RWC: France V Canada (18-09-2011, 20:30)

[Jayatron]

How Canada will look between 2015/19 is tough to say. Having the CRC fully professional would probably push the national team into the top 10. However, I can't see that happening any time soon. Realistically, Canada will probably be going into the next two RWC's ranked between 12-16. In essence, where they are now. Crowley has done a damn good job developing players (guys like Kleeberger, Sinclair, O'Toole, and Phil Mackenzie) and if that can continue to the next WC Canada could again challenge for third spot in the pool.

That said, Canada's showing thus far is a welcome change of pace from the usual disappointment that has plagued the last few world cup campaigns. If Canada can ever get back to where they were in the early 90s (RWC quarterfinal birth in 1991, beating Wales in 1993, beating France in 1994) I'll be happy. Hopefully the decline of Canadian rugby that has been happening since the 1995 RWC has ended.

I had a similar conversation with Little Guy, another Canadian user, about the CRC potentially going professional and was dumb founded to read the problems that Canadian rugby face; it's a shame to read that you echo these same faults/obstacles. Especially based on this world cup, and the performance of players like Adam Kleeberger, who have been outstanding. I can only imagine the players, and performances, that Canada could produce if they had a professional league that players could play in and train for all year round.

When you put Canada, and even the U.S., into context of the other "tier two" nations like Georgia, Romania and Russia, who all have professional leagues, and have performed extremely well, especially Georgia, I can only reiterate that if Canada had a professional CRC a top 10 ranking is very possible, perhaps even being the 6 or 7 in the world??

So impressed with the so called "minnows" this tournament. I understand there has been a few one sided victories this weekend, midweek games being a factor in those, but I think the iRB and the different unions will have to step up and look at Canada, Georgia, United States and Japan. They are a force!

Is interest on the up in Canada? Or is this a flash in the pan in terms of player base?

 

[Shaggy]

First of all congrats to France ... well played, you did what you needed to do, and got the win, plus the bonus point, while playing in less than ideal conditions

I think that, no matter what happens for the rest of the match, Canada can be proud.

Yes they can ... firstly, they were competitive for most of the match, and secondly they fielded their top side again after only four days down time, and went for the win to keep their quarter final chances alive, when they could have played it safe, and wrapped their top players in cotton wool for the crucial match against Japan

Honestly, France deserved the win but I don't think they deserved the bonus point. 46-19 doesn't really reflect the fact that the match wasn't exactly a blowout.

Yes, the fatigue factor finally cut in, and blew the margin out at the end ... maybe not the fairest reflection of the closeness of the match

The guys looked tired, and the some of the subs didn't acquit themselves well in the last 10 minutes, pretty gutted about the scoreline, especially that last French try.

Me too (gutted) ... it seems that unfortunately, my blog prediction came true, and the fatigue factor was telling in the end.

I agree with this, Canada were playing for penalties and trying to do the dirty work in the forwards to grind France down. The only way they were competing for 60minutes was because France played their game, (France were so boring for the first 60 mins, didn't spread the ball more than a couple of times). In the last 20 minutes fatigue and french flair took over. As soon as France spread the ball they looked very very good, a few classes above Canada.

Canada was always going to take France on in the forwards, and the conditions also suited this style of play ... playing to your strengths, and playing to the conditions, is just playing smart rugby in my opinion ... perhaps Canada deserve some credit for preventing the French from playing the style that they wanted to, for so much of the match, as do France, for exploiting the the tiring Canadians in the last quarter of the match.

On the contrary, I believe the reason why some of the minnow nations have faded in the 4th quarter of the match is more to do with the completely unfair scheduling of world cup matches.

Yes, that's true, the short turn around between some matches mean that for some matches, they either can't field their top side, or their top players don't have enough time to recover, but, this is more to do with how many tickets each side will sell for the weekend matches, combined with the time available in the rugby calendar for the RWC, rather than any favouritism towards any particular teams

Canada played really well, but it just seems that as good as the tier 2 teams are, their depth just isn't good enough to close the game out. Shame the goal kicking let Canada down.

Yes, you're right, the depth and experience isn't there throughout most of the squads, once the top players are replaced.

