Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Los Pumas player ratings vs Spain | Rugby World Cup warm-ups

Argentina's wing Mateo Carreras (R) is challenged by Spain's wing Feta Castiglioni (3R) during the pre-World Cup international friendly rugby union match between Spain and Argentina in Madrid on August 26, 2023. (Photo by Pierre-Philippe MARCOU / AFP) (Photo by PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU/AFP via Getty Images)

Los Pumas player ratings: Argentina put on an impressive display against Spain at the Civitatis Metropolitano in Madrid, leaving their opponents chasing shadows throughout the match played in high temperatures and high pace.

ADVERTISEMENT

Here’s how we rated Argentina:

1. Joel Sclavi – 8/10
Sclavi anchored the scrum with authority, providing a platform despite brave resistance from a doughty Spanish scrum. His work rate around the park was decent and he found himself on the scoreboard as a result.

2. Agustin Creevy – 7
The veteran’s experience shone through as he led the forward pack with gusto. His lineout throwing was on point, and he was a force to be reckoned with in open play despite his advancing years.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

Related

3. Eduardo Bello – 7.5
Bello’s scrummaging was pretty much flawless, putting the Spanish front row under immense pressure at times. The 120kg Newcastle prop showcased no little athleticism with dynamic ball carries that set the tone for Argentina’s attacking momentum.

4. Guido Petti – 8
Petti’s dominance in the lineout and his physical presence in the tight exchanges were pivotal. He consistently punched holes in the Spanish defence and got over the ball well.

5. Pedro Rubiolo – 7.5
A more than solid outing. Rubiolo’s work rate and commitment were evident as he tirelessly get through a mountain of work. His contributions in rucks and mauls didn’t go unnoticed.

6. Rodrigo Bruni – 8
With Pablo Materia missing, Bruni had to put on a show, and he did. His relentless tackling and breakdown expertise disrupted any chance of the hosts creating anything like a rhythm, allowing Argentina to maintain a vice-like grip on the game.

ADVERTISEMENT

7. Marcos Kremer – 8.5
A brute among men, he dominated the breakdown and showcased his abilities as a no-nonsense threat with ball in hand. His powerful ball carries and his high-end physicality stood out.

8. Facundo Isa – 8
Isa impressed, as he consistently made ground with his ball carries. The 29-year-old’s link-up play with the halfbacks was crucial in maintaining Argentina’s attacking shape and he claimed a try off the back of a rolling maul that the Spaniards couldn’t repel.

9. Tomas Cubelli – 8
Cubelli’s snappy service and decision-making at the base of the ruck kept the Spanish defenders guessing. His ability to dictate the tempo of the game was key to Argentina’s fluid attacking movements and his score just before halftime was fully merited.

10. Nicolas Sanchez – 8
A near-flawless kicking performance from Sanchez, who controlled the game superbly, admittedly off an armchair ride from a super-dominant forward pack.

ADVERTISEMENT

11. Mateo Carreras – 8.5
An awesome display in the Spanish capital. Carreras showcased his electric pace and agility, consistently beating defenders at will. Scored his latest international try in the 29th minute.

12. Santiago Chocobares – 7.5
Chocobares’ distribution and line-breaking ability added significant flair to Argentina’s backline. His partnership with Moroni outside him created opportunities that Spain struggled to contain in the first half.

13. Matias Moroni – 7.5
Moroni’s defensive work was top-notch, shutting down any attempts from Spain to break through the midfield. Another Newcastle player, the centre may not have had the toughest day at the office but was pretty ruthless nonetheless.

14. Rodrigo Isgro – 6
Isgro’s positioning and support play were noteworthy, allowing him to capitalize on the team’s attacking movements, even if he didn’t find his way onto the scoresheet here.

15. Juan Cruz Mallia – 8
Another try scorer, Mallia’s counter-attacking prowess was on show as he exploited gaps in the Spanish defence. His solid positioning at the back ensured a reliable last line of defence, although he was rarely tested here.

