Will the French rock up to play?

First topic message reminder :

French flair is dead. The myth lives on amongst some less perceptive media outlets, possibly because it's nicely alliterates, but the corpse of ambitious French rugby  was buried five years ago.

No team has been ensconced in more allegations, accusations and instances of biting, gouging, testicle grasping, hair pulling or head butting than the French.

As recently as the 2011 RWC final Rougerie, realising the game was up took the opportunity to gouge McCaws eyes.  

The rugby landscape is just littered with instances too numerous to mention and even highly respected publications will freely publish the view that this kind of illegal play is just part and parcel of French culture, without fear of litigation or reprisal.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/france/4945001/Eye-gouging-just-a-way-of-life-in-French-rugby.html

My question is: which France will turn up? The side who play rugby, or the side who want to permanently injure and disfigure a member of the opposition? And will this weekend's officials have the guts to remove them from the field when they do?

quinsforever wrote:McCaw is very good. But he is also a cheat..........

To be fair, so have all the decent opensides of the pro era. As are most modern backrowers. And props. And the hookers. And scrum halves. And the kickers who roll the ball forward a metre after a penalty is awarded when the ref isn't looking. And coaches who plan Hollywood style special effects to manipulate substitution rules..............

....etc.

Possibly you don't understand the laws. McCaw is very good and normally not off side. It's that people who don't understand the laws often think he is.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Possibly you don't understand the laws. McCaw is very good and normally not off side. It's that people who don't understand the laws often think he is.

Please explain the entry rules to the ruck and what taking the space is please?

If France win this week end. Will it be put down too the fact that France was the better team on the day?

Or will it be put down that the All Blacks was had a flue virous?

butterfingers wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:Possibly you don't understand the laws. McCaw is very good and normally not off side. It's that people who don't understand the laws often think he is.

Please explain the entry rules to the ruck and what taking the space is please?

Give him a chance, He'll be busy copying and ready to paste asap.......as he does with all his posts!

tigerleghorn wrote:

butterfingers wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:Possibly you don't understand the laws. McCaw is very good and normally not off side. It's that people who don't understand the laws often think he is.

Please explain the entry rules to the ruck and what taking the space is please?

Give him a chance, He'll be busy copying and ready to paste asap.......as he does with all his posts!

I look forward to it...

Under PSA the French have looked mentally fragile and lacking in thorough offensive execution, which I must say is tastily ironic given the volume of people backing France to take over the NH at the start of his tenure. Some counterattacking ambition can still be glimpsed in some of their games imo but for the most part they've become far more cautious and less penetrative. Contrast this to the years under Laporte or even Lievremont when a Frenchman with ball in hand anywhere on the field could be considered a threat.

Knowsit17 wrote:Under PSA the French have looked mentally fragile and lacking in thorough offensive execution, which I must say is tastily ironic given the volume of people backing France to take over the NH at the start of his tenure. Some counterattacking ambition can still be glimpsed in some of their games imo but for the most part they've become far more cautious and less penetrative. Contrast this to the years under Laporte or even Lievremont when a Frenchman with ball in hand anywhere on the field could be considered a threat.

Yeah, history will probably be kind to Laporte retrospectively. I remember when France were so easy to wind up, Brian Moore was excellent at this, they looked rabid singing the anthems before a ball had been kicked in anger.

Was it Nigel Heslop who made a late(ish) tackle on Serge which ultimately saw two of their front row sent off in the 91 WC?

French coaches since have tried to make them more English but with limited success.

butterfingers wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:Possibly you don't understand the laws. McCaw is very good and normally not off side. It's that people who don't understand the laws often think he is.

Please explain the entry rules to the ruck and what taking the space is please?

Sorry Butters GE is right. Ruck rules don't matter. He gets to the ball before it becomes a ruck. Means you can enter from bloody well anywhere.

Sorry, disney. is never right.

It's written in the site rules somewhere. I can't find it right now, but it's definitely there.

Knowsit17 wrote:Under PSA the French have looked mentally fragile and lacking in thorough offensive execution, which I must say is tastily ironic given the volume of people backing France to take over the NH at the start of his tenure. Some counterattacking ambition can still be glimpsed in some of their games imo but for the most part they've become far more cautious and less penetrative. Contrast this to the years under Laporte or even Lievremont when a Frenchman with ball in hand anywhere on the field could be considered a threat.

