NH International Rugby
-
@booboo said in NH International Rugby:
@majorrage said in NH International Rugby:
@booboo said in NH International Rugby:
@jegga said in NH International Rugby:
@catogrande said in NH International Rugby:
@mikethesnow Gimp. I think the word you're looking for is gimp.
I’ll have you know he’s a deep thinker . It says so here.
https://rugby365.com/countries/england/mitchells-notorious-track-record/
Bwahahahahaha
"the results have been sub-par with the exception of his short stint at the helm of the All Blacks."
Fuck off. Par is 1st, not 3rd.
As much as I hate to say it, par for 2003 WC would really have been second. England results in the run-in to that tournament were very hard to argue against.
However, big difference between 2nd and 3rd. We had the cattle to get over the line in that semi, just not the whole package. I don't think we had the cattle to win it though.
I do agree generally, although I do think we could have beaten England. I gave us a 40% chance.
I felt we had outmuscled them in the forwards in Wellington* but they did enough to win. We were especially effective in thst game (and the two big scoring games in SA and Aus) when we kept it very close to the forwards (pick and gos, one off runners etc). When we tried to go a little wider v Aus in the semi we got picked off and shut down. I was expecting (hoping for) similar forward dominance in the final. Shame there was no final in 03 ...
But it would have been an injustice (one I coukd have lived with) if England had lost that.
*Don't start me on the 6 man scrum thing: that was a penalty try to Rodders all day long.
Fair, we definintely could have. One thing that England had, regardless of ability, by that stage was big match temperance. The semi showed that was one thing we didn't have.
I never believed we got as smashed in Wellington as the UK press would have you believe. The superlatives used to describe how the forwards beat us up in that game were off the scale bullshit. One 6 man scrum, does not dictate 80 minutes of rugby.
All heresay anyway ... the bastards won, we came 3rd, and I got laid.
Every rose, etc.
-
@booboo said in NH International Rugby:
@majorrage said in NH International Rugby:
@booboo said in NH International Rugby:
@jegga said in NH International Rugby:
@catogrande said in NH International Rugby:
@mikethesnow Gimp. I think the word you're looking for is gimp.
I’ll have you know he’s a deep thinker . It says so here.
https://rugby365.com/countries/england/mitchells-notorious-track-record/
Bwahahahahaha
"the results have been sub-par with the exception of his short stint at the helm of the All Blacks."
Fuck off. Par is 1st, not 3rd.
As much as I hate to say it, par for 2003 WC would really have been second. England results in the run-in to that tournament were very hard to argue against.
However, big difference between 2nd and 3rd. We had the cattle to get over the line in that semi, just not the whole package. I don't think we had the cattle to win it though.
I do agree generally, although I do think we could have beaten England. I gave us a 40% chance.
I felt we had outmuscled them in the forwards in Wellington* but they did enough to win. We were especially effective in thst game (and the two big scoring games in SA and Aus) when we kept it very close to the forwards (pick and gos, one off runners etc). When we tried to go a little wider v Aus in the semi we got picked off and shut down. I was expecting (hoping for) similar forward dominance in the final. Shame there was no final in 03 ...
But it would have been an injustice (one I coukd have lived with) if England had lost that.
*Don't start me on the 6 man scrum thing: that was a penalty try to Rodders all day long.
Fair, we definintely could have. One thing that England had, regardless of ability, by that stage was big match temperance. The semi showed that was one thing we didn't have.
I never believed we got as smashed in Wellington as the UK press would have you believe. The superlatives used to describe how the forwards beat us up in that game were off the scale bullshit. One 6 man scrum, does not dictate 80 minutes of rugby.
All heresay anyway ... the bastards won, we came 3rd, and I got laid.
Every rose, etc.
@majorrage said in NH International Rugby:
@booboo said in NH International Rugby:
@majorrage said in NH International Rugby:
@booboo said in NH International Rugby:
@jegga said in NH International Rugby:
@catogrande said in NH International Rugby:
@mikethesnow Gimp. I think the word you're looking for is gimp.
I’ll have you know he’s a deep thinker . It says so here.
https://rugby365.com/countries/england/mitchells-notorious-track-record/
Bwahahahahaha
"the results have been sub-par with the exception of his short stint at the helm of the All Blacks."
Fuck off. Par is 1st, not 3rd.
