Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
Archived
Rugby World Cup 2007
Got Biased reffing?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="QKXV" data-source="post: 154036"><p>You see the thing is even if SA manage to scrape a victory over the Argentinians - which I believe will be the case in fact regardless of who wins, it will be a very close match - It would still be hard to be convinced by anything offerered in the Kiwi meaning of the word. The reason is that the quality of the opposition makes a huge difference to how well a team is perceived to perform. NZ performed brilliantly against Portugal - clean lines - didn't let the try fest run away with them, simply controlled it - solid defence, same against Scotland etc</p><p></p><p>'Convincing' rugby doesn't exist in it's true form in a competition like the world cup, because at the top the competition is too close, it's simply not a one off test like we see in between world cups, consider occasion, pride, nerves, consider the last stand made by many players and coaches, there's many other variables present as compared to a one off test, - the upsets in this comp should by now have convinced people that under competition conditions like in the RWC teams perform differently and it's those differences that makes the difference. </p><p></p><p>England's convincing pack performance against Australia is one of those differences, France's convincing defence against New Zealand is another, Fiji v Wales. It seems to me if Kiwi's speak about 'convincing' they speak about the perfect match for one side, a huge score and opponents left with nothing but bruises and questions and awe and fear. </p><p></p><p>The moment that could've defined NZ's campaign was the drop goal that never came in the last miutes against France, instead trying to work away on the fringes like to try and get a convincing victory rather than take responsibility for the gamble of a dropgoal and possibly get the game in the bag when it mattered.</p><p></p><p>In this world cup the only convincing that really matters is convincing the score sheet of the results.....all other convincing is better left for the posers, show offs and the braggers.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="QKXV, post: 154036"] You see the thing is even if SA manage to scrape a victory over the Argentinians - which I believe will be the case in fact regardless of who wins, it will be a very close match - It would still be hard to be convinced by anything offerered in the Kiwi meaning of the word. The reason is that the quality of the opposition makes a huge difference to how well a team is perceived to perform. NZ performed brilliantly against Portugal - clean lines - didn't let the try fest run away with them, simply controlled it - solid defence, same against Scotland etc 'Convincing' rugby doesn't exist in it's true form in a competition like the world cup, because at the top the competition is too close, it's simply not a one off test like we see in between world cups, consider occasion, pride, nerves, consider the last stand made by many players and coaches, there's many other variables present as compared to a one off test, - the upsets in this comp should by now have convinced people that under competition conditions like in the RWC teams perform differently and it's those differences that makes the difference. England's convincing pack performance against Australia is one of those differences, France's convincing defence against New Zealand is another, Fiji v Wales. It seems to me if Kiwi's speak about 'convincing' they speak about the perfect match for one side, a huge score and opponents left with nothing but bruises and questions and awe and fear. The moment that could've defined NZ's campaign was the drop goal that never came in the last miutes against France, instead trying to work away on the fringes like to try and get a convincing victory rather than take responsibility for the gamble of a dropgoal and possibly get the game in the bag when it mattered. In this world cup the only convincing that really matters is convincing the score sheet of the results.....all other convincing is better left for the posers, show offs and the braggers. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
Archived
Rugby World Cup 2007
Got Biased reffing?
Top