Non Gamstop CasinoMejores Casino OnlineGambling Sites Not On GamstopSlots Not On GamstopSites Not On Gamstop

Sponsor: Canterbury USA

Sponsor: Nike Rugby Camps

Saturday, August 17, 2013

U.S. In Big Hole After Losing To Canada


The U.S. finds itself in an 18 point hole heading into next week's penultimate World Cup qualifying showdown with Canada after losing 27-9 in Charleston, South Carolina. It was disaster straight from the start for the Americans as Phil Mack scored thirty seconds into the match. The U.S. then continued to hurt themselves with silly mistakes and defensive errors. Canada were not perfect on the night but the U.S. allowed them to play most of the match in U.S. territory and allowed their bigger threats to come up big. Credit to Canada for coming in with a strong game plan. They now look all but certain to walk away as the Americas 1 seed at the World Cup.

Take the jump to read more.
As was mentioned, Canada took the lead only thirty second into the match thanks to Man of the Match Phil Match. Shortly after the kickoff DTH van der Merwe saved the ball from going into touch where it then found Mack's hands. Mack, realizing that no one was home for the U.S., chipped the ball over the top, recovered it, and then pounced in for the early try. Referee Leighton Hodges checked with the TMO to ensure everything was good and once the TMO came back with nothing Canada was on the board. James Pritchard then stepped up to hit the conversion and give Canada a 7-0 lead only seconds in.

The Eagles had an opportunity to respond a few minutes later when Canada was hit with being offside, but the long kick from Chris Wyles was no good. When it was Canada's turn to kick after the U.S. was penalized for coming in from the side a few minutes later Pritchard made no mistake and put Canada up 10-0. Wyles would then have another attempt after Jebb Sinclair was hit with a high tackle but that kick also went missing.

Canada looked to increase their lead even further a few minutes later. Utilizing a set play Matt Evans tore through the U.S. defense before eventually passing to Mack, who looked to have his second of the day. However, upon review with the TMO it was ruled that a Canadian player obstructed Scott LaValla from making a tackle and the try was called back.

Things would settle down a bit before halftime with Canada the more aggressive of the two sides. Throughout the first half they played almost exclusively in the U.S. end.  The U.S. had the slight majority of the possession in the first half but all of that was spent trying to clear the danger. The problem was that they weren't very successful at doing so. Time and again kicks gifted excellent field position to Canada. The Canadians would take advantage of that possession one more time before halftime after Shawn Pittman was ruled to have interfered with the scrumhalf at the back of a ruck. Pritchard hit his second penalty of the match to give Canada a 13-0 lead at halftime.

The second half would start out well for the U.S. as Chris Wyles finally got the Eagles on the board only two minutes into the half. Coming out aggressive the U.S. were rewarded when Canada was penalized in the scrum. Wyles stepped up to hit the kick and pull the U.S. within 10. The scrum was actually one of the few bright spots for the U.S. on the day. The new rules seemed to help the U.S. and put Canada on their heels. It's an area that the U.S. may be able to take advantage of next week.

Wyles's kick was all the U.S. would get for awhile as the breaks continued to go Canada's way. After another Petri box kick Eric Fry missed a tackle on van der Merwe, allowing him to race down to the 5 meter line. From there Canada simply executed a few pick and rolls before finding fly-half Harry Jones for the try. Pritchard nailed the easy conversion to put Canada up 20-6.

The U.S. would get three points back a little later thanks to another Wyles penalty but it was all Canada. van der Merwe got Canada's third try of the match off a great set piece. It was just a simple movement through the middle of the field that caught the U.S. backs napping. Mack was once again at the center of the action. Pritchard's conversion made it 27-6 to Canada.

With the game now firmly out of reach Eagles head coach Mike Tolkin went to his bench and made a flurry of substitutions. Phil Thiel, Folau Niua, Zach Fenoglio, Robbie Shaw, Cam Dolan, and Titi Lamositele all came on a provided energy for the Americans. For Niua and Lamositele it was their first caps for the U.S. and for Lamositele it sets a new age record for the youngest Eagle. Roland Suniula and Brian Doyle came on in the first half for the injured Seamus Kelly and Peter Dahl.

