France coach Philippe Saint-André has laughed off criticism of his selections by former England boss Sir Clive Woodward.
Saint-André, who moved last Sunday to dispel rumours that he could resign because of the poor campaign that has seen les Bleus left win-less in four matches, has kept faith with the half-back pairing of Morgan Parra and under-fire Frédéric Michalak for Saturday's crunch Six Nations clash against Scotland.
Saint-André took aim at England's 2003 World Cup-winning coach, who had criticised him for staying loyal to Michalak, who was France's first choice at the 2003 World Cup and had a dreadful game in the semi-final which the French lost to England.
"For the past four or five years our friend Clive Woodward has been involved in athletics," said Saint-André , who cut his teeth as a coach with Gloucester during the Woodward era.
"He is no longer involved in rugby.
"I know Clive well. I respect his work and I worked with him when I was in England. He knows also that a national coach is a difficult job, that one has to take risks, to innovate, to find and put together a new squad in order to try and be better in the future.
"When he began his job he left for Australia with a very young squad, and they lost by between 70-80 points (76-0 in June 1998).
"He didn't win many matches at the beginning, but he believed in his players and they were world champions in 2003.
"As for his criticism of Frédéric Michalak he probably does not know that 80 percent of the fly-halves in the Top 14 are foreigners.
PSA has made however made three changes to his team with South African born flanker Antonie Claassen, new Caledonia-born lock Sebastien Vahaamahina and Toulon centre Mathieu Bastareaud coming into the starting XV.
Vahaamahina and Claassen, who will be winning their third caps, were given the nod by Saint-André because of the dreadful weather forecast for Saturday.
"They are predicting a lot of rain for Saturday thus we preferred to add the extra power of Sebastien Vahaamahina and Antonie Claassen," said Saint-André .
A decision on the participation of replacement centre Florian Fritz, who has a for infection and has not been able to train, will be taken on Friday.
Comments
KiwiRooster says...
Most uninformed people (like Clive Woodward) tend to forget that Fred Michalak played back to back Super 15, Top 14 and Heineken Cup, not mentionning the november test series and this 6 Nations. Michalak way passed the 45 games borderline. I don't know how many of you smart-arse supporters ever played 45 rugby games without a pause, but you would not know because you would be six feet under for trying.
The last player trying to achieve such a feat was Dan Carter when moving from the Crusaders to USAP Perpignan. Well, he did not actually played more than a game or two in France given that he suffered a fatigue fracture that kept him out of rugby for several months. Not a smart move that was.
Michalak admitted himself to be out of form added to the fact he lost a few pounds since returning to French rugby. Fatigue plus poor club preparation is ALWAYS going to be a recipe for disaster. There you go.
Michalak for me is France # 1 fly-half until PSA gives a chance to Wisniewski or Lopezhat is. There is no doubt in my mind an in form Michalak will always be head and shoulder above Trinh-Duc. Technically speaking these two are like night and day.
PSA made many mistakes in this tournament, Michalak at 10 is not one of them. Michalak not being rested by club and country is one.
Michalak has been France best chance at number 10 so far. Trinh-Duc had 4 years to prove himself and what do you remember him for? So get over it, and most of all get behind your team you slizy bunch of French ingrates...
Posted 19:14 16th March 2013
jamesliveinhope says...
Didn't the French recently get to RWC with a scrum half at 10?
Look, I'm not sticking up for PSA and I thibk the decision to keep playing Michalak at 10 feels wrong.
But the guy appears to have a plan and is sticking to it and the French have always had a funny attitude to 10s.,
Posted 22:26 15th March 2013
rugby_rockstar says...
to be fair, I was a rather pleased England Fan when Saint-Andre got tyhe job, but that reaction was chiefly based on the style of play employed by PSA when coaching Gloucetser, Sale and Toulon. Namely 10 man rugby with liitle or mo flair. I couldn;t think of a worse pick for the traditionally exciting french team.
Then he goes and picked maverick ten Michalac... go figure!?! its weird, he's getting it in the neck for the exact opposite reason than I expected.
