Boomed - Welsh egg-chasers beat Australia

[Doggy Styles]

Originally Posted by Stan.goodvibes

Yeah but as I have pointed out in other rugby threads - the World Cup winner is not necessarily the best rugby team in the world, just the best at that tournament.

You mean the tournament to decide the best team in the world?

The one where the Webb-Ellis Trophy is presented to the winners?

The one where none of the opposing teams are rebuilding?

The one with the most pressure, where ability alone is not enough and top mental strength is required?

[IR35 Avoider]

The last rugby world cup was had quite a few competitive and interesting games, however having watched many world cups I believe it was an exception. I really can't see what purpose is served by games like New Zealand versus Japan where the Japanese lose by more than 100 points.

Here's my recommendation for how the pools should have been organised for next time.

Take the teams in order of their ranking, and assign 5 teams to each pool. So the top five teams will all be in Pool A. For the knockout stages, allow 4 teams to qualify from Pool A, 2 From B and 1 each from the rest. Add a rule that in a knock-out game between 2 teams that were in the same pool, the pool result comes ahead of extra-time as a tie-breaker.

If all matches go according to world rankings, this scheme should ensure that only 2 matches in the whole tournament would be between teams more than 5 places apart in the rankings.

No team will be able to win the tournament without beating almost every other serious contender. (South Africa, second favourites, won the last tournament without playing, let alone beating, the favourites or third favourites.)

[Doggy Styles]

Originally Posted by IR35 Avoider

South Africa, second favourites, won the last tournament without playing, let alone beating, the favourites or third favourites.

That's only because, as usual, the favourites choked before SA had a chance to play them.

That's a fair point though.

[Stan.goodvibes]

Originally Posted by Alf W

didn't they lose to SA at home in Dunedin and get well beaten by Australia in Sydney?

Yes, that is correct, and

Originally Posted by Doggy Styles

The one with the most pressure, where ability alone is not enough and top mental strength is required?

The ABs suffered two horrendous defeats, at critical times during each respective tournament. That they managed to pick themselves up and from that and go on to win both titles convincingly says more about their resolve and mental discipline than winning 4 games in a row at the World Cup. In fact thats what made this year such a great year for the ABs.

Originally Posted by Alf W

errr, wouldn't that make them the be.......

No. Have a look at Englands form after they won the World Cup. They were the best team in the world for about 2 weeks after the tournament. And are South Africa the best team in the world at the moment? Um, no. I'd rather the ABs keep their World #1 ranking based on games played and points scored than playing average to mediocre for 4 years then winning the World Cup before heading back to mediocrity again...

[PM-Junkie]

Originally Posted by Stan.goodvibes

Yes, that is correct, and
No. Have a look at Englands form after they won the World Cup. They were the best team in the world for about 2 weeks after the tournament.

There is also the small matter of England being widely acknowledged as being the best team in the world for the 3-4 years before winning the world cup too....when Kiwis and Aussies were telling us that meant nothing unless we won the world cup.

Funny how the story changes when it's the kiwis or the aussies that's involved isn't it?