Rugby: The Six Nations Southern Hemisphere Tours

Recreation Sports
1

What will be the result of the annual Southern Hemisphere tours?

  • North 0 - 10 South
  • North 1 - 9 South
  • North 2 - 8 South
  • North 3 - 7 South
  • North 4 - 6 South
  • North 5 - 5 South
  • North 6 - 4 South
  • North 7 - 3 South
  • North 8 - 2 South
  • North 9 - 1 South
  • North 10 - 0 South

0 voters

Ok, to the fellows who don’t know. The Six Nations are; England, Ireland, Wales, Scotland, France and Italy. The Southern Hemisphere teams usually include; The Tri-Nations (South Africa, Australia and New Zealand), Argentina and I like to include the Pacific Islands (Samoa, Tonga and Fiji).

This thread is dedicated to the matches prior to the mini-World Championships, The Tri-Nations. :wink:

The match schedules are as follows:

May 2007

26 Australia v Wales (Sydney) - Predict Australia to win
26 Argentina v Ireland (Santa Fe) - Predict Ireland to win
26 South Africa v England (Vodacom Park - South Africa) - Predict South Africa to win

June 2007

2 Australia v Wales (Brisbane) - Predict Australia to win
2 Argentina v Ireland (Buenos Aires) - Predict Argentina to win
2 New Zealand v France (Auckland) - Predict NZ to win a tight game
2 South Africa v England (Loftus Versfeld) - Predict South Africa to win
9 Argentina v Italy (Not sure of the venue, but will be in Argentina) - Predict Argentina to win
9 New Zealand v France (Wellington) - Predict a big win by NZ
16 New Zealand v Canada (Hamilton) - Predict NZ to win

Note I haven’t included Australia v Fiji and South Africa v Samoa. This is strictly a North v South pissing contest before the RWC. So, between May and June we will see 10 tests; 2 involving Australia, 3 involving Argentina, 2 involving South Africa and 3 involving New Zealand.

I reckon by the start of the Tri-Nations it’ll be North 1 - 9 South. I think the only victory the six nations will get on tour is one win by Ireland in Argentina.

2

The slugging starts in two weeks. Next week, Saturday May, 19 is still dedicated to the Southern Hemisphere slugfest, the Super 14. Incidently, the final will be between the Blue Bulls (Pretoria, South Africa) and the Natal Sharks (Durban, South Africa) who dispensed with the “old enemy” yesterday. This is a first in the 13 years of Super rugby. The first time a Saffa team will win since the Transvaal Lions won the Super 10 back in 1994. So excuse me for being a little excited… :smiley:
Yesterday, Sharks (SA) 34 - 18 Blues (Auckland, New Zealand), and Bulls (SA) 27 - 12 Crusaders (Christchurch, New Zealand).

But back to the North vs South derby.

Let’s predict some scores.
Australia 38 - 12 Wales
Argentina 17 - 22 Ireland
South Africa 44 - 11 England

I think England will be well beaten, because they will be playing in South Africa for the first time in 10 years (and we beat them at Twickenham last year) and they are unable to take all their best players to South Africa. The Aussies are still smarting after some dismal performances in the Super 14 and the Irish will want to regain some pride after the Six Nations.

3

You’re picking the Irish?
I thought they were erm… shite?

4

You’re picking the Irish?
I thought they were erm… shite?[/quote]

I think that’s going to be one hell of a game. Both are physical sides that like a bit of niggle. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a bit of a punch up. Other than that, the Irish will be out to make a point. I doubt the Irish will lose both tests. However, the Argentines are good in Buenos Aires, and I think they’ll win that one. I think it’s foolhardy to write off the Irish. They’re always a very passionate side with some great players. The Springboks learnt that lesson the hard way some two seasons back.

5

Some news from the English camp coming to South Africa.

[quote]Coach Brian Ashton and stand-in captain Jason Robinson launched a spirited defence of England’s prospects in South Africa on Tuesday, a day before a virtual third-string squad departs for two daunting tests against the in-form Springboks.

Ashton has been forced to dredge the Premiership for some time-served old warhorses together with some promising youngsters after being deprived of more than 30 internationals through club commitments and injuries. [/quote]

and

See full article at: superrugby.co.za/default.asp … by/sarugby

I’m somewhat excited that Robinson will be joining the squad. Will be interesting to see what they deliver on May 26 and June 2.

6

Every weekend (of the Super 14) the writers at supersport get together and based on that weekends performance put together two teams. The weekends best Super 14 team (comprised of the weekends best players from all 14 teams from Aus, NZ and SA) and the weekends best SA players go into the “Springbok Barometer.” At the end of the competition the put together a Springbok team based on who was in the Springbok barometer the most times, i.e. the best and/or most consistent players. This weekend is the final, but here are the teams they put together (based on the above criteria) for the Springboks (SA), Wallabies (Aus) and All Blacks (NZ). It will be interesting to see how close or far these teams will be from the actual ones facing England (SA), Wales (Aus) and France (NZ) in a little more than a week.

