Basketball: Experts: Who's the Finals MVP? How do Cavs improve?

espn.com

Updated: June 14, 2007

If the season ends Thursday night in a San Antonio sweep of Cleveland, who wins the Finals MVP award? Where do LeBron's Cavs go from here? Will we see a rematch next year? Our experts answer six questions heading into Game 4 of the Finals.

1. Who's your Finals MVP (so far)?

Greg Anthony, ESPN: Tim Duncan. Yes, Tony Parker has scored more than anyone else. But Duncan is the guy that dominates both ends. He's the only one averaging a double-double and, let's face it, the reason we haven't seen any of LeBron's high-flying spectacular plays is because of a certain someone manning the paint.

Ronald Martinez/Getty Images

Tim Duncan makes it look easy on both ends of the floor.

Henry Abbott, TrueHoop: Tim Duncan. He defines the Spurs' defense and makes or facilitates a huge percentage of their points. I appreciate John Hollinger's case for Tony Parker as co-MVP of the Finals. Pending what happens in the rest of the series, I think that would undersell Duncan. Admit that if you were Coach Gregg Popovich and had to face the Cavs in a seven-game series without one of those two players, Parker would be on the bench, right?

Chris Broussard, ESPN Mag: Tony Parker's the MVP. That's no slight on Duncan at all, and I'll be the first to insist, "The Spurs are still Tim Duncan's team!'' But Parker's penetration and clutch shooting (the big Game 2 layups, the big 3-pointer in Game 3) have been the keys this series. For those who think a superstar must always win the Finals MVP award, do your homework: When Larry Bird won his first title in 1981, Cornbread Maxwell was the Finals MVP.

Ric Bucher, ESPN Mag: Tim Duncan. As terrific as it is to see Tony Parker prove himself in an NBA Finals, what the Spurs (Tony included) do begins and ends with Duncan. A vote in their locker room wouldn't be close.

John Hollinger, ESPN.com: I realize this is something of a cop-out, but we may need co-MVPs here. Tony Parker's ability to break down Cleveland off the dribble has been devastating, but Tim Duncan has been equally important with his defensive superiority, his passing out of double-teams, and his somewhat overlooked scoring. I'll go for whomever plays better in Game 4.

Chris Sheridan, ESPN: At this point I have to go with Tony Parker, although it's a tough call between Parker and Tim Duncan. But to me, it comes down to the matchup disparity at the point guard spot, and how huge of an advantage that has been to San Antonio.

Marc Stein, ESPN: Tim Duncan. Because I'm the last guy who can get away with voting for Bruce Bowen ... and because Duncan's mere presence helped Tony Parker get loose in the first two games ... and because defense is winning this championship. We all know the Spurs' D is built around TD.

---

2. Assess LeBron's Finals so far.

Anthony: We've come to expect so much from the kid after his brilliance in the conference finals. (I sure did.) It's probably unfair, because no one in this league has the responsibility he has, and other than Game 1 he's been, well, average. No matter how great your talent, you need help. Obviously the 911 he sent to his teammates and coaches went unanswered.

Abbott: The guy just jumped over a 700-foot-high hurdle. It seems wrong to get mad at him for not clearing the 1,000-foot-high hurdle that was behind it. Sadly for LeBron James, even though he just led a mediocre roster to the NBA Finals at the age of 22, the focus will probably be on how much of his expansive potential is not yet realized. Now everyone wants him to have a more reliable jumper, a midrange game, quicker moves with the ball and more assertiveness in the post. That's all stuff he ought to make it his business to get. And I think he will. He can play on my team anytime.

Broussard: He has struggled, but there's not a player alive who wouldn't struggle when essentially going one-on-five against the best defense in the world. He's scored and created tons of scoring opportunities for his teammates with his passing but, for the most part, they've missed shots. As great as LeBron is, though, he has much room for improvement, which is actually scary. If he had a better midrange J, he'd hurt the Spurs' sagging defense, and he's got to develop a better post game and take advantage of his size on the block more often.

