On the Collegiate All-Americans

opinion If you’ve ever played abroad, it’s not hard to recognize the Collegiate All-Americans as one of our most distinctive teams.

Begin with the matchless heritage of the USA’s 1920 and 1924 Olympic gold medal winners. The All-Americans also boast organic ties to our college sports environment, collectively the world’s finest athletic training ground, bar none.

Then there is the proven contribution to the Eagles. All-timers such as Lippert, Chris O’Brien, Hein, Hodges, Shuman, and more recently MacDonald, Schubert, and Emerick started here.

Or maybe you have to have played here – in any sport really – to appreciate the draw card that is “college All-American” to rising generations.

The 2007 All-American campaign is not going well. Perhaps (hopefully) the tourists will rally. But it will be hard to put aside memories of an Inter-Territorial Tournament in a remote park with an open ditch but without service academy players. Also gone is the luster of playing the Irish Universities – Oxford next September falls in a new school year and cannot be the same.

Recently this team traveled to Ireland, South Africa, and New Zealand. Now we settle for over the border, again, with the boys asked to pay their own way not two years after an unprecedented dues hike, the sale of the USA 7s, and a windfall International Rugby Board grant.

The matter recalls the ignominy of declining a test with touring England in 1991, or Eagles paying their own way to Denver for the 1992 Can-Am.

(As an aside, the last Canada Under-21 team to visit the US came to Long Beach in 1994, I believe, back when it was a home-and-away series. Kevin Dalzell played for the hosts, Mike James for the visitors. When will the junior Maple Leafs return?)

In a World Cup year, much time and money undoubtedly should flow to the Eagles. That is no excuse to allow the All-Americans’ standards to sag. Long since we have known better than to allow territorial coaches to double as selectors, or ask students to foot the bill, especially on short-notice fares.

Of course management is hard work, as it always has been. Who will be responsible for the rebuilding that must come next?

Comments

[John]

Happy to discuss all aspects of the All American Program with you and your readers AFTER the tour is complete.
For now the entire staff is focused on the PLAYERS and preparations for matches in Canada.
As always we encourage debate, invite critisism and welcome open discussion of the college game and it's future.
Look forward to reading how your readers feel about your latest entry.
John McNamara
AA Program Manager

[old beaver]

Give 'em hell Chase!!
Beat the Maple Syrup out of 'em!

[mel]

"the entire staff"- what's that cost us, to have an entire staff ? Oh my!

[Paul Horne]

The rivalry between the All American Squad and the Canada U 21 team was important to both countries in the late 80's and into the 90's. The game in Long Beach in 94 was actually the Canada U 23 side that included Mike James, Al Tynan, Jason Penaluna, Courtenay Smith, Gregor Dixon, Gareth Rowland, Chris Whittaker and Fred Asselin who all were capped for Canada.
The game was important for both countries in developing players for higher competition. It, in my opinion as former coach, would be timely to bring the game back and make it a home and away series funded by the IRB.
Paul Horne

[Titus]

A quick review of the last week’s news according to “Gainline” – and the official report is – nothing actually happened.

1. We had a premature ejaculation with a 9 paragraph report, about the “Mighty Olympic Club” it’s ties, it’s structure and it’s way of thinking. To which a very ugly debate ensued.

2. We had a National Club Championship – and you could only find 6 paragraphs of news worth reporting. There were no comments on this.

3. We had a reports on issues with the NCAA mens championship – and that was followed up by a report on the issues surrounding the exclusion/inclusion of the Cal players. Both with limited reader responses.

4. We also had the Woman’s NCAA tournament – again, nothing posted. It was like it never happened.

5. Our Canadian neighbors took on the All Blacks, and while the result may have been heavily one sided in the finish. It was not so at half time. The All Blacks were held to 26-13 by a side that is ranked 13 in the IRB ratings. That’s 12 whole places back from the leaders, New Zealand.

There have been numerous comments about the differences between Canadian Rugby and USA Rugby. Who’s getting better – who’s not. Clearly Canada has improved. Holding the All Blacks to 13 points at half time is something the French couldn’t do – so yes, Canada has improved. Does this bring the efforts of the USA Eagles into a slightly different light – yes. But that wasn’t covered on this Blog. There was no report. Why? Because it potentially may draw comment that readers may consider the same – Canada has improved, so has the USA – just not as fast or as much.

[JAEF]

It sounds like Titus is ready to start his own Rugby news page.

