Clive Woodward Mentions World Cup

England's searing form against Wales has led Clive Woodward to break his long term silence on the rugby World Cup.

http://nzh.tw/11217572

England's sole World Cup winning coach is renowned for being reticent to mention that he led England to a World Cup once, and so the fact that he has brought it up now is a clear sign that England are contenders for 2015, experts have said.

I personally was relived that his long term silence has been broken because I, and I imagine others had forgotten his involvement in 2003 and it is of such relevance to the game now, tht these things shouldn't be forgotten.

He also broke another of his traditions in refusing on comment on rival coaches when he (without any hypocrisy at all) accused warren Gatland of being a bit gabby about Welsh prowess.

Some priceless stuff in there. Thanks GE

"This is the first time this team really reminded me of the 2003 World Cup side"
The ultimate compliment


"The No.1 rule after a performance like that is to look in the mirror as a coach before pillorying your team so he has to take the responsibility.''

Wonder how many times did he apply that to himself...

Everytime he mentioned it on Sunday Jiffy and Guscott just looked at the floor. Then eventually if he got to a point Jiffy looked up and nodded, then looked down again when 2003 was brought up again. You can almost see the words "it was 11 years ago man, shut the :cuss up" on his lips (I know I said it out loud).

Anytime Woodward comments on anything he HAS to bring up his 2003 side

Can't see us not winning tbh.

IronMike wrote:Anytime Woodward comments on anything he HAS to bring up his 2003 side

And why not?

He is the only NH coach to win a Rugby World Cup. If it was a Welsh coach or Warrren Gatland for that matter we would never hear the end of it. 

IronMike wrote:Anytime Woodward comments on anything he HAS to bring up his 2003 side

And why not?

He is the only NH coach to win a Rugby World Cup. If it was a Welsh coach or Warrren Gatland for that matter we would never hear the end of it. 

The problem is he is only there on the panel because of it. The job he did at the time was remarkable but we're only interested in what is happening now. If SL can pull it off again then we can perhaps refelect on it in a different way but truth is I think it's a year too early and there would have to be some more outstanding development of this team to stand a chance, good as they are they still have a lot to do.

Clive, thanks for the memories but give it a rest.

I thought it was rate. Normally he's known for leaving the plaudits to his players, isn't he?

i think its pretty funny. guscott looks like he wants to slap SCW almost all of the time.

i do however think it is useful to have a manager commentating alongside ex-players. brings a different perspective.

and all the decent ones appear to have dayjobs at the moment

GloriousEmpire wrote:I thought it was rate. Normally he's known for leaving the plaudits to his players, isn't he?

is that some kind of SH slur or a typo?

Thanks quinns - I've just been banned for posting it. For frocks sake

I still talk about the time I scored six goals as me and my mates beat the bigger boys from around the corner in soccer in a 30-26 thriller on the road outside my house. Two headers, two tap-ins a free kick and a quite magnificent volley. I really showed the full breadth of my talents that day.

If I coached a team to a rugby world cup win you'd never stop me from talking about it.

that's not fair if you've been banned for the OP GE. if SCW said those things he deserves some abuse!

i know you dont understand the obstruction rule, but i generally enjoy your threads

Was that a genuine article and genuine Woodward quotes?

If so.................... why do whocares and GE get their posts 'reported'?

can i "un-report" this one?

GE- hope you got your week 5 predictions in b4 u got the boot!

maybe that's the ulterior motive

Reported?
Anyway, looked like a genuine article of the NZ herald to me.

just to be clear - wasnt me that reported it, although i have a pretty good idea who it might have been...

whocares wrote:Reported?
Anyway, looked like a genuine article of the NZ herald to me.

Oh I'm certain it is. It's just that you have a red tag on your first post. But you're okay...you're still here! .

Tend to agree with the write up and long term I'm picking England to win the World cup next year- even have bucks on it already.

Obviously closer to the time I'll be supporting the ABs but a quarter or Semi vs England at Twickers isnt a scenario I'd be throwing a party for. The final I'd be ok with as the expectation on England will be just as daunting for them- as we've seen before up there.

wow. nice to hear taylorman, but i dont think even the english fans are dreaming of world cup glory yet.

the summer tour versus the ABs with 2/3 of the starting XV missing for the first test is going to be a really interesting psychological battle, for both sides.

i have to say on current form NZ and SA are clear 1+2, and England clear 3 (imo). i guess a lot can change in 18 months but i hope you are right that the good momentum that england's young ambitious side have keeps going.

if england do win, i reckon their second rows will be the deciding factor. stick a gps on them and measure the open play work they do and i think they are redefining the role (have nicked that phrase from sgt pooly on another thread - credit where credit is due)

Re the summer tour I'm on the other end of that view. I don't think the Summer tour result makes any difference whatsoever in terms of the World cup. Its the one off-ness nature of the quarter and semi that drive the odds in Englands favour.

In a 3 or 5 test series at Twickenham I'd back the ABs for certain.

