<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Eagle Eye: Back to Basics - Please!</title>
		<description>Discuss Eagle Eye: Back to Basics - Please!</description>
		<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 03:02:46 --500</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.rugbymag.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/1748/10.html" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Clay says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5957</link>
			<description><![CDATA[[quote name="bloger 231"] but why focus on developing just one No. 10? why not have some competition and develop more? bring in some foreign specialist coaches to run fly half clinics like our football programs run specialty clinics? quote] That's a great idea davehalo. I hope someone at USAR is either reading this or they already have that planned. I'd be ok with them doing it and saying that was their plan all a long...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Clay</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2011 14:53:36 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5957</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RugbyShotta says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5928</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Maybe I am mistating what Ive observed, we have a lot of people in and out of the pool, folks arent playing together in the same system very often... and of those games had different groups together, and working that short a time with one another, the continuity lacks, which is what we are seeing. granted as a coach myself I see the rock and the hard place, because you have to find your best combination, but for a good portion of our pool, the USA assemblies are as much development as selection, which doesnt correlate very well with success in Tier I or a rapidly improving Teir II.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>RugbyShotta</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 17:08:48 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5928</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>davehalo says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5922</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Big Jim - finally someone else beating the same drum. good comment Rugbyshottas - not sure what you mean. the core of this team has been together (albeit not over long stretches of time but plenty of games) for quite a while. Joe Sweeney - the US was close to beating a side that had 12 changes from the japan team that almost beat italy. japan took the US match as a chance to test WC reserves. i'll take this comment back if you see more than 1/2 these guys line up in WC match together. And falling behind Canada? as we have more guys playing pro, CAN brought their guys home...and they still win? Clay - I agree with ya on Ebner and Palamo but why focus on developing just one No. 10? why not have some competition and develop more? bring in some foreign specialist coaches to run fly half clinics like our football programs run specialty clinics?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>davehalo</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:45:27 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5922</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>bloger 231 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5895</link>
			<description><![CDATA[to bj , it's def a lack of intelligence by 9 and 10. a team should always have a great #2 #8 #9 #10 and #15 but most importantly a good 9 and 10 that together can carry the team to a victory. they look lost almost like the game was going faster than their brain. wrong choices and kicks hole with out being explored , no creativity at all just the 1,2, 3 at times . 9 great support and great fitness but as far as being a natural smart tricky scrumhalf ???? far from it . it's good to be fit and have a great pass but scrumhalf is more than just passing the ball .. you have to see the holes you have to see 5 seconds ahead and it should come as a second nature , i think that petri is a good scrumhalf but at this level . forwards did great on the open play but imagine if the 9 and 10 could just be a bit smarter and faster on making quick choices!!!! best of luck .]]></description>
			<dc:creator>bloger 231</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2011 18:23:35 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5895</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>bj says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5881</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Is it a lack of rugby intelligence from key players at critical reocurring game situations, or is it an abscence of a good tactical decision maker on the field? Either way the team seems to be unable to create and exploit space in attack and unable to shutspace down in defence.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>bj</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2011 15:26:45 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5881</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Joe Sweeney says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5877</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Can't describe our back play yestedray as exciting, but keep something in mind; they were playing in the rain and may have chosen to play a simpler game with fewer flat passes near the point of contact for that reason. Japan ran it more aggressively, & while that resulted in three tries, it also resulted in Swiryn's second try of the night when an isolated player got quickly turned over by Emerick's tackle. While I would like to see Nese take the ball at pace more often (I think he plays better when he does) we should also recognize that the "play-it-safe" strategy almost worked. We eneded the match down by 6 & attacking inside the 22 when we knocked on. Had we been able to score and convert on the last passage of play we would have walked out of Tokyo with a win over a team ranked 5 places ahead of us in the IRB rankings. All is not perfect with the Eagles, but all is not broken either. Looking forward to seeing us get our best 15 on the field in our opening RWC match on Sept. 11.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Joe Sweeney</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2011 13:35:43 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5877</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Tom Clayman says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5867</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The Problem With Rugby in the USA: When the Chairman, CEO and Head Coach of your union are going to the RWC rooting for 3 teams other the you union they work for, you have a union that is very sick. USA Rugby is the village idiot of world rugby. Full stop.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Tom Clayman</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2011 12:09:27 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5867</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>james douglas says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5865</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The title of the article is misleading ... it implies that the Eagles are doing something complex and they thus need to get back to the basics. Unfortunately the backline play (with some pretty talented backs no less) is less than basic. It is 1st year rugby stuff. The second viewing I watched to see what the Japanese were doing - there was a lot of movement off of 1st phase - dummy runners etc. Off the QUICKLY FED 2nd phase ball runners came at speed and came at angles. Offloads were made at the same time contact with the tackler was made. Modern day rugby defenses require that ball handling occurs at or near the gainline - the long sweeping movements of the 70's and 80's are gone forever because rugby league style defenses are now employed - tacklers strung across the field taking up space. Is it at all possible Eddie is simply playing his cards close to the vest and against Ireland the Eagles will open it up?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>james douglas</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2011 11:36:04 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5865</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>No one of Importance says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5860</link>
			<description><![CDATA[We used to play an "open" style of rugby and now, obviously, we are looking to counter-attack from our defense. No one has that much energy! Malifa was too deep all day. He couldn't threaten to run. Everyone knew he would either pass or kick. Almost every time he kicked it went directly to a Japanese player instead of to open space. The only kicks that worked were short up-and-unders from either Petri or the full-back. We need a fly-half who can threaten to run now an again! If our backs are "shifty", I surely didn't see it. They mostly ran like forwards, directly into contact. We need more lateral movement to double up the defense or we'll never create holes to run through. Our forwards worked their butts off on defense (as well as Emerick (sp?)), but the backs seemed to be constantly on the back foot defensively. Just my 2 cents from watching the game.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>No one of Importance</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:31:53 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5860</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Clay says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5850</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Its the ugliest backline in all of international rugby (Tier 2 and up). Unfortunately, I think Matt Sherman needs replaced. Its clear that whatever he's teaching these guys isn't working. They look like a bunch of football players (fullbacks) running the ball. Above average athletes with no dynamic decision making skills. I'd maybe keep 3 guys (Ngwenya, Scully and Emerick) from this current squad and get rid of everyone else. I'd love to see Nate Ebner and Thretton Palamo give up football and give us some much needed dynamics back there. Both those two are beasts with the ball in their hands and Ebner actually has a decent boot. Unfortunately I think we've lost Thretton for a long time... Good for him, bad for USA Rugby. We should also start searching for a 10 today. Time to start combing the CPD and college ranks. We need a young 10 and we should start grooming him for 2019...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Clay</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2011 08:49:54 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/eagle-eye/1748-eagle-eye-back-to-basics-please.html#comment-5850</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
