« Belmont Shore notches 2d 7s crown in 3 years | Main | World Cup squad: All-Americans vie with 'America qualifieds' »

10 August 2011

Comments

Well deserved holiday, mate!

I like fishing too...

Thursday and no USA lineup. USAR in free fall of all acceptable international rugby standards.

Ridiculous that Goff has some stupid piece up on rugbymag about what to cheer/say and no fricking lineup!

A combined annual salary of 500 thousand for Melville and O'Sullivan and we can't get a lineup published?

Canada puts 10K plus people in a proper stadium and the USA is having the game in front of a couple thousand people at what is essentially a very nice public park. Pathetic.

Here's a thought: Schedule the test match in a city (ex: New York, Boston, San Diego, San Francisco) where demographics will almost guarantee a sizeable, knowledgeable and appreciative rugby crowd. With all due respect, Glendale…really? Even the Canucks have the foresight to play in cities providing a reasonable margin for commercial success.

USA Rugby is taking advantage of the hard work a few individuals did to create a rugby friendly venue near their HQ. It is not like USA Rugby made the Glendale RugbyTown project happen and want to get the most out of their hard work. The entire USA Rugby organization is a parasite to anyone that is attached to them. The IRB, their members, their players, etc, etc.

I hate to say it, but I think the Eagles are going to fall just short against Canada on Saturday. The Canucks have been playing consistently well through the Churchill Cup and have a much more settled side than the Eagles. I watched the game and their execution was not very good, but if they put it together on Saturday like they had it going at the Churchill Cup, they will beat the Eagles even if the Eagles are firing on all cylinders. Just an opinion.

Regarding where to play the match...The Eagles have played in the NYC Area recently and drew only 7000+, outside of San Fran, I think they would be hard to draw more then 10,000 for anyone aside from the All Blacks or South Africa (witness the 2001 match in Houston). So who cares if they play in Glendale and draw only 2500, the chances of them drawing more in NYC while playing at Red Bull Stadium is slight...plus the Red Bull would be 1/10th full while Glendale will be 50% full.

@PM,
It's not so much about what percentage of the stadium is filled, it's more about opportunity of spectators ie: rugby fans to view the game...larger cites = increased chance for rugby followers, American and Canadian as well as ex pats of other rugby playing nations to attend....might as well hold it at a high school field Wyoming, give away free tickets, fill the stands and call it a success.

USA Rugby just announced that tickets are sold out for Glendale. It will be the largest crowd to see anything at Infinity Park. The crowd will be loud, and very much into it, which will only be a good thing for rugby. Say what you will about growing the game in different markets, but Denver is just as solid choice as any for a rugby test match.

Crowd is going to look like a tea bagger rally. Why not keep our rugby internationals a little more upscale and have them in a proper city and stadium?

yea a u-s-a chant at a national team game. unheard of.

So glad grandpa Sitton is not in the booth.

Clever is a tool. The hair, bad flavor savor chin flair hair, etc, etc.

At the Half:
Even with the Canadians getting 2 yellow cards the Eagles only came away with 7 points after getting into the green zone multiple times. At that try was dubious in my opinion. They don't look at all ready to participate in the RWC. O'Sullivan has failed as a head coach. Bring back Thorburn.

At the Whistle:
Eagles scrum only looked good when it was 8 against 6, but otherwise if failed especially when they had attacking ball 5 meters out. No kicker of note for points, and no first choice 10 that is playing with confidence and/or skill, The Eagles looked woeful and things don't get easier when they go up against Japan who are coming off winning the Pacific Nations Cup with away wins over Fiji and Tonga to clinch it. Today Japan played well in a 31-24 away loss to Italy scoring 3 tries. Eagles may limp into the RWC with 3 losses in a row. To little coaching to late by Eddie who was to busy flogging his book back in Ireland for most his term as the head coach.

Really like Bill Seward, the commentator. A real professional. Has no background in rugby and yet is able to sound like a commentator who knows what he is doing. He knows when to speak and when to let the expert, Hightower, explain the details. Almost zero gridiron references and 100% treating it like a fully legit sport. Great job

@college

I agree.

For the first time, I agree with Beagles.

Well, the Eagles did worse than I predicted. I think Japan beats them and then they embarrass themselves against Ireland, Italy and Australia, but beat RWC debutante Russia and claim the RWC a success. So pumped to pay my 40 dollar CIPP fee in a couple weeks!

