Canada 41 United States 18 (halftime: Canada 24-0)

That the Eagle rebound should be v-shaped is no more obvious than the connection between the test team and USARFU's overall health.

Playing short-handed for more than 50 minutes, the US fell 41-18 to Canada Saturday in Edmonton, six tries to two. Following a pair of wins over Georgia and the Maple Leafs, the lopsided match revealed an US XV that is not yet consistently accurate in the setpiece and other primary objectives, thus limiting offensive thrust.

Defeat in the second of two World Cup qualifying matches concedes Canada a berth in pool A and consigns the Eagles to face Uruguay in another two-game series, expected to be contested this November. Presuming Eddie O'Sullivan's improving charges handle the Teros, the US would have to win two of three matches against Australia, Ireland, and Italy in order to reach the 2011 quarterfinals -- suggesting the seventh World Cup will not spark rugby's epiphany among mainstream sports fans.

Just as this winter's decision to set aside Commonwealth-style 'professionalization' has been salutary for the 2009 Eagles, so USARFU might be advised to rethink its 'top down' plan for advancing on all fronts, from outsized growth in playing numbers to revenue that falls to the bottom line.

2009's player registration advanced at a rate level with the start of the decade, but no more. With test-match attendance having fallen sharply through this year's six-game home schedule, it is evident that International Rugby Board grants and the increased dues intake, as well as the short-term National Guard pact, are vital to the budget's reported increase to $8-plus million from $4 million.

Yet if the union cannot pay for the best of the collegians, who make up more than one-third of dues payers and this year contributed six newcomers to the senior national squad, then the link between the 'grassroots' and the test team is both quantitatively and qualitatively broken.

With another dollop of rookies such 2008 All-American skipper Kevin Swiryn, over the next two seasons the Eagles could aspire to fully recovering ground lost over the past four years' 6-24 campaigning. But the gains evident in the spring-summer season are more attributable to focused coaching and players charged to excel, rather than lament something they are not.

If the 2009 edition to date has done what it can with what it has, then Edmonton confirmed confirmed that playing catchup is something the US has rarely been able to afford.

Unlike Charleston, when the US resisted early Canadian pressure, Saturday's match saw the US concede three first-half tries, two after Paul Emerick's dismissal, leaving Todd Clever's charges trailing 24-0 -- 18 points adrift in the aggregate scoring that determines World Cup qualification. Fourth-quarter scores to Swiryn and the skipper showed that a side capable of making its mark on a game, if not quite drawing close enough for respectability or an end to the 12-match road losing streak.

'We let the game get away from us early on and struggled to keep shape. We played better in the second half, but by that point we were chasing the game and forcing things a bit,' coach O'Sullivan said in a prepared statement.

Fall matches against Uruguay and Fiji are expected to succeed October's Americas Rugby Championship.

Canada 41, United States 18 (halftime: Canada 24-0)

United States
Tries: Kevin Swiryn, Todd Clever
Conversion: Mike Hercus
Penalties: Mike Hercus (2)

Chris Wyles; Takudzwa Ngwenya, Paul Emerick (dismissed), Roland Suniula (Salesi Sika), Kevin Swiryn; Mike Hercus (Ata Malifa), Tim Usasz (Mike Petri); Matekitonga  Moeakiola (Mike MacDonald), Chris Biller (Joe Welch), Shawn Pittman, John van der Giessen, Hayden Smith (Alec Parker), Louis Stanfill, Todd Clever (captain), Nic Johnson (JJ Gagiano)

Canada
Tries: James Pritchard, Adam Kleeberger, Justin Mensah-Coker, Ed Fairhurst, DTH van der Merwe, Matt Evans
Conversions: James Pritchard (4)
Penalty: James Pritchard

James Pritchard; Matt Evans, DTH van der Merwe, Ryan Smith, Justin Mensah-Coker; Ander Monro, Ed Fairhurst; Kevin Tkachuk, Pat Riordan (captain), Dan Pletch, Mike Burak, Tyler Hotson, Jebb Sinclair, Nanyak Dala, Adam Kleeberger. Replacements unavailable.