I think we all like to think it will have an impact but its different places, times and reasons for even being there.

We beat France 61-10 3 months before they knocked us out in 07 so I'm not sure what that says.

In fact, the best possible outcome for NZ, in terms of the World cup alone, is a 3-0 massacre by England in the Summer series. Having that hanging over NZ and its AB's for the year up until the cup would be invaluable- all the money in history couldnt pay for what that would give us. There would be no stones left in the country to turn over in terms of the resolve. Run out of cliches but I think you get the picture...  

When England topped us in 2012 Hansen put it down- in terms of what he could control going forward (rather than the fact that 'we met a better team' which you can do nothing with as a coach)- to not finishing the year out, that we need to front every test, every minute of every test- whether it be the first of the year or the last, the first minute of a test or the last.

What it meant was that even after a long year, and despite the NH sides pushing the AB's they were able to dig deep, culminating in that last minute versus Ireland. last test, last minute and the AB's finished at their best.

If they had have beaten England the previous year that level of resolve wouldn't have been there in 2013, and we would have lost that Ireland match under the same circs.

My opinion anyway, based on Hansens early year mutterings

majesticimperialman wrote:

IronMike wrote:Anytime Woodward comments on anything he HAS to bring up his 2003 side

And why not?

He is the only NH coach to win a Rugby World Cup. If it was a Welsh coach or Warrren Gatland for that matter we would never hear the end of it. 

Because he talks about his tactics and selection policy, preparation and why it was successful, didn't talk much about his more recent Lions tour though.

Wonder if he'll give Gats some tips for the tour in 2017- could be some valuable information he could pass on...

majesticimperialman wrote:

IronMike wrote:Anytime Woodward comments on anything he HAS to bring up his 2003 side

And why not?

He is the only NH coach to win a Rugby World Cup. If it was a Welsh coach or Warrren Gatland for that matter we would never hear the end of it. 

We have only just stopped hearing about 4th place at the 2011 RWC! and that was only down to the Lions tour which I'm sure we'll hear about for some time yet. 

But I think its time SCW started to cool it about 2003 if I'm honest, I'm surprised he isn't banging on about how he kick started Southampton to where they are today or how great 2012 was all because of him!

Scrumpy wrote:
But I think its time SCW started to cool it about 2003 if I'm honest, I'm surprised he isn't banging on about how he kick started Southampton to where they are today or how great 2012 was all because of him!

Don't forget he taught Dave Brailsford everything he knew, so SCW is also responsible for British cycling success included Tour de France wins.

I also believe that he may well drink the same coffee as Jurgen Grobler, so rowing is down to him as well.

Ben Ainslie was going to give up sailing after the disappointment of silver in 1996. However the inspiration of SCW refusing to leave after ignominy at the 99 RWC gave him the strength to continue.


SCW is a living foot.

Cringeworthy moment was when Clive said England should look to beat Italy by 50 points in Italy as if it is such a simple task.

The guy has made millions by being able to bang on about how great he is.

There is a lesson for us all there somewhere!   

I'm no fan of Sir Clive (except when he was playing) but if you actually read his comments they aren't as bad as some are making out. He mentions that the ball handling skills of the locks remind him of the 2003 team that's it. He also points out that Gatland said things that have now come back to bite him...which many on hear have already commented on.

SCW saying England have to look to beat Italy by 50 is true if they wish to win the 6Ns. He said they had to target such as score. Nothing wrong in that. Italy will be targeting to beat England, as Ireland will be wanting a good points win over France and France over Ireland. England need to win well to put pressure on Ireland, which is what SCW essentially said.

SCW's job is now to be a pundit. He has credentials as a former player and a coach who has won the 6Ns and RWC as well as a large and controversial gob.

Ball handling skills of the locks remind him of 2003? Ben Kay anyone...

didnt he drop one over the line in the final or semi final?

re SCW, i still say my favourite is the expression on Guscott's face every time SCW opens his mouth. hilarious.

quinsforever wrote:didnt he drop one over the line in the final or semi final?

re SCW, i still say my favourite is the expression on Guscott's face every time SCW opens his mouth. hilarious.

Yep, Kay dropped one practically on the try line in the final, I remember seeing interviews with him where he said something along the lines of him being scared of reading "dropped the World Cup" for the next few years if we had lost

haha. bet he sends jonny wilkinson a xmas card every year!

Slow and Sedate wrote:I'm no fan of Sir Clive (except when he was playing) but if you actually read his comments they aren't as bad as some are making out.  He mentions that the ball handling skills of the locks remind him of the 2003 team that's it. .

It's his building narrative that people are refeing to.  He's been punditing now right the way through the 6N and he's been writing articles for papers etc.  His continuing and strenghtening narrative is that this present England are on course now for something special.  Everyone knows what he's refering to.

