ay2oh wrote: ↑Wed Aug 28, 2019 1:31 pm
Shane Williams in the rugby paper banging on again about Wales being “ The fittest team in the world “. How does he draw this conclusion when Wales game plan is so lacking in dynamism that they rarely string more than 3 phases together. Would be interested to hear other views.
I think that Wales play with a lot of desire and certainly always have against England, transferring that competitive edge to matches against others has improved somehow.
I wouldn't argue against any claim that they are fitter than they were before, but the actual fittest beyond everyone else is debatable as other sides also look pretty fit to me.
I've seen enough of Sarries players etc in the Prem and Europe and they ain't no slouches!
If the guy on twitter is correct,France are only taking 4 props and 2 hookers! Cant be right?!
Edit: 5 and 3 but two players are uncapped. It's how he's set his graphs up
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
I'm sorry, but England do not deserve to be higher than Ireland. Wales just beat England recently and Ireland beat Wales home and away. Lets not forget that when England beat Ireland (in Twickenham) it was without the world player of the year playing, instead a rookie flyhalf with 2 caps to his name, and experimental 2nd row, 3 weeks behind in preparation as regards tough physical matches. England have drawn with Scotland. Why do you think they should be higher? I think England have a wonderful backrow (probably the best in the world at the moment), second row and 10, but the reality is that they havent won anything of note in quite some time so lets not get ahead of ourselves
It makes a mockery of the system really when warm-up games are used to calculate the rankings. The system definitely needs tweaking - a team that makes it to the WC semi-finals but then loses and the loses the 3rd-4th place game is penalised more than the team they knocked out at the QF stage, just because they will lose more games despite going further in the tournament.
Cardiff Tig wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 8:48 am
It makes a mockery of the system really when warm-up games are used to calculate the rankings. The system definitely needs tweaking - a team that makes it to the WC semi-finals but then loses and the loses the 3rd-4th place game is penalised more than the team they knocked out at the QF stage, just because they will lose more games despite going further in the tournament.
Well that is a nonsense then. I have never understood the ranking system and from what I have read I am not sure I will try to. I think I will keep to my current (admittedly simplistic) view that whichever team wins the World Cup is the best team in the world until the next World Cup. All the jockeying for positions in between the World Cups is irrelevant.
It's a ridiculous system,the only recent team that has been top of those rankings and been the world's best team has been the All Blacks simple as that. Ireland might have had a case but they still only split both games with them,but Wales and Ireland now are laughable imo.
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
... I think I will keep to my current (admittedly simplistic) view that whichever team wins the World Cup is the best team in the world until the next World Cup. All the jockeying for positions in between the World Cups is irrelevant.