Why Lievremont is the Charlie Sheen of rugby

Nope, however you can have the american channel and ESPN Classics on some satellite offers. Let me clarify though, when talking of TV coverage, I was just menaing Top 14. Alll six 6 nations games as well as 3 Hcup games and 1 eurochallenge per round as also broadcasted on free TV. But the league make most of its money out of the Top 14 as European cups revenues are shared through all country participants. This also creates some frustrations as France and Ireland are generating the most revenues and thus feel a bit furstrated in the process. I won't even mention here the so called "reelection" of Lux as ERC chairman which was clearly a farce. Just like in France, or football, the business has just become way too important for responsibles to really care about the sport.

that is sad. You would be envious of the england market: 6N are free to air and bid by BBC ITV (free to air) has weekly premiership highlights right. ITV has the RWC Sky (pay tv) has H cup Sky and ESPN have some premiership games each Sky has the championship (pro d2 equivalent) then espn and tv5 show t14 games I think ESPN is the big change in england as it creates real pay tv competition for the top club rights packages. Obviously espn globally has the financial clout to compete. Also if you note that espn is rumoured to be starting to show college rugby in its home USA market and you look at the online presence in espn scrum it suggests they may be becoming more serious about rugby coverage as a mainstream offering. ps is there espn in france?

Well, as said, the pressure is put by the french league that only see the financial aspect of playing so much. They however just failed to have their TV contract valued as they still lack leverage (Canal + being the only channel currently interesting in broadcasting Top 14 rugby, and thus not having any competition on the market, did not see any reason to increase the amount of the contract), meaning increasing the number of games is their current only way to increase income... this is really sad.

I feel you Gavin, though I'm afraid you don't need to worry that much. French sides have an history of pulling out one miracle win per world cup, but also tend to fade out directly afterwards. In order to go to the finals, and potentially beat the AB, they would need to beat two teams. Probably England in quarter finals (which we never achieved to beat in a WM, outside of the 3rd place finals of 1999) and probably another team of the SH (Argentina being the only team outside the big five to ever qualify for a semi finals). Hope this will help you sleep tight :)

Agree, France has nothing to lose and a lot to gain by firing the coach. Your details on the number of games was interesting. Compare to NFL football in America where the players have just refused to play 18 games a year up from the current 16 because they believe it will damage their health. Yet those same players can still sign $100m contracts. Do rugby players really need to play 40 games a year to make a living.

I'd say the foreign issue is relevant because of proportion, not the amount of qualified players. IMO there are myriad factors at work: France adapted badly to professionalism - various English players have noted how laissez faire and amateur the training was/is; the Top 14 is, as you say, far too long; The Top 14 is also a relegation league, which means that sides tend to play risk-free rugby, hence we see big packs and big kickers; the length of the league also means big squads, which tends to mean foreign players, and far too many journeyman foreign players; the financial structure of the T14 means that it isn't especially competitive; increased marketing has led to more 'stars' being tempted over from the SH; the French national side doesn't have a great deal of time together (Although it does have amazing facilities); the French national coach is an idiot. I think Lievremont has made countless and huge errors, but he also has a very faulty structure to work with, but still a structure that has developed good enough players to attain success in the past. When France beat NZ in NZ the other season Henry credited the toughness of the French league, and when Lievremont loses he blames the length of the French league. I'd take his claims more seriously had he moaned about the T14 during his successful periods, as Woodward used to do when winning with England.

hmmm i'm suspicious that the foreign player angle is a red herring. NZ only have 5 SuperRugby sides, so even with foreigners the T14 must expose a similar number of players to top level competition? I think the problem is the longevity of the t14. It is the most relentless competition in world rugby with internationals playing club games in between test matches. I wonder if the players struggle to 'get up' physically and more importantly mentally when they have played so much rugby prior to the 6N.

Interesting to hear a French perspective. From a NZ perspective all this does is give me a recurring nightmare in which France loses to the ABs by 40 points in Pool A and then beats us in the final. Beware an out of form French rugby side!

I'm pretty sure that many coaches could do better with the core squad that Lievremont has had at his disposal. To suggest that he is in no way to blame for the disaster that is the French Test side is ludicrous.

