Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Parra and Lopez are the latest to be sacrificed on Brunel's bloody altar

(Photo by Getty Images)

At the start of the 2019 Six Nations, there was no doubt who would be France coach Jacques Brunel’s first-choice halfbacks.

ADVERTISEMENT

Morgan Parra and Camille Lopez made perfect sense. Despite having only played one international together – back in 2015 – the Clermont pair were and still are, by some considerable margin, the most experienced hinge in the France squad, with a combined 92 international caps.

A combination of the vagaries of French coaches past and, more recently, injuries had kept them apart.

This week – a fallow weekend for the international tournament – they, along with team-mate Wesley Fofana and four others squad members, have been released back to their clubs. They could play some part in Saturday’s Top 14 match against Grenoble at Stade Marcel Michelin.

Theirs has been a rapid fall from grace. Prior to the opening game of the Six Nations, Brunel had only praise for his pivot players. He told anyone willing to listen he was looking forward to finally being able to pick both together for the first time. He praised their consistency with Clermont. And he was delighted at the prospect of – finally – a settled French halfback duo.

Video Spacer

As was pretty much any rugby fan. Parra/Lopez were the ninth different starting 9/10 duo for France in two years. No other starting pair had survived more than two games together. But it looked, at last, like it was relatively (in French rugby terms) plain sailing up to the World Cup in Japan.

Things didn’t go as planned. Like so many before them, Parra-Lopez got stuck on two outings – the defeat-from-the-jaws-of-victory Six Nations opener against Wales, and the embarrassment at Twickenham.

ADVERTISEMENT

Then, after the 44-8 loss to England, came the comments – and rumours of a full-on player mutiny.

Lopez, immediately after the game, told France Télévisions’ pitchside reporter Cécile Grès: “We are the first to blame, the players, since we are on the field, but I think it’s not just us, and we’re not alone in this sinking [ship].

Morgan Parra of France box kicks. (Photo by Dan Mullan/Getty Images)

And Parra told reporters: “We are able to do what the English do, but do we work on it in training? I think we don’t work on it enough, if at all.”

The two weeks between that game and the Scotland match featured a period of high Laporte-visibility at French rugby’s Marcoussis training complex, a series of player meetings, a major media relations crackdown, and the public unveiling of a leadership group that had been in place for some time.

ADVERTISEMENT

And the matchday squad for Scotland, released early following a request from the players notably did not feature either Parra or Lopez. They had been replaced by Antoine Dupont and Romain N’Tamack, who had 13 caps between them – 11 of which belonged to the former. Baptiste Serin and Anthony Belleau were on the bench.

The rugby press in France, starved of the ease of access that it had previously enjoyed under Brunel, went into speculation overdrive. Those post-England comments were scrutinised and subjected to analysis after analysis. The common conclusion? That they were leading actors in the reported player mutiny.

France’s Camille Lopez

Brunel insisted dropping 92 caps worth of experience for just 13 was entirely a sporting decision. “Given our performance [against England], we needed to change things,” he said at a press conference after announcing the squad, adding the Parra-Lopez partnership “did not perform as well as expected in the two games”.

He dismissed repeated suggestions the Clermont players were ditched for their criticism of the France staff and training methods: “What can I say to that? I can’t tell you anything more. Ask them, you’ll see what they tell you.”

It’s true. There were legitimate sporting reasons for Brunel’s decision. Parra-Lopez had not worked. France needed to do something. And there are legitimate sporting reasons for them – Fofana, too – to play this weekend, otherwise they will have gone three weeks without playing a competitive match.

It’s also true that there is no doubt, fitness permitting, both Parra and Lopez will be in the mix for seats on the plane to Japan.

But it’s equally true that they have dropped to the back of the national coaching team’s thinking for the Ireland game on March 10. So far back, in fact, that – like fellow released players Uini Atonio, Pierre Bourgarit, Geoffrey Doumayrou, and Yacouba Camara – it’s highly unlikely they will be considered for the trip to Dublin.

And it’s just as true that – with FFR vice-president Serge Simon paying very close attention – they will tell the media exactly nothing about what actually happened between the England and Scotland games at the 2019 Six Nations.

 

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 19 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Like I've said before about your idea (actually it might have been something to do with mine, I can't remember), I like that teams will a small sustainable league focus can gain the reward of more consistent CC involvement. I'd really like the most consistent option available.


Thing is, I think rugby can do better than footballs version. I think for instance I wanted everyone in it to think they can win it, where you're talking about the worst teams not giving up because they are so far off the pace we get really bad scoreline when that and giving up to concentrate on the league is happening together.


So I really like that you could have a way to remedy that, but personally I would want my model to not need that crutch. Some of this is the same problem that football has. I really like the landscape in both the URC and Prem, but Ireland with Leinster specifically, and France, are a problem IMO. In football this has turned CL pool stages in to simply cash cow fixtures for the also ran countries teams who just want to have a Real Madrid or ManC to lose to in their pool for that bumper revenue hit. It's always been a comp that had suffered for real interest until the knockouts as well (they might have changed it in recent years?).


You've got some great principles but I'm not sure it's going to deliver on that hard hitting impact right from the start without the best teams playing in it. I think you might need to think about the most minimal requirement/way/performance, a team needs to execute to stay in the Champions Cup as I was having some thougt about that earlier and had some theory I can't remember. First they could get entry by being a losing quarter finalist in the challenge, then putting all their eggs in the Champions pool play bucket in order to never finish last in their pool, all the while showing the same indifference to their league some show to EPCR rugby now, just to remain in champions. You extrapolate that out and is there ever likely to be more change to the champions cup that the bottom four sides rotate out each year for the 4 challenge teams? Are the leagues ever likely to have the sort of 'flux' required to see some variation? Even a good one like Englands.


I'd love to have a table at hand were you can see all the outcomes, and know how likely any of your top 12 teams are going break into Champions rubyg on th back it it are?

120 Go to comments
f
fl 3 hours ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Right, so even if they were the 4 worst teams in Champions Cup, you'd still have them back by default?"

I think (i) this would literally never happen, (ii) it technically couldn't quite happen, given at least 1 team would qualify via the challenge cup, so if the actual worst team in the CC qualified it would have to be because they did really well after being knocked down to the challenge cup.

But the 13th-15th teams could qualify and to be fair I didn't think about this as a possibility. I don't think a team should be able to qualify via the Champions Cup if they finish last in their group.


Overall though I like my idea best because my thinking is, each league should get a few qualification spots, and then the rest of the spots should go to the next best teams who have proven an ability to be competitive in the champions cup. The elite French clubs generally make up the bulk of the semi-final spots, but that doesn't (necessarily) mean that the 5th-8th best French clubs would be competitive in a slimmed down champions cup. The CC is always going to be really great competition from the semis onwards, but the issue is that there are some pretty poor showings in the earlier rounds. Reducing the number of teams would help a little bit, but we could improve things further by (i) ensuring that the on-paper "worst" teams in the competition have a track record of performing well in the CC, and (ii) by incentivising teams to prioritise the competition. Teams that have a chance to win the whole thing will always be incentivised to do that, but my system would incentivise teams with no chance of making the final to at least try to win a few group stage matches.


"I'm afraid to say"

Its christmas time; there's no need to be afraid!

120 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ ‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’ ‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’
Search