<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dullonien @ Nov 27 2009, 03:19 PM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Not disputing his quality Mehlor, as he is a world class player. Doesn't make that incident any less funny though.
There have been other rediculous incidents on a rugby pitch. Which England player was it that kissed the ball before putting it down, just for one of the Welsh players to kick it from his hands just before he touched it down?[/b]
That was this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlzZIT_p83w...player_embedded
He is actuallty from Fiji but was playing for England. It was a Sevens match at the London Sevens Quarter finals in 2007. His name is Isoa Damudamu.
With Leguizamon, I can't argue at all. I agree with you. Very funny and thankfully he learned from it.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teh Mite)</div>
You know, if I was new to the sport, I'm sure I'd also believe Argentina have (by a long margin) the worlds best players from 1 through to 15 just by listening to Melhor.[/b]
:bravo: Does that mean my posts bother you? This forum needs more on Argentina. I follow them very closely.
Well in terms of 8's right now they seem to be probably the strongest country in the World as three of the best are from there: Leguizamon, Fernandez Lobbe and Parisse. Interestingly all the players they use at 6 are actually 8's for their clubs: Fessia (Cordoba), Leonardi (SIC) and Abadie (Rovigo). Also interesting is that Parisse was 6 last season for SF Paris.
But about the comment overall.... I would like to clarify that I do not think Argentina have the worlds best players. I think they have world class players in every position but lack time playing together to play at their highest possible level and also are, in certain positions, lacking adequate cover. They have plenty of pro players but the current squad consists of many amateurs prefered to professionals like Fernandez picked over Todeschini (Montpellier) or Mieres (SF Paris). What I mean to say is that the players picked are better but are not conditioned in the same way as the Euroepan professionals who have not been picked. About 8's, they have great options. But for 6 all there options are 8's and 7 is similar too. The 6 Fessia, 7 Leguizamon, 8 Fernandez Lobbe combination which knocked over England in June were three club playing 8's.
A concern I have is at 4 where they cannot find a class player. They have professionals based in Europe to call upon but none of them are stand out players. Albacete clearly is very good at 5. If only they had a good 4.
Hernandez was number one flyhalf in the World in 2007 and number one fullback the year before that. He has had injury issues that influenced his play since but he remains an outstanding player. My favourite back to watch on form.
Argentina have some options at scrumhalf. Three post Pichot 9's have been used and none of them have, so far, been able to do very well. It is a concern. Lalanne and Figuerola are both good players but are not Pichot. Another is 12 with Felipe Contepomi at 32 and will be 34 for the World Cup. Ledesma will be 38 which is really pushing it. Roncero and Scelzo are both aged too. Ayerza could well make 1 his own, starting latter today vs Scotland. He and Roncero are outstanding. Wings have been Argentina's concern for too long. I do like Agulla at 15. He is not as good as Corleto but is good in terms of positional play for a fullback and is a good linking runner. Amorisino and Camacho are good looking wingers, a lot better than the guys playing the tests at the moment for los Pumas.
With many other countries it is similar. Thats the interesting thing about rugby today. It is far more competitive than ever before. Remember Wales 10 years ago vs Tri Nations teams? Argentina knocked them over in Cardiff in 2001. Today, they are vastly better than they were. Italy are much better as are Ireland, England and Argentina are too. The USA are significantly better as are Japan and everyone, except for Romania and the three Pacific Island teams. There are a number of theories as to why this is the case. My personal view is that the exposure to the Top 14 GP and Magners League that made Argentina the third best beam at the 2007 World Cup and has helped Italy, the USA, Georgia, etc has not employed so many Islanders. Canada have been thumped by Japan twice this month and are a team packed with second division English based players and Canadian based players.
I was looking at the Fiji team today compared to the team back in 1999 and, interestingly, they are not a team packed with more pro players. Back in 1999 they did have more in the Super 12, today next to none. They are without pro tight five forwards and really only have wingers and centres playing top flight rugby today in the worlds best pro environments. This is the opposite of Argentina who today have well over 100 professional players in Europe but in 1999 were a team of Argentina based players. Romania's players are more and more based in Romania now which has seen the team drop below Georgia and Russia. Scotland are doing well with many more players now in England and France and despite losing one of their three pro teams.
Comparing Fiji to Argentina is interesting in this sense. Neither country has pro rugby. Both are good at Sevens, Fiji the best or second best in the World. Fiji excell from 12-15 and Argentina from 1-5 (in 15s rugby). These are the historical rules. Yet today, thanks mainly to the French Top 14 the South Americans are a force and are much better than they were 10 years ago.
Similarly comparing Romania to Georgia is interesting. The Romanians were defeating teams like Italy, Scotland and France in the 1970s and 1980s. They even got a win over France in 1990. With pro rugby and the end of communism no money for the sport there has been terrible for them. But now they are losing to Georgia, Russia and Portugal. Georgia are interesting because most of their players are playing in France. Some are in Italy, Romania and Russia but France has so many of them. They have some great forwards in leading clubs like Giorgadze (Castres), Khinchaguishvili (Brive), Kubriashvili (Toulon) and Gorgodze (Montpellier). They have players getting more game time than Romanians in the Top 14 these days. More forwards than the Pacific Island countries do to. To me it is conclusive. Georgia now need Top 14 exposure for their backs.
Wales in contrast, lost to Samoa and Canada in 1991 and 1992. Today this is unthinkable as they are much, much better thanks to the pro set up. Still, Samoa were able to give them a good match. They have pro players across their team but Super 14 is not a place easy for the players to play these days. More and more are going to Japan which has a weaker level of competition than the Europeans offer. Samoa also lack tests. This is their first tour since the World Cup, unless the matchs vs New Zealand counts in which they could not pick their European players as it was played outside of the IRB sanctioned test window.
Similar with Ireland. They lost to Namibia, believe it or not, in 1991. Today they are very strong. Home wins vs South Africa in 2004 and 2006. A home win vs Australia in 2006 and a draw in 2009. The great scare they got from Georgia was interesting. Georgia was a team of French based players playing mainly in the third division. Which goes to show, any pro rugby can be greatly helpful! Ireland vs Fiji would have been far more competitive in 1999. The Fiji win vs Wales in 2007 was against a poorly coached Welsh side and was ina pool in which Fiji almost lost to Japan and were in danger vs Canada. Namibia did do well vs Ireland too in 2007, much better than in 2003. Everybody seemed to expect them to lose badly again but their exposure to pro rugby, mainly in South Africa, had increased and the team was better, even if they did lose all their matches by big margins.
With rugby on the rise in Italy rugby will continue to become more competitive as clubs sign more foreign players and the competition becomes stronger.
