Édition du Nord

Select Edition

Nord Nord
Sud Sud
Mondial Mondial
Nouvelle Zélande Nouvelle Zélande
France France

Les partenaires d’entraînement des Bleus au cœur des discussions

Le demi de mêlée français Maxime Lucu lors d'une séance d'entraînement au stade Georges Carcassonne d'Aix-en-Provence, le 02 octobre 2023, lors de la Coupe du Monde de Rugby 2023. (Photo by Anne-Christine POUJOULAT / AFP) (Photo by ANNE-CHRISTINE POUJOULAT/AFP via Getty Images)

C’est ce mercredi 13 décembre que la Fédération Française de Rugby (FFR) et la Ligue Nationale de Rugby (LNR) vont s’entretenir pour revoir la convention qui les lie. Cette convention est censée faciliter le passage des joueurs internationaux des clubs à l’équipe nationale et inversement.

ADVERTISEMENT

Le sélectionneur de l’équipe de France, Fabien Galthié, participera à cette réunion depuis Marcoussis où il commencera à partager son analyse sur la campagne tronquée de la Coupe du Monde de Rugby 2023.

Related

Mais c’est surtout la deuxième partie de l’ordre du jour qui est très attendue avec la volonté du nouveau staff d’obtenir les mêmes moyens dont il bénéficiait au fil des années précédentes. Parmi ces moyens, Galthié souhaite notamment la mise à disposition de 42 joueurs pour préparer les matchs des Bleus.

Le président de la LNR, René Bouscatel, a déjà indiqué que le cadre de la convention ne changerait pas jusqu’en 2027.

On ne touche pas aux 42, mais…

Si le principe des 42 joueurs ne semble pas remis en cause par une partie des dirigeants du Top 14, c’est leur répartition qui devrait faire réagir. « Être à 42 nous permet d’avoir deux équipes de 21 pour travailler à haute intensité sur deux journées, sans dégrader la qualité », a toujours dit Fabien Galthié.

« Le nombre de 42, avancé à l’époque par Fabien Galthié, est un mode de fonctionnement qui est propre à 80-90% des clubs de Top 14 », indique Ugo Mola, manager du Stade Toulousain interrogé à ce sujet par L’Equipe dans son édition du 13 décembre.

« On a tous besoin de continuer à s’entraîner à 42 parce qu’on a quand même des échéances. »

Sur les 42 mobilisés pour préparer une rencontre internationale, 23 sont assurés d’aller jusqu’au bout (les quinze titulaires et les huit remplaçants), cinq ont un espoir, même minime de jouer (ils sont réservistes et donc mobilisables en cas de souci de dernière minute).

ADVERTISEMENT

Related

Reste 14 joueurs qui jouent les partenaires d’entraînement, ce qu’on nomme dans le jargon les « sparring partners », qui sont généralement libérés le mercredi soir de leurs engagements avec le XV de France et remis à disposition de leur club pour jouer ou non le week-end suivant – sachant qu’ils ont manqué une partie des entraînements de leur club durant la semaine.

Que faire des 14 partenaires d’entraînement

Or c’est précisément sur ce point que les discussions pourraient s’enclencher entre la Fédé et la Ligue. « C’est vrai que les garçons qui ont vécu ce rôle de partenaires d’entrainement pendant deux, trois, quatre saisons peuvent estimer que c’est un peu lourd à gérer. Ils perdent un peu le rythme, ils ne sont ni en club, ni en équipe de France, c’est un peu pesant », indique Ugo Mola dans les colonnes de L’Equipe.

Related

L’idée serait par exemple de faire tourner cet effectif afin que ce ne soit pas toujours les mêmes joueurs concernés qui jouent ce rôle, quitte à faire appel aux moins de 20 ans pour compléter l’effectif.

Il faudrait ainsi voir qui, comment et pour combien de temps ces partenaires d’entraînement seraient mis à disposition du XV de France. Jean-Marc Lhermet, vice-président de la FFR délégué au haut niveau, fixe un cadre d’emblée : « repartir sur un nouveau cycle, avec une nouvelle organisation, la plus simple possible. Ce qu’on veut éviter, c’est d’avoir une usine à gaz ».

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Commentaires

0 Comments
Soyez le premier à commenter...

Inscrivez-vous gratuitement et dites-nous ce que vous en pensez vraiment !

Inscription gratuite
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

G
GrahamVF 26 minutes ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

"has SA actually EVER helped to develop another union to maturity like NZ has with Japan," yes - Argentina. You obviously don't know the history of Argentinian rugby. SA were touring there on long development tours in the 1950's

We continued the Junior Bok tours to the Argentine through to the early 70's

My coach at Grey High was Giepie Wentzel who toured Argentine as a fly half. He told me about how every Argentinian rugby club has pictures of Van Heerden and Danie Craven on prominent display. Yes we have developed a nation far more than NZ has done for Japan. And BTW Sa players were playing and coaching in Japan long before the Kiwis arrived. Fourie du Preez and many others were playing there 15 years ago.


"Isaac Van Heerden's reputation as an innovative coach had spread to Argentina, and he was invited to Buenos Aires to help the Pumas prepare for their first visit to South Africa in 1965.[1][2] Despite Argentina faring badly in this tour,[2] it was the start of a long and happy relationship between Van Heerden and the Pumas. Izak van Heerden took leave from his teaching post in Durban, relocated to Argentina, learnt fluent Spanish, and would revolutionise Argentine play in the late 1960s, laying the way open for great players such as Hugo Porta.[1][2] Van Heerden virtually invented the "tight loose" form of play, an area in which the Argentines would come to excel, and which would become a hallmark of their playing style. The Pumas repaid the initial debt, by beating the Junior Springboks at Ellis Park, and emerged as one of the better modern rugby nations, thanks largely to the talents of this Durban schoolmaster.[1]"


After the promise made by Junior Springbok manager JF Louw at the end of a 12-game tour to Argentina in 1959 – ‘I will do everything to ensure we invite you to tour our country’ – there were concerns about the strength of Argentinian rugby. South African Rugby Board president Danie Craven sent coach Izak van Heerden to help the Pumas prepare and they repaid the favour by beating the Junior Springboks at Ellis Park.

149 Go to comments
J
JW 6 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

149 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING 'Tom has the potential to be better than a British and Irish Lion' 'Tom has the potential to be better than a British and Irish Lion'
Search