Does NZL deserve the quarter final game than the FRA in the RWC07?

Question

Well it was totally the refs fault missing the forward pass which may have cause the loss. What do you think should the NZL move forward sending the host home or not.

Answer 1

But . . . it's not important, we can't seem to win the bloody thing but it doesn't stop us routinely thumping everyone. No nation has even a 50% strike rate against NZ. Many have 0%.

Makes me laugh when other countries get all excited about the world cup - means nothing. If just one country could beat NZ as many times as we have beaten them (or just half as many times!) then maybe winning the world cup would mean something - kind of like decide who the top dog is. The last four years of international rugby were dominated by one team. I suspect the next four years will be no different.

NZ and England have played 29 tests. England have only won 6 of those tests. If England win the world cup for 2nd time it will be a great achievement for them . . . but is there really any wonder why NZ people don't exactly rate England ?

EDIT: No Susan I'm not bitter - just honest - RWC - doesn't mean a great deal. England are happy to kid themselves that winning means something - and more than that they are the first to remind the world how great they are when they win and how sad others are when they lose. Which is missing the point.

It's really about growing the game - encouraging and fostering excellence in rugby. We don't actually need a world cup to discover who the top teams in the world are - That's already known before the tournament starts !

Worth noting that the Africans have more sense than the English - they don't attempt to disparage the Allblacks - they know how good they are but also know that in any given test it could go ether way - mutual respect. England will have to win more than 6 out 29 games to earn that respect, or at least go through NZ at a world cup before you start telling us how badly we play world cup rugby.

Answer 2

Its so funny how New Zealanders blame the ref, the ball, the weather, whatever they can...New Zealand had 15 minutes after that (forward) pass to score and win the game, the way the All Blacks were talked up they should have been pissing on the French anyway.

Dominate yes, but in World cup, where the game actually means something NO!!!!! (Dont give me that bs that the World Cup isnt important to NZ)p**s poor effort anyway, where was Mauger????

Answer 3

usually you cant blame the ref but in this case the forward pass led directly to the try.

nz played ****, but they still played better than france. nz had 75% of the ball possession. nz on a ahit day is equal to any other country on a good day

Answer 4

in how many games ever have u seen a team not get penalties with only 25% of the ball in 40 minets of rugby ever?? clearly nz got farked up the *** by barnes but owell thts rugby well just dominate for the next 4 years again

Answer 5

Anybody who blames the ref for NZ's demise is kidding themselves.

There were issues with the NZ preparation (eg player rotation etc) which lead to a sub-normal performance when it mattered.

France should not have been anywhere close for a reffing decision to make any difference.

All games have some contraversial decisions but using that as an excuse is poor.

There are bigger issues to address - How can the No 1 team from most of the last 20 fail to win in 5 consecutive world cups? There must be something about big pressure games that is a problem. Possibly because they are normally so good they don't play many pressure games, I don't know?