The Semis

To tell you the truth, I haven't thought too much about this weekend's games. My attention has been diverted to three cricket series going on (and the joys of been able to finally watch it over the internet on a decent computer). So my thoughts, for what they are worth:

I think we've seen enough surprises in this World Cup. I'm expecting a France South Africa final next weekend, although you can't completely write off the other two semi-finalists. It is doubtful whether France can play as well again as they did in Cardiff, although predicting how well the French are going to play is never easy. But having got past the insurmountable obstacle last weekend, I can't see them letting themselves slip up against a team they (should) beat 4 times out of 5.

South Africa have never lost to Argentina. That will still be the case on Monday.

As far as betting goes, I don't like the prices, I don't like the handicaps, so it's a sit and watch weekend for me.

Have a good weekend.

The Curse of the Hosts

A couple of comments on here by James has got me thinking. Thanks James – perhaps this blog will get off the ground sometime – I spout some shit; someone makes a semi-relevant comment and together we get there.

But the comment that NZ’s record at RWC reads a miserable 1 from 6 for the supposedly dominant rugby union team on the planet got me into research mode. And first stop is an excellent website I’ve mentioned before – an expat-Pom who keeps records of internationals and Super 14 here.

Scroll to two-thirds down the page and you can see a graph - Riding The Wave - which shows the annual average ranking points of major rugby playing nations over the last 20 years. Apart from the last 3 years and the 3 years following the 1987 RWC, NZ exactly haven't had it all their own way, have they? And the older of us can remember the early-90 Wallabies, the mid-90 Boks and of course the 2002-3 English as teams who were at least our equal, if not better.

Now I want to add in the home ground factor. Don't ignore it - teams that play at home have a significant advantage in any sport, and rugby is no different. Hosts of the RWC have an impressive record, due to the fact that they are a major rugby nation playing at home:

NZ 1987 - winners
England 1991 - runners-up
SAF 1995 - winners
Wales 1999 - OK OK there's an exception to every rule
Australia 2003 - runners-up
France 2007 - ???

Yes we need to qualify this with the fact the Northern Hemisphere editions have more hosts than a timeshare sales evening, but the principle still stands. And here's something that surprised me - in the more-competitive sport of soccer, sorry football - the hosts have won it 5 times out of 14, finished runner-up twice (and won the 3rd/4th playoff 3 times). So 10 out of 14 soccer world cup editions have seen the hosts finish in the top 3.

What's this got to do with the All Blacks? Simple, 3 out of our 5 exits have been at the hands of the host nation - 1995, 2003 and now 2007, although yes, last week we were in Cardiff, but we are talking about the French here who would probably prefer to play us in Cardiff or London than Paris anyday.

Let's look at our record against the Wallabies and French, for they are the ones that have knocked us out twice each, and let's be charitable and forgive the 1995 team for they did actually draw the final.

In the 20 year period from 1987 to 2007, the W/L record for NZ v Australia is 28-17 (1 draw), a win percentage of 61%. But look at the games on Australian soil, and we're behind, 11-12 (1 draw). Leading up to the 2003 "shock" defeat, the Bledisloe Cup games on Australian soil between 1999 and 2003 were shared 2-2. Perhaps we were only a 50/50 chance four years ago despite what the bookies said at the time. Back in 1991, the Aussies had beaten us twice beforehand and with the benefit of hindsight, we see the Aussies were at the beginning of a period where they were top of the tree for 3 years. The point: these two losses were not "upsets".

Our record against the French is more substantial - a 70% win record both overall and away, so the losses to Les Bleus do fall into more of the surprise category. But as any long-term follower of rugby knows, the French do have this infuriating habit to be mediocre or sublime on any given day, and the All Blacks have drawn the short straw twice.

So is 1 from 6 a sub-standard record? Or do we expect too much in that our team is expected to knock over the hosts by just turning up? Never under-estimate home field advantage.

If I may be allowed to indulge for a sec, I backed Italy in the 2006 Soccer World Cup principally beacuse of their draw. Knockout tournaments have a "luck" factor in that who plays who at the business end is just as important as who is the best team. The current Springboks must be laughing. And luck also plays a part allowing supposedly superior teams to get away with a poor peformance and still get through - Italy last year against Australia; the 1991 Wallabies against Ireland and you can possibly throw in the Boks against Fiji in the weekend into that category. The ABs have yet to have that luxury from memory.