As usual, whenever the walk get tough, the French ask for a revolution. Unfortunately it's only justice since France has a habit of ignoring problem until it makes a whole system implode. This is especially true in Rugby were old players and products of the amateur era are now running a business they do not understand. I would not agree with Adrien telling the rugby is facing a financial crisis yet, as the DNCAG is a gate keeper for this. We've seen how it impacted football as it was first implemented (sending a few clubs, including some historic division 1 residents in inferior division in the process) and it's now stabilized. The amount of foreigner is more of an issue. Even though quota of French players and players coming out of the clubs rugby schools have been implemented, this is not going to solve anything. The true problem of French rugby is the lack of cooperation between the league and the federation. The League is trying to promote its own product, the top 14, failing to understand that the national team used to be the flagship getting people interested in rugby in the first place before following clubs. This resulted in an amount of fixtures unmatched in the rest of the world. 14 Teams means 26 games per in the regular season only. Then playoffs going adding 2 to 3 games depending of ranking. Meaning a championship team will have played 28 to 29 games in the local competition only (4 more than in England although they also have a cup, 10 more than super rugby). Add to this European fixtures (only pools already accounts to 6 games, 9 if you go all the way to the final) which almost all French teams are taking part to (the 7 top teams play H-cup, whereas the following 5 and the 2 newcomers play challenge). That means all the teams of the top 14 will have played at least 32 games by the end of the season (not counting French or European playoffs). As an example Toulouse last year played 36 games altogether. No wonder then that French teams commonly tank European games, especially when they started badly or face trouble in the local championship (keep in mind this not a league system and relegation awaits the last 2 of the Top 14) There's also international rugby. On a normal year that's 5 six nations games, and 3-4 games for each tour (so between 11 and 13 additional games a year). While it's common practice to send a "B" team during summer tour (as the top 14 finals played out only days before, thus keeping out most of the players of both finalist) it still means international would have to play at least 40 even more if coming from a top team with good results in all competition in which case it would go as far as 50, in theory at least cause since the season is not long enough, some championship games are played during international tests period or European weekends. This force French clubs to increase the rosters size, up to 40 players for big teams while keeping quality and thus invite teams to recruits foreign talents. Players thus lost interest in some games, especially when any winning chance as been slimmed down in a competition, trying hard not be injured as they have to be ready every week for yet another big game, with no time to rest. What French rugby needs is a collaboration of federation and League to reduce the number of games (and / or teams) and reorganize the schedules so that players can play every match and still be fully available for the national team. The top 50 players of the championship should have contract with the federation, instead of club in order to avoid any conflict of interest and insure a pool of talent is at the national team availability. Only the French Rugby league is only interested in the top 14 and even included two more games last year, mostly for financial purpose (although it does keep the whole thing more interesting as more places are available for playoff qualification). This would be the ideal scenario, however in the short terms, if we want to avoid embarrassing ourselves in the World cup this fall, there also are quick fixes. 1. Fire Lievremont. He's been tuned out by his players anyway, the Italy game shows it. Sure he was right saying that what we saw did not correspond to whatever speech he's be giving before the game, however it shows a lack of leadership and communication skills. No player will admit it because they would then end up in the coach doghouse and lose any chance to fly to New Zealand. However they will not achieve their best with a coach they don't believe in, fear public comments or exclusion from and who will not be back after the world cup anyway.... (although it's a bit farfetched, I do agree Domenech was the typical example of that, albeit probably the worst case scenario as well) Hiring a new coach would loosen the player reduce pressure of failing in the world cup while keeping the after world cup into perspective. Lievermont said himself France is back to square one, so if we have to start again, let's do it entirely and avoid adding yet another band on a wooden leg. 2. Actually select the best players available Malzieu (2nd best try scorer of the top 14), Picamoles, Ouedraogo, Fritz, Dupuys are all head cases, but temperament is part of great teams. I'm sure any coach would have trouble containing players such O'driscoll, Shane Williams, Shalk Burgers or Martin Johnson, but those are the players that keep teams from quitting and insure the right level of engagement. Lievremont should now it, he was that kind of player himself. he instead selected a bunch of nice guys that fear and respect him. Problem is, as soon as the game is sliding the wrong way, there is no one able to lead the revolt and result in a team lacking, pride, character, swagger and reaction ability. Also while inserting young guns is a good way to keep the team fresh and spirited, it would be nice to pick players that already have some big game experience (from successful TOP 14 or Hcup team instead of bottom feeders Brives and Bayonne) and proved they could play at his level (ex: Andreu vs Huget) 3. Play the players at their club positions Players already have so few time to play together, avoid making them learn a new position in the process. Traille is neither a 10 nor a 15, Clerc although able to switch if needed, plays on the right wing. Palisson is currently playing fullback in Brives and Medard is a winger in Toulouse. Why invert this in selection? This just keep adding confusion to players who already struggle to understand the system. Also while having some flexibility with player that can play different position is a good thing, specialists are also required. Jacks of all trades are often masters of none and while this might help of the bench, it decreases the talent if starting. 4. Stop the tinkering. Chose a side and let them play. Lievremont hasn't kept a single backline for two straight games. No wonder that players do not show creativity as they have to learn every single game how to play together. The whole selction system lack coherence as Lievremont can sack some player for a single mistake (Poiterenaud or Medard) while showing blind trust to others who also fail to show merits on consitant basis (Huget, Trin Dhuc...). France is currently only respected for its pack, and it is not a coincidence that forwards have not have nearly the same turnover ratio) Ok it was a long read, sorry for the big posting but I'm getting tired of reading all and everything on forum while no deep analysis has been done?. This might still be too naive or incomplete, those are the main points I wanted to make.