Referee: Alan Lewis (Ireland)
Attendance: not available

Comments

[bpf]

well, they weren't going to win 2 out of the vs. new zealand, france and whomever so i don't think this exactly hurt our chances of advancing to the quarterfinals. i think getting in and winning a game would be a step in the right direction.

but wow, what a depressing effort.

[HAHAHA]

Getting in the QF! Anyone that thinks the Eagles are possible quarter finalists is nuts. The Eagles shouldn't even be in the WC based on that performance this weekend.

[Disappointing]

Clearly we weren't going to get to the QFs no matter what. But if we had taken this game, we'd be in a pool with NZ, France, Japan and a Repechage team - and we could win two games at the WC for the first time in our history.

As it is, we'll be (if we're lucky) in a pool with Ireland, Australia, Italy and likely Georgia - so we will again probably only be able to win one, unless we play out of our skull and somehow beat Italy.

[fairweather fans]

"Saturday's match saw the US concede three first-half tries, two after Paul Emerick's dismissal, leaving Todd Clever's charges trailing 24-0"

That is all you need to say, as soon as Emerick was red carded, that sealed the deal. To misjudge how the team played when for 2/3rds of the game they are playing short handed and trying to compensate for that is a little over the top. There was a couple soft tries that came in as a result. In test level rugby you usually cannot win playing a man down for 10 minutes, let alone 2/3rds of the game. It is amazing to see how quickly everyone is jumping off the USA bandwagon.

[Bonzai]

I don't see how someone can think that we are looking at beating Japan as a sure thing, or even as anything more than a tough game. Japan lost to Fiji, in Fiji, a couple weeks ago in the Pacific Nations tourney only by a converted try that was scored in injury time. Japan is no pushover.

Furthermore, we are looking at a team that has gone 5-24, or something like that, over the past few years. We beat a Georgia A side and had a fluke win over Canada. After last week it must be assumed that Canada came out overconfident and flat on the 4th and combined with the heat couldn't regroup in time to defeat the Eagles.

Eagles are a Tier 3 team and should just consider getting to the WC an accomplishment. We will not be beating the Tier 2 nations (Italy, Canada, Italy, Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, Georgia) any time soon.

[J v T]

The game was slipping away before the red card because of the error count. Even EOS acknowledged that in the post match interview.

[Concerned Rugby Fan]

I think the loss on Saturday is a blessing. We now play two more international games on the iRB dime. The more opportunity that Eddie O'Sullivan gets to work with the Eagles in competitive situations the better the Eagles will get

[E P I C F A I L R E Q U I R E D]

Complete failure of the Eagles and to not qualify for the 2011 WC is what is needed. Only then will the IRB either abandon the USA as a rugby nation and let the locals run the thing, or they will say let's listen to what the Americans have to say about building the game. Any Eagles success will be used to justify the continuation of this misguided agenda.

[Was expected]

Not worried about Uruguay, just thinks its funny talking about the Quaterfinals. Its like Jim Mora, "playoffs, we cant even win a stinking game!!" If America beats Japan/Romania/Georgia at the WC thats all we can expect, but build the game and audience up. Too bad we cant get a bledisloe cup match in the USA. Only when people see the top level will it ever gain an audience. EOS has done well with what he has. Id like to see more support for the college game instead of grabbing foreigners with american passports, but hey its the best we got.

[Suwoop Gang]

The truth coming Fall '09

[Poof Jockeys]

I didn't see the match, so I can't comment on the game, but I have no problem with Emerick accidentally kicking a Canadian skull while trying to retain possession of the ball. I also had no problem with Malifa biting to maintain possession.

I am proud that these Americans are willing to shoulder chaarge, punch, bite, and kick to win the ball.

Some of these foreign pussies would sooner give you the ball than contest for it. I'm tired of seeing wet blankets jumping on backs and dryhumping the opposition from the numbers to the socks.