The Eagles are afraid of the tryzone. How gut wrenching to watch them move the ball into the redzone over and over without anything to show for it.
I'm not blown away by Canada in the least. They struggle to win 50% of their lineout, and in the 2 matches with the US they probably "earned" 15 of their 55 total points (the rest were handed to them by the many US errors).
Opportunism is great, but wins will be few and far between at the RWC for teams that can not create their own offensive opportunities. or for teams who can not cash in on opportunities created.
I'm afraid 1, maybe 2 wins isall we can hope for from our N. American duo in NZ.

@oregonbobby
Canada's defense was very solid and especially so when they were down men and when the Eagles were in their red zone. That is not easy. The created pressure that earned them those "gift" tries tonight. Exploiting your opposition's mistakes is the name of the game in modern rugby with highly organized and specialized defenses. You need to understand the game before you post.

I'm a more casual fan than most of you, but I've seen Chris Wyles playing professionnally on Fox Soccer and they say he is American, why isnt that guy playing for USA in the world cup? Are there more guys like him available and not playing for their country? Or is he not eligible? Curious....

he'll be on the team and starting. Dont worry.

It all looks bad for our guys on the field. They are playing hard, but there is no sense of a plan, how bout the aimless kicks!

I think the commentators are just ok. Hightower looks the part, but his "color" commentary isn't as good as Vizard's. Hightower's angle is all about desire and focus, with a few references about the lack of a plan. Viz would offer better, more specific examples of what could/should be done.

Todd Clever = Most overrated player in USA history. Seriously that guy spends half the game on the wing, gets in a push and shove to get on tv and cheap shots the Canadian winger that should have seen him red carded. He is tiny compared to other international 6's, he is a benefactor of being a decent looking guy and USA rugby needing someone to push the game. Malifa was poor, timid, confused i could go on and on, he doesn't know how to build pressure just kicks and hopes. Team has gone nowhere in the 3 years O'Sullivan has been here.

I agree about Clever. I think he is more worried about the "Todd Clever" brand than the results on the field. Not singing during the National Anthem is a player's prerogative, and having the camera in your face is part of the gig, but to back away from the camera "acting" like some hard a$$ on Breaking Bad instead of refocusing the team minutes before kick-off gives you a pretty strong indication where his head is at. These Canada games are the Todd Clever show in his head.

Also, of all guys to be the face of the team who decided to pick the guy that is the biggest douchebag? The long hair and flavor savor on his chin, his barely articulate replies to questions, all adds up to not really be a true reflection of what is on the field. The team is split between white college educated middle to upper middle class guys and pacific islanders. Let's choose one of those groups to represent our game and not the guy trying to look like an Ed Hardy model or UFC fighter.

What a waste of money - get rid of Eddie O, Nigel and the plastic Kiwi douchebag and pile the money back into the game. Help get our best players pro-contracts anywhere abroad and have a CEO and coach who get half of what we are paying right now.

By re-focusing on the grass roots of the game and making a real effort to getting rugby into schools, we might take a step backwards on the international scene. But surely it cannot be any worse than this?

Hightower is really bad. He makes Sitton look great.

@tool time -- Sculley is the likely next "face of the team." Not taking a stance on that, just making a prediction.

Vizard and Seward would be the best available broadcast combo in my opinion.

I dont think Hightower is unbearable, but agree Seward/Vizard is the best there is for an american broadcast

Clever is a good player. let's not get crazy. Maybe he shouldnt be the captain.

Canuk...
If that "solid" defense lets NZ/France/Tonga march down the field and camp out inside the 22 for as long and as many times as the Eagles just did, they will give up 50pts a game. Even Japan with much better goal kicking and coaching than the Eagles will scortch them.
Richie McCaw will not be throwing a dumb quick lineout 5m out gifting the Leafs a try.
If you tackle Chabal at the goal line he will likely stratch out and score rather than roll up in ball.
Dan Carter will not miss multiple chip shots at goal.
Canada has less chance of winning any of their games at RWC than the Eagles do... and that ain't saying much.

Turn your backs on the Eagles and support the USA Tomahawks rugby league side, a better, tougher team and a code that will continue to build it's appeal in the States.

No chance Bazza. Rugby league is the bastardization of union for bogans and cretins.

Go to Brian Lowe's joke of a website for your fix of that crap game.

Just a thought, before the bashing continues. At the match in Glendale, I'm standing at the rail, which is full, as the national anthem is getting ready to kick off. A lady comes up and asks if she can stand at the rail, just for the anthem, then I can have my place back. I oblige. After the anthem is finished, she thanks me, and starts to walk away, tears streaming down her face. She had been singing, and waving to the players. She was obviously a mother, so I asked who belonged to her. It was Clever's mom. Very touching, and a reminder that the honor of wearing the Eagles jersey goes beyond the players.

