Black day

Well, for many reasons. Let's try and take the matches in order.

The All Blacks beat Romania. Not as well as I'd expected, but still convincingly. They'll be a bit worried about how well the Romanian's disrupted the scrum, and/or the scrum half, although the second string 7 and 8 might have contributed to that. Chris Masoe had a good game otherwise, but when Richie MacCaw came on for 20 minutes, normally a powerhouse for the whole 80 after all, god did he look spectacular.

There were quite a few mistakes, but AB rugby often has mistakes. It's odd for a side that does so well from mistakes/turn overs that they're relatively happy to make them and give the ball up. Says something for their (justified) confidence in their defence, and ability to get the ball back. Thorne, for all he had a good game, is clearly there as a utility player, across blind-side and lock. Romania might not be the best team in the world, but at line out time he looked rather anonymous. That said, having him as an extra tackler around the park was pretty positive, but it's a balance thing. You'd expect the ABs to threaten the Romanian line out, and they didn't really, with two of Jack, Williams and Robertson you'd have thought they would, even as they lost the mobility around the park.

Australia looked out of shape. Perhaps the rain helped, but they sputtered and stuttered. OK it was only a pool game and quite a few second choice folks in key places, but it was still not great. I can't see them playing that badly next week, but if they do, England could win. Particularly problematic, their scrum creaked against Canada. Against CANADA, when the English scrum stood up well against the Boks, could be a disaster in the making. Mind you, the aussie line out ruled.

Kudos to Fiji. Being Welsh, it hurts, and there are a number of places we should have done better, but Fiji played a blinder, and at least we went out in a great game rather than in a damp squib. Will Gareth go? Apparently not without being pushed. He asked to be judged on his RWC performance - the judgement? Not good enough. Sure, being a manager/coach it's not all his fault, but the combinations, selection choices and style of play in broad terms, if not every choice on the field are his. Why does he want Wales to play structured power rugby, it's not really what they've ever done, why try to change it? Why choose Hook and Shane Williams if you do? Wales won the grand slam on pace, passion and flair. Tempering that a little isn't necessarily a bad thing, adding a plan B, but it has looked more and more like he wants to knock it out of Welsh rugby rather than add an alternative. Sorry, I'd be pushing if I was the WRU.

Scotland and Italy was close, closer than I'd expected actually. You'd have to say the better team won, even if it was a dull, grinding, bad tempered game. A game where ill discipline really made the difference - shades of England v France in years gone by. I'm still putting my money on 4 Southern Hemisphere semi finalists, which means Argentina get through as group winners (I think they'll win, Ireland have lost it too much), and Argentina will just chew up and spit out the Scots on today's evidence. They won't be as likely to give away silly penalties, and they will be more able to threaten with a variety of plans than poor old "big boot and nothing else" Pez. Even Rob Andrew at the height of 10-man rugby showed more option taking than Pez.

Tomorrow - only one match that matters isn't there?

France really ought to rack up the 5 points, South Africa's first choice team, ditto, and both will do so with time to spare. Ireland v Argentina? A team flying high, full of confidence and a team that looks fragile and out of sorts? Teams that are actually close on the world rankings too? Look how close Tonga came, how well Fiji did too. Confidence works wonders, and Ireland don't have it, unless Argentina really blow it early to hand it back to the Irish, ignominy awaits.

England flatter to deceive

So England won. Shame.

If only that pass that lead to Sackey's second had gone to a Tongan hand, you have to wonder how different it would have been. A try then, to Tonga - not a certainty, but reasonably likely you'd have thought, and 17-14 at half time and you wonder just how different it would have been.

As the commentators said, there was a period in the second half where England lost shape, lost self-belief, and if they hadn't had that lead, and if Tonga hadn't had a couple of passes go to ground, they'd have still been in trouble. If they'd been behind when that hit, who knows?!