For the full article, see: superrugby.co.za/default.asp … by/super14

Once the actual teams have been announced, I’ll post it here.

7

Well, at least there’s been one more vote… :smiley:

Come on all you rugby lovers (if there are any…I’m starting to doubt it… :frowning: )

There are six days left, make your predictions for the weekend.

8

That was my vote, Bismarck. I’d have to agree with your predictions. I think it could also be a clean sweep for you southern boys because Ireland is pretty much sending a B team down to Argentina, which doesn’t bode well for even one test victory. But I’m Irish so I must hope against hope :wink:

9

Actually, I didn’t know that, and I’m somewhat shocked. Is it due to injuries? The way Argentina have been playing the last few years I don’t think it’s wise to send anything but your best side to play them.

All the same, good luck for your team, who knows, some youngster might just pull it out of the bag for them.

10

Actually, I didn’t know that, and I’m somewhat shocked. Is it due to injuries? The way Argentina have been playing the last few years I don’t think it’s wise to send anything but your best side to play them.

All the same, good luck for your team, who knows, some youngster might just pull it out of the bag for them.[/quote]

It’s a fear of injuries that has the management deciding to keep most of the first string at home. Compared to other major rugby playing nations our player pool base is not that large. So if we were hit by some long term injuries in Argentina, which is very possible considering how physical a side Argentina is, it would certainly affect our chances of a good showing in the World Cup.

Also for the fact that I don’t even think the management wanted this tour in the first place because it’s a World Cup year and Argentina are in our ‘Group of Death’. I, therefore, can totally understand the management’s decision. However money, of course, takes precedence over this reasoning.

So Bismarck, what do you think of South Africa’s chances this World Cup? Is the Super 14’s a good reflection of South African rugby at the moment, or not? And if you top your group in Sept. who are you most likely to play in the Q-Fs?

11

I think the Springboks have a very good chance of winning the RWC this year. However, I don’t think the good showing in the Super 14 has too much to do with that feeling. The All Blacks were left out of the five New Zealand franchises for the first half of the competition. Then when they returned it would have been more of a disadvantage to some teams as the “Non-All Black” players would have gelled together by then. New players seemed to cause more of a disruption in the first few weeks after the All Black players’ return. I think NZ and SA are relatively on par with each other at the moment and I think the Tri-nations will give a better reflection. I think Australia is looking a little weak, but again, the Tri-Nations may see them playing well.

RWC Q-F’s:
Well, if we beat England to top our group (Group A) we will play the runner up of Group B, which is likely to be Wales (unless of course if Wales beats Australia to Top pool B). I think the only certainty of a pool winner is NZ. They seem (it always seems to be the case, doesn’t it?) to have the easiest pool, yet again…

Pool A - Either SA or England can top it. I don’t think the willy nilly team that England has in SA right now will be any reflection of their RWC squad, and if anything, blooding some youngsters might actually do them good and strengthen their team.

Pool B - Realistically, I think either Australia or Wales can win this one. However, Wals’ current tour down under and the Tri-Nations will reveal more on these two sides.

Pool C - NZ seems sure to win this pool.

Pool D - This one (having rightly called it the pool of death, yourself) is a toss up between Ireland, Argentina and France. This will be by far the pool to watch with the most interesting games.

With the Northern Hemisphere touring the south and the Tri-Nations to come, I was hoping to start a RWC thread after the Tri-Nations in August. We know the 6Nations was tough, France won, but Ireland was looking good, Italy improved and England was looking much better than last year. I think before we can predict anything on the RWC we need to see how the NH plays in the next two months and how the 3Nations turns out.

I have a feeling NZ will win the 3Nations hands down, and be beaten in the RWC semi-finals.

12

[quote=“bismarck”]

Pool B - Realistically, I think either Australia or Wales can win this one. However, Wals’ current tour down under and the Tri-Nations will reveal more on these two sides.[/quote]

All it will reveal is that Wales has sent 5 test players with a bunch of school boys.

England did the same thing with a ten 18 year old Johnny Wilkinson and they got crushed 76 nil.

This farce of Wales Australia is not going down well and they will be paying people to come to the games as they can’t sell the tickets

13

[quote=“Satellite TV”][quote=“bismarck”]

Pool B - Realistically, I think either Australia or Wales can win this one. However, Wals’ current tour down under and the Tri-Nations will reveal more on these two sides.[/quote]

All it will reveal is that Wales has sent 5 test players with a bunch of school boys.