Good news; Eagles I believe enjoyed a
lion's share of possession.
Bad news: Inability to convert and/or finish when it counted.
Also: How much standing around and looking for options before clearing ruck ball (USASZ!!)can we stand? POD ball is useless when a good defensive team can defend it with one player with slow recycle. Quick ball is quality ball.

I wouldn't be suprised if Usasz loses his pro contract due to Saturday's game. Awful stuff. Please drop Malifa, he can't hack the pressure. And if all of them just stopped trying to look like superstars and started playing as a team maybe we would have scored the 5 or 6 tries that were within range. Japan will not be so gentle as Canada next week and Ireland, obviously a whole other level. Hopefully they have mercy and put in their reserves.

Glass half full view ... the Eagles were in position to win both games; the second one decisively. Canada created nothing in two matches (they had 25 decent minutes in the first game but tries scored were due to Eagle giveaways). I do believe that had Stanfill been able to touch down (and I dont believe he did) then that may have swung the momentum the Eagles way.

The game was lost due to poor decision making and execution. Among the poor decisions:

1. Giving Malifa a poke at the sticks on the first penalty - a difficult kick that was not assured. Killed his confidence right off. A kick to the corner looking for a try would have been a better choice.

2. While up two players with a line out inside the Canada 22 - lineout won and ball swung wide. Why? 8 on 6 - drive the ball up the gut.

3. Pods - I hate little clumps of three forwards going nowhere; or in the Eagles case sideways.

4. Scrum - OK but disasterous at the 5 meter scrum after Stanfills near try. Getting better but still not good enough.

Of those on the field Uszaz absolutely kills me - as has been noted - he stands around with the ball available and allows the defense to reform. MOVE THE BALL!!!

Roland Siniulu - kicks when he should run, runs when he should pass and passes when he should run. If EOS wants a hard running center then put Emerick there and put Swiryn at the OC spot - he will be more effective there than wing.

Backrow - too slow about the field. Lots of effort and heart but a step too slow. Can't have BOTH Stanfill and Johnson on at the same time.

As for Canada .. they take home the bragging rights but my god have they dropped off in standard. The Eagles carried much of the play over these two tests and without the gift packages from the US where would the Canadians have scored?

Cool story Fezzik!! Let's remember that the guys on the field didn't select themselves to play and most are making huge sacrifices in their personal lives to be an Eagle. The effort they displayed on Sat was their best - which was at a level that most on this blog (including myself) have never even had a sniff at achieving. The Eagles shouldn't carry the blame for the stuff that happens at Boulder.

The Eagles players do not make any "sacrifices". They make decisions. This isn't the military. Each player makes a decision that playing for the national team is more important to them than work or family opportunities/considerations that they might otherwise prioritize.

If they tried their best then they and we can be proud of their effort as they are the best rugby players the US has to offer. By playing for the national team they open themselves to criticism by fans. Comes with the territory.

We should, perhaps, admire them for pursuing their dreams over pursuing a day job like most people, but this whole "sacrifice" thing is silly.

@Fezzik

Save the sappy hokum and shameless man love for Clever for the Days of our Lives forum. While his mom was wiping tears from her face her son was mugging for the camera like it was a UFC weigh-in when he should have been getting his team focused for the kick off. Imagine how much time he spent in the changing room getting his hair and chin flair ready for the camera. The guy is a poser and poor choice to be the "face" of the national team and our game.

All - I put the blame for the woeful play of the Eagles squarely on the shoulders of Eddie and Clever. There is no leadership on this team. Eddie spend most the last 2 years flogging a book in Ireland and not scouting for new players and better understanding his current team. Clever isn't a leader. He appears to be a narcissistic.

@Tool Time

Look through my past posts and you'll see that I've been no fan of Clever's.

Clever clearly should not be captain, and he should not be an option for a quick ball out of the ruck any longer, because he has no understanding of when to run alone vs. pass and follow to support.

I agree that the leadership is missing from the team. Whenever they do put phases together, you'll notice they aren't running in pods. When things start to go bad, however, they go back to pods, and running crash ball after waiting an eternity, so the defensive line has plenty of time to set up.

Yeah, maybe the sappy stuff was for another place, but it's not a bad idea to remember most of these are guys we've played with or against, and even if they aren't up to international standards, or our critical standards, they've still earned their spot and are worth a nod of appreciation once in a while.

