Lessons from the RWC

aimee1

Celly Smunt wrote: »

I feel club rugby is completely isolated from the problems internationally.

When we look at France we see big names and players capable of tearing any team apart on the day. When we look upstairs we see an disorganised mess of a coaching panel who can't find direction or response from their players. That is the reason they are where they are, that's all.

When we look at England we see similarities, I don't directly blame Lancaster but more so the mediocre group of coaches around him (Farrell who?). Selection has been off, their captain is lost for direction and too timid to take a game by the scruff of the neck like we would see from POC. They change 10's as often as their underwear to their own detriment too.

They're down on their luck for the next few years, not due to talent but due to coaching. Throw Gatland or Schmidt into either side and they'd have their mess cleared up.

England had a gameplan but when it came to the crunch v wales they bottled it. The lack of on field leadership has hurt them on two fronts in that robshaw is an average player and a poor captain.

France just dont look like they have a plan and their set piece has been awful

marc96

ixus wrote: »

England - playing Burgess, dropping Hartley & Tualagi and not taking that kick cost them v wales. The players dropped should have been out of squad earlier or let off given close proximity to tournament. Robshaw made that kick mistake early in his captaincy career too. The 15 & extended squad are there.

France - inconsistent selection over extended period has cost them. Had a settled squad entered that training camp, could jave been a different story.

Against NZ, charged try, Parra missing sitter, Spedding trying to be French efore half time and Piccamoles being French after half time cost them dearly. The final two instances caused a major swing in momentum. Irreversible. Oh, and Naquatacki (spelling).

Nz & Aus are slicker with ball, as ever and playing with confidence. South Africa are muck but can still smash thungs Hulk style. Argies are good as ever. Northern Hem teams blighted by injury or selection policies.

Must be horrible knowing South Africa are playing their worst rugby but still get into semis,where as Ireland need to play their best and still not got semis yet?

ted1

Id like to see the quad nations changed to the 6 nations with 2 of the northern hemisphere 6 nations teams making the trip down every odd year. It should improve the standard, we generally constantly play each other and need to add to the gene pool of defending different set pieces and standard of a play.

NZ were amazing last night playing school boy rugby, running the the ball along the line . Player with ball runs straight sucks in a player or two and pop it out to the player beside you and repeat. The ball carrier was never left alone and always had a man either side of him

Celly Smunt

ted1 wrote: »

Id like to see the quad nations changed to the 6 nations with 2 of the northern hemisphere 6 nations teams making the trip down every odd year. It should improve the standard, we generally constantly play each other and need to add to the gene pool of defending different set pieces and standard of a play.

NZ were amazing last night playing school boy rugby, running the the ball along the line . Player with ball runs straight sucks in a player or two and pop it out to the player beside you and repeat. The ball carrier was never left alone and always had a man either side of him

We kind of have that with the autumn tests and to a degree the lions tour though?

I suppose the biggest argument against that from the union would be that it tarnishes the novelty of the biggest money spinner which is the world cup. The less the teams meet the better is the kind of attitude I get from those in charge.

ted1

marc96 wrote: »

Must be horrible knowing South Africa are playing their worst rugby but still get into semis,where as Ireland need to play their best and still not got semis yet?

What sports do the other countries play?
I mean we have a similar population to NZ but we play Gaelic Football , Hurley , soccer and Rugby so our talent pool is split.

In Oz they have Rugby League, Aussie Rules, Cricket then Rugby Union.

Are we trying to do too much ?

rrpc

irishbucsfan wrote: »

The French clubs have no say at World Rugby/IRB so it really doesn't matter what they think about an extra international window.

Now, if you were to say that the French clubs might be upset at the French national team taking advantage of that extra week then that's another issue. Maybe the French national team would choose not to play that extra game in order to bargain for extra time with the players elsewhere, or extra JIFF player, or extra whatever else. That's completely up to them. But the French clubs have no say over WR.

