The League Media

[Train Without a Station]

The media loves controversy but the Rugby media loves to paint the game as on the verge of collapse.

 

[Braveheart81]

I think there's a level of false expectations. Most journalists, like Aussie rugby fans come from a position of thinking that we should be winning against everyone at least on a reasonably consistent basis.

Everyone expects us to be competing to win whatever we're playing in but the reality is that we need to perform above expectations to achieve that.

We'll probably start the next RWC ranked 3rd. As the home side on the up, I'd also suggest that England will be favourites compared to us pushing us down to 4th.

The way the pools are worked out, we have to produce an upset against England to be ranked number 1 and get a good passage through the elimination rounds. If we beat England we should have a good run to progress to the final. If we lose to England, we then are likely to meet SA in the quarter finals and then NZ in the semi finals if we achieve an upset there.

So in the scheme of things the Wallabies need to pull off a minimum of two upsets to win the tournament and need at least one upset to make the semi finals.

So with those issues in mind, you would look at the current position of the Wallabies with a bit of doom and gloom because we're not tracking to be the RWC favourite and thus our chances at winning the tournament aren't that great on paper.

 

[qwerty51]

I had to laugh at Kafe suggesting our chances were good based on our pool. What a load of shit. We have to play Fiji, England and Wales in the pools. England and Wales are the last two matches. That's 5 matches of top tier opponents consecutively, no squad rotation can be used. We're fucked if we even make it to the final from fatigue.

Fatigue was the main reason behind a lot of the results last World Cup. Australia were fucked physically from that quarter final defending all game and gave a limp effort against NZ in the semi who had only Argentina to contend with in the quarter. NZ poured everything into that semi recognising it had more importance than the final, it's why they barely scraped home in the final. France barely beat a 14 man Welsh side in the semi, it's why they went so good in the final.

 

[RugbyReg]

what it will mean is that there will be no carrying of injured players. We did that in 95 and 2007. Whether we will get a a completely 100% squad (unlikely) but we definitely need to target it.

 

[Braveheart81]

I agree with you Reg but our draw could also make that tricky. Given that our first two games are our easiest, there will be an incentive to carry a star who is a few weeks away from being healthy if they'll be available for our main games in the tournament.

Definitely need some luck with injuries heading into the tournament.

 

[Highlander35]

Little bit pessimistic there. A big group stage would benefit you immensely, and set you up well for a charge at the cup..

If you top pool A, you end up on the right side of the finals draw, missing out on the Saffas and the All Blacks.

You get a relatively easy quarter against either us or the Samoans (although given recent history... ), followed by the French, the Argies or the Irish.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Definitely need some luck with injuries heading into the tournament.

I think that applies to every successful sporting team. The All Blacks in 2011 only suffered injuries to the first choice starter in 1 position.

Luck with injuries is the one factor beyond the control of any team, which you need to in order to achieve success.

 

[wamberal]

I think that applies to every successful sporting team. The All Blacks in 2011 only suffered injuries to the first choice starter in 1 position.

Luck with injuries is the one factor beyond the control of any team, which you need to in order to achieve success.

I sometimes wonder whether it is just a matter of luck.


I suspect that some teams have better S & C, and maybe are better able to give key players a break when they need it.

Pocock is a case in point. Some believe that he got too built up, too young, and of course started playing at the top level in a very demanding position at a tender age.

 

[mxyzptlk]

Pocock is a case in point. Some believe that he got too built up, too young, and of course started playing at the top level in a very demanding position at a tender age.

He's so strong it seems his musculature over-compensated for his surgery and recovery, giving that knee a false sense of stability. If he'd waited just two or three weeks more before he came back, I wonder if he'd be playing now.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I sometimes wonder whether it is just a matter of luck.


I suspect that some teams have better S & C, and maybe are better able to give key players a break when they need it.

That is a factor. But ultimately some of it comes down to luck. Drew Mitchell's injury in 2011 - Poor S & C? No. Just pure bad luck.

Injuries even with the best S & C are unavoidable. Your key players being the ones which avoid injury is down to luck.

 

[wamberal]

So we agree. It is not all about luck

 

[Train Without a Station]

Well poor S & C can harm you. The Reds are probably an example of this, with higher injury rates than other teams. I'd say it's likely attributed to poor S & C due to the loss of the previous S & C coach and a change in the S & C team at the last minute leaving them a bit caught out.

But the best teams would all be doing something pretty similar with S & C, and not every team has the same injury outcomes, which comes back to my original comment.