Whichever side won was going to struggle against the Aussies, lets be honest. Australia will be licking their lips after that display from England. They're vulnerable up the middle, they're moderately vulnerable at the line out (and Tonga aren't great there in all fairness), their scrum didn't really dominate at the times you'd expect it to - Gregan will not fall to the soft touches that Gomersall managed to inflict which did the most damage to the Tongan scrum, Mortlock and whoever (Giteau?) will hammer the 10, 12, 13 channel that looked so vulnerable, and if it's bulked up by Farrell, they'll run past him at speed.

However, Tonga should go home full of pride. A country with the population of a smallish town in England played well and made the English sweat and struggle. They struggled at times with precision, but they actually played far more attractive rugby for most of the time, and their commitment to the cause certainly can't be doubted. The mainstream media are harping on about a high tackle. It was high, but it wasn't sickening, as I've seen it referred to - you have to wonder if it was Lewis Moody's mum writing the piece. The damage that left him in a heap on the floor was because, to my eyes, Moody ducked his head into the tackler's shoulder at speed. The arms were wrapping, and one wrapped high. A penalty, certainly, but anything more, no way. You see far worse tackles than that in most games without cards, sometimes without penalties even. It was made to look worse because Moody tried hard to knock himself out for the second time in the game, not because it was a highly dangerous tackle, no more than most tackles that are just over the shoulders anyway. Dangerous by law, but not full of malice.

Let's hope, whatever the political fun and games with the IRB, that Tonga build on this and come back next time better yet. England, don't feel to comfortable. You avoided one embarrassment, the first defending champions to fail to get out of the pool stages. Chances of going past Australia - cat in hell's got better odds.

Great matches

One of the things I love about watching rugby is the number of ways you can get a good, enjoyable match to watch.

No-one would call the All-Blacks v Portugal (108-13 or so remember) a contest. In fact to make it a contest how low down the New Zealand age tree would you go? I'd certainly put money on the NZ under-21's, probably on the under-19's. Would the under-17's be a fair match? That's not to insult the Portuguese team, they're mainly amateurs playing against the most rugby mad country and one you'd have to say has the best development structures in place.

But, it was a good match, for skill and for passion.

Being Welsh, living in England, South Africa v England (36-0) was a great match to watch. Anyone kicking it to the sais is good of course, but seeing them clueless, and a highly skilled display from the Bokke was good, and would have been good against many opponents.

Then we come to today's two games in the world cup. Most of the teams in the ANZ Cup would have won, comfortably, today. The standard of Japanese, Portuguese, Romanian and Canadian rugby just isn't that high. No shame on them, and they're mostly improving, but getting the time, resources and so on to play the game is hard work in countries where they're fourth, fifth or sixth sports. But the games were compelling to watch. Would brave Portugal hold out the bully-boys Romania? No. (Not trying to say that Romania cheated either, but they won by grinding forward play and were just bigger and stronger there.) Who would win between Japan and Canada? (No one it turns out, 12-all draw with the final kick of the game, 5 minutes into time added on sealing the draw for Japan.)

Great to watch because of passion and of the fact they were both good, close contests.

When will we see their likes again? (Sorry Scotland, too good a line to pass up.) Well, if the Irish remember how to play, maybe Ireland v Argentina. Maybe Tonga v England, it's got the makings of it, but if England start well, maybe not.

France v New Zealand? Probably. Otherwise, not until the semi-finals to be honest. But, Australia v England (if that comes to pass, still not sure it will) will have that rivalry, and revenge for 4 years ago - that will be watchable if not a contest.

France v New Zealand will be a match that everyone will watch. Will the ABs cope with the decent opposition? Will France show up? Will they show up rather better than this time last year?

South Africa v Wales - if Wales show adventure and spirit it will be a great game, but if not, well meh. Even being Welsh, SA ought to win, sadly.

That leaves Argentina v Scotland... I'm still thinking rather 1-sided for the Southern Hemisphere side.

Let's hope the organisers decide to let the small teams carry on. The crowds tonight, in France, were better than for Scotland (seconds) v NZ at Murrayfield. If the Scots can't show up (on or off the pitch) at home, but the minnows can get massive support and play such compelling games, let's have more of them!