REPLACEMENTS – 8.5
The substitutes injected fresh energy into the game and maintained the high standard set by the starting line-up. Jeronimo de la Fuente and Santiago Grondona stood out, although Grondona left the field limping badly. Martin Bogado was also on fire.

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

f
fl 25 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Would I'd be think"

Would I'd be think.


"Well that's one starting point for an error in your reasoning. Do you think that in regards to who should have a say in how it's setup in the future as well? Ie you would care what they think or what might be more fair for their teams (not saying your model doesn't allow them a chance)?"

Did you even read what you're replying to? I wasn't arguing for excluding south africa, I was pointing out that the idea of quantifying someone's fractional share of european rugby is entirely nonsensical. You're the one who was trying to do that.


"Yes, I was thinking about an automatic qualifier for a tier 2 side"

What proportion of european rugby are they though? Got to make sure those fractions match up! 😂


"Ultimately what I think would be better for t2 leagues would be a third comp underneath the top two tournemnts where they play a fair chunk of games, like double those two. So half a dozen euro teams along with the 2 SA and bottom bunch of premiership and top14, some Championship and div 2 sides thrown in."

I don't know if Championship sides want to be commuting to Georgia every other week.


"my thought was just to create a middle ground now which can sustain it until that time has come, were I thought yours is more likely to result in the constant change/manipulation it has been victim to"

a middle ground between the current system and a much worse system?

46 Go to comments
f
fl 40 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Huh? You mean last in their (4 team) pools/regions? My idea was 6/5/4, 6 the max, for guarenteed spots, with a 20 team comp max, so upto 5 WCs (which you'd make/or would be theoretically impossible to go to one league (they'd likely be solely for its participants, say 'Wales', rather than URC specifically. Preferrably). I gave 3 WC ideas for a 18 team comp, so the max URC could have (with a member union or club/team, winning all of the 6N, and Champions and Challenge Cup) would be 9."


That's a lot of words to say that I was right. If (e.g.) Glasgow won the URC and Edinburgh finished 16th, but Scotland won the six nations, Edinburgh would qualify for the Champions Cup under your system.


"And the reason say another URC (for example) member would get the spot over the other team that won the Challenge Cup, would be because they were arguable better if they finished higher in the League."

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


"It won't diminish desire to win the Challenge Cup, because that team may still be competing for that seed, and if theyre automatic qual anyway, it still might make them treat it more seriously"

This doesn't make sense. 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. Under my system, teams will "compete for the seed" by winning the Challenge Cup, under yours they won't. If a team is automatically qualified anyway why on earth would that make them treat it more seriously?


"I'm promoting the idea of a scheme that never needs to be changed again"

So am I. I'm suggesting that places could be allocated according to a UEFA style points sytem, or according to a system where each league gets 1/4 of the spots, and the remaining 1/4 go to the best performing teams from the previous season in european competition.


"Yours will promote outcry as soon as England (or any other participant) fluctates. Were as it's hard to argue about a the basis of an equal share."

Currently there is an equal share, and you are arguing against it. My system would give each side the opportunity to achieve an equal share, but with more places given to sides and leagues that perform well. This wouldn't promote outcry, it would promote teams to take european competition more seriously. Teams that lose out because they did poorly the previous year wouldn't have any grounds to complain, they would be incentivised to try harder this time around.


"This new system should not be based on the assumption of last years results/performances continuing."

That's not the assumption I'm making. I don't think the teams that perform better should be given places in the competition because they will be the best performing teams next year, but because sport should be based on merit, and teams should be rewarded for performing well.


"I'm specifically promoting my idea because I think it will do exactly what you want, increase european rugyb's importance."

how?


"I won't say I've done anything compressive"

Compressive.

46 Go to comments
J
JW 43 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Generally disagree with what? The possibility that they would get whitewashed, or the idea they shouldn't gain access until they're good enough?