BING BING BING....we have a winner. I agree completely. Perhaps the RWC should be be scheduled like the NFL. Better teams get tougher schedules. for example, the minnows should be allowed longer recovery times between games as their player pool is shallower.


It will never happen.


Well done today boys

no it won't ... the scheduling is centred around maximising revenue from ticket sales and TV revenue, so the top ranked sides are going to get the weekend matches.

The only ways for any tier two nation to get a fairer deal, is to improve/be a bigger draw card, or for the duration of the RWC tournament to go for longer, or for the number of teams to be reduced, or for the pool sizes and structures to change (for example five pools of four teams)

... most of these options have draw backs, so I can't see anything changing any time soon

this is not a swing at you, but did the Pride further the game, ie: increase player base, and quality of player across the country?

honest question.

I've said it before elsewhere on this forum, but I see the best way for Canada to increase the numbers and quality, is to take advantage of rugby sevens being an olympic sport, and promote sevens tournaments.

... the RWC, TSN television coverage, and the performance of the Canadian team, have all been great to enhance the popularity of the game here, but the main problem I see as a relative new comer to the country, is that non-rugby playing Canadians don't understand the game/can't identify with the rules ... the commentators have been great with their praise for the tier two nations, but if they are broadcasting to a world wide audience, and trying to attract new people to the game, they need to put more time into explaining/educating the viewers - this will attract more players and supporters in my view

... that's pretty much all i've got to say

 

[Canucks]

While I certainly hope that's true, a lot more has to be done to make it a reality.

The biggest hinderence to Canadian rugby is geography. Considering that 90% of the country is under a metre of snow for eight months of the year and our country has seven time zones, selectors and national competitions will always be at a disadvantage. It also doesn't help that the BCRU has a spoiled brat mentality and refuses to make rugby a summer sport. As long as we have two seasons and a lack of a pathway to national team selection we will suffer. In order to play for Canada do you have to play in the CRC? Or does turning out for your BC Premier League club cut it? Some do both, and others do one or the other (and some do none at all). We need more clarity on BC's commitment to the CRC and we need the regions putting forward their best possible sides. Anything less undermines the competition.

Additionally, the media exposure has to be there. It's great that so much rugby has been on TV the past few years (TSN has done a fantastic job showing EVERY RWC game and an abundance of Canadian tests) but that has to continue if we want to draw new supporters and young kids to the game. As far as the media goes, CRC games need to be televised. Why can't the CBC do this? Its mandate is to promote Canadian content, and what better way than to show games from Canada's top domestic competition? Surely it wouldn't be a big hassle considering that most CRC games are played in cities where the CBC has major offices (Toronto, St. Johns, Calgary, Vancouver). Rugby Canada needs to push hard for the CBC to broadcast games because countries are only as strong as their domestic competitions.

Additionally, the Pacific Pride has to be brought back. It produced so many great players it would be insane not to bring it back and focuss on the development and recruitment of players that are right out of high school. Do that and more players will be turning to rugby rather than Hockey, Canadian Football, or Lacrosse. Why would a kid play those sports for free when he could get a sport canada stipend, free education, and live in BC year round? Maybe that's being too optimistic, but the more incentives there are for quality athletes to take up rugby, the better our national teams will be.

If all of this is done and we place a renewed emphasis at the development of rugby at the grassroots level (i.e. having quality mini's and high school programs in provinces other than BC) Canadian rugby will be better off. Argentina has shown that a professional domestic competition isn't necessary to be competitive on the international stage, but Rugby Canada has also shown that top-down investment in the sport doesn't work well either.

Canada reclaiming the top ten status in international rugby that it had in the early nineties will be no small feat. If we are to do it, however, it has to start at the bottom. No more band-aid solutions; its time to streamline the pathway to national selection and invest at the bottom, not the top.

If we do that, Canada can be a powerhouse in rugby.

Wow what a post. Most of the issues we face summed up pretty well. I'm a player from the 87-89 age bracket which has proved to be pretty big for sports in Canada in recent years. To put it in perspective, Sidney Crosby is 87, Jonathan Toews is 1989. Numerous CFL and NCAA football players are 87-89 (I remember my year breaking the amount of college players to the states from canada 1988.) 16 of the 30 players on the Canadian national team were 25 or under at the start of the year. Sports in general in Canada have recently taken off. As of today, looking at wikipedia from BC alone 8 players play in the CFL from the years 87-88, and that's without all the redshirts and 89s like Tyson Pencer (stud left tackle from Washington State) to come into effect in the next few years.

