The tournament starts tomorrow with the blockbuster France v New Zealand clash. There's a lot of very odd decisions that have gone into the build up to this tournament such as the decision to base the seedings on the January 2020 world rankings rather than something more current. Which has led to a lopsided draw where England and Wales are seeded too high and France, Ireland and Scotland seeded too low so the groups are unbalanced. There's a group of death containing France, Ireland and Scotland with one guaranteed to miss out while the weak England and Wales have much easier groups than they should have had. The four strongest teams at the moment are France, Ireland, South Africa and New Zealand but the way the draw has fallen means that all four can't reach the semi finals and one have to miss out. It's quite conceivable that this shit England team could shithouse their way through their soft draw all the way to the semis before getting battered by whichever one of the big three they meet there. Probably won't happen, we really are that bad and Argentina will probably beat us, but it could happen bizarrely. It's also going to be interesting to see how the new rules reducing head clashes will affect the matches. Also a very strict concussion rule which means that quite a few players could be forced to wait 12 days before they can next play which could lead to a lot of players to be missing games throughout the tournament.
It will be Sourh Africa, or New Zealand if they turn up. Would love to see a northern hemisphere team win it, just for something different.
You've got to fancy France unless they bottle it. They've got some great players. With England realistically out of contention I think I'd like to see a new name on the trophy. So Ireland or France, basically.
Been known to of course! Ireland always look good in the run up but then get knocked out by New Zealand. As you say it's a lopsided draw so likes of England and Wales might get luck but still will need to improve somewhat. Eddie Jones would love to knock us out I am sure.
I never fancy France, no matter how strong they look. Even at the weakest, they are capable of beating anyone, particularly on home turf, but their form can swing to extremes one game to the next. Would love to see them win it though.
Not a rugby union afficiando, but why do teams spend most of the game kicking the ball back to each other instead of running with and passing the ball? At least in rugby league they play the game the way it was meant to be.
France been the stronger team this half and deserve to be ahead. TMO is good for hearing what is said and understanding a decision but not sure going to a 2nd set of officials in the “bunker “would go down well in football !
New Zealand players look gutted every time they go more than 2 minutes without giving away a penalty.
NZ very very sloppy this game, not good after the hammering they took to SA. France haven't even been that good tonight, NZ so so poor.
https://rugbyroar.com/why-do-they-kick-so-much-in-rugby/ Give that a read. Explains it well. Union is a much more tactical game than League, and kicking is a big part of it. Also, game over. Excellent 2nd half from France.
Cheers, interesting link, although it still seems to boils down to hoping the other team muffs a catch and gives the ball away, which at international level, on a dry day, is rarely going to happen.
they kick for two main reasons. 1. field position 2. to conserve the big men. when you have the huge collisions that there are in rugby and you have up to 20 stone men running about they do struggle. anyone who's played any rugby at all knows how tough it is to keep going and going. what teams are doing is rather than have backs running into a wall they have them running to get everyone onside. they want less massive collisions per man over time. field position is far more important than people give it credit for. france hemmed nz in their own half last night in the second half. NZ were not backing their own set piece so they couldn't get out. the more desperate they got the worse the kicking became and the more turnovers and pens came. the 50-22 kick now rewards teams who kick massively as well. you win the line out if you can kick the ball put on the bounce and that sets up an attacking set piece. massive massive rule that.
A German in a Rugby Thread? Sounds like the beginning of a joke Nah, seriously, although Rugby is nearly non-existent in Germany I became interested in it when I worked in France in the early 90s and work colleagues dragged me into watching a Rugby match. Although I didn't know the rules I instantly became interested of what happened on the field. And now I even understand most of the rules and still interested, so I watch the World Cup, too Although it is only shown here on a little TV channel or via stream, at least most matches are shown. Because of my first encounter wirh Rugby was in France I keep my fingers crossed for the French team ( Germany never qualified for any World Cup so far). I hope they win the whole thing. It's long overdue and it would be good for the "Northern Hemisphere" when after England 2003 we get a 2nd country winning it which is above the equator. Good start for France into the tournament, giving NZ their first ever loss in a World Cup group match. Unfortunately I can't watch England vs Argentina this evening because at the same time it's the friendly Germany vs Japan in Football. Although I like Rugby but Football is always my #1, no matter how shit we're actually btw: What always impresses me in Rugby is how the players accept every decision of the referee without heavy lamenting. No "pack-forming" around the ref like in football, no acting, etc. Brilliant. It should be mandatory for "acting footballers" to watch a Rugby match at highest level, they would be ashamed afterwards about their own acting. One question about the points system Is this new that even the loser of the match can get points ( 1 point if the losing team gets 4 tries in a match and another point if they lose with less than 7 points)?
