POLL: Six Nations - Who will win it?

Remove all ads!

Thats bullsh*t. And even then, that might be an understatement on my part, around the same level as "The World is quite big" and "I wouldn't mind kissing Britney Spears"

Although, yes, we have the best forward pack and fly half in the World. But to dominate the whole of World rugby (lets not forget that teams like Australia, New Zealand, France etc. are teams of real quality) you need to have an extremely complete team allover the park, or weaknesses will be exploited by good teams.

[Edit: Ok, I rephrase: Robinson is certainly in the top 5 fastest rugby players in the World. But for acceleration and agility, he is the best. Which means, for my money in 1v1 or even 1v2 situations, he is the best. He's who I would want above all else to finish off a move.

And what do you mean by "France are a shoe in"?

[ February 16, 2004, 19:39: Message edited by: Morsmordre ]

 

That was exactly what NZ and Australia did wrong last year. They employed the wrong tactics to counter the weaknesses in the English team. If you watch those games again you will see that England controlled the game up front but had no innovation in the backline (and hence scored very few tries). They defended extremely well but employed a very flat backline defence. Neither Australia nor New Zealand showed sufficient skill or vision to vary their attack to use their precious possession (such as kicking in behind the defence to make them think twice about coming up so flat). NZ in particular placed far too much faith in the speed of their outside backs but these players were not given the opportunity due to failure of the pack to dominate and the halves to break things up.

Clive Woodward and Martin Johnson were smart enough to work out where England's strengths were and chose exactly the right tactics to make the most of them. That was the real beauty of England's victory.

Remember also that the victories over Australia (in the final) and New Zealand (in June) were very close (within 3 points) and could easily have gone the other way if a) Wilkinson ever missed or b) NZ had a reliable kicker. Given this, it is hard to see how you can claim that England had a team that could dominate in ALL positions.

[ February 16, 2004, 20:17: Message edited by: Harbourboy ]

 

Thank you for your reply. But do you not see how flawed your argument is?

By your argument, any team with a decent forward pack and a good kicker can dominate World rugby. This is obviously not the case, as a team needs quality all over the pitch. Your point that Australia etc. lose to England because they did not know how to capitalize on weaknesses that you seem to see, yet the coaches don't is imo, a great insult on the coaching and scouting staff.

England play a kicking game because it is the best way to utilize the superior forwards and good ol' Jonny to best effect . That is our strongest point, which is why that is why we play the style of play that we do. The argument that we have a weak team outside of those positions is quite frankly, ridiculous and a grave insult to the rest of the team.

Balshaw, Cohen, Dawson, Robinson, Paul, Lewsey etc. these all have quality written in permanent ink on their foreheads. They make very few mistakes and know exactly how to capitalize on mistakes (England play rugby like a chess game, play solid and defensively and wait for the inevitable mistakes from your opponent ) made.

I can see your arguments and appreciate where your coming from, but I'm afraid I disagree .

 

Don't get me wrong. The English backline is clearly quite good (my statement of 'ordinary' was an exaggeration for emphasis). Of course they must be good. But they are not the BEST backs in the world in the same way the forward and Jonny are. If you are claiming that they are, then that is where I would continue to disagree. If the backs were the best AND the forwards were the best - you would be thrashing everybody. There has probably never been a team that has dominated in *every single* position on the field.

If I was picking an ideal World XV, I would pick most of the forwards and Jonny but I'd never pick people like Cohen or Greenwood when I could have people like Howlett or O'Driscoll.

And it is not an insult to say that certain players are not the best in the world because by that token I am insulting 99.9999999% of the players in the world, which of course, I can't be.

 

I wasn't arguing that are backs are the best in the world, I was arguing your statement that they are not simply ordinary. They are very useful

But this could go on for ages and I'm sure we both have better things to do .

Nice to meet someone with as strong opinions as me, hehe. Been nice discussing with you .

Cya 'round!

 

Of course it's fun for YOU. You always have the option of wheeling out the unanswerable point that 'we won and that's all that matters'.

It's always fun when YOU'RE the champion . . . . all the rest of us can do is come up with hypothetical but ultimately pointless arguments.

Bring on 2007!!

...... but that's so far away . . . . . .

 

England will cain everyone in the Six Nations with ease, there is no point pretending otherwise.

