Search results

Missed this bit at first. I think scrums are a much more contentious issue. Right now, problems exist with them; that would be true to me even if the Wallabies were the best in the world at scrummaging. Too often, people claim that rules shouldn't be changed because they fear it might...

Without wanting to put the mocker on our boys, it was a lovely sunny day in Marseille too.

Other people did. I just think they also picked the Irish and/or the English, working on the presumption that defensive sides do better in World Cups.

Unless used in gambling, where it becomes an expression of certainty. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lay_down_misere

Not only there are different ways to play rugby, but different spectators enjoy different things. While there are people who love to see backs being unleashed in intricate passing and running displays, there are also people who just love to see a physical confrontation between two awesome...

In case anyone accuses me of creativity: http://xkcd.com/386/

I've done the hard yards of spotting our frontrunner already. Just go back 3 posts.

Indeed, I am 2/2 so far. Hopefully it keeps up.

I was just thinking that today, whilst watching the England/France game. It should be a ray of hope for the All Blacks. Anything that they can link to 1987 would have to be a plus for them. Fortunately, we'd still see different semi finals to that time round and (hopefully) different results.

Fair bit of playing the man in this thread. Eyes on the ball, lads.

Not a word. /pedantry

Nice girl, I can understand why Scarfy is interested in her.

1/1, here's hoping the rest play out.

I took both posts to be somewhat in jest. It seemed like a bantering exchange that way. I could certainly be wrong though.

:nta: Which is why you felt compelled to add to it?

1. Wallabies - Self explanatory 2. Wales - have always had time for the taffs 3. Argentina - would be amazing for them and world rugby (and us not having to play the ABs if we win would be nice) 4. France - Because it means England is out of the cup.

Vickerman was a noticeable source of the 'hardness' that lifted the Wallabies in Bled 2, for my mind. I quite like this split. Getting Vickerman to go hard early and then Sharpe on for some ball carrying later.

Stopping and thinking for a bit, I don't hate the idea of McCabe to start and Barnes to finish. Let Pat do the heavy lifting of boshing it up early and bring on Barnes to control things in the later stages. 4-3 is interesting. They must be betting on Ant. Fainga'a bringing some big hits later...

ABC providing some insight into the incident: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-10-03/carter-reveals-cup-agony/3207234/?site=sport&section=all&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

I'm guessing you didn't rate the tighthead then?