Is this just a long-winded post in a vain attempt to search for an excuse? Maybe, or perhaps here in NZ we do not completely understand the concept of knockout tournaments and home field advantage. Whichever it is, I can't wait for 2011 :-)

Weekend Wrap

Last word to Jonah Lomu. Asked in a TV interview who we should blame for the All Blacks' defeat, he replied "Blame the French. They beat us." About sums it up.

Honestly, I've avoided most of the TV and press over the last 24 hours. Open up the Herald this morning and we can read all sorts of angles - including how Monday was a non-productive work day and wife-beatings are on the increase. For fuck's sake, it's a game of rugby. I'm done with it - we lost for a variety of reasons to a team that played bloody well.

I reflect on the weekend as a rather special 4 games of rugby. That we have eight teams capable of producing such "theatre" (to borrow a term from John O'Neill) should be something rugby afficianados applaud. Yes, even that turgid England - Australia game, but that only qualifies because of the unexpected result, combined with the Australian forwards going AWOL. If they weren't so busy poking the borax at us here in NZ, I'd love to read the Australian media's analysis of their own team performance.

It will take a while to forget another amazing 10 minutes of Fijian rugby - if they played like that for 80 min gawd help the rest of us, while it was interesting to see the Argentinians are not quite as good coping with the favourites tag as they are when underdogs.

Having recently moved towns, I'm very much in "look forward not back" mode, so thoughts are already turning to the semi-finals which have the potential to produce more theatre, wouldn't you agree John. But I suppose he is too busy hating the English to read this.

Current odds for the RWC winner's market at Betfair are:

South Africa 2.38
France 2.66
Argentina 10.5
England 8.8

SAF have drifted over the last 24 hours while the other three are coming in. Perhaps people are cottoning on to the fact this is now wide open, but I remain slightly bemused that if the more likely France-South Africa final eventuates the South Africans will be favourites. Not in my book, but we'll see how they play this weekend.

If you think the mis-alignment of planets is consigned to rugby, over in the cricketing universe I'm seeing England leading an ODI series in Sri Lanka, the Indians winning an ODI against Australia while South Africa just won a test in Pakistan. Another reminder about the glorious unpredictability of sport, which is part of its attraction - but I guess NZers don't want to hear about that at the moment.

Back later in the week.

A Special Sunday Wrap

I blame Mike McRoberts. Milliseconds after Australia’s loss to England, the frontman for (NZ’s) TV3 coverage couldn’t help himself:

“Four more years George”

Oh dear I thought. Actually, that is a lie and as this has an R18 classification, here’s what I really thought:

You stupid motherfucking idiot. Hours before kick-off you go and have to put the commentator’s kiss of death on the All Blacks by an unnecessary gloat, don’t you. Didn’t it cross your tiny mind that in four years time, George Gregan will be sipping a latte a million miles away from NZ and probably won’t give a flying fuck about RWC in 2011? Now, where is my pin cushion and voodoo doll ...

You may think I’m angry and upset. Far from it – it took me three hours to stop doing cartwheels after the final whistle blew in Cardiff and only then on the advice of my doctor who was concerned at the sudden spike in physical activity. He also cautioned against walking to the dairy to get a paper as chances were I’d get that huge grin wiped off my face by some locals.

Yes, when it comes to mixed emotions through money and loyalty, money wins hands down every time. That is not to say I share the pain of the nation. I do, just suitably cushioned. But it allows me to be more objective than most here in the Shaky Isles about the earthquake we suffer every four years. Here’s a few tips to get over the grief:

Don’t bag the players. We actually didn’t play that badly. Not suggesting we played well either, but compared to the shocker the Aussies put in against England we were OK. At least our forwards weren’t beaten to the breakdown by a pack of players who should be signing up for the pension instead of playing a semi-final at the RWC.

Don’t bag the ref. There’s no doubt the yellow card was the turning point of the game and we can debate ad infinitum whether it was deserved, but it happened and no amount of moaning is going to change it. And I’m reminded of a game in Wellington 2003 where the AB’s were beaten by a team who at one stage had only 13 on the park. The ref is not a total excuse.