With the new substitutes on the field the Eagles finally had energy. Shaw and Niua in particular made an impact and did a good job pushing the U.S. forward. The best offensive movement of the game for the U.S. came late in the match as Niua made one of the same darting runs we are accustomed to seeing in 7's. Still, it was all for naught until Wyles stepped up to hit another penalty late in the match. Final score, Canada 27-9 U.S.A.

Overall it was an extremely disappointing match for the Americans. The U.S. was far too undisciplined and while Canada only hit two penalties from the U.S. errors it did gift Canada plenty of field possession and momentum. One of the most disappointing aspects of the match for the U.S. was the complete lack of offense. The U.S. forwards couldn't get the ball going forward and the U.S. weapons in the backs--Blaine Scully, Wyles, and Taku Ngwenya--hardly saw the ball. When a player like Ngwenya did see the ball it was deep down field on a kick. Playmaking was lacking just as it has all summer. There were a few bright spots. The scrum was decent and the substitutes that did come on in the second half were strong, but it wasn't enough.

All credit should go to Canada for this win. They came in with a very strong game plan and executed it to perfect. The early try put the U.S. on edge and Canada did a good job of taking advantage of it. All they wanted from the match was a cushion to take to Toronto and they got more than they could have asked for. Players like Mack, Aaron Carpenter, and van der Merwe were great on the day.

If the U.S. is going to overturn the deficit next week it is going to take a near perfect match. The veterans on the team need to step up and take charge of the squad. It can't just be talking outside the pitch it needs to be a step up on the pitch. Even if the U.S. play better next week it's going to take a lot to overcome an 18 point deficit.

The second leg of the series is planned for next Saturday at BMO Field in Toronto. Kickoff is scheduled for 4:00 p.m. et/1:00 p.m. pt.

Canada 27

Tries: Mack, Jones, van der Merwe
Conversions: Pritchard (3)
Penalties: Pritchard (2)

U.S.A. 9

Penalties: Wyles (3)

What do you make of the Eagles performance. Share in the comments.

33 comments:

  1. It's a relief. Maybe now USA Rugby will start anew with young players who have grown up in the United States playing rugby instead of the same tired choke artists.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That would be the SMART thing to do.

      Delete
  2. First off don't use a word in a piece unless you know what it means.

    "...heading into next week's penultimate World Cup qualifying showdown..."

    penultimate

    — adj
    1. next to the last

    — n
    2. anything that is next to the last, esp a penult

    Neither of these two RWC Qualifier games would be the "penultimate" game because there was only 2 games. A first one and a last one.

    Regarding the Eagles. Tolkin is a failure and the players know it. He needs to go. Clever is past his sell by date and should only be used as an impact player off the bench. USA Rugby should fire Tolkin after next week, which most likely will be another loss to Canada, and give the position to Dan Payne who should have the respect of the players being a former Eagle with RWC experience.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm agree about Tolkin. He's a complete failure. The Eagles need a international quality coach not an home grown expert. USA still don't have enough domestic talented players to look for a domestic expert. Bring on Martin Johnson !

      Delete
  3. Terrible stuff from the halfbacks. Count me in the fire Tolkin camp if things don't look substantially better in Toronto.

    One thing Tolkin has consistently done is waste development opportunities for players. He brought in a 35 year old Mose Timoteo for absolutely no reason last year and then also wasted a development opportunity on Troy Hall against Canada in May. I just don't see much of a vision being instilled and the gameplan today, whatever it was, was executed worse than just about any I've ever seen. Among the most frustrating things today was that we weren't comprehensively outplayed man for man, just at the key positions in the halfbacks. Hell, that was even the best scrum performance we've had in years. But a piss poor gameplan basically cost us this game and this series.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree about Tolkin. He is not the right fit for the job, however, I am not sure who would be. You are essentially stuck with this lot until other players mature. Not enough high quality matches means you are stuck with the people that are "reliable."

    I have said for a long time, and agree with others that a youth movement is necessary for USA Rugby to be successful moving forward. Blooding players early means they have that high level of experience early and can acclimate to that level of play.

