Flanker Todd Clever nabbed a pair of second-half tries as the USA clinched a berth in the 2011 World Cup with a 27-6 victory over Uruguay in Ft. Lauderdale.
The four tries-to-none performance rose little above perfunctory. Still, America's 4th win in its last 5 tests distanced Eddie O'Sullivan's 2009 from from the past 3, which combined to produce 4 wins in 20 internationals.
More positively, Saturday's contest was the second time this year that all of the try scoring was done by past (or present) Collegiate All-Americans. Flanker Lou Stanfill (Cal) and wing Kevin Swiryn (St. Mary's) accounted for America's first-half tallies, joining Clever (Nevada-Reno), whose second came after Swiryn's ankle injury prompted the backrower's unusual shift out to center.
The All-American strike rate is no more a fluke than Clever's 7s-fueled midfield skills. In the 27 most recent internationals dating to 2006, the US has scored 71 tries. All-Americans have claimed 37 of them. Try-scoring is not a perfect for overall performance, but it is obvious enough, particularly when you are not winning much.
The 52 percent share contrasts with the 37 percent of USA international appearances won by former collegiate standouts over the same time. Thus All Americans turned Eagles are punching above the weight.
Indeed, until recently the percentage was lower as O'Sullivan's predecessors had no regard for unprofessional 'schoolboys' or even domestic-based players. It is hard to remember that Swiryn, disregarded by Scott Johnson in favor of Australian recruits, is a first-year man. The 2008 All-American skipper has scored in three straight matches, on top of a phenomenal 7s season.
2009 also saw a rare try on debut for Colin Hawley, the University of California wing who crossed against Georgia. But reluctance to aggressively promote collegiate prospects appears to linger among USARFU's senior management.
Although the union has been touting revenue growth, this year's All-American squad was all but shelved, forced to fall back on pay-your-own-way in order to visit South Africa, a tour that was not announced until the last minute. Meanwhile, the Americas Rugby Championship, the shrunken representative competition which has replaced the National All-Star Championship and the North America 4, was staged in early fall, when students such as Hawley have just started classes and obviously can't play.
In New Zealand, the Eagles will meet Australia, Ireland, Italy, and an undetermined European qualifier, which almost guarantees foreign media will fasten on O'Sullivan's facing the team he coached to its most successful era, while overlooking more interesting phenomena.
The four tries-to-none performance rose little above perfunctory. Still, America's 4th win in its last 5 tests distanced Eddie O'Sullivan's 2009 from from the past 3, which combined to produce 4 wins in 20 internationals.
More positively, Saturday's contest was the second time this year that all of the try scoring was done by past (or present) Collegiate All-Americans. Flanker Lou Stanfill (Cal) and wing Kevin Swiryn (St. Mary's) accounted for America's first-half tallies, joining Clever (Nevada-Reno), whose second came after Swiryn's ankle injury prompted the backrower's unusual shift out to center.
The All-American strike rate is no more a fluke than Clever's 7s-fueled midfield skills. In the 27 most recent internationals dating to 2006, the US has scored 71 tries. All-Americans have claimed 37 of them. Try-scoring is not a perfect for overall performance, but it is obvious enough, particularly when you are not winning much.
The 52 percent share contrasts with the 37 percent of USA international appearances won by former collegiate standouts over the same time. Thus All Americans turned Eagles are punching above the weight.
Indeed, until recently the percentage was lower as O'Sullivan's predecessors had no regard for unprofessional 'schoolboys' or even domestic-based players. It is hard to remember that Swiryn, disregarded by Scott Johnson in favor of Australian recruits, is a first-year man. The 2008 All-American skipper has scored in three straight matches, on top of a phenomenal 7s season.
2009 also saw a rare try on debut for Colin Hawley, the University of California wing who crossed against Georgia. But reluctance to aggressively promote collegiate prospects appears to linger among USARFU's senior management.
Although the union has been touting revenue growth, this year's All-American squad was all but shelved, forced to fall back on pay-your-own-way in order to visit South Africa, a tour that was not announced until the last minute. Meanwhile, the Americas Rugby Championship, the shrunken representative competition which has replaced the National All-Star Championship and the North America 4, was staged in early fall, when students such as Hawley have just started classes and obviously can't play.
