• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

2014 Six Nations: France vs England (Round 1)

very interesting, stormer. I guess you're spoiled by the French Huguenot blood in deed then :p

But you would agree the Springboks have a big work ethic, I'm sure. No time to fart around when you're a Bok. Gym gym gym, training training training I'm sure. They are after all entirely based on strength, so if they can't be assertive at the breakdown that's a humongous part of their game lost.
 
very interesting, stormer. I guess you're spoiled by the French Huguenot blood in deed then :p

But you would agree the Springboks have a big work ethic, I'm sure. No time to fart around when you're a Bok. Gym gym gym, training training training I'm sure. They are after all entirely based on strength, so if they can't be assertive at the breakdown that's a humongous part of their game lost.

A lot depends on the coaching set up. If the rumors are to be believed the work ethic in the Bok camp was close to non-existant in the PdV era if compared to that of Jake White or Heyneke Meyer currently.

Also, most of the work gets done at the provinces rather than in the national set-up where time together is limited and mostly focused on game plan oriated excersizes rather than out-and-out conditioning. I know some of the players moving from here to the Blue Bulls (and there have been a fair few in recent years) have stated that the amount of work done there dwarves what we do here and that they've found 'a new level' or 'havn't pushed themselves as far yet' or something to that effect. I know Francois Hougaard and JJ Engelbrecht have said that at least.
 
I never talked about the scrum...I'm obviously talking about the breakdown, rucks the whole time...

And about French fitness, it's not a myth. The English have a much more thorough culture for working out. Just look at what they look like for proof. Like I said earlier, players, pro or not, make mention of that often. We're not as intense with our gym sessions, bottom line. We do have the endurance to keep up and even surpass them, but that's another thing. They still work out like crazy over the Chanel, in comparison to us. We were ridiculously behind before the pro era, and we still are now though the gap is a little narrower.
I couldn't give you stats, hard evidence like number of hours at the gym, specific workouts or anything, but hearing/reading all those stories, looking at the bodies, knowing the English and the French in general, watching England workouts on YouTube and then French workouts (on DailyMotion), there's a clear difference.

And about stamina, we did have disasters because of fitness: December 2010 EOYT, Australia. We're right with them at 16-16 around half-time and then all Hell breaks loose. We remain at 16 and they end up going up to.....59. You look at the French players, they're spent, they can't keep up with the Wallabies. Overtaken, completely. And you don't play a competitive 50min with a tied score and then get ANNIHILATED - at home, when your fitness is similar to that of the tourists.
The Top 14 calendar can be blamed most certainly here, but only partially.

We just have this culture in France of "ok, training's important now, let's work out....alright, that's enough."
The "anglo-saxon" cultures, they never stop working. Just some weeks ago, Bastareaud explained it, admiring Wilkinson's work ethic, and saying how guys like Giteau and Wilko just had this culture we don't have in France of working extra hours. First at the gym, last to leave, exceeding the required amount, working overtime...that's English/Australian/NZ and probably SA'can. Def. not French.
After all, there's a saying (in general, not just Rugby): "the French work to live, the English live to work", dunno if it translates well in English but "les Français travaillent pour vivre, les Anglais vivent pour travailler".

yes I heard you. My point is same about technique being more important than bulk in both scrum and ruck areas.
you are giving too much importance to weight in my view. I have seen smaller and lighter guys compete in scrums, rucks everywhere on the field because they are technically strong.

We are talking about 2 different things, fitness and work ethic.

For me only the result in terms of fitness counts. If we have to follow a different method to be as fit as the rest then so be it.

And in fitness terms, there's NOT a shred of evidence that shows that french palyers are less fit. In their last game agst Eng there's plenty of evidence that say otherwise.

In the BBC footage of Fra vs Eng

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bM1Ws6xi4s4

Guscot in his prematch comment make the point that Eng might edge it cos "they are fitter". So the view is out there. But he is wrong. The whole shape of last Sat's humdinger and final result contradicts Guscott's view.
The last 10 mn of the Fra Eng is telling in my view. From 70 min we are RUNNING with the ball. NOt kicking. Watch the last 10 mn again and you will see. We could NOT have produced that passage of play running TWICE across the width of the pitch to move their defense, had we kicked the ball for touch (which a tired 10 will do). We were tired but still fit to run with the ball and take it to the Eng defense with our backs. Plisson said they made the decision in the last 10mn to RUN the ball, not kick. But that decision had to be backed by belief in their own fitness otherwise they're just talking!

Now the work ethic could be different. That's ok. I don't have a problem with that. We're different in culture. We are more laid back. Nothing wrong with that as long as we get to the same fitness level. And we do. Its just a different approach that yields different results. But in the end, regardless of conditioning methods used and different attitude/mindset, only the result matters and we are as fit as any other top nations.

Im just going by recent match facts and NH competitions. And these do not support the view that french fitness is questionable. Its a myth.

Now in the future if our standards of S&C were to go down, we would get taken to the cleaners in every single Intl game.

We would not have 3 teams in the QF of HCup like last year. We would NOT have survived physically such an intense game and won in the last 5 min agst a strong physical and very fit side like Eng on Saturday. If fitness level btw the 2 sides was really a deciding factor, we would have been eaten alive by Eng. We weren't. Fact
 
yep, as I've said before France won this match based on fitness. The English defenders are spent on that last Fickou try. I've made a distinction between *STAMINA* and then bulk/mass.
I gave the 2010 Aus example as just one time where we weren't nearly up to par with other nations.

