Laporte reckons AB still the best....

Hamo

In the NZ Hearlald M. Laporte commented the following:

It will be of little comfort for All Blacks fans but French coach Bernard Laporte believes New Zealand is the best rugby team in the world, despite losing to France in the World Cup quarterfinals.

Laporte said the All Blacks played the tournament's best rugby and in fact, they are the only team to play any rugby.

"This World Cup has been crazy. Who has played any rugby? The only ones are the All Blacks," he said on the BBCwebsite.

"They have the power and the genius, something that no-one else has. They are the best team in the world."

Laporte, who is leaving coaching for politics after the tournament, added that if his side had played New Zealand again the next day and the following day, there is a great chance France would have lost.

"The All Blacks are the only team who can put 30 points on everybody else."

- NEWSTALK ZB, NZ HERALD STAFF

Looks like he's starting his POLITICAL career with immediate effect.....!!!

Endurance Man

He is almost correct, they are the second best rugby team, Springboks are the best .

toomevara

Mad Bernie can ramble on in his usual half insane gallic way, all he likes, but I'm afraid the best team in the world will be the one raising the Webb Ellis on Saturday night. The AB's might play the prettiest rugby on a good day, but by virtue of their knock out, it aint the best.....

Endurance Man

toomevara wrote: »

Mad Bernie can ramble on in his usual half insane gallic way, all he likes, but I'm afraid the best team in the world will be the one raising the Webb Ellis on Saturday night. The AB's might play the prettiest rugby on a good day, but by virtue of their knock out, it aint the best.....

I would hardly call it "pretty" rugby, on a good day they play the best rugby in the world and can beat any team into the ground. They do also have a lot more good days than bad, its just a shame one of the bad came in the WC.

davyjose

He's right. You can't go by 1 single result to determine a team is not the best. The AB's were the best team in the world (I say were becuase the next time they play they might not be)

HaroldGodwinson

Yeah he is right, but would he of said it if France had went on to win the tournament? I very much doubt it.

ThomasH

He is right, 3 times 3N winners, hammered Lions tour and 100% success record on their November tours for last 3 years. Only for one match and trophy they missed out on but they are still a quality team.

HaroldGodwinson

The best team does not always win these type of tournaments, if you have one bad game your gone. Argentina were much better than Italy in last years football WC, but they had one average game and got knocked out on penalties. Italy had plenty of average games early on in the tournament and had the luxury of a relatively easy path to the final until they played a German team which had been playing above itself. They then win the final on penalties. They were not the best team, but they are World Champions, and you can't take that away from them.
Liverpool were European champions a few year ago, only an idiot would think they were the best team in Europe though having only finished 5th in the Premiership.
If England win the world cup on saturday, it does not mean we are the best team in the world, but it means we are world champions.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

HaroldGodwinson

The only way you could do it is to have a league with the best 10 teams or so, playing each other home and away. The team that won the league would be undoubtedly the best, but this will never happen

toomevara

Following the logic of some learned posters here we may as well call off the actual world cup and have a virtual one from now on. Where the manager who talks the talk and whose team has won the most meaningless pre-tournament rubbers is decided to be the winner.

The world champions and, by extension, best team in the world will be decided on Saturday night. Thus has it always been (well at least since 87) and thus always should it be..end of.

As for all the "shudda, cudda, wudda" brigade, talk to the hand....

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

padser

daveirl wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Ridiculas argument. Just because there is not a better system in place to deterine who is the best in the world doesn't mean the team that wins the world cup is the best.

Clearly a league format with 20 or 30 games is the best way to determine who is the best team, the fact it doesn't happen doesn't suddenly mean that the world cup winners become the best team by default.

Also to say that the CURRENT AB team don't perform under pressure doesn't add up either. They lost 1 game under pressure - thats hardly enough to justify ignoring the fact they have been head and shoulders above every other team for the last 2 or 3 years

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

HaroldGodwinson

padser wrote: »

Also to say that the CURRENT AB team don't perform under pressure doesn't add up either. They lost 1 game under pressure - thats hardly enough to justify ignoring the fact they have been head and shoulders above every other team for the last 2 or 3 years

I believe the All Blacks are the best still, BUT, they only played one game under pressure, and lost it. They pissed their group and so would any of the other top sides. So this has go to go against them, 1 big match and they lost it!

toomevara

Rugby is,imo, the world's greatest field game for a whole host of reasons, but its biggest attraction is that it is the team game where psychology and mental toughness play as much, if not more of a part, as skill, power and natural talent. This is why rugby consistently throws up some (to the unschooled eye) bizarre results.