    At this point though, I would be happy to see some tires scored. They need to loosen up and make something happen...I could say so much more, but at this point it is repetitive.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Something stinks in USA Rugby.

    The same players that always underperform, the same coach who has taken a really good tier 2 team and made them almost a laughing stock. The same game plan of get through a couple phases and then kick that NEVER works. Sound familiar? If you guessed "insanity" then you would win the vat of fish balls and lizard testicles.

    Tolkin needs to go. Like .... MONTHS ago! Going back to June of 2012, the Eagles are 3-9, have been owned by Canada 3 times in a row, went winless in the Pacific Nations Cup, and only won against 3 nobody with no real talent teams.

    he always picks the same players, and they always underperform like there is no tomorrow. he can not come up with a successful game plan to save his life. he can't get the players on the field to execute what little plan he DOES have. Tolkin needs to go. I don't know if the above mentioned Dan Payne will be a good choice or not. But let's face it. He can HARDLY get any worse. We need new coaches, and several players need to no longer be wearing an Eagles Jersey.

    We have the local coaching that knows how to win, and will aggressively do what needs to be done to win. We have the talent out the yin yang! Our club teams compete VERY well over seas. Look at USA Rugby South. The won all ove their games in the NACRA Tourney a few months ago. We have the talent, and we have the coaches. We are just not using them for some reason.

    Unfortunately I think despite all this, the Eagles will beat Uruguay for the Americas 2 spot and get in to an easier pool so they can win a couple games (maybe) and management will not look to change what is obvious to everybody is the problem.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Try Niua at 10 in Toronto. We've seen enough of L'Estrange to just admit at this point he's not an international-level fly half, and Niua albeit in limited minutes when the game result was not in question did more than L'Estrange did. It's not like we're winning the game next weekend by 19 or more points, so what's it hurt to see what we have in Niua as opposed to what is probably going to be another bad performance from L'Estrange and then we have three months waiting for the next international.

    Maybe see this backline:

    9-Petri (Petri's been solid at scrum half long enough for us, let's not be kneejerk here)
    10-Niua
    11-Ngwenya (don't run into contact in the middle of the field, you're superfast, so use it, RUN FOR CORNERS!)
    12-A. Suniula (well, who else is there?)
    13-Kelly is a youth movement pick, if he's still injured, R. Suniula I guess here (again, who else is there?)
    14-Hume if he's healthy, if not Scully
    15-Wyles (if you want Scully on the field and not Kelly or R. Suniula, you could stick one of Wyles or Scully at 13 and the other is fullback)

    New guys for the center positions have to be in the camps leading up to the November tests.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are actually a lot of quality players at the college level that could get a chance that the centers, Seki Kofe for example. It would be nice to get Thretton Polamo back in there.

      Delete
    2. There's too big a gap between college rugby and international XVs rugby.

      Even if a guy played for Cal like Kelly did, he had maybe 5 to 6 competitive rugby XVs matches a year at Cal? He was never really challenged outside of a few games because so many of the teams Cal plays don't give them a competitive match, so Kelly is not sharpening his game as a center against stiffs. College rugby's problem is it has zero depth beneath the quality teams to the point that it is a detriment to our player development. The same issue exists to an extent in senior club rugby, but senior club rugby is far more competitive than college rugby. And there's nothing that can be done about it to make college rugby better until rugby becomes more popular in this country, more schools take the sport seriously, and the best rugby schools choose to play one another instead of some other school whose rugby team is a joke just because they share the same conference in football.

      Scully made the jump but he was a wing, and he's been #23 on Eagle rosters most of the time it seems. DTH van der Merwe if he were at center tonight would've eaten Seamus Kelly for lunch, as would most international centers.

      Delete
    3. Although I agree on the college front, sometimes you have to look past the body of work to spot talent that is capable. Paul Emerick played for Northern Iowa and made the jump to international level.

      As an HS All Star coach, I saw Titi from the time he was a U17 and you can tell that some players are just built differently.

      Many of the Cal players are great, but they are also products of their system. I that vain, it can be hard to tell if the player looks that great individually or because of the structure they play in.