[let me help you]

Who cares, this is the wrong plan at the wrong time. We are flunking biz/leadership 101.

If this USAR leadership group isn't gone and gone soon, God only help us.

BTW, I have some opinions on the actions of those aboard the Titanic after it hit the iceberg. Should we all comment on these views. No, stay the fu*k away from the iceberg traveling at full speed.

It's the plan you dumbshits. These foreign short-timers have us on a "top down" plan to nowhere.

[Ben Dover]

a "top down" plan, maybe. screwing us from behind, for sure.

[sending off]

Is there any video out there of Emerick kicking the Canuck? Was it egregious? Did he deserve a red card? On the face of it a kick in the head is a no brainer that the guy should go but sometimes things are not quite so simple.

Down 10 - 0 the game MIGHT have been salvagable. To then lose the lynchpin to the defensive pattern is a critical issue.

Any word as to what sort of sanction is in line for?

[Beagles]

Based on the response of the guys commentating it was an obvious red card. He got a 10 week suspension too.

[sending off]

Wow!!!! His Eagle resume is thus highlighted with a yellow card that turns into a suspension during the World Cup and now a red card with a major suspension during what was arguably one of the most important games in the history of the Eagles.

Not the way a player of such talent wants to be remembered.

[Where it's Due]

Got got give credit where it's due...

In hindsite the match in the sweltering heat on our nations birthday may have been the edge needed to win the first leg. Doesn't really matter in the longrun but if you're going to roast the admin on the bad better be able to admit the good.

All things being equal (assembly time and lead up matches) the effect of the venue is undeniable.

NM EOS and who ever else got that one right. Cape fear or not...

[Uruguay]

Re. post above - "Not worried about Uruguay"
Granted Uruguay's current form is rather dismal but a result against them is hardly a foregone conclusion. Whatever you think of the IRB rankings (USA 18 URUGUAY 21) they're in our competitive neighborhood. Anyone feeling complacent might like to revisit our nail-biting August 2002 qualifying experience. (We lost by 1 away and won by 4 at home.)

[8 forwards, 6 backs, no #13]

On the ARN podcast Bruce McLane says “we beat ourselves” but can’t bring himself to criticize the coaching staffs choice to play 8 forwards & 6 backs after the Emerick red card.

McLane said “when Emerick went off…. should they have… changed a flanker, and played even in the backs, and shorten the forwards, … and maybe could they have put a back rower…or… ah… I’m not going to sit and second guess and judge… I don’t… I don’t know the players well enough, I haven’t been in practice, …I…the fact is… Canada plays a very wide game, they play a very expansive game….they’re willing to hit holes, they use dummy runners, and those types of things confuse defenses, and especially when your defense is short, you’re going to start to give up points, and unfortunately the United States just didn’t have an answer.. when they went down, and it was hard for them to come back, and it’s not the type of team… it’s a young team, so it’s not the type of team that is going to do well chasing a game….”

“changed a flanker, and played even in the backs” YES, THEY SHOULD HAVE.
IN THE FOOTBALL, NOT GOING FOR A 2 POINT CONVERSION WHEN YOU’RE DOWN BY 2, ON THE LAST PLAY OF THE 4TH QUARTER MOST LIKELY MEANS YOU’RE A FORMER FOOTBALL COACH LOOKING FOR EMPLOYMENT.

“I’m not going to sit and second guess and judge,” NOT GOING TO SAY ANYTHING NEGATIVE ABOUT MY BOY FROM NYAC & XAVIER, THE EAGLES DEFENSIVE COACH, TOLKIN.

“I don’t know the players well enough” AND THEN GOES ON TO GIVE A PLAYER-BY PLAYER ANALYSIS AND OPINION ON EACH PLAYER. PRICELESS.

“Canada plays a very wide game, they play a very expansive game”. EVERYONE KNOWS CANADA HAS A WIDE GAME PLAN. WHY MAKE IT ANY EASIER BY PLAYING 8 FORWARDS & 6 BACKS?