That's saying the same thing a different way. If we're trying to fix issues with national squads, nothing World Rugby does or says will help if the leagues dig their heels in and don't release players. If the federation has to horse trade over player availability or high performance issues, inevitably it will be a compromise of robbing Peter to pay Paul.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

That's always been the case. It might be marginally more the case nowadays but not a huge amount so. It's not a massive problem at the moment. I see no evidence that Irish players, despite our player welfare rules, get injured any less than the players in the French squad or the EPS. We could barely field a team against Italy in 2013. It's a lot more complex than just more matches = bad.

I'm not comparing Irish players with others, I'm saying all players are playing too many matches. There are more international matches and more league matches than ever before and the pressure to enlarge leagues is building. The French were talking about a Top 16 a couple of years ago and I'm not sure that idea has gone away. There's been talk of expanding the Pro 12 and the Premiership as well. But look at the number of players that have had to retire early through injury. That's just not sustainable, never mind about the long term ramifications for all players.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Nope. Neither of these things work. If you just split the 6 Nations into 2 leagues then who is in those leagues? Who decides that? What happens if Germany start to fluorish,how do they get in? That's just kicking the can down the road. We already have a framework for European rugby that encompasses ALL of the teams in Europe, it's just some nations believe they're too good for it. I certainly never said I wanted to add anyone to the 6 Nations, that would just make things far worse.

I'm not wedded to the idea, but you can't put a quart into a pint pot. Whatever solution is arrived at will of necessity be a league system unless you divide rugby into league and international.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I'm not buying that really. If players are playing too many matches then it's up to themselves, their clubs and their unions to sort it out anyway. It's not a structural issue. Club rugby works fine (outside of various issues unique to each league that don't really apply to this).

You can't talk about club rugby as if it were a separate animal to international rugby. They compete with the same players. They have different aims.

marc96

ted1 wrote: »

What sports do the other countries play?
I mean we have a similar population to NZ but we play Gaelic Football , Hurley , soccer and Rugby so our talent pool is split.

In Oz they have Rugby League, Aussie Rules, Cricket then Rugby Union.

Are we trying to do too much ?

3million white South Africans only and they play rugby,cricket and soccer and athletics??whars ur point?

ted1

marc96 wrote: »

3million white South Africans only and they play rugby,cricket and soccer and athletics??whars ur point?

It was more of a question, are we spreading ourselves to thin compared to the other countries who have reached the quarters

Dirty Dingus McGee

ted1 wrote: »

What sports do the other countries play?
I mean we have a similar population to NZ but we play Gaelic Football , Hurley , soccer and Rugby so our talent pool is split.

In Oz they have Rugby League, Aussie Rules, Cricket then Rugby Union.

Are we trying to do too much ?

So basically in order to help the rugby team people should not want to play whatever sport they would like to play.

I can only imagine the abuse a GAA fan would get for posting something similar.

wp_rathead

ixus wrote: »

England - playing Burgess, dropping Hartley & Tualagi and not taking that kick cost them v wales. The players dropped should have been out of squad earlier or let off given close proximity to tournament. Robshaw made that kick mistake early in his captaincy career too. The 15 & extended squad are there.

Disagree - I think Lancaster got that 100% Spot On
I think not trying EVERYTHING possible to get Armitage in at 7

marc96

ted1 wrote: »

It was more of a question, are we spreading ourselves to thin compared to the other countries who have reached the quarters

No not spreading urself thin,people play the sport that they want to play,I just find that the Irish tend to get carried away abit.im mean people talking about which Irish players will get in the AB team and that semis are a given.:)

Hermy

marc96 wrote: »

Must be horrible knowing South Africa are playing their worst rugby but still get into semis,where as Ireland need to play their best and still not got semis yet?