In New Zealand, the Eagles will meet Australia, Ireland, Italy, and an undetermined European qualifier, which almost guarantees foreign media will fasten on O'Sullivan's facing the team he coached to its most successful era, while overlooking more interesting phenomena.
United States 27 Uruguay 6 (halftime: USA 13-3)United States
Chris Wyles; Takudzwa Ngwenya, Paul Emerick (Alipate Tuilevuka), Junior Sifa, Kevin Swiryn (Pat Danahy); Mike Hercus (Valenese Malifa), Tim Usasz (Mike Petri); Mate Moeakiola (Jacob Sprague), Phil Thiel (Brian McClenahan), Will Johnson, John van der Giessen, Hayden Smith (Alec Parker), Louis Stanfill, Todd Clever (captain), JJ Gagiano
Tries: Todd Clever (2), Louis Stanfill, Kevin Swiryn
Conversions: Mike Hercus, Valenese Malifa
Penalty goal: Mike HercusUruguay
Referee: David Smortchevsky (Canada)
Penalties: Jerónimo Etcheverry (2)
Attendance: 2,237 (announced)
We get it Kurt. You like college boys and especially if they are from Nor Cal and more specifically the Cal program. Give it a rest.
Posted by: College Boys Rule | 23 November 2009 at 08:53
This group is best positioned to take 100-150 colleges away from money grubbing USAR, The National Small College Rugby Organization.
Posted by: you heard it here 1st | 23 November 2009 at 09:36
Wow there are some drinkers in this rugby administration, no names, but how could those people get anything done in meetings?
The venue sucked. The stands were 40m from the touch line. Although you could purchase a circa late 90's Eagles jersey, it was like a garage sale!
Posted by: SBR-ORG | 23 November 2009 at 09:49
I watched the match on the internet. My connection was good, which was a first.
The three College Game of the Week matches last year, Cal v UBC, Utah v BYU, Army v Navy were 100% better than the USAR test match to qualify for the RWC.
If this is the best USAR can do for an important RWCQ match they should be ashamed.
Posted by: internet watcher | 23 November 2009 at 10:02
The quality of the match was very poor. Tons of errors made for a stop start affair. No imagination in the backs meant 10 man rugby and the USA was just more physical. I have seen better college matches. Yes the Eagles won and are going to the World Cup in 2011, but they beat a team made up of the best of 5 or 6 clubs in Uruguay. Not really a major accomplishment considering what they are going to be up against.
I have seen some posts that people think the Eagles have a shot to win 2 games at the WC targeting Europe 2 and Italy. Really? Someone thinks the Eagles have a shot against Italy? This is one sad rugby country.
Posted by: Beagles | 23 November 2009 at 10:10
Beagles.........
Do you think all the backs suck?
Posted by: crang | 23 November 2009 at 12:10
I think it was the game plan. I don't the EOS wants them to play what is in front of them because either that is not his style or he has no confidence in Hercus to have the skills or imagination to make things happen. To answer your question I think the Eagles have a very weak backline.
Posted by: Beagles | 23 November 2009 at 12:34
Beagles - your an idiot. The Eagles have two years to prepare for the WC. Italy are far from world beaters and can be taken. Europe A is likely to be Georgia or Romania - certainly not a stretch to think that the Eagles can beat either of those two sides.
The Eagles put over 8 tries in two matches. That doesn't just happen. If you have been watching the games coached under EOS it is clear that he has slowly started to get the backs more involved. There was more backline movements this weekend than any other matches the Eagles have played this year.
What is sad is that even despite the minor successes the Eagles have achieved this year the detractors continue to be negative.
Sorry if some of us happen to have a little faith in the current coach and players that are actually going out and winning a few games while you and others hang back and whine about everything and anything without offering anything productive to the debate.
Posted by: Go Eagles 2011 | 23 November 2009 at 12:47
This group is best positioned to take 100-150 colleges away from money grubbing USAR, The National Small College Rugby Organization.
This is an interesting thought. College rugby needs to take a page from ice hockey and baseball, both of which have organized, national, intercollegiate club organizations (American Collegiate Hockey Association (http://www.achahockey.org/) and National Club Baseball Association (http://www.clubbaseball.org/)). University of Oregon only had a club team until Oregon State won two national championships, then the U of O restarted a varsity baseball program.