“unfortunately the United States just didn’t have an answer” TRY THIS. AT THE NEXT TRAINING, PLAY A GAME WITH THE EAGLES STAFF OF 6 COACHES DEFENDING A BACKLINE OF 7 ATTACKERS. STILL NO ANSWERS. GIVE THE 6 COACHES THE BALL AND SEE HOW MUCH OFFENSE THEY CAN PLAY AGAINST 7 DEFENDERS.

[Plan B]

Good thoughts. I'd have pulled Stanfill at the same time Emerick was walking off the field and replaced him with Sika. And I'd have hauled Z off at the same time for someone who can catch a ball.

[?]

Sika and alipate are enormous and athletic. fast as shit. 6'2''s at least and 240+ each? are they no prototypical backrow players? they dont seem to have it in the backline.

Someone with more knowledge, can you tell me why they are out playing center and sometimes wing? not fit enough? not good enough defenders? wasted in the pack? whats the thinking?

[DaTruth]

I'm not going to claim to have more knowledge, but I would guess that it's because they are both trained specialist backs, and have played those positions for years. While they have the size to play backrow, they don't have the experience and would likely get worked over at every breakdown by an experienced backrower who understands the support lines/defensive lines that will get him to the breakdown a second or two before a guy who is green at the position.

At the international level (even at the level the US/Canada are playing at), you can't easily convert players from backs to forwards or vice versa.

Also, why would you want to? The Eagles already have one stud and a couple up-and-comers in the back row. And 6'2, 240 lb backrowers are a more or less a dime a dozen.

That's my 2 cents.

[Bruce McLane]

OK, you got me, I didn't want to answer the question. I don't know what I would have done as I was not at training and don't know what i would have done to best deal with that eventuality.

I likely would have kept the team as is and maybe moved Swyrin to center and had Hercus cover wing like Cal did with Engelbrecht and maybe moved Clever or Johnson to 10 on defense, so there were even numbers in the backs off of scrums. (I don't know what was done though as the video stream was poor at best) that is why I didn't have a comment either way, since I couldn't see what they did.

That scenario that I just described could have also been a disaster if it was not practiced. I was not covering for any friends, I really don't know what I would have done.

I would have kept a full pack to scrum on attack (that is certain) and probably would have gone to short LO on attack and kept some players out in defense and tried to beat them at first contact in the LO and contested at the jumper they used most often (I don't know who that was though, since I didn't study Canada film that closely).

When you play without one of your most potent attackers and one of your most effective tacklers for a large portion of the game, it is difficult to play no matter what. Especially when he can't be replaced.

My answer is poor still, and it shows that I had no answer either.

[Bruce McLane]

I have seen many of the players enough to make general comments, but, if I am not at training day in and day out, I can't really say that I am in a position to judge either way. That is all I meant by that. The coaching staff certainly knows that eagle pool far more in depth than I can ever hope to know them and they made the choices that they felt gave them the best chance to compete and I respect that.

[steve]

Perhaps EOS should give a call to the person who posted under "8 forwards, 6 backs, no #13" to see if they are available to come in for a few guest coaching sessions.

[youth + high school + college = success]

Kurt,

As part as your stated change of focus to the bottom up strategy could you look into how this rookie rugby program is going? USAR just released a report that they are going to exceed 100k kids being introduced to rugby. impressive. but is this being extended to other states? how quickly? whats the impact, etc.