@Fezzik,
Well stated.

Well stated "college". Far too often the current batch of Eagles and national team coaches have been gifted a pass.

The team is disorganized and ill disciplined, for whatever reason, but the coaches and players ultimately have to claim responsibility for their performance. If not, we have much bigger problems than ever imagined.

A difficult match looms versus Japan. Wasn't it Scott Johnson, after historic losses to the cherry blossoms, who said that it was because the Japanese were full time pros. None of those excuses are going to cut it this time around.

Mistakes aside the tale of the game was when it was 10-7 at the 50th minute. Stanfill was held up in goal and we had a 5 meter scrum our put in. The first scrum is restarted and there is some argie bargie between the players. The scrum is reset. You would think our boys would have their tails up. They are 5 meters out, the home fans are roaring, your adrenaline is spiking from the argie bargie, your passion and commitment should be sky high. What happens? The Canadians get the shove on us and the ball comes out sloppy from the back and there is a few phases of pick and goes and we lose the ball. This team is not mentally prepared to play for each other or the jersey. They are individuals and that is the fault of the head coach and the captain. End of story.

Did the Jesuit grad/incoming Cal freshman, Chipman, get added to the Eagles pool? I saw that in a "Premium RugbyMag" headline which I do not subscribe too. Apparently he is a stud wing, but I didnt know he was thaaat good. Anyone got the word?

Chapman from Utah warriors not the hs kid


Bazza,

We enjoy union, you like league. Don't show up to our chess board asking to play checkers.

Drek said,
"1. Giving Malifa a poke at the sticks on the first penalty - a difficult kick that was not assured. Killed his confidence right off. A kick to the corner looking for a try would have been a better choice."

As important as it is to give your kicker "confidence", at the international / RWC level, it is earned thru respect.

Having effective kickers forced the opposition (and even the referee) to respect your ball, platform, and space to play.

If there is no numerical punishment for infractions, then the infractions will continue.

To shy away from kicks at goal inside your own half early on in a game will actually shut the game down for you, and in turn hurt your team's confidence.

Anybody know the scoop on Chris Wyles? I recall that he was held out of the 1st test against Canada due to an ankle injury. Figured he would be in the line up on Saturday. Is he lost for the Cup? I would have liked to see him linking with Nqwenya and a bck three of Wyles, Nqweyna and Scully (at wing) would make for a nice combination. I assume that since Patterson did not figure in any of the matches that he has not been able to gain fitness for selection?

Finally ... did Hercus retire from rugby? Or was he simply put out to pasture by EOS? Hercus was not perfect but he was able to direct the backline play and at the moment Malifa cannot do that.

And general goalkicking has been our bane for quite a while now. How many matches has our sevens team lost 14-10?

How many clutch games have we lost on kicks, vs won on kicks? It hasn't just been Malifa -- it goes back years. Even Hercus missing at full time against Fiji in RWC 2003 comes to mind.

This gets back to the tired mantra of needing to develop players young.

The more players we get at the grass roots, the more players you will have with 10+ years of rugby ball kicking skills, and the less we will have to compromise on general play skills vs kicking skills.

Not bagging on Hercus and Malifa per se, but saying that with youth development, you'll have a bigger fraction of your backline players able to give them a challenge at the kicking duties.

Look at the Top Tier countries in the world. Sure Dan Carter kicks for the ABs, but how many other guys in the AB backline are the 1st choice kicker for their Super Rugby franchise?

whups

USA drops to #18 in the IRB rankings and Canada jumps two spots to #14 one behind Japan. Romania takes the #17 spot USA held and Russia is at #19.

When do we become a tier 3 country like Russia and Portugal?

In all honesty ... wtf do the world rankings have to do with anything? They ave no bearing on WC qualification at all. Which at the end of the day is all that matters.

Canada can rejoice at being # 14 if they want but they were in many ways worse than the US -created zero in the two matches just played.

And if the US beats Japan does that really change anything in the larger scheme of things. Not really.

When the rankings actually mean something then I will pay attention!

Russia and Portugal are tier 2 and rising fast. We'd be lucky to have the Domestic comp that Russia has and Portugal is putting up real wins in sevens.

We have beaten both Russia and Portugal so I say again - what do rankings matter. If it is all that exciting get behind the Tomahawks .. they are # 13 in RL. Woo hoo!!!