Some states have ice hockey orgs that manage ice hockey outside of the state high school sports body (in Pennsylvania for example).
USA Rugby has shown that they don't understand the American sports model. Kurt, you seem passionate about this and (reasonably) connected in California. Why isn't there a California Interscholastic Rugby Federation to mirror the CIF? (http://cif.org/) I know that California is in two territorial unions, but it couldn't be that hard. Or do you just like to talk about it?
Posted by: Frank | 23 November 2009 at 14:06
I think very few people are negative towards the Eagles. Beagles hasn't much too nice to say, but very few others have had negative stuff to say about the team. Most of us are too busy trashing, well deserved trashing, the administration. They suck.
The Eagles are doing what they can. However, I think spending the amount of money we are spending on the Eagles is the dumbest business decision ever made.
Posted by: The Eagles are not USAR | 23 November 2009 at 14:29
Frank,
You are getting HS and college mixed up. Your example is college, the CIF is HS.
Maybe you're saying we need both. Your point is hard to follow.
Posted by: ??? | 23 November 2009 at 15:20
Yeah the Eagles have 2 years till the WC, and so does Italy. They have 2 Six Nations competitions to prepare, plus 2 spring tours to real rugby nations. They have all their players in pro set-ups. They have money (they just generated $6M USD in their All Blacks match at San Siro attended by 80K people). They have an Italy A team playing in the Six Nations and the Nations Cup. In the 2007 WC Italy missed a penalty with 4 minutes left in their final pool game with Scotland that would have put them in the quarter finals - Eagles went 0-4.
Should I keep going? I will take Italy over the Eagles, and I recommend some of you guys take an long honest look at your Eagles before you start thinking they are going to pull a Rudy at the 2011 WC and win something. Clowns.
Posted by: Beagles | 23 November 2009 at 16:30
And in 2010-11 Italy may have 2 sides in the Magners league - Something That USAR should have pursued.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/mar/26/italy-magners-league-rugby-union
Posted by: rags | 23 November 2009 at 17:47
Yes you are correct rags. 2 teams from Italy will be admitted to the Magners League starting fall 2010. The two teams are made up of Italian qualified players most likely the the best Italian players from the Super 10 (Italian pro league) and not players contracted to French Top 14 clubs.
Posted by: Beagles | 23 November 2009 at 18:11
I think Beagles is just being realistic. He may not do it in a nice way but I'm actually on his side in this matter. The quality of Italian rugby is real and to deny that is naive. The Italian players that I can name right off the top of my head are far superior to their Eagle opposites.
Prop-Martin Castrogiavani-Makeola/McDonal...no contest. 8-Sergio Parisse-Johnson...no contest. Flanker-Mauro Birgamasco/Josh Sole-Clever/Stanfill/anyone else...tight but given Birgamasco and Sole's experience in the Top 14 I'd say the Italians win....Center-Mirco Birgamasco-Emerick or anyone we have...no contest. Coach-Nick Mallet-Eddie O'...Mallet has coached the South Africans when they went on a 17 game win streak, not as much can be said for O'Sullivan.
That's all I can think of now but those are key positions which will probably be filled by these same players in two years time and if not the Italians will have time to develop others in the Top 14 while we will be developing ours in RSL or hopefully abroad but probably not at the levels of competition the Italians have at their disposal.
I believe that unless we have guys playing in the Top 14/Super 14/Guiness Premiership or an equivalent competition we are doomed to being ecstatic about 2 wins in a row over Uruguay.
Now don't get me wrong I fully support the Eagles but we have to be realistic in this and understand that a 25 point win vs Uruguay is not on par with a win against a major rugby playing nation which the Italians can now be considered.
I may be mistaken, and I hope I am.
Posted by: crashtheline7 | 24 November 2009 at 07:28
Hey I hope the Eagles do well, but at what cost? How much will this World Cup campaign cost the rugby union? This figure (and plan) should have been tabled at the last Board-Congress for those members who made it to the meeting.
It is the most important question, because we have many needs for funding and winning a match or two at the World Cup won't change a thing on the ground. If the Eagles go 0-4 or 2-2, nothing changes.
In fact 2-2 won't even get reported in the local newspapers, much less on TV sports news.