BC is where rugby is at in Canada. Ontario and the Prairies can produce players but BC produces the highest quality league in Canada naturally due to the climate. BCRU has always been fickle at best. As I'm sure Rusty_lock may be able to confirm, to get promoted within the leagues takes a lot of lobbying and even then there are a lot of "other" hurtles (I'm looking at you Bayside.) As well the only rugby at any level that occurs during the summer is the U19 Japan cup. Extremely important for the development of players but there needs to be a national level competition and more teams in the Japan cup.

As well, I agree with the need for a clear path to the national team. In my years, players chose rugby because they were either too small for the football selection or missed out on being selected by a junior team in hockey. They saw rugby as an opportunity. Unfortunately, there is far too much bureaucracy and not enough clear information to make the national team. These athletes excelled at numerous sports and enjoyed rugby but didn't continue because there was no clear path to continue thus they either quite playing competitively altogether or struggled through other sports until they were given a chance. At points, it seemed that the U-19, U17 national team was made up of a small scope of players from the same clubs.
I do feel if BCRU get their act together and make a clear path to success then we'd stop losing top atheletes. Players chose Football because after high school there's midget, after midget there's Junior/Canadian college/American college, after that there's a legitimate shot at any number of American pro leagues or even CFL/NFL. I myself gave up on rugby to continue on to BC junior football and I was much better rugby than football. The same can be said about our developmental standards in hockey (best in the world.) The best players know that they will be recognised in these sports, whereas in rugby, you just have to hope your team plays the team of the national team coach (ie. Tim Murdy with Rockridge/Shawnigan Lake.)
Pacific Pride needs to return but instead of focusing on only good rugby players, there's need to be a focus on attracting (or if necessary stealing) top athletes to this sport. At some point for rugby to compete with football, Rugby Canada will have to find away to counteract the scholarships that football gives. As football is not a national sport, there needs to be some way Rugby Canada can appeal to the Government for some extra funding.


Now this is where I may differ from the rest of my fellow canadians, the Waterfront Stadium in Vancouver needs to be built. Rugby Canada needs a home in Canada's rugby hotspot. As well, Vancouver has the most temperate climate and is in a great location for all teams to the make the journey (9 hours from europe and only 14 from Australia.)
I do think Rugby in Canada is on the rise. I mean the stats from the Tongan game speak for themselves (225000 viewers.) As well, in my high school years, our best teams were on par with the best in the world (see Rockridge vs marist from Australia 2006.) The younger Canadians have quite a bit to offer our country and I do feel that Crowley has a plan to continue our development. He wasn't hired to lose and I feel he has a good understanding of how Canadians are and how to motivate us. Really all you have to do is watch a playoff Hockey game.

 

[LittleGuy]

The 225,000 viewers was just for the replay, 138,000 was the live number, although a few people probably did watch the game twice. As well this dosen't iclude the RDS numbers from french language Quebec, I'm guessing they aren't huge but it could be another few thousand.

With three tests next year I am assuming Rugby Canada will try to spread them out across the country, especially if we are hosting games in November these pretty much have to be held out in the Lower mainland or Vancouver island in BC. I wouldn't want to see all of Canada's games played only in Vancouver or Toronto. I think we might see European teams play in Toronto while the islanders and four nations teams visit Vancouver. I think games vs. the States should be spread out to other parts of the country since it is much cheaper for them to send a tour up here.

I think the pathway is becoming clearer thanks to the CRC, while the CDI Premier league in BC is excellent, I don't think it showcases enough of the country's more isolated rugby pockets(eg. Newfoundland) as well some Canadians who play overseas also return to the CRC for the summer. Seb Pearson is one such player who was playing in England last year but returned to the Blues in the summer.

 

[erwanseb]

Ya you appear to be right on numerous fronts. My apologies to Gringo if I was taking anything out of context but it did appear to me that there was a hint of arrogance.