Don’t bag the touch judge either. Sure, with a few minutes to go when we were marching inevitably towards the winning score and some dirty cheating Frog played the ball on the ground with his over-sized mitt in full view of the touchie with the ref on the other side and touchie said nowt … well, he does come from the same country as Suzy the Waitress – what do you expect?

Don’t bag the coach. He didn’t play the game.

Hopefully you’re getting the gist. If you want a scapegoat, send McRoberts back to Iraq or wherever there’s a war going on.

And just remember. The All Blacks are still the best rugby team in the world (any overseas readers want to argue – bring it on). Four-yearly losses to teams they should beat doesn’t change that.

So while the rest of the world mock, laugh and delight in our moment of misery, we should not fall into the 1999 trap of bagging those who after all will be feeling the pain a helluva lot more than us armchair viewers. Unfortunately, it has already started:

Commentator Murray Deaker described the result as nothing short of a national disaster.

"Sadly we are a dumb rugby nation, we don't play the big matches well," he said.

"We play them in a boofhead way. We were a bunch of boofheads playing out there tonight against a French side that isn't that good. On the big occasions we choke."

There’s another commentator I wouldn’t mind sending to Iraq. I repeat, personally I don’t think we played poorly – but we still got beaten. Rugby Union is a game where it is easier to defend and spoil rather than attack and create. Points are more often than not scored through errors and turnovers. We played a team who can defend (see RWC preview peoples) and didn’t make many mistakes. We should congratulate them, be gracious in defeat and share the disappointment of our team. Hopefully we have learnt over the years not to take out our frustration by criticising the players and coaches, but I’m probably hoping for a bit much there.

So well done France. Hopefully you’ll play just as well next week otherwise life could get really unbearable.

QF thoughts

With the caveat that I missed last weekend's matches and thus fumbling a little in the dark, some musings on the weekend ahead at the RWC:

AUSTRALIA v ENGLAND
(NZ TAB $1.18/$4.50 - BETFAIR $1.24/$5.5/draw $44)

I'd like to see who replaces Farrell at second five for the Poms - if it's Barkley and they keep Tait at 13 it opens up all sorts of possibilities. While I have a knock on Oz as tournament winners they are one of the smarter teams around, so as long as they can keep the penalties in their own half to a minimum (someone have a quiet word to Rocky Elsom before the game please) I can't see anything but a comfortable win. The Wallabies' pack should get close to parity while their loosies will have time for a cuppa before having to do battle with their counterparts after first phase.

One of two bets for me this weekend -Australia with the points start ($1.85 for -11.5 at the TAB and $1.87 for -12.5 at Betfair). Why? Towards the end the Poms will get desperate and the Ockers will feed off their calamitous mistakes to blow the score out. OK, it may not happen but I think it's worth the risk.

NEW ZEALAND v FRANCE
(NZ TAB $1.10/$6.00 - BETFAIR $1.18/$7.0/draw $65)

France do have the capacity to upset but there have been far too many 40-point thrashings in yesteryear for me to believe it's anything other than a remote possibility. I actually like the picking of the young number 10 (can't spell his name) and while I understand the logic (well, French logic that is) of Traille at 15 it will be interesting to watch his positional play.

Games involving France are difficult to bet - if they play well the ABs will know they've been in a game while a mediocre performance like that against Argentina will see them well beat. In fact, that opening game of the RWC is what I suspect most games will be like this weekend - full of "safe" rugby and in this case factor in the referee as well. The one negative I have on the ABs this year is they too can put in performances where tactical kicking is unsound and handling errors abound. Throwing all of that into the melting pot it's a game to watch, not bet, not even at the handicap. A 6 or 36 point win to the ABs, or something in-between.

SOUTH AFRICA v FIJI
(NZ TAB $1.02/$12.00 - BETFAIR $1.04/$23/draw $110)

A shame Nicky Little is out with injury - I think Fiji are half the team with him missing. Not worth getting up at 2 a.m. for; Fiji have won "their" World Cup, South Africa are just starting theirs. I also think the games they've had against Samoa and Tonga will stand them in good stead for this clash.

ARGENTINA v SCOTLAND
(NZ TAB $1.15/$4.85 - BETFAIR $1.19/$6.4/draw $60)

Typical betting markets - for so long Argentina have been ignored and unfavoured and now we're in the middle of an over-reaction. The price is far too tight for this match although I do think they'll win. Unfortunately having missed both their important pool matches last weekend this is one match I'm a little uncomfortable spouting off about but with Scotland possessing the world's most deadliest boot, this is not as cut and dried as many people think.