Good luck with that Titus. Why don't you try to add to the debate, not piss on this website. Now please STFU.

[Eagles Fan]

While I think it is unfair of Titus to knock Gainline for their content (free speech and all), I do see his point. Positive news coing out of the US Rugby community is often overlooked by this site in favor of jabs at the current USA Rugby administration or at least news that will incite the fans of the site to take their own jabs at the administration. Most of the talkback is negative in tone and arguments seem to have a nice breeding ground here.

It would be nice to see some more positive news around here (and more constructive talkbacks), but I respect the fact that this site retains the right to post whatever they want.

As for the All Americans, best of luck guys. Use the "pay your way" as a motivator and put a big old chip on your shoulders.

[Titus]

JAEF - When I need your opinion, I'll give it to you. Until then WDY STFU.

[JAEF]

Titus,

Well argued.

I forgot that this website is the 'official' voice of USA Rugby, and the end all be all of rugby news, not a forum to discuss certain events ongoing in rugby today.

As I said before, if it does not suit you, then take a hike, don't complain about your perceived shortcomings because your daughter's 13-14 year old touch game was not written about.

[Go The Eagles]

The Gap between the US and Canada is wide and getting bigger by the day.

What happend to the team that Almost beat France in Hartford in 2004? It has been steadily downhill since then.

[Rick the Rugger]

JAEF,

You're funny. You're also right. I don't need to hear about Titus's complaints. This site does a damn fine job of getting a lot of important happenings of United States rugby posted for the benefits of our discussion.

Few events draw the large amount of posts that USA Rugby administration news does, including game write-ups involving USA Rugby.

Titus most likely has a vested interest in an event, or venue, or team that garners little to no discussion from both the editor and users, and thus the complaining about it. That is his/her right, although it is also ours to let him/her know that the post was foolish, and that others are lining up on the other side of that complaint.

Keep up the good work Kurt! Titus is just a little acute on the importance of finding news that your viewers are interested in discussing.

[Antipodes]

JAEF & Rick – Whoa!

I just read the post by Titus – and he’s not wrong, plus he added some comments. He gave his view and opinions – which is his right to do so, in an open forum situation like this.

You two however, hadn’t posted anything on this thread. Infact you never chimed in on this thread with any thoughts or discussion points of your own, until after Titus’s comments. All you two have done is to berate another reader – for little or no reason. He made a point – it was directed to the editor, not you two bumkins. You accomplished exactly - what you demanded Titus do, you two are as stupid as the integrity of your comment.

JAEF – you never made a comment on this thread, but immediately began cussing in text. Who gave you that right? You stated “Why don't you try to add to the debate, not piss on this website” then you stated “not a forum to discuss certain events ongoing in rugby today” What are you trying to say JAEF? You make no sense - apart from showing your willingness to cause pain and hurt to other people. Go look in the mirror and ask if you want others to treat you this way.

Rick – Your opinion is” This site does a damn fine job” really? I think this site gives a biased opinion on anything anti establishment. It promotes everything Cal and now by the looks, the Olympic Club as well. This site takes extreme pleasure in pointing out all deficiencies in the current establishment and staff.

Something did happen overnight – but this site hasn’t even followed up with an article. If you want to read about it – you’ll need to go to a site that posts news on a daily basis – not whenever the opportunity arises to take a jab at the establishment.

In future you two should add comments yourselves – not attack other posters for little or no reason. The only thing you two have done is to discriminate against someone else, because he has his own opinion. Which was more beneficial than anything you two Nobel prize winner have said.

[Gainline Fan]

Kurt is the premier rugby journalist in North America.

When the IRB wants media work for any of their publications they call Kurt. When one of the esteemed international rugby journalist needs information, its Kurt who gets the call. His stories are well written and have a clear and important point.

What goes wrong with this site is when the wanna-be bloggers decide to take Kurt or his point of view on. This thread normally begins with a suggestion of some type of conspiracy. Cal this or that, is a favorite, which BTW, I don't see in Kurt postings.

On occasion there is little comment to one of Kurt's stories, either because Kurt has said it all or because there is less interest in the angle.

More often, Kurt's opposition has a go at the story and this brings out those that agree with his reports.

I like the suggestion that if you don't like this blog, you subscribe to a different blog. Kind of like a Fox news or CNN decision. If you want to participate then bring your 'A' game of ideas, which to the credit of most, happens.

Most of us like the fact that Kurt's views are less political and to the point. In some cases he appears to take on the watchdog role, which is important if we want to stay away from another Doug Arnot period.