Big three all stutter

It seems odd to describe a 40-0 and a 55-12 scoreline as poor, but in all honesty they were. The All Blacks and Australia will both look at the matches and wonder why the scores were not far more one-sided.

The All Blacks could easily, should even, have scored another 6 or more tries. Australia should have scored 3 or 4 more, and not conceded at least one of the two that they did. South Africa, of course, came even closer to the brink.

It would be easy to start screaming "choker" at this point, and I'm sure the coaches will have things to say, but I wonder if the format of "7 important games in a row" is actually too much. In that time the odd poor game is going to sneak in. Will having them now, when there's still a match before the quarter-finals will give the coaches a sneaky sigh of relief, because they've got a stick as well as a carrot and they'll be thinking they've got the "bad game" out of their system.

You'd have to say that, despite the stutters, all three of these sides will win their quarter-finals, probably at a canter. They'll play better against each other than against their lesser rivals when in the semi's too, I'm sure. So, unlike France, not a disaster, but still an odd weekend.

Not so super Saturday

So, the long Saturday is finally over.

Argentina kicked into gear and racked up 60+ against Namibia. Even more than yesterday it's a case of "Goodbye Ireland" and a quarter-final line up that says France v All Blacks, Argentina v (probably Scotland).

England sort of clicked into gear. Johnny was back and had a pretty good game, made easier because Gomersall kicked the English forwards into gear in a way Perry just never managed. But, Samoa, who have rather flattered to deceive this time around, pushed them close. Tonga, who beat Samoa, can still win and kick the English out, and probably will to be honest. There is still an impression that England are blustering rather than genuinely confident whilst Tonga will be full of fire and self belief. An early score by Tonga and England will fall apart. An early score the other way, and Tonga will fight. If it's close near the end, Tonga will have the belief to win.

Why are Tonga so positive? Well, they faced the South African second stringers and were winning. White sent on all 7 of the senior squad to bolster things, which they did, but Tonga still fought back, and but for a bounce of the rugby ball going right instead of left could have won at the end. It made for a great game, a real classic, and if it didn't boost Tonga's self-belief nothing will.

It's cemented for me an All-Black win I think. I know that matches in the knock-out stages can swing on silly things and there's no second chances, so it's not a certainty, but when you look at the side against Portugal for example, supposedly New Zealand's second stringers, they were smooth, efficient and shone from 1-15. Some of the SA second stringers did, Skinstad had a great game for example, and deserved his try, even if it denied Tonga the win, but by and large they looked appreciably less good than their big team counterparts. Still probably a top 10 in the world team, but not #2, whereas the AB's "second team" still looks like #1 in the world.

Ireland going home early

There, I've said it.

Ireland were woeful. France didn't play with absolute abandon, but never looked like losing, not in a million years. From 10 years ago it's odd to say that France were the better disciplined team, but they were all round. The little things, like knocks-on, the big things, like giving away penalties, even the ability to apply their game plan, which is less noticeable but still an expression of discipline, all were on the French side.

It wasn't perfect - Chabal isn't a natural lock, but can be an impact player as a lock I suspect, he's a better Number 8, but is he really better than Bonnaire? That's a hard call.

Ireland looked lost and bereft of plans, talent and self belief. Eddie O'Sullivan must be really pleased he signed his new 4 year contract already. It probably wouldn't be on the table still if he hadn't signed it. I wonder how long he'll actually keep the coaching post for?

England and Ireland probably both need to change coaches. Brian Ashton isn't getting the team to play well - whether that's also because he's not coaching what he truly believes or not I don't know, but England's talent isn't performing for him, and they still do have some talented players, even if they left loads of others behind, and the same is true of O'Sullivan. In O'Sullivan's case it's more surprising. Ashton inherited a team in disarray and managed to do a papering over the cracks exercise. The World Cup has exposed the cracks, and probably unfairly he won't get the next 4 years to try and fix them. But Ireland have looked like real potential semi-finalists, even finalists over the last 18 months or so, until they hit the big stage. France certainly choked, but have recovered (probably too late, but recovered some dignity and pride at least). Ireland have just choked and aren't showing signs of recovery. It's pretty much too late for them, except to spoil Argentina's party. Frankly, I don't think they can, not unless there's a miracle.