Bucher: Sobering. No more "he's the best player in the league" until further notice. No more Michael Jordan comparisons. He's an incredible talent who still has a lot to learn about leadership and execution. Pretending he doesn't isn't doing him any favors -- and it's insulting to those (Duncan, for one) who have.

AP Photo/Tony Dejak

LeBron's first taste of the Finals hasn't been all that pleasant.

Hollinger: Forgettable. He's shooting 36.7 percent and has nearly as many turnovers (17) as field goals (22), plus his early foul trouble was a factor in Game 2 and he couldn't make the tying shot in Game 3. The Spurs are doing what the Pistons failed to do -- swarm him and make somebody else win the game.

Sheridan: Mediocre at best. He has been too slow to find ways to counter the defensive schemes the Spurs are throwing at him; his team has been basically trounced twice; and his body language after Game 3 was that of a defeated man.

Stein: The word is fortuitous. Thanks to a favorable draw and one great series against Detroit, LeBron was insanely lucky to get this experience at the tender age of 22, before the team around him was ready for it. I'd certainly like to see him play more decisively at the offensive end, but facts is facts: He often has been going one-on-five against the league's best D. The biggest LBJ disappointment in this series is that, after all the Michael Jordan comparisons, he couldn't pull in TV viewers in like everyone thought.

---

3. What should the Cavs do after this series to improve the team?

Anthony: A combination of things must happen. First, growth from the young players -- Gibson, Gooden, Varejao (if they can re-sign him) and Pavlovic. That by far is the most important; Larry Hughes showed people that you can't solve everything via free agency. Also, I'd like to see some depth in the backcourt. Eric Snow has provided leadership, but he and Damon Jones have not provided much else. Ilgauskas is also not getting any younger, so developing a center is another issue.

Abbott: The thought is a guard who can reliably handle the ball, take pressure off LeBron James and knock down shots. (Maybe Daniel Gibson evolves into that, or maybe you want to keep him coming off the bench.) But I think offensively challenged title teams should have a big man on the bench who can "manufacture some runs" by posting up and bulling to the hoop for some and-1s. Players like Adrian Dantley and Corliss Williamson have played that role, taking part of the game that might have been a 10-2 run for the opponent and turning it into a 10-6 run, while controlling the tempo. Also, wouldn't it be nice for LeBron James to play with a big man who regularly commanded a double team?

Broussard: The Cavs cannot rest on their laurels. While they've had a terrific season, they must realize that they had an easy run to the Finals (barring Detroit). This experience will certainly strengthen and embolden the young Cavs, and they'll be much better next season. They legitimately could be considered the favorite in the East, but winning the East isn't the goal. They have to improve to win it all. Ideally, they find a way to put an All-Star-caliber 4-man next to LeBron. They shouldn't be afraid to move any of their young talent to try to get that done.

Bucher: Have LeBron develop a post game and the ability to move without the ball. Have coach Mike Brown add post-up plays and curls off screens to the playbook for LeBron. He would be unstoppable, even versus San Antonio. Oh, and develop a fast-break offense. As the Suns and Spurs have shown, you can play good D and score in transition.

Hollinger: They have a lot of work just to keep it at this level, since Anderson Varejao and Sasha Pavlovic are free agents. But beyond that, they've got to figure out how to get another ballhandler on the court and should add another shooter, too. LeBron is a great playmaker and finisher, but he can't pass it to himself.

Sheridan: That's a tough call because of the way they are tied up cap-wise for the next couple years with guys like Eric Snow, Ira Newble and Damon Jones taking up so much room while on the downside of their careers. Making another run at Mike Bibby makes sense, though it'd probably cost them Anderson Varejao and a future No. 1, at the very least.

Stein: The Cavs' issues haven't changed. They still need a proven playmaker and better shooters around LeBron, for starters, but they still have a payroll that offers no easy fixes because of the big contracts owned by Larry Hughes and Zydrunas Ilgauskas. And now expectations are a lot higher because of this Finals run. With only three seasons to go before LeBron can (and will) opt out, Cleveland will be depending on the East's continued suckitude as much as anything.

---

4. Forty years from now, your grandkid says: "Tell me about the Spurs."

What do you say?

Gregory Shamus/Getty Images

The Spurs were way ahead of the curve when they drafted Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili.

