It is exactly 100 days until the first ball of the 2015 Rugby World Cup will be kicked at Twickenham, so it seems as good at time as ever for a progress report on how the main protagonists are shaping up. Here’s what’s going on with the top ten teams in the world (as per World Rugby rankings):
1. NEW ZEALAND
Reasons to be optimistic
They’re the holders, they’ve been consistently the best side between the 2011 World Cup and now, showing no signs of their performance levels dropping away. In fact, they’ve lost just twice since that tournament, an incredible win rate. They have unparalleled strength in depth in almost all positions and their franchises have dominated Super Rugby again this year. Simply put, there’s a good reason why they are top of the World Rankings by some distance.
Causes for concern
A few of their key figures for the past decade – Richie McCaw and Dan Carter most notably – are arguably not the form choices in their positions. It throws up the dilemma of whether to pick them on reputation, which they likely will given the aura and experience they bring to the unique battlefield that is the World Cup. Other than that, the fact they’ve failed to win the thing on foreign soil despite heading into almost every tournament as favourites is a spectre that still hangs over them. Oh, and France.
2. SOUTH AFRICA
Reasons to be optimistic
They’ve won a World Cup in the Northern Hemisphere before, winning the 2007 instalment in France. They have far and away the most physical pack in the world and have powerful scrummagers coming out of their ears. Add to that a core of immense experience – there are feasibly 11 players who won that title in 2007 that could feature in their squad this year – and you have a recipe for a side that will be there or thereabouts come the business end.
Causes for concern
Similar to New Zealand, several of their bigger names haven’t been firing on all cylinders recently – most notably the du Plessis brothers have been struggling with both discipline and form, while Frans Steyn has had little game time recently due to a combination of both those things. Captain Jean de Villiers has missed the entire season through injury, all of which gives Heyneke Meyer some real selection headaches.
3. IRELAND
Reasons to be optimistic
Aside from New Zealand, they have been the form international side over the past couple of seasons. The Joe Schmidt project is in full swing and it has brought them back to back Six Nations titles and some impressive wins over Southern Hemisphere giants to boot. The last time they played New Zealand they were an extra time conversion away from beating them, too, so they will fear nobody. They’re fourth favourites (7/1) for the tournament with bookies Paddy Power which reflects the fact they can no longer really be considered dark horses.
Causes for concern
They’ve a terrible record at the World Cup, having never progressed beyond the quarter-finals and only made the knockout stages twice since 1995. While none of the players will be that bothered by that fact, the media will continue to mention it and it’s the sort of thing that can pop into the head at the wrong moment. They’ve also not got the levels of depth in some positions that other top nations have, most notably the midfield.
4. ENGLAND
Reasons to be optimistic
They’re the hosts and will have immeasurable support across the country, and do not discount how important it is that they will be playing every single one of their big games at Twickenham. In their current guise under Stuart Lancaster they have beaten every side bar South Africa there, and will run out without fear. They have one of the best packs around and in their Bath contingent, the backs that have been playing rugby that has been high on both aesthetics and efficacy.
Causes for concern
Just as it did in 2011 (in fact, even earlier than in that campaign) discipline is becoming a bit of an issue, both on and off the pitch, with several important players making the headlines for the wrong reasons. Stuart Lancaster has thus far been quick to condemn and banish those responsible, but it must be a real worry that this sort of thing has happened frequently, so close to the biggest tournament for English rugby for some time. Add in their pool of death and it’s really a make or break time for Lancaster.
5. WALES
Reasons to be optimistic
Wales were one of the great success stories of the 2011 tournament, narrowly missing out on the final. Upwards of 15 guys that performed so well in New Zealand that year will make the squad this time, and will likely form the backbone of a side that has trotted out consistently since then. They have a decent record at Twickenham, where they will play what could be the make or break game of the pool against England, having won there as recently as 2012. In Warren Gatland they have a gnarled coach who knows exactly how to get the best out of this group of players.