(some of the) Big NH sides starting to fire

France fired against Namibia last weekend, Wales fired against Japan last night.

In a normal year, a normal world cup, this wouldn't be news. But Ireland and England have failed to fire, Italy and Scotland have looked OK. Wales even fired, in patches, against Australia, the ONLY Northern Hemisphere side to shine against significant opposition so far, even if too little, too late.

Can Ireland produce such a shocking performance again? Well, yes - remember squeaking home over Georgia followed a lack-lustre performance against Namibia, albeit one with a bonus point win. Something is stopping the men from the Emerald Isle firing as a unit. France could always freeze again, but you've got to say that this game is theirs to lose, before the start, rather than Ireland's to win.

Can England produce a performance against Samoa? On paper England ought to win. They're going to have a new 9, 10, 12, 13 combination though, and unless England sort themselves out it could be a very dour match in which you'd have to say Samoan passion, self-belief and stung warrior pride after last week could do the job. England might dominate possession, but we've seen the All Blacks, and (sadly) Georgia prove that the team that dominates possession and territory doesn't necessarily win.

Don't believe me, look at the stats - the ABs often win matches with less than 50% of territory and possession - scoring clinically from turn overs lets you do that, because they have the ball for several phases until you turn them over, and you score. Very fast, and often long range. The stats show the other team apparently in the ascendancy. I'd have to say that of the two sides, I'd believe both that Samoa will make more turn over ball, and they're far more likely to score from it.

Scotland won't have a chance to shine - they're playing the ABs, but, finally two of the Northern Hemisphere sides have really shown they can do it, and do it well.

My predictions:

England to still crash out, I think Samoa and maybe Tonga can both do it over this England side and see them slide right down the world rankings. I know which side I'm rooting for, and humiliation of being the first defending champions to fail to get out of the pool stages, excellent!

France to beat Ireland. Argentina too. France then lose to the ABs, Argentina beat... probably Scotland. Neither side looks that good, but Scotland look OK, Italy are stuttering.

Australia, New Zealand, Argentina and South Africa to be the semi-finals. The biggest doubt there, oddly (and with my heart perhaps), South Africa. If Wales forget structured rugby and try to take the Bokke on they'll probably lose. If they try to front up in a physical confrontation they'll lose for sure. Charvis, Popham and Martin Williams can feed ball to the backs, probably enough against South Africa still, and if Wales let their backs sparkle and run riot, they can do it. It's high risk, but, much though I'd love it not to be true, if Wales play that way they could get stuffed (against the number 2 side and joint RWC favourites that's not a disaster though), but they could produce an upset, and it's the only way they can do it.

Radical ideas for the RWC for 2011 and beyond

Don't reduce the size of the contest, increase it. 24 teams, 4 groups of 6...

OK, that's not exactly radical. But, then, borrow an idea from sevens, and have the cup, plus a shield and plate competition.

Cup quarter-finals drawn more or less as shown, shield from those that finish 3rd and 4th, plate from those that finish 5th and 6th.

We, the fans, get more rugby (hooray). We still have possibilities of matches like Ireland v Georgia providing scares and upsets. Matches like England v Samoa keep their significance, but are repeated elsewhere. We still have the possibility of such good natured mismatches as NZ v Portugal - and whilst it was a mismatch, it was fun to watch.

And, at the end of the time, every team plays a knockout match (at least one) against a side that's roughly, in this month or two of the 4 year cycle, on a similar level with them. This would make matches like Georgia v Namibia, which before the tournament looked like an empty contest except to the players, suddenly rampant with meaning, just as much meaning as Wales v Australia yesterday.

