• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A look ahead: the 2014 Six Nations

I can't agree with that, the 6N is almost on a par with the RWC for me.

Although the quality of rugby is clearly higher in the RC... the competition itself has nothing on the 6N.

well it's true my dear English person, it wasn't up until 1987 that a supposed 'Rugby World Cup' decided it would surface from nothing into the greatest challenge in Rugby tests. While the 6N dates back to around the 10th century, scholars aren't exactly too sure; it's been a really long time, and it's great tradition...more importantly, it is a cultural thing; the RWC will always carry its otherness along with it wherever it goes, England this time...

By the time the generations pass, the newer ones will have grown up with a history of RWC already. People will look back and say "oh yeah, it's smt that started at the end of the 20th century".
Like, for me, I was 1 when world cups started. It's really about the 6N, isn't it...or let's say just as important, and not completely comparable. They follow different patterns of logic that may not be directly confronted...
 
Last edited:
From my point of view I see Wales and England as the big contenders to take this tournament, whilst Ireland and France will be fighting for the 3rd spot and Italy and Scotland will be playing for the wooden spoon.

Now, having in count all the important injured players that England has (well I guess only Tuilagui and Corbisiero, cause Lancaster prefers to play with Ashton and Foden instead of giving Wade and Yarde some minutes on the field), I would say Wales is the big favourite, also they're defending the ***le again so they're clearly the team to beat this year.
 
I don't think we can say Wales are the "team to beat this year". Diminished or not, they conceded 3 tries against South Africa at home, looked powerless against Australia for a large portion of the match and barely managed 17 points and a 10-point victory on a very, very mediocre Tongan side that even a struggling-badly-on-attack France managed 38 points over.
Yes, this is their November curse, and they may turn up big time again in February and March, and they are the two-time defending champs - but we don't know that they'll find form again, and based on current form I don't think we can affirm they are "the team to beat".

I don't think there is a team to beat. England, without Tuilagi and Corbs, have managed a strong month of November. But they aren't scary either. France are coming off a record-low year, but aren't exactly harmless. Wales I've written about, and Ireland looked fine against Samoa, sucked against Australia and then rocked NZ's world. Who the hell knows what they can produce consistently for 5 matches.

Then there's the actual schedule, which will change everything of course. For Ireland for instance, they have 3 games at home, but the 2 they're playing away are Paris and London...
 
Wales will be the team to beat in the minds of their opponents, not necessarily because of their quality. They're still the bookies favourites, albeit narrowly.

England will be desperate to get revenge for Cardiff last year. Ireland will want a repeat performance of last year (and avenge the dropping of BOD). Both sides have them at home too. France want a bounce back from two wins in eleven (That's the opposite of England's year. Just so you know. Wouldn't want you to miss that.) so they'll want to win the tournament. What better way than beating the reigning champions? Not to mention the historical precedent following Lions tours.

As an England supporter, beating Wales is probably most important. With the RWC pools and the last two years' results, for morale's sake they need to be beaten. They're the only Six Nations side to have beaten England under Lancaster, and are one of only two sides in the world England haven't beaten in the same time period. (South Africa being the other.)

---

I will (as unnatural as it feels) defend Wales against Tonga. It was their second side in a game where the referee was testing his shiny new whistle. Only 11 minutes in the first half were open play; hard to score tries in that situation. They dealt with Argentina easily enough.
 
I don't think we can say Wales are the "team to beat this year". Diminished or not, they conceded 3 tries against South Africa at home, looked powerless against Australia for a large portion of the match and barely managed 17 points and a 10-point victory on a very, very mediocre Tongan side that even a struggling-badly-on-attack France managed 38 points over.
Yes, this is their November curse, and they may turn up big time again in February and March, and they are the two-time defending champs - but we don't know that they'll find form again, and based on current form I don't think we can affirm they are "the team to beat".

I don't think there is a team to beat. England, without Tuilagi and Corbs, have managed a strong month of November. But they aren't scary either. France are coming off a record-low year, but aren't exactly harmless. Wales I've written about, and Ireland looked fine against Samoa, sucked against Australia and then rocked NZ's world. Who the hell knows what they can produce consistently for 5 matches.

Then there's the actual schedule, which will change everything of course. For Ireland for instance, they have 3 games at home, but the 2 they're playing away are Paris and London...

