join the Planet Network
They are not unlucky it's just really a consequence of the scoring system for the world cup and getting battered in the final.
If they had scored like they should of done in the way they played against against New Zealand, then they would of been higher up the ranking.Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 4:53 pmThey are not unlucky it's just really a consequence of the scoring system for the world cup and getting battered in the final.
The day before the world cup final
1 England 92.3
2 South Africa 90.72
3 New Zealand 89.93
The day after the final
1 South Africa 94.20
2 New Zealand 92.12
3 England 88.83
Usually after a loss like that a team trots out all the usual cliches about learning from it and the experience will be benefit later etc. Not this time though, we have learned our lesson and definitely will not be heading to the 2023 RWC with an over the hill team led by a 38 year old captain, despite having far better alternatives across the board.EverReady wrote: ↑Mon Oct 28, 2019 11:32 amLuck has had a significant hand and this time father time caught up on the team. Last time injuries did for usmsp. wrote:The question is what are Ireland doing wrong, They been one of the top teams over the past 15 years, yet they never got past the 1/4 final and never won a knock out game of a world cup. Is it a mental barrier for them? it cannot just be luck. (good or bad)nardol wrote: Hey - I'm just entering the debate about where I see Ireland. Remains to be seen if Japan keep getting the performances they have to date. I don't think they will and see them dropping down quite a lot. Player eligibility on residential grounds becoming longer could hurt them next cycle.
Are you saying there can't be 6 or more good teams?kiap wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 4:24 pmBeat the All Blacks by a large margin is the mathematical answer. And then only lost to higher ranked teams thereafter.charltom wrote:Scots tend to beat Aussies when they play too. What are Australia doing that high up?
Also, 6th is not high up.
A team ranked 6th is generally a poor team. This is no exception.
Any of the teams below ranked 6th for any length of time the coach would be under serious pressure to keep their job. Australia have basically been ranked 6th since the end of 2018.eldanielfire wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 10:37 amAre you saying there can't be 6 or more good teams?kiap wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 4:24 pmBeat the All Blacks by a large margin is the mathematical answer. And then only lost to higher ranked teams thereafter.charltom wrote:Scots tend to beat Aussies when they play too. What are Australia doing that high up?
Also, 6th is not high up.
A team ranked 6th is generally a poor team. This is no exception.
I disagree. Australia is a good team, inconsistent, has some flaws (which teams don't), but capable of beating any side in any given moment. Except maybe Eddie Jones England.
Good teams don't go down to record scores.eldanielfire wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 10:37 amAre you saying there can't be 6 or more good teams?kiap wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 4:24 pmBeat the All Blacks by a large margin is the mathematical answer. And then only lost to higher ranked teams thereafter.charltom wrote:Scots tend to beat Aussies when they play too. What are Australia doing that high up?
Also, 6th is not high up.
A team ranked 6th is generally a poor team. This is no exception.
I disagree. Australia is a good team, inconsistent, has some flaws (which teams don't), but capable of beating any side in any given moment. Except maybe Eddie Jones England.
I think the fact oz are 6th are as much an indication how the competition and quality has widened as opposed to it being a bad position in this day and age, even if old expectations are there. Essentially 4 of the 6 nations and 3 of the RC all believe they can be number 1 in the right circumstances and here are around 3 or 4 more teams wo believe they can crack the top 6, usually the right coach. They obviously can't all be.Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 11:06 amAny of the teams below ranked 6th for any length of time the coach would be under serious pressure to keep their job. Australia have basically been ranked 6th since the end of 2018.eldanielfire wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 10:37 amAre you saying there can't be 6 or more good teams?kiap wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 4:24 pmBeat the All Blacks by a large margin is the mathematical answer. And then only lost to higher ranked teams thereafter.charltom wrote:Scots tend to beat Aussies when they play too. What are Australia doing that high up?
Also, 6th is not high up.
A team ranked 6th is generally a poor team. This is no exception.
