Rugby - The Game They Play In Heaven II

[LDiCesare]

I couldn't see the end of teh match, but I think I can agree that Scotland would do way better if they had a half-decent lineout. Jackson was indeed much much better than last time.
Lièvremont is saying he feels a bit lost, which is understandable. He says that apart from Bonnaire (and in another note Dusautoir and Clerc), the players didn't play with their guts, but the real issue is this one:

Ils n'assument pas leur propre faute, ni leur propre contre-performance.

They don't assume by their own fault, nor their own counter-performance. This really is the problem. It's as if the players didn't feel concerned with what they did (or didn't do) on the pitch.
There will be changes against Wales, but it's definitely too late and there's no guarantee that they will amount to much if anything. It's particularly irritating when you know some players (Bastareaud, Picamoles...) haven't been selected because the coach thought they didn't have the proper attitude for a professional competitor.

[finbar]

I couldn't see the end of teh match, but I think I can agree that Scotland would do way better if they had a half-decent lineout.

Or someone who can throw. Actually he's usually a bit better than that. They've got the jumpers.

They don't assume by their own fault, nor their own counter-performance. This really is the problem. It's as if the players didn't feel concerned with what they did (or didn't do) on the pitch.

He's saying the French players aren't taking responsibility for their own poor play? Pfffft. That's called shifting the blame. Pick the appropriate players in their best positions for starters, instill confidence, wind them up, let them go. It's not a big stretch to believe that the players have lost all confidence in M'sieur Le Coach.

Whereas the Italians would run through brick walls for Mallett, and not just after yesterday's result. He believes in the players, they believe in him. It's a very tight unit. Hopefully - fingers crossed - Italian rugby politics don't sink Mallett.

[LDiCesare]

Italian rugby politics would have a hard time, I hope, sinking Mallet after this match. The tournament has been relatively good for them this year, losing only to bad luck against Ireland. Against England, Italy was inexistant, but their other matches have been good, and beating France is a feat they managed only once before. Even then, it had been a disguised A-team at the time. Every Italian rugby fan should see that Mallet has done a good work with this team. The new players (Semenzato, Benvenutti) show a lot of promise too, which is great.

As for France, here's the group for the next match. Once again, some decisions are hard to understand:
Chabal, Jauzion, Poitrenaud, Rougerie, Marconnet, Thion are out. Why Poitrenaud who didn't play this match, one can wonder?

Lapandry, Schuster, Papé, Marty, Estebanez and Palisson come back in the group.

Forwards : Servat, Guirado, Ducalcon, Mas, Schuster, Domingo, Papé, Pierre, Nallet, Dusautoir, Harinordoquy, Bonnaire, Lapandry.

Backs : Parra, Tomas, Trinh-Duc, Traille, Marty, Estebanez, Palisson, Médard, Clerc, Huget.

So, the front row won't really change (Marconnet would probably not have begun against any team but Italy). The second row sees Thion out for Papé. I'd question the presence of Pierre myself but whatever. Chabal is finally out, and Lapandry should be a replacement. Scrum and fly half don't change. I know that Trinh-Duc had a hand in both tries but I'm very very unconvinced by his match yesterday. Estebanez is likely the replacements at fly half.
Rougerie is out. Good. He showed his limits both in attack and defense as a center I think. This will make a center pair of Traille/Marty (most likely) or Estenabez/Marty. Marty is not the kind of player who actually passes the ball, but at least he usually is committed and tackles well. Palisson in for Poitrenaud doesn't make much sense. I'd probably have gotten rid of Huget who proved little and get Andreu back who showed commitment every time he played.

[finbar]

Reading M'sieur Le Coach's post-match comments this morning -

The coach apparently spent 15 minutes with his players after the defeat by Italy and while he said he had to bear some responsibility for the loss, he was not prepared to shoulder the entire burden.

"This match was an hallucination. I do not want to clear myself from the blame but they invented things on the pitch," he said. Lievremont said captain Thierry Dusautoir, whom he singled out for praise along with wing Vincent Clerc, felt betrayed by some of his team-mates. "Do you really think that I told them to play as they did against Italy? I was ashamed. I do not have the impression we asked them to walk on the moon. I do not ask for complicated things."

- he really is shifting the blame. So much for harmony in the camp.

[smokecigrate]

I'm not going to argue with a band of atheists in yet another thread.

[LDiCesare]

The French version of his comment says he actually credited Bonnaire, Dusautoir and Clerc. Which, given the match, is something I can about agree with. He also said that the week had been bad, the players attitude hadn't been serious or good. There's a very definite management issue. He expects the players to behave like professionals, they don't, but he's unable to coach them into a proper behaviour. I think I should try guessing the next coach's name right now, but it's not until after the world cup.

[finbar]

The English version had him crediting the three players too. The point, though, is the extraordinary attack on their teammates.

Anyway, your try last week probably puts you in line for M'sieur Le Coach's job.