I do wonder about this given the Irish team had to work so hard for the victory over France last week and yet now all I'm reading about is how bad the French team are. Is Ireland's dominance of northern hemisphere rugby in some part at least simply down to the current state of the English and French national sides? Obviously a result today and possibly next week will give a truer picture of where we are at on the world stage but as an armchair fan I'm wondering can the current form of Ireland be put in perspective or are you always only as good as your next game?

Legalfarmer89

Coburger wrote: »

Smaller nations like Japan, Samoa, and Georgia need more games against top opposition on a regular basis and be able to field their strongest team. Financially it'll never happen, but I think teams should tour over there more often.

I think that we will definitely see 6 nations teams touring Japan as part of their tours to the Southern hemisphere now that Japan will provide meaningful competition and most importantly to the touring sides and World rugby "Money". Japans rugby market has been awoken as a result of there performances in this tournament I believe.
The Islanders will still get the odd international against tier one sides, especially Fiji who look impressive. Samoa and Tonga, its hard to know, their such small countries that they provide very little in the way of finance for sides to tour them!
As for Georgia, I think Ireland was the only country to give them their llast test against tier 1 opposition test, last Novemeber, they really need tests too help them improve, they already have a brilliant pack and some potential in the backs and while they might be a bit off in terms of 6 nations participation, they have ultimately dominated the European Nations Competition in the last few years (winning 7 of the Last 8) so have reached a ceiling in where they are competing now.

ted1

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

So basically in order to help the rugby team people should not want to play whatever sport they would like to play.

I can only imagine the abuse a GAA fan would get for posting something similar.

Nope that's not what I'm saying, if it transpires that as a small population we are playing to many sports to effectively challenge the world leaders then the IRFU should make a good effort to attract more players rather than on just maintaining access through the usual schools.
My kids recently started playing with the local GAA club because they have a great kids academy. Rugby wasn't an option because there is no similar academy for 4 and 6 year olds

jacothelad

CatFromHue wrote: »

I'm not sure about England yet, I think it was just a bad tournament for them in a tough group, but the French are in trouble. In the last 4 6N's they haven't finished higher than 4th whereas the English have finished 2nd in each of those 4 tournaments and won it in 2011.

They have a poor coach interms of rugby development, ideas and selection. They have many very fine players who never - or rarely - get a look in.

pickarooney wrote: »

I think we need to consider investing in the sevens game at all levels in the NH. We have our head totally in the sand regarding developing core skills and all the European teams are being found wanting in key areas. You can talk all you like about league politics and national management but it's clear that we're not breeding players who can cope with a fast-paced game.

If the Pacific nations ever got it together in terms of coaching and access to their players (and that's mostly down to them not being allowed to) I think they'd leave us behind, despite having only a tiny population to choose from.

The idea of sevens helping the 15 game is misguided. A good player is a good player because he has talent, not because there are fewer or more players on the park. The games are different.

marc96 wrote: »

3million white South Africans only and they play rugby,cricket and soccer and athletics??whars ur point?

I'm pretty certain I saw a few players with more melanin than us. 53,000,000 at the last count and rising. About tyhe same as England and France. Soccer may be the dominant sport in S.A., as it is in most countries but the numbers of non-white players in R.U. is increasing. Maybe more slowly than some want and worryingly a quota system would be shocking but S.A. simply is in a bit of a down cycle. Providing those 'political interferences' don't throw a spanner in the works that might cause many white players to leave for Europe, I assume that by the next RWC they could be back to being their historically formidable selves. There are some very fine young players on the horizon or already here.

jacothelad

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

So basically in order to help the rugby team people should not want to play whatever sport they would like to play.

I can only imagine the abuse a GAA fan would get for posting something similar.

Where did the poster say this?

Dirty Dingus McGee

jacothelad wrote: »

Where did the poster say this?

He said: "I mean we have a similar population to NZ but we play Gaelic Football , Hurley , soccer and Rugby so our talent pool is split."

He then said:"Are we trying to do too much?"