 

I don't very often say this (especially after that 1999 World Cup semi-final), but . . . .

GO FRANCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Your just sour after years and years of domination by the Southern Hemispehere countries . England have come from being a team of underachievers to a team of real quality world class players who dominate the world stage!

We are enjoying our success while it lasts! Give us this one opportunity! (although with the class of young players coming through, it looks like we will be #1 for a long time!)

Stop being such a sad jealous creature and support the best team in this Six Nations! You know for a fact that France will probably
fold when it comes to the crunch!

 

*cough*

Who was it again that you said would probably fold?

Who is that is going to be #1 for a long time?

Well done France and Ireland!

Now I wait to see if my Euro 2004 prediction for England comes true as well.......

 

O.k, we lost to France and Ireland deservedly but every great team goes through a loss in form. France are a fantastic team and to lose to them is no disgrace. There isn't much to choose between the big four of England, France, N Z and Australia (taking nothing away from Ireland who thoroughly deserved their win) but I feel the difference is Johnson. During the world cup we played badly yet got results, this was a combination of the opposition not taking advantage and great leadership qualities shown by Jonno. Against France we looked clueless in the backs and the forwards didn't dominate as they had during the WC. Now isn't the time to start panicking though we have a great set-up here in England with plenty of youngsters coming through. Barkley has had a solid 6 nations and Chris Jones looks a fantastic prospect, never mind the U 21 team. Woodward thrives on preparation and I think he now has the time to start formulating his next major squad to take to the Southern HS.

England lacked a leader of the calibre of Johnson throughout the tournament and that was the deciding factor. Dallaglio is a wonderful player and is great as one of the senior members of the squad, but not THE leader. There will never be a replacement for Jonno but I think we should go with Phil Vickery or Matt Dawson. Vickery is hard as anything and will lead by example, while Dawson does so much talking anyway.

Plus, with Wilko in the team we most probably would have scored the 5 points the young Barkley missed. Meaning we would have won.

But I think the future of Rugby looks great atm! So many teams progressing quickly and it's gonna be an interesting next few years!

 

Hallelujah. I wouldn't want to be betting on rugby tests in the next or so. South African teams are even playing uncharacteristically well in the Super 12 so maybe the 'Boks will be better this year as well. England, Australia, NZ, and South Africa are all rebuilding after the World Cup so we will be watching carefully so see what each of them can come up with.

Plus next year there is the Lions tour!

 

Yeah, the Lions looks very strong for next year!

That's a debate in it's self! Who to pick for the Lions Tour?

Erm... Let me think a bit....

I think:

1) Woodman or Corrigan
2) Byrne or McBride. (Thompson would be top if he went and practised his throwing a bit more )
3) Vickery.
4) O'Connell - by a mile.
5) Mmm, tougher choice. Owen had a good game for Wales, but not sure he's bulky enough. Grewcock is a quality player, as is Kay although he seems a bit adrift atm. I'd also like to see Chris Jones somewhere on the team.
6) Hill (u need to ask? )
7) Tough call. Martyn Williams, Easterby and Gleeson all good atm.
8) Taylor, although he needs to work on his discipline. Dallaglio can be good or bad.
9) Matt Dawson. No questions or debate.
10) Wilko. (although Paterson should have a place on the team)
11) * See below
12) Greenwood or D'Arcy. Harris or Catt would provide a different option.
13) O'Driscoll, with Tindall onboard for something different.
14) * See below
15) Lewsey on current form. Murphy and Kevin Morgan be in a with a good shout if fit.

* Would pick any from the following:

Robinson + 1 of the following: (would probably pick Shane Williams)

- Either of the 2 Williams, Hickey or Horgan, Cohen, Lewsey.

 

No question or debate on halfback?

Peter Stringer would be the halfback in my WORLD XV, never mind the Lions. The Irish backs have revelled in the space and time that he has created for them. Dawson is strong with the ball in hand and is quality on defence but if I've stacked my Lions team with best backs in the Home Nations then I'd want the halfback that was best at unleashing them.

Otherwise, I agree with your comments (for once)

 

Stringer is good. I will agree with you on that mate. His distribution is brilliant. Probably one of the best in world rugby. But he has a few weaknesses in defence and is not vocal enough of a half back imo.

Matt Dawson is one of the best all-round half backs in the world in my opinion.