As much as I hate to say it, par for 2003 WC would really have been second. England results in the run-in to that tournament were very hard to argue against.
However, big difference between 2nd and 3rd. We had the cattle to get over the line in that semi, just not the whole package. I don't think we had the cattle to win it though.
I do agree generally, although I do think we could have beaten England. I gave us a 40% chance.
I felt we had outmuscled them in the forwards in Wellington* but they did enough to win. We were especially effective in thst game (and the two big scoring games in SA and Aus) when we kept it very close to the forwards (pick and gos, one off runners etc). When we tried to go a little wider v Aus in the semi we got picked off and shut down. I was expecting (hoping for) similar forward dominance in the final. Shame there was no final in 03 ...
But it would have been an injustice (one I coukd have lived with) if England had lost that.
*Don't start me on the 6 man scrum thing: that was a penalty try to Rodders all day long.
Fair, we definintely could have. One thing that England had, regardless of ability, by that stage was big match temperance. The semi showed that was one thing we didn't have.
I never believed we got as smashed in Wellington as the UK press would have you believe. The superlatives used to describe how the forwards beat us up in that game were off the scale bullshit. One 6 man scrum, does not dictate 80 minutes of rugby.
All heresay anyway ... the bastards won, we came 3rd, and I got laid.
Every rose, etc.
Soon ended when Tuilagi and Cipriani came on the scene
-
@booboo said in NH International Rugby:
@majorrage said in NH International Rugby:
@booboo said in NH International Rugby:
@jegga said in NH International Rugby:
@catogrande said in NH International Rugby:
@mikethesnow Gimp. I think the word you're looking for is gimp.
I’ll have you know he’s a deep thinker . It says so here.
https://rugby365.com/countries/england/mitchells-notorious-track-record/
Bwahahahahaha
"the results have been sub-par with the exception of his short stint at the helm of the All Blacks."
Fuck off. Par is 1st, not 3rd.
As much as I hate to say it, par for 2003 WC would really have been second. England results in the run-in to that tournament were very hard to argue against.
However, big difference between 2nd and 3rd. We had the cattle to get over the line in that semi, just not the whole package. I don't think we had the cattle to win it though.
I do agree generally, although I do think we could have beaten England. I gave us a 40% chance.
I felt we had outmuscled them in the forwards in Wellington* but they did enough to win. We were especially effective in thst game (and the two big scoring games in SA and Aus) when we kept it very close to the forwards (pick and gos, one off runners etc). When we tried to go a little wider v Aus in the semi we got picked off and shut down. I was expecting (hoping for) similar forward dominance in the final. Shame there was no final in 03 ...
But it would have been an injustice (one I coukd have lived with) if England had lost that.
*Don't start me on the 6 man scrum thing: that was a penalty try to Rodders all day long.
Fair, we definintely could have. One thing that England had, regardless of ability, by that stage was big match temperance. The semi showed that was one thing we didn't have.
I never believed we got as smashed in Wellington as the UK press would have you believe. The superlatives used to describe how the forwards beat us up in that game were off the scale bullshit. One 6 man scrum, does not dictate 80 minutes of rugby.
All heresay anyway ... the bastards won, we came 3rd, and I got laid.
Every rose, etc.
@majorrage said in NH International Rugby:
@booboo said in NH International Rugby:
@majorrage said in NH International Rugby:
@booboo said in NH International Rugby:
@jegga said in NH International Rugby:
@catogrande said in NH International Rugby:
@mikethesnow Gimp. I think the word you're looking for is gimp.
I’ll have you know he’s a deep thinker . It says so here.
https://rugby365.com/countries/england/mitchells-notorious-track-record/
Bwahahahahaha
"the results have been sub-par with the exception of his short stint at the helm of the All Blacks."
Fuck off. Par is 1st, not 3rd.
As much as I hate to say it, par for 2003 WC would really have been second. England results in the run-in to that tournament were very hard to argue against.
However, big difference between 2nd and 3rd. We had the cattle to get over the line in that semi, just not the whole package. I don't think we had the cattle to win it though.
I do agree generally, although I do think we could have beaten England. I gave us a 40% chance.
I felt we had outmuscled them in the forwards in Wellington* but they did enough to win. We were especially effective in thst game (and the two big scoring games in SA and Aus) when we kept it very close to the forwards (pick and gos, one off runners etc). When we tried to go a little wider v Aus in the semi we got picked off and shut down. I was expecting (hoping for) similar forward dominance in the final. Shame there was no final in 03 ...