The other alternative, move to two 16-strong contests - which gives us even more matches! But, let the middle-16 (the 8 that don't make the cup quarter-finals and the 8 that would make the tier-2 quarter-finals) play a 16-strong knockout format. Seeding the teams that finished top of the lower tier 1-8, and the teams that finished bottom of the upper tier as 9-16, and apply the tennis "round of 16" structure to the games: 1 v 16, 2 v 15 etc.

Celtic nation woes

Wales and Ireland played today. One side won, the other lost.

The side that lost played poorly for half a match, and well, brilliantly in patches, for the other half. If they'd managed to string the whole 80 minutes together, they could have won. As it is, Wales losing to Australia is hugely disappointing, but not a disaster. Everyone knows what they need to do in the quarter-finals against South Africa, and they played well enough that it's pretty clear they will be there. Whether they can do it or not is another matter, but they know what they need to do, and they've proved, against top flight opposition, they can do it in patches. Credit to Australia, they do better in the RWC than at other times, and it showed again. Their scrum, however, was atrocious, against even bigger scrummaging packs than Wales (who are pretty good and looked good today) they'll get taken apart there one can't help but feel. Of course England, Tonga or Samoa won't complain, and probably, on recent showing won't even challenge them there.

The side that won played poorly for the whole match, and must be relieved that they were playing Georgia rather than Argentina or France. They'd have been thumped, deservedly, off the pitch by a fitter team. As it was, there was a held-up ball over the try line that the video referee couldn't see grounded (and almost certainly wasn't in fairness) that would have handed out a shock defeat. Not a surprise like Argentina beating France, a shock, a genuine shock. Federer knocked out in the first round of a grand slam kind of shock. The luck of the Irish was with them tonight - two of the three attempted drop goals by the Georgians were close, if they'd gone the other side of the uprights, Ireland would have lost by two points.

My earlier post about the minnows needs revisiting. Georgian probably won't make a 16-strong World Cup if that's what the IRB in it's "wisdom" decides for the next one. Shame, stupid, let's hope they nobble the Irish vote and look at this match and decide the minnows really do have something to add. And bad luck Georgia. To this neutral, you looked the better side throughout. If Ireland don't improve in leaps and bounds, France, yes France, Ireland were that bad, and Argentina will be facing the All Blacks and the runners up from pool C.

Would you really bet against all Southern Hemisphere semi-finalists? England won't get through, quite possibly not to the quarter-finals, but certainly not out of them, so that gives us the Aussies. Wales could beat South Africa, but the odds are against it. France v All Blacks, only one winner you'd say, and Argentina should beat Scotland or Italy quite comfortably in France.

It just might be worth a penny or two. I wonder what the odds are?!

Keeping the minnows

The All Blacks weren't as clinical as you might expect in dispatching Portugal 108-13. It sounds ironic saying that, but 10 of those points were pretty avoidable, and there were a few missed passes and things, so it could easily have been closer to 150-3. Nevertheless, with the exception of an injury to Mils Muliaina, there were no injury worries on either side, and, you know what, it was a fun match to watch.

The crowd got behind Portugal, the players all seemed to enjoy it, and no-one was injured severely. There are rumours that the IRB is thinking of cutting the next World Cup to 16 teams. To be honest, I have to ask why?

The All Blacks, Boks, Australians etc. whoever the powerhouses are at the next World Cup will destroy the 16th placed team as thoroughly as the All Blacks just took the 22nd placed team to the cleaners. It's not like it will make for less one-sided matches, save it will make for less matches. But, we'd lose Fiji v Japan, one of the closest and most gripping matches of the world cup so far. We'd lose the spectacle and joy of the AB v Portugal that we've just seen. We might even miss out on Italy v Romania. Not an edifying match, but hard for a old rugby fan like me not to watch, it was tense and close, as well as brutal and ugly.