and maybe i could avoid to say maybe 3 times in the same sentence, maybe.

I have no problem with what you said, i won't go away lol it's an interesting debate and maybe i tend to be to passionated maybe, so maybe i've been too far away when i talked about dignity. As you mentioned, he said the players were cowards and traitors, and above all he said they played really bad and showed a lack of courage.But let's be honest a second...wasn't he right??? Seriously??? Is he to blame because he only said the truth ? He said publicly what any other coach would say in the dressing room. He tried to touch the ego of the players. Please make an analysis of the game without the eye of a fan. Wasn't it horrible to watch? (from both side though but let's only focus on the french side). Did you honnestly think the players gave all they had to win the game? Even in the last seconds of the game, they did not even try to shot a field goal. It's a professional fault. And Chabal...don't you think Lievrement is not the only one to decide who will play and who won't? He obviously have pressions from a lot of influencial people because of the marketing contracts on Chabal. Everyone know that Chabal is absolutely crap, this guy is obviously not playing because of his abilities and skills. I read a few of the internauts comments on LEQUIPE.FR and the level was awfull. I really was sad to see how stupid can be poeple's analysis and comments. But that's the way it goes when you have a large publi Oh and a last thing for the players... maybe it's time to learn how to offload the ball.

Tell me about dignity, Adrien 2166. Did Lievremont have it when he railed against his team and called them cowards? I don't think so. Was French rugby's financial trouble the reason why he called them traitors? I don't think so. I remember the old days, too. And they don't include a megalomaniac who is so sure he's right that he chooses to play Chabal at 8 yet again. For 55 minutes anyway. When you lose, because of the system or not, you never, never publically accuse your team of being wimps. I welcome your comments on this forum because we have few posters interested in French rugby, so don't go away. Just get it right next time. JON - next week, let's have your comments on the Welsh game.

Yes you made a good point, this is another problem. And again Lievrement has nothing to do with the style of play of the Top14 and the way the refs are doing their job.

The problem is the T14. Partly it's the foreign players crowding out local talent, partly it's the refusal of the clubs to work with the FFR. But the real problem si the style of play in the T14. Refs allow a ridiculous amount of cheating at the breakdown, the ball is kicked away far too much, there is not enough focus on running rugby, and too much on position and set pieces. This is not the formula needed to stand up to the tope teams (Australia, New Zealand, South Africa).

Lievrement has nothing to do with the defeat agaisnt italy, or even against england or australia. Let's face it, rugby is in crisis and is going to have serious trouble in the future here. I think crowds and TV ratings are still pretty good, but the crisis is a financial one. How many clubs have been bankrupt in the last few years? How many clubs are or will soon be bankrupt? A lot. French rugby was not well prepared for the professional era and a lot of clubs have lived above their means means in order to be competititve on the player market with the rich clubs based in the big cities, and these club got into debt and are soon going to bankrupt. It's the case of Perpignan, Bayonne, Bourgoin (which filed a bankruptcy statement recently), Stade Français...well others come to my mind but i'm not 100% aware of their financial situation. Consequently a lot of top 14 rosters were composed of overseas players who prevent french young players from playing first grade and as a result after a few years of professional era, it weakened the level of the national team because youngsters didn't turn into good players and so now we have an old team. Lievrement has nothing to do with the total failure of modern french rugby. So don't blame him please, i'm sick of this, please have a bit of dignity, we are not soccer to bash a poor man victim of the system. Even himself admitted they were not the players to make a good team in France. And mind you, i'm sure he is not fired because there's no one else who wants to take his job. All the specialists know the situation and no one will want to take his job. I remember that game against the blacks back in 99, those were the days...