[David C]

Bruce, it's hard to believe that American players cant play in other positions being that we grow up in a country where we play numerous sports growing up. I'm no expert, but to break it down in simple terms, stay in your lane, tackle the guy with ball when playing defense. Have a buddy there to back you up if you whiff on the tackle. Everybody on the team has a buddy. Dont lose your buddy. Offense, run away from defenders, but not your buddies. Man on an island, is S.O.L. Kick for position. If you cant kick, run faster then defender chasing you. Most importantly, HOLD ON TO THE FREAKING BALL.
Seriously, some of you guys are right when you said that recruiting overseas players isnt helping us. American players should be more athletic and have a grasp on how to pick up the slack when penalties occur. Practice it for God's sake. There should be no excuses for poor performances by now. If you're at that level you should know the basics and quit playing like its the first time you've been on the pitch. Amateur or not. We all grew up playing athletics and those that are good athletes can effortlessly play in any sport. Rugby should be no different. USA Rugby needs to find more of those kinds of athletes. This fall, the team needs to go into the Uruguay series as if the Teros have banged their wives, girlfriends or sisters and didnt even buy them dinner first. Just no head stomping this time okay Paul???

[elite coaching?]

Thee is no excuse to playing a man short in the backline. If you have two red cards, you play two short in the forwards and hope that your entire front row twists their ankles at the first scrum.

I did not see the match, but this would be a major blunder. I have seen instances of yellow cards, where a back was not replaced straight away. These were blunders. I saw only one instance where a team was not savvy enough to realize that they needed to be even in the backs, within the full 10 minute period.

You pack down a back within the 22s, if you are a man short. Even a bunch of kids could figure that out pretty quick.

Canada also made a blunder in the first match before the game even started (selecting 6 front row).

So much for the elite coaching staffers.

[one more question?]

Does Eddie play Suniula to make Hercus and Usasz look bigger, fitter, smarter, and more dynamic?

I used to get the same impression when watching Bay Watch. Hasselhoff (EOS) was a genius in the way he elevated Pam Anderson, by the use of the supporting cast.

[ecm]

to digress -

rugby gets some national love...http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/sports/15rugby.html?_r=1&hpw

& now back to our regularly scheduled gripe session...

[8 forwards, 6 backs, no #13]

After Emerick was sent off, Canada scored 4 more trys against our 6 backs. In the moment EOS, and his 5 assistants didn’t solve the “what happens when a back gets carded scenario” and days later McLane the Super League winning Coach still can’t solve this mind bending conundrum.

Perhaps McLane can twitter Les Kiss or Ewan MacKenzie or some other Aussie I forgot to name drop, to get the answer for us in time for next weeks ARN plod cast.

[PudCast]

Here we go again with Bruce defending what he said on the ARN Podcast. I think it is time for ARN to put up or shut up. If you want some respect ARN (specifically Bruce McLane) from the rugby public in the USA, let's see an interview with EOS and ask him is reasoning for playing with 6 backs for 50+ minutes. Ask him the hard questions....

We are waiting.

[23rd Man]

EOS should have understood the situation of losing a back, and needing to fill the hole, by subbing off a forward. It's the same as losing a front row player to a yellow card, and needing to pull off a loose forward so a front row sub can go in.

The other staffers don't have enough coaching experience to understand it. The net result was they all did nothing.

When 'kick em when the're down' Emerick went off it was 0-17. The game wasn't lost at that stage. 2 converted trys and a kick would have evened it. I'd have expected the eagles to dig deeper and make that happen. They didn't, and that's a reason for concern.

EOS could use a cell phone with a bluetooth, and make the call to "8 forwards, 6 backs, no#13", that way, no one would know he made the call, and everyone would think it was EOS idea on what to do next.

[DaTruth]

First, I think that Bruce essentially did say that they should've moved a forward out to the backs. He was just qualifying it by saying he didn't/couldn't see the match, and didn't know what the players' capabilities or the team's plans were. Fair enough. It was clearly a blunder on EOS' part -- I don't know how you can explain that one away. He appears to be a tremendous coach, but that is a huge tactical blunder.

As far as all of the people saying that what we really need to do to get any change is to miss out on the World Cup, that's a self-defeating attitude. Who's going to fire them, the BOD!!??

I would have to agree with Ray Viers that, while the Canada loss was one step backwards after two baby steps forwards, there were some good, long-term developments that came out of the summer series.

The forwards, individually and as a unit, took a huge step forward. Uruguay historically has a strong scrum, so time will tell how they do there -- if it's true improvement or a flash in the pan.

