How is your team travelling for the RWC?
By Jason, 1 Dec 2010 Jason is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- 2011 Rugby World Cup, 6 Nations, All Blacks, Ireland, les blues, Rugby Union, Rugby World Cup, Six Nations, Spring Boks, Tri Nations, Wales, wallabies
Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Wallabies news
- Rugby World Cup 2011 news
- Tri Nations Tournament news
- New Zealand All Blacks news
- Rugby 2011 news
Now that the annual expedition north has finished, let us turn our eyes to the fixture everyone is thinking of next year. With no inbound tours, and a shortened Tri Nations, that leaves the quadrennial knockout tournament otherwise known as the Rugby World Cup.
Most would agree that barring miracles, the following are making up the numbers: Tonga, Canada, Japan, Georgia, Romania, Italy, Russia, USA and Namibia.
So what have we learnt? How are the contenders placed based on the last few weeks?
If there is a pool of death, it has to be Pool D, where Fiji or Samoa could turn in an upset and make life very difficult for Wales (again).
Regardless, whoever comes second in this pool is going home after the quarter finals anyway. They’ll expect to face Australia, who rightfully should top Pool C.
So to Pool A. Contenders are the All Blacks and France. I’ll deal with the All Blacks last, so France, what have we learnt?
Despite Lièvremont’s assertions that he was looking to take advantage of the new law interpretations and had seen the light during the recent Tri Nations, his squad selections are schizophrenic.
His team are lacking the basic skills in passing a ball in front of a moving man, robbing them of momentum. The questions they ask in attack are limited and easily contained by adequate opposition.
Barring a miracle, the French will have one good game in them and no more. If it’s in the pool it changes things immensely for everyone else, if it’s in the quarters it won’t really matter, they’ll still be going home after the semis.
Pool B. England will top this. They’ve shown their intent and some enterprising rugby in the last few weeks. They have some excellent prospects in Ashton, Cole, Foden, Lawes and especially Youngs, and shouldn’t be troubled by a steadily improving Scotland nor a declining Argentina.
As everyone has commented on by now, they need a better centre pairing and balance in the backrow. Second place will be Scotland’s. Ignore their aberration against New Zealand, that’s what happens when a team is bereft of game time come up against the number one ranked team in the world who play sublimely.
Their other results are a more accurate indicator of their growing ability.
Pool C. Australia will top this group and possibly with the best for and against of all teams after the group stage. While the Wallabies have noted issues in one key set piece, they are very good at the lineout and have the firepower to dominate at the breakdown.
Pocock is currently the best snaffler of the ball in world rugby. Teams need to work out to either stay well away from him or actually run at him and make him tackle. If he’s second into the breakdown, there’s every chance you’ve lost the ball.
Add to this what is possibly the best backline in world rugby. Given a sliver of time and space, they run fantastic lines with soft hands and execute chances. They are getting better with game time. Their forwards need to raise themselves to this standard, but I don’t think they can. As a team, they need to play with consistency.
Ireland will come second, and a distant second at that. They need props more than the Wallabies do. Despite the skills of Sexton, BOD, Bowe and a handy lock pairing of Donncha O’Callaghan and Paul O’Connell, they’re a team whose best football appears to be behind them.
Italy are so poorly and predictably coached, that they’re going to be badly exposed as a one dimensional team playing yesterday’s game.
Pool D. If there is a “pool of death”, this has to be it. There’s not much we can derive from South Africa’s tour based on the amount of injuries they have apart from two important aspects; namely no one plays 10 man rugby better.
If your team doesn’t front up at the collisions, you’re in for a very long day. Make a mistake from anywhere between your try line and the Springbok’s 10m line and Morne Steyn is more likely than not to keep the scoreboard ticking over. In a period of great kickers, he appears to be the cream. Can’t run a backline to save himself and the coaching staff don’t seem to care.
At no point have they suggested they want to embark on this voyage of running the ball at any opportunity, which is a pity because they do have some handy backs. I’ll say at the outset, if they continue to select a fat, unfit hooker at prop they’re dead in the water. If they select Smit instead of Bismarck du Plessis at hooker, they’ve got rocks in their head.
Wales. Hmm, Wales. Just as likely to come second as to not make the quarters. Plenty of talent and no depth. Both Fiji and Samoa are capable of revisiting the horror of 2007 on the Welsh.
All Blacks. Hosts. Winningest team in world rugby. Quite possibly the most complete team. Excellent forwards and backs. Strangely muted during their Northern Tour showing very little inventiveness in back line play from set pieces, instead appearing to rely on natural ability and counter attacking to score tries.
Still completely and utterly disinterested in drop goals, but when you score more tries than the opposition, have forwards playing like backs and props spotting gaps running 30m to score, who cares? A good team is one that can play badly and still win.
