Jump to content


TotalRL.com Shop Alert: Last Ordering Date for Free Pre-Xmas Delivery within UK: 2pm Thursday 18th December!!
Rugby League Yearbook 2014/15 The Forbidden Game League Express League Express Gift Card Rugby League World Rugby League World Gift Card
Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

16/11/13 - World Cup QF3: England v France (Wigan, KO 8pm)


  • Please log in to reply
392 replies to this topic

Poll: Who will win? (44 member(s) have cast votes)

Who will win?

  1. England by 21 points or more (30 votes [68.18%])

    Percentage of vote: 68.18%

  2. England by 11 to 20 points (10 votes [22.73%])

    Percentage of vote: 22.73%

  3. England by 1 to 10 points (3 votes [6.82%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.82%

  4. France by 1 to 10 points (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. France by 11 to 20 points (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  6. France by 21 points or more (1 votes [2.27%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.27%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#381 dibbley

dibbley
  • Coach
  • 109 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 05:51 PM

Our performance wasn't rubbish.  It wasn't brilliant but it wasn't rubbish. I'd suggest we were too casual and got caught out.  France have improved as the tournament has gone on and but for some naive last play options, or maybe lack of skill/experience, they would have had about three more tries on the board.  I think that is the best I have seen France play in the 10 years I've been a rugby league fan.  Maybe, just maybe, some of our English players thought it would be a breeze, didn't put their rugby heads on and then floundered when they found themselves challenged?

Boils down to one's own definition of rubbish really.  I reckon they switched off as soon they were comfortably in front, and allowed the French to look good, to me that was rubbish.  It was probably a difficult match for the players to get up for.  Next week will focus them properly.  The French did have their best game of the tournament, I agree with that, and part of me wishes they were able to punish us for our lacklustre performance.  



#382 Ant

Ant
  • Coach
  • 3,223 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 05:58 PM

So when Samoa stepped up v NZ was it because NZ were rubbish?

Or when the USA lifted v Aus, was it because he USA were rubbish?

#383 Kenilworth Tiger

Kenilworth Tiger
  • Coach
  • 9,017 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 06:00 PM

So when Samoa stepped up v NZ was it because NZ were rubbish?

Or when the USA lifted v Aus, was it because he USA were rubbish?


None of the above - McNamara is to blame for anybody being rubbish apparently
Now then, it's a race between Sandie....and Fairburn....and the little man is in........yeees he's in.

I, just like those Castleford supporters felt that the ball should have gone to David Plange but he put the bit betwen his teeth...and it was a try

Kevin Ward - best player I have ever seen

Posted Image

The real Mick Gledhill is what you see on here, a Bradford fan ........, but deep down knows that Bradford are just not good enough to challenge the likes of Leeds & St Helens.


#384 dibbley

dibbley
  • Coach
  • 109 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 06:09 PM

So when Samoa stepped up v NZ was it because NZ were rubbish?

Or when the USA lifted v Aus, was it because he USA were rubbish?

New Zealand took their foot off the gas and when they needed to stamp their authority on the game, they did so. England didn't do that last night. 

 

Not quite sure of your point regarding USA. 



#385 Bomballey

Bomballey
  • Coach
  • 799 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 06:44 PM

Well in that case why didn't someone else do it sooner?


I think that's a question for our coach.....

#386 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,272 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 07:57 PM

through pigheadedness alone will not alter what is a LOSING combination at by this level in the halves.

this is the only point you have which is correct, everything else you wrote is just frustrating.

You say England have played poorly, actually look at the results themselves.

Australia 28 - 20 England. 8 points off beating Australia. We were missing two of our best forwards during this game. Imagine what would of happened if we had played well.

England 34 - 12 Fiji. Fiji beat Samoa by 16 points today. New Zealand beat Samoa by 18 points so what does that say to you? We played poorly against a side which beat Samoa by 2 points less then what New Zealand beat them by and still won by 22 points. Imagine what would of happened if we had played well.

