Winning Top 14 bigger than H Cup - even O'Gara says so

[FrenchFan]

why? parce que Toulon.

because it is.

 

[Feicarsinn]

why? parce que Toulon.

because it is.

That's great for you. I still don't want to watch it though.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

well judging by your presence on that thread nobody has attacked the keyboard better than you

Do you understand things? Other than my homosexual attraction to Rob Kearney of course.

 

[Big Ewis]

Wait wait wait...firstly, there's a bunch of reactions here that seem a little over-the-top from Irish posters.
Secondly, I don't know what intentions FrenchFan had as he posted this, but my guess is he read the article as I did on rugbyrama.fr and wanted to share it to back his views, and indeed it's relevant to see guys recently like O'Gara or in Toulon Drew Mitchell admit they're overwhelmed with how big the Bouclier de Brennus really is, for French people. France and us fans aren't stuffing it in other people's faces, we're just saying "look, the H Cup is very big, but the Bouclier de Brennus is bigger than you think at this point in time with every team a mastodon and so much competitiveness". It's not like back in 1996.

You can't put me, FrenchFan, gaston or others in the same basket. gaston hasn't provoked anyone, neither have I, or shoved anything in you guys' faces. FrenchFan likes the polemics lol, and is very uncompromising with his points.

What I see on this thread is pics of Ireland holding the 6N trophy for God's sake, again a bunch of strong reactions, including a few overreactions, the typical Olyy post full of utter nonsense and concentrated negativity in a more recent unjust demeaning of Top 14 Rugby wave on this thread...

And I mean a French team is going to win the European Cup again this year, so it's not like we're withdrawing into our Top 14 headquarters trying to give it meaning. There is real discussion to be had about what the Bouclier really means nowadays as its weight has grown with each year passing.
There was a time when the top teams barely lost a game, Premiership style:
* this year, 1st placed Toulon had 9 defeats in 26 matches, compared to 11th placed Grenoble and their 13 defeats.
* another example: 2nd and 3rd Montypellier and Clermont had just 2 more wins than 8th ranked Bordeaux.

That's great for you. I still don't want to watch it though.

You're not going to watch the H Cup final this year ?

 

[Feicarsinn]

Serious question, how much do you think those statistics are coloured by French sides not trying as hard away from home?

 

[Big Ewis]

Serious question, how much do you think those statistics are coloured by French sides not trying as hard away from home?

now that's true as well. But you imply something by saying that: I retort with another question, to you, ask yourself: why do French sides have such difficulty away from home ??

And anyways, this thread has turned too stuckup already....let's just enjoy a nice BBQ with the next repeated champs here:




hmmmm......look at Davy and all his...MEAT.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

now that's true as well. But you imply something by saying that: I retort with another question, to you, ask yourself: why do French sides have such difficulty away from home ??

And anyways, this thread has turned too stuckup already....let's just enjoy a nice BBQ with the next repeated champs here:

View attachment 2873


hmmmm......look at Davy and all his...MEAT.

A Weber and charcoal... I am disappointed; I'd have thought the SA RCT contingent would've taught the others how to prepare meat by now. Bakkies, Danie, trek jul sokkies op, maters!

 

[Feicarsinn]

now that's true as well. But you imply something by saying that: I retort with another question, to you, ask yourself: why do French sides have such difficulty away from home ??

And anyways, this thread has turned too stuckup already....let's just enjoy a nice BBQ with the next repeated champs here:

View attachment 2873


hmmmm......look at Davy and all his...MEAT.

Well, if teams aren't putting in as much effort away from home then you can't judge the quality of the league on it's competitiveness. If every team wins 70-90% of its home games (that's a hypothetical figure before anyone goes correcting me) because the league is so close that home advantage is that key it's one thing. If teams are winning those same percentages because the opposition isn't sending as strong a team as they could it's certainly not a sign of a great competition to me.

 

[Big Ewis]

what I was hinting at was that by bringing up the fact that teams have issues on the road in the Top 14, we're de facto exposing how hard the league is, in that very few teams have the budget/depth to go and defy a side in its own backyard. The calendar is too dense, and the matches are too demanding. We've got tons of injuries constantly, and guys who don't even play international test Rugby, i.e. play JUST club ball are rested consistently. Not because we're cool like dat in France to our players, but again because of the infernal calendar the guys go through.

It's not that guys aren't trying, that's just not realistic reasoning and a little bit ridiculous. It's just club authorities/coaching staff understand the kind of season it is, 26 games, and must be utterly lucid and reckon a plan for their roster: teams could go into every away match thinking they'll win, in the very middle of a seething, exhausting season; but after some observation and empirical calculation, it's obvious sides must settle for "lesser" goals. Achieving a defensive bonus, or perhaps a draw in Castres or Toulouse is a great enough feat. Even Toulon don't have the depth to align a super XV to go and defy Clermont in Michelin, and have come close enough in Toulouse for e.g. this year.

