Blood and Mud

When rugby shirts went bad

 In years gone by, you knew where you were with rugby shirts.  They were in block colours and had not changed since public schoolboys took time out of desperately trying not to engage in sexual activity with each other and created the game of rugby instead.  

It was so simple back then.  England wore white, Wales red, Ireland green, Scotland navy and France royal blue; all of them had a badge on, a white collar and that was that.   It was also very rare that you would know who the manufacturer was as there was no logo, and anyone looking to the label for enlightenment would be led to believe that all shirts were made by a company called: "Large, Wash Colours Separately"

However, at some point in the early to mid-1990s this all changed.  The spectre of professionalism was looming large, and most unions and sports clothing manufacturers were sensing money to be made from the punters and so shirts began to change - and not for the better - as the marketing men moved in.  We have actually managed to get hold of the meeting minutes from each manufacturer at that period and here is a typical example after the jump.

Wales Kit Meet, 1992.

Mike Kristiansen outlined the proposal that we need to make kits more appealing and modern to consumers in order to boost revenue for both ourselves and the WRU.  This will need to identify with the potential consumer, capturing their imagination so that they not only wear the shirt of their nation with pride, but become stakeholders in the our brand, the lifestyle and the ethos of being winners. MK then opened the floor to the creative team.

Ethan Brownstick said, "Shall we just add some ugly stipes and shit to the arms?"

All agreed, meeting closed.

Thus it was that rugby kits were changed forever.  Only to return to something like the beauty of the basic kits some years later when some crap-haired and trendy spectacled marketing monkey went down the 'classic/retro' route.   

England's classic white was replaced by this monstrosity in the 1991 World Cup, closely followed by this minger, this disgrace and so on it went until this hate crime in 2007. 

Wales went for this green-collared, hoopy-sleeved nightmare, before realising the error of their ways and returning to some semblance of normality by the 2000s

Scotland somehow ended up having purple stripes in their shirt, before succumbing to a level of shirt-detail nonsense normally associated with Stade Francais.

France went all tricolour-striped on us, while Ireland thankfully resisted putting any gold or other daftness on their shirts for longer than anyone, but then caved and added white arm trims and side panels in the early 2000s.

Professionalism has brought many things that are good for the game;  Ooerly-fussy shirts made from fabrics with made up names like 'dri-fit' and 'pro-armour', that roughly translate as 'a bit like a pair of tights, only manly and that' are not one one them.  Especially seeing as some of them now retail and upwards of £90.  NINETY QUID!!

What exactly is a "gameplan"?

 England players talk about them a lot in post-match interviews and we take the piss out of players with a version of them, but what do people mean by a gameplan? 

Yoda Ashton (remember him?) has been quoted this week as saying, ""One of the things I am constantly battling against is the dreaded word gameplan," he said, "That is where everything is prescribed from phase one to six or seven. By doing that, no one ever learns to understand the way the game is played, the way one aspect impacts on another."  His definition - gameplan as phase-by-phase directives - is an interesting, if not entirely correct, one.

Many people, particularly those who have to watch England, refer to the word "gameplan" with the the kind of disgust normally reserved for the c-word in a primetime TV slot.  As if it is something to be reviled; a one-word summation of all that is wrong with the over-drilled, gym-monkey infested, zero-creativity modern approach to rugby. This is wrong.  Any team at any level of any sport must have a "plan", and this plan has several layers.

The first job of a head coach (team manager, Principal Strategy Enabler, or whatever they call themselves these days) is to formulate an approach to the game for his team.  To select a simple decision: are you a rucking side or a mauling side?  If you are a rucking side do you look to ruck through a repetitive number of fast phases via the forwards or do you look to ruck fast and go wide as soon as possible?  etc etc. Once you have come to the conclusion you must then get the coaching team in place to ensure the players have the skills to carry out this general approach.  As a coach you will also agree the creative freedom you want your players to have and tailor your whole coaching strategy to this.  This can take years to reach fruition, especially if you are looking to turn around a culture a la Clive Woodward. 

This is your approach to the game, your philosophy, your strategy.  This never changes as you should have the confidence in your approach to keep working at it to get it and the players right.

Assuming you have all that sorted (no small feat), below this sits your gameplan, or more specifically gameplans.  Unlike your overall approach, your gameplans will change for every game and every opponent.  For example, one team may have a defensively weak 10-12 channel and so you will request your 9 and 10 to focus attacks there; or perhaps one team have a particularly weak ruck defence, thus you will work your carrying forwards into that area on repeated phases, and so on.  

