All Black, Wallaby fans should cheer for Poms

I'm an 'ignorant', LP. Thinking too much hurts my brain box. That said, one thing I did go and think was that the writing of this chappie reminds me of another person's writing: 'they haven’t made the semis yet Mike G, Like I said 4 weeks is a long time in super rugby, i think you might need to chill out boy, because the pain of them not making it will be just too much for you'

Grandpabhaile just saw that! ha ha chucke, I suspect that VC adminstered a few rogerings back in the day, but perhaps imight be a little old for such mischief these days.

Interesting post rugby fan. Worthy of an article.

I'm an England supporter who came to the game in the early 70s. I've no idea whether my reactions are typical of the average fan but here's a rough summary of what my (often faulty) memory and prejudices make of the opposition: Australia - Pretty much off my radar until the '84 Grand Slam team swept all before them. Since then however, we've never gone into a match thinking they are unbeatable but we rarely do well chasing a game against them and have lost by some hefty scores. Australia are a barometer for the England team. When we beat Australia after a run of losses, it has often meant the England team comes into some form. In a World Cup, no matter how pessimistic I might be about England's chances, I'd still think we'd have a chance against an Australian team in the knock-out stages. When Australia aren't giving us a hiding, the games are often nerve-racking affairs. I'm always impressed by the ability of Australia to put out competitive teams given the comparative lack of resources. New Zealand - We've still got an inferiority complex about NZ and rarely have had cause to think we are the better team even if we have won. I'm not surprised Andrew Mehrtens said we are "pr*cks to lose to" because the euphoria of winning against an All Black team is still so great. Although NZ Grand Slam tours are more common, I have the impression we don't seem to play them that much. We've only come up against them twice in a World Cup (versus 4 times each against Australia, France & SA). I sometimes feel that NZ are to France what Australia are to England. South Africa - Given the rugby history of the Springboks, I should perhaps be more overawed by them but, somehow, I'm not. When the Boks returned to international rugby we turned them over at Twickenham, We then managed to do the same in SA, with a score of 32-15, at a time when supporters didn't really expect the England team to win on tour. The Lions win in 1997 also made the Boks seem more beatable than the All Blacks. England put 53-3 on SA in 2002 when the tourists had a player red-carded. South African rugby has handed England some rugby lessons (notably in 2 World Cups) but they are the only SH team we have defeated with big scores in modern times. The impression remains that South Africa play rugby we can beat and, on our day, deserve to beat. France - England are a bit of a bogey team for France which is not a bad position for us to be in but unfortunate for them when it comes to trying to win a World Cup. We seem to have a knack of beating them even during a bad patch but these records do change and, for some French fans, coming through the last 6N match against us felt like a monkey off the back. Wales - I grew up with the British Lions first so have a real fondness for the great Welsh teams of the seventies. In the eighties, Welsh insults against the English began to rankle but we couldn't seem to put the b*ggers away in Cardiff. When we finally did, I may well have been prepared to sell my soul to the devil to keep doing so for the next 30 years just to keep them quiet. Who says I've got a chip on my shoulder? I've got a slightly more balanced view now although they remain one of the teams I dislike losing to. It's probably a tie between Australia & Wales for that status. Scotland - I'll usually support a Scottish team against anyone other than England and I can stand losing to them slightly more than anyone else. The 1990 Grand Slam loss might be an exception. I always have a sense that Scotland have our number and we can walk off after a defeat without ever quite knowing how we managed to lose. Australia might have felt a similar way after their World Cup game against England in 2007. Nevertheless, most of my rugby life has been spent following an England team which should have the measure of a Scottish team. Ireland - I've always enjoyed watching Irish teams and didn't begrudge them a Grand Slam. I remember being quite upset at around seven years old and first learning that the Irish didn't like the English. I quite liked them, they seemed like a lot of fun, why couldn't they feel the same way about us? It was surprising to learn just how poor England's record has been against them in recent years. I've seen all the games but, somehow, it didn't register in total. If Ireland had made the most of their opportunities and won some more Grand Slams or matches against the SH teams, England might have started developing a complex. As it is, Irish frailties elsewhere mean we fancy our chances even as the evidence of recent results suggests we shouldn't.