Points are precious, precious, precious, and clubs wouldn't be that incredibly silly as to winning all at home and then just throwing away games casually on the road, thinking "ahhh, it's just too much work". Points can be achieved without winning a match in this kind of league.
With less games, surely teams would change their culture and would set their minds to winning more.

 

[Feicarsinn]

what I was hinting at was that by bringing up the fact that teams have issues on the road in the Top 14, we're de facto exposing how hard the league is, in that very few teams have the budget/depth to go and defy a side in its own backyard. The calendar is too dense, and the matches are too demanding. We've got tons of injuries constantly, and guys who don't even play international test Rugby, i.e. play JUST club ball are rested consistently. Not because we're cool like dat in France to our players, but again because of the infernal calendar the guys go through.

It's not that guys aren't trying, that's just not realistic reasoning and a little bit ridiculous. It's just club authorities/coaching staff understand the kind of season it is, 26 games, and must be utterly lucid and reckon a plan for their roster: teams could go into every away match thinking they'll win, in the very middle of a seething, exhausting season; but after some observation and empirical calculation, it's obvious sides must settle for "lesser" goals. Achieving a defensive bonus, or perhaps a draw in Castres or Toulouse is a great enough feat. Even Toulon don't have the depth to align a super XV to go and defy Clermont in Michelin, and have come close enough in Toulouse for e.g. this year.

Points are precious, precious, precious, and clubs wouldn't be that incredibly silly as to winning all at home and then just throwing away games casually on the road, thinking "ahhh, it's just too much work". Points can be achieved without winning a match in this kind of league.
With less games, surely teams would change their culture and would set their minds to winning more.

So hardest doesn't translate to best then. In terms of quality, a shorter league would be preferable?

 

[FrenchFan]

yes harder because you have to win more games over a longer competition

and the level of competitiveness makes the league better

thats why

your feigned interest in our league is touching

 

[Feicarsinn]

yes harder because you have to win more games over a longer competition

and the level of competitiveness makes the league better

thats why

your feigned interest in our league is touching

Well, you fist two sentences contradict each other. If teams can't commit their strongest sides every week due to the length of the competition that hardly makes it better. It certainly lowers the standard.

And must you go out of your way to be an arsehole at all turns?

 

[FrenchFan]

there is no contradiction. And nobody said that the teams don't commit because of the length of the competiton, you're the one saying that.

why u keep rattling on about a league you don't watch, can't help yourself.

Must be an Irish condition. I know you guys have the gift of the gab but in your case its more like diarrhea.

 

[big ginger 8]

Well, you fist two sentences contradict each other. If teams can't commit their strongest sides every week due to the length of the competition that hardly makes it better. It certainly lowers the standard.

And must you go out of your way to be an arsehole at all turns?

there is no contradiction. And nobody said that the teams don't commit because of the length of the competiton, you're the one saying that.

why u keep rattling on about a league you don't watch, can't help yourself.

Must be an Irish condition. I know you guys have the gift of the gab but in your case its more like diarrhea.

Wouldn't it be easier to just say yes?

 

[Big Ewis]

And must you go out of your way to be an arsehole at all turns?

hey, we all know that's your job, nobody's competing for that ! Although FrenchFan does seem like he'd make a strong candidate

Listen, all I can say is the Top 14 has really evolved into something ultra-competitive. I personally couldn't give less of a shhit what term we use here, and "best" is usually a term I find is used in silly ways. Who's got the "best" league ? What a silly question.

I'm just on this thread talking about how competitive the Top 14 is, it wasn't ever a question of "best" anything, that's silly. So no need to get pedantic, it is what it is the, Top 14, one heck of a competitive league - and since you touch on it yeah, personally I'd rather it took less space and had less weight. On one hand it's created something really big time, but on the other it's just too much. Players are often complaining about the pace of the league and the calendar, and for me, I know FrenchFan disagrees, it's taking up a lot of the space for national duty, it's so weighty.

 

[FrenchFan]

ehm not sure what I disagree with. The league is what it is.
Yes there are too many games in my view. But there is a plan to move to a Top12. It used to be a Top16. So it has moved in the right direction. They want to reduce the number of games, and shorten the competition. They are moving on.

there's also new players coming in like Lyon which offer big potential because they have the resources aka money, people to spread the game around and become a force in the league.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

ehm not sure what I disagree with. The league is what it is.
Yes there are too many games in my view. But there is a plan to move to a Top12. It used to be a Top16. So it has moved in the right direction. They want to reduce the number of games, and shorten the competition. They are moving on.

there's also new players coming in like Lyon which offer big potential because they have the resources aka money, people to spread the game around and become a force in the league.

Surely the clubs wouldn't give up four rounds and a quarter final round worth of money for player welfare?!

 

[Big Ewis]

not sure what you disagree with, my a$s !!!
http://www.therugbyforum.com/threads/33133-Sofiane-Guitoune-to-join-Bordeaux

Agreed, a Top 16 would've been a near disaster...