Lost in interpretation

We spoke to Dimitri Szarzewski to find out where it went wrong against South Africa on Saturday.

Did France make too much of the new law interpretations? We spoke to Dimitri Szarzewski to find out where it went wrong against South Africa.

Needless to say the atmosphere at the French team hotel after the 42-17 defeat to the Springboks was pretty gloomy. Disappointment was etched on the faces of every member of the squad and support staff.

So much more had been expected of a French team that had dominated in Europe. The game was over inside of twenty minutes as a false start from Les Bleus was followed by a luke-warm performance in almost very sector.

Beyond disappointment, confusion was the dominant sentiment amongst the tourists – not only in trying to understand their own lack of spark but also the new law interpretations at the ruck.

“I'm bit lost,” said coach Marc Lièvremont after the game – a feeling shared by most of his players.

'No excuses' was the mantra of every player spoken to – “we can only blame ourselves” was repeated at length, but it was often followed by “I don't understand”.

After trying all week to adapt to what they expected to be new approach, centre Maxime Mermoz went as far as to say they were no clearer about what was expected of them at the ruck after 80 minutes.

We sat down with Dimitri Szarzewski as he tried to make head or tail of a major hiccup in France's preparations for next year's World Cup.

Planet Rugby: Thanks to chatting to us, Dimitri, you're obviously very disappointed.

Dimitri Szarzewski: Yes, we're all very disappointed, but when you start a match like that it's difficult to hope for better.

PR: Over the twelve months we've seen the French tight five dominate, but you didn't carry the ball much today.

DS: That's true. In the rucks and especially in the line-outs we weren't effective. We had a lot a balls stolen in the line-outs so we couldn't really use our forwards they way we would have liked. As far as the scrums go it wasn't so bad, but the line-outs really let us down.

PR: Victor Matfield was in top form, he made you suffer.

DS: It's clear, it's difficult when Matfield starts countering your throws like that. It's his speciality. He has a feeling for what's going to happen.

PR: Did you get the feeling that he'd decoded your calls?

DS: Not necessarily, you know, but he does it often. He moves back, forward, tries to anticipate what's going to happen. Sometimes it works for him, sometimes it doesn't. Well today it did, so it's up to us to learn from our defeat.

PR: In the scrums one got the impression that it started well for you but it didn't last. Did the changes to the South African front row have in influence?

DS: Yes, we had the upper hand in the early stages, but they kept on fighting and as the match continued we lacked a bit of rhythm. Maybe we took the foot of the gas a bit while they were able to continue with the same consistency.

PR:Chatting to the French players during the week, you all spoke of 'new laws' while down in the southern hemisphere they made a point of emphasising that they are just new 'interpretations'. Do you have the impression that you might have focused on that too much and ended up over-complicating matters.

DS: Yes, I agree. We really made an effort. We wanted to be very disciplined in that sector … where the tackler rolled away every time, we contested the ball less than usual, but it wasn't what we expected at the rucks.

PR: Do you have the feeling you were too cautious?

DS: That's exactly what happened. I didn't have the impression that the referee interpreted the new laws the way we interpreted them. The South African tacklers were contesting the ball when the new laws state that you must roll away when the attacking support is there.

PR: It's that half-second that makes the difference…

DS: It's clear – we came off second best in that sector. I think we got the interpretation wrong, and we're going to have to review it quickly because it cost us today.

PR: Over the last year the French coaching staff has often spoken of the need to put together a series of big wins. Last November it was going well until that bad game against New Zealand, now you've hit another hiccup after a strong Six Nations. Why the inconsistency?

DS: I don't want to make excuses. Maybe it's the old problem of our championship and the dates. We had a difference in rhythm, some guys have played too much, others not enough over the last few weeks. It's complicated, but I don't want to use that as an excuse. It's up to us to be more rigorous and more consistent in our results.

PR: Could that lack of rhythm have played a part in your poor start?

DS:I'm not sure. Maybe were surprised by the Springboks' start but we knew what to expect. It took us twenty minutes to get into the game…and it was twenty minutes to much.

PR:Thanks Dimitri, bon voyage and bonne chance against the Pumas.

DS: Merci.

By Ross Hastie