However, the worst thing any coach can do is lay down too many "patterns". Those who have played know the type - e.g. "we always go three drives blindside then we go open to the backs", which then leads to an overlap going begging because the forwards are taking in their second, robotic blind-side drive when the ball should have gone.  It is this approach which is too prevalent in too many teams, certainly in the Guinness Prem and moreso with England.  

Having no plan and believing that somehow good players will figure it out is stupid, but equally stupid is drilling and planning all spark out of a team.  It seems an obvious thing to say but the evidence of this happening is all to prevalent.

It is this micro-managed approach to the game that Ashton is railing against in the quote above, but a gameplan need not be like this.  It is not the idea of a gameplan that is wrong, just the gameplans many coaches seem to be using.  

Julien Dupuy's ban appeal

Stade Francais and Marc Lievremont are not happy that Julien Dupuy is banned for six months.  This is understandable as he is arguably the form scrum-half in Europe at the minute and his absence from his club and country will hit them hard. So what they are actually doing is taking the usual scoundrel's way out by bleating about technicalities.  The fact is that they have a case under French law for the decision to be reviewed, that will undoubtedly lead to a reduction in the ban and they are pursuing it. Shame on them.

At a time when the entire game is abhorring the practise of eye-gouging, and the authorities finally hand out something resembling a proper sanction, France chooses this time to focus on the detail rather than the principle. 

Let's be honest, the game in France has always had the worst reputation for this practice - John Eales threatened to take the Wallabies off the field in the 1999 World Cup Final, such was the extent of the gouging of his team -  and this was a clear opportunity for them to show to the world that they believe Dupuy acted in a despicable and cowardly manner.

Instead, we have Stade owner Guzzardi uttering crap like "The ERC wanted to make an example of a symbolic player of Stade Francais and of the French team which has never had a disciplinary problem."  No, the ERC wanted to make an example that gouging has no place in the game and those that are caught doing it are going to get their arses kicked. Gouging is a violent criminal act that should shame the perpetrator, and no-one should be offering public mealy-mouthed defences. 

The loss of Dupuy will hit his teams hard, but not as hard as it would hit Stephen Ferris to lose sight in one eye.  I know this didn't happen, but the fact is that this is more by luck than design, because if you stick your fingers in a person's eye socket you have no idea what the outcome will be.  Given the evidence above, six months was probably too light.

Dupuy, his club and FFR should be thankful he didn't blind anyone, shut their yap and take the sanction on the chin.  Or in the eye.

Rugby Union is dead, apparently.

Paul Rees, a man unique among rugby correspondents in that he doesn't seem to like rugby much, is today once again lamenting the death of the game.  Move along everyone, nothing to see here but the chalked outline of William Webb Ellis...

His argument is valid enough on at least some of the Guinness Premiership numbers: there are half as many tries this year as there were at the same time in 2007-8, and 2.6 and 4.7 tries per match respectively; but less convincing on others, the comparison of drops and pens between the same years are not that different.

To be fair to Paul the Misery, he is not the only one wringing his hands about the state of the game, with issues being brought up about player bulk, lack of creativity and excessive kicking coming from all sides since the summer.  Many are blaming the rules, but is it entirely justified?  I'm not sure.

In the midst of many games that have admittedly been utter dreck this autumn, there have been some corkers; Leicester vs Ospreys, most Northampton matches, France vs SA, Ireland vs Aus, even Wales vs Arg showed some class (I'm sure you could name others).  Surely, if it was all the fault of the rules then no games would be any good? 

It cannot be denied that the new protocols at the breakdown have caused problems, but the fact still remains that if you get enough people to the breakdown you will still win the ball just as before.  It has always been the case that no player should take contact when isolated and while the protocols have made this more important this should not be an impossible obstacle for coaches to overcome.  Instead of whining about it, get your players operating in tighter units, look at using pods - mostly simply accept the fact that for years it was piss-easy to recycle your own possession and now you are being asked to earn your money.  Likewise, the players should look at the themselves and trust their ability rather than taking the coward's route with the boot.

