Tweet
Waow, I have to remember to look at this thread everyday, look at it every second day and you are good for a one hour read before replying.
I will try to reply to everybody's posts before Finbar filter is released.
LDiCesare : the first half was really bad and you have summed up the game appropriately. But I don't agree on all of the issues of your post. First of all, it is clear the Argentinans were the most eager to win this match, some of the french players seemed reluctant to "fight" in order to win it. Yes, the french have been very clumsy but they also proved themselves lacking of of a clear mind. As far as I can remember two tries have been scored after an interception by an Argentinan player. In my opinion, it means the french game was too predictable.
Another important factor is that, at the time of the test match, our Championship was only finished since a week. The players haven't worked together enough and some of the players are tired. This is in no way an excuse but it can explain why some players have played far under their real level.
Havak : you're right, I was talking about the wrong game between our favorite teams. As far as I can remember, all the matches between the Tigers and the Stade have been great rugby games (I'am not sure but I think I've seen Dean Richards playing in Toulouse, also a legend in France...) .
About rolling mauls, you know they are an important part of the game especially in France (Biarritz players have been feared for this all along this season) and can be a strong weapon. How to stop a rolling maul, the defense has to commit more men to the maul, the attacking forwards have the advantage of the move and don't have to add players. Ideally, the defense has a choice, resisting the pressure by adding men and thus creating a hole in its defending line (which is one of the goals of the maul), letting the maul rolls and going back (only if the attackers are far from your try line) or crumbling the maul which is rightfully sanctionned by a penalty. In France, many rolling mauls are followed by an attack launched by the backs, and when this attack is well executed it can make for a really beautiful try. Yes, as Finbar told it, this is one of the great sight of Rugby.
More generally, I would say the perfect game is one in which I can see a great fight forward (we should rather look at England and France for scrums), a creative pair of half-scrum and half-back (Wilkinson, Gregan, Galthié, Larkham) and enterprising backs. This game should also be well balanced between attack and defense. I think we agree that such a game can only arise if a good referee is in charge of the game and if he is neither too lenient neither too severe.
This season, I've seen some matches that have been mostly played forward and nevertheless very entertaining. I guess this is a matter of taste and culture.
Caligastia : I agree with you when you write some matches can be boring when the game is limited to skullbashing. This year I've seen few SH matches (and I regret it) and some of them were boring mainly because the two teams were clumsy and their players uninspired, in this case I have seen many, many mauls and mishandled spontaneous scrums. But the fact the game has been played forward is not to be blamed, the players seemed unable to do something else. I'am convinced the game forward is only boring when the players are uninspired, that is when this game form is considered as an end in itself, which should not be.
Some matches were equally uninteresting because I had the feeling to see a Thirteen player game played by fifteen rugbymen : pass - run - block - pass - run - block - maul - pass - run - block... is there someone playing rugby here ?
By the way, do you remember the block is forbidden by the rules ? The block has deeply changed the nature of the defenses and has became so important the tackle is almost disappearing (and a good tackle, down to the knees, is really a beautiful sight).
About the All Blacks name, yes it is a typo. During a controversial tour in South Africa, at the time of the apartheid, the NZ team was so impressive a South African journalist claimed "they are all backs". The South African personal secretary charged to type the text did not understood what the journalist was talking about, she thought it was a mistake and typed "they are all blacks"...
Unfortunately, I won't have the opportunity to watch the Tri-Nations this year, my access to the appropriate private channel is momentarily disrupted.
I will have to rely on the written press and your (biased) comments.
I will try to reply to everybody's posts before Finbar filter is released.
LDiCesare : the first half was really bad and you have summed up the game appropriately. But I don't agree on all of the issues of your post. First of all, it is clear the Argentinans were the most eager to win this match, some of the french players seemed reluctant to "fight" in order to win it. Yes, the french have been very clumsy but they also proved themselves lacking of of a clear mind. As far as I can remember two tries have been scored after an interception by an Argentinan player. In my opinion, it means the french game was too predictable.
Another important factor is that, at the time of the test match, our Championship was only finished since a week. The players haven't worked together enough and some of the players are tired. This is in no way an excuse but it can explain why some players have played far under their real level.
Havak : you're right, I was talking about the wrong game between our favorite teams. As far as I can remember, all the matches between the Tigers and the Stade have been great rugby games (I'am not sure but I think I've seen Dean Richards playing in Toulouse, also a legend in France...) .
About rolling mauls, you know they are an important part of the game especially in France (Biarritz players have been feared for this all along this season) and can be a strong weapon. How to stop a rolling maul, the defense has to commit more men to the maul, the attacking forwards have the advantage of the move and don't have to add players. Ideally, the defense has a choice, resisting the pressure by adding men and thus creating a hole in its defending line (which is one of the goals of the maul), letting the maul rolls and going back (only if the attackers are far from your try line) or crumbling the maul which is rightfully sanctionned by a penalty. In France, many rolling mauls are followed by an attack launched by the backs, and when this attack is well executed it can make for a really beautiful try. Yes, as Finbar told it, this is one of the great sight of Rugby.
More generally, I would say the perfect game is one in which I can see a great fight forward (we should rather look at England and France for scrums), a creative pair of half-scrum and half-back (Wilkinson, Gregan, Galthié, Larkham) and enterprising backs. This game should also be well balanced between attack and defense. I think we agree that such a game can only arise if a good referee is in charge of the game and if he is neither too lenient neither too severe.
This season, I've seen some matches that have been mostly played forward and nevertheless very entertaining. I guess this is a matter of taste and culture.
Caligastia : I agree with you when you write some matches can be boring when the game is limited to skullbashing. This year I've seen few SH matches (and I regret it) and some of them were boring mainly because the two teams were clumsy and their players uninspired, in this case I have seen many, many mauls and mishandled spontaneous scrums. But the fact the game has been played forward is not to be blamed, the players seemed unable to do something else. I'am convinced the game forward is only boring when the players are uninspired, that is when this game form is considered as an end in itself, which should not be.
Some matches were equally uninteresting because I had the feeling to see a Thirteen player game played by fifteen rugbymen : pass - run - block - pass - run - block - maul - pass - run - block... is there someone playing rugby here ?
By the way, do you remember the block is forbidden by the rules ? The block has deeply changed the nature of the defenses and has became so important the tackle is almost disappearing (and a good tackle, down to the knees, is really a beautiful sight).
About the All Blacks name, yes it is a typo. During a controversial tour in South Africa, at the time of the apartheid, the NZ team was so impressive a South African journalist claimed "they are all backs". The South African personal secretary charged to type the text did not understood what the journalist was talking about, she thought it was a mistake and typed "they are all blacks"...
Unfortunately, I won't have the opportunity to watch the Tri-Nations this year, my access to the appropriate private channel is momentarily disrupted.
I will have to rely on the written press and your (biased) comments.
Comment