Tri Nations Preview
With one World Cup appraoching its climax, another is about to start. Yes, the annual World Cup of rugby, otherwise known as the Tri Nations kicks off with NZ hosting Australia on Saturday. Still basking in my excellent prediction from last year that the Aussies wouldn't win a game, I predict this year they will (win a game) - but will still come last. Unless the South Africans continue to have injury woes in which case they may have company down in the basement. Which means there can be only one winner. Spoken like a true Kiwi.
I am not buying into the talk that the Aussies have looked the best of the three sides from the pre-tournament internationals played over the last month. First, England were awful and made them look good. Second, Ireland ran out of puff in the last 20 minutes which in hindsight shouldn't have been a surprise given they had two extremely physical encounters with the All Blacks in inclement weather (and kept the same starting XV). The Australians have played no better (and to be fair, perhaps no worse) than the ABs. I'm glad they are arriving here quietly confident - the time to be worried about the Australian rugby team is when they are given no hope (e.g. RWC 2003 semi-final, God I hate to bring that up).
There is little doubt that the 2006 version of the Wallabies will be better than last year's one. With a new coach at the helm, an improving scrum, lineout options to die for and a good backline - yep, they're not going to be the easybeats of last year. However I question whether they will have improved enough. Especially when they have to play in the freezing conditions that ChCh will provide (and hopefully rain, or if not, dew) first up.
While the Wallabies have improved, the draw is not as kind. With the expanded format it is an uneven competition - while all teams get 3 home and 3 away, some poor sucker has to come to NZ and play them twice, and this year that sucker is Australia. Can they pinch a win in NZ? - not in my book, so they are behind the eight-ball already.
So how do we fit South Africa into the equation? A month ago, I was fancying their chances. But after a loss to France, continual bickering about racial quotas and injuries already, I'm not so sure. A pity really, as they are always value in Tri Nations matches (and at $9 in the outright market, this year is no different). I'm keeping an open mind about them, and will watch their first match against Oz on July 15 keenly. The draw does them no favours either, with all their away matches first before returning home. However if they can get a win in Oz (or even NZ) and perhaps bonus points in their other matches, with 3 matches on the high veldt at the end they will be in contention.
While NZ have not been that impressive either, I think they have the best of the draw (although the first match in South Africa a week after a test in Oz will be a tall order) and deserve to be favourites. They'll also have their best XV on the paddock and the merry-go-round will stop. I like the selection of Eaton at lock and judges far better than me have been crying out for Muliana to start at centre. While they will be tested on Saturday, so long as the lineout doesn't completely disintegrate and they get a reasonable amount of possession, it's hard to see them losing.
Currently on the outright market on Betfair (not that there is a huge amount of liquidity), NZ are $1.59, Aust are $3.75 and SAF are $9. One bet stands out, and that is to lay the Aussies. Backing SAF is tempting as well, but I will wait until after their away games before deciding what to do - chances are they will still be at long odds when on the plane back to Joburg.
For non-betting exchange users, the NZ TAB has NZ at $1.60, Oz @ $2.85 and the Saffers $8. Centrebet (Aust) has NZ $1.55, Aus $3 SAF $8. So to those who think I'm spouting a pile of horse manure and want to back the Aussies, go and open a Betfair account (although Stan James and Skybet in the UK have them at $3.75). For the rest of you, the odds on offer for NZ and SAF down at the tote are OK - you can't get much better elsewhere.
As I'm taking on the Aussies in the tournament, I'm not betting on the opening game. If the unthinkable happens and the ABs lose, after a helping of humble pie I'll go away and work out an exit strategy.
I am not buying into the talk that the Aussies have looked the best of the three sides from the pre-tournament internationals played over the last month. First, England were awful and made them look good. Second, Ireland ran out of puff in the last 20 minutes which in hindsight shouldn't have been a surprise given they had two extremely physical encounters with the All Blacks in inclement weather (and kept the same starting XV). The Australians have played no better (and to be fair, perhaps no worse) than the ABs. I'm glad they are arriving here quietly confident - the time to be worried about the Australian rugby team is when they are given no hope (e.g. RWC 2003 semi-final, God I hate to bring that up).
There is little doubt that the 2006 version of the Wallabies will be better than last year's one. With a new coach at the helm, an improving scrum, lineout options to die for and a good backline - yep, they're not going to be the easybeats of last year. However I question whether they will have improved enough. Especially when they have to play in the freezing conditions that ChCh will provide (and hopefully rain, or if not, dew) first up.
While the Wallabies have improved, the draw is not as kind. With the expanded format it is an uneven competition - while all teams get 3 home and 3 away, some poor sucker has to come to NZ and play them twice, and this year that sucker is Australia. Can they pinch a win in NZ? - not in my book, so they are behind the eight-ball already.
So how do we fit South Africa into the equation? A month ago, I was fancying their chances. But after a loss to France, continual bickering about racial quotas and injuries already, I'm not so sure. A pity really, as they are always value in Tri Nations matches (and at $9 in the outright market, this year is no different). I'm keeping an open mind about them, and will watch their first match against Oz on July 15 keenly. The draw does them no favours either, with all their away matches first before returning home. However if they can get a win in Oz (or even NZ) and perhaps bonus points in their other matches, with 3 matches on the high veldt at the end they will be in contention.
While NZ have not been that impressive either, I think they have the best of the draw (although the first match in South Africa a week after a test in Oz will be a tall order) and deserve to be favourites. They'll also have their best XV on the paddock and the merry-go-round will stop. I like the selection of Eaton at lock and judges far better than me have been crying out for Muliana to start at centre. While they will be tested on Saturday, so long as the lineout doesn't completely disintegrate and they get a reasonable amount of possession, it's hard to see them losing.
Currently on the outright market on Betfair (not that there is a huge amount of liquidity), NZ are $1.59, Aust are $3.75 and SAF are $9. One bet stands out, and that is to lay the Aussies. Backing SAF is tempting as well, but I will wait until after their away games before deciding what to do - chances are they will still be at long odds when on the plane back to Joburg.
For non-betting exchange users, the NZ TAB has NZ at $1.60, Oz @ $2.85 and the Saffers $8. Centrebet (Aust) has NZ $1.55, Aus $3 SAF $8. So to those who think I'm spouting a pile of horse manure and want to back the Aussies, go and open a Betfair account (although Stan James and Skybet in the UK have them at $3.75). For the rest of you, the odds on offer for NZ and SAF down at the tote are OK - you can't get much better elsewhere.
As I'm taking on the Aussies in the tournament, I'm not betting on the opening game. If the unthinkable happens and the ABs lose, after a helping of humble pie I'll go away and work out an exit strategy.
Labels: previews
posted by Rob Crawford at 12:27 PM
1 Comments:
More important for assessing South Africa's form than their loss to France, is the way they struggled against Scotland. Before last weekend's match I would have had them distant third easily. As Australia never completely folded against NZ (just got beaten, by a lot!) I'd still give them favouritism for tomorrow, just, and will also "watch with interest".
But it all makes me even more annoyed about the short-sightedness of the old-men-of-rugby who thought it would be more interesting to squeeze another couple of matches out of NZ/Aus/SA than invite rugby's "next (potential) major power" into the mix. On current form, could you see South Africa or even Australia winning in Buenos Aires?
Even the IOF could take lessons from the-old-men-of-rugby about how to pay lip service to globalising a sport but doing nothing really...
Post a Comment
<< Home