A team that has people arguing over the relative merits of which of their brilliant players should be in the XV. This is that team. Although not at the level of dominance the 2005-06 All Blacks were, this squad is still better than any other in world rugby. This does not mean they’ll win the RWC.
To win the RWC, a competent team just needs to win three hard tests in a row. Any serious contender is going to make the quarter finals. That’s where the real competition starts. Of the eight teams that make it here, only five have any real claim to beat any of the others on any given day.
Scotland, Ireland and Wales aren’t them. You could probably add France to that list quite frankly. I’ll revisit this after the Six Nations and the Tri Nations next year to see what, if anything, has changed.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Reds back in contention, but Waratahs need a cleanout (287)
- What Hansen’s first squad means for the Wallabies (191)
- ALAN JONES: We have the players, it’s the coaches that are to blame (161)
- Who will be in the Wallabies’ backrow? (158)
- Will Cooper and Mitchell be back in time for Wallaby selection? (156)
- CAMPO: Will Deans change the style of the Wallabies play? (128)
- Tahs out. Brumbies win ugly. And Quade’s back! (124)
- A Kiwi’s advice to Wallaby supporters (7)
- Confessions of a rugby union traitor (2)
- Brumbies vs Reds: a lesson for the other provinces (8)
- Chiefs vs Bulls: Super Rugby live scores, blog (14)
- Hola Argentina, and welcome to the Rugby Championship! (21)
- Irish coaches looking to head Western Force (15)
- Dull Super Rugby coaches equal dull rugby (50)
- Explore:
- 2011 Rugby World Cup, 6 Nations, All Blacks, Ireland, les blues, Rugby Union, Rugby World Cup, Six Nations, Spring Boks, Tri Nations, Wales, wallabies



December 1st 2010 @ 2:45am
Rockin Rod said | December 1st 2010 @ 2:45am | Report comment
So it looks like an Australia v England in one semi and All Blacks v South Africa in the other. Which side of the draw is france in?
December 1st 2010 @ 6:02am
allblackfan said | December 1st 2010 @ 6:02am | Report comment
France is in NZ’s pool. They meet in a pool game in Wellington!! At night!
December 1st 2010 @ 5:10am
rhys said | December 1st 2010 @ 5:10am | Report comment
ahh, i think i speak for a few people here when i ask, what about argentina?
made the semis last time, didn’t have a great tour against the home nations, but smashed france in buenos aries a few years back….
December 1st 2010 @ 7:40am
sheek said | December 1st 2010 @ 7:40am | Report comment
That was last time. It appears Argentina have sadly failed to sustain the momentum…..
December 1st 2010 @ 10:39am
rhys said | December 1st 2010 @ 10:39am | Report comment
yeah i think that is writing them off to easily though, they did nothing before the RWC in ’07, and look at what they did…
December 1st 2010 @ 10:53am
Jason said | December 1st 2010 @ 10:53am | Report comment
That’s not necessarily true. Argentina had beaten Japan, Wales, France, Italy, Ireland and Scotland IIRC in the years following the 2003 RWC and heading into the 2007 RWC. They had also had narrow losses to England, South Africa and New Zealand. They were a good side and few astute observers should have been surprised by their 2007 results. However, one certainly could not say that they have kicked on from there, in fact it would be more accurate to suggest that they’ve either stagnated when other’s have improved (except France), or gone backwards. Felipe Contepomi said as much following their loss to Ireland.
December 1st 2010 @ 7:04pm
sheek said | December 1st 2010 @ 7:04pm | Report comment
Look,
I want Argentina to do well, & they might surprise again. But we can only go on what we know…..
December 1st 2010 @ 5:56am
Riccus said | December 1st 2010 @ 5:56am | Report comment
Good analysis; pretty accurate I think. Aussie has a real easy draw and should not be over-played by the semi’s where they will run rings around England. Whether NZ can beat SA in a “winner takes all” semi is hard to predict, and then get up again to take on the Wallabies?; so it seems that Aussie has the inside running – of course thats assuming the AB’s beat France in the group stages! It is interesting to read your comment about the AB’s not trying too much – what are they holding back? Probably not enough to stop being bashed by a desparate and nasty Springbok team. By-the-way, losing to SA or Aus is NOT choking!!
December 1st 2010 @ 6:01am
Sam Taulelei said | December 1st 2010 @ 6:01am | Report comment
I don’t agree with all the points raised here by Jason but I recognise why these conclusions have been reached.
If anything the results on the November tour will only serve to deceive when assessing the prospects for next year’s world cup.
You have to look deeper than just the results to gauge how you think each team is “expected” to perform. Results will only tell you one side of the story, there are other key indicators that are often overlooked as we tend to concentrate on “patterns” that closely resemble historical events as an indication of what will happen next year.
