You havent suggested any facts, you have simply said we are much closer.

The facts themselves suggest we arent.

I'm assuming you've ignored the times in the recent past when we have beaten France/NZ/OZ, and imagined some times where France have beaten us/Oz/NZ? Don't remember us losing to Wales recently either.

But hey, go with what you like (which seems to be that actually beating teams, or losing to them by smaller margins, doesn't suggest you're any more competitive than not beating them and losing by whopping margins).

Do you mean whopping margins like 46-16, 52-4, 44-4, 64-10 and 42-6.

We have beaten Australia more than France have beaten us, because we play Australia more than we play France. We have lost 85% of our last 20 matches against Australia, you cant get much worse.

Are you really trying to tell us that if we played France as much as Australia they'd beat us? I don't.
Who was the last team we lost to that wasn't Australia or New Zealand?


You can. 100% of the last 20 years of matches.

england have played france far more times (about twice asmany in fact) than england has played australia



technically speaking of course

Still doesn't change that 'All Star' matches should be in addition to the international programme, not replacing them. As far as I'm concerned, England should have annual games against France and Wales at the very least and also alternate between playing against Ireland and Scotland in that time.

And you say you arent arrogant or disrespectful to France

why just the last two years? and Why ignore the 34-12 result?

You are comparing 2 friendlies 60-6 and 66-12 then ignoring the last friendly that England played against Australia which finished 64-10.

Oh btw and France havent lost 100% of their last 20 matches against us

How far back do you want to go to make a decision as to whether the current French team are providing decent competition for the current England team? What have results from years ago got to do with the decision as to how best to prepare an England team in 2011?



You are missing the obvious conclusion here - did Australia continue to play mid season friendlies against England after that friendly result or did everyone decide that it was pointless?

Nobody is saying France can't play in competitions they qualify for, just that these friendlies are as pointless as the one you refer to, which was never repeated.



I didn't say they had.

So you think if it was announced that the England football team would be playing a one off game (maybe to become a regular fixture) against a brand new side containing the best foreigners that are currently playing in the Premier league no one would be interested?



Yup.

People are right.


You ARE deluded!

I dont know, how far do you want to go back? the 34-12 result was between the two results you quoted

Do Australia continue to play against England? When we were demolished by Australia in 2002 we had an Australian tour in 2003 and the start of the tri-nations (in earnest the 99 tri-nations wasnt really the same format, or regularity) in 2004. What are replacing the game against France with, that includes France? We swapped the friendlies for competitive games, our results were closer, when we have done the same with France the results have been closer. If we follow your logic, why are we casting France out and not bringing them in?

So which time scale was the same timescale if not the same as the timescale which was mentioned?