This whole top down plan is a sham. It is meant to make Roberts and Melville look good as they ride off into the sunset. BTW, when they leave, we will be worse off for their time with us.
Thorburn-Johnson-O'Sullivan, 2007 and 2011 World Cups have been a waste of time and money. We will have wasted many million of dollars which could have been spent on building rugby as an US sport.
Best of luck to the team, hope they win a match or two, but it really doesn't matter to the growth of US rugby either way. Once this is clear, Roberts can resume his love affair with the AB's and Melville can take the first job that comes along. We can bring salaries back in line with the scope of the union and begin the next chapter in US rugby, building for our future.
Posted by: chasing our tail | 24 November 2009 at 10:16
Every available dollar is going to go to the Eagles 2011 WC effort because that is the path the IRB wants the USA Rugby administration to take. It is that simple. The IRB gave them development grants to build the best national team possible to showcase at the WC. If it is a massive failure, they will leave dodge and most likely USA Rugby will be high and dry because the IRB will not be rolling in the green after this world cup. The development dollars being thrown around now are all from a hugely profitable WC in France. The NZ WC is going to lose money. Nearly all of the IRB's revenue comes from the WC, so expect a 4 year drought of grants and a fractured USA Rugby after 2011. Good times.
Posted by: Beagles | 24 November 2009 at 10:40
Beagles...thanks for the answer
another one it seems that EOS keeps switching the backs...how do you feel about this and also which backs and forwards have a lock on the WC or national team..
THanks
Posted by: crang | 24 November 2009 at 10:44
Melville is the best!!!!
Posted by: terrycuckoo | 24 November 2009 at 10:45
Just read the press release out of Boulder regarding the Board/Congress meeting held in conjunction with the Eagles game.
What a load of Bullsh*t.
Having spoken directly to folks that where there, all agreed that there has never been a less accountable group not only involved, but running USA Rugby.
Posted by: Florida Rugby Gal. | 24 November 2009 at 11:25
How about the Board/Congress members showing up hungover to the meeting Sunday? Which Lonestar was too hungover to even show up??
How about the member which fits every bad stereotype of a certain island nation??? Fat and drunk, bad combo.
The Chairman didn't attend the emergency meeting????
Who the fu*k are these people?????
Posted by: we have met thy enemy | 24 November 2009 at 12:09
Yep. All true and am amazed that more people, especially those of us that were there at the match and know what a circle jerk it was, are not screaming for some accountability.
I for one was okay with the initial change in the governance structure, and was hopeful that Kevin Roberts, Bob Latham, and Nigel Melville were going to get things done.
NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE. NOTHING.
Posted by: Fed up Congress member | 24 November 2009 at 12:28
Vote out of office your Congress person ASAP. The good ones, less than a half dozen, will thank you as it will keep them from resigning.
The USAr Board-Congree meeting release is insulting.
Melville states, it was good to"revisit our strategy". Dude, we don't have a fu*king strategy to revisit. You dick-heads have been making up stuff as you go for three years. You are just now getting around to making some plans, now that the heat is coming.
The release said, "clear strategic priorities were established". Well first, BULLSHIT! Next, you fools mind sharing whatever your clear priorities are with the people who own this rugby union? The members! If they are so clear, it should be easy to give us a priority list 1 through 5. Well?
LOL, hard to even type this through the laughter and tears, but Alan Sharpley states, "it was a valuable opportunity to interact and work together...it made for a team-oriented atmosphere" Puking now! LOL again, Puking again.
I'll say this for the Board and Melville. At least they are screwing us with a purpose. The Congress, are just tools in the shed.
Posted by: Sharpley for Chairman | 24 November 2009 at 12:34
Yea, I think the pleas for Congress to help us and keep the Board accountable need to stop. Congress is more lame than ever. Remember, when they last ran out of ideas, they voted themselves out. Congress isn't the answer to anything. I could rip through about 10 names of Congress members and they are the least qualified and the biggest jokes of anybody I know in rugby.
Taking the page out of the SBO and USCRA what if we just started a new rugby union. I'm not going to league and it sounds like the next best option.
Who cares what USAR does, we just start a new org. Where is Major League Rugby when you need them? That concept would fly today.
Posted by: new org time | 24 November 2009 at 12:56
Sorry for not being clear. Rugby needs to follow the US varsity model in both high school and college.
