Comments on: Can the All Blacks shed 'World Cup chokers' tag?

By: tuffymacca

tuffymacca — Sat, 18 Dec 2010 15:22:28 +0000

I find it absurd & nonsensical to suggest that NZ lost the 1995 rugby world cup final to the Springboks due to poisoning by a SA Chef.This assertion shld be treated with the utmost contempt.If they were indeed poisoned they wldnt have taken to the field later alone play full time & extra time.Kiwis are arrogant bad losers .They simpy lost to a superior Springboks in`95.The only way the rugby serial rugby chokers are going to win the William Webb Ellis is by hosting it just like in 1987.No doubt NZ PLAY expansive ,entertaining rugby.NZ cannot be termed the Brazil of rugby coz they have only won one world cup yet Brazil have won the FIFA WORLD CUP 5 TIMES.Hail the 2 time world champions --Springboks minus their crazy coach.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 19:07:36 +0000

The All Blacks are consistently the benchmark by which other teams measure themselves. Wait unitl players like Israel Dagg get more time on the field. The AB's are the Brazil of rugby – they love to play with creativity and power. Yes the Springboks are good, but they lack the finesse of the All Blacks.

By: John

John — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 18:08:38 +0000

I'm Australian... therefore cannot comment.

By: Frank

Frank — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 17:58:52 +0000

Hopefully, it should once again be a worldclass spectacle with rugby the eventual winner! Just hope all the teams will be able to field (all) their best and most able players.

By: MIke

MIke — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 17:40:00 +0000

As Frank says you can never discount the Boks. Though historically not quite (but the closest out of anyone) as successful as the Blacks, the Boks are big game players. To a lesser degree the same can be said of the Aussies.
But any of the top 5 could turn around and grow from now until the Cup into a winning team.
All that said the All Blacks need to win on home turf which is a huge advantage for them or I fear the NZ public may throw in the towel.
The way the draw has been done with France in the same pool as the ABs, on home turf and with a pretty solid team it is now or never
Don't choke, please!

By: Pete

Pete — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 16:56:04 +0000

They are, quite simply, always the team to beat. I am English and know that for any team to beat the All Blacks they have to be nearly twice as good simply due to the passion with which the Balcks play the game. The South Africans are nor far behind. Even if the rest of the world catch up with the kiwis as far as skill is concerened, they still have a way to go. Oh for the same passion to be displayed by our lot – (having said that, much more evidence of its appearance of late.)

By: Lucas Carr

Lucas Carr — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 16:48:54 +0000

Might add that the allblacks were poisoned by south african chefs at the 1995 wc, I can't make an excuse for the other failed attempts, home ground advantage goes along way but im putting my money on swaziland!

By: Frank

Frank — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 16:01:50 +0000

O, and yes, Alex. What happened during last years Tri Nations. The Boks beat the All Blacks twice in their own backyard. Twice because they only played two games there. Eisch!!

By: Frank

Frank — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 15:58:04 +0000

Although the Boks made a real mess of their Tri-Nations tournament, they had by far the better 30 players in the Super 14, just prior to the Tri-Nations, which one tend to forget. The Boks are the guys for the great occasion, bar all their current injuries....... and of course their dearest coach'es influence and "strategies".......