Post-RWC 2011 reactions

chupacabra

First of all its been a great journey over the last few weeks. The pool stages were a marathon to be sure. I vowed before this tournament that I would be up and watching every single game and I managed it all for one half of rugby which was, strangely, the first half of Ireland vs Australia. Fairplay and thanks to everyone who was on our early morning match threads here, it was a tiring and sometimes insane endeavour (Georgia vs Romania at 6am anyone? :pac:)

The main point of this thread is to assess the peoples reaction to the world cup as a whole. The common consensus seems to be that it was a poor tournament and I think people form that consensus based on the high profile, highly anticipated games not living up to their billing and the numerous poor refereeing decisions or justified ones based on your point of view.

But look, the rugby world cup isnt about France vs New Zealand, Australia vs Ireland or South Africa vs Wales in the pool stages, its not about England vs France or South Africa vs Australia in the quarter finals. This tournament, for me, is all about WORLD RUGBY. Teams coming together from all over the world on the same stage to fight for pride and play with fervent passion for their countries. Canada were a joy to watch, Japan were magnificent, Tongas win brought a tear to my eye, Samoa arguably deserved to be in the knockout stages, Wales surprised everyone and Romania and Georgias game was titanic

I know people expect there to be magnificent tries left right and center because this is supposed to be the showpiece for world rugby. But modern international rugby will never be the same game it was back in 95 or 99. The game is evolving away from small quick backs devastating defenses with beautiful running play. The game is becoming so physical and defenses are getting so technical and organized that teams really have to work hard to make tries like that happen, teams have to earn their points and rightly so.

For me this world cup was superb in every way. The highs, the lows, the beards. I laughed, I cringed, I gasped, had my head in my hands, my hands on my mouth, I may have even teared up once or twice. People seem to forget just what a terrible game of rugby the 95 final was... yet it goes down as one of the greatest sporting occasions of all time in many peoples minds and is one of my earliest and fondest memories. Thats what sport is all about. This world cup gave me many great memories.

Oafley Jones

Good final and some decent games in it, but overall I still think the RWC is a bit of a sham and a mickey mouse event compared to say the Soccer world cup - and I say that as someone who'll watch maybe one or two games of soccer a year and watch pretty much the entirety of the Soccer World Cup. There just isn't the depth out there to justify the competition in it's current form.

MungBean

I thought it was a bit rubbish overall. I thought no team lived up to their capabilities. As a rugby show-piece event it was terrible for the game imo. Huge scores put past minnow teams and then scrappy poor play between the higher ranked teams. Top 8 teams contested it as usual and it didnt come down to who was the better team but rather who scraped past, certainly on the NH side of the draw.

Final was same as all finals, whichever team got the lead worked on keeping it more so than pushing the game. Cant complain about it though or indeed any team in the competition who got through, you do what you have to to win because its knockout rugby and there's no second chances.

Personally though I was disappointed with the level of rugby played but maybe my expectations were just too high.

Brendan97

Very Poor!
although the final was great

danthefan

I could watch fairly few of the games (didn't see a single midweek game for example), so my main focus was on Ireland, and therefore the RWC kind of got ruined for me when the team for the Wales game was announced.

I much preferred the 2007 tournament where I watched the whole thing, and there were more compelling games.

nc6000

It was very poor overall. The final was probably the best game for me out of the 20-25 games I watched. I wasn't expecting a good game today but glad it was.

There are still not enough teams strong enough to get the 1/4 finals. The 8 that did were no surprise really with only Scotland and Samoa unlucky to miss out.

It's a 20 team competition with at least 10 teams there to make up the numbers.

Fishooks12

Mixed bag tbh, some very good games and some very poor games

Big plus of the tournament was the lack of a gap between southern and Northern Hemisphere sides

I think the SH has suffered due to the lack of defensive focus in the S15 whereas the HC is more of a total rugby game

desertcircus

I'm a bit worried that the RWC might be on the way to being eclipsed by the Heineken Cup and Super Rugby, in much the same way as the football World Cup is losing ground to the Champions League. The final this morning was engrossing and a damn good game of rugby, but I suspect that, divorced from the narrative that surrounds the games, a randomly picked HC or S15 game would be more entertaining to watch than a randomly picked game from this World Cup - expecially the knockouts, which are tense, low-scoring affairs.

decisions

Overall it was poor but what a final.

sock puppet

Fishooks12 wrote: »

I think the SH has suffered due to the lack of defensive focus in the S15 whereas the HC is more of a total rugby game

You might want to actually watch the RWC before commenting on it.