Both baseball and ice hockey have intercollegiate organizations separate from NCAA (NCBA and ACHA), while also having NCAA support. The NSCRO is a start for rugby, except that it concentrates on small colleges.
For high school, the same sort of thing is done for ice hockey, where in some states ice hockey is sanctioned "normally," but in others there's a separate hockey-only org. California is a hotbed of high school rugby, and should have an organization that parallels the CIF.
But who will do anything? Me? No. You?
Posted by: Frank | 24 November 2009 at 14:51
I didn't see the game. Wasn't even aware when it was played or where.
I don't have to watch the game to know what happened. The Eagles won a game they were supposed to win. They had bigger, stronger, better athletes going forward.
It was an even match, tactically, with the Eagles missing at least 3 try scoring opportunities. Breakout runners were isolated multiple times. Defensively, they were overlapped and couldn't figure out why. They had difficulties in the kicking game, and several 15 meter kicks to touch. Clever ran 30 meters with the ball after the whistle and Hercus threw a looping miss pass, which killed a scoring opportunity.
Posted by: groundhog day | 24 November 2009 at 18:01
"Take time to deliberate; but when the time for action arrives, stop thinking and go in."
While they continue to spew the rhetoric of strategic focus and others rattle the sabre of secession, there's a third group very quietly going about the business of building the future of interscholastic rugby.
Posted by: Andrew Jackson | 24 November 2009 at 18:09
and who is that? Someone put forth the national small schools rugby org. That's a joke. I hope you are referring to someone else.
Posted by: college | 24 November 2009 at 18:32
Probably 80 percent of the Congress are gadflies, have personal commercial interests in rugby or are wanna be players in the union. Don't understand the last one because the union is a joke, but if you want to go to tests and feel important it is a way to be there. None of these people are going to A) stand up to the board or B) have anything to bring to the table to change the game. The IRB owns USA Rugby because Arnot and company ran the thing into the ground. We made our bed and now have to lie in it.
Posted by: Congress is a joke | 25 November 2009 at 06:25
I'm not sure what can be changed, but I'm going to start laughing my ass off every time I see a Congress member. I agree with an earlier comment, that we can at least respect the Board for being greedy, Congress is indeed a joke.
Posted by: LOL | 25 November 2009 at 09:18
How about the USCRA failing to accomplish anything, but yet having their stock rise, because USAR is such a bunch of wasted fools.
A bunch of losers on the piss, meeting up with the team at the bar trying to be somebody.
The word coming out of the meeting was the budget is getting cut again, this time by $2m. USAR is running on grants and dues, nothing else. How about a CEO job, where you make good money and never have to create a dime of income?
By doing nothing USCRA has become college rugby's best option. This is an only in US rugby story. Just when you think you understand the meaning of the word 'lame', USAR has a meeting and the word takes on a whole new meaning.
Posted by: USAR-not! | 25 November 2009 at 10:16
Here's an idea. Instead of bitching about everything, do something to fix the problems. Otherwise STFU.
You don't like the Congress? Get yourself elected to the congress, then work to make positive changes. That way you can help fix the college issues, and get the funding back into the game at the college level, without having to reinvent the wheel. You can get rid of the CEO if you can or want too. You can force USAR to stop having a Test centric approach to the game. You can rebuild what you think is broken at USAR.
Whatever you want. But don't blog yourself into the history books as someone who just wants to be known as the prick who says "I told you so". Do something about it.
Posted by: It's not Broken | 25 November 2009 at 15:37
It's Not Broken -
Your speech is on target, but the reality is that the most competent people in rugby in the USA are busy being coaches, club administrators, referees, referee evaluators or still playing the game. The reality is that the Congress only attracts the opportunists and the weak, but not the best rugby men. So, what competent person would want to join a group polluted with these people? The Congress method to run rugby in the USA does not work. The job of CEO of USA Rugby should be someone that is a qualified and existing TU president that wants to be a professional rugby administrator with a decent salary (100K). Let's be honest. The job is more like running a territory than anything else. There are no big broadcaster negotiations, no big sponsor negotiations and no big financial decisions to be made (i.e. complicated taxation issues). Any specific that is over the management of USA Rugby's head can be managed by a consultant. There are plenty of brilliant sports entertainment people out there willing to negotiate a broadcast or sponsorship deal on behalf of USA Rugby for a fee.