It is also why, imo, the current AB team is not, the best rugby team in the world! They have skill and talent in abundance, but to borrow a phrase from our yank buddies, they aint got 'game'.

Arrogance and mental fragility was their downfall. All the truly great teams of the past had a mental toughness, a game winning psychology and a humility that renders a team, regardless of individual shorcomings virtually unbeatable. The boks in '95 had it, the aussies had it and the english had it in '03.

The 2007 crop of all blacks did not and do not have it. If they go away from this competition and develop some humilty and respect, while also realising that they dont have a God given right to win, they may just do it in 2011, but I wouldnt hold my breath...

shrapnel222

unfortunately, it looks like NZ is the best team in the world 3 out of every 4 years

Teg Veece

daveirl wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I don't think that you can say whichever team wins the world cup is automatically the best in the world. It's a knock out competition in which luck plays a massive factor (i.e. the ref not seeing Michalak's forward pass resulting in New Zealand being knocked out of the competition) and can't really be used as a deciding factor.

A league format would be the best way of working out who's the number one team. Obviously, one doesnt exist officially but, unlike in soccer, the big teams do meet each other quite frequently in the 6 Nations, Tri Nations as well as in the Autumn and Summer Internationals and New Zealand would certainly come out on top if you applied a points system to these meetings.

Having said all that, I was as happy to see them knocked out of the world cup as anyone.

marco_polo

Teg Veece wrote: »

New Zealand would certainly come out on top if you applied a points system to these meetings.

Haven't you just described the IRB world rankings .

Teg Veece

marco_polo wrote: »

Haven't you just described the IRB world rankings .

Almost, but not quite. IRB rankings continue ranking in knock out competitions such as the World Cup so its not exactly a league format. SA for example could jump ahead of New Zealand this weekend in the IRB rankings but that's down to having been allowed to play more games than them.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

RugBeir

Find it to hard to believe the ABs are a good side. They had a very easy group and got knocked out in Q/F by a poor French side.

meathman 007

^
thats absolute rubbish imo, if you have watched rugby for the past 4 years, you would realise that new zealand are the best team in the world. Just because it went wrong for them in this world cup does not mean they are a bad team. Next thing you will be telling me that Greece were the best team in Europe after they won Euro 2004

RugBeir

I didnt mean to imply they are a bad side. I accept they are good but would debate their 'greatness'. Individually and technically they are great players but unfortunately, as a team, tend to win their matches with power rugby - brawn rather than brain if you like. Most teams roll over when faced with the ABs. Or worse still they try to play the AB game and fail dismally!

But a world cup comes along and the ABs meet a team that doesnt roll over and suddenly they have a bad match? I am only arguing that a great team would be able to handle that situation!

Oilrig

The AB's are a bit like the US military, they've got it all but have yet to win a war...

Diarmuid

If you can't win the biggest tournament in the rugby game, you're not the best.

Teg Veece

daveirl wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I think if you look at who South Africa had to beat in order to win the World Cup and, according to you, the best team in the world by default, you will see how flawed your system is.

All they had to do was beat the Pacific Island teams, USA, an tired Argentina team and England. That's all. I can think of a number of teams that could have pulled that off and I'm tempted to include Ireland in that. But that doesn't mean that they're the best team in the World.

New Zealand have shown over the last number of years that they are the team to beat.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

toomevara

daveirl wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yeah, I find this SA knocking really churlish and totally ill-founded. They played lovely, consistent rugby and were quite easily the best rugby team, in every sense, over the course of the competition. Had we been in that group, as I've said before, we would have been annihilated/massacred in all our pool games.

SA played some of the most physical and talented ball players on the planet and dispatched them without ever getting out of second gear (slight Tonga wobble aside). Unquestionably the best team in the world at the moment.

And before the usual brigade of All-Blackophiles get on their soap boxes, if I can paraphrase good old Castagneide; 'the All Blacks have the best players and the best coaches in the world, but they are not the best team' which I thinks neatly sums 'em up.

