TheReligion
Abusive
They both barely lost in two of the greatest games of all time. Underperformed?
I thought I read here that Ireland were well below par v NZ and that NZ played out of their skins?
They both barely lost in two of the greatest games of all time. Underperformed?
If we’d subbed the passing statue in the last 20 mins we’d be playing tomorrow nightif ireland were better three years ago, they’d have got a better draw. the key is to not be shit for large periods of time.
Leaving the fact that I'm pretty certain that noone said "well below par", what would that change about barely losing one of the greatest games of all time?I thought I read here that Ireland were well below par v NZ and that NZ played out of their skins?
But they lost.They both barely lost in two of the greatest games of all time. Underperformed?
They're just not very good and neither are Argentina. Awful game, that.
But they lost.
Look, my perspective is that Ireland came in as world number one, and this was widely considered the finest Irish team of all time. Yet it still went out in the quarters. That’s underperformed. And to be honest, if you don’t think your best team of all time underperformed going out in the quarters, then that’s not a very optimistic take for ever doing any better
Quite a few are on their last legs in that England squad, and then you’ve got some who are just very average. As a Bath fan, it amazes me that Will Stuart gets starts for England. The likes of Genge and Sinckler haven’t seemed to kick on from where I thought they would be four years ago.I don’t disagree but England look unfit in the Argentina game, at the end they couldn’t get rid of the ball fast enough. They are not exactly quality, but they never lack fitness.
Saying that England overperformed only makes sense if you think independent of any context. In context, they did exactly what would've been expected.
Exactly, if the draw had gone how everyone claims it should then they’d have been beaten in the semi if things remained the same and been 3/4 overall. Which is an underachievement for the 1 ranked team.
Leaving the fact that I'm pretty certain that noone said "well below par", what would that change about barely losing one of the greatest games of all time?
It’ll be interesting to see where England go now. I’m expecting bugger all from SN2024 because it’s only just round the corner, but you’d have to say by 2025 we’d want to see the next wave of players and idea bedded in.Quite a few are on their last legs in that England squad, and then you’ve got some who are just very average. As a Bath fan, it amazes me that Will Stuart gets starts for England. The likes of Genge and Sinckler haven’t seemed to kick on from where I thought they would be four years ago.
It would say they underperformed
Still fecking ruminating on our loss. I've been listening to the Ireland-NZ post mortem on a podcast I listen to (second captains) who have a bunch of pundits who are very knowledgeable about rugby (unlike me!) They have me a bit confused though.
The consensus is that:
1. A lot of NZ players put in 9/10 or 10/10 performances. Only Aki managed that for Ireland
2. NZ were completely dominant at the breakdown
3. NZ set pieces were better than Ireland
4. NZ preplanned attack plays were better than Ireland
5. NZ defence was better than Ireland's
6. NZ coaching on the day (subs. tactical adjustments etc) was better than Ireland
I completely agree with points 1-5 and am happy to take their word for 6 (that stuff is over my head)
What melts my head is how all of the above can be true and the game was still so close? I can't think of any close shaves at the Ireland try line but the held up maul and the cross kick which just evaded Sheehan's hand were two moments which could have won Ireland the game.
Most of the stats have Ireland as the dominant team too.
Can anyone make all of this make sense? How did Ireland manage to play so badly - and New Zealand play so well - without New Zealand winning comfortably?
Weirdly, I don't fully disagree with the pundits. I'd say we played at about a 6 or 7 out of 10. Our backs probably played as well as they usually do but our pack was well below their best. Very rare to see all 8 members of the Irish pack have so little impact in open play. I think NZ played at 9 or 10 out of 10. Very close to their best anyway. Which makes me wonder if they're not actually that good and will be found out in the final. Which would be a bit of a kick in the balls, with hindsight.
Would this not say the Ireland underperformed then?
Ruck speed. With the emphasis on ruck speed and quick ball being so high for most teams it’s a hard enough job for the 9 to be at the next ruck in time to make the next pass as it is. If he’s having to get up off the deck it’s even harderAaaaaanway… moving on… why don’t scrumhalf’s do dive passes any more? Mentioned that to my young lad and he said nobody does it in schoolboy rugby. It’s not a thing. When (and why) did it die out?!
