Good grief!
Sort of begs the question why we are not seeing better Rugby doesn't it? We seem to be besotted with technology, so why not put teams of robots out there instead? I know this has been mooted in a few SF films.
There are times when I feel REALLY, REALLY old!
Peter B,
following on from my point above about National sponsorship for France, it is also the only country that doesn't have a dedicated Rugby HQ Ground. Stadt de France is a shared venue hired by all sorts of teams, PSG football being one. I seem to recall Racing Metro being based there, but I believe they are quartered in Nantes now?
The problem with the studs Rugby players have now are real ground-shredders, so not many Football clubs would enthusiastically share grounds with them I would think? So I don't think it would happen as the top teams homes are too far away from each other for it to work. Perhaps at lower levels it could be a cost-saver.
Brian, we are of an age when just about all sports were 'amateur', but in reality were 'shamateur' with the perks and 'expenses' thrown in, but even with that and I know it is the 'old fart' speaking, but I did believe the games on all levels were more competitive, and more fun.
I no longer watch or even see cricket, but I was involved on the sidelines of the Pyjama Game in Australia, being one of the minor sponsors of it with Stuart Surridge Cricket. To be fair it WAS a lot of fun and a nice counterpoint to things like Ashes of even State games, but I remember being present on one occasion when Kerry Packer was trying (successfully) to sign up top players in the early days. It was a real eye-opener as to how it was done.
There was an anteroom in which almost all the Australian top players were invited, and one by one they were invited in to the 'inner sanctum' where Packer and one or two others were seated.
Packer simply asked one question 'Do you want to be a millionaire?' Those who immediately said 'yes' were asked to wait in yet another room, whilst those who even slightly prevaricated with say 'it depends on how', were thanked for coming and wished goodbye. I never forgot that. Needless to say the 'yes' people did very well out of the new game.
Now it is understandable that short careers make players more conscious of getting what they can, while they can, and the current 'Mack Truck' crunch levels in Rugby make that even more front-of-mind, so it is hard to blame the players. It can make sad reading of where so many stars of so many sports have ended up. I can remember the days when Rugby players were also known for their qualifications - Lawyers, Doctors and yes Investment Bankers etc., I don't see much reference to such things these days.
Just a small point did anyone realise (and I didn't) that France is the only team in the 6-Nations that doesn't have a major National sponsor?
Norman, saw that Toulon had actually made an application to join the UK system. This reminded me of both Rangers & Celtic talking about playing in the English Preiership a few years back and PSG who have clearly 'grown out' of the French TOP 14 (or whatever it's called nowadays).
Re-Brive. I used to watch them a lot a few years back and thoroughly enjoyed it but i'm afraid funds no longer allow such luxuries. It's interesting that during their last season spent in the promotion race to get back to the Premier division they had serious talks with Limoges RU about a possible merger, mainly for economic reasons of course. Most fans of both clubs were against this idea though maybe this is the future ? ie. merging and ground sharing etc ?
It's essentially a GPS system Norman. It transmits data on the player's positions, routes, speed etc. If it also contains an accelerometer it could give info on the "weight" of tackling the player exercises and in reverse it could provide data on the impact a player receives when he is tackled
Norman, many professional rugby men wear a GPS system in a neoprene pouch between their shoulder blades. The data supplied gives details of speeds, distances and lengths of time covered and this data is used to organise individual training regimes. A load of b******t ? Maybe, but when you consider the tracking systems cost around the £30,000 per team mark someone obviously feels it's good value !!
Regarding the League version i'm a St Helens fan (since 1967) and althoughI enjoy both codes I find League more entertaining mainly thanks to the less stop-start brought on by too many rules. Union needs to be streamlined to make the game easier to follow, especially at the non-pro level. I watch local Union teams but find the games too frenetic with more time seemingly spent brawling than playing !
My nearest League team is about three hours away and I do a bit of journo work for a UK publication and i'm armed and ready to go with pen and notepad for the start of a new RL season in France next month.
Precisely. The establishment are screwing the game with their management styles. The rules of most other sports do not allow the possibility of a team ever consisting of nationals of other countries, indeed many insist teams are entirely of nationals, so where is it going. Young players do not have a chance with the transfer system as it is. I have seen more impressive play by local amateur clubs who do it on determination and love of their sport than the fat pay cheques. Something is rotten in the state of rugby, to paraphrase Hamlet.
Brian,
it was interesting to read about the admittedly eccentric owner of Toulon saying they were looking to play in the English RU league as the 'quality of the French teams is so low'. I think he's a bit overboard but I DO think they have to start to control the number of overseas players here. Many of these are now seeing out their time - notably the South Africans, but in the process surely blocking out paths for younger upcoming French ones?
There is an excellent pool of Under-19s and Under-21's often seen on Friday nights CH.4 so there seems to be no shortage of talent out there.
I accept that Italy have improved out of all site since their players came into the French league, and even Scottish players have gained from playing in a more intense league than just their own, so maybe I am arguing against myself?
Yes, and double yes re. the expansion of the Competition. Can only be a good thing even if the new entries have a hard learning curve, from what I saw in the WC you couldn't fault their fitness and enthusiasm, which I am finding a bit harder to find in the current teams.
The refereeing in both games was awful. Also it is turning into drop goals and penalties as means of scoring rather than fighting for the field to touch down. Tries are becoming the hens' teeth of contemporary rugby union.
I agree, France did not deserve to win actually. Reading about the games this morning a couple of journos mentioned the growing pressure to step up their game or be replaced by either Georgia or Romania in the Six Nations. Perhaps. Why not make it the seven or eight nations anyway? Bring on and develop the sport rather than having an exclusive club with a 'wild card' sixth member that is always predestined to be the loser. That is unsporting if it is the case.