It's the nature of sports. Sometimes the score is accurate, sometimes it's not. You could see were I would get very defensive because I feel that was one of the absolute best performance my country could put out there barring the goal kicking. It is easy to take Gringo's comments as belittling but I see what you are saying.

Kudos to France getting the BP though, it took some very good coaching from Lievremont to pull that out of the game, especially realising they had the opportunity left for it at the end. It's almost a must do because if they manage to the ABs, then they need at the BP they can get.

Unlike football, the difference between playing well, holding your ground, keeping the scoreline close.... and actually winning is huge.
Some teams may play well, get within a few points of their opponents for years before they actually can get the win.
That is the frustrating nature of the rugby game as lucks does not play much part unless the two teams are very close. That may seem arrogant, but yesterday Canada never looked like the winning team and France indeed were in control. Sure Canada gave plenty of food for thought and asked quite a few disturbing questions to the French team and players, but the final result was never really in the balance.

Again that is the nature of rugby, the step between getting close and winning is just huge. Unlike football, you will never see a second division team beats a first division one because the final score in rugby magnifies the difference of skills and fitness while potentially nullifying/reversing them in sports like football.

 

[rusty_lock]

Well it has taken me a while to get up to posting since the game. Proud of the boys for a showing that we could run with the big dogs for 70 of 80 minutes today. I've watched the game twice, once in the middle of the night, live and then the midday rerun with new rugby fans. So if this post is a little rambling please excuse me as I've been drunk for about 20 hours now LOL. If nothing else this team has won some new converts to the game of rugby and I should a have a few new recruits to coach for my highschool team. This team has great heart and even the unschooled can see that and given time they will only get better. Look at a guy like Jason Marshall. Just over two years ago he was the starting quarter back for a university football (gridiron) team. That is quite a leap to make to go from QB to tighthead prop.

The game itself was disappointing but not surprising. I thought we were in with a chance for a while there but late in the second half as France was pulling away you could see the difference between the two teams. I know people have been on about the 4 day turn around but honerstly I don't think that that was the problem. The depth just isn't there and when we go to the bench we will get out classed everyday of the week. You look at the Canadian bench versus the French and look at the level of competition that they are used to and you really can't expect much difference. As an example just look at scrum half. Although Sir Edward played brilliantly he tires and gets subbed by Sean White. While I like Sean, he plays club rugby for Jame Bay AA and gets 4 or 5 Games in during CRC. When Morgan Parra tires the French look to the bench and what do they find? Dimitri Yachvili. There in lies the difference. Tier 1 Nations have so many players that play at such a high level all the time that while we can sometime put a little scare into the top teams every once in a while at the end of the day it is not a fair fight.

Don't misunderstand what I'm saying I'm not whining about things being unfair just that we have a long way to go to bridge that gap. That gap will be bridged in the long term by creating a more competitive environment at the local level. Increasing the grass roots level of participation and expanding the player pool. Instead of having players start playing when there 15 or 16 like we do now we need to see them playing mini's when their 5. This is why we are great at hockey. From the minute a boy is out of diapers he is dreaming of playing for the Canucks or the Leafs or the Canadiens. At seven he is trying to emulate Sidney Crosby and at 16 he believes he can be the "next one". Rugby doesn't have that yet and until we get there we will never compete seriously with the French or the Saffers or Kiwis or English et al. In the short term we have to find a way to get more and more players contracts overseas playing at the highest level (T14, Premiership, Magners) There were only two players on that team yesterday that play at that level. The others either play RFU championship or are amateurs playing club rugby in BC in the spring and going home to there provincial teams for the CRC comp in late summer and fall. Domestic quota's, Passports and work permits are the issue and I don't fully understand how all that works but that is the challenge that we face

And Canucks, I won't even get started about the BCRU. The politics between island vs. mainland is enough to make the dispute between house of Capulet and Montague seem like a small squabble

 

[Canucks]

http://www.irb.com/rankings/full.html

Closing in.14 away from top 10

 

[LittleGuy]

http://www.irb.com/rankings/full.html

Closing in.14 away from top 10

Thats fantastic, I think realistically Samoa is a better team and should be at #11 but us at #12 would be pretty reflective of our play as of late.

 

[cardassian]

Good stuff guys! Now if you can win against Japan it should go some way towards cementing this spot.

