France's fall from the top

[Sonic Kiwi]

"France's fall from the top"

From a Kiwi's perspective I'd say....'how the hell did the French do that?"

Is it flair or just "je ne sais pas"

 

[RedruthRFC]

The point was if France have such a big problem, then by the same logic so do all the Celts who have less players playing in their league each weekend through less teams. Yet nobody (quite rightly) says that only having 4 teams is killing Welsh or Irish rugby at international level.

I'm not sure that the comparison to the celts quite works anyway - the nature of said teams being regions is that they are designed to filter talent upwards. I don't think club systems are as good as doing this.

That assumes that the younger player is as good or better than the departing player. Which isn't always the case, and competition with that experienced player is usually a good thing. There's no way Super Rugby won't be at all effected by losing so many top players.

I don't think that's quite the case. I'd have thought that it's the exception more than the rule that the incoming youngster is better than / as good as the outgoing one. The incoming player does however have the potential to become a better player and plenty of years of rugby ahead of them, which we're arguing is more useful to the nation in question in the long term. I imagine that Super Rugby will indeed be affected by the predicted exodus, although as the focus of the thread is on national teams, I'm not sure that this is too relevant (although there is a follow on effect I guess).

 

[goodNumber10]

I agree with this. But it's about the exposure at top level which brings the benefit to players.

But

If an ageing SH player is playing in France. That ageing SH player's spot is given to a younger player who deserves to be there back in the SH. That spot isn't in turn given to a NH player as a swop. This means that the SH team's player pool keeps on increasing at top level, while the NH player pool keeps on decreasing.

It's only getting smaller if the SH player is getting selected ahead of the NH counterpart.

Case in point, look at Plisson, he is being selected over Steyn, he gets injured they have a quality back up that they probably wouldn't have had if they'd only had french fly halves in the squad. So Stade have been able to develop Plisson over the last two years safe in the knowledge that should he have arough patch they can fall back on Steyn, wheras if they had one of their espoirs backing him up they'd have been stuffed.

- - - Updated - - -

I quite enjoy my point about fly halves being blocked, with the rebuttal that Wales and Scotland have few pro teams - and they don't struggle for depth in key positions. Here is hoping Biggar goes down for the RWC, I'm dying to see the 'local' talent in the Pro 12 which will jump in.

No one actually said that....

- - - Updated - - -

Well said. The analogy that comes to mind is cutting back a bush to allow fresh growth to come through - it might look a bit sparse for a while, but will be healthier in the long term. There are obviously situations when SH sides would prefer certain players to be playing on home soil but if the trade off is ensuring a strong conveyor belt of talent coming through, it's not the worst thing in the world.

Going back to the hypothetical fly half who is struggling for game time, I agree that any coach with the resources available to him is totally right to pick the strongest side that he can, but how does said fly half get the game time needed to become a better player? Moving clubs seems like the only option.

who is to say that young player getting game time will make him better?

If he trains, gets better and get's selected over his rival he'l be far better for it than if he's just selected because he's young and french.

The real trick is to not drop him for silly little mistakes and show faith, but you have to balance that out. Plisson is a perfect case in point of how it should be done.

 

[RedruthRFC]

who is to say that young player getting game time will make him better?

If he trains, gets better and get's selected over his rival he'l be far better for it than if he's just selected because he's young and french.

I don't think that anyone is saying that players given game time will get better. I take the point that you're making, I'm just making the point that it's tougher to get up to tier one standard on the training paddock or in lower leagues and that getting thrown in at the deep end with a tier one role is a quicker way of identifying and developing talent. I suppose if all talent's development is slowed the same way, you still have a conveyor belt to rely on, the disadvantage is that players' international careers will be shorter.

 

[gaston le gaff]

experience is second to none!!!! how many front row forwards or locks are under 23 not many playing top class rugby and on a regular bascis i have witnessed young players thrown in the deep end and the results are more disasterous than benificial, its just the way it is, there are of course exceptions to the rule but they are far and few between. As we have said many times the season in the TOP 14 is hard and long with not that many points between 1st and 13th (there is normally one team who has a disaster season) so we need alll these players to rotate and keep the squads fresh and positive.