I disagree. Australia is a good team, inconsistent, has some flaws (which teams don't), but capable of beating any side in any given moment. Except maybe Eddie Jones England.
New Zealand (never happened)
England
Australia
South Africa
You are coach of one of those 4 teams and in 6th place for a year. Tell that to your employers. You are still getting the tin taceldanielfire wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 11:49 amI think the fact oz are 6th are as much an indication how the competition and quality has widened as opposed to it being a bad position in this day and age, even if old expectations are there. Essentially 4 of the 6 nations and 3 of the RC all believe they can be number 1 in the right circumstances and here are around 3 or 4 more teams wo believe they can crack the top 6, usually the right coach. They obviously can't all be.Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 11:06 amAny of the teams below ranked 6th for any length of time the coach would be under serious pressure to keep their job. Australia have basically been ranked 6th since the end of 2018.eldanielfire wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 10:37 amAre you saying there can't be 6 or more good teams?kiap wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 4:24 pmBeat the All Blacks by a large margin is the mathematical answer. And then only lost to higher ranked teams thereafter.charltom wrote:Scots tend to beat Aussies when they play too. What are Australia doing that high up?
Also, 6th is not high up.
A team ranked 6th is generally a poor team. This is no exception.
I disagree. Australia is a good team, inconsistent, has some flaws (which teams don't), but capable of beating any side in any given moment. Except maybe Eddie Jones England.
New Zealand (never happened)
England
Australia
South Africa
a coach said "No" to 300 mil and "Yes" for getting his players ready again first player welfare
Yawn.......Argentina has a much worse Covid situation and yet they manage to turn up and produce a fantastic performance.ZuluBoy wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 7:23 pmIf a coach said "No" to 300 mil and "Yes" for his player's welfare
and you call such a quality decision which will improve player's conditioning and lead to less injuries to key players for the 2023 WC
as "have no balls"
then it's better you stick with whatever mediocre lot and cheer them on in this covid madness just because they didn't had one of the harshest lockdowns in the world and could play and therefore the opposition are now scared or scum or have no balls
rather go play with your marbles
because you didn't play when you should have played
They’d actually played the previous two weeks v Australia A and NSW.Midfieldmaestro wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 5:48 pm Argentina will go better by game 3. It was only their first game this year. nz mediocre performance
Maybe because they have only won 3 games in their last 15 and two of those were against USA and Tonga, and in that same time Scotland have won 10 out of their last 15 games.
Yeah, I know who I'm more afraid of if the All Blacks were to meet in a World Cup.BlackMac wrote: ↑Tue Nov 17, 2020 10:06 amMaybe because they have only won 3 games in their last 15 and two of those were against USA and Tonga, and in that same time Scotland have won 10 out of their last 15 games.
Also possibly the fact that they have only managed to beat Scotland twice in their last 10 games.
They are going to engineer some kind of International ban on themselves for 20 years so they can scream from the rooftops that they are the number one side for 20 years without playing anyone. They have form you know.
Brumbie_Steve wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 6:12 amThey are going to engineer some kind of International ban on themselves for 20 years so they can scream from the rooftops that they are the number one side for 20 years without playing anyone. They have form you know.
Well then the rankings should reflect that once they get a few more wins under their belt. It would be a crap system if you advanced to high on the back of one good win.Jerome Manning wrote: ↑Tue Nov 17, 2020 9:08 pmYeah, I know who I'm more afraid of if the All Blacks were to meet in a World Cup.BlackMac wrote: ↑Tue Nov 17, 2020 10:06 amMaybe because they have only won 3 games in their last 15 and two of those were against USA and Tonga, and in that same time Scotland have won 10 out of their last 15 games.
Also possibly the fact that they have only managed to beat Scotland twice in their last 10 games.
If they don't play they get removed from the rankings. However in 20 years time if they played a game they would come back with the same amount of points.Brumbie_Steve wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 6:12 amThey are going to engineer some kind of International ban on themselves for 20 years so they can scream from the rooftops that they are the number one side for 20 years without playing anyone. They have form you know.