Causes for concern
They are stuck in the group of death and their recent record against Australia, one of the three who will fight to get out of it, is terrible – they’ve somehow managed to lose their last ten against the Wallabies. They’ve also the odd injury concern and in several positions the back-up just isn’t of the quality, or experience, of those front line players.
6. AUSTRALIA
Reasons to be optimistic
They’ve got some of the best broken-field runners in the world, and the likes of Foley, Folau, Beale and Ashley-Cooper are all seemingly hitting form at the right time for the Waratahs. When you add in the likes of Toomua, Kuridrani, Genia, Cooper and others, you begin to realise just how many quality backs the Wallabies possess. Their favourable record against Wales will give them hope of emerging from their pool, although they’ve not beaten England at Twickenham at the last couple times of asking so could face a tough knockout draw if they do qualify.
Causes for concern
As always, these will centre on their forwards. They are not the meek scrummaging unit that they used to be – the new laws have deprived them of the opportunity to ‘chase the hit’ and meant they have had to actually learn how to do set pieces – but their pack does not strike fear into the heart of anyone. They’ve also got plenty of players capable of a disciplinary brain fart or two, although since taking over Maichael Cheika seems to have largely brought that under control.
7. FRANCE
Reasons to be optimistic
They seem to save their best for the World Cups; or, if that’s not strictly true, they seem to have developed a handy knack for negotiating their way to the latter stages of the tournament. Amazingly, France have only once finished outside of the top four at a World Cup, way back in 1995. That is a proud history and whatever the issues that the team appears to have at the moment, they won’t want to break that run.
Causes for concern
Being honest, the French national side is in a real state of disrepair. They’ve finished fourth in the last three Six Nations which, given the quality at their disposal, isn’t really acceptable. Philippe Saint-André’s selection policy has been at best inconsistent and at worst utterly baffling, which has left them in a situation where they are unsure of what their best combinations are in most key areas.
8. ARGENTINA
Reasons to be optimistic
They’ve done the business at the World Cup before, enjoying their break out year in 2007 when they finished third, beating hosts France twice in the process. They’ve also been dealt a pretty friendly hand with their draw – they won’t expect to beat New Zealand but they should be confident of finishing second in a pool whose only other real challenge will come from Tonga. As ever, their pack will go toe to toe with the best.
Causes for concern
Since that 2007 revelatory tournament, things haven’t really kicked on as they might have liked. A Super Rugby franchise and most of their top players returning home should help with that next season, but for now their top players remain scattered all over the globe and it makes coherence hard to come by.
9. SAMOA
Reasons to be optimistic
They’ve some of the most gifted athletes in the world in terms of physical stature and know how to use them. Although there is still a long way to go, they are starting to feature in more fixtures with tier one nations (frankly given their presence in the top 10, the tiering system probably needs a review). Similarly, although their union still seems pretty poor when it comes to organisation, they will likely come into this tournament better prepared than they have in the past.
Causes for concern
The scandal surrounding players being paid extra not to go to the World Cup has shocked everyone and while the majority of their top players should be there, it’s clear all is not well within Samoan Rugby. That sort of unease can easily permeate performances. In terms of areas of weakness, it has always been in the half-backs – specifically finding ones that can manage a game and kick goals consistently – that has let the Pacific Islanders down.
10. SCOTLAND
Reasons to be optimistic
In Vern Cotter they have a world class coach and in their contingent of Glasgow Warriors players the bulk of the squad has experience winning a major trophy; the first in many years for a Scottish side. They have a host of young, exciting players that have taken the PRO12 by storm and have the ability to actually play some good rugby – Scotland’s backs are far from the one dimensional unit that they used to be (the days of Dan Parks and Graeme Morrison were not as long ago as you might think).
Causes for concern
Most of the above was true going into the Six Nations, when there was real optimism surrounding the Scotland team for the first time in many years. They ended up whitewashed, firmly at the bottom of the table. The Vern Cotter regime is still very much in its infancy and things behind the scenes are far from settled. In a group that also contains South Africa and Samoa they will do well to qualify; 2019 is a more realistic goal for this young group of players.