 

[Tony Manx]

Good Lord, this thread has turned into a decent and interesting one with no angst, anger, trolling, intimidation or nationalism.

Time I left this forum............!!!

 

[Sonic Kiwi]

Just like the AB's, when the French put on their jerseys regardless of club commitments on the world stage.....they're unpredictable but only with loose play.

French like NZ have flair and passion. Forget the 6 nations rugga, when France play their unpredictable style they're weird but poetry in motion.

I hope NZ wont face France "again" for this RWC but if we (NZ) do then I'd like to think we've learnt from our mistakes.

Bottom line is, the RWC is a different beast and one mistake in the Q.Finals can cost anyone no matter how good they are and/or were in 2015

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Worn out old cliches, I'm afraid.
France have no more flair than any other side these day, and considerably less than some.

 

[Sonic Kiwi]

Maybe so but I'd rate in this order the three countries that use "flair" as a cliche

1) NZ
2) Australia
3) France


8th or there-abouts) England....although J. Wilkinson's drop kick to win England's RWC showed flair as a "cliche"

 

[JJFlash]

I would add that the "flair" was lost when Marc Lièvremont and Philippe St André were in charge and if it is to be rediscovered, then Guy Noves is your man.

 

[psychic duck]

I would add that the "flair" was lost when Marc Lièvremont and Philippe St André were in charge and if it is to be rediscovered, then Guy Noves is your man.

I take it you haven't watched Toulouse play much then of late.

 

[JJFlash]

Of course I have, and regularly, but as I wrote a few posts back, Noves has stayed a bit too long with Toulouse and should have taken on the XV de France a few years ago.
There can be no doubts about the man's abilities and I am convinced he'll be able to bring a much needed improvement to the French team, but maybe pd, you are a better judge of Noves than me.

One player that I'm sure he will want in his squad is Maxime Machenaud, the Racing scrum half, who many think is the best in France at the moment, but sadly, PSA doesn't think so, having chosen Parra, Tillous-Borde and Kockott (and why he has been picked ahead of Machenaud is a mystery)

 

[goodNumber10]

I don't think that anyone is saying that players given game time will get better. I take the point that you're making, I'm just making the point that it's tougher to get up to tier one standard on the training paddock or in lower leagues and that getting thrown in at the deep end with a tier one role is a quicker way of identifying and developing talent. I suppose if all talent's development is slowed the same way, you still have a conveyor belt to rely on, the disadvantage is that players' international careers will be shorter.

OK, look at it like this.

You manage a team at work.

Your best employee leaves.

You have a bunch of people who all do the same job but aren't ready to step up, do you promote them anyway?

More likely you look for the best person available to your means, that might turn out to be one of your own team but might be someone from another company.

Perhaps if you think someone internally can be up skilled quick enough to mitigate any impact you develop them.

It might be neither in which case you head hunt someone/get a contractor in on a short term contract.

It's the same, if you are missing a player you fill it to the best of your means. That might be internal, might mean bring someone in and develop someone.

No one cared about this under the amatuer laws, people followed theur "jobs". but now it's a business people seem to think the clubs owe the unions players.

 

[Peat]

I outright ignored player development in my first post simply because I thought it was irrelevant; it is very clear that you don't need a big player pool to be successful in international rugby by NH lights. France's potential player pool and professional opportunities are so vast compared to some of their competitors that they can afford to waste huge amounts of their talent and still have a competitive squad. I stand by this belief.



However:

Any sports body with a big budget and big expectations will always feel the temptation to go out and get ready-made answers rather than develop them from within. The French clubs are en masse at the top of both lists and therefore feel the temptation strongest.

That in itself is not caused by foreign players, or even necessarily the French clubs' independence; the Irish provinces are branches of the union with strict rules on foreign players, yet still given to more than the odd bout of putting journeymen ahead of young native talent.

Foreign players exacerbate this and are a symptom of this; there aren't enough French veterans to satisfy the Top 14's demand for talent, so players from abroad are needed to fill the gap.

If there was a cap on foreign players, would you see more opportunities given to young French players? Yes. But at least some of the opportunities would go to older, more experienced French players with less overall potential.