Some further thought is required, but I'm leaning towards either playing around with Argentina 12 and under ($2.75 at the TAB, $3.25 Betfair), or backing Scotland with the points start ($2.02 for +13.5 at Betfair). Interesting to note Argentina have won 5 out of the 6 matches between these two, but never by more than 9 points.

Have a good weekend.

Damn Damn Damn

Ahhh well, it looks like the Douggie bet as the top tryscorer is sunk. Still, at 12/1 I got a good run for my money. Truth is, even if he did play, I think the chances are Habana will end up top of the tree given the slightly easier run SAF have (potentially of course) to the final.

Far be it for me to criticise Lord Ted and the rest of the selection panel, but starting Sivivatu really is a head scratcher. Some lazy defence against Italy and his fumbles v Scotland do not exactly fill me with confidence, and if the French had brains and a decent kicker (a big IF on both counts), kicks behind the line turning the wingers around would IMHO keep the upcoming QF a lot closer than most NZers will feel comfortable with. Especially when you add in the referee (Wayne Barnes) who I seem to recall looked out of his depth when SAF and Oz clashed in the opening Tri-Nations game this year.

More thoughts on the QF's closer to the time, in the meantime if any can explain the selection of Sivivatu over Howlett I'm all ears.

When to strike?

The All Blacks continue to drift to win the Rugby World Cup, with the NZ TAB pushing their price out to $1.65 while at Betfair it has touched $1.70. The reasons behind the drift have nothing to do with the ABs themselves; rather a combination of South Africa looking a real challenger for the trophy on the other side of the draw, and a gradual realisation that the wild-card in the pack (France) have a greater chance of meeting NZ in the quarter-finals.

In many minds, such a drift is justified for these reasons, but stop and think for a moment. Who has the greatest control over the destiny of the All Blacks at RWC? Why, the ABs themselves of course. Yes, while a referee or brilliant opposition play may ultimately decide the winner, the ABs will to a significant extent determine the outcome. That’s the “benefit” of being the best in the world and a tournament favourite. Play to your ability and you win. It’s a simple equation. And as an aside, rather ironic the (good and bad) performances of other teams is what's driving the AB price at the moment.

So while there are a couple of injuries and a horribly soft run-in of pool games to a possible tricky quarter-final that may provide a few butterflies to a NZ supporter, in reality nothing much has changed since the tournament kicked off with respect to NZ’s chances of winning the tournament. And in betting that’s the important thing – making an assessment of the probability of an outcome.

So I’m going against the flow – a possible harder quarter-final against France means diddly-squat in my book. South Africa? Don’t have to worry about them until the final, and let’s not forget they – like the All Blacks – are not cast-iron certainties to get there. In my humble opinion, NZ’s price is getting close to worth backing – the question now is when to strike in case something (e.g. another France loss tomorrow) causes it to go back into freefall.

My back of an envelope price assessment of RWC Winner’s Market:

New Zealand $1.80
South Africa $4.00
Australia $12
France $30
Argentina $40
Scotland $200
Rest – who cares.

Possible Quarter-final matches:

New Zealand v France
Australia v England
Argentina v Scotland
Wales v South Africa

An AB Loss

Yes, you read it here first, the All Blacks have lost a game at the Rugby World Cup.

And would you believe it was to Portugal? No? Well, go here and all will be revealed (Sep 18 post).

RWC Betting Preview (Chapter Two)

OK OK despite my warnings you’re itching to have a bet. Here’s one:

TOP TRYSCORER

Usually I avoid these markets like the plague as with 20 teams of 30 players you’re on a hiding to nothing. Yes, you can whittle the field down to half a dozen serious contenders but there is always a chance some dirt-tracker will score a bucket-load during one of the cricket-score games and throw the market out of whack.

That nearly happened in 1995 when Marc Ellis refused to pass the ball to his wingers in NZ’s romp over Japan – he ended up joint top for the tournament with Lomu. But it doesn’t always – Latham got five in the Wallabies training run against Namibia 4 years ago, but didn’t end up at the top of the tree.