      Overall, America needs to dump all its money into the youth market and allow kids to play rugby for dimes on the dollar. Draw in athletes early and build from the ground up.

      Delete
    4. Based on last night, what I'd like to see for Toronto. I don't think we can make up 19 points, but we need to give it a chance.

      1. Lamositele
      2. Biller
      3. Thiel/Wallace
      4. Stanfil
      5. LaValla (C)
      6. Clever
      7. Dolan
      8. Manoa
      9. Shaw/Davies (for Int'l rugby, Petri's decision-making is too slow & his delivery takes too much time).
      10. Niua/Holder (not LeStrange, this experiment is over).
      11. Zee (agreed about the corners, but Canada just didn't allow that space to him.)
      12. A. Suniula
      13. R. Suniula
      14. Scully (Hume is injured and, word is, moving to London for a new career at the end of August)
      15. Wyles

      You are both correct, looking to the college game for replacements will be problematic until 30-40 universities moved their rugby teams out of club sports and into their Athletic Departments. Even then, there will be about a 4-5 year period of instability before the unis develop a formula to create quality teams. Stanford & PennSt seem to be going through these periods, right now. PennSt would be a bit further ahead of the curve if not for the off-gridiron debacle in their AthDept. So, we are likely 10 years away from this dream.

      Dean Gericke is a possible at OC. Miles Craigwell hasn't played the position, but could given his much-improved defense, passing, and decision-making - displayed as of late.

      Hopefully, Brian Guillen (OC/Wing) and Chris Saint (SH) obtain some meaningful minutes playing in the Southern Hemisphere through 2014 and can translate themselves to the next level.

      Tolkin said it at the end of June, "We lack depth."

      This weekend, we saw that we have gained MUCH depth in 7s rugby. SFGG & NRODA in London showed that we can play with the rest of the world. Rugbytown/Serevi 7s displayed about 20-30 athletes who have the ability to make it at OTC/CV. This is good, because somewhere between 4-7 of the Eagles 7s players from 2012-2013 will not be in Chula Vista for this coming season for reasons other than injury (I haven't even counted those players).

      There are thousands of youth playing rugby in the US today. A great deal of money has been sunk into making that happen over the last 15 years and we are beginning to see the results. It is not enough to propel our men's XVs team firmly into Tier 1.

      What is needed to do that?

      1. Better all-around coaching. This is coming. It was a realized need a few years ago and the coaching certifications clinics being held this year are part of the process. But coaches need to be developed and this takes time, experience, and tough competition.
      2. The ODAs have done well for 7s (and will do better). A similar setup is needed for men's XVs. The women's NT have done it on a smaller scale and are already experiencing the benefits.
      3. Money. USA Rugby fails to realize that they have a product to sell. Sell the broadcast rights for a contracted amount plus percent of profits. Partner with the broadcaster to properly market the show and use the money to run USA Rugby AND create winning rugby teams at every level.
      4. A professional rugby competition. It doesn't matter HOW it comes about as long as it has staying power, makes money, and puts rugby in front of the American sports fan on a more regular basis than international matches.

      Delete
    5. Spoken like a true Tolkin ButtBoy and Clever FanBoy. Pathetic.

      Delete
  7. I like how all these "Tolkin has to go" comments pop up, but when Tom Clayman was saying it weeks ago the board attacked him.

    USA Rugby Fans = Village Idiots of World Rugby

    Can't wait for that Cole Clown to come to Tolkin's defense.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "USA Rugby Fans = Village Idiots of World Rugby"

      http://forum.planet-rugby.com

      you should go here and talk to the Brits and Irish more :D

      Delete
    2. Use your name, then talk their "Unknown"...

      Delete
  8. "Unknown's" personality issues aside, USA Rugby fans are not the village idiots of the rugby world. I am new to these boards, but in all honesty, I haven't heard or seen a single comment that was NOT for getting rid of Tolkin. Perhaps back in the day, there was a faction that were willing to give him the chance to build something and not expecting instant results. I don't know. But honestly, that comment was just straight up douchebaggery at its most base.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Much followup journalism is in order.
    What players were available and not selected is a question to be asked. We have how many #9's with test level experience exactly? Match fit and ready to play? We got what we got, I dont see that as a Tolkin issue at this time.

