Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

2023 RWC Buildup, Squads, Fixtures 'etc'

1274275277279280306

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,884 ✭✭✭TheRona


    NZ had to beat Ireland, who were world #1 at the time.

    Now they have to beat SA, who are currently world #1.

    SA only came up against the #1 ranked team once, and lost. It doesn't really fit the narrative that NZ have had it easy.



  • Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,488 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    SA will have to beat themselves to be worthy winners?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,884 ✭✭✭TheRona


    Hilarious. They may end up beating themselves by selecting a 7-1 split, so you might be on to something.

    I don't think anyone has questioned whether SA would be worthy. People only seem to think that NZ aren't worthy due to them having a 'soft draw'.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,154 ✭✭✭✭Neil3030


    Who's actually saying NZ had a soft draw?

    They had to play the hosts (amongst the favorites for the tournament), and the #1 team in the world (at the time).

    They had an easier SF but that's about it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,031 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Don't agree with this. While SA had a tougher route to the final, they lost a game and their only significant win had big question marks. They won v France due to a bad ref call, SA got a pen and 3 points when it should have been a pen and likely 3 points the other way. The game was far more than "80 minutes of forwards smashing each other" too.

    They were flat v England, most likely due to the physical and emotional toll the quarter took from them. However they didn't rotate so that is on their coaches.

    Ireland were well below par for the first 20 minutes v SA yet they didn't really take advantage. Despite Ireland's poor start and and SA having basically a new pack for the final 25 minutes, SA still do enough to win.

    Ultimately bringing 7 forwards off the bench against Ireland wasn't enough to win them that game and I suspect it will be the same tonight. NZ were excellent v Ireland, better than SA were against us. I think NZs peak is actually higher than SAs, although SA generally perform at a more consistent level.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,149 ✭✭✭Musicrules


    The number one team in the World didn't play like the number one team in the World though. It was a tough draw on paper. Also, I know that it's looking at it in hindsight but the group games turned out to be irrelevant. France and Ireland probably put too much emphasis on winning their groups. New Zealand and South Africa put their emphasis on winning their quarter finals.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,149 ✭✭✭Musicrules


    Every team can point to referee calls. I was talking about the semi final which was clearly a forwards battle and them bashing each other. You're criticising their coaches for not rotating in a World Cup semi final?

    As I said above, South Africa were aiming to win their quarter final with less emphasis on the group phase. That's something we can learn from. We will never know what impact the preceding games had on the outcome tonight, we'll only have opinions. I think if it was 2 fresh teams, South Africa would show that the record defeat they handed out to New Zealand before the tournament wasn't a fluke. I don't think anyone can argue against that New Zealand will be the fresher team tonight.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,154 ✭✭✭✭Neil3030




  • Hosted Moderators Posts: 8,140 ✭✭✭fitz


    I don't buy that NZ had an easier run either. They played their best rugby in years to beat us, with some of them having their best game in a black shirt (Sam Cane...don't think I've ever seen him play as well), and were still inches from probably losing. That game was a huge shift from them to win. Scotland didn't really make it that hard for SA in the pool, so both that and the QFs were more or less on par, imo. SAs drop off in performance had more to do with their SF being tougher than England being any good. NZ would have torn England apart, imo. As would SA if they didn't play such negative rugby themselves.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,354 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Score predictions for tonight??



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,249 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Argentina are not appreciably worse than England. NZ just handled business in the SF better.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,031 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    I'm criticising their coaches for SA barely scrapping past a vastly inferior team in the semis. They could have made a few changes and still had a better starting 15 than England. If you have an issue with making changes late in a tournament then surely you disagree with the half backs selected for the final?

    I don't think SA or NZ put less emphasis on the group stage, they both just lost but that didn't impede their progress. In truth, those group games were long enough before the quarters that they would have had little or no effect from tiredness.

    If both teams were fresh, it'd be 50:50 tonight.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,187 ✭✭✭✭Clegg


    It's gas that this is probably the most social media engagement anything World Cup related has received so far.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,149 ✭✭✭Musicrules


    Hmmm I think you mean the draw on paper. That was a tough draw but the draw in reality was quite soft. I think it's clear now that New Zealand were holding stuff back to try to peak at the business end of the tournament so the opening game against France didn't really matter. After that, they've beaten a really poor Italy, Namibia, Uruguay, Argentina and a very underpar Ireland. That's quite a soft draw.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,149 ✭✭✭Musicrules


    New Zealand had an easier quarter final and semi final. Argentina are a good bit worse than England. Last night's game was a nothing match.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    15-12 South Africa. If damp.