Ah well, we still beat 'em and that's what counts.
Posted 14:06 15th March 2013
JamieTheProp says...
I guess the difference is SCW has won everything there is to win in international rugby and PSA hasn't.
So I know who's words carry the most clout.
Posted 12:37 15th March 2013
Davoust says...
Almost random - maybe they are involved in snooker
Austin Healey: "If Michilak is an international 10 I might come out of retirement"
Will Carling: "A very basic observation, isn't Parra a more reliable kicker than Michalak? Strange thinking within French camp"
Posted 08:37 15th March 2013
Davoust says...
mlbp > You didn't get the point.
"80 percent of the fly-halves in the Top 14 are foreigners" - that's a lie and the list shows it
You have to choose the in form man, as Lancaster does for England. That's why he is the coach and not us. Michalak plays 9 and there are fly halfs better than him.
"He is no longer involved in rugby." - that's a rude thing to say about one of the few coaches that really won IT, but it's true that the article title is for sensationalism
Posted 08:32 15th March 2013
jamesliveinhope says...
Fair play PSA (although, "HIts Back" is a little sensationalised).
I actually agree with Woodward about Michalak and its not just SCW making the remarks but you have to accept that Trinh Duc is nothing more that competent and after that you have no-one.
Fair play to PSA for having a plan and sticking to it, and yes, SCW was lambasted for the same.
Posted 08:27 15th March 2013
kenzo says...
Psa "hits back" textbook media sensationalism. I see a very composed and logical response. I for one was expecting a shitfight.
Posted 02:55 15th March 2013
melkdave says...
What aload of rubbish from PSA,his not compairing like with like ,and to say France are unexperianced is a joke,they still had alot more caps than England and Wales iirc .He can laugh all he wants ,but the facts dont lie,his meddaling and selections have been so wrong,and deep down he knows it.Perhaps PSA being a coach whos never won anything,tells its own story,in regards to his abilties.
Posted 23:55 14th March 2013
turboboy says...
Now is the right time to experiment IMO....... but there has to be something of measure to come out of it at the end of the process, which I assume must be after the 6N. From there the plan has got to be develop a squad for the June tests - great idea to play 3 against NZ and 1 vs the Blues, no touring here and there. Two years out from the World Cup I think this is great preparation.
Posted 22:59 14th March 2013
mlbp says...
I am not a great fan of Trinh-Duc as a 10. I don't think he makes the right tactical decisions. He doesn't have the potential to become a dominant fly-half in the international scene. Michalak is better at decision-making and he varies his game better. Trinh-Duc could be the equivalent of what Aaron Mauger was for the All Blacks, an excellent distributing 12, but Fofana is perfect for that role.
That list Davoust published does not impress me. Peyrelonge was not a good 10 when he played for France some years ago. Pre-2007 I thought Beauxis was going to be the best in his position in Europe but he has become a one dimensional fly-half. He only kicks now, while then he proved to be the best player when it came to the balance between kicking, distribution, tactics and defence.
I've heard Plisson and Lopez can be good future prospects. The rest of the fly-halves need some confidence from the coaches in the Top14 teams to reach the national team first but that is difficult when you see non specialist players playing at 10 (Luke McAllister taking the position of more specialist players is an example).
But France always had nightmares with this position, and others. I remember 1999 when Galthie was the fourth-choice scrum half and he ended up playing the World Cup final and was one of the best players for France. The same about Lamaison, who was a 12, then a 10 for the World Cup.
At least Davoust didn't mention Skrela. He was never up to international standard. He always made the worst blunders in the most important moments.
And also the coaches never give enough confidence to some players. Francois Gelez looked like an interesting choice but he had a bad game from the tee in a November match and was erased forever from the list of available players by Laporte. He was good at tactics and distributed well.
But France have always been like that, as far as I can remember.
Posted 22:12 14th March 2013
Davoust says...
PSA is lying and this is the last time I'm interested in the french team until he's gone. Except England, how many number 10 have the NH teams, like Scotland, Wales or Ireland ? I never heard them crying all day (well ... except Wales).