For those of you keeping score at home, Kurt has exposed the; Arnot and Bob Latham leadership crisis, the resignation of Tom Billups over this executive leadership crisis, the firing of long-time greats Dan Lyle and Dave Hodges for blowing the whistle, the misuse of the IRB grants, the shortsighted appointment and performance of Peter Thorburn as national team coach, the new thinking concerning a separate organization to run youth rugby, the melt-down of the All-American team as we knew it, ect.

Go on with your bad self Kurt and keep telling it like it is. The more the politically entrenched hate it the more the members of USA Rugby need it.

[Another fan]

100% agree with Gainline Fan. Kurt has done an excellent job reporting on troubling developments over the past few years. Keep up the good work!

[JAEF]

Antipodes,

I only post on stuff that incites a response, like some knot head dissing the content on this site. I stand by my comment.

Perhaps you should go back and read his post again, because he does not add to the discussion, only bitch about what was under-reported or not reported.

Thanks though. My third post and it's all because you guys can't swallow a bitter pill.

[ecm]

If you don't like the content of someone's blog, then don't read it. The beauty of a blog is you get to write about the things you want to write about. And a blog is not a newspaper. While his reporting is generally strong, in a blog you get to be subjective & present your own opinions & points of view.

Kurt's not a waiter taking orders and you're not a diner ordering a la carte off a menu. You get to eat what Kurt serves up or you go eat somewhere else.

As for the alleged Cal/OC/NorCal bias on the Gainline site, my take is that you have rugby systems (especially w/ Cal) in place that have proven to not just work but to excel in an enviroment where results are easily measured.

I'm not sure the same can be said for most of the rest of the initiatives out of USARFU and I think it's fair to compare & contrast the performance/administration between the Clark/Billups era & the post Clark/Billups era.

Gainline does that & it obviously makes people uncomfortable. If he thinks the performance doesn't measure up, he says so, but guess what, it's his blog, he gets to make the point he wants to make. And just because he calls out the present national rugby administration as lacking doesn't make him a stalking horse for Mssrs. Clark & Billups & the Cal contingent.

And finally, why are folks so exercised and defensive about all things Cal? Celebrate the effort, achievement and dedication of the Cal program, learn from it, and attempt to beat them on the pitch. I don't get the animosity and venom towards the most succesful rugby system in the USA.

On a somewhat related topic to the original post, what's the story with why no Cal players will play on the collegiate national/all-star touring side? Is Cal witholding players or is there a selection freeze-out of Cal? Seems like there's a story there & somebody must know. Mr. McNamara offered to discuss the touring side selection "after the tour is complete" & I'd like to know what the story is.

[Tausend]

ecm,

I think this was either addressed in the ealier All-American thread, or you missed it in this one, but there were (I believe) 8 Cal players selected to the team. However, only one is traveling (Ross Biestman). Two of those selected (Rikus Pretorius and Louie Stanfill) will have NA4 commitments. The other six I cannot speak for. But rest assured, Cal is well represented in the selected AA team. There are also several academy players who are not traveling. I believe americanrugbynews.com has an article that names both the selected AA team, and the touring side. Two pretty different animals actually.

Liked your post, just wanted to address your last question.

[Antipodes]

Good to see so many Gainline fans.

Gainline Fan, you wrote: “Kurt has exposed the; Arnot and Bob Latham leadership crisis, the resignation of Tom Billups over this executive leadership crisis, the firing of long-time greats Dan Lyle and Dave Hodges for blowing the whistle, the misuse of the IRB grants, the shortsighted appointment and performance of Peter Thorburn as national team coach, the new thinking concerning a separate organization to run youth rugby, the melt-down of the All-American team as we knew it, ect.”

Gainline should get the credit - Really? And all this time I thought he started this blog site because USAR released him from his role as Media Relations. Right about the same time as the Billups fiasco. Just before the Strain termination at USAR. Right about the time Lyle and Hodges got sent to the corner.

Yeah – we read it all. Every one sided comment made.

Gainline Fan – explain your point when you say “the shortsighted appointment and performance of Peter Thorburn as national team coach” That’s your opinion. You’re entitled to it, and to speak it. I bet you don’t have the balls to call Peter Thorburn and tell him that. Instead you post crap like that on a blog site, without fear of open debate. You cyber warrior.