A good amount of youth and/or new caps came through: Biller, Pittman, Swiryn, Johnson, Van der Gissen, not to mention the one-off's like Hawley, Malifa (not Nese), etc., who go into the system and would undoubtedly benefit from the assembly experience.

Team defense showed improvement from the start of the summer to the end (notwithstanding tries leaked playing 14 v 15). The lineout showed improvement as well.

On the down side, there still isn't a sustained attack that puts pressure on the defense, and builds on that pressure to force the defense to eventually give up the points. Sure, we may hold onto the ball for 10 phases with pick-n-drives and one-out hitups, but that doesn't neccessarily translate to pressure on the defensive line. Many of our tries came from counterattack or broken play.

Also, certain "leading" players have been found wanting over the summer -- Z, MacDonald, Petri (not quite sure of his performance, because we never really saw him in much gametime), and Hercus (started out the summer pretty poorly, got a little better towards the end).

Overall, all the USARFU admin BS aside, I think that there has been a good deal of improvement over the summer. It's just a shame that they had to end it on a sour note.

Add in the 7's successes over the past Series (and the tremendous job Caravelli is doing in discovering and developing talent, and giving them "big-time" international experience), and it's not all doom and gloom at the National team level, despite what the USARFU critics and the other player haters say.

Success won't happen overnight, but progress can be measured in incremental improvements, and I think we're starting to see that.

My apologies for the long-winded post.

[top down]

Rookie Rugby, is touch rugby. Its been around for some time now. It's great that a state school district will trial it. It's great that a bunch of school kids stopped by Glendale ONE DAY and participated in a day of Rookie Rugby. This is all well and good.

But please, Rookie Rugby is an unfunded attempt aimed at justifying a couple Boulder salaries. For the poster above to believe this is bottom up building is a mistake. Might this be one small unfunded link in bottom up building, yes.

But lets be clear we spend 90% of our high priced salaries, budget and Boulder focus the Eagles and other such programs. The USAR commitment to youth, high school and college rugby is appalling.

The Nigel Melville bull about building both top down and bottom up is a calculated lie. The budget doesn't lie and USAR is a very unsuccessful top down organization.

[DaTruth]

Just to clarify, I never said that "bottom up building is a mistake".

I said that, taking the administrative element out of the equation, at the national team PLAYING level (specifically mens 15s and 7s), there are signs of improvement.

At the administrative and operational level, things leave quite a bit to be desired.

[bpf]

the answer regarding what to do when Emerick gets red-carded is...it doesn't matter, because in any of the above scenarios we get the shit kicked out of us by a better team. the answer is: don't do dumb shit while the outcome is still in doubt. if i am the coach of uruguay, i am getting together with my staff a.s.a.p. and trying to figure out ways we can provoke american players into getting themselves tossed.

[8 forwards, 6 backs, no #13]

Lets win or lose American way. Let’s revolutionize Rugby.
Question: What could be better than the EOS 2 pod, 4 yards and a cloud of dust offense.
Answer: Sub off more backs, bring on more forwards and go with 3 pods.

12 forwards, 2 backs, still no need for a #13

[sideline eye]

14 against 15, mean everyone needs to work harder...from reading the match reports it doesn't help when a team of 14 are doing more defense than attack. reports all noted that basic errors were a factor. The same ol' thing, errors don't win games consistancy does, somrthing our players aren't doing. Well two wins in a row was something to smile about!

[youth + high school + college = success]

If Rookie rugby was spread to a significant part of the country then that would be a significant step. and its not just touch rugby. its an accessible form of touch for grade school kids. That was my question. just a couple districts in florida would be nothing. youre right. is the plan to spread this to other areas?

[8 forwards, 6 backs, no #13]

And if by Rookie Rugby you mean Rookie Mistakes, made by the 6 man Eagles Coaching Staff last Saturday playing only 6 backs against Canada, then yes, we are developing a bottom up, top down approach to the American Game. Yes, absolutely, we make Rookie mistakes from top to bottom.