Rees' analysis also makes the mistake of focusing on the Guinnes Premiership, falling into the common trap of believing that the English domestic league or England national team is somehow the appropriate laboratory sample to use in the diagnosis of the health of world rugby.  It is not.  The Premiership is suffering from a combination of organised defences and a particular crop of players who are a bit on the creatively mediocre side.  Funnily enough, teams that have creative players - Saints and Irish for example -  are creating things; teams which do not are not - what a miracle, eh?

What is the common thread in the England rugby team's crapness?

The years since 2003 have not exactly been a picnic for England fans; or if it has been a picnic it is one at which it consistently drizzles, the sandwiches are all chicken paste and the occasional wild animal turns up to savage you and your kids. There have been some sunny intervals of course - World Cup final in 2007, and some recognisable improvement in this year's Six Nations - but all in all, this period has been a pride-swallowing siege for all who follow the red rose. 

The years immediately after 2003 saw of a number of pivotal persons retiring or suffering long-term injuries, plus the loss of Clive Woodward. Since 2006 there has been no such ready-made excuse. 
 
Leaving aside RWC 07, when every other team played into England’s hands by allowing a slow, forwards and kick dominated strategy to dominate the tournament, in the last three years England have consistently failed in the part of the game that matters most: securing decent possession, particularly at ruck.

The reasons for this are many: lack of penetrating runs, poor rucking technique, lack of ideas around the fringe, the endless pick-and-gos; I could go on. Securing ball, even in this modern era is still primarily the job of the forwards, something they have signally failed to do in three years. Who is to blame for this is very simple in my eyes; it’s the bloke responsible for England’s forwards since 2006 – John Wells.

If you accept that this is the case - and I’d be interested to hear any arguments in support of him as I can’t think of any - then it begs the additional question of why he is still in the job.  

Up until this year you could put his survival down to the turmoil raging around him, with the turnover of head coaches happening at such a rate that the powers that be felt stability in the second coaching layer was probably sensible. However, since Johnson was appointed as the long-term coach last year then this argument looks increasingly shaky. Given that, with the possible exception of Scotland, England’s forwards look the worst in Europe most of the time and last Saturday against the Wallabies was yet another game to add to the litany of soul-splintering failures of recent times, you have to ask what it would take for him to lose his job?

I have no desire to see people sacked when there is a long-term strategy that they are part of. But, if a man who has presided over not a single iota of consistent improvement in three years is part of your long-term plan then surely your plan is a SHIT one? Only Martin Johnson knows the answer to that and we can only hope that he is considering his forwards coaching options very carefully, otherwise it's more chicken paste and drizzle in the run up to the next World Cup.

bloodandmud.com talks to Keith Wood

 

When I started this blog some 18 months ago, if someone had said to me that my intermittent web-based ranting would one day lead to me interviewing a bona fide legend of our game I would have laughed so hard you would think I was watching Iain Balshaw field a high ball.  However, that day has come as this week I had a chinwag with Keith Wood.  KEITH WOOD!

Read on to hear the big fella's views on the Lions, the 6 Nations, Munster, the possible insanity of Nick Mallett and Marc Lievremont, and retirement - among other things

I was at Wembley when Ireland beat Wales in 1999.  Your try featured probably the best sidestep from a front row in history, is that your best try when you look back?

You know, it really was incredible, and if I hadn't done the most extravagant thing possible then Gibbsy would have killed me - as he was wont to do.  I tell you, you could find skills you didn't know you had when you saw that battleaxe running at you, but it probably was my best try actually and it was nice to score it at Wembley.

Are you still friends with Gibbsy and other boys from 1997?

Very much so, yes, a good few of them I would say. A lot of these friendships are obviously built on when you can meet up really, but I see Scott Gibbs all the time, also Ieuan Evans, Tom Smith, Jason Leonard, Dallaglio and Jonno.  It's a special thing we have, given that we won and all shared in that victory.

Given the old rugby adage of "what goes on tour stays on tour", how did you feel about them making Living With Lions?

It was a strange thing, in that the cameras and everything could have made us play up a bit, but we didn't need that, it was such a great tour with great boys and it showed us all having good fun.  But, what it also showed - and this is the best thing for me - was how intense it was inside the changing room.  There are fun parts like the court and all that, but the changing room is a part of rugby that people never ever see, that pure intensity.  Even right down to Tom Smith just sat in the corner.

And Neil Jenkins throwing up..Oh all the time!  Just mention a rugby game to him and he'll blow some.  Terrible reflux, I think.

Bringing things back to the present, as a Munster man yourself how do you rate their Heineken Cup chances this year?