    'We lack depth' comments speaks volumes. This coach came one PK from beating Ireland in a match where all agreed the ref was borderline.

    Yes, we need a brilliant international level coach - if you were successful at international level, would you take the job at USA? E.g. no money, handful of players, they work for peanuts too, lots of critics, whats the upside? Or you can be an assistant ball boy and live in the South of france for a similar wage....

    Lots of suggestions about Youth Movement, develop domestic game, etc. Canada is smaller than California population wise. Australia is the size of NY State. Our best athletes play money sports, period. How does Canada use their tiny resources so well to develop their talent to what is obviously a higher standard? They face the same issues of geography and money. @GRantCole what is their per player expenditure (total budget/# of players?)?

    Pre kickoff I was pretty pumped to think about the quality of players at Rugbytown 7s, World 7's, and Eagles all playing at once. We have a growing number of great athletes. But lack a means of developing an actual team. But from what I saw, a US team playing in RWC is a waste of money at this point. Not competitive even in rows 8-16 of the world. Lets skip it and pour the money into the Olympic movement. If we can qualify, and medal, or even compete for a medal, we'll have kids watching Rugby on Prime Time and Katie bar the door...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Jon,
      We can probably obtain the Canadian records of per player expenditure, easily. Obtaining the same from USA Rugby is like pulling blood from a turnip, but I will give it a try. I doubt they have this information themselves. I doubt it is even a metric that's considered important there.

      It will be unfortunate, but I fear you are correct about 7s.

      Delete
    2. As a high school coach for a single-school team in Southern California I can say four important things that address many of the things mentioned in this string:
      1. The players who grow up playing rugby are years ahead of even the best football athletes who are newcomers to the game. This is a fact that appears to fly in the face of USA Rugby's approach to developing the Eagles.
      2. High school (not club) rugby is booming in SoCal, where this season there will be 30+ high school rugby clubs, many on campus under the auspices of their schools athletic directors, and many fielding both varsities and junior varsities. This is the model that will develop rugby in the U.S.
      3. USA Rugby only pays lip service to growing rugby in the high schools. If it were to happen that high school rugby becomes officially sanctioned by state high school organizations, it would mean that USA Rugby would lose a significant and rapidly growing revenue stream.
      4. USA Rugby and the State Based Organization structure, which also depends on high school rugby's revenue stream, are significant hindrances to the development of rugby in the United States.

      Delete
    3. @Makapuu I too coach rugby, but I coach a high school club. The major hurdle I see in the wide creation of single school teams is the number of coaches available to run these programs. The state of California is way ahead of the curve when it comes to rugby.

      I think the money should go into youth development I.e. little kids 5-12 years old.

      Delete
    4. I agree with developing youth between ages 5 and 14. But once high school rugby is sanctioned by state high school federations, USA Rugby should be out of the picture. Coaches training, background checks, referee training and insurance are already handled by individual school districts for all high school sports. USA Track and USA wrestling are nowhere to be seen on high school campuses, for example. The $30 per player that currently goes to USA Rugby in return for insurance and little more that is tangible will go to paying high school rugby coaches. Our high school team already has college players, one of whom majors in education, coming back to coach. That combination, salaried coaches and returning players, will take care of the coaching problem you mention. It is a model that is supported by the school district for obvious reasons. It is the same model used in all other high school sports. Then those players go on to college, where Olympic sports are well-supported. It's faster, surer and cleaner than the club model because it is the U.S. sports development model most recognized by Americans.

      Delete
    5. Makapuu, if the rumors are true, you SoCal Youth Rugby folks have already written USA Rugby out of your picture. Kudos. Dominoes need to be kicked over.

      Dues are not a revenue stream.

      Delete
    6. If that is true, please do tell regarding SoCal going without USA Rugby...