 

[Shaggy]

Good stuff guys! Now if you can win against Japan it should go some way towards cementing this spot.

... and more importantly, hopefully third spot in the pool, and automatic qualification to the next RWC

 

[rusty_lock]

The Canada V. France rerun had 224k viewers on a jam packed sports Sunday afternoon competing head to head with NFL. Very good numbers all things considered... Haven't heard the live number yet but if I find it I will post it. I suspect it was down from the tonga game as the game was 1:30 am on the west coast and 4:30 am in Toronto.

Also, His regalness Sir Edward Fairhurst was ranked 5th by NZ hearld

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.php?c_id=1&objectid=10752956

 

[formerlyfastwing]

... and more importantly, hopefully third spot in the pool, and automatic qualification to the next RWC

good point......BTW, don't you work?

 

[Shaggy]

good point......BTW, don't you work?

Work, it's not legally possible for me to do so at the moment ... hence, lots of comments on TRF

 

[formerlyfastwing]

Work, it's not legally possible for me to do so at the moment ... hence, lots of comments on TRF

physically, mentally or legally????

 

[Shaggy]

physically, mentally or legally????

:lol: ... Ouch! ... door number 3 ... I hope

 

[LittleGuy]

The Canada V. France rerun had 224k viewers on a jam packed sports Sunday afternoon competing head to head with NFL. Very good numbers all things considered... Haven't heard the live number yet but if I find it I will post it. I suspect it was down from the tonga game as the game was 1:30 am on the west coast and 4:30 am in Toronto.

Also, His regalness Sir Edward Fairhurst was ranked 5th by NZ hearld

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.php?c_id=1&objectid=10752956

This information about our Ed belongs in the thread dedicated to his worship. I've also heard he was actually first but wanted to cool down the ladies at least a little bit...

 

[Canucks]

Work, it's not legally possible for me to do so at the moment ... hence, lots of comments on TRF

oh that sucks. Especially in Edmonton, they make on average 30% more there than anywhere in Canada.

 

[psychic duck]

Adam Kleeberger is being eyed up by Biarritz as a possible medical joker for the injured Magnus Lund

 

[formerlyfastwing]

oh that sucks. Especially in Edmonton, they make on average 30% more there than anywhere in Canada.

Really, you sure about that figure? I would think Fort McMurray might want a piece of that argument. To be honest, I reckon there are plenty of city's that would argue that...the bentley dealorship in YYC would also be interested.....Edmonton, can't see it...

 

[Canucks]

Really, you sure about that figure? I would think Fort McMurray might want a piece of that argument. To be honest, I reckon there are plenty of city's that would argue that...the bentley dealorship in YYC would also be interested.....Edmonton, can't see it...

Ahh it's from some survey that compared average earnings of households in cities above 500,000 people in 2009

Canada 68,410
Québec (Que.) 75,160
Montréal (Que.) 65,960
Ottawa–Gatineau (Que. part, Ont.–Que.) 80,110
Ottawa–Gatineau (Ont. part, Ont.–Que.) 93,070
Toronto (Ont.) 66,790
Hamilton (Ont.) 74,660
Winnipeg (Man.) 71,470
Calgary (Alta.) 88,410
Edmonton (Alta.) 86,250
Vancouver (B.C.) 67,550

Unedited version available below:
http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/famil107a-eng.htm

Ottawa is kinda of inflated as the number of high paying government jobs there (specifically in the Ontario part.)
Calgary/Edmonton has the biggest job market and highest earnings in Canada mainly due to Alberta having the lowest taxes that attract a lot of businesses and that people seldom want to live there due to the winters. Not slagging Calgary or Edmonton off, although Chris Pronger's wife might have a thing or two to say. Alberta in general also has one of the lowest cost of living in Canada whereas Montreal and Vancouver has the highest.
Compared to Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver (Canada's 3 biggest cities in that order) where the wages are low because they are generally considered world class cities and have much nicer weather and scenery thus they attract a lot of people who immigrate (all 3 cities have hugh population growth and Vancouver has 52% of it's population that doesn't speak English as a first language.) Average home in Vancouver costs 750,000 Canadian compared to 350,000 in Edmonton.

I'm far too lazy to source all this.
Not even rugby related aahahhha.