IRB allocates development funds based on a tier system and the teams within those tiers split those funds. Tier 2 has fewer teams where tier 3 has many teams going after allocated funds. The IRB also facilitates and funds international tests based on teams in tiers. The games against Scotland A, Portugal and Georgia that the Eagles played last November where the results of the IRB funds and us being a tier 2 nation. Because Japan has their rugby house in order and are hosting the 2019 RWC there is a 10 year tour schedule from the IRB that will see Tier 1 nations playing in Japan. They are on their way out of Tier 2.

If the USA gets bad enough, we could find ourselves in tier 3 and not having access to IRB development funds or being paid to participate in internationals organized and funded for tier 2 nations. The screw the national team and focus on HS and college could have consequences.

Is a Tier 2 teamdefined by the World Rankings? Just curious.

I do believe that the number of wins at the WC may have some determination as to who gets what from the IRB ....

Tier 3 nations like Namibia, Portugal, Spain, Uruguay, Zimbabwe and Russia have, or will, participate in a RWC. The tier system is supplemented by, but not replaced by, what is called a band system. This breaks down as follows:

High Performance (nations currently or previously in Tiers 1 and 2)
Argentina
Australia
Canada
England
Fiji
France
Ireland
Italy
Japan
New Zealand
Romania
Samoa
Scotland
South Africa
Tonga
USA
Wales

Performance (nations earmarked for developmental potential)
Georgia
Namibia
Portugal
Russia
Spain
Uruguay

Targeted (the IRB did not release a list of unions in this category, but named several as being in this band. Most likely because of the revenue upside)
China
Germany
India
Mexico

Developmental
This is the location for all remaining national unions recognized by the IRB

So, the answer is not really clear. World rankings is something that the IRB takes very seriously as a means to determine a teams progress on the global stage. Obviously things like the earning power of the nation involved and cultural elements like being an Anglo nation have consideration in this subject way to determine what band a nation is going to be in. Personally I don't see the USA and Canada as high performance because there is a minority of national team pool players in pro set-ups. The Pacific Island nations and Romania may not have pro leagues like Japan, but because of Commonwealth Nation status they are all over the pro leagues in Europe and the Super 15.

How are you functioning as a change agent in your organization? Are you stuck and working straight by the book in the old culture? Are you radically making the shift and functioning straight down the middle of your picture of the ideal, new culture? Or have you found some way to do the dance of transformational leadership that discerns the most helpful work in each situation - able to be bi-cultural and function well enough in the existing system to succeed and build trust while also creating enough new and adaptive changes to move into a new way of working together?

Layer Cake - Nothing on Brazil? I would think with the size of their country (200 Million in pop.) and being ranked well ahead of Mexico there might be something to pushing them to this "Targeted" group. I didn't even see that Mexico was ranked in the top 100. Not trying to be an ass, just curious if you accidentally left them off your list or if the IRB really isnt targeting Brazil to develop.

IRB doesn't formally announce what unions are in their Targeted band, and I only listed the unions they have mentioned as targeted in the past. With the 2016 Olympics in Rio, and it being the return of rugby to the games in the form of 7s, I would assume the Brazil union is on their Targeted list at this point. More evidence may be that the IRB TV show Total Rugby did a feature on rugby in Brazil within the last month. See http://youtu.be/Q40703XlRcg

If Brazil, as the host nation, decides it wants to have a side entered into the Olympics, then then get one of the slots...and if that's the case, the iRB will certainly "target" them, instead of letting them enter a side that will be an obvious embarassment.

Not saying there's an easy way to avoid the slaughters, but that'd surely be the intent in targeting them.

@Fezzik

You talk out your a$$. The IOC establishes or approves Olympic event qualifications. The IRB will make a qualification proposal to the IOC as the governing body of the sport, but not make any decisions. Formal proposal will not be reviewed and decided on until some time in 2014. At this point the IRB has been presenting their ideas/plans to delegates from the 205 National Olympic Committees. The hot topic during these presentations was that the all 5 continents were represented. Brazil will find it tough to qualify in South America with Argentina, Uruguay and Chile currently the more established rugby powers on the continent.

yeah the olympics don't have the same rules as a world cup event.

@Layer Cake

You miss the point. The host nation getting a slot for representation is obviously weighted in the publicity side of the house. The iRB would have to know that...and try to make it possible for that nation, which would come into their funding plans.

I shouldn't have said they get to choose. You're correct.

Their decision about interest in fielding a side will probably have an impact on any iRB proposal.