Posted by: Beagles | 25 November 2009 at 16:51
Congress is the losers club. It has no power or the guts, know how to get any.
Getting elected to Congress puts a person in a club of losers, now who in their right might would want this. I bet there is a couple international athletes who want off Congress.
Nice Congress role call: half-wits, fat dumb bastards, dikes and kiss asses. Lots of Eagle polo's and low standards.
Instead of "I slept at a Holiday Inn last night", its "I had drinks with Clever last night".
There is NOTHING that can be changed or earned being part of the USAr Congress.
As worthless as pointing this out on a blog is, its better than thinking that running for Congress would change anything.
Posted by: sign me up | 25 November 2009 at 17:28
I think everyone should chime in on the people that they know in the Congress. I know about the three from SCRFU.
Paul Ganey - Nice man. Has been around rugby in So Cal for decades as a player and then administrator. Been the SCRFU VP for years. Not a lot of major accomplishments on his resume. Not a real influencer.
Steve Vent - Nicknamed Weasel or Wease and is a longtime fixture of the rugby community in So Cal. Was manager of Griffin sides long ago and now refs. He has run for exec board positions at SCRFU, but has never won. Again, nice guy but not a influencer.
Pat Guthrie - Talks a good game, but seems to be most interested in his commercial interests around rugby. He is a television producer and director of rugby content going back to the days of The Rugby Club on Fox Sports, and is co-author of a rugby book. I think he is currently involved with content creation on Rugby Zone. Didn't even bother to go to the September meeting in Dallas.
What is the quality of the people representing your union in the USA Rugby Congress?
Posted by: SCRFU Congress Members | 25 November 2009 at 18:20
...And the really sad, but honest, part of the SCRFU rundown is that it gets worse in other territories. It is unfortunate, but who we currently are as a rugby union. As mentioned in the previous post, there folks have all been around a long time, and have little to nothing of material difference to show for their date stamp.
Makes me remember the old saying, "not how long you be hanging around, but what you got done".
The governance change, as I understood it, was going to get us out of this environment. Guess not.
Based on all the facts; the latest board meeting-Chairman blows it off, board member(s) too drunk to attend etc. the eagles test venue, the press release recapping the previous mentioned events, the governance change has completely failed. For anyone to even try to argue is comical.
Well Gang, am not a pessimistic, but we have to face the reality in front of us, we have failed. Chairman has failed, CEO has faield, national team in general has failed, board has failed, congress has failed.
Sorry to mention the obvious, just keeping it real.
Peace out.
Posted by: Bruce | 25 November 2009 at 20:06
But we are failing up!
Posted by: U _ S _ A ! ! ! ! | 25 November 2009 at 20:16
The post about SoCal Congress members was sad at first. Has it come to this, we are naming the names of the individuals on Congress and showing them for their lack of accomplishment?
Well its only fair in war. These people are part of a problem which has hurt US rugby.
Personally I don't know every member of Congress, but a few phone calls got the goods on most of them.
SoCal is on par and not as bad as some of the other TU's.
The MARFU has Dana Bateman and Eric Pittelkau, both longtime servants of the game. In a Congress comprised of losers maybe they are the best of the lot. Neither has made a stand against the foreign Board or even made waves on the Congress, but their long service does count. Interesting that their own TU was embezzled right from under their nose, so we shouldn't expect them to be a first line of defense. George Durocher no one knows, even in the MARFU.
The South has Pat Kane who many people think highly of, but it also has a couple of guys that no one knows. The South almost doesn't count in USAR. They seem just happy to be at the party.
The Midwest has been a longtime joke. A former female Congress member was best known for getting drunk and crying about her Congress boyfriend. The new cast has Adrian Gannon to carry on the tradition of bad stereotypes, along with Jeremiah Johnson and Tom (loud but pay no attention) Schmitt. The MWRFU is in the medal hunt for biggest waste of Congress seats.
Speaking of waste, the PC has a winner in Frank (I want to be the chairman) Merrill, one of the really really poor USAR administrators. He shares the role with Dave Pelton, don't have him ref your games is the word. The third is Ellen Owens, she is, Ellen. The PacCoast is Silver medalist in the hunt for the biggest waste of adminstration.