Well I don't think the November test are that important to define how teams will perform in the upcoming Six Nations, and specially in the case of Wales cause, as you already may know, they tend to suck when it comes to Autumn test but the next year they're simply on fire.

Look the 2012 EOYT of Wales:

Lost 12- 26 to Argentina
Lost 19- 26 to Samoa
Lost 10- 33 to NZ
Lost 12- 14 to Aus

Really crappy way to end the year for them, including two unexpected defeats... Now, who would it thought that they were going to win the next Six Nations?? I am sure that not many people had faith in them.

Also, remember that this year Wales were playing without Jonathan Davies and Adam Jones during almost all the series.. and also I think that Alex Cuthbert only played vs Australia. I know that basically all the teams suffers from injuries, but those were three big losses for Wales. I think that the full strenght starting XV of Wales is the best team that one Europe nation can offer right now. Yes they usually struggle a lot to replace one player, but when they got their full squad available and in form, they simply are the best team around.

That's why I think they're the team to beat, once again.
 
England will be desperate to get revenge for Cardiff last year. Ireland will want a repeat performance of last year (and avenge the dropping of BOD). Both sides have them at home too. France want a bounce back from two wins in eleven (That's the opposite of England's year. Just so you know. Wouldn't want you to miss that.) so they'll want to win the tournament. What better way than beating the reigning champions? Not to mention the historical precedent following Lions tours.

ahhh...the English. Can't live with em, would love to live without em ! Brag all you want, despite the records France didn't really have a dreadful year and England didn't really have a great year. Wins are wins, losses are losses, but seeing how England played at their potential and France hasn't even scratched its own for obvious reasons, I'm waiting for a change in results soon enough...

I mean sure France lost to Italy, but it was in Rome and they played the best match I've ever seen em play. Literally, and by far. England had tremendous trouble against a mediocre Italian side at home and can thank God they never scored that impending second try.
France lost 30-0 in NZ, but it's a France in total crisis that managed 3 other very good games still against NZ. England lost 30-3 in Cardiff and were playing their simple, consistent, well applied Rugby, just wasn't nearly enough...

So easy on the bragging. When France get smashed regularly and England put 40 on everybody, I'll keep my silence, but it's far from being the case and this is just a cheap thing to underline, just so you know ! ;)

We put 33-6 on the Aussies last year, you couldn't even beat em. Even the Italians got much closer than England. You had to cheat to win this year !

Rant over, and well deserved.
 
Last edited:
ahhh...the English. Can't live with em, would love to live without em ! Brag all you want, despite the records France didn't really have a dreadful year and England didn't really have a great year. Wins are wins, losses are losses, but seeing how England played at their potential and France hasn't even scratched its own for obvious reasons, I'm waiting for a change in results soon enough....
i definitely agree with you there
 
but seeing how England played at their potential...

I'd disagree there. The pack played very well, but haven't peaked. Given our oldest loosehead is 25 they've not reached maturity as props. Dan Cole is only 26. Launchbury and Lawes are 22 and 24 respectively. Billy Vunipola (21) had only two caps at the start of the series.

England also didn't have a backline to all intents and purposes. So there's far more potential there. Relating back to the Six Nations, the number of backs injuries (barring Wade and Yarde) opens the door for a lot of creative players. Now we just have to wait and see if Lancaster will pick them. If he does, then England will have a very good, young pack and some backs who might do something with the ball they're provided with.

There's plenty of room to improve.
 
I'd disagree there. The pack played very well, but haven't peaked. Given our oldest loosehead is 25 they've not reached maturity as props. Dan Cole is only 26. Launchbury and Lawes are 22 and 24 respectively. Billy Vunipola (21) had only two caps at the start of the series.

England also didn't have a backline to all intents and purposes. So there's far more potential there. Relating back to the Six Nations, the number of backs injuries (barring Wade and Yarde) opens the door for a lot of creative players. Now we just have to wait and see if Lancaster will pick them. If he does, then England will have a very good, young pack and some backs who might do something with the ball they're provided with.

There's plenty of room to improve.

no no, you didn't get me. I'm saying England have "played their game" this whole year, and it's not like giving them more time *WITHIN* the frame of this 2013 year was going to make them any better. Of course they can improve, nobody has trouble with that notion. I'm saying they've played their game, and have done it fairly well.
Relatively to their own game i.e. to their intrinsic limits for the year, England have played about an 8/10 this year, on average. What we've seen is just about the most they could've done, there wasn't a whole lot more in store they hadn't shown.