The conclusion I came to after reading those statements was that the poster was suggesting that in order to help the rugby team perhaps the country shouldn't play as wide a variety of sports and should specialise more.

ixus

marc96 wrote: »

Must be horrible knowing South Africa are playing their worst rugby but still get into semis,where as Ireland need to play their best and still not got semis yet?

Not at all. Appreciate how passionate South African fans are about their team but lets not forget who you have beaten. A terrible Samoa, USA, Scotlands second team and half a Welsh team. If they beat NZ, they'll get the credit they deserve.

Ireland really haven't done a lot. One decent performance against a poor French team.

ted1

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

He said: "I mean we have a similar population to NZ but we play Gaelic Football , Hurley , soccer and Rugby so our talent pool is split."

He then said:"Are we trying to do too much?"

The conclusion I came to after reading those statements was that the poster was suggesting that in order to help the rugby team perhaps the country shouldn't play as wide a variety of sports and should specialise more.

No you said that I suggested people shouldn't be allowed play the sport that they want to. Which they should be allowed to.
The IRFU need to market themselves better to get players. Let's take people from Terenure, Mary's , Blackrock etc they play Rugby because that's what they grow up with and what is played in the area. The IRFU need to expand and make it easier for people in other areas to enter the sport.

ixus

wp_rathead wrote: »

Disagree - I think Lancaster got that 100% Spot On
I think not trying EVERYTHING possible to get Armitage in at 7

He stuck by them so long. Should have done it a year earlier, not so close. To jettison them and bring in Burgess. The English would not have given a toss if those two boys were there and they had made it out of group. Agree on Armitage.

jacothelad

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

He said: "I mean we have a similar population to NZ but we play Gaelic Football , Hurley , soccer and Rugby so our talent pool is split."

He then said:"Are we trying to do too much?"

The conclusion I came to after reading those statements was that the poster was suggesting that in order to help the rugby team perhaps the country shouldn't play as wide a variety of sports and should specialise more.

Nowhere did he suggest that anyone should be impeded from playing their chosen sport. We are alone of the major rugby nations in playing 2 team field sports that no other country enjoys. Everyone speculates about how rugby might be improved if more GAA players experienced it but I've never heard or read of anyone actively implying that it should be discouraged. You were being a bit precious.

pickarooney

jacothelad wrote: »

The idea of sevens helping the 15 game is misguided. A good player is a good player because he has talent, not because there are fewer or more players on the park. The games are different.

It makes more sense than the old 'our lads are great at the catching because GAA' chestnut.There are a lot more useful transferable skills from 7s.

Dirty Dingus McGee

jacothelad wrote: »

Nowhere did he suggest that anyone should be impeded from playing their chosen sport. We are alone of the major rugby nations in playing 2 team field sports that no other country enjoys. Everyone speculates about how rugby might be improved if more GAA players experienced it but I've never heard or read of anyone actively implying that it should be discouraged. You were being a bit precious.

Not really.I just came to that conclusion which I think was reasonable enough based on what he said.I apologize if I misinterpreted his post.

Cricket isn't played by a lot of people here yet it's a big sport in 3 of the 4 southern hemisphere nations.The Aussies play Aussie Rules football which none of the other major rugby countries play.

I don't think the amount of sports played makes a blind bit of difference to Ireland's performance in international rugby.It always get thrown out as an excuse for Ireland under performing in the Olympics as well and people seem to think that other countries don't play a wide variety of sports when they actually do.

There are only 2 countries in the world where rugby union could be considered the number 1 sport so I don't think Ireland is that disadvantaged compared to the other rugby countries.

The Lost Sheep

ted1 wrote: »

Id like to see the quad nations changed to the 6 nations with 2 of the northern hemisphere 6 nations teams making the trip down every odd year. It should improve the standard, we generally constantly play each other and need to add to the gene pool of defending different set pieces and standard of a play.