In every World Cup, a winger has ended up as top (or joint top) tryscorer. And in 4 of the 5 editions, that winger has worn a black jersey. So no surprises where we start looking hardest:

(NZTAB Prices)

J Rococoko $5.50
S Sivivatu $5.50
D Howlett $8.00

And this is where I think the bookies have got it wrong. Howlett is the outsider of the three I presume because up until recently he has not been flavour of the month with the AB selectors. The key words there are “until recently” – Howlett’s 2007 form is definitely an improvement on his past couple of seasons and his selection for the final Tri-Nations game leads me to suspect he is now the first choice No. 14. It helps the other two wingers in the Squad are principally No. 11’s. Basically, unless Howlett gets an attack of the dropsies I expect he’ll be wearing 14 more often than not.

With 4 pool games, there are 8 selection spots for the wingers and my expectation are they’ll be shared 3-3-2. From the quarters on, the third-choice winger won’t even be in the match-day 22. So assuming a finals appearance it is possible two of the AB wingers will play 6 games and the other only 2.

I have been known to be wrong in the past, but it is my opinion Howlett is the number one right winger, I think Sivivatu will be warming the bench more than the others, so I think $8 is a reasonable price in this market. For the record, I got $13.50 at Betfair and I’ll be looking for more at anything over $10. You may want to wait until the team (expected to be the top XV) is named for the opening game against Italy, but that runs the risk of the bookies cutting the price when they wake up.

Yes, there are wingers in other teams apart from New Zealand – but traditionally the ABs score the most tries in the tournament and I don’t expect that to change this time around. Of the other teams, the French are next in line to consider but only the world’s best psychic will have any clues about Laporte’s selection policy. But their outside backs are all are at tasty prices.

While there are inherent risks in this market (e.g. an unusually defence-dominated tournament may see some dirt-tracker at the top of the list), $8 is a reasonable price in my opinion - $13.50 definitely so.

EDIT 11.50 a.m.

Yes, I forgot to mention the NZTAB has a top tryscorer market for New Zealand players, with Joe and Sivi at $3.75, and Doug at $5. If you're worried about some French garlic-munching winger scoring a truckload against Namibia and Georgia, there's worse bets around than backing Howlett at 5's in this market.

RWC Betting Preview (Chapter One)

A major sporting tournament comes along, such as the Rugby World Cup, and bookies start salivating at the mouth. They know it’s a prime time to knick some money off Mum and Dad punter who only bet on special occasions, or where the more regular recreational gambler puts a little bit more money into his betting account. It’s Melbourne Cup day for 6 weeks.

If you go to (for example) the NZTAB’s website, you can see a myriad of options pertaining to the tournament – from who will win it, who’ll win the Pools, when some of the big teams will be eliminated, who will be the tournament’s top tryscorer etc etc. It all gets a bit overwhelming even for a supposed professional such as moi, so I can only assume it must look like a dog’s breakfast to others.

The key trick to major sporting tournaments is to ignore a lot of the markets. Sure, you might miss out on an opportunity, but more often than not you’ll be sucked into having a bad value bet. Let me give you an example. Even though rugby is my No. 2 betting sport, I don’t pretend to know everything that happens in the world of rugby. I wouldn’t have a clue how good Portugal is, who their top 15 players are and thus I can really only make an educated guess as to whether the All Blacks will cover the 110.5 point handicap that is already up at Betfair for their match against the Portuguese. And guessing and betting are not great bedfellows.

One of the golden rules in betting is stick to your knitting. So for a lot of the first month of the tournament, I’ll be sitting on the sidelines. OK, maybe I will back Portugal with the 110.5 point start (I’ll see how the Iberians play in their first match), but only because I know to win a game by that margin is feckin hard. The ABs have only ever done it once.

And so my advice to Joe Public is don’t get sucked into having a bet just for the sake of it. Another fundamental in betting-land is there is always another opportunity around the corner. But I know some of you will be itching to contribute to the profit of the NZ Racing Board, so without further ado here’s some pointers and advice from someone who supposedly knows what he is doing.

TOURNAMENT WINNER

Of course the major interest surrounding a tournament such as RWC is who is going to win the bloody thing. It tends to be the first market everyone looks at and where the most dollars end up going. Already at Betfair over 4 million quid has been wagered, most of it on the All Blacks at prices ranging from $1.38 to $2.60 (yes, the early birds got some value when this market opened up 12 months ago – alas I was not one of them).