I think the first is a fairly irrelevant view, decide on the second and then worry about the first. Personally I'd have had them in a third lvl comp with all the bottom dwellers of the leagues. I liked the idea of those league clubs resting their best players, and so being able to lift their standards in the league, though, so not against the idea that T2 sides go straight into Challenge Cup, but that will be a higher level with smaller comps and I think a bit too much for them (not having followed any of their games/performances mind you).

Because I don't think that having the possibility of a team finishing outside the quarter finals to qualify automatically will be a good idea. I'd rather have a team finishing 5th in their domestic league.

fl's idea, if I can speak for him to speed things up, was for it to be semifinalists first, Champions Cup (any that somehow didn't make a league semi), then Challenge's semi finalists (which would most certainly have been outside their league semi's you'd think), then perhaps the quarter finalists of each in the same manner. I don't think he was suggesting whoever next performed best in Europe but didn't make those knockouts (like those round of 16 losers), I doubt that would ever happen.


The problem I mainly saw with his idea (much the same as you see, that league finish is a better indicator) is that you could have one of the best candidates lose in the quarters to the eventual champions, and so miss out for someone who got an easier ride, and also finished lower in the league, perhaps in their own league, and who you beat everytime.

46 Go to comments
J
JW 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Well I was mainly referring to my thinking about the split, which was essentially each /3 rounded up, but reliant on WCs to add buffer.


You may have been going for just a 16 team league ranking cup?


But yes, those were just ideas for how to select WCs, all very arbitrary but I think more interesting in ways than just going down a list (say like fl's) of who is next in line. Indeed in my reply to you I hinted at say the 'URC' WC spot actually being given to the Ireland pool and taken away from the Welsh pool.


It's easy to think that is excluding, and making it even harder on, a poor performing country, but this is all in context of a 18 or 20 team comp where URC (at least to those teams in the URC) got 6 places, which Wales has one side lingering around, and you'd expect should make. Imagine the spice in that 6N game with Italy, or any other of the URC members though! Everyone talks about SA joining the 6N, so not sure it will be a problem, but it would be a fairly minor one imo.


But that's a structure of the leagues were instead of thinking how to get in at the top, I started from the bottom and thought that it best those teams doing qualify for anything. Then I thought the two comps should be identical in structure. So that's were an even split comes in with creating numbers, and the 'UEFA' model you suggest using in some manner, I thought could be used for the WC's (5 in my 20 team comp) instead of those ideas of mine you pointed out.


I see Jones has waded in like his normal self when it comes to SH teams. One thing I really like about his idea is the name change to the two competitions, to Cup and Shield. Oh, and home and away matches.

46 Go to comments
f
fl 2 hours ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Yes I was the one who suggested to use a UEFA style point. And I guessed, that based on the last 5 years we should start with 6 top14, 6 URC and 4 Prem."

Yes I am aware that you suggested it, but you then went on to say that we should initially start with a balance that clearly wasn't derived from that system. I'm not a mind reader, so how was I to work out that you'd arrived at that balance by dint of completely having failed to remember the history of the competition.


"Again, I was the one suggesting that, but you didn't like the outcome of that."

I have no issues with the outcome of that, I had an issue with a completely random allocation of teams that you plucked out of thin air.

Interestingly its you who now seem to be renouncing the UEFA style points system, because you don't like the outcome of reducing URC representation.


"4 teams for Top14, URC and Prem, 3 teams for other leagues and the last winner, what do you think?"

What about 4 each + 4 to the best performing teams in last years competition not to have otherwise qualified? Or what about a UEFA style system where places are allocated to leagues on the basis of their performance in previous years' competitions?

There's no point including Black Lion if they're just going to get whitewashed every year, which I think would be a possibility. At most I'd support 1 team from the Rugby Europe Super Cup, or the Russian Championship being included. Maybe the best placed non-Israeli team and the Russian winners could play off every year for the spot? But honestly I think its best if they stay limited to the Challenge Cup for now.

46 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Henry Arundell lined up for early England homecoming Henry Arundell lined up for early England homecoming
Search