NZ were amazing last night playing school boy rugby, running the the ball along the line . Player with ball runs straight sucks in a player or two and pop it out to the player beside you and repeat. The ball carrier was never left alone and always had a man either side of him

Never will or should happen the 4 nations should expand but to include island nations not northern hemisphere sides

ted1 wrote: »

No you said that I suggested people shouldn't be allowed play the sport that they want to. Which they should be allowed to.
The IRFU need to market themselves better to get players. Let's take people from Terenure, Mary's , Blackrock etc they play Rugby because that's what they grow up with and what is played in the area. The IRFU need to expand and make it easier for people in other areas to enter the sport.

The IRFU are working a lot to expand the game but when schools like Blackrock can just offer scholarships to best guys every year it doesnt help the sport expand from its current playing base.
The way competitions are organised/ran/developed need to be better
How would you get the IRFU to expand and make it easier for people to start playing the sport?

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Not really.I just came to that conclusion which I think was reasonable enough based on what he said.I apologize if I misinterpreted his post.

Cricket isn't played by a lot of people here yet it's a big sport in 3 of the 4 southern hemisphere nations.The Aussies play Aussie Rules football which none of the other major rugby countries play.

I don't think the amount of sports played makes a blind bit of difference to Ireland's performance in international rugby.It always get thrown out as an excuse for Ireland under performing in the Olympics as well and people seem to think that other countries don't play a wide variety of sports when they actually do.

There are only 2 countries in the world where rugby union could be considered the number 1 sport so I don't think Ireland is that disadvantaged compared to the other rugby countries.

The number of sports a country plays does make a difference to performances in world rugby. We have a small population and overall most of the best athletes in ireland dont play rugby....

ixus

Probably a good time to look at the fixtures structure of North v South Hem. Super 15 rolling into Rugby Nations against the Six Nations mid club season.

Six nations at season end, takes clubs out of equation and played in better weather. Opens the game up more. Home & away takes out Summer tours.

ted1

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

How would you get the IRFU to expand and make it easier for people

Maybe work with primary schools by providing a coach to take some PE classes and introduce kids to the sport who mightn't normally get an introduction. Also work with local clubs to improve their academies, as I mentioned earlier the local GAA club in dalkey have a great academy and have about 70 4 years old, (boys and girls )kids same with 5 and 6 years old and so up.

The Lost Sheep

ted1 wrote: »

Maybe work with primary schools by providing a coach to take some PE classes and introduce kids to the sport who mightn't normally get an introduction. Also work with local clubs to improve their academies, as I mentioned earlier the local GAA club in dalkey have a great academy and have about 70 4 years old, (boys and girls )kids same with 5 and 6 years old and so up.

The IRFU have loads of development officers working with primary schools and getting kids introduced to the sport for the first time.
What would you do in working with clubs to improve their underage systems?

Coburger

irishbucsfan wrote: »

This is exactly the problem. The fact it needs to be changed at all is the problem. Especially when the people who have to vote for the change make a lot of money out of the status quo which they would risk losing. Do you think the Scots or Italians would EVER let Georgia in on their slice of the pie?

Put it into a larger structure under Rugby Europe, make it division 1 of the ENC with a defined route for progression and let the rugby do the talking. If they're not good enough to play at the highest level they won't.

I wonder if there were four teams in a group, e.g. France, England, Ireland, and Wales, and they play home and away like the South Hemisphere teams.

And then there is another group with Italy, Scotland (sorry), Georgia, and Romania, and the top team from the bottom group plays the lowest team in the top group for a play off place.

AbusesToilets

Real, useful change will never happen in the NH because of the unions. The IRFU in particular are renowned for their resistance to change, and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

The Lost Sheep

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Real, useful change will never happen in the NH because of the unions. The IRFU in particular are renowned for their resistance to change, and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

What would you consider real, useful change and at what levels of the game are you talking about needing real, useful change?