Anthony: They were perhaps the best defensive team ever. They didn't have the charisma or the persona of some of the other dynasties, and they played in San Antonio, which is not as compelling or as significant a sports market. And of all the great dynasties, this team never won back-to-back titles (the one glaring quality absent from its résumé). However, there's nothing else to argue. They had the best power forward ever! And one of the best coaches and front offices the game has ever had.

Abbott: There was a lot more than basketball to the NBA. There were marketing deals. There was hype. There were agents, shoe contracts, police records, media, money, strippers and a million other things. But the San Antonio Spurs? As much as is possible in that era's NBA, they were an organization that was about basketball. And you know what? They were pretty good at it.

Broussard: The Spurs were a very good team led by the greatest power forward of all time and a Hall of Fame point guard in Tony Parker. They didn't capture the imagination of the public because they were a fairly dull team, both in terms of playing style and personality. But they were the most professional team in sports. Their players were old-school in that they respected the coach's authority and didn't mind being yelled at, and the coach was old-school in that he was no-nonsense and didn't care about having his name up in lights. The Tim Duncan Spurs were a dynasty, but not as good as the Jordan Bulls, Magic Lakers or Bird Celtics. But Duncan retired with five rings. Wow!

Bucher: The best example of teamwork and ego-less NBA basketball in their era. Proof that mainstream America couldn't care less about those qualities -- otherwise, the Spurs would draw the highest TV ratings, not the lowest.

Hollinger: They were the first basketball team to really operate like a corporation, and as a result they were the best-managed sports organization of their era. Now, four decades later, everybody operates like this and we take it for granted, but the Spurs were truly ahead of their time -- everyone else ended up copying them, even in other sports. Amazingly, at the time almost nobody remarked about how incredible the Spurs were in this regard. I was a witness.

Sheridan: Pretty much every other year they were in the Finals, and in those in-between years they were the team everyone feared most in the playoffs. They were a model franchise in so many ways, and they were the first to successfully make the move toward importing international players. They weren't a dynasty, but they were a known commodity that every other team feared, year in and year out.

Stein: I will say that Duncan was the most dominant player of his generation more than I will call this a dynasty. I will say that I was lucky to live in Texas for a good chunk of Duncan's career so I could cover it closely. I will say that Popovich and Duncan were the pre-eminent coach/player combo for the first 15 years of my career covering the NBA. And I will say what Brent Barry said the other day to the New York Times, except I will have to explain that the Spurs never got their due from the people in spite of these truths: "No character issues, professionalism, preparation -- everything people always say they want, it's all happening right here."

---

5. Who wins Game 4? Game 5? Game 6? Game 7?

Abbott: Before the series started, my consistent prediction was that it would not be a cakewalk. (When I packed for Cleveland, I packed for San Antonio, too.) But now I'm just as convinced that I was wrong. With the pressure now off, perhaps Cleveland finally manages to have a good shooting night in Game 4. But barring a major San Antonio injury or an unforeseen tactic, I don't think Cleveland can win more than one game, and that's iffy.

Broussard: There will be no Game 5, 6 or 7.

Bucher: Spurs win Game 4. Handily.

Hollinger: Cavs. Spurs. San Antonio will lose a rigged Game 4 because a beleaguered commissioner Stern wants to punish the media by keeping them sequestered in Cleveland for three more days, before rallying to a 15-point win in the Game 5 clincher.

Sheridan: Spurs will win it in 4. The Cavs don't have the mental toughness to climb out of the hole they're in.

Stein: Stop it. Spurs finish this off in Game 4.

---

6. Which team is more likely to return to the Finals next year?

Abbott: Even though the West is so strong, my gut is San Antonio because they'll be more or less intact. The Cavaliers are in need of some retooling, and the Eastern Conference already has several teams with the potential to knock off Cleveland next year (Chicago, Miami, Detroit, Orlando, Washington, Toronto ...) and might also be importing big names from the West like Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett and Shawn Marion.

Broussard: Both clubs have a good shot, a very good shot, but the Spurs have the better shot. Duncan is still the most dominant player in the game, and Parker is still young and only getting better. This team will be motivated to repeat.