I was waiting for it...I was getting impatient.  But there it is.  Congratulations, Knowsit, that get's the international year off to it's traditional start - finally.

I can relax now and enjoy it.

Someone had to, there are only so many ways you could express it differently.

In the past others might have used the same terms but rarely under the conditions that are at large now, off the back of two horrendous years by French standards. The only impressive win they've achieved in that time is over Australia in Paris and looking at the last few months that particular win might since have shed some of its gloss.

So hopefully I've skirted the hidden trench many in the past have fallen into and applied the mental fragility label better than most  

What's with this mentally fragile label? Where that's come from?
I can understand and agree with people saying this team is overrated and not as good as people might want us to be but what does this tag is meant to say? That france are chokers? Dont think so unless its against england ? That the players are a bunch of softies that give up at the first hurdle? Very debatable... To put things into perspective let's compare France with a team of similar quality (according to recent 6N encounters i.e. Ireland) both properly outclassed by NZ:
- NZ - France 2013: 23-13, 30-0, 24-9
- NZ - Ireland 2012: 42-10, 22-19, 60-0
If anything france results against NZ were sort of consistent although you have to wonder about the mental strenght of the Irishmen during the last test of 2012.

So in a nutshell France is not a great team full stop. They are below England and wales for sure and way below nz and sa. Finally i dont buy in that romantic french flair crap. Sure we had some gifted backs in our days but where I come from its a no nonsense forward abrasive game. French grassroot is often not pretty but very passionate and remains true to its core value of "fight".

whocares wrote:What's with this mentally fragile label? Where that's come from?
I can understand and agree with people saying this team is overrated and not as good as people might want us to be but what does this tag is meant to say? That france are chokers? Dont think so unless its against england ? That the players are a bunch of softies that give up at the first hurdle? Very debatable... To put things into perspective let's compare France with a team of similar quality (according to recent 6N encounters i.e. Ireland) both properly outclassed by NZ:
- NZ - France 2013: 23-13, 30-0, 24-9
- NZ - Ireland 2012: 42-10, 22-19, 60-0
If anything france results against NZ were sort of consistent although you have to wonder about the mental strenght of the Irishmen during the last test of 2012.

So in a nutshell France is not a great team full stop. They are below England and wales for sure and way below nz and sa. Finally i dont buy in that romantic french flair crap. Sure we had some gifted backs in our days but where I come from its a no nonsense forward abrasive game. French grassroot is often not pretty but very passionate and remains true to its core value of "fight".

I've never avoided the bullet that says we've got a lot in common with France... more than most people might be aware.  And yeah, mad coaches (player selections/tactics), erratic performances (the very good and the downright embarrassing) and indeed 'mental fragility' might be three of them
I also found it interesting when a year or two ago I was looking back at the IRB rankings since they began.  And I think unlike any other two top ten sides, French and Irish rugby seem to perform an uncannily unified dance of ups and downs through time.  Yes, divided by one or two positions often but the graph has a very similar matching set of upturns and downturns (thus sharing bottom places in this year's 6N!)

In other words, I'm looking closely for a French upturn in fortunes because I think if it happens then we might have a chance of continuing that dance upwards too.

Now that you bring it up it is uncanny  

Come to think of it I can't remember the last 6N where more than one place in the final table separated France and Ireland.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:Well, if anyone has spent time playing in France or reading about Rugby in France, there has been a history of all sorts of 'aggressive' play.  However, I think that is mostly a thing of the past at the top levels, although at club level the referees are a bit more tolerant of the Social Darwinism of Rugby.  

I disagree there was any foul play by Rougerie (I think it was him, though I might be mistaken) in the RWC final.  Fingers slid across the face in a ruck but did not seem to me to be any attempt to put fingers in the eye, nor to scratch, nor, in fact, an attempt to do anything untoward.  I know that puts me in the minority, but I saw what I saw (or rather what I didn't see).    

I suppose Saturday will be interesting, though I agree with some other folks that France has not been on form this season.  C'est la vie, non?

Well DG a very small minority. The IRB have even stated (in a typically yellow bellied and unnecessarily bureaucratic and gutless side step) that he would have been sanctioned for sure if the evidence supporting the claim had arisen within the legal window. So... Certainly McCaws obvious reaction showed that it was more than the merry accidental jape you imply.