The vote for gold goes to Bill Sexton, Alan Sharpley and John Wolf of the West. If you can find one thing this trio has accomplished in rugby the beers are on the house. They are systematic of the root cause of Congresses problems, along with a few selected individuals. If anyone is considering writing in their defense please hold. These fellows are so unaccomplished they are just happy to have their name mentioned.
Well friends this is our team. 1-2-3-go-win.
Posted by: others | 25 November 2009 at 23:14
The first in a series of BACK OUR ADMINISTRATION post.
Question: Which three Board members haven't even introduced a sponsorship lead in the three years they have been on the USAR Board?
Answer: All of them, but the three in question are Kevin Roberts, Bill Middleton and Paul Tsuchiya.
Posted by: BACK OUR ADMINISTRATION | 25 November 2009 at 23:27
Question: Which USAR Board member was fired by the IRB in a previous position?
Answer: Tom Wacker
Posted by: BACK OUR ADMINISTRATION | 25 November 2009 at 23:28
Question: Which USAR International Athlete Board member decided to marry her partner at an Eagles match, resulting in an IRB representative in attendance to say, "what the hell have we gotten ourselves into?"
Answer: Come on, you figure it out.
Posted by: BACK OUR ADMINISTRATION | 25 November 2009 at 23:33
Question: Which USAR Board member and chair of the eligibility committee is known for cheating as a college coach by fielding players attending other colleges for his team?
Answer: John Mullett, suspect coach of Grand Valley State.
Posted by: BACK OUR ADMINISTRATION | 25 November 2009 at 23:41
Question: Which current USAR Board member supported Doug Arnot's bankruptcy of the union as Chairman and now sits as Vice Chairman of the new money losing USAR?
Answer: Robert Latham
Posted by: BACK OUR ADMINISTRATION | 25 November 2009 at 23:46
McNamara you're getting tough with these guys.
Posted by: CRA Fan | 25 November 2009 at 23:51
Who gave Jonah Lomu a reach around at the 1999 World Cup?
Posted by: Oh Snap! | 26 November 2009 at 00:21
France?
Posted by: Invictus II: The Reach Around | 26 November 2009 at 16:04
Saw Total Rugby today and even with all the production tricks in the book (showing south beach miami to give the impression the match was right down the road, smash cuts and tight shots of the crowd) the event still looked bush league.
Posted by: We Suck | 26 November 2009 at 20:53
I'm not sure why Beagles thinks that our undetermined Euro opponent is likely to be Georgia or Romania. Georgia is the strongest team outside of the 6 Nations and will most likely qualify as Europe 1 in a different pool. Romania is in VERY serious danger of finishing 4th in the ENC Division 1 and thus out of the World Cup. Should they manage to overtake Portugal and finish 3rd, they will have to face either Lithuania or Ukraine, followed by Tunisia, followed by Uruguay (or some Asian team).
Our unknown opponent at the world cup is most likely going to be Russia. Portugal has a shot at taking it. Georgia could fall into it.
Posted by: Alan | 29 November 2009 at 01:21
Meant to say...if Romania does manage to finish 3rd and go through those various series, they will still qualify to another pool.
Current Europe Standings:
Georgia: 4-0-1
Russia: 4-1
Portugal: 3-1-1
Romania: 2-3
Spain: 1-4
Germany: 0-5
#1 qualifies to Pool B (England, Scotland, Argentina). #2 qualifies to our pool. #3 can qualify for Pool B by beating Lithuania or Ukraine, Tunisia, and Uruguay or Asia #2 (almost certainly Kazakhstan or Korea).
Posted by: Alan | 29 November 2009 at 01:26
Alan, less than 2% of all American rugby players past/present could tell you where the USA is currently listed on the IRB ranking chart, or care. Also, less than 2% of this group could tell you where Romania or Portugal are on a map.
Watching this group is like watching a bunch of monkeys trying to pound square pegs into round holes, for 3 fuking years!
Gents, your run of the mill primate gets it after the 3rd or 4th time. You imbeciles are on something like the thousandth day!!
Don't you blokes get it yet?
Posted by: I. C. Schmidt | 30 November 2009 at 03:55
I.C. Schmidt -
As a black man I find your comments racist.
Posted by: Jackson | 30 November 2009 at 09:01