England 42 - 0 Ireland. Was it 28 - 0 after 22 minutes or something like that. Australia beat them by 50 points which is 8 more than we beat them by. Logically if we played Australia the score would be 8 points different. Funny how things work out. Imagine what the score would of been if we had played well.

We played poorly against a much improved French side from the group stages and still won easily. Imagine what would of happened if we had played well. Are you getting the jist here?

The results indicate that if England play well for 80 minutes, we can beat these Aussies and Kiwis that you think of when using your right hand.

Explain why playing so poorly, are England putting similar scores past similar opposition to the Aussies and Kiwis. Surely this means if we can beat them if we play well?

#387 christopher

christopher
  • Coach
  • 1,217 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 08:04 PM

The fact is England hasn't played badly at all, it's just the narrative certain posters want to peddle to try prove a point.

We were well under par last night but still easily beat a rejuvenated french side.

#388 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 577 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 08:09 PM

I think England have been pretty good with the exception of the second half vs France,That was rubbish to me,i actually thought that was like watching middle to bottom end SL last season

#389 terrywebbisgod

terrywebbisgod
  • Coach
  • 8,625 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 08:14 PM

this is the only point you have which is correct, everything else you wrote is just frustrating.

You say England have played poorly, actually look at the results themselves.

Australia 28 - 20 England. 8 points off beating Australia. We were missing two of our best forwards during this game. Imagine what would of happened if we had played well.

England 34 - 12 Fiji. Fiji beat Samoa by 16 points today. New Zealand beat Samoa by 18 points so what does that say to you? We played poorly against a side which beat Samoa by 2 points less then what New Zealand beat them by and still won by 22 points. Imagine what would of happened if we had played well.

England 42 - 0 Ireland. Was it 28 - 0 after 22 minutes or something like that. Australia beat them by 50 points which is 8 more than we beat them by. Logically if we played Australia the score would be 8 points different. Funny how things work out. Imagine what the score would of been if we had played well.

We played poorly against a much improved French side from the group stages and still won easily. Imagine what would of happened if we had played well. Are you getting the jist here?

The results indicate that if England play well for 80 minutes, we can beat these Aussies and Kiwis that you think of when using your right hand.

Explain why playing so poorly, are England putting similar scores past similar opposition to the Aussies and Kiwis. Surely this means if we can beat them if we play well?

Spot on,yet again,common sense prevails.


Cannibal chiefs chew Camembert cheese,cos chewing keeps them cheeky.

#390 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,789 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 09:40 PM

New Zealand took their foot off the gas and when they needed to stamp their authority on the game, they did so. England didn't do that last night.

But why couldn't it be that Samoa stepped up their game and the Kiwis couldn't handle it?



#391 Ant

Ant
  • Coach
  • 3,223 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 10:05 PM

Impossible

They are gods so can only have taken it easy

England are rubbish so there's no way France could have upped their game

#392 shrek

shrek
  • Coach
  • 5,964 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 10:28 PM

A few photos here.



#393 dibbley

dibbley
  • Coach
  • 109 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 12:13 AM

But why couldn't it be that Samoa stepped up their game and the Kiwis couldn't handle it?

The Samoans did step up their game.  The Kiwis eased off, and the Samoans took full advantage, visibly lifted, and got on a roll.  Only when the Samoans started creeping to within touching distance did the Kiwis step on the gas again.

 

There are valid comparisons between all the big 3 at this stage, and now we're down to business next week we'll at least see where NZ and England are at, and it will put to bed all the speculation.  I don't see any reason why England can't beat NZ if they turn up in the right frame of mind.  My only concern is that NZ and Australia have used the past 3 weeks to warm up their squads, so everyone involved will be going full pelt this week in training to get a spot.  We've only really warmed up the team, and outside that there hasn't been much game time for some.  Consequently we have some players in a comfort zone they should not be in.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users