Club officials looking ahead to the fall season are frustrated that details of the revamped North American 4 haven't been released, blocking their planning.
In the renamed American Rugby Championship (ARC), top players are to compete on four all-star teams in a September round-robin that effectively replaces the quietly shelved Inter-territorial Tournament. But the union has yet to outline assembly times, player pools, and other vital details of the International Rugby Board-sponsored competition.
USA Rugby had intended to make an announcement in May. In Canada, British Columbia has already named its management team and presumably is setting plans in motion.
Autumn matches remain important to championship competitions in almost half the territories. Eastern Super League clubs hope to limit the 'head start' that warm weather XVs gain in December and January.
The uncertainty is a reminder that USA Rugby's 2006 strategic plan called for a competitions review, which three years later has yet to be completed, and that competitions director Dan Payne is leaving the union. Additionally, the September-October schedule is open to criticism that standout college and high players can't compete because it falls at the start of the school year.
Clubs have also been frustrated the union has scheduled test matches at the same time as domestic 7s and 15s championships.
You have to wonder if Dan Payne left USA Rugby because the Life job is so great, or that the USA Rugby job is such crap. I guess we will find out if Dan leaves Life within a year.
Posted by: Feel The Panye | 10 June 2009 at 11:55
In Canada, all 4 teams (BC, Ontario, Prairies and Atlantic) have appointed staffs and begun training, first league games are Sept 12 and most have friendlies arranged ahead of that.
Not too sure what the delay is south of the 49th but hope it works out as well down there.
Posted by: mark winokur | 10 June 2009 at 12:03
The Midwest Thunderbirds have presented there schedule. Ron Bowers is coach and a they play a game against the Ontario Selects on August 22nd in Elkhart, IN.
Posted by: Tibirt supporter | 10 June 2009 at 13:56
Tibirt supporter, this sounds like a warm up game for Ontario - the Midwest or any other TU or HP Region (not sure we are still doing these)have not been identified as teams for this ARC.
My guess is this is the Ontario team getting a jump on the competition and the Midwest trying to continue select side rugby as they have been leaders in it for some time (especially the LAU comp)
Nothing from Boulder on this, so if this is a scoop by you give us more detail!
Posted by: not clear | 10 June 2009 at 14:05
The Midwest Thunderbirds vs Ontario Blues is is part of a Midwest initiated plan to develop their own high performance model, in lieu of USAR doing so. The Ontario side is supposedly IRB funded HP program.
Posted by: Tibirt supporter | 10 June 2009 at 14:23
USA Rugby is out of money. Not a penny for the ARC. The US teams will need to use the new CIPP dues money that starts to roll in come September.
The mismanagement is epic. We haven't appointed coaching staffs, began the selection process, started communicating with the players, arranged facilities, nothing.
We can't tell the participants what it will cost them, because we don't know. Boulder only knows that the credit lines are maxed out and there is no money for anything other than the Eagles until the dues roll in.
How sad this has all become. The kids dues money now goes to these lame development plans instead of building US rugby from the ground up.
How much longer must this go on before this administration is thrown out on its ear?
Posted by: flat broke | 10 June 2009 at 14:26
It appears as though the "new" ARC is what was in place 15-20 years ago??
The old system was a good system.
Funny that millions were spent to figure how to ID players better.
Only a handful of wet blankets slipped through (nepotism) back then.
USArFU will still manage to screw the pooch with this thing and pick the wrong time of year and strange venues, but at least they understand that they are fricken clueless.
The current playoff structure is an embarrassment. Who was the architect for this? This must be the same joker who established the NASC and 8 teams, er 7, er 6.
Posted by: 3rd world rugby | 10 June 2009 at 15:15
Canada lost to Ireland A 30-19 after Ireland scored a converted try in the 78th minute. Canada played with a lot of cohesion and if their scrum wasn't dominated they would have won. Ireland was lucky to come away with the win. Based on what I have seen from the Canadians in the Georgia and Ireland A match, Eagles are miles away from where the Canadians are at this point.
Posted by: Canuk | 10 June 2009 at 17:14
Fourteen fresh Eagles were only able to put together 40 minutes of rugby today against a Jaguar squad with 9 players on 3 days rest. I was not impressed. Game lacked shape and aside from the fierce contest at the breakdown for the first 40 minutes there was not much positive to say about the Eagles. Power looked lost at 10 unless he was charged with kicking the ball down field, which he did fine. De Bartolo was good at times. The mid-field was non-existent. Pack was average after the first 40, and hot and cold in the set pieces. I would say that Canada will shred the Eagles at this point.
Posted by: Beagles | 10 June 2009 at 20:14
USA should have won this match.
DeBartolo and Power played well.
The centers were useless.
Boyd is out of his depth.
Usasz is good for making slow ball, as slow as humanly possible ball. If that is the way Eddie likes it, he is a fool.