Issue of Debate: Titus said – lets have more news. JAEF responded in text message language SFU = “Shut The Fuck Up”. Rick posted to pat JAEF on the back and to further insult Titus. Neither of you made any discussion point about his posting. JAEF, you said “I only post on stuff that incites a response” Incites a response? Cheap shots is a more realistic way to describe your MO.

“Perhaps you should go back and read his post again, because he does not add to the discussion, only bitch about what was under-reported or not reported” Exactly! How could the poor guy post, if there aren’t any current, objective news articles. Hell – Titus may agree with something that gets posted. You don’t know.

And I’ll say it too – because I do like this site, and I like it for the same reasons you do. But this is a rugby blog/news site – yes? Because we are all educated people, we want to form our own opinions. And that requires examination of all the facts on an issue before we make a decision. There has been a lot of very news worth things happen over the last few days – but ‘Opinion’ articles is all we got. I want to see more news. I can’t speak for everyone – but I like news, good or bad. It keeps me informed.

[Antipodes]

You want some news: The USA just got dropped in IRB World Rankings. That's news.

Maybe in some strange way Titus knew more than you gave him credit for.....

Now - lets see if there is an article, and how the rhetoric is used.

[ncrfu]

ecm,

Most of the Cal players selected have graduated, how could Cal withhold them. It might be they aren't interested in paying for a dorm room stay and match with a team that UBC would beat. Others like Stanfill and Pretorious are in the NA4 during this tour.

The word on campus is that the Cal returning players where not allowed to miss their end of year finals to trial with the Pacific Coast team. How lame is it to have the trial during finals.

I doubt there is a freeze-out of Cal players (I think McNamara is a Cal grad), but its clear that interest in the All American program is down across the board with players footing the bill and heading to dorm rooms in Canada. What happened to those international tours?

The real lost is no military academic players at the trials. Navy looked the part in the Championships at Stanford and don't have any players going. They beat St Mary's who have 3-4 players on the tour.

It looks like the All Americans have picked up the Army standoff who also didn't trial, but is an excellent player.

I think the story is the All American program is suffering and interest is lower than previous years.

Even without Stanfill and some of the other best players we still have a good team and we should get behind them.

[Gainline Fan]

I saw that news Antipodes, Tonga passed us in the IRB world rankings.

The match aired this weekend, quite exciting for a tier two affair. Tonga beating Fiji, in Fiji, without their overseas professionals is a bad sign for our World Cup hopes.

In watching many of the tier two countries I see improvement in their play. Japan had a big victory over Tonga recently for example.

Why the hostilities around the thought that it was shortsighted to hire a lame duck older coach, whose performance has us going backwards. Why do you think people wouldn't have the guts to say this to his face. This is not personal, he might be a really nice man, but he has done poorly with the Eagles, as he did in his last job before being fired at Bristol, after he got them relegated.

I base my opinion on how the Eagles are playing, and those going backward results against Canada. Why in his defense, which I respect, do you make it personal. These are well paid employees of USA Rugby, why as members can't we have the opinion that its not good enough? Are you somehow vested in this through your nationality or a role in USA Rugby, because I have no issue with foreign coaches. I also think we should move on from these comparisons.

Lets get to the here and now. This isn't good enough. I think it insulting to pay a guy $150,000 to tell us we need more professional players and that we aren't good enough. It's true, but that's not what we pay the coach to do. We pay the CEO to organized this stuff and the coach to win, or at least to improve our play, neither is happening. The other tier two countries are getting on with improving their teams without a bunch of excuses, why not us?

Save our breath if you turn these remarks into a call for Billups' return or whatever other crap you can roll out.

I read Gainline to get an informed opinion on what is really happening, not to engage in politics. Thanks again Kurt.

[LM]

Hey Everyone--

I also enjoy reading GL. Even though you are all wacked.

The positive Antipodes is USA Rugby CEO Nigel Melville. He will turn this ship around in no time. Read the story posted on erugbynews about elite rugby and you get the sense this long national nightmare is almost over.

[JimmyD]

'wacked' is about right for most of the comments posted here. However where else can you read comments from the former coach of the Canadian u-21 national team and the manager of the all American team they faced. answer, no where. Count me in as a gainline fan and I will ignore the rest of you cybernuts.

[Interested]

Are you trying to tell me that Thorburn is making $150,000??

Is that for the year, or just the 10 months until the RWC is over??

Is that the kind of money that Billups was paid as well??

[JAEF]

I believe that Tom Billups was making roughly half of that of the current coach, or about the same as the assistants on the staff.