Some information about past Olympic hosts and how they participate in selected events:
Sailing:
"...Seven nations are sending teams to every event. As well as Greece, which, as host nation, automatically receives an entry for each event, Australia, Spain, France, Great Britain, Germany, Italy and the USA will all have a full Olympic team."

This is all I could find, but it implies that Greece got an automatic bid for each event as a host nation. I would assume the same for Brazil in 2016, being qualified nations PLUS the host. The host would not take a spot from a qualified nation.

It should be clear to all how wrong the USA Rugby approach is to international or domestic success.

Our national team has only regressed our world ranking under this administration. The Board and Congress have been a disgrace. The Boulder office equally as poor.

USA Rugby needs a new chairmen and new CEO asap! Only then can we get our house in order with a new Eagle coaches.

It amazes me that you guys get on a blog and just start spewing stuff without knowing a thing about how the process is done. Unlike sailing the IRB has recognized rugby being played in 116 counties, and current presentations to 205 National Olympic Committee delegates have made it clear representation will be across the 5 Olympic continents represented by the rings (Africa, America, Asia, Europe and Oceania/Australia). So, the question will be how they parcel out the spots and represent all 5 continents. Part will be on how teams do in the IRB World Series, and part will be determined by how teams do in events like the Commonwealth Games, Asian Games and the PanAm Games, which all include rugby. The current proposal is for a 2 day 12 team tournament. Will the IOC give the Brazilians a spot because they are the host? Who knows, but it would be at the expense of one of the other capable teams in the Americas. Canada? USA? Doubt it because the NBC broadcast agreement and USA corporations is where the IOC makes the majority of their money. Argentina? Uruguay?

The same old posts on the same old tired blog. Calls for change are entering (at least) year four and absolutely nothing has changed.

Roberts is still incredibly smug, Melville evasive and ineffective, and O'Sullivan complaining all the way to the bank.

Hopefully after yet another four years have been wasted something will happen, anything would be better than where we are right now.

Isn't spewing info out of your a$$ what comment sections of blogs are for? Please don't tell me you come to these postings to look for informed discussion. If you have so much info on this, why don't you write a piece for Rugby Magazine about it?

I'm not a journalist. I know about it because I follow rugby 7s and know how to use the internet to get factual information.

Don't take all this so seriously. Here is what is fun, this administration's 30 minutes of fame is just about over. They will go down as the biggest failure of all time.

The Congress, Board and Melville will all get their proportional share of the blame.

5 years from now, we will still be discussing what a failure Kevin Roberts and his Board were. We will be drawing conclusions on failed leadership from Melville. The thought of Congress will make us laugh out loud. The biggest group of dumb asses ever produced by a rugby community. The lessons will be good and profound. We will never hire another national team coach who doesn't live in the US!

There is some lost opportunity in all this mess, but we will live to compete again. Smile people, our long national nightmare is almost over.

Isn't that what someone said after we sold off the 7s game and Doug Arnott was seeing the door hit him in the ass after he failed miserably?

Good luck getting these jokers out of town. They're stacked the deck (congress) in their favor. It's like holding elections in a dictatorship... all show.

Drastic measures will be needed to oust this group. Outside of EOS, who is done after the RWC, the rest of these guys will be around until they get tired of taking our money and spouting off about waking the Sleeping Giant.

@Layer Flake:
The information I got was from the IOC website. An event can't be in the Olympics unless it is played in and overseen by a national governing board in over 200 countries. Sailing is an example of that. Greece got a free bit. Relevant to the topic discussed here. How will that be worked out for rugby and Brazil? We'll find out when they announce their decision. Until that time... Lighten up, Francis.

Why would Georgia be considered Tier III behind Romania? Their whole team is professional most of them playing either Top 14 or D2 in France. They drew 50,000 for a game against Russia and swept the Nations Cup... It is a team on the rise and been trying to get into the Six Nations with a playoff with the wooden spoon winner usually Italy against the Nations Cup winner. It won't happen because of money but, they are a team they can advance from their ranking.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Subscribe

About Comments

  • Gainline.us values readers' thoughts and wisdom. While correspondents are encouraged to use given names, aliases in combination with a valid, publicly accessible email are acceptable. Profanity will be edited and unverifiable identities unpublished. Thanks to all who write in for helping to advance our collective understanding of American rugby, as it is and could be.

Corrections & Amplifications

  • Gainline.us values accuracy and fairness. If we fall short of the goal, we promptly correct errors or oversights. Strikethroughs denote text which has been replaced. *Asterisks* denotes text added after the initial post.
My Photo