The plan does not suit these players. The forwards will always look average in this attack plan.
Eddie's attack is terrible, the backs selection and gameplan are terrible.
Need a pivot man in the centers that can move the ball and penetrate. Maybe Power to Tuilevuka to Emerick or Wyles or Swiryn would not only shuts things down, but also open up DeBartolo and the wings for some space. The last lot of centers produced nothing, but they were also given nothing but slow ball.
I'm glad Eddie reads this blog.
DeBartolo is the Eagles fullback for the next 4 years.
Eddie,
Tuilevuka would make a great wing, if the Eagles had other centers (in camp) that could pass or catch.
The backs need more touches going forward, from quick ball!
Posted by: Crazy Eddie | 10 June 2009 at 20:14
why select a natural 13 at 10 and a 10 at 13? I am confused! Swiryn would be an asset at center,but I agree s/h is the problem. No creativity and too slow.The have to be a threat to slow down the 6 and 7's who are having a field day out there.
Posted by: dazed and confused | 11 June 2009 at 07:12
Power is a defensive deterrent at 10. His left boot and DeBartolo's right boot allow them to compete with Tier 1 countries. You can't coach that god-given talent into what the other choices are. Those guys are the baseline for international rugby.
The rest is up to the coaching staff. It is quite easy to sort out if the attack and selections were altered.
The centers need to be able to break the line and offload if the Eagles plan to score 30 points against Canada. 5'9 centers with average pace and skill are not the answers.
The s/h obviously was directed to slow the game down. Although USazs is suited for a slower style, he is Australian and Australians don't play that. This is Eddie's choice.
Line breaks create scoring opportunities and penalties, Eddie's attack does squat.
He understands this and now has something that is easy and will put pressure on the opposition's goal when they get down there.
He now has the boot to get inside the opposition's 22 and keep the wings back.
The thing that is killing the Eagles is the lineout. It is awful, it is basic, it needs some innovation and rythmn ASAP.
If those pieces were in place and the attack focus were pushed out to someone like Tuilevuka playing 12, you have something to work with. Add a couple of straight line runners outside him, and all of a sudden we get big line breaks and finishes.
This is a back coaches dream.
Big boots to keep the wings back, a physical deterrent at 10. Just add some real go forward and offloads and you all of a sudden compete with England. That is if a 25 year old Luke Gross were on the squad, and you had a decent lineout coach and better back lifters.
Posted by: Go big or go home. | 11 June 2009 at 08:54
This was a very young, true Argie development team...on three days rest.
I've seen the Eagles lose by less than a try to the full Puma side. This match is the best indication of just how far the Eagles have fallen under this administration.
We had a few new caps, a few of which continue the Johnson plan of flying in foreign born players to play for the Eagles. O'Sullivan those guys aren't that good, WTF, why are you selecting them? Scott Johnson's and Eddie O'Sullivan's Eagles teams didn't win much...but they selected a lot of foreign born players to represent the US...great legacy.
SELECT PLAYERS THAT LIVE IN AMERICA!
The Eagles also had some 30 year olds selected to the match as well as front line starters like Clever and MacDonald.
Comfortable win for a young Argie side and a sad indication of what has become of US rugby under Melville and Roberts.
Posted by: FireMelvilleRoberts.com | 11 June 2009 at 09:07
EOS has 2 games to figure out what his best side is going to be for the Canada WCQ match. We are behind the Canadians on this task, as they have had a coach in place for a year and he knows who is best 15 are at this point. Furthermore, his team knows his patterns and can execute his game day tactics. This was obvious by how structured they played against the Georgians and Ireland A in their last 2 matches. They were patient and created pressure that they turned into points, which is a sign of a settled team. Add to this that they have a U20 team in Japan at the JWC getting blooded in test rugby and they have their American Rugby Championship teams and management in place, and it is obvious that their High Performance and 2011 WC plans are in place and working. I don't think we even have a plan at this point. I expect Canada to beat us in the 2 WCQ matches. We need to keep an eye on Uruguay who are competing in the Nations Cup in Romania this month making their second appearance in the tournament, and have sent their best team. If they get their act togther, we may be staying home in 2011 like we did in 1995. This may be a good thing as we can clean house and actually put a real plan together.
Posted by: Crunch Time | 11 June 2009 at 09:52
I predict there four teams from the Americas at RWC 2011. The Eagles will be one of those teams.
This is different from 1995 when only two team from the Americas were allowed at RWC 1995.
In 1995 the Eagles lost by less than a try to the Pumas twice in RWC qualification, while Canada had an automatic berth from their quarter-final finish in 1991.
If the RWC 2011 qualification situation was similar to 1995 the Eagles would be in trouble, but not the way it is currently structured. The Eagles may not beat Canada, but they will qualify and so might a fourth team from the Americas like in RWC 2007.
Posted by: Go Eagles | 11 June 2009 at 10:15