Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Argentina name experienced pack to take on England

Julian Montoya (Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)

Argentina head coach Michael Cheika has named a starting pack which averages 60 caps to take on England on Saturday in Marseille, with a centurion on the bench in the form of Agustin Creevy.

ADVERTISEMENT

The 89-cap Julian Montoya captains Los Pumas, and he is joined by four other players in the pack with 50 caps or more, with flanker Pablo Matera boasting the most with 95. England head coach Steve Borthwick has named an equally experienced pack, with both Dan Cole and Courtney Lawes having over 100 caps.

The backline is slightly less experienced, with only scrumhalf Gonzalo Bertranou and Emiliano Boffelli having more than 50 caps, with both having 53 apiece.

Both sides will be acutely aware that the winners of that match will have one foot in the door of the quarter-finals, and in a very good position to top the pool.

Cheika said after naming his squad: (Translated on Google) “I am happy with how we are prepared for this first match. Choosing the team was difficult, because the 33 players who are available are in very good condition, they have done a good job. We know that beyond the game, preparation is the most important thing, and we arrived well.”

Montoya added: “We are calm, with logical anxiety in these circumstances, but knowing that we made good preparation. We have been preparing for this first game for a long time, and that allows us to stay focused on the present.”

Argentina XV
1. GALLO, Thomas (17 caps)
2. MONTOYA, Julian (captain; 89 caps)
3. GÓMEZ KODELA, Francisco (31 caps; no RWC tests)
4. ALEMANNO, Matías (87 caps; 10 tests in RWC)
5. LAVANINI, Tomás (82 caps; 9 tests at RWC)
6. MATERA, Pablo (95 caps; 10 tests at RWC)
7. KREMER, Marcos (57 caps; 4 RWC tests)
8. GONZÁLEZ, Juan Martín (24 caps; no RWC tests)
9. BERTRANOU, Gonzalo (53 caps; 1 RWC test)
10. CARRERAS, Santiago (35 caps; 4 tests at RWC)
11. CARRERAS, Mateo (11 caps; no RWC tests)
12. CHOCOBARES, Santiago (14 caps; no RWC tests)
13. CINTI, Lucio (16 caps; no RWC tests)
14. BOFFELLI, Emiliano (53 caps; 3 RWC tests)
15. MALLÍA, Juan Cruz (26 caps; 1 test in RWC)

ADVERTISEMENT

Replacements
16. CREEVY, Agustín (101 caps; 15 tests at RWC)
17. SCLAVI, Joel (12 caps; no RWC tests)
18. BELLO, Eduardo (14 caps; no RWC tests)
19. PETTI, Guido (75 caps; 10 tests at RWC)
20. RUBIOLO, Pedro (5 caps; no RWC tests)
21. BRUNI, Rodrigo (21 caps; 1 RWC test)
22. BAZÁN VÉLEZ, Lautaro (7 caps; no RWC tests)
23. MORONI, Matías (74 caps; 8 tests at RWC)

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 5 hours ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Yep, that's exactly what I want.

Glasgow won the URC and Edinburgh finished 16th, but Scotland won the six nations, Edinburgh would qualify for the Champions Cup under your system.

It's 'or'. If Glasgow won the URC or Scotland won the six nations. If one of those happens I believe it will (or should) be because the league is in a strong place, and that if a Scotland side can do that, there next best club team should be allowed to reach for the same and that would better serve the advancement of the game.


Now, of course picking a two team league like Scotland is the extreme case of your argument, but I'm happy for you to make it. First, Edinbourgh are a good mid table team, so they are deserving, as my concept would have predicted, of the opportunity to show can step up. Second, you can't be making a serious case that Gloucester are better based on beating them, surely. You need to read Nicks latest article on SA for a current perspective on road teams in the EPCR. Christ, you can even follow Gloucester and look at the team they put out the following week to know that those games are meaningless.


More importantly, third. Glasgow are in a league/pool with Italy, So the next team to be given a spot in my technically imperfect concept would be Benneton. To be fair to my idea that's still in it's infancy, I haven't given any thought to those 'two team' leagues/countries yet, and I'm not about to 😋

They would be arguably worse if they didn't win the Challenge Cup.

Incorrect. You aren't obviously familiar with knockout football Finn, it's a 'one off' game. But in any case, that's not your argument. You're trying to suggest they're not better than the fourth ranked team in the Challenge Cup that hasn't already qualified in their own league, so that could be including quarter finalists. I have already given you an example of a team that is the first to get knocked out by the champions not getting a fair ranking to a team that loses to one of the worst of the semi final teams (for example).

Sharks are better

There is just so much wrong with your view here. First, the team that you are knocking out for this, are the Stormers, who weren't even in the Challenge Cup. They were the 7th ranked team in the Champions Cup. I've also already said there is good precedent to allow someone outside the league table who was heavily impacted early in the season by injury to get through by winning Challenge Cup. You've also lost the argument that Sharks qualify as the third (their two best are in my league qualification system) South African team (because a SAn team won the CC, it just happened to be them) in my system. I'm doubt that's the last of reasons to be found either.


Your system doesn't account for performance or changes in their domestic leagues models, and rely's heavily on an imperfect and less effective 'winner takes all' model.

Giving more incentives to do well in the Challenge Cup will make people take it more seriously. My system does that and yours doesn't.

No your systems doesn't. Not all the time/circumstances. You literally just quoted me describing how they aren't going to care about Challenge Cup if they are already qualifying through league performance. They are also not going to hinder their chance at high seed in the league and knockout matches, for the pointless prestige of the Challenge Cup.


My idea fixes this by the suggesting that say a South African or Irish side would actually still have some desire to win one of their own sides a qualification spot if they win the Challenge Cup though. I'll admit, its not the strongest incentive, but it is better than your nothing. I repeat though, if your not balance entries, or just my assignment, then obviously winning the Challenge Cup should get you through, but your idea of 4th place getting in a 20 team EPCR? Cant you see the difference lol


Not even going to bother finishing that last paragraph. 8 of 10 is not an equal share.

126 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Stuart Lancaster Racing 92 exit rumours wide of the mark Stuart Lancaster Racing 92 exit rumours wide of the mark
Search