The Rugby Thread

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2010
Messages
9,084
I would usually agree with that sentiment but I’m not so sure. If Australia beat you and NZ and go onto win I still wouldn’t necessarily think they’re the best team in the world but deserved winners, no doubt.

Look, mate, I’m not conceding anything. I think we’ve got a great chance of getting to a final, equally I wouldn’t be shocked if we went out the weekend, I’ll have to assess the manner of the defeat when/if it comes.

I think your point blank refusal to accept any kind of advantage to you, NZ and France is a tad disingenuous, though, as I think deep down, the reason you’re getting a bit prickly about it is you know it is an advantage.

I’ll tell you what; I’ll meet you half way, you admit it’s given you a slight advantage with regards to rest, prep and injuries and I’ll admit that perhaps I’ve been overstating the advantage.

Even old man Arnie has conceded that it’s gives you a slight edge.

The only way it would give us any sort of edge would be if we were struggling with injuries. We're not though.
 

SugarRay

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Messages
6,958
Potential slight edge, but England and France were facing a disadvantage compared to other tier 1 nations in the group stages. Nobody else had to play two tier 1 teams ( well technically Italy are tier 1 but you get my drift... )

The so called advantage is minimal at this stage. I’m still a believer of being battle hardened, although lots of changes were made by the Welsh for example against Uruguay, so the reserves did the job there
 

E17yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
11,288
The only way it would give us any sort of edge would be if we were struggling with injuries. We're not though.
You could’ve got injuries, though, that’s the point. Also, it’s all about prep these days. Especially in 50/50 games. The team that preps better usually wins and the more time you have to prep and train with 1 knockout game in mind the better
 

E17yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
11,288
Potential slight edge, but England and France were facing a disadvantage compared to other tier 1 nations in the group stages. Nobody else had to play two tier 1 teams ( well technically Italy are tier 1 but you get my drift... )

The so called advantage is minimal at this stage. I’m still a believer of being battle hardened, although lots of changes were made by the Welsh for example against Uruguay, so the reserves did the job there
I’d have loved not to have to play Parkes (who’s been named Robocop due to all his injuries he’s got) and Adams, who’s also carrying a knock. On another day 1 or both of them break down.

Also would’ve been nice to not have to play Patchell.
 

talkshowhost86

Mod-Moose
Staff
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
45,595
I would usually agree with that sentiment but I’m not so sure. If Australia beat you and NZ and go onto win I still wouldn’t necessarily think they’re the best team in the world but deserved winners, no doubt.

Look, mate, I’m not conceding anything. I think we’ve got a great chance of getting to a final, equally I wouldn’t be shocked if we went out the weekend, I’ll have to assess the manner of the defeat when/if it comes.

I think your point blank refusal to accept any kind of advantage to you, NZ and France is a tad disingenuous, though, as I think deep down, the reason you’re getting a bit prickly about it is you know it is an advantage.

I’ll tell you what; I’ll meet you half way, you admit it’s given you a slight advantage with regards to rest, prep and injuries and I’ll admit that perhaps I’ve been overstating the advantage.

Even old man Arnie has conceded that it’s gives you a slight edge.
I literally don't know whether it would give us an advantage or not. I can see why an extra weeks rest seems like an advantage but is I've said I really don't think it's as clear cut as you say. England are now the only team in the quarters who haven't had a competitive game in the tournament and I think that's a disadvantage.

Trying to weigh up the pros and cons is pretty much impossible which is why I find the insistence thats it's a massive advantage wrong, particularly when the other teams in the quarters have had plenty of opportunities to rest players.

It could be a benefit to England, France and NZ. It could be a negative. I just don't agree at all that it will be a deciding factor in who wins the tournament.
 
Top