This tournament has a dominant favourite and currently you can back NZ at $1.60 at both Betfair and the NZTAB. Interestingly, that $1.60 at our local bookie is one of the highest around – many overseas bookies still have the ABs shorter. Even though NZ has drifted over the last couple of months, the current price is not good value. By comparison, Australia was around $2.75 to win Cricket’s version of the Holy Grail earlier this year.

It is a frequent conundrum in sports betting that the most likely outcome has a price that is too short. The only thing you can do is keep your money in the wallet (or look for value on outsiders – more about that in a mo’). However, if you really want to back NZ to win the World Cup, I’d suggest an alternative method – back them in each knockout game. My prediction of (Betfair) prices from the quarters on goes something like this: v Ireland $1.10; v Australia $1.22; v SAF/France $1.33.

Multiply those three figures and you get $1.78 – yes I could be wrong (not only with the prices, but opponents) but it’s probable you’ll get more bang for your buck that way than sticking it on now in the winner’s market.

So if the All Blacks are too short, there must be value elsewhere, right? Unfortunately due to the bookies profit margin, not necessarily. Current prices for the four main contenders (if you want to back anyone else, be my guest) at NZTAB/Betfair are as follows:

New Zealand $1.60/$1.60
France $6.00/$9.20
South Africa $5.50/$8.40
Australia $8.00/$13.00

At the NZTAB it’s hard to get excited about any of those, while imho France are the most over-priced on the Betfair market (mainly due I think to their so-called Pool of Death). So in essence, if you think NZ are going to end 20 years of heartbreak, it may be worth taking the risk and all-up betting them from the quarter-final onwards. Based on current prices I think the best option is keeping your powder dry.

RWC Preview

Right, the warm-ups are completed, the teams are winging their way over (or in South Africa’s case, going home for 5 days – WTF is all that about?), so it’s time to put the stake in the sand, … well, at the TAB at least.

I’m not going to get the Einstein prize for rocket science, but fear not fellow Kiwis, the All Blacks ARE going to win the Rugby World Cup. Probably. From what I’ve seen over the last few months, there are only 2 – OK to be kind to my friends across the ditch - 2.5 realistic contenders to knock the AB’s off Mission Win That Fucking Trophy We Haven’t Had For 20 Years.

Do not argue – the facts are NZ are Numero Uno in rugby union, have been for some time and they’ve lost F.A. matches in the past 4 years. But (and this is a big but, a Serena Williams butt if you like – gawd did you see her fall over yesterday on centre court? No? Lucky you), rugby is a complex sport and combined with a knockout tournament structure New Zealand is not a put your mortgage on them betting proposition. In fact, the RWC is a shit avenue for betting but more about that another time. Let’s get back to the teams.

After NZ, you can really only count South Africa, France and maybe Australia as genuine possible winners. The main argument against other teams such as Wales, England and Ireland winning is while they have the ability (actually, ability is the wrong word, potential is more like it) to knock over one of the big guns, the probability they can do that three times in a row is entering the territory of fat pink things flying past your window.

Let’s get rid of the Breast Brigade first. Diggers, you’ve won your game against us this year. Lightning doesn’t strike twice. If you get to the semis, prepare for an arse-whipping of 1970’s proportions.

Which leaves two teams to be worried about – the Frogs and the Boks. Thankfully we’ll probably not meet either of them until the final, and currently I’m more worried about the hosts than the Saffers. Their warm-up games have been a bit like the ABs through June and July – not setting the earth on fire but winning games comfortably enough without looking like they’re digging deep. The one thing I have been impressed with them is their defence – remember when France C came out here earlier this year they weren’t missing many tackles?; well, their A and B teams don’t miss many either. In three warm-up games they gave up one try – admittedly two of those games were against a clueless (on attack) England, but nevertheless impressive. The Frogs also have good depth in their squad with perhaps their only (slight) weakness being having quality back-up grunt in the engine room.

The only nagging doubt I have about the French is lining up northern hemisphere form against that from south of the Equator. The SAF-Scotland game is the only form guide available since a full-strength NZ team went to Europe 12 months ago. And that game is a glass half-empty half-full kinda thing – the Saffers won comfortably enough but if you take out the three-try burst in the first half, South Africa only won 6-3 in 74 minutes of rugby.