It's a good thing the IRB funding can cover that tab.

[TB]

Tom was well over paid, if that is the case.

[Dan]

You've got to admit that the creation of this web site (just as Billups was being pushed out) and Kurt's close relationship w/ Tom is seemingly more than coincidental. w/ that said, Kurt has every right to publish what he likes, he is a fine writer in his own right.

this blog is kinda like reading a newspaper that you know is slanted or biased towards a political party. everything is spun to favor the supporting party and to discount the opposing party.

for instance, the headline "Thorburn predicts Canada win" was extrated from his statement “I’m as confident as ever that we will come away with a win on Saturday,”. that to me does say he's PREDICTING a win, he's just expressing his confidence. Kurt saw this opportunity to put him on the spot and did so. very nice.

i still read this web site b/c i like tracking rugby but i know very well who this web site supports and who is does not. Freedom of Speech.

[Dan]

You've got to admit that the creation of this web site (just as Billups was being pushed out) and Kurt's close relationship w/ Tom is seemingly more than coincidental. w/ that said, Kurt has every right to publish what he likes, he is a fine writer in his own right.

this blog is kinda like reading a newspaper that you know is slanted or biased towards a political party. everything is spun to favor the supporting party and to discount the opposing party.

for instance, the headline "Thorburn predicts Canada win" was extrated from his statement “I’m as confident as ever that we will come away with a win on Saturday,”. that to me does say he's PREDICTING a win, he's just expressing his confidence. Kurt saw this opportunity to put him on the spot and did so. very nice.

i still read this web site b/c i like tracking rugby but i know very well who this web site supports and who is does not. Freedom of Speech.

[Interested]

Billups was making $75k and we are now paying this guy $150k.....

Is this public knowledge? I guess now that the IRB is footing the bill it is OK to over pay the Head Coach and his assistant coaches.

Sounds like Billups was reasonably compensated compared to what is going on in the current setup.

[Dan]

$75K aint bad for 3 or 4 matches a year...almost $25k/match!!

[Tha Truth]

Dan,

2002 - 7 games
2003 - 13 games
2004 - 7 games
2005 - 5 games

This is a little different than your assertion.

Although it does look like current coach is getting about that $25k/match you talk about.

2006 - 7 games ($150 k)
2007 - 7 games ($150 k)

I hope he gets one win at the World Cup, because NO WINS for $150 K looks pretty bad

[Rick the Rugger]

Funny.

The lame-duck coach gets $25,000 on game day, the players get about $100.

So is the state of USA rugby.

[Dan]

Its not like the players were getting more compensation under the previous management...

[Tha Truth]

Well at least the players were getting MORE wins under the previous management....

[DifferentPerspective]

Both sides have a good point that a coach is judged on wins and losses, especially for the national team.

When comparing their salaries be sure to look at not just the wins/losses but experience and influence.
Thorburn has opened up the skills and fitness aspects of the game to everyone's benefit. The MNT coach also has a job of setting a clear style of play and the demands of that style. Let's not forget that Thorburn has promoted American based coaches through the ranks.

Tom was closed shop in every sense of the word. You were not evey allowed to get one of the fitness programs if you were not on the team. Cal is a powerhouse, no doubt. How much good does it do them or anyone else to keep it a secret and thrash everyone by 50 points? Tom was rightly compensated for what he did, and that was to focus purely on the National Team and Cal. Stewardship was just not one of his strengths. As well Thorburn is probably compensated correctly. He had more experience coming in, usually requires a higher salary. He has also reached out to improve the overall standard in this country. Let's not forget the NA4 commitment that Thorburn has overseen. He's taken on double duty, not sure it requires double salary, but him getting paid more makes sense.
Personally I'd like to see a performance based contract for the next coach that involves National Team Performance and overall stewardship. Or, take other duties off his plate and let him focus purely on the National Team and let the contract reflect performance.

[Antipodes]

The NA4 is on this week in Canada. Does anyone know if Kort Schubert was included? If his knee held up ok at the Club playoffs, then IMHO he is good enough for the NA4 this time around. I hope they picked that massive loosehead prop from Hayward – Fukafuka. He plays tighthead as well, and at 6’4” will allow Blake Burdette to be in the front row without the hooker being the tallest man in the front row. Will this leg of the NA4 be covered by any of the TV channels or Rugby Websites (The Rugby Channel or Setanta)?

[M.O.]