The same couldn't be said about France. We've had a handful of training sessions together, extremely limited time. Guys are like strangers to each other, and this is very obvious to anyone who's watched France this entire year; and hopefully this'll change soon the more they play together as we're solidifying our core and making less changes to the roster.

With a backline consisting of the likes of Fofana, Fritz, Fickou, Bastareaud, Guitoune, Huget, Benjamin Fall, Dulin...etc, big ball carriers up front like Picamoles or Debaty, and an attacking platform like the French scrum, we can obviously say France hasn't exactly squeezed all the juices out of its oranges, to say the very least...the very least.

Calling bull**** on that!

you call what you want out of what you want fella, no problem ! :D
 
Last edited:
I'd probably say France. Their results obviously haven't been good but have masked improving performances and immense physicality. I still think England are too limited, they have all the muscle in the world but not enough flair, especially with Wade out injured. As others have stated, Farrell is an excellent kicking 10 behind a dominant pack, but England will need more than that to win the 6 Nations or beat New Zealand or South Africa, and there's no evidence that they have it.

People may reply that France are in the same vein (i.e reliant on a big pack) but what I'd say there is that they have the players to change their gameplan to a more expansive approach if required. Trinh-Duc is still one of the best running 10's in world rugby and they have an embarrassment of riches out wide. France can go down the set-piece, beat 'em up approach or a running approach, whereas England can only pull off the former, which won't be enough to win a 6 Nations.

The Irish challenge is contingent on two things: injuries and that old buzzword, consistency. Scotland first up is a good opportunity to build some momentum, and Wales at home next up will be a tight game. If Ireland can win that, they could build enough momentum to mount a challenge. They've only won once in Paris in 40 years however. Also, their lack of depth is a real problem - getting lucky on the injury front is key. They may pull off wins in 2 out of the 3 "big" fixtures, but I don't see them winning the 6 Nations for these outlined reasons.

Wales will be serious contenders but with a couple of tough away fixtures, I can't see them pulling it off for a third year in a row, especially with a vengeful England and a simmering, angry and improved France lying in the wings. The post Lions tour thing also tips the scale in France's favour further.

So France to win, but no Grand Slam. At a guess (and it is just a guess):

1.France
2.Ireland
3.England
4.Wales
5.Scotland
6.Italy
 
^ very well written and interesting in concept, neiliog.
I'm a tad less optimistic about France, but this is probably due to them being my side, we tend to expect the worst out of defense. And the Lions thing is a little bit ridiculous for me, but that's unimportant.

It's courageous of you to emit a future rankings prediction, so I'll try. Of course injuries may occur before the start of the tournament, and yadi yada, but what the heck let's try something here.
Let's go with France, out of enthusiasm, but I think Wales have a real chance too with England never too far and Ireland a much improved, well coached side:
1 - France
2 - Wales
3 - Ireland
4 - England
5 - Scotland
6 - Italy

It feels too low for England to be just 4th, but there are only so many slots.

* France has all the advantages we've talked about, but also have all the disadvantages we've talked about as well...
* Wales benefit from 3 games at home, but have Twickenham and Aviva this year. I can see them taking revenge on the Irish and just losing one match the whole tournament though.
* Ireland are strong and have 3 home matches out of 5, but the two away ones are Paris and London. Tough, tough...probably two losses to be straight-forward about it.
* England are always tough and organized and have a simple enough style that they won't fail badly any time soon like other sides might (Aus, Fra, Arg, Ita, Ire - this 2013 year). But they're too one-dimensional, badly need some back play and have injuries there, and have just two home matches. And both Ireland and Wales will be a tremendous handful for the poms ! Plus, besides Paris, Murrayfield and Rome may prove more tricky than we all expect this year.
* Scotland are fine, but need just that little extra. They've got 3 away matches, but are hosting France and England, who knows, they may pull something interesting off there. Aviva and Millennium might be a bit too much to ask for, but Rome is within grasp and more for Kelly Brown's men.
* Italy: miserable form. Not bad - *miserable*. They've no hope of upsetting France this time as they travel to Paris, Cardiff before that, and Dublin later in the schedule. Their home games may be interesting though: Scotland and England. I'm hopeful they might find their good home form again and push the English even further this year.
I thought at the end of last year's edition that 2014 would be the year when they finally upset England for the first time, but based on recent form, and consistently that, I doubt it a bit more now. But who knows. Fingers crossed for our Trans-Alpine cousins, la Squadra Azzurra.
 
