THE HERALD REPORTS

Lessons Scotland should learn from Argentina’s successes

KEVIN FERRIE, Chief Rugby Writer October 11 2007

Seven matches between the countries have seen Scotland score 151 points to Argentina's 136. Yet the Scots have won just one - the first, way back in 1990. That 49-3 victory was achieved by a team that won a Grand Slam and was cheated out of a first-ever victory over the All Blacks that year before going on to within Gavin Hastings' missed sitter of reaching the World Cup final.

None of Argentina's six wins has been achieved by a margin of more than nine points, making the outcome of last Sunday's World Cup quarter-final sadly familiar.

Members of teams that lost similarly to the Pumas over the past 17 years have been among those criticising the current team for failing to play enough rugby in Paris. Emotional reactions are, of course, understandable. However, even setting aside the effort required to earn the right to play against the world's fourth-best side, the perspective offered by those statistics is significant.

These Pumas have emerged as a force this past decade - losing just once to current European champions France in their past six meetings, and that by a point in Paris last year - because they are battle-hardened and hungry. They rightly feel they are treated unjustly by the other leading nations in their disgraceful exclusion from the major annual tournaments, while their players must travel to Europe to learn their trade then make their fortunes.

Interesting that Jason White, Scotland's captain who plays in England's Premiership, reckoned his own side might benefit from many senior players moving to the more intense environment of English and French competition. His observation should not, though, be confused with the simplistic opportunism of those who, before and after the Argentina match, sought to use the Pumas' success to reignite foosty Scottish arguments about the way forward for professionalism. I could only shake my head when told one pundit, who was a few months ago castigating the disgrace of closing down the Border Reivers, is now suggesting Argentina have proved there should be no pro teams in Scotland. No prizes for guessing the postcode.

White’s views should not be confused with the simplistic opportunism of those trying to ignite foosty arguments about professionalism


White was talking about players already operating at the elite end of the game, as opposed to creating the best environment to identify and develop talent, which is the domestic priority. What the Pumas have proved is not that their system is superior to Scotland's. Their relative advantages are overall population, rugby population and the nature of that population, for the most part more powerful and athletic than Scotland's thanks to a combination of genes and environment.

They have overcome extraordinary geographical adversity because of their rugby community's collective determination to overcome the aforementioned injustice, a far cry from Scottish rugby's in-fighting through the corresponding period.

Just as the 1990 team that thrashed Argentina was probably this country's greatest-ever, so the decade between the first ignominious defeats by the Pumas in 1994 through to the excruciating 2003 World Cup campaign, then Matt Williams' stint as national coach, was perhaps the most debilitating period in Scottish rugby history.

Poor leadership and the assertion of individual ego over collective responsibility were to blame. That is why White and his men seem well-equipped to learn from last week's defeat. In saying he aims to play at the next tournament, White is Scotland's first World Cup captain to do so. Colin Deans (1987), Gavin Hastings (1995), Gary Armstrong (1999) and Bryan Redpath (2003) all bowed out after quarter-final defeats. David Sole played on less than a year after the 1991 semi-final exit. Eleven Pumas from the squad that reached the 1999 quarter-final remain involved. The lesson for White's artisans - by far the least experienced squad in the last eight - and for those who claim to love the sport more than their own little domains and agendas, is obvious.

Meantime, we wonder if Juan Martin Hernandez - probably this tournament's most influential player in spite of some having claimed at its outset that he would never make a stand-off - and his team-mates believe they can go the distance.

They have already beaten the team favoured to win the other semi-final and at the venue the final will be played. Do they really believe they can beat South Africa, though?

Like the Australians and the New Zealanders before them, the Springboks have no such worries regarding self-belief and have been talking about winning the tournament throughout. Yet the Puma pack can take them on, Hernandez will be the best individual player afield and, with Felipe Contepomi's guile alongside him, if they are willing to play just a little more creatively they can win.

Meanwhile, those of us who have tipped France since the start have grown in confidence since the weekend. Of course, with the French there is always the fear of a negative reaction to a great win. However, if they do not get caught up in machismo, they should have too much for a gallant England team that has produced a mighty title defence while silencing many clowns in its own media as well as the southern hemisphere braggarts.

With France's win having guaranteed the country remains abuzz, it would be wonderful if this finest-ever World Cup ended with a rematch of the opening game. Allez les Bleus.

This article was posted on 10-Oct-2007, 22:06 by Hugh Barrow.