Stev_o

toomevara wrote: »

And before the usual brigade of All-Blackophiles get on their soap boxes, if I can paraphrase good old Castagneide; 'the All Blacks have the best players and the best coaches in the world, but they are not the best team' which I thinks neatly sums 'em up.

Depends really what way people will look at that All Blacks team as in the in between world cup team [2003-2007] Arguably the best rugby team to ever grace this earth and i think thats undebatable.

Now if SA played New Zealand during the RWC i could see it being and 3 point victory for either team depending on what New Zealand team showed up.

Still if the SA gov. gets its way then that SA team will never have to prove to anyone if they are the best team in the world since it ll be re-shacking completely

zAbbo

In a similar fashion, we'll never see this AB team together again, key players are moving to the NH (Jack, Heymans, Mauger, McAlistair, Kelleher etc.)

From watching S14 & Air New Zealand, I don't think they have players who can step up quick enough to fill the void.

Pinetree Boy

Depends really what way people will look at that All Blacks team as in the in between world cup team [2003-2007] Arguably the best rugby team to ever grace this earth and i think thats undebatable.

I think that is a bit of an exageration. I can think of better AB teams (87-90) and 1995-1996. The best team in the world at the moment is SA by definition. Wheteher they will still be in a few monts is open but they will be the world champions for the next four years.

zAbbo

Yup, I agree with you there Pinetree Boy.

The Saffies are there on merit, shame we didn't get to see AB v SA, I think SA would have won anyway.

I don't think there's many teams who consistently stay at the top for 4 years, especially in Rugby.

Personally, I think they peaked during the Lions tour of '05

RuggieBear

I don't remember the all blacks teams before the 1990's but the 96 vintage was far superior (imo) than the present lot.

Just look at the centres: Bunce and Little....phenomenal

davyjose

zabbo wrote: »

I don't think there's many teams who consistently stay at the top for 4 years, especially in Rugby.

Personally, I think they peaked during the Lions tour of '05

Or in the last 3 Trinations? I guess it comes down to this: someof us are willing to write off New Zealands performances over the last 3/4 years over one poor match against france, and some of us - those that still see the AB's as the best - aren't.

Jigsaw

If rugby was like boxing where you can win the world title by beating the player/team that last won it, who do you think would be world champion if the All Blacks played RSA next week. I take my hat off to RSA as a great team but I think any arguments stating that the All Blacks AREN'T the best team in the world are baseless.

Having said that it depends upon what you mean by "best". THe All Blacks are clearly the best team in the world. Look at the standard as opposed to all the farting about in the Magners League. We are not worthy to touch the hem of their garment.

Stev_o

Jigsaw wrote: »

If rugby was like boxing where you can win the world title by beating the player/team that last won it, who do you think would be world champion if the All Blacks played RSA next week. I take my hat off to RSA as a great team but I think any arguments stating that the All Blacks AREN'T the best team in the world are baseless.

Having said that it depends upon what you mean by "best". THe All Blacks are clearly the best team in the world. Look at the standard as opposed to all the farting about in the Magners League. We are not worthy to touch the hem of their garment.

Very true i mean if you look back over the 4 years that Henry has been with them he's lead them to be some what unbeatable. Id like to see the stats for the last 4 years something says in my brain that they went 50+ matches without loosing though i cant remember. I mean look at their GS over here when they played the home nations thrashed us back into the stone age

Just unlucky for New Zealand that once again they peaked too soon, if they had of had a decent center pairing and left the 2nd rows to the Williams and Jack pairing i think they'd still beat any team in the world but hey thats my own opinion

RuggieBear

Stev_o wrote: »

Just unlucky for New Zealand that once again they peaked too soon, if they had of had a decent center pairing and left the 2nd rows to the Williams and Jack pairing i think they'd still beat any team in the world but hey thats my own opinion

Just unlucky that Ireland peaked to soon too;)

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

toomevara

Stev_o wrote: »

Now if SA played New Zealand during the RWC i could see it being and 3 point victory for either team depending on what New Zealand team showed up.

Agree, now that would have been a game....roll on the tri-nations

gosplan

OT but just wondering, did Jabba ever show up with those NZ choking pints??

RuggieBear

gosplan wrote: »

OT but just wondering, did Jabba ever show up with those NZ choking pints??

nope....


/me contemplates banning him

gosplan

he was probably going to but bottled it.

Another black mark on the collective NZ national image.