[the budget doesn't lie]

My point is in agreement that, any and everything done at the youth, high school and university level is better than completely doing nothing.

Nothing is what USAR is really doing at these levels. The USAR's payroll and budget expenditures are mostly at the wrong end of the game. USAR spends millions on the Eagles, NA4, ARC and other backward ideas, while spending next to nothing on building US rugby from the ground up.

Is Rookie Rugby a small link in the youth rugby mix, of course. But more than anything Rookie Rugby is being used as a marketing ploy aimed at the USAR membership, "Hey look what we are doing". When the truth is USAR is spending squat on youth, high school and college rugby.

One month of Melville and O'Sullivan's salary is more than the Rookie Rugby budget.

High School's are getting nothing, college is having a bake sale to take one tour.

Don't buy the spin from these crooks.

[8 forwards, 6 backs, no #13]

So even without seeing the game Bruce McLane with a graduate degree in Statements of the Obvious, from Statement of the Obvious University located at www.statementsoftheobviousuniversity.edu could easily work out the Canada Game plan was to attack out wide.
Brian Lowe called the game and he didn’t reference in the moment or on the Podcast the 8 forwards, 6 back debacle at all. Days later Bruce still doesn’t have any real answers what to do.
The 5 Eagles Assistants with a specialist defense coach on staff, didn’t do anything while the Eagles gave up 4 more trys in the last 55 minutes of the match.

For Ireland, EOS used to sit in a Grandstand full of fans in their Tens of Thousands, surrounded by competent assistants, wearing a sharp suit and tie. Now he sits on portable bleachers in front of Tens of Hundreds, surrounded by assistant he hopes are just bright enough to wear the same colored T shirts.

It’s great that we are all in total agreement. Just like Brian and Bruce, and the 5 assistants, I just couldn’t agree more. I just love the 8 forwards 6 back split. And I just love the Emperors new clothes.

[shamful]

"One month of Melville's and O'Sullivan's salary is more than the Rookies Rugby annual budget."

Well that about say's it all.

[in the know]

Sadly the RR budget is not that high. It's much less.

[canuck]

Bruce,
do you still think the USA is a "better team" then Canada? Think you might have misjudged that one after the Cape Fear shocker the canucks played.

[you can handle the truth!]

I still can't get over playing short in the backs. I would like to see what the Eagles coaches have to say about this.

How did Hercus allow this. How did Clever allow this to happen. Where was Matt Sherman during this debacle. How bout the flankers or Wyles. What about Usasz? What were the bench coaches and players saying or thinking?

The defense coach normally plays a soft defense, now they are in essence playing a two man overlap at every scrum?

What was the rationale behind it?

This was obvioulsy discussed many times during the game between the coaches and at least a few times between Hercus, Usasz and Clever.

The staff should know better. Were they scared to pipe up?

Who is going to ask the tough question to these few good men?

I want to know the truth!

[8 forwards, 6 backs, no #13]

DID YOU ORDER THE 8-6 SPLIT ?
I’ll answer the question. You want answers.
I THINK I’M ENTITLED.
You want answers.
I WANT THE TRUTH.
You can’t handle the truth.
Son we live in a world with scoreboards above bleachers. And those scoreboards have to be guarded by men playing Defense. Who’s going to do it….you…you. I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Emerick’s red card and you curse the assistant coaches in matching T shirts….you have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. Emericks red card and the 8-6 split while tragic, probably saved trys… and my existence while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves trys. You don’t want the truth becoz deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties or blog sites you want me on that bleacher, you need me on that bleacher. We use words like Honor, Code, Loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something…You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide… and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said “thank you” and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up some cleats and stand a post or join eithor of the pods. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you are entitled to.
DID YOU ORDER THE 8-6 SPLIT ?
I did the job
DID YOU ORDER THE 8-6 SPLIT ?
You’re goddamn right I did.
Without men like me, you’d still be ranked 19th by the IRB.