Would this be a good thing for young French players? The reality is that's a case by case question. Some have the talent but need the gametime to bring it out. Others will benefit more from playing in high quality games with high quality players and would lose out if the foreign players went. Some guys will end up getting chances too early and get burnt out, others might get second chances they mightn't have otherwise got. And some would still get blocked by journeymen.


But, in any case, I stand by my point that it's all a bit of an irrelevance.

 

[TRF_heineken]

It's only getting smaller if the SH player is getting selected ahead of the NH counterpart.

Case in point, look at Plisson, he is being selected over Steyn, he gets injured they have a quality back up that they probably wouldn't have had if they'd only had french fly halves in the squad. So Stade have been able to develop Plisson over the last two years safe in the knowledge that should he have arough patch they can fall back on Steyn, wheras if they had one of their espoirs backing him up they'd have been stuffed.

Everyone is stuck on the fly half position. But let's be honest, it's one of the toughest positions to fill with quality players. I think everyone should stop using Morne Steyn as the scapegoat target when trying to use an example. Morne Steyn wouldn't have been the first choice pick for the Bulls if he were to stay in SA. Handre Pollard would have been picked ahead of him, maybe even Jacques-Louis Potgieter because of the style the Bulls wanted to play.

How about all the other positions??

You guys talk about flair, yet, the guy who showed the most flair in the French top 14 last season wasn't a Frenchman, it was Nick Abendanon!!

But let's revert back to my previous post about the SH filling their pools while our top players go abroad. Heinke Van Der Merwe is an example, since he left the Lions, he has been demolishing opposition scrums in France, and since his departure, the Lions has introduced 3 players in his position which have been also demolishing Super Rugby team's scrums the past 2 years. That is proof that one guy left, filled a french player's spot and back in SA his old spot got filled by 3 SA players. So basically 4 South African players got the benefit from filling one position in France.

And even if a SH player isn't a regular in his French team, he is still on the roster for that team, filling the gap of a potential french player. While back in SA, his position is filled by South Africans, who could possibly become world class players.

 

[gaston le gaff]

What i find amusing about all these threads on the French downfall are everyone having this almighty dicussion about the French National team when the majority of the French posters or followers of the TOP 14 are not that involved, have you guys nothing better to do ?????

- - - Updated - - -

I take it you haven't watched Toulouse play much then of late.

its a little like stating Sale have won nothing since PSA left!!!!!!! but only Noves has 4 Heineken Euro trophies and umpteen French Championships so i think he can rest firmly on his Laurels!!!!!!!!

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

@heineken

I am not saying there isn't truth to your statement in some cases but it is not so in all cases I'd like to argue. I agree Heinke having left opened the door to Schalk van der Merwe who is also a good option. But critically, up till now the Bokke hadn't used Heinke because he wasn't a settled test player having had only 1 or 2 caps before moving off and we rather relied on what we knew (Guthro Steenkamp) and what we have had locally (Oosthuizen/Nyakane) so instead of having a class prop in his prime for the Bokke and gaining experience in test rugby we've had the twilight years of a once class prop and the growth pains of potentially classy props as an example.

The Top14 has 14 teams and play double the amount of games we play in SR. That's roughly 6 times more minutes of rugby than what SA gets. So, theoretically you could field 5/6th of your teams with foreigners and stil get the game time SA gets currently. on top of that you are filling your teams with proven test stars that your youg players can learn from in their own setups and test themselves against during training and against opposition. That is something our own youngsters are getting less and less of as our quality slowly gets drained. Sure, we have guys coming in who are good but generally they aren't at their best or ready for test rugby yet and in many cases we just aren't able to get the same quality in again for long whiles. Look at the obvious class players we have rushed in; the likes of Etzebeth, Goosen, PSdT, Malherbe etc. They are out injured for longer than not. u20 to SR to test rugby are big steps up and though they have the ability the body needs time to adapt. We don't have the depth of class anymore to allow those players that time.

And on the fact that players in Europe tend to play close to double the amount of time they do down here, we don't get the benefit of those players being readily available and fit/rested and we won't get it with players now doing SR and then going to the Japanse top league either.

I guess what I am saying is that the situation has way more downsides for us than for France or positives for us.