Furphy number one – the All Blacks are the dominant team before the world cup again and are therfore expected to choke.
Furphy number two – the Wallabies beat the All Blacks in their last encounter of the year just like they did in 1990 a year out from the world cup (and just like SA did in 2006) and are therefore expected to win the world cup
Furphy number three – the nothern hemisphere teams results this autumn/spring reinforces the stereotypes that they are simply there to make up the numbers and aren’t expected to progress deeper into the tournament
Furphy number four – SA’s terrible form this year, squabbling internal factions, and muddled gameplan counts against them doing well next year
There is no magical blueprint or formula for success despite all the former players, coaches and experts telling us otherwise. You know the spiel : a world cup winning team needs to have a world class no.10/halfback, a certain number of caps, a world class scrum, a world class loose forward/lineout forward, a world class captain, a world class goalkicket etc
When you review past winning teams it’s easy to identify certain parts that make up the whole and reach the conclusion that this is all you need to win a world cup. That ignores other factors such as the laws in vogue at the time and the affect it had on teams, the influence of the referee, the form of players in key positions, team selections, injuries, how the team built momentum throughout the tournament and even a bit of luck etc
As a knockout tournament, the intensity from the quarterfinals onwards is different to anything that has been played in the years in between. The stakes are higher than just a deciding match of a series and unrated teams raise their performance to levels never seen before. Defences are tighter and take longer to break down, scoring opportunities are fewer and then there is the influence of the referee with a crucial decision.
From now until the knockout stages there willl be performances that will reinforce or mislead us in assessing teams chances to lift the Webb Ellis trophy. I’m not writing off SA and in my mind they are a good bet to make the final even though that means if we met in the semifinal the’ve knocked us out on their way.
Right now Kiwi will be feeling buoyant about our chances given the impressive form and results this year. However it was only 12 months ago that we were struggling to beat the Boks and find the right balance with attacking with ball in hand and playing for territory given the law interpretations last year. So there is nothing stopping another team to burst out of the gate next year as well.
The All Blacks still have weaknesses in their game that the coaches hasn’t yet resolved and it’s easy to gloss over these given their run of victories and they’re in a better position now than the rest but that doesn’t mean we can afford to rest on our laurels.
December 1st 2010 @ 8:34am
sheek said | December 1st 2010 @ 8:34am | Report comment
Sam,
True enough. Each world cup has its own genetic makeup, & each world cup winner arrives by their own unique fashion. There are similarities of course, but each WC winner is unique.
The world cup is a bit like the Melbourne Cup. It’s a long distance race with a frantic sprint at the end. The “in-between years” are important for jockeying for position, & laying the foundation. The ‘in-between years’ are important for the moment, but not a true guide to the WC winner down the track.
But its the sprint (actual WC) that will determine the winner.
Go too early (pools, 3N, 6N) & you may run out of steam. The winner times his run later rather than sooner. In the WC, most winners only become obvious during the quarter-final stages & onwards.
December 1st 2010 @ 10:05am
Jason said | December 1st 2010 @ 10:05am | Report comment
I don’t agree with all the points raised here by Jason but I recognise why these conclusions have been reached.
If anything the results on the November tour will only serve to deceive when assessing the prospects for next year’s world cup.
Hence why I said I’d revisit this after next years 6 Nations and Tri Nations.
Furphy number one – the All Blacks are the dominant team before the world cup again and are therfore expected to choke.
Furphy number two – the Wallabies beat the All Blacks in their last encounter of the year just like they did in 1990 a year out from the world cup (and just like SA did in 2006) and are therefore expected to win the world cup
Furphy number three – the nothern hemisphere teams results this autumn/spring reinforces the stereotypes that they are simply there to make up the numbers and aren’t expected to progress deeper into the tournament
Furphy number four – SA’s terrible form this year, squabbling internal factions, and muddled gameplan counts against them doing well next year
Yes, they’re all furphies, none of which I raised.
December 1st 2010 @ 8:43pm
Jack Petro said | December 1st 2010 @ 8:43pm | Report comment
Jason – sorry – you’re full of it! Presume all you like and sit on the fence – Wallabies v All Blacks Final – winner take all!
December 2nd 2010 @ 12:07pm
TembaVJ said | December 2nd 2010 @ 12:07pm | Report comment
Sam as always good post… When do you get a job writing in the red section?
PDV aside if they rest the senior players in South Africa Matfield, Burger, Smit, Smith, Habanna, JDV, Fourie ext these guys will be fresh to make one last push for glory but they will need to be fresh for the 8 games and well managed throughout 2011. Add to that the return of the South African “Dan Carter” Fourie Du Preeze.
The experience in this team under John Smit will put them on par with the AB’s to win it next year.