Wales appear to be in better shape than Ireland, but then Scotland were supposedly than England and France far more than Italy and look what happened to those two games. A large number of huffing and puffing older players need to be replaced which is where Italy looked fresher and the management of teams into coherent teams looks like a priority. Guilhem Guirado was a pretty useless captain for France, no wonder you did not know who was Norman. I am not really looking forward to the rest of the games if yesterday is any indication of this year's competition.
Dick,
that's a good point. In Australian Rules - of which I was a complete fanatic*, but never a player, each Saturday Game was analysed (to death of often seemed) but what was always good was the Official Reports on the Referees from their own Tribunal.
Australia being Australia as it was in those days, weasel words were not obvious, and the Reports were really intense. To be fair the game had few rules, and as an unpadded impact sport it was not surprising that they got 'entertaining' on most occasions and most referees had enough sense not to get involved when 36 hefty players decided to have a bit of fun! At least they were answerable and they also had a points system from which it was decided at what level of games (and remuneration) they could officiate.
I suppose there must be some system in Union, but I confess to never having heard of it.
Some of you younger blokes can maybe answer a question for me, although I am assuming it has something to do with on-field communications. We know the refs., are all wired up but I have noticed the appearance of little pouch between the shoulder blades of the players today - anybody know exactly what these are for - and how they would work as I don't see any earphones on the players.
*Lifelong supporter of St. Kilda if anyone is interested.
Peter, I don't get any English TV so have lost contact with League, but mainly as my brother lives there I was a follower of Wigan Warriors, which is odd as in Union and despite my own youthful excursion and involvement with London Irish (NB never in the first team), I never settled on a Union side, although I liked Saracens.
Again here in France I tended to follow teams I liked Toulouse being the first, and probably still the one I have the most interest in. Toulon seem to have collapsed with the departure of Jonny, and I hear he is now one of the coaching team of England? Maybe in the future we could see him as the England Coach and that WOULD be interesting to see.
Sorry but I can't get excited about my new regional team of Brive. Seen them on TV twice but they look a journeyman side to me. However as I may have mentioned before I am kindling an interest in Beaulieu-sur-Dordogne who are current Amateur Champions of France, and as my Doc. is Secretary of them (an ex Fly-half) that could be fun.
Terry, talking about an upcoming match and putting money on it I think are two different things, arf! arf!
Bit previous until we see what Ireland and Wales come up with this afternoon, but I have to agree with most of the comments below.
No France were NOT impressive, and Italy played well enough - and for me Paresse is the best most consistent player in the whole European game but I thought he had retired from internationals?
The French side once again were individuals, and did anyone notice when the presumably Islander was interviewed he didn't speak French? In the National side? Also did anyone know who the French captain was?
England played well as did Scotland in the first half, but if I was an England supporter I would be dubious about the older players stamina, as by the middle of the second half they looked knackered. Yes Hartley as the Captain surprised me too, and he was also one to go off, plus one of his team members had to pull him away from a situation which should have been the reverse. Scotland lost the match in the 55th minute with the try against them. I was astonished as to how quickly the team deflated after that.
The referees did make some odd decisions and for the life of me even after watching the replays some were inexplicable if not downright wrong. I don't want the game to rely on replays. I DO feel the whole wheeling of the scrum rule where the scrum is not collapsed needs clarification, as although appreciating the referees have a closer view, seems to be interpreted differently each time.
As I say it will be interesting to see this afternoon's match, but from what little I hear Wales look better shaped than Ireland.
England were poor and the lack of discipline was as noticeable as it was during the last World Cup. Saying that, they were still good enough to beat a weak Scotland outfit. The 'lack of scrums' was inevitable with such a bitty stop-start game littered by unnecessary penalties. What annoys me is the need to kick instead of running with the ball or indeed the good old ruck and maul tactics.
Today was uninspiring in both games, it can only get better...
That was hardly an inspiring Calcutta Cup. Scotland floundered completely and England won as much because of that as any great skill on their part. What was so strange was the lack of scrums. Did anybody else notice that?
France versus Italy was strange too. Was it simply that Italy played well or France were not that hot, despite winning. France were off target all over the place. Italy were much stronger up front. Either way, it was close and a thriller.
If only they could find some decent referees!
You are Alex Salmond and I claim my £5.
Ach, awa we ye. We'll hae the Sassenach's frae breakfast efter a roond o deep fried Mars and a wee bit a Irn Bru.
England v Scotland is the big one for me. It's good to beat the Scots at anything if only to get bragging rights for the year. Interesting that the new England coach reckons the Scots start as favourites . Is this just a bit of double-bluffing or is he serious ?
The Welsh to win the whole thing for me this time around.
The new Super League League season started yesterday with champs Leeds Rhinos getting beaten at home. All set for another exciting season for those of us who appreciate the 'other' code also..
Personally I would put my money on Wales. By far the best of the six in the World Cup despite injury problems and they have the most settled squad and management team. A lot will depend on the opening match against Ireland at the Aviva. And anyway, if I'm going to have to choose between England and Wales I'll always go for Wales. Except when they lose to France. In which case I suddenly become very English, much to the disgust of my rugby-mad French mates.
England's advantage is that they get to play Wales and Ireland at Twickenham. But on the other hand, Wales and Ireland have three home games. Does that make a difference?
Talking of betting, I know the research the bookies do before setting the odds is the best there is and presumably they have equally brilliant mathematicians (or computer programs?) to work out the odds. But once they start taking bets, the odds have to be influenced by how much money is being put on a given team. And as there are more punters in England than in the other home nations wouldn't that distort the odds in England's favour?