But there's no denying other nations work harder, again, like England, Australia...and the gym culture is more intense. Man just look at Tom Wood, look at Marler in one year's change, look at Robshaw.
Of course we can compete in scrums being lighter, but we waste a lot more energy doing that. Remember the match against the Boks in November ? The guys even said before the match, Lauret in particular I recall, we'll contest a bit in the rucks but it's silly to waste too much energy in there, they're too huge, so we'll just get back into the defensive line. And that's exactly what we did.

FrenchFan, you who constantly implicitly hints at being so divinely knowledgeable about this sport, surely you can grasp the notion that 110 even 120kg loosies and huge locks are going to have *some kind* of an impact at the breakdown that we just cannot deny physiologically speaking with 95kg/100kg specimens ? When Alberts comes in to clear out his rucks, there's NO WAY we can keep grip and turn the ball over. They shove us out of the way, we're sent back 3meters. And this happens over and over again. Then, the Saffa mauls are virtually unstoppable. They used them against every great nation, even got scores against NZ off them. When we tried a maul against them, we'd go backwards ! We don't have the mass, technique is great, but this is just too much and what do you do when they've got mass AND technique ? They even had an edge in the scrum. They bullied most of the game, and it's only because we've got such individual quality that we managed to survive and "only" lose by 9.
We're happy we've got the brutal Picamoles.....they've got 3 of those in front.

They said "flair won over muscle" when we beat England last Saturday. Yeah, we won by a couple of points at the last second. Imagine if we'd lost it, even by a single point. Imagine they get a penalty in the last 3min, win by a point. NOBODY would even mention flair, and everybody would be saying how we were subjected to wave after wave of white jerseys from min.30' to min.70'. And you wouldn't be talking about how technique is efficient too, you'd be saying "ahhh we lost at the breakdown, they out-muscled us, we need more couillus, more couillus !!"
 
The French are as fit as anyone but they still smell.

yeah OK we'll be sure to roll ourselves in mint as a pregame ritual next time to make you feel better ! or a tea-flavored sauna pregame, whichever satisfies the Queen best...:rolleyes:
 
..............whichever satisfies the Queen best...:rolleyes:


I presume you mean Her Majesty and not referring to the long gone perception of English rugby players being ex Public School boys who overly enjoy the post match communal bath.....?!!!
 
yep, as I've said before France won this match based on fitness. The English defenders are spent on that last Fickou try. I've made a distinction between *STAMINA* and then bulk/mass.
I gave the 2010 Aus example as just one time where we weren't nearly up to par with other nations.

i know and i said technique is more important than bulk in my experience. But you've never played the game so you wouldn't know :D

But there's no denying other nations work harder, again, like England, Australia...and the gym culture is more intense. Man just look at Tom Wood, look at Marler in one year's change, look at Robshaw.

Marler did not enjoy his evening in the scrum

their backrow has nothing
they look bulky, so what? spend more time in the gym, you'll start to like yourself more :lol:

Of course we can compete in scrums being lighter, but we waste a lot more energy doing that. Remember the match against the Boks in November ? The guys even said before the match, Lauret in particular I recall, we'll contest a bit in the rucks but it's silly to waste too much energy in there, they're too huge, so we'll just get back into the defensive line. And that's exactly what we did.

FrenchFan, you who constantly implicitly hints at being so divinely knowledgeable about this sport, surely you can grasp the notion that 110 even 120kg loosies and huge locks are going to have *some kind* of an impact at the breakdown that we just cannot deny physiologically speaking with 95kg/100kg specimens ? When Alberts comes in to clear out his rucks, there's NO WAY we can keep grip and turn the ball over. They shove us out of the way, we're sent back 3meters. And this happens over and over again.

I know i got your point. You're starting to waffle now

Then, the Saffa mauls are virtually unstoppable. They used them against every great nation, even got scores against NZ off them. When we tried a maul against them, we'd go backwards ! We don't have the mass, technique is great, but this is just too much and what do you do when they've got mass AND technique ? They even had an edge in the scrum. They bullied most of the game, and it's only because we've got such individual quality that we managed to survive and "only" lose by 9.
We're happy we've got the brutal Picamoles.....they've got 3 of those in front.


no problem we'll get more safie imports like Le Roux (who had an excellent game) and Classens. Problem solved.

They said "flair won over muscle" when we beat England last Saturday. Yeah, we won by a couple of points at the last second. Imagine if we'd lost it, even by a single point. Imagine they get a penalty in the last 3min, win by a point. NOBODY would even mention flair, and everybody would be saying how we were subjected to wave after wave of white jerseys from min.30' to min.70'. And you wouldn't be talking about how technique is efficient too, you'd be saying "ahhh we lost at the breakdown, they out-muscled us, we need more couillus, more couillus !!"

I didnt say anything like this.
 
Dont know whaty Yarde and Wade would have given us tonight that would have made any difference

Made England play less narrow and given us pace out wide. Brown and Nowell are no speed merchants.
 
oh hey, don't mean to bump this, but an interesting concept came to my mind. Has it been said that basically in last year's fixture France's bench lost the game, and in this year's France's bench won the game ?...
anyways, way too late, I apologize :p
 
Top