We saw the Boks sweep England aside. The scoreline was less obviously one-sided, but Portugal scored more against the best side in the world than England, traditionally a powerhouse side, managed against the 3rd placed side. It was also nice to see a match where the players, and the fans, all looked like they were having fun. RWC is a serious thing, perhaps the old farts at the top of the IRB want it all to be deadly serious, but as pure entertainment for the masses, this and Fiji v Japan would be the matches I'd show - spirited, fun, highly skilled in parts for this one, and matches they don't want us to see next time. Shame on you, IRB.

Oh, congratulations to both the All Blacks, who did, mostly, what they had to do, what everyone knew they would do, but did it with style, poise and a smile; and to Portugal who turned up, had fun, had a go and made what could have been a sterile whitewash, like Australia v Japan, into a spectacle.

The Minnows, including England

Wednesday saw the last of the teams enter the contest. Realistically none of the teams playing for the first time stand a chance of winning progressing out of the pool stages, Italy are the possible exceptions to that.

But, today the death of English Rugby was finally kicked home. 36-0! Although there wasn't a try bonus point, that's a bigger margin than England managed to beat the USA by, both points conceded, and points scored were for the losing side in this match than the earlier one.

England had one player on the pitch that looked like he had a clue. When he left with a hamstring injury, Jason Robinson quite rightly got a standing ovation, not least as a farewell to a great servant of both versions of the game. He might be back, but almost certainly not in time for Samoa, and if the men in blue get any sniff of the ball, they have the pace, invention and desire to beat the English, just because the English won't score points. They failed to sparkle against the USA, they failed to even threaten against the Boks.

England might not, technically, be out of it yet. If they lose to Samoa they will be, for sure. But, whichever side wins at the Millennium Stadium tomorrow, Wales (I hope) or Australia (my head says more likely, they tend to peak in World Cups) will take enough from the result to beat the English in the next round anyway.

Pack up guys in white, your days as World Champions are counting down, and less than 20.

Citing madness

The citing system in rugby matches is under criticism again, quite rightly IMO.

If you're reading this, you probably know the system is there to pick up dangerous play and serious infringements, primarily, but not solely (despite its initial statement of use), those missed by the referee. Nowadays it includes dangerous play felt not to be suitably punished at the time.

Saturday produced a trip (2 weeks), a number of high tackles (variably dealt with between nothing and 4 weeks). Brian Lima's hit on Pretorius was, frankly, shocking, even for "The Chiropractor" it looked high and dangerous. He may have escaped citing because he knocked himself out, but it's hard to see why he wasn't cited and banned.

Vickery's trip - he alleges was instinctive and not cynical. I'm unconvinced, lashing out with a foot is always hard to do, and he lashed out a long way, it's not like a trailing leg, only got him 2 weeks. Trips, particular kick-trips like that one, are good ways to break legs, arms and potentially head injuries. By their very nature they're unexpected and throw you off balance. You'd hope an international rugby player is sufficiently co-ordinated to land well, but it's not always easy when you running at full pelt and thrown so badly off balance so unexpectedly.

Burger's suspension is outrageous. I think the penalty was probably right - hitting people in the head is something we need to strongly discourage, but 4 weeks would be about right for someone that had jumped in to smack someone in the head, watching the replay it still looks to me like Burger leapt for the ball and missed - clumsy, but not penalisable. He carried through - it's hard to shift momentum when you're in the air after all, and hit the Samoan in the head. Could he have missed the head? Probably (not certainly, and if he'd lowered his arm to hit him in the chest if possible it would still have been hitting a man in the air), but, that "probably could have missed the head" warrants a penalty to my mind.

What is going on with the system? I have moderately little sympathy with "MacCaw gets away with murder" but I certainly have some sympathy that it appears Burger has been harshly treated, and it often seems the Bok players are harshly treated.

Dissing Argentina

Why is everyone still so shocked by Argentina's success?

In what other sport is a talking point in tones of shock for days and days when the team in 6th place plays the team in 4th and comes up with a hard fought win?