Bucher: Tough call because of San Antonio's inability to win back-to-back years and the West's greatness, but I'll say Spurs. Cavs have some inherent organizational flaws that need to be addressed, the first being a way to fully utilize LeBron's capabilities.

Hollinger: Cleveland, because the East is so dilapidated. Let's hope they make a better show of it next time.

Sheridan: The Spurs, simply because they're better. Yes, they play in a much tougher conference, but they've been the class of that conference (if you look at it in terms of longevity) for a while now, and their experience in just being able to get through the first three rounds will still be there a year from now.

Stein: San Antonio. The case for bestowing dynasty status on the Spurs is that they've been a contender for the championship for a full decade except for the 1999-2000 season, when Duncan was injured in the playoffs. LeBron's development can only benefit from getting here so soon, but the wide-openness of the East benefits four or five other teams as much as Cleveland.

*Disclaimer - Views expressed within this story are not necessarily the views of this Blog

Basketball: Duncan says his fourth ring finest of all

By Marc Stein
ESPN.com
(Archive)

Updated: June 15, 2007, 3:16 AM ET

• Comment
• Email
• Print

CLEVELAND -- On the night Tim Duncan clinched what he immediately proclaimed to be "the best" of his four championships, Duncan got only one vote for NBA Finals MVP from a panel of 10.

He's had worse nights, though.

Tony Dejak/AP Photo

Tim Duncan savors title No. 4.

You couldn't exactly call Thursday catastrophic when General Mills representatives greeted the final buzzer by passing out a new Wheaties box that pictures Duncan lining up a bank shot . . . and when championship No. 4 cements Duncan as the franchise player of his generation.

There is some widespread reservation to talk about the Spurs in dynastic terms, especially from the Spurs themselves, but this much can't be disputed: Duncan is the NBA's best player since Michael Jordan.

At one early stage of these playoffs, Duncan joked about turning 31 two months ago. "I am old," he said. "I've accepted it." Yet he's three years younger than Shaquille O'Neal was last June when Shaq won his fourth ring and has played five fewer seasons than Shaq.

Put another way: No. 21 is such a winner, such a difference-maker even when he's struggling, that David Robinson is now referring to the Spurs' run as "this Tim Duncan era," as if Robinson never had much to do with it.

"The only constant is Tim," Spurs forward Robert Horry said, naturally crediting Duncan for leading the way to the last two of Horry's seven rings.

With an 83-82 escape that broomed out LeBron James' Cleveland Cavaliers and completed its first-ever Finals sweep, San Antonio ranks with the 1990s Chicago Bulls, 1980s Los Angeles Lakers, 1960s Boston Celtics and the old Minneapolis Lakers as the only teams in history to win four titles in less than a decade. They're one of only four franchises -- behind the Celtics (16), Lakers (14) and Bulls (six) -- to win it all four times since the league was founded in 1947.

Yet it's the modern-day title maven Horry, who's the first to say that you can't automatically bestow dynasty status on the Spurs, in spite of the four championships in a nine-year span and their every-year status as top contenders.

"The Lakers had one team," Horry said, referring to the mini-dynasty from 2000 to 2002 that was presided over by O'Neal and Kobe Bryant.

In San Antonio? "It's been two teams," Horry said.

One with Robinson for the first two titles, in other words, and one without Admiral Dave for the last two.

Which can only enhance Duncan's individual legacy. He doesn't have a three-peat or even a repeat on his resume, but he's also never been paired with a Kobe or a Dwyane Wade, either.

"Tim is the common denominator," Popovich said. "He's [had] a different cast around him [in] '99, '03 and '05. He's welcomed them all. He's found a way to help them all fit, feel comfortable in their roles, and not many players can do that. But he is that easy to play with and his skills are so fundamentally sound that other people can fit in [easier], and I think that's the key to the whole thing."

You can try to diminish Duncan's stature by lampooning the quality of the Eastern Conference victims they've repeatedly schooled, as Phil Jackson did when he claimed that San Antonio's first title -- in a cruise over the Patrick Ewing-less Knicks in the lockout-shortened 1999 season -- deserved an asterisk. There have been plenty of asterisk cracks during this post-season, too, even before the Spurs wound up matched against the novices from Cleveland.