 

[goodNumber10]

Everyone is stuck on the fly half position. But let's be honest, it's one of the toughest positions to fill with quality players. I think everyone should stop using Morne Steyn as the scapegoat target when trying to use an example. Morne Steyn wouldn't have been the first choice pick for the Bulls if he were to stay in SA. Handre Pollard would have been picked ahead of him, maybe even Jacques-Louis Potgieter because of the style the Bulls wanted to play.

How about all the other positions??

You guys talk about flair, yet, the guy who showed the most flair in the French top 14 last season wasn't a Frenchman, it was Nick Abendanon!!

But let's revert back to my previous post about the SH filling their pools while our top players go abroad. Heinke Van Der Merwe is an example, since he left the Lions, he has been demolishing opposition scrums in France, and since his departure, the Lions has introduced 3 players in his position which have been also demolishing Super Rugby team's scrums the past 2 years. That is proof that one guy left, filled a french player's spot and back in SA his old spot got filled by 3 SA players. So basically 4 South African players got the benefit from filling one position in France.

And even if a SH player isn't a regular in his French team, he is still on the roster for that team, filling the gap of a potential french player. While back in SA, his position is filled by South Africans, who could possibly become world class players.

Key word being "possibly".

The difference in SA isn't that guys are getting better rugby at the pro stage of their career, it's that they've come through a much better and highr intensity youth system then the french, meaning there are guys already there in a position who can CAN step in, they are further along in their development.

Again, i re-iterate the point people are placing playing over potential, if you don't have a guy who has the potential to go that far then you don't promote him. Don't forget these squads have to be registered so bringing them in and out is not as simple - so you don't waste squad places with guys you're not 100% sure about.

 

[gaston le gaff]

Key word being "possibly".



Again, i re-iterate the point people are placing playing over potential, if you don't have a guy who has the potential to go that far then you don't promote him. Don't forget these squads have to be registered so bringing them in and out is not as simple - so you don't waste squad places with guys you're not 100% sure about.

that is quite true unless he is called Rene Ranger!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[TRF_heineken]

@heineken

I am not saying there isn't truth to your statement in some cases but it is not so in all cases I'd like to argue. I agree Heinke having left opened the door to Schalk van der Merwe who is also a good option. But critically, up till now the Bokke hadn't used Heinke because he wasn't a settled test player having had only 1 or 2 caps before moving off and we rather relied on what we knew (Guthro Steenkamp) and what we have had locally (Oosthuizen/Nyakane) so instead of having a class prop in his prime for the Bokke and gaining experience in test rugby we've had the twilight years of a once class prop and the growth pains of potentially classy props as an example.

The Top14 has 14 teams and play double the amount of games we play in SR. That's roughly 6 times more minutes of rugby than what SA gets. So, theoretically you could field 5/6th of your teams with foreigners and stil get the game time SA gets currently. on top of that you are filling your teams with proven test stars that your youg players can learn from in their own setups and test themselves against during training and against opposition. That is something our own youngsters are getting less and less of as our quality slowly gets drained. Sure, we have guys coming in who are good but generally they aren't at their best or ready for test rugby yet and in many cases we just aren't able to get the same quality in again for long whiles. Look at the obvious class players we have rushed in; the likes of Etzebeth, Goosen, PSdT, Malherbe etc. They are out injured for longer than not. u20 to SR to test rugby are big steps up and though they have the ability the body needs time to adapt. We don't have the depth of class anymore to allow those players that time.

And on the fact that players in Europe tend to play close to double the amount of time they do down here, we don't get the benefit of those players being readily available and fit/rested and we won't get it with players now doing SR and then going to the Japanse top league either.

I guess what I am saying is that the situation has way more downsides for us than for France or positives for us.

But you are forgetting about the Vodacom Cup and the Currie Cup, does those matches not count at all??? Each system has it's positives and negatives. And yes, I agree that players in the NH play more games in SA, but that is beside the point.

This is hypothetical, but if the SH teams were to play as many games as the NH teams during the same period as the NH teams, can you honestly see SA and NZ teams being loaded with NH players?? I can't. We would rather pick our own guys and try to find the next diamond-in-the-rough.