England did the same thing with a ten 18 year old Johnny Wilkinson and they got crushed 76 nil.

This farce of Wales Australia is not going down well and they will be paying people to come to the games as they can’t sell the tickets[/quote]

That may be true of Wales, but regardless of the team they send, it will still be a better indicator of where Aus rugby is than the Super 14. Wallabies scattered over four franchises doesn’t seem to be much help in the Super 14. Also, the 3Nations will definitely be a good indicator, and help the 3Nations teams see where they need to improve.

Against Wales, for instance, there has been talk of playing Giteau on scrumhalf with Gregan on the bench. Sounds wierd to me, but when they moved Larkham to flyhalf everyone thought that was wierd too. Turns out it was a very good thing.

That Wales are going to be beaten is probably a fait accompli. Still, will be interesting to see what the Wallabies do, and there are other tests before the 3Nations.

14

[quote=“May 26, 2007 Springbok Team”]15 Percy Montgomery, 14 Ashwin Willemse, 13 Wynand Olivier, 12 Jean de Villiers, 11 Bryan Habana, 10 Butch James, 9 Enrico Januarie, 8 Danie Rossouw, 7 Juan Smith, 6 Schalk Burger, 5 Victor Matfield, 4 Bakkies Botha, 3 BJ Botha, 2 John Smit (captain), 1 Deon Carstens.

Replacements: Gurthro Steenkamp, Gary Botha, CJ van der Linde, Johann Muller, Pierre Spies, Ruan Pienaar, Francois Steyn.[/quote]

Vs

[quote=“May26, 2007 England Team”]Mike Brown; Iain Balshaw, Mathew Tait, Toby Flood, Jason Robinson (captain); Jonny Wilkinson, Andy Gomarsall; Nick Easter, Andy Hazell, Chris Jones, Alex Brown, Dean Schofield, Stuart Turner, Mark Regan, Nick Wood

Replacements: Matt Cairns, Darren Crompton, Roy Winters, Pat Sanderson, Shaun Perry, Anthony Allen, James Simpson-Daniel.[/quote]

Overall, not a bad Springbok squad. All of the Super 14 performers are in the team or on the bench.
Exceptions: Fourie Du Preez - Injured. Derick Hougaard - I think they think he’s too small and want to use Butch James to disrupt Wilkinson. Brad Barritt, Jaques Fourie and JP Pietersen - No idea why. Perhaps just unlucky, or perhaps they’ll get a run in the second test.

As for the England team, they look somewhat shoddy. However, although they are without the bulk of their regular players, the Springboks have had less than a week together (Super 14 Final) so I predict a scruffy game. And Wilkinson will be kicking for posts and attempting drop goals every time he’s within range.

Personally, I hope Butch James welcomes him back to test rugby with a tackle that sends him back to last Sunday.

15

[quote=“May26, 2007 Wallaby Team”]15 Julian Huxley, 14 Mark Gerrard, 13 Stirling Mortlock (vice-captain), 12 Adam Ashley-Cooper, 11 Drew Mitchell, 10 Stephen Larkham, 9 Matt Giteau, 8 Wycliff Palu, 7 Phil Waugh (captain), 6 Rocky Elsom, 5 Mark Chisholm, 4 Nathan Sharpe, 3 Guy Sheperson, 2 Stephen Moore, 1 Matt Dunning.

Replacements: Adam Freier, Benn Robinson, Dan Vickerman, Stephen Hoiles, George Smith, George Gregan, Scott Staniforth.[/quote]

Al Baxter (no.3 Prop) was ruled out due to Bronchitis.
Odd looking Wallaby team, except for the usual suspects. Seems they’re trying something new with the front row and trying out some combinations in the backline. I think they’re experimenting as they’re not really taking the Welsh team (who are under strength) seriously.

16

Ditto. Remember what Jonah’s “storm-lopie” over Mike Catt did to the latter? I certainly hope Butch does the same to Johnny! Other than Jason Robinson, Ian Balshaw and Johnny Wilkinson, this England team (despite their combined 199 caps) is a disgrace for the England jersey. :raspberry:

Tot later…

17

Ditto. Remember what Jonah’s “storm-lopie” over Mike Catt did to the latter? I certainly hope Butch does the same to Johnny! Other than Jason Robinson, Ian Balshaw and Johnny Wilkinson, this England team (despite their combined 199 caps) is a disgrace for the England jersey. :raspberry:

Tot later…[/quote]

That is very true. The players who opted not to come on tour are an utter disgrace, too. If you get called up for your country and you decide to rather play for your club or other some such nonsense you don’t deserve to ever wear the jersey again.