A somewhat small minority outside of La Belle France, no doubts.  However for those from the nation which enshrined Liberté, égalité, fraternité as a right of man; for those who sing La Marseillaise from the heart, they see poor sportsmanship by the match winner and un-necessary whinging.  

I suppose its where one comes from and one's own perspective based upon one's background.  And of course, which team one is rooting for.  
It is healthy to be open to other opinions rather than go with the crowd.

doctor_grey wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:Well, if anyone has spent time playing in France or reading about Rugby in France, there has been a history of all sorts of 'aggressive' play.  However, I think that is mostly a thing of the past at the top levels, although at club level the referees are a bit more tolerant of the Social Darwinism of Rugby.  

I disagree there was any foul play by Rougerie (I think it was him, though I might be mistaken) in the RWC final.  Fingers slid across the face in a ruck but did not seem to me to be any attempt to put fingers in the eye, nor to scratch, nor, in fact, an attempt to do anything untoward.  I know that puts me in the minority, but I saw what I saw (or rather what I didn't see).    

I suppose Saturday will be interesting, though I agree with some other folks that France has not been on form this season.  C'est la vie, non?

Well DG a very small minority. The IRB have even stated (in a typically yellow bellied and unnecessarily bureaucratic and gutless side step) that he would have been sanctioned for sure if the evidence supporting the claim had arisen within the legal window. So... Certainly McCaws obvious reaction showed that it was more than the merry accidental jape you imply.

A somewhat small minority outside of La Belle France, no doubts.  However for those from the nation which enshrined Liberté, égalité, fraternité as a right of man; for those who sing La Marseillaise from the heart, they see poor sportsmanship by the match winner and un-necessary whinging.  

I suppose its where one comes from and one's own perspective based upon one's background.  And of course, which team one is rooting for.  
It is healthy to be open to other opinions rather than go with the crowd.

Love you Doc. In a manly way.

tigerleghorn wrote:

butterfingers wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:Possibly you don't understand the laws. McCaw is very good and normally not off side. It's that people who don't understand the laws often think he is.

Please explain the entry rules to the ruck and what taking the space is please?

Give him a chance, He'll be busy copying and ready to paste asap.......as he does with all his posts!

Children. It's simple really. As long as the tackler releases and he's on his feet he his on side until the ruck forms and he is cleared out. The tacklee must then release the ball and McCaw pounces from wherever he is like the stealthy unstoppable panther that he is.

However you are all sadly deluded because McCaw isn't the one yous gotta worry about. It's Sam Cane that is doing the damage at the moment.

That and the ABs cunning plan to let ruck after ruck form and the ball be recycled laterally or sometimes linearly until the ball carrier has run out of support and then whammy isolated turn over.

McCaw has apprenticised the entire team and they are now a collective unstoppable no 7.

The problem I have with the constant harping on about McCaw cheating is that there comes with it some kind of assertion that he cheats and gets away with it. Now why would he get away with it? To me this suggests that the refs are consistently missing his infringing or seeing it but not penalising him. Now if they are consistently missing his infringing (depsite opposition fans, players and coach pointing out his infringing) that would suggest some kind of massive incompetence on the part of multiple referees from multiple countries over the last decade. This is entirely possible though if this were true they would also be missing similar infringing by other players (which fans are not suggesting)
The other suggestion is that they see the infringing but decide not to penalise him. Now since we know he does get penalised we should change that to penalise him enough. So why do they not penalise him more. Are these refs afraid of him? in awe of him? scared to send him of because he is captain? afraid to offend their boss who is a cheating biased Kiwi? paid off by the mass of NZ money flooding the world rugby system .... could others may be add some more theories for me.

Or could it may be be that our (you, me, other fans) knowledge and judgement around the rules of rugby perhapes less than the referees'. You know some times the refs are actually right - in fact I would probably go as far as to say they get most of the calls right including their decision about whether McCaw and every other player on the field needs to be penalised or not.

Yes goodness knows England fans would never suggest referees might change the outcome of a game through incompetence...

Not meaning to burst anyone's balloon, but McCaw and his style of play is yesterday's news. If we know anything about sport, it always moves on. If the entire AB team is crafted in his own image, they could be in for big doo doo. Thierry Dusautoir is the new prototype. Cripe, give me XV Dusautoirs and the Maginot Line would never have been breached or driven around.