By Jamie Hosie
Follow Jamie on Twitter: @jhosie43
Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images
As you know by now, we are hilarious, and you should be following us on Facebook and Twitter. 
I don’t hold with the idea that discipline is a concern for England. If a few months ago you were asked to pick three guys that might cause a problem, it would be Hartley, Manu and Cips (passing judgement too early in his case). It’s a matter of two/three individuals letting themselves down and not reflective of the squad. The silver lining here is that concerns about behaviour largely dissipate with them out of the picture.
Cue dwarf tossing in Soho and leaps into the Thames from the rest of them…
JK
But wasn’t this the same in 2011? Only a few, tarnished so many, with so little.
Everyone was looking for a scapegoat in NZ & Johnno was the, er, Johnny on the spot. His record is little different from that of Lancaster’s, as you must know.
Because a couple of guys got elephant’s & tossed a dwarf or 2 (ought to be banned as prejudicial btw) & the previously snow white Tinders went face down into a sheila’s bosom (unlucky bosom I say) & oh, Tui jumped into the drink (after England went out!), it was all MJ’s fault as he didn’t discipline the troops. Cods wallop! Lancs has disciplined the troops (has he? they don’t all seem to be listening then) & has lost 6 in a row v the SH!? Hello!
Is this simply a case of beggered if you do, beggered if you don’t, I wonder?
Playing better footy, with a discernable pattern & picking the best players might be a good idea too don’t you think?
I don’t think that was the problem at all Don P.
Martin Johnson bottled it with his selection. He had a good record (not great, but ok) as England coach. Beating Australia home and away; winning a 6 nations title in the WC year.
His issue was that he got the the WC and changed all the good he had done. Toby Flood lead England to those wins, then got shifted to 12 and dropped in favour of Wilko. Thompson came in for Harley despite him playing so well at the time. Stevens, Deacon came into the side etc etc.
Essentially, he built for a few years, then as soon as we lost (quite miserably) away to Ireland at the end of the 6 nations in 2011 he caved to media pressure.
SL’s record is very similar to Johnsons, albeit SL having a slightly better record, but more importantly he commands a respect from the squad that I don’t think ever existed under MJ. Strange really considering the playing career that MJ had – I think realistically he was still looked at my many as their mate; not their head coach.
Jacob
This is your opinion of Johhno’s caving.
Lancs has also chopped his back line about.12trees & Barritt were seemingly the anointed ones, or Tui?, only for his ‘stumbling’ upon Joseph & Burrell to replace them. Also Ford for Farrell. He’s too experimented with 1 offs @ wing like Roko & Tui. He’s talked of his missing ‘Lions’, like Croft & Corbs, only to not play them.
Surely there parrallells here with Johhno?
And the bottom line is results.
Point taken Don but I honestly don’t think we’ll need to worry about the same level of distraction if only because the players will be so aware of themselves being at home. In 2011 there was almost a ‘lads on tour’ feel to things that got out of hand. Of the remaining squad, Ashton is unlikely to remain and Hask is now upstanding captain material, so no danger! Also like to think that Rowntree will ear them to death if they get out of line.
JK
Well, as alluded to elsewhere, surely there already IS distraction with indiscipline… & the WC hasn’t kicked off yet!
It’s always seemed to me that Johnno was unduly scapegoated for England’s going out in 2011.
And given that his & Lancaster’s records are similar, as are their conservative (&/or indecisive?) style of playing the game, surely this encapsulate a wider issue for England with the RFU’s picking their ‘type’ in the 1st place.
Johnno had NO managerial exp & had been out of the game for 5 yrs. Lancaster had no appreciable track record either @ Int’al level.
Because the latter swept out the old (whether they merited it or not) & talked ‘pride in the jersey’ etc shouldn’t fool anyone.
Don’t blame Lancaster for initially picking guys like 12trees, Barritt or Tui, for instance, but if they can’t cut it for whatever reason, what are they still doing hanging around after near 4 yrs? And what exactly is England’s ‘style’ anyway? Do his team’s skills match that of those of the SH, even S15? Aren’t these issues that should be of as much as, or more than, concern for discipline?