Fishooks12

sock puppet wrote: »

You might want to actually watch the RWC before commenting on it.

? I watched nearly every game apart from one or two of the earlier group games!?

And how pray tell would you know that I haven't watched any of the RWC?

doomed

Wonderful final and the right winners. NZ needed it.

Gap between NH and SH seems to be closing and all of the really important games were fairly low scoring. No sign of S15 basketball scores.

Hard to know what to do with the mismatch games. If you relegate the developing nations into a separate competition there will be no TV coverage until the final. Better to leave them in but give them the money to develop.

You can't help feeling that this was Ireland's best chance to make a real impact. Not completely fanciful to think it could have been us playing the All Blacks.

sock puppet

Fishooks12 wrote: »

? I watched nearly every game apart from one or two of the earlier group games!?

And how pray tell would you know that I haven't watched any of the RWC?

The Tri Nations teams' defences all stood up well and they conceded fewer tries than the European teams. Lets not forget that although the gap might be small we were the only side able to record a win over them.

Fishooks12

sock puppet wrote: »

The Tri Nations teams' defences all stood up well and they conceded fewer tries than the European teams. Lets not forget that although the gap might be small we were the only side able to record a win over them.

Could you not have said that rather than what you first posted?

We may have been the only side to beat SH opposition in the competition but considering they had their own side of the draw it would have been hard to do

Add to that the fact that Wales should have beaten SA and France were IMO denied today by Joubart, It's not hard to say the gap isn't huge

sock puppet

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Could you not have said that rather than what you first posted?

Why? You said the lack of defensive focus in the Super 15 cost them when really they were all good defensively. In fact when it came to South Africa it was an inability to convert opportunities that cost them.

MyKeyG

Once again the qualifying teams didn't do anything to justify their presence as anything other than farcical. I just don't think rugby is well enough developed on the world stage to justify a world cup in its current format.

niceoneted

If I was in Ireland for it I would have been up every early morning to watch all the matches. But I was in NZ for 6 weeks of it and got to 9 games and it was one of the best rugby experiences of my life. I will have memories for years to come.
I am delighted that NZ won it on home ground too.

duckysauce

MyKeyG wrote: »

Once again the qualifying teams didn't do anything to justify their presence as anything other than farcical. I just don't think rugby is well enough developed on the world stage to justify a world cup in its current format.

tonga beat france and Samoa got Reffed out of the WC,Georgia nearly put Scotland away

Fishooks12

MyKeyG wrote: »

Once again the qualifying teams didn't do anything to justify their presence as anything other than farcical. I just don't think rugby is well enough developed on the world stage to justify a world cup in its current format.

Tonga (albeit an automatic qualifier this year) beat France. Romania gave Scotland a great game, as did Japan against France. The US didn't cave in against us and Georgia did themselves proud

Not to mention these teams had to try and play 2 games in the space of 4 days with limited squads

I think there's still a huge gap but it's not the qualifying teams fault and the IRB didn't make it easy on them

.ak

Meh. Roll on the 6N and the HC.

Fishooks12

.ak wrote: »

Meh. Roll on the 6N and the HC.

The ****ty weather is actually getting me excited for then pool games in Thomond!

sock puppet

.ak wrote: »

Meh. Roll on the 6N and the HC.

I'm actually quite worried about the Heineken Cup now. How can we possibly win against a team with Donald, world cup winning outhalf, playing for them?

Fishooks12

sock puppet wrote: »

I'm actually quite worried about the Heineken Cup now. How can we possibly win against a team with Donald, world cup winning outhalf, playing for them?

Donald might not want to see another Irish province after what happened in Thomond!

sock puppet

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Donald might not want to see another Irish province after what happened in Thomond!