From the greatest movie ever made: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM-E2H1ChJM

ah. That'll be why France won the World Cup while McCaw was fully fit and disautoir had a broken foot.

 

Yesterday's news     

Besides the ABs won because of..............Steven Donald, the greatest player in NZ

AB's won because they bought it from the start. Specially the Final. Everyone knows that.

Gibson wrote:AB's won because they bought it from the start. Specially the Final. Everyone knows that.

Geez theres some fools around. The green envy knows no limits...but its a point- its so hard to choose which matches to buy these days...I mean which of the many the AB's play where the opposition isnt going to collapse into the usual drivelling mess of depression and ineptitude without them forking up a dollar- its just so difficult to pick one with so many defaulting to that position.

Luckily we picked France that day then ay?

We only havin' a bit o fun with y'all, Taylor.  No sweat. And not with you, mate.  
Just makin' a smatterin of a point about runnin up the flagpole an alleged gouge.  

Most Anglos take it on faith there was evil intent and evil was done.  Go to France and about 90% of the Rugby public truly believe youse guys are sore winners because of how the incident (they almost universally believe did not happen) was played up after the win.   I think you would be surprised at the negative pub the ABs and their fans received in the world's largest tier 1 Rugby country and the damage to the rep of the ABs.   But it all happened in French, so we Anglos don't see it.  Very different perspective to our fairly closed English language world. I read Midi Olympique (the French weekly Rugby newspaper) most weeks so I see some things from their perspective. Très différent.

The bit about Dusautoir is just me havin a bit o fun. Please give a simple country doctor his due.

And, by the way, most French think they have virtually no chance this weekend.

Interesting, you're saying the reputation of the ABs in France was damaged because a Frenchman gouged McCaw. Can they do eye transplants yet doc?

ebop wrote:Interesting, you're saying the reputation of the ABs in France was damaged because a Frenchman gouged McCaw. Can they do eye transplants yet doc?

NO.  
You have it completely wrong.  
I am saying the French believe a gouge did not occur and that the AB supporters and a lot of the Anglo media made much ado about squat.  In fact, they see the AB/Anglos taking it on faith a gouge occurred, which they do not believe.  And this is so polarised because most Anglos, especially AB supporters, take it on faith a gouge did occur.  The French disagree, and see it as really poor sportsmanship.  In simple terms you won.  Now shut up and show some class.  This is the general opinion across the south of France.  

Looky mate, I am a dumb English doc working in America at the moment.  Just telling you like it is.  Taking no sides because one of my good mates is a team doc for Toulon.  I have to maintain public neutrality. But you ask a typical French Rugby fan and 'no class' is right below the surface.

I get ya doc, maybe it's a bit like us in 07. We thought we were robbed whilst the French probably thought the ABs were outplayed. Just perception. We don't understand French so we never know what's going down. Hope there's some feeling in the game in the weekend but no funny stuff.

doctor_grey wrote:And, by the way, most French think they have virtually no chance this weekend.  

Erm. That's not true. One of my clients is one of the larger French companies. I was over there yesterday and let me tell you...the Pierre on the street....they think France will win. I'm getting the whole "of course" (shrug) "France will win" (outrageous clichéd eye movement) "we are in France." From all of them.

Taylorman wrote:

Gibson wrote:AB's won because they bought it from the start. Specially the Final. Everyone knows that.

Geez theres some fools around. The green envy knows no limits...but its a point- its so hard to choose which matches to buy these days...I mean which of the many the AB's play where the opposition isnt going to collapse into the usual drivelling mess of depression and ineptitude without them forking up a dollar- its just so difficult to pick one with so many defaulting to that position.

Luckily we picked France that day then ay?

I'd suggest the comments are aimed at the terminally dull GE as a retaliatory response. You and your fellow countrymen are collateral damage I'm afraid.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:And, by the way, most French think they have virtually no chance this weekend.  

Erm. That's not true. One of my clients is one of the larger French companies. I was over there yesterday and let me tell you...the Pierre on the street....they think France will win. I'm getting the whole "of course" (shrug) "France will win" (outrageous clichéd eye movement) "we are in France." From all of them.

A swarthy Frenchy sat on a bar stool is unlikely to be oracle of Rugby. Just pour him another one!

Man. That joke never gets tired.