Discipline & pride are necessary of course, but more than than is needed to win a WC & that’s what’s at stake here.
I just don’t see an appreciable difference between Johnno & Lancaster as the only real determining factor, their track records, is razor thin.
As hosts England will have countrywide WC support, but will it be enough to win the thing?
And as Lancaster’s record ought to be of at least some concern for England, what price this ‘Rugby World Cup Progress Report’ then?
… than discipline?
You’re branching off from my point Don, which was simply that the prime suspects, those likely to get themselves into trouble irrespective of the general spirit/attitude of the squad and arguably beyond help, have weeded themselves out.
Ignoring 2011, albeit we have two of the same culprits, and putting aside any comparison to Johnno, we should be going into camp with a relatively clean sheet and without the more combustible characters who could pick a fight with a mirror. That alone clearly won’t win us a world cup but it’s a start.
Not sure what my point had to do with SL picking 12T etc. Although while we’re on it I’ll have a major gripe if he makes it into the 31.
JK
So indeed the ‘beyond help, have weeded themselves out’.
I suppose my thought on that is that Lancaster knew of their history & may have acted sooner rather than waited until the 11th hr for it to sort itself out? I see SOME culpability here.
Either that, or he could have given these guys some/extra anger management treatment. Maybe he did, who knows?
Either way, England have been deprived of some people who might have benefited a squad already depleted by the exclusion of 2 Euro Players of the Yr. If Cip also gets dished, potentially that’s 1/4 of a team. Plus, in the latter’s case, IMO he’s (was?) the only ‘skilled’ player likely to replace Ford if the latter gets injured.
Regds ‘… my point had to do with SL picking 12T etc’, maybe I was ‘branching’ & had read too much into yr initial statement in respect of ‘ dwarf tossing’?
Took it as criticism of Johhno… & you’ve had my views on that for free! What a waste of effort!
Surely Don, you state a fundamental difference between 2011 and now? That is, precisely the issue of discipline. Because of Lancasters actions, the players know that now this behaviour will not be tolerated.
This was not the case in 2011.
The fact that some players have transgressed simply reinforces this point because they have been disciplined in a manner which was not done, or expected under the previous regime.
Blub
‘Because of Lancasters actions, the players know that now this behaviour will not be tolerated’.
But Lancaster’s ‘discipline’ ISN’T working. He’s picking the wrong guys with previous & is inviting trouble, surely lacking foresight.
In any event, his record speaks for itself. In terms of comparison with Johnno’s & it stacks up too closely.
Hey Don, what does this mean?
“But Lancaster’s ‘discipline’ ISN’T working. He’s picking the wrong guys with previous & is inviting trouble, surely lacking foresight.”
What makes you say that his discipline is not working? How can you measure this? You think England would have won the 6 Nations if, er, he had been less disciplined?
How has he invited trouble? Are you trying to link picking Easter, and Cipriani, (someone else also?)and this being the reason for some kind of comparative measure with teams under Johnson’s leadership?
Blub
You’re having another of your giraffes. You KNOW what I mean ol’ bean.
You’re suggesting Lancaster’s discipline is working with 2 just chucked out right before the biggest event for 4 yrs… & after only almost 4 yrs of pep talks on er, discipline?! Pretty funny I guess. That’s def worth a larf.
An even funnier 1. Bring back Johnno I say. His & Lanc’s track & dis records are almost identical! That’s a ‘non nuanced nonsense’ fact.
Ta, tah.
Really Don, it doesn’t make sense.
You are linking a concept with a result and pretending that they are linked, when common sense would suggest otherwise. Ah – common-sense – I should have known better…
Ho hum Blub…. z z z z z z z z z z z z z z!
I’m disappointed & have eventually become bored with your attention seeking antics & seeming use of this site as a platform for your ostentatious verbal gymnastics.
What this all has to do with rugby I can’t say, but do send me a sae & I’ll draw a picture that you can understand.
Or better still, maybe you could go Uni Challenge where the subject isn’t likely to be rugby. Right up your street I’d have thought.
