Roman_K said:
Or, you could look at the Boks being more prepared, both physically and mentally.
Jason, agree.
Pfaff! What a pair of defeatist turncoats you two are!
When it comes to rugby, we never need to be taken down a notch on anything, ever. I say thrash everyone all the time then humiliate them with lofty and condescending advice on how they can do better.
Arrogance is what makes the All Black's the greatest winning international team bar none, it's worth six points before we even kick off.
Because we are in such a pickle with obvious lack of depth due to injuries and a poor performing options at first five just now we are blind to glaring deficiencies of the other teams in the Tri-Nations.
The Lion's would have lost to all the Tri-Nations countries. The Bok's worked their "A" team to a frenzied peak for the first two tests and the Lion's series showed they've got zero depth on the bench. De Villiers is not a coach, and he is up against to two REALLY good coaches in Henry and Deans. Remember, the Bull's players also peaked when won the Super 14. A lot of them will be carrying injuries/running on empty by the tri-series, and like I said - there isn't much on the bench.
Despite all the cocky Aussie hype, they are only strong in a few positions and they've got a lot of "pick and hope" still going on in selection. One or two injuries and a bit of pressure and they'll fall apart. I think they might just shade the All Black's, but only because I tend to think that Henry out thought a rookie (at international level) Deans last year and this it is Dean's turn.
Remember, of the three teams on display in the early matches the All Blacks are the ones who have the most scope for large improvements. Our weakest position is first five but McAlistair is an outsanding and proven international player, his early All Black form is a startling indicator of how low the standard is in British club rugby, not of how poor he has become. He'll improve HEAPS.