Fine.  That's his right to think it, to believe it and to express that view.  But how he articulates and arrives at that view is always invariably down the same avenue of..because the players, the structures, the skills, the sense of belief etc, etc.................. remind him of His team - the Olympic Gods of 2003.  The tiring aspect is that he continually uses His team as a yardstick for defining quality.

There are other markers existing in the world today that can be used to define quality.  There have been other WC winning sides since 2003... there certainly has been one potent International side as a prime example of near 'perfection' strutting the world now for a long, long time.

This England side doesn't need to be a carbon copy of Woodward's side to have potential.  I'd say it's not really a Woodwardesque side at all.... but he's always struggling to make the connection in the minds of the viewer.  Today's potential and My 2003 Team - one truth united.

One more thing I've noticed - and maybe I just haven't listened closely enough to him and people can put me right on it if so - but I certainly haven't heard him say too much about Lancaster himself as being the influence.  He mentions the team, the players, the structures, the environment of belief...... does he give much credit to a successor of his for that or does he just think the England team are using His blueprint to become winners again?

beshocked wrote:Cringeworthy moment was when Clive said England should look to beat Italy by 50 points in Italy as if it is such a simple task.

It's ambitious, but actually, doable. England are going well, Italy are not, and whilst they are no pushovers these days, England's momentum and form could secure a big win out there. In fact, i'd be surprised if England didn't put at least 40 on Italy, why should England fare worse than Ireland did against the same team?

Sir Clive is always good value.

He's quite mischievious and I think he knows he'll wind people up. Much like GE.

Thing is up till very recently he had a real downer on Lancaster, trolling him all over the press. Now hes got a good TV job hes towing the party line again.

He's not winding people up, Cyril.  

Some of his family members should tell him to ease off as he's actually been laughed at.  Nobody wants past heros who are aging to be laughed at by talkin' about the old days endlessly.

It's like Cliff Richard always talking about his Christmas Number ones.....   

SecretFly wrote:He's not winding people up, Cyril.

This thread (and countless others) hanging on his every nostalgic word would suggest otherwise

He is a bit like Uncle Albert with his 'during the war' anecdotes, but that's cool.

Secret his job as a pundit is to be outspoken.  If he was bland the BBC & Daily Mail wouldn't employ him...no Jack Rowell, no Ashton etc.  Look at Sky and BT they have prats IMO as pundits in Barnes and Healey, but the add flavour as in Marmite.

I don't like SCW and find it hard to defend him, but he is doing his job and at the end of the day has done and been far more successful than any of us here   

Cyril wrote:

SecretFly wrote:He's not winding people up, Cyril.

This thread (and countless others) hanging on his every nostalgic word would suggest otherwise

He is a bit like Uncle Albert with his 'during the war' anecdotes, but that's cool.

And again Uncle Albert was laughed at behind his back and even sometimes to his face. That is what is happening to SCW.

On the BBC (as opposed to his paper column) his comments are extremely bland and continuously reference RWC 2003. To be fair though that was the last time (other than just before Dublin 2011) we could fell confident in the England team.

Secret Fly's post made perfect sense. SCW is trying to be all 'I'm the man' I should know a good team when I see it. But England are bubbling away nicely and don't need SCW blowing smoke up their bums. If you're good, you don't need to tell people you're good.

Cyril wrote:

SecretFly wrote:He's not winding people up, Cyril.

This thread (and countless others) hanging on his every nostalgic word would suggest otherwise

He is a bit like Uncle Albert with his 'during the war' anecdotes, but that's cool.

It's funny.  People like to be entertained.... These threads entertain people.

Me?  I find him a sad figure in truth.

Slow and Sedate wrote:
I don't like SCW and find it hard to defend him, but he is doing his job and at the end of the day has done and been far more successful than any of us here   

You know that for a fact?? I think there might actually be more success around this site than you might imagine. Not every successful person sticks only to Twittersphere.

SecretFly wrote:

Slow and Sedate wrote:
I don't like SCW and find it hard to defend him, but he is doing his job and at the end of the day has done and been far more successful than any of us here   

You know that for a fact??  I think there might actually be more success around this site than you might imagine.  Not every successful person sticks only to Twittersphere.

Since I can imagine only a miniscule amount have been, it might not be difficult to surpass expectation.

SecretFly wrote:

Slow and Sedate wrote:
I don't like SCW and find it hard to defend him, but he is doing his job and at the end of the day has done and been far more successful than any of us here   

You know that for a fact??  I think there might actually be more success around this site than you might imagine.  Not every successful person sticks only to Twittersphere.

Perhaps I should have used the word most rather than any.  But then again there aren't that many world cup winning coaches...

He's a RWC-winning coach who's milking it a bit. Pfftt who cares. I'm looking forward to Gats' punditry in a few years time. Let's face it his whole world revolves around 2003, but why not, he reached the top for a brief period. He's less boring than Guscott, less biased than JD, less whiney that that Scottish guy, but not as amusing as Brian Moore. So there we have it, a little bit less of Clive and lots more of Brian.