i think it it will go like
1. France
2. Wales
3. Ireland
4. Scotland
5. England
6. Italy
 
Last edited:
* Scotland are fine, but need just that little extra. They've got 3 away matches, but are hosting France and England, who knows, they may pull something interesting off there. Aviva and Millennium might be a bit too much to ask for, but Rome is within grasp and more for Kelly Brown's men.
our only main problem is we dont have a good 10 weir is decent but no one good or outstanding we do have players capable of scoring tries (matt scott, tim visser, stuart hogg and sean maitland) its just they dont seem to get that much involved in the match which i think is the reason for our lack off tries in recent games
 
our only main problem is we dont have a good 10 weir is decent but no one good or outstanding we do have players capable of scoring tries (matt scott, tim visser, stuart hogg and sean maitland) its just they dont seem to get that much involved in the match which i think is the reason for our lack off tries in recent games

yeah man, some good back play in potential. I thought they looked good against Japan this year, which itself wasn't an easy foe and held their own in MF.
But the problem past a good 10 is also the scrum. They can hold up against a team like Ireland, and on a "good day" other teams, but they did concede a penalty try in the Quadrangular twice against two different teams: Italy and South Africa. Now these two are amongst the Top 5 in the world in that department for sure, but France, England and Wales will all present a huge challenge up front for the Scots.

And they may lack a good 10, but they have a rarity. A good 9. They've also produced some good work at the breakdown this year, and despite not scoring many tries, they've shown some solid movements on attack.
 
i think it it will go like
1. France
2. Wales
3. Ireland
4. Scotland
5. England
6. Italy

England 5th? You got to be joking. Under Stuart Lancaster the only 6N team they have lost to is Wales and are currently the most successful vs SH. Short of half the England team picking up injuries beyond what we already have, there is no way Scotland will be higher. The last time Scotland finished higher than England was 2006. Since then England haven't been lower than 3rd and I really don't think England have got a lot worse since 2006 or Scotland a lot better.

EDIT: Even more, England have NEVER finished 5th in the 6 nations or 4th in the 5 nations as far back as 1990 (I can't be arsed to go back even further) essentially you are predicting the worst English 5/6 nations in the last few decades, probably even history.

1. Wales
2. France
3. England
4. Ireland
5. Scotland
6. Italy
 
Last edited:
I can't agree with that, the 6N is almost on a par with the RWC for me.

Although the quality of rugby is clearly higher in the RC... the competition itself has nothing on the 6N.

Well... good onya mate, that'll be why the panty waist NH teams think they can win a RWC.
As long as they continue to play in the joke that is the 6 Nations tourney they don't stand a chance of surviving against the big 3 SH teams in RWC.
Home and away is crucial, and cut all the crappy breaks out and get on with playing some rugby.
As an historical event the 6 Nations is a bit of fun, but as a preparation for the RWC, which is what it needs to be if the NH teams are to ever start competing with the big 3, it's nothing more than a jolly old event, much like the boat race, the Chelsea flower show and cheese rolling in the villages.
Home and away would make it so much more watchable and vault the 6 Nations ahead of the Quad nations as a competition.
Until then it's like the Queens tennis event, always the bridesmaid and not universally attractive to the codes fan base.
 
i think it it will go like
1. France
2. Wales
3. Ireland
4. Scotland
5. England
6. Italy

Interesting- what's your reasoning? I'm all for being cynical about England's chances but even then it would take a hell of a lot to hit 5th place.
 
I think you have to look at the fixture lists for the 6N.

I see:

England
France
Ireland/Wales
Italy
Scotland
 
Interesting- what's your reasoning? I'm all for being cynical about England's chances but even then it would take a hell of a lot to hit 5th place.
oh damm didn't noticed that i did that lol sorry if i offended u so this is what i actually meant

1. France
2. Wales
3. England
4. Ireland
5. Scotland
6. Italy
 
Top