAR players. Of course they are impressed because they are bolstered by these SH players, so they play actually better than Ireland.

By contrast, when the Leinster players go to Ireland and play, for example NZ, they get pasted by 60 points.

Fans in the NH tend to say "Why can't the Leinster guys play as well for Ireland as they play for Leinster", but they miss the point that Leinster are really competing at a much lower level.

In the SXV Leinster would finish near the bottom of their conference.