    24-15 New Zealand if the slim chance of a dry evening over head happens.

    So 15-12 SA!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,149 ✭✭✭Musicrules


    They just beat France at their home World Cup in an epic battle, you're not rotating in a World Cup semi final after that. Do you think Ireland would rest Sexton and others for a World Cup semi final? Nonsense suggestion and they're not rotating like you're suggesting for the World Cup final.

    I think both tried to win their group games but the whole coaching setup etc were aiming to peak later in the tournament. It turns out that they were spot on in their preparation. As I said, something we can learn from.

    Your last statement is an opinion I'd disagree with but we'll never find out the answer.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,031 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Wet weather was given by some as a reason for SAs struggles against England. I don't see the weather as being a determining factor tonight.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Yes, the high ball, small wingers, not as used to it as New Zealand.

    I'm basing my prediction on more scrums and the 7:1 split working towards the end of the game. The scrum won it for SA v England.

    Who knows.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,985 ✭✭✭Buddy Bubs


    France beat NZ but lost v SA

    Ireland beat SA but lost v NZ

    NZ beat Ireland but lost v France

    SA beat France but lost v Ireland

    Looks like the top 4 can all beat each other on their day, which is how it should be.

    Ireland and France got wins which topped a group, NZ and SA got wins when needed to progress. And a bit of fortune there but that's the way it is.

    Don't think anyone has a tougher draw than anyone else. NZ or SA will win world cup by playing all the other top 4 teams. Winning twice and losing once. The runner up will have won once and lost twice.

    SA had tougher semi by playing poorly against an England team that due to styles, could probably trouble SA but not trouble the other 3 top teams. And had a tougher game v 3rd place team in Scotland rather than Italy but it wasn't that tough and it was so long ago now it's irrelevant really.

    My call tonight is NZ by just over 1 score, maybe 8 to 12 points. Score early tries and bring SA out of their comfort zone and lose a key back to injury rendering the 7-1 split a backfire.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,249 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Solid anti-Ireland jibe, but no, NZ did not have an easier QF.

    They did have an easier SF, but not by as much as the difference on the scoreboard would make you believe. SA simply made incredibly hard work of their win.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,031 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    You are also saying that NZ has an advantage tonight by being the fresher team. SA could have negated that by making a few changes for the semi. As you said, the quarter was an epic battle and many were no doubt still feeling the effects 6 days later. There is a snowball effect now after the same team started the semi.

    There are several positions where there is very little between SAs starter and the backup. I think they would have gotten past England with a couple of changes, possibly more comfortably than they actually did as they would have had fresher lads for that game and guys would have been looking to secure a starting place for the final.



  • Registered Users Posts: 90 ✭✭Leslie Purkiss


    SA by 10. They are a different animal to NZ. The French game showed it. France and SA (in knock out rugby mode) are well ahead of rest.

    NZ were flattered by a bad Irish performance.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,617 ✭✭✭lawrencesummers


    23-21.


    SA win and the rugby world spends the next 4 years adopting (copying) the innovations that rassie has brought to this competition.

    I think a nervy first 40 with teams level at halftime



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,884 ✭✭✭TheRona


    Did you watch last week, or you're basing everything on the quarters?

    Do you not think SA were flattered by two soft scores against France because France don't know how to catch a high ball?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭Augme


    NZ have also been had an extra days rest thanks to the nature of the draw. Ans they played their last group game on a Thursday. It's not their fault, but world rugby really don't do a very good job to endure a level playing field.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I think once South Africa get 7 days, as opposed to teams who got 6 in previous tournaments they are fairly ok.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It's unusual the the final is on RTE and Virgin.

    I don't recall any sports event simultaneously on both stations. TG4 may have overlapped with the odd GAA game back in the 1990s\2000s, and I'm not even sure on that.

    A lot at stake in this final, from the title itself to who goes ahead on the roll of honour. They play each other so often there must be serious rivalry between players. Like we saw the rivalry develop with NZ and us and we don't meet as often, or have such a historic rivalry.

    As long as the game isn't decided by a card or bad decision and we have champions without question or caveat.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,617 ✭✭✭lawrencesummers


    Dont forget its also on ITV so you dont have to listen to any dinosaurs like lenihan or williams and its a high cahill free zone as well.



Advertisement