[Havak]

Jonno's siege mentality can be annoying but he is loyal - arguably far too loyal - to his players. In other words the same kind of personal attack would be unthinkable from martin. He would talk about the teams failings as a unit within the game and might even say "they did not do what I told them" but he wouldn't try to paint himself as the victim in the same way. Frankly this chap makes Laporte look like a genius man manager in comparison?

I missed the Wales game whilst travelling to see friends - a blessing it seems given the Rees wrong ball incident seems to have been the only highlight? And now Ireland are hot favourites for next weekend - which sort of suits me I think. And a large part of me is hoping Italy can get their second win (with apols to kOc) as having Italy and England as the only two 6N teams heading to the RWC in a progessive phase would be interesting?

[finbar]

You missed nothing with Wales -v- Ireland except two teams doing their best to lose to each other. The standout, though, was Paddy Wallace, with nothing left on the clock, with Earls free on his outside with a straight, unstoppable run at the line, the most guaranteed try in the history of tries, and Wallace heads back infield to try to improve the angle of the conversion, straight into the defence, end of story. All of that after the dodgy Welsh try. So Ireland had a gilt-edged chance even after the dodgy try. The bleating is pathetic, really.

If their dudgeon fires them up, they're a chance to roll England, but there's so much wrong with their game at the moment - discipline, tactics, Fitzgerald at full back - that an England prepared to control the breakdowns and produce decent ball, as they didn't against Scotland, should win.

M'sieur Le Coach is losing the plot. Making his predecessor look sane. And that's an achievement.

If Italy turn up they can win. Scotland doesn't have the attacking firepower to wreak havoc.

[LDiCesare]

Yes, Johnson not only wouldn't insult his players publicly, but he certainly can coach their heads so they turn up on the field. I mean even saying the venue in Ireland is the hardest in the NH is sure to have the English motivated. I would certainly not call the Irish favorites.
England showed good rugby in the whole tournament. Their worst performance was against France, who had turned up that day even though they could have been luckier, and they still won. France played quite poorly against Ireland and still beat them. Italy should have beaten Ireland too. Ireland has been poor all this tournament. Their pack is far below the level they used to have, their fullback average, and the scrum/fly half pairs aren't exceptional (O'Gara is good, but Flood is better).

[finbar]

What I can't fathom is the apparently random interchanging of O'Gara and Sexton. Almost as though Kidney has an agreement to give them game time. It's not doing a lot for Sexton's confidence.

[LDiCesare]

I'd keep O'Gara ahead of Sexton personally, he's much better overall even though they have quite different qualities. I think Kidney would like to bring Sexton to the fore but realises he's not up to it, and so he hesitates between them.

Lièvremont has announced his team, bringing Palisson and Marty in. He still talks about not understanding how the players can blunder like they did. He really speaks like someone who has very little analytical skills. Being unable to find the cause of the problems he has to fix won't help much.

[kittenOFchaos]

What I can't fathom is the apparently random interchanging of O'Gara and Sexton. Almost as though Kidney has an agreement to give them game time. It's not doing a lot for Sexton's confidence.

Sexton is lucky to get any game time given how much inferior to O'Gara he is.

O'Gara appeared to have developed a new quality as he ripped the ball from the Welsh on at least two occasions.

[finbar]

Overall, Kidney is rivalling M'sieur Le Coach for erratic selections.* Sexton does several things better than O'Gara, like actually tackle. Yes, O'Gara stripped the ball a couple of times but that doesn't constitute defence. Sexton has serious talent. He shows it with Leinster on a regular basis. What he hasn't done is produce it on the bigger stage with any regularity and the haphazard selection policy can't be helping. Nor can O'Gara's pretty obvious antipathy towards Sexton - in the media, and his reactions from the bench - be helping. Methinks there are egos and provincial biases at play in the Ireland camp.

*M'sieur Le Coach this week has actually selected something approaching a sensible team. Hardly an inspiring centre pairing - why is he aping J**** in this regard? - but at least most players seem to be in something approaching their right positions.

[Havak]

Oh come now - Hape and Banahan are a world class centre pairing surely? Just not in Union.

Watching the "highlights" of the Scottish game I noticed that Youngs has started crabbing - negating much of what makes him such a good scrummy. That may be nerves but I have a nasty feeling it might be instructions too - though god knows why. Shipping the ball quickly and cleanly is what set him apart from the pack and we don't need crabbing slowing down the play (we had years of it after Bracken and Dawson hung their boots up).

Leinster and Munster have significant history and it will carry into the Irish side. It is more prounounced than even the Wasps and Tigers rivalry with England (not that the insects contribute any longer). I have to say I don't think irerland are a very good side right now. Still threatening, still dangerous but inconsiastent, ill disciplined and weaker up front that I can remember for a decade. Unfortunately I don't think England are a very good side either. Certainly dangerous if you let them get quick ball consitently but prone to the old problem of not adapting to circumstances. I have splinters trying to preedict saturday.

Old sods shambolic RFC would have sussed not committing bodies to the break down was hurting them - but England against Scotland never really did so. Inexplicable for a Pro international outfit? Are they afriad to go "off message" from coaching instructions?