One of my fears some time ago was NZ would have a series of too-easy pool games before meeting a fired up Irish in the quarters. Funny how things change – the Scots and the Italians will both give us a reasonable game and the scoreline will be closer than most people will expect, while the Irish look rudderless without their talismanic captain. That fear has now been erased and I really do feel the planets are aligning well for the Kiwis.

The RWC is not known for producing upset results. If the quarters aren’t NZ-Ireland, France-Scotland, South Africa-Wales and Australia-England, I’ll be surprised. Ditto for the semis where we can expect NZ-Oz and Frog-Boks. And that, my 4 regular readers, is when it will be time to turn the TV on. For all the dross that the tournament will serve up in the first month, there will be two monumental games to round it off – the Fra-SAF semi and the winners of that against the ABs in the final. And while I’d say on the balance of probabilties NZ will beat France (or SAF) in the final, it’s a knockout tournament and at the end of the day it will come down to who can hang onto the ball better and who gets pinged the most by the ref (yes, refereeing is a significant variable to factor into calculations). And also not to lose sight of who is sitting in the stands watching the game injured.

That’s enough entertainment for you lot for one day. I’ll knock up a betting guide in a few days.

Lack of ...

motivation to post. In fact, the time has come to knock this blog on the head me thinks. I'll be back in a week or so with a preview of RWC for betting, and then that'll be it. In the menatime, the match to watch this weekend is Scotland v South Africa - I have a sneaky suspicion Scotland may be just a little better than most people are expecting for the RWC (although they field a slightly weaker lineup than the one that took on the Irish), while the second-stringers for SAF can't have had much sleep on the plane judging by their performance against Connacht. Hopefully their first XV will have their minds on the job. In any case, it's the most interesting of the warm-up games period and the one and only chance we get to see a north v south match-up.

How Low Can It Go?

Although the Rugby World Cup is still 4 months away, there has been tremendous activity on the winner's market at Betfair where the general consensus is some large punter has been dripfeeding a monstrous bet on the All Blacks to win. Already over 2 million quid has been matched, although this is a slightly misleading figure - pulling up the amount bet on the ABs you see about 900,000 pounds has been wagered on NZ to win at prices ranging from 1.39 to 1.43.

Exactly who has been doing this is of course a mystery, although one candidate is larger than life UK punter Harry Findlay who has already publicly advised to mortgage your house and put it on the All Blacks. The interesting point about these bets is they were been placed around the 1.40 mark at a time where most bookmakers still had NZ to win RWC at around 1.50. It's not often that a price on Betfair is shorter than what is freely available at bookmakers, but understandable if a large punter is wanting to get set as bookmakers get nervous accepting a 900 pound bet, let alone a six figure one. Recently the bookmakers have fallen into line, most now offer NZ at 1.40 (including the NZ TAB).

While there is no argument that the All Blacks deserve to be warm favourites to win the William Webb Ellis trophy, the question on most people's lips is what will happen to their price between now and September? There have been many people, myself included, getting involved in the winner's market as NZ's price has freefalled from 2.25 when the market opened to it's current level of 1.40.

The logic goes like this - 1.40 to win RWC represents an average price of about 1.12 to win the quarter, semi and final, with the group thrown in for free. While NZ does have an easy group and will be unbackable to qualify from it, on current form they will probably face Ireland, Australia and one of France/South Africa in the knockout stages. Will they really be an average of 1.12 to win these matches?

To cut a long post short, 1.40 represents IMHO incredibly poor value and there are some of us who are quite happy to provide such a price at this stage. There is not much downside (surely the price cannot go much lower) and a Tri Nations loss or an injury to Dan Carter or Richie McCaw will probably see the ABs on the drift. But not as much as people think - with the large amount already wagered, there will be a long queue wanting to back the ABs on any price drift.

Finally some advice to anyone wanting to back NZ to win RWC - WAIT! There is a high probability you will be able to get a better price sometime between now and September; anyone taking 1.40 four months out needs serious help.

Betfair Prices to win RWC at 1 May 2007:

New Zealand 1.40
South Africa 13.0
France 13.5
Australia 19
Ireland 21
England 38
Wales 95
Argentina 110
Scotland and Italy 550
All Others 1000