Foot in Touch

Entries categorized as ‘Argentina’

Quarter-final preview

October 6, 2011 · Leave a Comment

The Celtic clash between Ireland and Wales is the best of a cracking quarter-final lineup

In a Rugby World Cup group game, the average winning margin is 28 points.  In a knock-out game, it is 14 points.  In a final, it is 10 points, and three finals have been decided by less than one score.

The newspaper in which I read those statistics used them as evidence that knock-out rugby is boring.  I strongly suspect the correspondent was a football fan, because the actual reason is quite the opposite – it gets close in the quarter-finals because that’s when the best teams start playing each other.  This is where it gets fascinating.

While there are those who will complain that the competition has again failed to produce a group-stage upset, it is difficult to be too downhearted about this because it guarantees an immense weekend of rugby.  The obvious weak link is Argentina, who are extremely unlikely to overcome New Zealand (30/1 last I checked), but then Dan Carter thoughtfully ruptured a tendon he never knew he had, giving the game huge resonance for Colin Slade and those who put their house on the All Blacks instead of a pension plan.  I for one will be tuning in with rapt attention, not only to see if Slade can fill the winged sandals of Carter but also to seize upon the first sign of choking, spluttering or even mild heart burn from the men in black.

Elsewhere, England and France will renew an historic rivalry with both sides looking to improve.  This may turn out to be hubristic, but I make England heavy, heavy favourites.  Not only have England won 4 from 4, including two games that thoroughly resembled knock-out rugby, they also have pedigree in this type of game.  Add to that the abject form of the French, the deteriorating relationship between coach and players, their weird selection and the psychological impact of a certain J Wilkinson, and I will be astonished if England lose.  That said, it is a World Cup quarter final, and if ever there is a game where form goes out of the window, it’s a knock-out game in a World Cup.  France are always capable of a mercurial turnaround.  I just think that in this instance, it’s more unlikely than usual.

As if that wasn’t enough, the really mouthwatering clashes are the two I have yet to mention.  Australia vs South Africa will be titanic, with large numbers of travelling supporters set to create a pulsating atmosphere.  David Pocock against Heinrich Brussow, Will Genia against Fourie du Preez – huge clashes in a huge game.  Australia are favourites, having beaten South Africa in their last four meetings, but I actually fancy the Springboks to win.  Not only is this side the most experienced in their history, with 836 caps, it contains a number of players who are World Cup winners, where Australia have none.  Ireland showed that you can beat the Wallabies by kicking your goals and having a blanket defence, both strong facets of the South African game, and I expect that will have had a psychological impact.  The onus is on Australia to make the play quick and loose, and in the knock-out stages I always bet against the side who have to break free to win the game – it’s just not how knock-out rugby works.

That is in turn what makes the Celtic clash the pick of the round, as neither side should look to stifle the other.  Wales will never abandon their free-flowing style, regardless of circumstance, and a Northern Hemisphere opponent reduces the chance that they will execute badly because of nerves or psychological weakness.  Ireland, meanwhile, have the pack to play it tight, but they cut loose against Italy and their dynamic back row will want a broken game so that they can scavenge possession.  Although it would buck the trend of late-stage rugby, there is a genuine chance that we’ll see exciting, fast-paced, incisive rugby.  The last time Wales and Ireland met in an ultra-pressured game was the 6 Nations decider in 2009, and that was an absolute belter.  I really can’t pick a winner, although my heart just about says Wales.  Ultimately, whichever of the outstanding back rows wins the day will lead their side to victory, and Warburton against O’Brien is too close to call.

Categories: All Blacks · Argentina · Australia · England · France · Ireland · RWC 2011 · South Africa · Wales
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Pick ‘n’ Mix

September 23, 2011 · Leave a Comment

Jack Lewars in Cloud Cuckoo Land

Can someone please check the drinking water in New Zealand, preferably as a matter of urgency?  I only ask because there must be some reason why half the coaches in the tournament seem to have gone stir crazy with their selections this week.