Ah yes. I remember he scored what proved to be the decisive match winning try. He also played a big part in the All Blacks' stunning 2009 Bledisloe Cup win. Is there no end to the man's talents?

Fishooks12

sock puppet wrote: »

Ah yes. I remember he scored what proved to be the decisive match winning try. He also played a big part in the All Blacks' stunning 2009 Bledisloe Cup win. Is there no end to the man's talents?

I really don't know if your being sarcastic or not...

He was awful with the boot that night and he was constantly scrutinised in the Kiwi media for never reaching his potential

MyKeyG

duckysauce wrote: »

tonga beat france and Samoa got Reffed out of the WC,Georgia nearly put Scotland away

Well I meant more Canada, Georgia, Romania, Namibia, Russia, Fiji. USA gave us some trouble but they turned into whipping boys after that. Seven teams that simply had no business at a World Cup. Just there to make up the numbers IMO.

.ak

sock puppet wrote: »

Ah yes. I remember he scored what proved to be the decisive match winning try. He also played a big part in the All Blacks' stunning 2009 Bledisloe Cup win. Is there no end to the man's talents?

Hahahahha. I LOL'd.

.ak

Fishooks12 wrote: »

The ****ty weather is actually getting me excited for then pool games in Thomond!

... and the Amlin cup games there after, don't forget those!

J/K!

ArmaniJeanss

MyKeyG wrote: »

Well I meant more Canada, Georgia, Romania, Namibia, Russia, Fiji. USA gave us some trouble but they turned into whipping boys after that. Seven teams that simply had no business at a World Cup. Just there to make up the numbers IMO.

Fiji quarter finalist in 2007, unlike group-eliminated Ireland.
If this WC had reduced number of teams then Fiji's case for inclusion was similar or better than ours.

Fishooks12

.ak wrote: »

... and the Amlin cup games there after, don't forget those!

J/K!

Low blow

cgpg5

Each team should be given at least a seven day break until their next game, it would make them far more competitive on each outing, rather than just the first game they play in.

With regards to this tournament was grand, nothing special, although early starts didn't help.
Positives- Wales, Samoa, France's final performance and the best team winning it ultimately. Irl v Aus was special from a biased point of view. My highlight though was Tonga beating France.

Negatives- Poor quality Quarter and Semi finals. South Africa's negative rugby and a limited France beating Wales. One-sided group games which did no good for both teams involved. Structure of certain group games.

Moment(s) of world cup- France amazingly showing one of the greatest moments of madness ever seen in sport when electing to scrum under the posts with time up when 3 points would've seen them advance. Also, the "red card" gets a mention.

Wishful Thinking

cgpg5 wrote: »

Each team should be given at least a seven day break until their next game, it would make them far more competitive on each outing, rather than just the first game they play in.

With regards to this tournament was grand, nothing special, although early starts didn't help.
Positives- Wales, Samoa, France's final performance and the best team winning it ultimately. Irl v Aus was special from a biased point of view. My highlight though was Tonga beating France.

Negatives- Poor quality Quarter and Semi finals. South Africa's negative rugby and a limited France beating Wales. One-sided group games which did no good for both teams involved. Structure of certain group games.

Moment(s) of world cup- France amazingly showing one of the greatest moments of madness ever seen in sport when electing to scrum under the posts with time up when 3 points would've seen them advance. Also, the "red card" gets a mention.

I think people who said the tournament was rubbish prob only watched Irelands matches & missed all the 6am. 4am games.

It was a brilliant comp & the only complaint I'd have was quick turnarounds for tier 2 & 3 sides. It should be structured in such a way that tier 3 sides play all their matches midweek & it's the tier one sides that get a quick turnaround & have to play them 4 days after playing another tier 1 or 2 side. We can't go to 8 weeks as sides could have 11 day gaps between matches.

On the whole great tournie. Just need to look after minnows better

cgpg5

Wishful Thinking wrote: »

I think people who said the tournament was rubbish prob only watched Irelands matches & missed all the 6am. 4am games.