I'd have to say very good.  They got out of their group very well and they now have a home quarter and home semi, and of course they've been there before.

Do you get back to Killaloe (Keith's home town in County Clare) much?

I live in Killaloe now.  I moved back for a little while as I wanted to give my boys a taste of home and I've been back there for a year; it's a great place and it's home.

I've been near there myself, in Kilrush, and I saw some dolphins.

(Animated, perhaps due to the mention of dolphins)  You did well there!  I love that part of the world, it really is proper old Ireland.

Back to rugby; who is your pick for the hooker's jersey for the Lions?

I really don't know; I won't be able to make a determination until after the first match of the Six Nations and go from there, rather than say that it's going to be Flannery or something.  Also, you never really know until the guys get out there and there is always a surprise pick in the first Test team, so you never know.

When you look at the hookers playing international rugby these days, Lee Mears for example, do you ever think you retired to early?

(diplomatically stifling a giggle)  I don't think I retired too early, no.

You were pretty young at 31 though, had you just had enough?

To be honest, my body was falling apart - I was 31 but my shoulders were in their early 50s.

Good job you sidestepped Gibbsy in 1999 then.

Exactly! That was another injury that was winking at me...

What do you think about Italy's decision to pick Mauro Bergamasco at scrum-half for the England game this weekend?

Oh, I am just so upset about that.  It's just so hard.  He's a really fine player but I just cannot see him as scrum-half, it just isn't right or fair.  Another shocker is Elissalde not being picked in the French squad.

Would it be fair to say that Marc Lievremont is slightly insane?  At least when it comes to selection...

Well, I'll allow you to say that not me, but I will say that I don't like the constant chopping and changing as I think it does everyone involved a disservice.

The latter end of your career overlapped what has become known as Ireland's golden generation of players.  Why do you think they didn't reach the heights they perhaps should have?

Firstly, I think that generation is still there and that they still have a chance to reach those heights.  But looking back, at times injury got in the way and at other times it just didn't happen.  I think that if we'd just won one championship, say in 2003 or 2004, we could have won it three of four times on the trot.  You have to remember that we have only won one Grand Slam (in 1948), it's not like we're tripping over them, so we don't have that history of winning developed yet. Once we get that going, then I think we could sustain it.

Speaking of winning, who is your pick for this year's RBS 6 Nations?

(hedging his bets) Ireland, France or Wales.

What do you think of Paddy Wallace and Brian O'Driscoll as the midfield for Ireland vs France?

I think it's a big call.  I don't think we'll get the best out of Paddy Wallace and that's because I don't see his position as a centre, but obviously I hope he does well.

When you think back to the days when you were playing, is there anyone that you see as a lost talent, someone who you think could have achieved more?

Without doubt the biggest loss for me was Simon Geoghegan.  He had that terrible toe injury and had loads of operations, then retired just as the game went professional because he couldn't do it any more.  He had something special.

Any regrets from your time in the game?  Anything you'd wish you'd done more of?

I wish I'd won more.  But, you know, I had a great time every time a strapped my boots on.  I retired early, as you mentioned, but I was happy with the decision, I didn't have to look back on three or four years of going downhill and not playing as well as I could and should.  I enjoyed it right to the end.

Would you have liked to have played under the ELVs?

People complain about the ELVs, but the rules changed all the time when I was playing as well, you are better off not complaining and just getting on with it.  The game has become a lot more physical, however, and for a guy to survive now they need to have started playing when I finished.  For anyone to try to play with a catalogue of injuries under his belt now would not be a good idea under these new rules - it's just become incredibly physical and aggressive.

But you were always more renowned for your play in the loose, so do you not think you could have excelled under these rules had you been born a bit later?

Maybe so, but when I was playing it was pretty loose and it opened up even more as it went on so I think I had a good chance to show what I could do.

Fair enough, final question Keith, what was the best front row you ever played in?

1997 Lions, no doubt.  Not just the Test guys (Tom Smith and Paul Wallace) but Jason Leonard as well in some of the other matches.  I can't believe Tom is still turning out for Northampton, perhaps he has Lions hopes this year as well, you never know with him.

Keith Wood was talking to us after refereeing the first ever Bushmills Table Rugby Six Nations.  The winners of the prestigious tournament were Italy. If you fancy having a pop at Table Rugby yourself, and as Keith says, "I urge all sports fanatics to get involved, it provides great banter", you can find the rules on the Bushmills.com site. 