      Delete
    7. From my understanding, the rumors of SoCal potentially departing, along with a few others, from USAR has more to do with insurance costs from the CIPP than CIF ( the California HSAA)and not a departure from the SRO. In fact all states are having issues with the HSAA and it is primarily due to funding. There are also title 9 issues, we have been attempting to work within our own state and they will not even speak to us until the number of girls varsity level teams. The primary issue is money. If a the HSAA accepts and promotes Rugby as a school supported sport, the school will have to hire and pay a coach. Those funds, especially for schools in funding trouble, will need to come from the general budget. That also means most rugby coaches will also need to be educators. It also means rugby will be limited to a very particular season, say spring. No Summer 7s, not fall rugby, not tours, nothing because this falls outside of the school sanctioning. After working with our states HSAA, there is a better chance of the US winning the 2015 world cup than rugby 15s ever getting into a varsity sport level sanctioned by a HSAA.

      That said, there are pathways to improve the quality of coaching and player development as extracurricular clubs ( like chess). We have seen soccer do it incredibly well with paid coaches for the premier leagues. We have a lot to learn from them. Need the money? It won't come from teh taxpayers but from the players who have done well giving back.

      Delete
    8. One more thing, my cousin pays $700 a season for his kid top play on a D2 soccer league. Those coaches are paid and many of those kids go on to University, especially if they make the premier. There is your funding mechanism. Will you eliminate some kids? Yes, you will but that is why you have rec league teams as well. It has to be a combination of extracurricular school teams, premier leagues, and rec leagues. Oh yeah, the US has to win a few to excite the kids too.

      Delete
    9. Personal pride is now probably the #1 reason Rugby Canada is dominating the USA Eagles in 15's (and 7's in a way). To be 'the' team that loses to the Eagles would not only be looked upon as weak, but letting down the other winning squads that have come beforehand and beaten the Eagles... It seems the smaller player #'s in Canada is actually making for more competition for national team positions, the teams overall are tighter then US squads which look to change around quite a bit - it comes down to pride, desire, heart & teamwork. Until the USA figures out how to produce these intangibles, it's in for a long losing run vs the Maple Leafs.

      Delete
  10. Guidestar.org contains all records for all Non profits. Registration is free. Read IRS Form 990 it has the total dollars, membership fees, grants, etc. Perhaps you could send them a copy, and ask for input from the CFO, as well as a credible unrelated non profit consultant.

    this may cost a couple bucks but every player coach ref etc in the usa will read it.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Saracens fan in England watching with interest. From the outside, it seems USA Rugby needs to decide once and for all which form of the game (7/15) it cares about more and throw everything they have at it. Saw Blaine Scully playing for Leicester in the Premiership 7s the other day and he looks capable at professional level. Combined with Wylesy and Ngwenya, that's a class back three. They just need a solid distributing 10 who knows how to utilise them. From what I saw of last night (nightmare trying to find a way to watch), the forwards have the bulk to get over the gainline, it was just distribution and handling after a few phases that let USA down.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it is quite evident where USA Rugby has decided to throw their support and $ to. And it is the 7s, because of the inclusion in the Olympics. Let's not forget, the Eagles are based at the US Olympic training complex in Colorado. That is the main goal they seem to be headed towards. I honestly see no real intent to do anything to really improve the 15s side of things at all. At least not for the men anyway. And I think that is sad, because a really strongly supported, and developed men's 15s structure (from youth up to the Eagles) could develop in to a pro union, and that would bring in over time just ridiculous amounts of money.

      Delete
    2. thought they were based in Chula Vista? or is that only women?

      Your thoughts that XVs could bring in a lot of money are not borne out by Arena Football, Canadian football, D2 football, or other types of contact sports playing in big expensive stadiums. Pro lacrosse, even in hotbed areas, is not a full time job. Nor minor leauge basseball, pro soccer maybe kinda sorta in areas with large latin communities.

      Rugby would need outside help to make it big, such as legalized gambling on 7's. Not that I think the product is bad, but it is a crowded market for sports entertainment and we have years to go before players build any fanbase at all. USA v Canada attendance looked really weak anyone have #'s?

      Delete
    3. Attendance is recorded as 5,258 in a stadium that seats 5,100.

      Delete

Digital favorites