La composition de l'Angleterre contre l'Australie

BTW I wouldn't be so forgiving of Sam Cane if I was a Kiwi. He cost them a World Cup. Foster was blaming the TMO as usual. But it was Cane. SA were always going to be fatigued. One message. DO NOT GET RED!

Ireland's B team beat SA in Durban after all, so not unheard of.

The key to victory is for the All Black backs to not butcher the opportunities when that pack gives them front foot ball through poor ball handling/ passing (J. Barrett & Ioane) or mindless kicking possession away (Ratima & McKenzie).

It’s sly now. But unfortunately, as soon as the ABs beat Ireland, we’ll return to regular programming. Something about how shite the boks are.

I prefer it when Ben is quiet.

To use a perfect example... The Bulls from South Africa in the URC reached 2 finals, and in both semi finals they played Leinster(effectively the Irish team), not their 2nd team, but all stars, and they beat them both times, once away and once at home. Those games was the Bulls finals. In the actual finals, they lost to the Stormers of SA, and Glasgow Warriors of Scotland. They put everything into those Leinster matches, knowing what would be needed, but it cost them in the finals.

Putting too much energy in silly celebrations, instead of focusing on the task at hand until the final whistle blow is what will give the other team the edge. It's why teams like the Boks and the Irish play 80 min games, not 50-60 min games. It's why they regularly wins. It's why the AB's struggle, because they have the talent, but they don't have 80 min in them yet. When a player gets tired, that's when mistakes slips in and teams like the Boks will punish you for it, even if they play bad, because they are focused. They are saving that energy for when it really matters.

That last 20 minutes is where most games are won or lost and that's where you need to dig deep. Wasting energy on silly celebrations like tackles or a ref decision etc is detrimental. Celebrating tries or points or even penalties, that is understandable. Required even to hype yourself up for about a minute or two, but then it's time to refocus.

In RWC 2023 and previous iterations the draw between seed placings was known in advance. So Wales knew that whoever won their group was playing the second placed team in England's group in Marseilles at a certain time and date.

Similarly South Africa and New Zealand knew if they won their groups they were playing the second team in each others groups. As it happenned Ireland and France won these groups so we ended up with the exact same fixtures pairings anyway!

I don't know for certain if the top4 is set in stone I am just surmizing that they will want to have the knock out fixtures mapped out in advance as in previous years, unlike soccer tournaments. I would be happy if the knock outs were doled out on merit as Ireland and France in 2023 would have got Fiji and Argentina and much improved prospects. But I don't know for 2027, I am guessing based on past tournaments that this is what they do.

The main issue with the 2023 arrangements was that the rankings between World Cups counted for nothing. The ranking was taken from tournament end in 2019 which meant that even though Wales were ranked #10 in 2023 their ranking was taken from the 2019 RWC which was #4 so they were a no 1 seed. That was majorly beneficial as both Wales and England (#3 seed) won their groups.

Poor Scotland were #4 in 2023 and #9 in 2019, so got pooled based on #9th with SA and Ireland, got spat out with their rankings decimated and are in a real fight to make it into top 6 again.

So it could be that the top pool team (wins all matches + tries scored, PD whatever) gets a good draw versus a 3rd place pool qualifier etc. But my hunch is they will not be so nuanced: the top 2 seeds going in will get the two 3rd placed teams and the top 4 going in won't meet until the semi should they win their groups and knock out matches.

I may send a letter in to ask, but World Rugby don't tend to respond.

Personally, I don't like measuring teams from the past against current teams. Too much changed. Different eras with different rules and regulations etc etc etc. I prefer to rate teams by decades. For instance, who was the best team between 2000 and 2010, best between 2011 and 2020 etc.

There is many ways people rate the best teams and the world rugby ranking system is absolute 💩. Some would rank the best teams via WC's. Other would say how many games they win between and during WC's. The Richie McCaw AB's was the best of their time, no doubt.

We need a new ranking system. I don't have a system to suggest except the usual, but I wouldn't mind other people's inputs as to what they think will work or why they prefer this system and why.

For the love of God. Please win.