I don’t think the new laws will make it more score friendly, we will see much of the same only the team names changing.
If they do meet in the qrt finals it will be an epic game, with a kick deciding the winner.
December 1st 2010 @ 6:16am
allblackfan said | December 1st 2010 @ 6:16am | Report comment
I suspect the NH teams may do better than expected. The ground conditions will see to that.
I could be wrong but the last team a WC playoff game was played in bad weather was the SA-France game in 1995 (correct me, anyone?).
NZ’s conditions (especially at night) could potentially reward those teams with strong packs. Just the other month, Argentinian officials wanted to visit Invercagill but the weather prevented them; one official noted that the weather plays a big role in NZ and that they would have to study local conditions.)
First and foremost, a strong scrum will be needed. Then depth. Fiji has had world-class backs for years but regularly got thumped because their forwards weren’t up to it.
Another aspect that AB kockers seem to have forgotten is that NZ plays its bogey team in pool play; even if NZ loses to France again (unlikely but u never know), they will have a second bite at the cherry. At that point, the other WC teams will have to cope with a vengeful fired-up AB side!! (To quote BA Baracus — “I pity the fools!!”)
December 1st 2010 @ 7:48am
Jiggles said | December 1st 2010 @ 7:48am | Report comment
you are correct about the weather Allblackfan.
If it starts to even spit in the Knock-out phases the Wallabies will be on the next plain to sydney.
Their wet weather rugby is dismal to say the least
December 1st 2010 @ 8:21am
Darwin Stubbie said | December 1st 2010 @ 8:21am | Report comment
Yip that’s the massive factor everyone likes to gloss over … the question aussie’s should ponder is – where are their pool game v Ireland and likely QF to be played ? … if that pool game’s in CHCH god help them, and the QF will most likely be in dodgy Wgtn weather …
December 1st 2010 @ 8:42am
Jason said | December 1st 2010 @ 8:42am | Report comment
Australia play Ireland at Eden Park (Auckland) at 20:30 local time. During September you can expect temperatures from 11-18 degrees, with one day of rain in three.
December 1st 2010 @ 6:19am
Geoff Brisbane said | December 1st 2010 @ 6:19am | Report comment
It will be a pot luck affair, upto the 1/4 finals everything should progress pretty straightforward. However once this milestone is met watch out, a mistake here or there and you are on the plane home (unless you are NZ). Agree with you Sam AB’s do have some glitches to iron out but certainly not as many as the other teams have. From 2010 season Australia scored 49 tries in 15 tests at an average of over three per game and conceded 33 (2nd ranked team) NZ scored 59 tries and average of just over 4 from 14 tests and conceded 22 an avge of just over 1.5 per game. The interesting stats is that NZ on their NH tour were scoring tries more consistently through their forwards as well as their backs.
Can’t wait for 2011
December 1st 2010 @ 7:36am
Geoff Brisbane said | December 1st 2010 @ 7:36am | Report comment
How is my team travelling???
Hopefully by bus
December 1st 2010 @ 1:17pm
Ralph said | December 1st 2010 @ 1:17pm | Report comment
From Brisbane, by Bus?
Tell him he’s dreaming!
December 1st 2010 @ 7:41am
mike1 said | December 1st 2010 @ 7:41am | Report comment
Really good article. Fair bit of knowledge of o/s teams – Type of thing I would want to read as a full-page spread in the paper leading into the RWC.
NZ are massive favourites for sure. However, this fact alone and the enormous local media pressure that comes with it could be difficult for the team to deal with. What a relief it would be for the team and the NZ public if they do lift the trophy again after 24 years.
Would love to see a lowly ranked nation (running on tournament adrenaline) crack the quarters and semis.
December 1st 2010 @ 7:47am
True Tah said | December 1st 2010 @ 7:47am | Report comment
All Blacks should win their pool easily, barring a miracle game by the French.
England should win their pool, with either Scotland or Argentina to follow them.
South Africa to win their pool, with Samoa following them.
Ireland are capable of knocking over the Wallabies.
Overall I reckon it will be England v NZ final.
December 1st 2010 @ 7:48am
Jiggles said | December 1st 2010 @ 7:48am | Report comment
I have money on a France V NZ final.
December 1st 2010 @ 8:13am
Heat Lop said | December 1st 2010 @ 8:13am | Report comment
I reckon the SH teams will do better than expected.
South Africa could beat Wales and Argentina might grab second spot over Scotland.
Australia should be able to overcome Italy to grab a quarter-final spot against the Boks.
Difficult to call after that. Ireland and England to fight out one semi-final spot and possibly the Boks to manage to beat Australia and face New Zealand.
December 1st 2010 @ 8:27am
Tui said | December 1st 2010 @ 8:27am | Report comment
England will beat Aus in the Semi. NZ v Eng final.