But it would have been an injustice (one I coukd have lived with) if England had lost that.
*Don't start me on the 6 man scrum thing: that was a penalty try to Rodders all day long.
Fair, we definintely could have. One thing that England had, regardless of ability, by that stage was big match temperance. The semi showed that was one thing we didn't have.
I never believed we got as smashed in Wellington as the UK press would have you believe. The superlatives used to describe how the forwards beat us up in that game were off the scale bullshit. One 6 man scrum, does not dictate 80 minutes of rugby.
All heresay anyway ... the bastards won, we came 3rd, and I got laid.
Every rose, etc.
Aaaand any of that happened since?
-
One of them has.
And we haven't come 3rd since, England haven't won.
-
One of them has.
And we haven't come 3rd since, England haven't won.
@majorrage said in NH International Rugby:
One of them has.
And we haven't come 3rd since, England haven't won.
Well may I be the (probable) first to congratulate you and also to register my surprise.
-
SOme fair points from Mr Barnes!
@machpants Barnes is the proverbial stopped clock - he will be right every now and then. Sadly (from and England perspective) all valid points.
-
Warren Gatland spends a lot of his year in New Zealand. It doesn't stop him being a superb coach for Wales.
Cueball is a tough guy and an excellent training ground coach. He'll do a lot to develop the English players especially their backrow players.
A tip though, Eddie, don't let the man who picked Ben Atiga ahead of Christian Cullen anywhere near team selection.
-
@majorrage said in NH International Rugby:
@booboo said in NH International Rugby:
@jegga said in NH International Rugby:
@catogrande said in NH International Rugby:
@mikethesnow Gimp. I think the word you're looking for is gimp.
I’ll have you know he’s a deep thinker . It says so here.
https://rugby365.com/countries/england/mitchells-notorious-track-record/
Bwahahahahaha
"the results have been sub-par with the exception of his short stint at the helm of the All Blacks."
Fuck off. Par is 1st, not 3rd.
As much as I hate to say it, par for 2003 WC would really have been second. England results in the run-in to that tournament were very hard to argue against.
However, big difference between 2nd and 3rd. We had the cattle to get over the line in that semi, just not the whole package. I don't think we had the cattle to win it though.
I do agree generally, although I do think we could have beaten England. I gave us a 40% chance.
I felt we had outmuscled them in the forwards in Wellington* but they did enough to win. We were especially effective in thst game (and the two big scoring games in SA and Aus) when we kept it very close to the forwards (pick and gos, one off runners etc). When we tried to go a little wider v Aus in the semi we got picked off and shut down. I was expecting (hoping for) similar forward dominance in the final. Shame there was no final in 03 ...
But it would have been an injustice (one I coukd have lived with) if England had lost that.
*Don't start me on the 6 man scrum thing: that was a penalty try to Rodders all day long.
@booboo Didn't Justin Marshall pull a hamstring in that game when he had a clear run to the line?
Carlos kicked like shit.
We didn't manage to score when they were down to 13 men.
We had a stronger team at the RWC than in that game. I think we had a reasonable shot at toppling England if we'd made the final.
Unfortunately....
-
As World XV will be playing Japan XV, I'll post this here:
-
@booboo Didn't Justin Marshall pull a hamstring in that game when he had a clear run to the line?
Carlos kicked like shit.
We didn't manage to score when they were down to 13 men.
We had a stronger team at the RWC than in that game. I think we had a reasonable shot at toppling England if we'd made the final.
Unfortunately....
-
@stargazer Top 12 teams? What will the Wallabies be doing?
It sounds like someone explained how the RWC works to Pichot. Stupid idea.
-
dumb idea. but we can get rid of the World Cup and it's cycle that allows coaches of shit teams to have ready made excuses.
-
Not a fan on first reaction.
I'd prefer more development matches v the likes of Georgia, Romania, the PIs, Japan, US, Canada, Uruguay. Only 3 of them currently in top 12.
We've already got a RWC. Why have one every year?
Also restricts ability for teams to okay revenue matches.
-
Stephen Welshenglish Jones is unhappy too
Machpants said:
Stephen Welshenglish Jones is unhappy too
Two fat obnoxious English rugby trolls are upset, I am doubly pleased now .
Has anyone asked Woodward for his thoughts yet ?