Sure, you'd expect the higher placed team to win, especially when playing at home, that's why they're more highly ranked after all, but is it really a resounding shock? It does make the exclusion of Argentina from both the big annual competitions seem increasingly like prejudice. I understand it can take a while to work a new team in to the schedules - I'm not sure how far ahead they're planned out, but just continuously saying "No" is starting to sound like fear.

To finish off, kudos to the Georgians for fronting up so well. Argentina looked a bit tired - playing France on Friday then Georgia today was always going to be hard work, you have to wonder why the team was rotated more - the All Blacks have basically shifted just about everyone around for this weekend, but Loffreda must be relatively happy, despite the fatigue and the hard confrontation his team racked up the bonus point, a decent points difference and the like. Beat Ireland - a team they're now ahead of in the world rankings after all, so we might expect a win (without being shocked if they don't) - and they're looking at a likely semi-final match against South Africa, pretty good result really!

Happy Coaches league

This is purely for fun... but it's my ranking of the happiness of coaches in contests. It's not necessarily the same as who will win the various contests, you can be happy for various reasons.

1. Henry - of course.
2. Connelly - Losing Gerrard for Shepherd, not as bad as some loses could have been (Larkham say).
3. White - losing de Villiers seems bigger than losing Gerrard to me. A regular starting centre v a replacement winger?
4. Loffreda - only this low because the other Southern Hemisphere nations all did so well.
5. Berbizier - losing to New Zealand, not a disaster. Played with spirit, will challenge the Scots.
6. Jenkins - his team came from behind, which they shouldn't have had to, but played well in patches.

After that, does it matter that much? The bottom might be interesting:
19th place - Laporte. Shocking performance with freezing, but gives him something to build from, and removes expectation from the side... always good for France!
20th place - Brian Ashton. What positives can he try to manufacture from the pile of manure that was England's performance. Even Laporte is happier.

Rugby World Cup, weekend 1

So, we've had the opening round of matches.

New Zealand, no surprises to me, proved those who said "They've had no consequence games, they'll be rusty" wrong with a very clinical outing, killing the Italians in every respect. I'd be a happy Graeme Henry today.

Argentina rocked the rugby world. That's not meant to suggest that they're a bad side, but France had played like real challengers in the warm-up matches, Argentina hadn't played that well. On Friday night, the roles were reversed. Les Bleus froze under pressure and expectation, the Pumas played with heart and soul and conviction, and thoroughly deserved their win.

Of the home nations, I'd rather be Welsh (which I am) than anything else. Why? Well Wales varied between mediocre and good, and played a team which can surprise bigger sides in the right sort of way. They weathered, albeit with more damage than we'd like the storm at the start of each half, and then struck, and struck, and struck to kill them off when that initial roar died back.

Ireland looked old and flat. They won, but please... with the greatest of respect to Namibia, they're not exactly dangerous. Ireland v Argentina and Ireland v France could both be even more fascinating than anyone thought in "the group of death." Before the tournament I'd have said France and Ireland to qualify, in that order. Argentina unlucky to be in that group rather than say in the group with Australia instead of Wales. Now, I just don't know. I guess it depends on how France do against Ireland. They might show up worked up and demolish them and go through. I suspect they'll be fragile though, and if Ireland start well France could easily go out in the pool stages.

Scotland, playing Portugal looked a bit stunned and out of sorts. They played between badly and mediocre, not what you want in a first game. Still, I'd rather be Scots that English - England were shocking against the USA. They failed to get a bonus point, against a side that many places below you in the rankings, it's unforgivable.

Australia? Don't know. Japan, with the best will in the world, didn't pose any sort of threat. Australia v Wales will be interesting, the only real challenge for them in the pool stages you'd say. After New Zealand v Italy, it remains to be seen how much of one, although recent matches between the two in Wales (and the first test in Australia) have all been contests, which might bode well.

South Africa - did a good job against Samoa, but losing a centre, particularly such a good one, who can guess.