Why are the Olympics even being mentioned in this debate, The Olympic tally is not something you can really take seriously as Wavell is arguing the English argument but using GB statistics, Ah hello last time I checked GB was a combination of 3 countries. Australia competes on its own yes its own a country of 24 million, New Zealand a country of 4 million combine the two and you'd be hard pressed to even get to 50% of the total population of GB. But that doesn't fit Wavells rather fanatical posting so he chooses to ignore it. I'm not sure what it is with you Wavell but it seems you pick out one poster and just harrass them mercelissly and try to prove your imagined superiority. It is tiresome and up until now I have felt no need to comment. But you really are starting to irk me a little, if you hate us that much how about you run along to some UK website where you can gloat to yourself and other like minded ignorants

No, it was initially picked up by the newspaper and then commented on by the newspaper and then the BBC must have said something. Take this for example, I looked at two forums, this one and BBC 606. The 606 forum was taking delight in our success, this was full of people complaining about the POM's coming above them in the medal table

So your telling me it was the BBC commenting on that Australian press commenting on the state of the medal tally ?

well thought out reply, el_P. You sound like a real nice guy to have a chat with.

"Ahh, the Gaelic language, the poetry,the rugged coast and mountains of Connemara etc. It’s a great place. I suspect you have bever been lad?" Is there an 'i' missing in that last sentence?

I like to fit in all God's people MyGeneration. Why when telling the locals of all the great delights and wonders outside the antipodes, just seeing their feral little eyes light up with curiosity makes it worthwhile enough. 'Objectivity' they cried, 'what ever does this mean?' 'Oh do tell us Pajo! Do!'

London is wedged full of Aussies pulling pints and doing odd jobs and getting plastered listening to 'Men at Work' in the 'Walkabout Bar'. Great bar for alcohol fuelled fillies though. Fair share of Saffers there too.

yes gb did...

I bet Chris is one of these guys that 'was better than Giteau in schools only my knee gave in' 'I could have been a Wallaby maaaaan!'

VC: Ahh, the Gaelic language, the poetry,the rugged coast and mountains of Connemara etc. It's a great place. I suspect you have bever been lad? The Race week coupled with the Arts Festival is the highlight of the summer calendar in Ireland. Worth a look. I assume your not too old to make such an excursion. Direct flights from most UK cities to Galway too.

Rugby Future, GB won 19 Gold compared to Aus's 13 in the last Olympics. I'm worried about your factual sources old chap.

I'm still chuckling at Chris Mckays little rant. No doubt written inbetween a vegemite sambo and whilst waiting for the kettle to boil for his warm glass of milo before nestling down into his lazy boy to watch the biggest loser. In any case enough of this mish mosh turgid school yard rubbish, let's speak and breath rugby again and let's be sensible men like we were all raised to be (apart from Chris). A strong England makes things interesting for everyone. I do however think that this will be the most competitive WC in years and that there will be a few surprises. For what it is worth, I expect the irish to beat the Aussies in the group stages (this, will not be a surprise) and to then make an exit in the Semi's. France to hopefully win of course, but it's hard to see past the AB's. They wont have the pressure on them in the group stage v the French and regardless, if they lose that or not, they won't lose again. I tip the AB's to do it. The Saffers punishing number of tour games (ridiculous) will take its toll, in addition, not much fresh blood emerging to replace the Boks that are getting a little long in the tooth.

ah wavell lets break this down, there were 13 gold medals at the last olympics won by englishmen and women 16 by australians. the australian cricket team are still regarded by everyone above england, an english side won't ever win the super rugby ancy that, australia are ranked 3rd, whats englands rank again? whats england ranked in basketball? 11 doesnt seem bad to me considering we only just got a domestic competition this last year.

Obviously boxing and snooker aren't the limit, hence the fact I offered more sports than just boxing and snooker. Right... Australia did worse than GB during the last Olympics, England holds the Ashes, the soccer team is clearly one of the best in the world, England has countless champion boxers, champion F1 drivers, an improving league team and a reasonable union side. You may well think that the union team is far superior to England but the results don't work out that way. An Australian side hasn't won the Super tournament in years, the 3N in years, had a 100% European tour away record in years and Australia got knocked out of the QF in the last WC. In real terms there is little difference. The same applies to basketball, Australia is ranked 11th in the world. Heady stuff, eh?! Just stick to rugby league...

didn't realise that snooker and boxing were the limit of measures of a countries success... a bit of swimming is a bit of an understatement, theres still a couple within the top 30, england doesnt have any, soccer team is building, rugby is still way better than england, cricket team, if you think we are underachieved in the olympics you are sadly mistaken, ranking 4th, 4th, 4th and 6th since the 96 summer olympics. netball and basketball we achieve greatly at, athletics we have a decent amount of champions. tell me, where does england rank in much of these sports rahter than the commercially driven ones of snooker, boxing and f1? we're better than many at poker too if that counts as a sport

'How is it not?' Because it doesn't lead the world in any sport beyond rugby league and a bit of swimming. Australia doesn't have champion boxers or champion F1 drivers or snooker players. It doesn't have any world class tennis talent. It doesn't have a good soccer team. It has a reasonable rugby union team and a good cricket team but badly underachieved in the Olympics etc. There is absolutely no consistency across the board.