Discussion about NZ Rugby curtesy of Trish O?

Question

Yesterday I asked question about people's view on the under/over achievers at the 2007 RWC and on previous world cups.

Please have a look & post your views/opinions

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ap5JaXOM4AAbDO6nJtdyhTrsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071021145418AA8h59b

My list (and reasons) included 4 under-achievers, France, Ireland, NZ & England. Anyway, one contributor (Trish O) took exception to NZ being on that list and said:

"Is your knowledge of rugby confined to the RWC? If so, do you do not know enough about the game to be in this forum? The subject is rugby - not world cup rugby. Lets talk about the achievements of NZ over the past four years. World Cup rugby is the luck of the IRB draw and NZ got all the back luck this tournment. Since November 2003 NZ has played 49 internationals won 43 and lost 6. One to France, two to Australia and three to South Africa."

So, for benefit of Trish O, please discuss why NZ dominate the world between RWCs but struggle at the Cup.

Answer 1

It's kinda hard to explain

Answer 2

Simple really, the World Cup nearly always comes towards the end of the Southern Hemisphere season. Add to this the mad decision by Henry this time to rotate and underuse his first xv plus Carters loss of form and you have a team that failed again.

2003 they were outmuscled by Australia who raised their game 200% against their biggest rivals. In 1999 they took their foot off the gas against France and couldn't get back in the game. 1995 they lost because as with Saturday the boks nullified their threats. 1991 they weren't the best in the world and in 1987 they won it.

Personally I am overjoyed as I have never liked the way the All Blacks pick and choose the best of the surrounding Pacific Islanders and add them to their own best. That plus Graham Henry has to be the smuggest most overrated coach around !

Answer 3

good question , i think the reason nz dominates ithat is outside of world cups is due to its depth in its squad while most countries will struggle to field top fit teams or potentially even B sides  during their internationals , nz will always field a relatively full strength line up, the problem with nz rugby at world cup, is that they try to play a too expansive and stylish game if you like , and as jake white said world cup finals trys are a rarity , i think nz lacks the mentality and physical toughness when it comes to pressure moments in knock out games, they would have greatly benefited if they had a least a single competitive group stage match leading upto that fate ful corner final ,  as all the teams to go through to the semis, where from the same groups and therefore played pressure rugby, ie england played sth africa before beating australia, france had played likes of argentina,  etc

Answer 4

Again you make assumptions based on what. I am a supporter of Graham Henry. As I said in my blog I wish to discuss rugby not the World Cup. It is over. I refuse to enter into a debate with someone whose knowledge seems to limited to the World Cup. Not interested go find someone else to hassle.

Answer 5

I think its got to do with the fact that because Nz are ranked first in the world everyone has such high expectations of them. In the years between the world cups do they actually play every team, every year? NO! They only really play Aussie & SA more than once a year. They are only ranked first in the world because they are the only team in the world to have a winning record over every other nation.