First up, we’ve got France.  Now in many ways this is the least surprising one, given that Lievremont has form here.  As a mate of mine said recently, you never play for France, you just play one game for them.  Then there’s every chance you’ll be out of the squad the next week and captain in a fortnight.  Even given the truth in this, however, the French coach has gone properly overboard this time.  This is one of the biggest games of the tournament, certainly the crunch match of Pool A, and Lievremont has dropped Trinh-Duc, his established fly-half.  Oh well, you say, England have changed like that effectively in the past.  Well, yes, they have, but they did usually replace the dropped player with another fly-half.  Lievremont has put Morgan Parra there, a man with 35 minutes of test rugby in that position.  Ever.  And twenty minutes of those were against Japan.  Can you imagine what David Skrela must have said? 

DS: ’You’re doing what?’
ML: [shrug] ’We’re going with Parra.’
DS: ‘Yes, you said.  I just wanted to know who’s playing fly-half?’
ML: ‘Parra.’
DS: ‘I see.  In that case, can I start at prop please?’
ML: ‘I was thinking more water boy.’

Now the New Zealand press have gone to town on this, as tabloids over there are wont to do (thank goodness ours are so down to earth - today’s Mail led with ‘Staring Down the Barrel of Economic Disaster’).  They have claimed that this is match-fixing, as France want to end up in the quarter-final draw with England, Wales and Ireland – the half of the draw that the IRB officially renamed on Sunday as the ’easy route to the final where the All Blacks will crush you’ half.  The media have further pointed out that people who bought a £241 ticket for the game are unlikely to be too happy about it, leading Lievremont to tell a reporter “I will speak to the players to see what they decide. Perhaps they will decide to give up if it’s easier for us afterward.”  Ah, the old ‘tell the truth sarcastically enough and people won’t realise’ trick.  How wiley.

Imanol Harinordoquy was a bit more direct, saying that the idea of the French deliberately losing the game is preposterous - a cunning line to take, as it distracted attention from the French squad and selectors, who are dead keen on deliberately losing the game.  He added, “I feel like telling them that I’ve bought four tickets at 250 euros (£217) each, and I’m not complaining.”  In fairness, he probably bought them in case Lievremont dropped him in favour of Carla Bruni.  Let’s hope he at least gives one to David Skrela.

Next up on our carousel of bafflingness is Andy Robinson, a man normally associated with stolid predictability.  This week, however, faced by an absolutely crucial game against Argentina, he decided to spring a tactical surprise.  Unfortunately, the only surprising thing he could dream up was to drop his captain, Alistair Kellock – it was that or tell them to wear odd socks, and the Argentinians haven’t fallen for that one since the Falklands.  Now I am a bit cautious about taking on a man who was assistant coach of the immortal 2003 England side, but I think we can be pretty sure that he wasn’t much involved in selection back then.  “I know Martin Johnson’s good, but have you considered Iain Balshaw for the final?” “Just wait outside and watch for eavesdroppers Andy, like we agreed.  Leave the socks.”

On the subject of England, they are (predictably) the one rock of solidity in a sea of surprises.  After resting several key players against Georgia – a reasonable enough decision, even if it did backfire a little when England weren’t very good – Johnson has named the team that he hopes will take England to the final, minus the unavailable Stevens, Easter and Lawes.  Thank goodness – some sanity.  Sorry what’s that?  They’re doing what?  That’s right folks – the Romanians are putting out a second XV.  They’ve made 11 changes since the Argentina game?  Of course they have.

Now hold on a minute.  Clearly while the rest of the rugby-watching world turned to the man on their left and went ‘there really aren’t any minnows in this tournament, you know’, they had all forgotten the one glaring exception: England.  Thank heavens the Romanians are here to remind us what a pushover the English are.  After all, their World Cup form since 2002 does read played 16, won 14, lost 2.  Many of you will no doubt read this and say ‘they’re obviously resting players for Georgia’, which seems fair, until you realise that the Georgia game is undoubtedly the last one they’ll play in the tournament.  Surely their players can lift themselves for the only winnable game they’ll get in the group, especially as it’ll be ‘one last push’ time?  And anyway, what are they resting them for?  God forbid that, after two games in four days, the Romanians won’t be fit for their next match, the always-crucial European Nations Cup Division 1A tie against Portugal in February.  I’m not trying to be rude about developmental rugby, but Romanian players live to play in World Cups, and they only get four games every four years.  So why not give who deserve to start the chance to play the most successful Northern Hemisphere team?