[quote="tigerleghorn"]

Taylorman wrote:

Gibson wrote:AB's won because they bought it from the start. Specially the Final. Everyone knows that.

Geez theres some fools around. The green envy knows no limits...but its a point- its so hard to choose which matches to buy these days...I mean which of the many the AB's play where the opposition isnt going to collapse into the usual drivelling mess of depression and ineptitude without them forking up a dollar- its just so difficult to pick one with so many defaulting to that position.

Luckily we picked France that day then ay?

I hear that the NZRU had originally forked out for an England final because we heard that had tournament pedigree, a conservative game plan based around winning tournaments and the worlds best winger. So when they unexpectedly capitulated in the first knock out game there were some hasty transfers to be made, so much so that the first half of the final was played under straight gamę conditions. Talk about touch and go!

GloriousEmpire wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:And, by the way, most French think they have virtually no chance this weekend.  

Erm. That's not true. One of my clients is one of the larger French companies. I was over there yesterday and let me tell you...the Pierre on the street....they think France will win. I'm getting the whole "of course" (shrug) "France will win" (outrageous clichéd eye movement) "we are in France." From all of them.

'Payment up front and I am discrete, clean and always use protection'.

At least we know the clowns employment now

That doesn't even make any sense.

Discrete: (adj.) individually separate and distinct.

Discreet: (adj.) careful and prudent in one’s speech or actions, especially in order to keep something confidential or to avoid embarrassment.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:And, by the way, most French think they have virtually no chance this weekend.  

Erm. That's not true. One of my clients is one of the larger French companies. I was over there yesterday and let me tell you...the Pierre on the street....they think France will win. I'm getting the whole "of course" (shrug) "France will win" (outrageous clichéd eye movement) "we are in France." From all of them.

That might not be true with the people you spoke with, perhaps.  Many people on the local sports radio - according to my mates down south and what I stream in at home (in the south where the Rugby lives in La Belle France) - are afraid of what the ABs will do.  Your sample size might be too small to make broad generalisations ("That's not true" - I suggest using less absolute terms).  A different mate who runs a company near Fontainebleau is also concerned.   But wants to put a beating from hell on the ABs.  I suggested he start drinking today.

It isn't difficult to rile up a crowd.

I have seen plenty examples on rugby forums.

Monday: we can't win
Tuesday: we could get close
Wednesday: we'll give them a go
Thursday: heck come on guys, why so negative we going to win
Friday: Hell Yeah, we gonna thump them.

Sunday: That bloody referee.  

All you have to do is read the article to realise that GE believes that all you need to prove something as fact is the experience or voice of one or a small select group of people. In reality a sensible minded person will understand that the voice of one is not a reliable acid test for a populous of many.

Biltong wrote:It isn't difficult to rile up a crowd.

I have seen plenty examples on rugby forums.

Monday: we can't win
Tuesday: we could get close
Wednesday: we'll give them a go
Thursday: heck come on guys, why so negative we going to win
Friday: Hell Yeah, we gonna thump them.

Sunday: That bloody referee.  

Yes,  William Webb Ellis said the same thing........

GunsGerms wrote:All you have to do is read the article to realise that GE believes that all you need to prove something as fact is the experience or voice of one or a small select group of people. In reality a sensible minded person will understand that the voice of one is not a reliable acid test for a populous of many.

Truth and logic is not a democracy.

Fact is fact no matter how many people deny it.

Very true  

 

Biltong wrote:Monday: we can't win
Tuesday: we could get close
Wednesday: we'll give them a go
Thursday: heck come on guys, why so negative we going to win
Friday: Hell Yeah, we gonna thump them.

Sunday: That bloody referee.  

The eternal optimism of the rugby supporter!

GloriousEmpire wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:All you have to do is read the article to realise that GE believes that all you need to prove something as fact is the experience or voice of one or a small select group of people. In reality a sensible minded person will understand that the voice of one is not a reliable acid test for a populous of many.

Truth and logic is not a democracy.

Fact is fact no matter how many people deny it.

Its not a democracy if you want to limit truths to one mans experience. Its true that the eye gouging Kiwi you referenced had bad experiences playing in France but that doesnt make it a fact that everyone does. What you're struggling with is understanding that one mans truth isnt necessarly everyones.

Sometimes fiction and embellishment make for a more interesting narritive. It is good to have an imagination but only quacks and outcasts routinely try to pass off fiction as fact.