I agree with you on both Schubert and Fukafuka being selected. Schubert looked close to being the player prior to his knees being injured and Fukafuka was unstopable in the loose. I would like to see how he scrums against Canadian opposition.

Also, the Rugby Channel on Mediazone is advertising that they will be showing the NA4 this weekend live as well as the final on July 7th.

Not sure if anyone saw Samoa defeat Tonga on Saturday night on Setanta, but since both are Eagles' opponents in the World Cup is was interesting to watch. Samoa won big (50-3) and have excellent backs and their #7 is pretty good. Tonga looked to lack fitness and were sucking gas in the second half. Both teams are beatable for the Eagles.

[OLD BEAVER]

No, I was going to watch it tonight when I got home from work.
BOOOO Rugby Spoilers! Horray Beer!

[M.O.]

Sorry Old Beaver!

[old beaver]

Well, I don't know why the roster got reshuffled, But, we won 43-33.

[John McNamara]

So here we are at the end of the AA tour. A 2 and 0 record.
All of the credit goes to the young men that took the field and did what was needed to put down a very good Canadian side. The coaching was fantastic, the support from USAR and Kooga was exceptional. From a rugby standpoint, the results speak for thenselves. We entered the tour competing against the Candian U21's. By the second game we were facing a full Candadian "development side" and still acheived the result we were after.
If Gainline readers and editiors have an issue with the way this team was selected or coached I will be happy to discuss the details of the process.
I would encourage Kurt to post a follow up story that will allow a specific discussion of the AA program and it's promise.
I'm not interested in discussing Jack Clark, Tom Billups, what the current pay scale is at USAR or the rest of the majority of posts on this article were concerned with.
The story here is the work that 27 Collegiate rugby players did over a 9 day period that resulted in a historic turn of events in Canada this weekend.
I am admittedly pround of the results we have acheived here.
Interested in hearing how you all feel about the AA program now that the silly rumors have been been silenced by the facts of the matter at hand.
Canada U23+, 18 All American Rugby 27. A two game sweep.
Great work AA's. Look forward to the Oxford match in Sept.

John McNamara
AA Program Manager

[canuck]

before you go patting yourself on the back too much coach, the Canadian team you just beat was full of second and third or fourth choice players. With the NA4 on at the same time as well as the need to rest some of the players returning from NZ, our U23 were made up of the leftovers. Instead we had our young players starting in the NA4 games-- like Hirayama(19), Perrazulla(18 yr Tighthead), Trenkle(20),DTH VanDermere(21),.... list goes on. Our 2011 prospects just spanked both of your NA4 squads full of Eagles. BTW the loosehead for the Hawks is a waste of skin, spent all of his time throwing punches and avoiding rucks.

[Go Canada]

Thanks Canuck, I have two further points.

Congratulation to the all Americans for their victories. Canada is wisely using younger players than the USA at every level of competition, we win most of the encounters and we are set up for continued success.

This guy McNamara is a big mouth, have some grace in victory. The coach was very generous to the younger U-21's, if you don't have any class, just keep your mouth shut.

[Play Rugby, not Street Fighting]

Ahem!

The Falcons loosey is none other than Mike French, and while I would not classify him as a waste of skin, he would be better off in a octagon fighting someone who knows they are there to fight rather than on the pitch where he delivers cheap shot after cheap shot.

I don't think he is capable of playing a clean 80 minutes. In fact, a lot of readers comment on his poor/dirty play. He is well known to the site as a dou*he bag.

[Todd]

Note: French did not even play in the game due to his red card suspension. Get your facts straight before making an ass of yourself!

[JAEF]

Todd,

While I did not see the game, this was the published lineup for last Friday's game:

US Hawks starters: 1. Michael French; 2. Mark Crick; 3. Jon Vitale; 4. John Van Der Giessen; 5. Jake Stanfill; 6. Inaki Basauri; 7. (Capt) Dan Payne; 8. Pat Quinn; 9. David Williams; 10. Nese Malifa; 11. Scott Jones; 12. (VC) Riaan Hamilton; 13. Nathan Rogers; 14. Kevin Mongold; 15. Jone Naqica

Reserves: 16. Patrick bell; 17. Matekitonga Moeakiola; 18. Louis Stanfill; 19. Michel Laubscher; 20. Henry Bloomfield; 21. Kimball Kjar; 22. Link Wilfley

[Tom C]

I watched the game on mediazone and Matekitonga Moeakiola was the starter at loosehead.

[canuck]

there both thugs that give away stupid penalties