Luck with injuries is the one factor beyond the control of any team, which you need to in order to achieve success.

There's an element of luck there. With the injuries the team gets, who to and when they get them.

The Sydney Swans this year are a perfect example of this. Had a number of injuries to key players. These all occurred early in the season and allowed them to build towards the finals. Is this superior S & C? I doubt it, they had more injuries than some teams. Just luck as to when they occurred.

 

[Pfitzy]

"if I could get out of this cot with all my toys, I'd deadset walk"

That was gold, Reg.

it shows how guys like Gould and Geyer - western Sydney and proud - will brook no treaties because they still hold the belief that the TRUE Sydney still belongs to league.

Compare to the other guys who are aware of the threat, and will hastily point at anything migrating outside the game (Hunt to AFL, Izzy to Union, etc) as proof of the game's ability to develop athletes.

 

[Pfitzy]

With the two "weaker" games first, there will be no settling in period and no free caps should be handed out unless a bench option is not yet decided.

Play your best side as long as you can and let them build into Wales and England, then onto the quarters if we're good enough.

Fuck, I'd rather have it that way than a massive encounter first, then three duds, then a big quarter final. It fucks with the ABs when they get to the QFs having put a million points on minnows.

 

[qwerty51]

Really don't see it that way, remember there's going to be a TRC beforehand. No chance of being 'underdone' before the knockout stages. Only a chance of injuries and fatigue.

 

[Biffo]

i am wondering whether the injuries and depth issues with respect to RWCs are exaggerated.

no team has to play more than two "top" teams in its group. thus, the top XV can play two games and be in the pink for the three games in the knocks-out. it's not as arduous as many claim.

looking back at the RWCs gone by, i can see only one where injuries played a determining part in the outcome.

i suspect that too many teams and individuals in tournaments want to blame their arduous or unfair draws for their failures. lesser ability would be more explanatory.

 

[Biffo]

With the two "weaker" games first, there will be no settling in period and no free caps should be handed out unless a bench option is not yet decided.

Play your best side as long as you can and let them build into Wales and England, then onto the quarters if we're good enough.

Fuck, I'd rather have it that way than a massive encounter first, then three duds, then a big quarter final. It fucks with the ABs when they get to the QFs having put a million points on minnows.

you reckon The AIGs would be well advised to use what influence they have to get into a pool with two highly ranked teams and a Pacific Islands team to toughen them up?

 

[Omar Comin']

I think the All Blacks will be well enough prepared by their pool. While they're not in any serious danger of losing a match Argentina will clearly provide a decent test. Tonga at full strength (which is only really at world cups) are a good side too. And even Georgia will give their forwards a tough and very physical battle.

They will beat Namibia by however many they like, but as that game is only 4 days after the opener with Argentina it will be their reserves in that one. Their best 23 will get 3 decent warm up games.

 

[Braveheart81]

With the two "weaker" games first, there will be no settling in period and no free caps should be handed out unless a bench option is not yet decided.

Play your best side as long as you can and let them build into Wales and England, then onto the quarters if we're good enough.

Fuck, I'd rather have it that way than a massive encounter first, then three duds, then a big quarter final. It fucks with the ABs when they get to the QFs having put a million points on minnows.

I expect we'll play as close to our best side as possible in the first game against Fiji and then rest players in the second game against Russia/Uruguay.

There's only a four day turnaround between these two games so resting players will be crucial, particularly the older players in the squad who take longer to recover after a match.

With a squad of 30 that realistically only means a few key players are sitting out. The third string halfback and hooker should start as well as your fifth choice prop.

You ten have to play your best side for what is hopefully 5 more games.

you reckon The AIGs would be well advised to use what influence they have to get into a pool with two highly ranked teams and a Pacific Islands team to toughen them up?

The pools are determined via IRB rankings at a specific point in time (including which pools are allocated a qualifier and from where etc.).

There's no requesting certain teams.

 

[Crashy]

I’ll tell you what has given me the sh!ts in today’s media – its the article about (former Canadian Rugby Intl) Mike Pike playing for the Swans this weekend.
In it there is a quote by some nobody, claiming with absolutely no question that, ‘Everything in AFL is harder’ (than rugby).
What? Playing for your country in a world cup knock-out game is harder in AFL?
Packing down scrums is harder in AFL?
Catching a bomb out of your 22 with the entire opposition forward pack waiting to smash you is harder in AFL?
Fark you and everything about you AFL.