Meantime you’ll have to grab your attention from elsewhere.. some Greek Sophist or other obscurantist, obfuscator, nit-picker or hair-splitter
perhaps?
Whether they’ll have any common is another matter of course.
England just are not good enough to beat NZ and SA
For Ireland, if we can’t keep Sexton fit then we potentially are going home early, very early. When he is on the field and playing well the rest of Ireland’s significant talent really fires. Without him and we are less than convincing. History has some bearing but think Schmidt is too smart to let that get in the way.
For South Africa, the veterans of 2011 are unlikely to win them the Cup. It’s the supporting cast South Africa will need to provide to the new generation of Vermeulen, Etzebeth and Le Roux that will be the biggest determinant of how well they do. Plenty of talent but in some key positions a lack of big game experience.
Wales and Australia will be the dark horses. France will do something special but probably only once England will either amaze us all or the sheer psychological pressure of performing on the world’s biggest stage at home in front of the Twickenham faithful could all end up being too much for them.
All things being said let’s hope we’re in for an incredible six weeks!
In the telegraph is a pick your squad article – you need to choose your final 31 and I ended up with Goode in my squad! What has happened to me! Is there a plan for something similar on here Jamie?
Jamie states that among ‘Causes for concern’ regarding NZ is the fact that ‘ A few key figures’…, like ‘McCaw and Carter are arguably not the form choices in their positions’.
Well if these 2 aren’t up to it, then they won’t play. Likely Barritt & perhaps Cane will. NZ, though, is unlikely to see this ‘issue’ as a ‘dilemma’ in picking them or not. As you’re only as good as your last game/s, then ‘rep’ is unlikely to come into it.
But psychologically, McCaw’s and Carter’s ‘aura’ will, surely, initially at least, have some impact on the oppo. NZ has deliberately gone for exp in the ‘unique battlefield that is the World Cup’. My take on this is that obviously these ‘vets’ are less likely to fold than ‘young guns’ when the hair dryer’s turned up. Wasn’t this evidenced in Dublin last time when they keep discipline & shape until they prevailed & who but ‘over the hill’ Ritchie scored at Twickers not so long ago?
Besides they have plenty of ‘youth’ in guys like Retallic, Whitelock, Read, Franks, Savea, Arron Smith, Dagg & so on.
Whilst it’s true that, NZ have ‘failed to win the thing on foreign soil despite heading into almost every tournament as favourites’ (so far), is it really ‘a spectre that still hangs over them’? To paraphrase Joe Schmidt, ‘This is a distraction’. And anyway, weren’t there similar, throwaway (Campese copy cat like) ‘choker’ comments made until NZ won the last Cup? Don’t hear them so often now.
‘Oh, and France’. The oldest 1 since, ‘Your cheques in the post’? Well, NZ also put France out of 2 WC finals… but that’s all history now & again, a distraction.
It’s what happens on the day & there re no guarantees that anyone will win the competition, NZ included, but they must have at least as good a shout as anyone else.
However, I perceive it could be other outside issues, like cards, TMO or ref calls that could turn tight games, rather than ’causes for concern’ mentioned in this article.
We’ll see.
Don p
I rarely comment on others perceived ideas of commentators but surely you must look at some things you write and question whether it was the right thing or not?
I actually completely agree with your earlier post to JK and often find logic in your arguments but too often they are somewhat vitriolic for me, you bait people like Brighty who only express opinion like yourself.
Please continue to post as I like the view you bring from the other side of the pond but it would be so much nicer if you could do so with slightly more regard for other opinion
Stu
Regds Stu
I could likely respond better about ‘baiting’ & ‘vitriol’ if you gave specific e.g.s. From time to time I find comments similar to yours a bit too general.
Everyone is entitled to opinion in an open forum such as this. However, I see sometimes statements as being ‘big headed’ or attention seeking by some. If statements are made, then they ought to be backed up by something factual, or specific reasons, IMO. I don’t always find this to be the case, so I do at times query these.
In respect of Brighty. We’ve had some history, although I thought we’d kind of buried the hatchet… & not necessarily in each other’s heads?