Last year he complained about the front row.
I think this concurrence is, in fact, good for the french rugby, one can't compare the english football with the french rugby ... except in their pride.
Montpellier: François Trinh-Duc
Racing Métro: Jonathan Wisniewski
Toulouse: Lionel Beauxis
Bordeaux: Camille Lopez
Stade Français: Jules Plisson
Mont-de-Marsan: Antoine Vignau-Tuquet
Agen: Raphaël Lagarde
Castres: Rémi Talès
Biarritz: Julien Peyrelongue ( Jean-Pascal Barraque)
Posted 20:07 14th March 2013
Jhamer25 says...
Why has he dropped samson, he made more tackled than anyone last weekend. That is a stupid call.
He syas that 80% of fly halves are foreign in france (good cause it's come back to bite them) but they have a good 10 in trinh duc.
Odd decisions.
Posted 18:09 14th March 2013
shoobydo says...
I don't think you can say CW believed in his team in 98 - he was shafted by the English clubs into taking 17 uncapped on a tour against the best 3 teams in the world.
I don't believe for one minute France have that lack of choice.
Posted 17:03 14th March 2013
Spartacus says...
I had a look at the PR Top 14 round up for last week (or week before). 50% of the fly halfs were French. Yes 50%, not 20%!
PSA is correct to point out CW's poor record at the start, but CW had a unique set of players who made him look better than he was. When that squad started to crumble post 2003 so did CW. But he still has a WC to his name, and PSA has added talking nonsense to selection and coaching nonsense.
Posted 16:59 14th March 2013
rugby_rockstar says...
The 80% foreign no10 point is well justified and something I banged on about after the england france game too. Its not good to have a team like toulon who's typical starting line up boasts NINE foreign players Topping the Top 14. its not helping the French team and its hurting Wales, New Zealand, Ireland, Scotland and Australia when they lose players like Sexton / Giteau / Masoe and Hinds. The only side thats quietly content with the status quo is England because with 12 club league they have the depth to lose the armitage brothers and andrew sheridan and still come up with strong deomestic replacements.
as far as clive goes, what he;'s saying about Parra and michalic not working is a fair point but as a pundit he ought to be divining the real reason for fRances woes and this is an issue that the english media ducks away from as well, they are loathed to critise the clubs, even when they are at fault. We all know the problems english football has with foreign players and the form of the english football team. We're seeing the same this mirrored in french rugby even down to laying into the national coach when things don;t go well on the pitch. there are biiger issues to address but lazy journalists and pundits just take the easy route and lazy fans swallow it whole.
Posted 16:50 14th March 2013
heathy says...
I'm sorry PSA but you are not comparing apples with apples. For a start CW was merely stating an opinion and this 'opinion' is held by many who understand rugby. CW went to athletics to pass on his experience with creating a certain culture and putting certain things into place. Actually, GB did rather well in the Olympic Games I seem to remember!! He is still very much involved in rugby and having played it at international level, has a huge knowledge of the game and is still a pundit. England went to Australia with barely a cap between them and off the back of a couple of really hard seasons. France, on the other hand are full of experience and have many caps. Most of them have been playing international rugby for a while now. A new and young squad? WTF?? They most certainly are not!!!! Not only has the selection of his team been bizarre but his substitutions have also. When players were picked in the correct position, France improved dramatically. Smart substitutions when they are needed and going to be effective, as opposed to changing players as a pre organised plan on x minute, would also have improved their chances.
I'm sorry PSA but your argument is empty and with no foundation whatsoever. If I were you I would get your head out of your backside, ring CW up and ask him for a few pointers!!!
Posted 16:26 14th March 2013
Haldir says...
CW would obviously be aware that 80% of T14 10's are foreign; when England lost 76-0, it was with a young squad, riddled with injuries and inexperience. Can you really call the likes of Freddie and Morgan Parra inexperienced? even my son knows that Fran TD should be starting at 10, he offers so much more than FM, who sometimes just does not function at 10; and he's not even born yet.
Posted 13:55 14th March 2013