Stransky vs Wilko Drop

[Bullitt]

Dawson>Wilkinson>Greenwood>Tindall>Cohen>Lewsey>Robinson - All in their prime.

Crap backline, wasn't it?

Oh and that England side had put EVERYONE to bed in their own back yard.


Next?

 

[Prestwick]

Surely you are joking, that 03 England team the best ever? surely you need to have a half decent backline before you can be given such an accolade. Also the Aussies that year performed above themselves, the All Blacks were a far better team at the time but messed up in the semi. Afterall earlier in the year they had put 50 POINTS on the Aussies in their own back yard. [/b]

You do remember that the England team which went on to win in the World Cup beat New Zealand even when down to 13 men...right?

You see, this is why I find your claim that Dan Parks to be weak at best... :huh:

 

[Steve-o]

I voted Stransky.



His was further out (40m odd) and if I remember correctly it cleared the top of the uprights by some way.



He had more pressure on him as well, being on home soil. Too many people are letting thier emotions blur thier decision

 

[Prestwick]

They were both superb and wonderful DGs. I think regardless of which one wins in a vote, both are brilliant.

 

[Steve-o]

They were both superb and wonderful DGs. I think regardless of which one wins in a vote, both are brilliant.
[/b]

Lol, i have a feeling you'd be singing a different tune if Wilko's DG was ahead in the voting poll. But that, of course, I can only speculate.



I can, however, agree that both are integral and special parts of our great nations' rugby history

 

[Prestwick]

Lol, and I have a feeling that I wouldn't be!

 

[Incredible Schalk]

Dawson>Wilkinson>Greenwood>Tindall>Cohen>Lewsey>Robinson - All in their prime.

Crap backline, wasn't it?

Oh and that England side had put EVERYONE to bed in their own back yard.


Next?
[/b]

I never said they werent the best at that time, but the best of all time? rubbish..

Surely the greatest of all time could have done a better job against the likes of Wales and Samoa.

<div class='quotemain'>
Surely you are joking, that 03 England team the best ever? surely you need to have a half decent backline before you can be given such an accolade. Also the Aussies that year performed above themselves, the All Blacks were a far better team at the time but messed up in the semi. Afterall earlier in the year they had put 50 POINTS on the Aussies in their own back yard. [/b]

You do remember that the England team which went on to win in the World Cup beat New Zealand even when down to 13 men...right?

You see, this is why I find your claim that Dan Parks to be weak at best... :huh:
[/b][/quote]


Yea, that was more down to dreadful goal kicking by the New Zealanders and wasted chances.

 

[Bullitt]

ORLY??

surely you need to have a half decent backline before you can be given such an accolade. [/b]

No, you implied they're not even half decent.

And that 2003 side would have beaten any other team in history? Why? Fitness, skills, intensity and technology were all better then back in the ametuer days. That side would have overwhelmed Wales of the 70's or the AB's of the 80's (should such a match be possable).

In the nicest possable way (being there's bound to some South African who takes this the wrong way), if it were possible to play in a micro tournament;
The '95 Boks,
The '99 Wallabies,
The '02 England,
The '05 All Blacks
The '07 Boks

England would come out on top.The pack was far more destructive then any other side, in Johnson they had best leader in the business, the backs had the tight combination of power (Lewsey and Tindall), creativity (Greenwood) and Pace (Robinson and Cohen) to happily counter attack from anywhere on the field, and with Wilkinsons ability to slot 80-85% back then, the mouth of Dawson (who since Gareth Edwards was the best half back ever) would win so many penalties to finish the other sides off.

None of the games would be whitewashes by any mean, but England were the best of the lot.

It upsets so many to say a Northern Hemisphere side could even consider themselves as the best, but when world rugby was at it's height, England were the creme of the crop.

It's just a damn shame rugby itself has gone downhill since 2003, England by far more so then any other side.

 

[Incredible Schalk]

ORLY??

<div class='quotemain'> surely you need to have a half decent backline before you can be given such an accolade. [/b]

No, you implied they're not even half decent.

And that 2003 side would have beaten any other team in history? Why? Fitness, skills, intensity and technology were all better then back in the ametuer days. That side would have overwhelmed Wales of the 70's or the AB's of the 80's (should such a match be possable).

In the nicest possable way (being there's bound to some South African who takes this the wrong way), if it were possible to play in a micro tournament;
The '95 Boks,
The '99 Wallabies,
The '02 England,
The '05 All Blacks
The '07 Boks

England would come out on top.The pack was far more destructive then any other side, in Johnson they had best leader in the business, the backs had the tight combination of power (Lewsey and Tindall), creativity (Greenwood) and Pace (Robinson and Cohen) to happily counter attack from anywhere on the field, and with Wilkinsons ability to slot 80-85% back then, the mouth of Dawson (who since Gareth Edwards was the best half back ever) would win so many penalties to finish the other sides off.

None of the games would be whitewashes by any mean, but England were the best of the lot.

It upsets so many to say a Northern Hemisphere side could even consider themselves as the best, but when world rugby was at it's height, England were the creme of the crop.

It's just a damn shame rugby itself has gone downhill since 2003, England by far more so then any other side.
[/b][/quote]


As you highlighted what i said, backline. I know its easy to look back with slightly rose tinted spectacles but England were outscored in tries by Wales 3-1,France 1-0 and it was 1-1 with Australia in the 03 world cup. Surely there have been plenty of better backlines over the years.

What do you mean world rugby was at its height? the current Australian and All Blacks especially are far better than the team they fielded in 03.

Anyway i dont want to act like a troll. England deserved to win the world cup but in my opinion they are definetely not the greatest ever side. The Aussies of 99, the All Blacks of 05,95 are just some of the superior teams that spring to my mind.

 

[danny]

getting back to who kicked the best drop goal i have to say it must be Wilkinson due to the fact that he hit a high pressure kick with his wrong foot(right foot if you get my meaning). This is taking away nothing away from Stransky whos kick was superb.
by the way the Aussie side are certainly not better now than in 2003, they are far weaker in the forwards.

 

[nam97]

getting back to who kicked the best drop goal i have to say it must be Wilkinson due to the fact that he hit a high pressure kick with his wrong foot(right foot if you get my meaning). This is taking away nothing away from Stransky whos kick was superb.
by the way the Aussie side are certainly not better now than in 2003, they are far weaker in the forwards.
[/b]

Yeah, but Wilkinson was right in front no more than 20 out.

Stransky's kick was more impressive as he prevailed in a tight shoot out with Mehrtens. The fact he dropped 3 in extra time is amazing altogether, then to go on and nail one on an angle like that took nerves and then some.

 

[Incredible Schalk]

by the way the Aussie side are certainly not better now than in 2003, they are far weaker in the forwards.
[/b]

They had 50 points put on them at home by the All Blacks at home as ive previously said, they lost to the Boks also who were dreaful. Also until the semis they wee poor, very lucky to beat Ireland. I think this years team was at times considerably better, with the ball in hand the Aussies are superb but the pack was cack.

 

[samoa77]

wilko's best...

 

[mesq]

From a purely emotional point of view: Wilkinson's.
Stransky's kick was fine (I'll grant you that), it may have put to rest a sporting history marred by racism...but on the other hand it denied one of the finest groups ever assembled in rugby a more than deserved ***le. Quite honestly, I hated it. <_<

Wilkinson's was a memorable, once-in-a-lifetime moment. England World Champions in anything? :mellow: :lol:

 

[gilton15]

Stansky ran that final