The bloodandmud.com awards 2008

Forget the "World Player of the Year" and all that nonsense, these are the awards that really matter to the players.

The Post-2003 England Decline Award - Wasps, for managing to go from winning the Guinness Premiership to looking like Penzance & Newlyn 4ths in the space of six months.

Winston Churchill Award - Harlequins, for never surrendering in France or at home.

Zebedee Award – the London Irish line-out, for boinging higher than everyone, and finally earning an England call up for Nick Kennedy.  About bloody time!

Temperance Award – Danny Cipriani, for definitely not drinking and being out on the piss inappropriately at any time.

Investors In People Award – The RFU, for the good practice and adroit handling displayed throughout the process of Brian Ashton’s sacking.

Musn’t Grumble Award – Brian Ashton, for being the only man to come out of the whole sorry mess with some dignity.

Love Birds Award – Shaun Edwards & Warren Gatland, for showing young men it is OK to love your friends in a very real way.  No kissing, mind.

Insomniac's Thankyou Award – Scotland, for putting an entire nation of sufferers to sleep for at least 80 minutes every weekend during the Six Nations.  Things are looking up now though, to be fair.

Teflon Award – Brian O’Driscoll, for blame never, ever being apportioned to him for any Irish failure. Ever.

All Mouth, No Trousers Award – Rob Andrew, for his litany of failures accompanied by his constant nasal drone of pointlessness.

All Trousers, No Mouth Award – Wales, for quietly winning a Grand Slam.

Spike Milligan Award – Marc Lievremont, for his logic-defying surrealist comedy selection policy

Reader Poll: Have we see the last of Jonny Wilkinson?

His knee is dislocated and he is out for months, is this it for the golden boy? Has he gone the same way as his Crap Lookalike? Have your say here.

Meet the new laws, same as the old laws (sort of)

If you believe the likes of Stephen Jones, the ELVs first full round of matches was plenty of time in which to ruin the game of rugby by making it (GASP! THE HORROR!!) a little bit like rugby league.    But at the less hysterical end of the rugby world (i.e. my house), what has the impact been?

As a spectacle it still looked very much like a game of rugby union, and I certainly did not get the impression I was witnessing a revolution before my very eyes.

The kicking rules meant that the ball went to touch less, therefore more time was dedicated to kicking tennis - but not an insufferable amount, and the clarification of the breakdown rule saw the ref pinging players more in that area.  I expect that to reduce as players get out of old rucking habits.

The rule likely to have the biggest impact appears to be that around numbers in the lineout, and not only on that particular set-piece itself, but, alloyed with the new five-metre offside line, on the scrum.

The likelihood of losing your own lineout under the old rules was probably 20%, but now, due to defending sides being able to pack the line with lifters, it is probably 40% - thus turning every side into Wales.  This could lead to sides more keen to take a scrum, with its new offside line, in the 40 - 50 metre distance from the try-line: controlled possession with a bit more room from that distance may be preferable to scrappy or nonexistent possession at 20 metres. What could this mean to the traditional position of lock?  Ball-carrying and scrummaging will become more important than lineout ability - someday I see all locks being clones of Brad Thorn.

Dallaglio must be sorry he retired; a scrum at 15 metres out will now see the defenders back on their own line, and a decent wheel and pick-up by a fast, powerful Number 8 coupled with a decent back-row move could be a guaranteed try.  Players such as the lightweight Ryan Lamb should get some serious tackle practice in.

After seeing one round of matches, like a child approaching a clown I am more intrigued than frightened, but at first glance the game looks like it is safe.  Not sure Mr Jones will agree, though.

England's top management team just got a whole lot uglier

Following the appointment of Brian Smith as attack coach, England's Frankenstein-featured manager, Martin Johnson, was no doubt beginning to feel a little intimidated in management meetings.  As he sat outlining his strategy, he could not help but be distracted by the Bond-villain (not Renard, obviously)  good looks of Smith and the cheeky-chappy visage of defence coach Mike Ford. 

Something had to be done, and Jonno has not been appointed to dither over decisions, so he immediately promoted Graham Rowntree, a man whose face resembles a chewed toffee with ears drawn on by a person in mid-seizure with a paint-soaked Alsatian.  Rowntree is still scrummaging coach, but will now sit at the top table - with a remit to snarl and growl like a bellicose badger, and occasionally eat the odd glass or two.