It was a brilliant comp & the only complaint I'd have was quick turnarounds for tier 2 & 3 sides. It should be structured in such a way that tier 3 sides play all their matches midweek & it's the tier one sides that get a quick turnaround & have to play them 4 days after playing another tier 1 or 2 side. We can't go to 8 weeks as sides could have 11 day gaps between matches.

On the whole great tournie. Just need to look after minnows better

I most certainly watched more games than the Irish ones and it was not a brilliant comp. How about maybe pool A games played every Thurs, pool B every Fri, Pool C every Sat and D every Sun for the next world cup? Admittedly I haven't thought this through 100% so would the fact that there is 5 times in a pool affect this at all? I know each would have 2 week turnaround on one occasion but it's surely better than what's in place? Or maybe 5 pools of 4 or just reduce it to 16 teams. The little turnaround for minnows is a serious concern I feel

duckysauce

MyKeyG wrote: »

Well I meant more Canada, Georgia, Romania, Namibia, Russia, Fiji. USA gave us some trouble but they turned into whipping boys after that. Seven teams that simply had no business at a World Cup. Just there to make up the numbers IMO.

Fiji reached the qf in the last world cup, Namibia put the sh'ts up us in the last wc. How do teams progress if you don't let them play at the top?. These teams add a lot to the whole tournament.

anonymous_joe

duckysauce wrote: »

Fiji reached the qf in the last world cup, Namibia put the sh'ts up us in the last wc. How do teams progress if you don't let them play at the top?. These teams add a lot to the whole tournament.

Fiji have collapsed. Presumably the usual Polynesian reasons.

I'll probably fire up my thoughts on the overall WC tomorrow, I've a long day of essays, so it's likely I'll be procrastinating like fúck.

sugarmonkey

am i the only one completely disillusioned with joubert, one of the all time one sided performances i have ever seen, i have read post match articles speaking of nz discipline and lack of infringement at the breakdown, mc caw on one occassion could of being penialised 3 times. no doubt new zealand were worthy winners over the course of the tournament, but to hand the title to them at all costs is a black mark on the sport, we may have to one day call it soccer if this is to continue!

CatFromHue

Harinordoquy has some interesting post WC comments:

"Harinordoquy believes the turnaround in the team's fortunes came when the players took their campaign into their own hands

"After the defeat against Tonga I did not attach too much importance to what Marc said," Harinordoquy told Midi Olympique.

"It was our adventure. It was meant to be the nice experience of 30 men. We had to free ourselves from his supervision," he added."

http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,3551_7283450,00.html

So what we all thought was happening actually seemed to be happening!

phog

Not sure where is the best place to post this but here goes

2011 Rugby World Cup Highlights -

* Scrums, lineouts and kicks were reduced from the 2007 Rugby World Cup, while passes significantly increased, highlighting an emphasis on running rugby

* In almost 80 percent of matches, the team scoring the most tries won the match - in only one match did the team scoring the fewest tries win because of penalty goals

* Winning margins in the opening pool matches between Tier 1 and Tier 2 halved, reflecting the improved performances of Tier 2 teams since France 2007, with Tier 1 teams no longer pulling away from Tier 2 opposition in the final 20 minutes of a match as frequently as in the past

* The smaller winning margins extended across the whole tournament with Tier 1 v Tier 1 matches producing far small winning margins than ever before

* Despite such competitive matches, yellow cards were half those issued at the 2007 Rugby World Cup

* The 2011 Rugby World Cup also confirmed that any scrum problems are concentrated on matches between Tier 1 teams with collapses and penalties in matches played between Tier 2 teams being substantially fewer

In the most detailed Rugby World Cup statistical analysis ever, the report provides a detailed analysis of the performances of the teams in all aspects of play, including scoring, winning margins, impact of penalty goals on match results, rate of try conceding, source of tries, try locations, timing of tries and penalty goals, ball in play and possession, passing, rucks and mauls, kick-offs and restarts, lineouts, free kicks, penalties conceded, penalty options taken and cards.

The report also features a fascinating analysis of how the tournament has evolved since the 1995 Rugby World Cup to become a game of fewer set pieces and greater 'ball in play' time.

From a time when there were as many set pieces as breakdowns, there are now four times as many breakdowns as scrums and lineouts combined.

Full report here