I may, of course, be wrong on all of this.  It could all be genius.  Scotland may win convincingly, thus securing the quarter-final spots for themselves and England, in turn allowing Johnson and Robinson to pick their teams solely on height for next week’s meeting; Romania may lose heroically, discovering a new generation of young superstars who will sweep to glory in 2015; and France may thrash New Zealand, with Parra scoring 80 unanswered points and breaking both the New Zealand backline and Dan Carter’s sense of self-worth at the same time.  But I doubt it.  So perhaps someone could spare a thought for the real losers in all these shenanigans, who are the players.  After all, they don’t go out there just to get in a bit of dwarf-throwing.

Categories: All Blacks · Argentina · England · France · Romania · RWC 2011 · Scotland
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Dysfunctional England scrape past Argentina

September 11, 2011 · 1 Comment

Jack Lewars

We at Foot in Touch promised a lot for the major World Cup games – match reports, tactical analysis, special features.  In this instance, however, we think the less said about the game the better.

England were bad – bad in their discipline, bad with their kicking and, worst of all, very badly led.  They started the game with errors and penalties, losing their own line out, knocking on in midfield and twice straying marginally offside.  This should have served as a warning, both that they needed to stick to the basics and that Bryce Lawrence was in the most pedantic of moods.  Instead, England seemed completely unable to adapt, either to the Argentine physicality or to the extreme ‘idiosyncracy’ of the referee’s decisions.

Argentina went ahead via a Contepomi penalty, before Wilkinson restored parity after a high tackle.  Then came the first of a series of let-offs for the men in white, as Contepomi missed a penalty attempt.  Although Rodriguez did open a three point lead a short time later, his subsequent misses were a key factor in allowing England to sneak home.

Apart from several more missed kicks, including one from Wilkinson (who missed four overall in his worst ever kicking performance), the only bright spot of the first half was a searing break from Ben Foden.  The Northampton full-back, who was added a rare touch of quality to England’s play throughout, picked a great line through an Argentinian dog-leg and sped clear.  Unfortunately, he chose to throw an ambitious pass to Armitage, rather than feeding Wilkinson and Ashton on his inside, and England had to settle for a penalty, which their fly-half duly missed.  Until the introduction of Youngs, it was to be the last moment of excitement for England fans for some time.

For the Argentinians, however, excitement was not in short supply.  Exeter winger Gonzalo Camacho was constantly dangerous, profiting from the fact that England’s defensive line seemed vulnerable to sideways running and a change of pace; and, whenever the Argentine pack stalled in its progress forward, England gifted them a penalty.  When Dan Cole was sin binned for blatently collapsing a maul, England were lucky to go in at half time only 6-3 down.  Only the inconsistency of the South Americans’ kicking prevented England losing touch.

The second half was a similar story, with a succession of wayward penalties.  The difference, however, was Ben Youngs.  Introduced on 50 minutes, he instantly added pace to the game with a quick penalty and from that moment on England’s tempo was lifted.  At the same time, their superior preparation (Argentina only played two warm-up games, and one of those was against Worcester Warriors) and fitness began to tell, and the set piece and close exchanges swung England’s way,  Eventually, as England finally established a platform, Youngs was able to snipe over from close range, with Wilkinson’s conversion giving them a 10-9 advantage.  There was still time for Youngs to execute a magnificent cross-kick, and for Wilkinson finally to land a penalty, but the remainder of the game petered out.  It was an apt conclusion.

Overall, England’s few positives came from individual performances – Youngs, Foden, Armitage in parts (although he was far too flat when England went wide) and Lawes, who single-handedly destroyed the Argentinian midfield.  It is also immeasurably better to be wondering how you nearly lost, rather than contemplating a quarter final against New Zealand.  However, the missed one-on-one tackles, the lack of control and the chronic indiscipline need immediate attention.  Perhaps more profound is the issue of leadership.  When England were conceding penalties on a regular basis and were struggling for possession, who stood up and took control?  Certainly not Mike Tindall, stand-in captain; not Nick Easter or Steve Thompson, the most experienced forwards.  Martin Johnson, a consumate leader in his playing days and a man who always responded positively to pressure, must have been tearing his hair out.  England have frequently been accused of lacking leadership and this game added weight to that accusation.  If England are to go far in this World Cup, the senior players will need to be much more visible when the going gets tough – otherwise England will continue to stutter and struggle when the pressure comes on.

Categories: Argentina · England · RWC 2011
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,