These “useless” teams they send south (Wales and Ireland have the same problem - it seems only the All Blacks will be playing a decent test side, the French) shouldn’t even qualify as tests. Rather they don’t come then and we play teams who want to play. Teams like Samoa, Fiji, Tonga, Argentina (why they aren’t in a four Nations competition is beyond me), Italy and even Canada.

We should return the favour and send the SA u21’s next year on the Northern Hemisphere tour. Although those boys all play in the Super 14, which is as close to test rugby as you’re likely to get other than actually playing in a test.

18

So far: Northern Hemisphere 0 - 3 Southern Hemisphere

Australia 29 - 23 Wales. And Australia were lucky to win, especially seeing as this wasn’t Wales’ best side…

South Africa 58 - 10 England. Yeah, a nice arse whipping that has been long in the coming. Now before anyone whinges that England had an understrength side, let’s remember that the Springboks only got together for the first time on the Monday before the game due to Super 14 Final commitments by the Sharks and the Bulls. Also, if you’re going to go on an internation tour it’s your Unions responsibility to select your best available 15. Therefore whining about being understrength becomes moot.

That said, the Boks played 20 minutes of rugby (the first half hour of the first and second half being testament to the fact that they only had four days of practice together before the game). If England had sent a better team there would have been some real fireworks. Personally I feel insulted that these teams (including the current Ireland and Wales touring teams) send these half assed teams on tour. Personally I believe they shouldn’t be given test status and they should play our u21 sides.
It’s pitiful and it isn’t good for rugby.

This picture about sums it up for England:

Argentina 22 - 20 Ireland. The hapless Irish lost after a last minute penalty by Contemponi.

19

At last a top official, All Black Coach Graham Henry, lashes out at the underpar excuses for “international” test sides that the Six Nations teams send South. I fully agree with Mr Henry.

This is what he had to say on the matter:

[quote=“Graham Henry”]I think the IRB needs to lead and lead very strongly and work with the clubs in Europe to ensure we preserve this great game, and at the moment there’s not a lot of sign of that," Henry said. "When sides are coming to this side of the world that are not as strong as they should be that’s not good for the game…

The All Blacks team that went to Europe last November was the best All Blacks team we could put on the track. We’re holding up our end of the bargain, we’re showing a lot of integrity there. We’re putting the international game first but it’s not a good situation at the moment…

To have the French competition’s semifinal and final over the next two Saturdays … for me that’s organizational chaos for the game. How can the international board and the French federation not have their heads together on that one? These things need to be talked about and solved. The game’s bigger than that.[/quote]

This was in response to:

[quote=“Super Rugby”]The 26-man French squad which arrived in New Zealand on Tuesday includes 14 uncapped rookies and a number of veterans recalled to make up for the absence of players from clubs such as Biarritz, Toulouse and Stade Francais.

France’s two-test tour is running simultaneously with a visit to Australia by an under-strength Welsh team and the South African tour by a sub-par English side, beaten 58-10 by the Springboks in last weekend’s first test.[/quote]

Full report here: superrugby.co.za/default.asp … ionalrugby

20

Ironically, Jake White (South African Coach) doesn’t quite agree with his All Black counterpart.

[quote=“Jake White”]At the request of the All Black coach most of New Zealand’s top players were rested for the first eight matches of the Super 14. That shows how seriously he takes the need to manage players and give them a rest,” said White.

I think the fact top teams from the north are leaving their players behind is an indication of how seriously they are taking the World Cup. Everyone is attaching massive importance to the tournament, and no-one is prepared at this stage to do anything that might jeopardise their chances.[/quote]

Full article: superrugby.co.za/default.asp … springboks

Personally, I’m starting to think Jake is a little deluded. The Springboks are “bullying” a severly understrength England side and he’s trying to sugar coat it. As in, “no, really, it really is a good English side. We’re on track for the World Cup. Really.”

If he thinks thumping this touring side from England is a good thing, I think he’s going to be in for a shock when we play Samoa in two weeks and England in France at the RWC (which will be a totally different team from the current one).

Full article: superrugby.co.za/default.asp … springboks

I think he’s quite mad to be happy about this. Yes, on paper it looks like a good “dry run,” but in effect, this is not any indication of the England team we will face at the RWC, the Samoa test (as always) will be very physical and probably end with more uneccessary injuries than lessons learnt and Australia are struggling at the moment (and with their BMT and RWC record, no indication of where they’ll be come RWC time). The only credible team we’ll face before the RWC will be two tests against New Zealand.

Once again, unless we manage to beat New Zealand or Australia (or both) in Australia and New Zealand, we wouldn’t have achieved anything substantial…

What do you guys think? Do you think the “psychological” edge will give them much needed confidence, or do you think it will make them over confident and thus act as a detracting factor later on?