He should be pleased as feck with them not bothering to call that first try back for a very obvious forward passCheika wasn't happy with the officiating last night. Does he have a case?
He should be pleased as feck with them not bothering to call that first try back for a very obvious forward pass
Ruck speed. With the emphasis on ruck speed and quick ball being so high for most teams it’s a hard enough job for the 9 to be at the next ruck in time to make the next pass as it is. If he’s having to get up off the deck it’s even harder
England overachieved considering their last 18 months. As did Wales.
Ireland and France both underachieved considering their last 18 months
I thought the ref was very good. Especially with how he ref’d the scrum. Preferring resets over fussy penalties. How it should be.
Aaaaaanway… moving on… why don’t scrumhalf’s do dive passes any more? Mentioned that to my young lad and he said nobody does it in schoolboy rugby. It’s not a thing. When (and why) did it die out?!
predictions for the final then? i’m quite conflicted. in general, i find south africans annoying and they’re unable to join in the joshing and bashing in the correct way, yet the south africans on here are actually decent. new zealand seem to peaking at the right time and have had two weeks off. they’ll also want to avenge the mauling they got a twickenham in the warm up.
south africa got a wake up call last week and its a major chance of history for them. hoping for extra time and a cracking game, but think new zealand will pinch it.
predictions for the final then? i’m quite conflicted. in general, i find south africans annoying and they’re unable to join in the joshing and bashing in the correct way, yet the south africans on here are actually decent. new zealand seem to peaking at the right time and have had two weeks off. they’ll also want to avenge the mauling they got a twickenham in the warm up.
south africa got a wake up call last week and its a major chance of history for them. hoping for extra time and a cracking game, but think new zealand will pinch it.
I also think NZ are likely. A lot is being made of the 7-1 split as a tactic, but I'm starting to think a lot of the forwards are exhausted, and the 7-1 is almost a necessity at this stage.predictions for the final then? i’m quite conflicted. in general, i find south africans annoying and they’re unable to join in the joshing and bashing in the correct way, yet the south africans on here are actually decent. new zealand seem to peaking at the right time and have had two weeks off. they’ll also want to avenge the mauling they got a twickenham in the warm up.
south africa got a wake up call last week and its a major chance of history for them. hoping for extra time and a cracking game, but think new zealand will pinch it.
They’d have still been crap and had a crap tournament even if they’d have turned the boks overYeah, definitely agree with England and Wales take. I never expected Wales to get out of the group, to be honest. And they really should have beaten Argentina. Thought England were great against SA and they should've made the final
Anyone else scour @rimaldo’s serious posts hoping a capital letter has slipped in unawarespredictions for the final then? i’m quite conflicted. in general, i find south africans annoying and they’re unable to join in the joshing and bashing in the correct way, yet the south africans on here are actually decent. new zealand seem to peaking at the right time and have had two weeks off. they’ll also want to avenge the mauling they got a twickenham in the warm up.
south africa got a wake up call last week and its a major chance of history for them. hoping for extra time and a cracking game, but think new zealand will pinch it.
I reckon it's because the balls they hve used for some years now weigh half as much as the ones we used at school and the rugby club back in the 60's and 70's when Gareth Edwards was the best exponent of the dive pass and the reverse pass. England are a mirror of United, look clueless at times but somehow manage to grind out a result. It was criminal that Arundell didn't get a decent pass and chance to run. The match last night reminded me of my school day rugby in the 60's (1960's) when it was a ten man game. Win the ball pass it to the stand off who wellied it, chase it, get possession and welly it again. Underhill was a beast last night and should have played against the Boks imho. We are not the third best team in the world for sure. Should be an interesting six nations. All Blacks will win it.Aaaaaanway… moving on… why don’t scrumhalf’s do dive passes any more? Mentioned that to my young lad and he said nobody does it in schoolboy rugby. It’s not a thing. When (and why) did it die out?!
Anyone else scour @rimaldo’s serious posts hoping a capital letter has slipped in unawares
Light the beacons, a fecking capital letter!!