You can make the argument that, for all of their impressive triumphs in the unforgiving West, our most unforgettable playoff memories involving the Spurs were usually against them: Derek Fisher's buzzer-beater in 2004 or Ginobili's foul in Game 7 against Dallas last season.

You can recite the most recent claim that they wouldn't have even reached these Finals if not for the league-issued suspensions of Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw, just as Phoenix had seemingly seized control of their second-round showdown, or how the overmatched Cavs weren't even whole because of Larry Hughes' injury.

You can even extend the lucky argument with the reminder that Shaq, Kobe and the Zenmeister couldn't dodge drama consistently enough to keep their championship triangle together for more than five seasons, disintegrating a monster that made Popovich feel at the time as though "the Soviet Union just disbanded."

Yet none of the above seems to dissuade the experts closest to the game, who are almost universally moved by the accomplishments and traits that make Duncan so unique in the modern game.

Around Duncan, San Antonio has crafted a locker-room environment that you won't find anywhere else. No one ever whines about minutes or shots or the lack of spotlight that filters to their market. Two key rotation regulars -- Ginobili and Bruce Bowen -- followed Duncan's team-first influence to take less money upon re-signing with the Spurs and help the club's overall financial flexibility. The relationship between franchise savior and coach, meanwhile, prompted the most veteran Spurs-watcher of them all -- San Antonio Express-News columnist Buck Harvey -- to brand Duncan and Popovich as the modern-day Russell and Red Auerbach.

Russell doesn't seem to have a problem with the comparison, either, which will come as another blow to Bostonians who still haven't gotten over missing out on Duncan in the '97 draft.

"I feel very privileged to see the things he does as a basketball player," Russell says. "I see and understand it. There is no wasted motion and no wasted emotion. It's an absolute thrill because he only concentrates on things that are important.

"Tim and I both play in a way that I can do my thing and leave room for other guys to do their things without bumping into each other."

Said NBA commissioner David Stern, feeling a rare need to speak up for maybe his ultimate (but perpetually overlooked) role model: "[Duncan] is a player for the ages. I'm a tennis fan, and Pete Sampras is one of the greats. OK, he wasn't Andre Agassi or John McEnroe. He just happens to be one of the greatest players of all-time. You take great players as you find them."

When the Spurs got him, they had the good fortune of easing him in as Robinson's sidekick, with Avery Johnson around to supply the loudest in-house leadership. And as Popovich reminds: "Timmy began with great character. It wasn't like this was a troubled child that was brought in or anything like that."

Still . . .

A decade later, Robinson sees a different guy.

"He's smarter than he was when he first came in the league, but the biggest area [of improvement] is his leadership," Robinson said. "He's much more vocal. When he came here, he didn't really want to be that guy. He's stepped into that now and he's an incredible leader. He's still not overly vocal, but he says things at the appropriate time. He's not afraid to speak up and he's not afraid to go into the press conference and say what he needs to say.

"The whole package, yeah, I think this might be the best basketball I've ever seen him play. When I watched the [Phoenix] series, I thought Kurt Thomas played him as well as anyone I've seen play Tim over the last couple years. And Tim still did whatever he wanted."

The "best" playoff run of Duncan's life didn't exactly end that way, with Duncan shooting 0-for-5 in the first half in the face of Cleveland's most aggressive double-teaming in the series and signing off with just 12 points on 4-for-15 shooting . . . as well as six turnovers and six missed free throws.

Yet he did manage 15 rebounds, including five biggies in the fourth quarter -- a fourth quarter in which Finals MVP Tony Parker was held scoreless -- when the Spurs eventually broke the Cavs' spirit by generating a series of extra late possessions. From the series-long perspective, furthermore, Parker couldn't have scored as freely as he did without all the attention Duncan attracted, just as the Spurs couldn't have corralled James as well as they did without Duncan co-anchoring their defense with Bruce Bowen. Duncan was the only guy, from either team, to average a double-double.

All of which is why the lone Finals MVP vote Duncan received was mine.

"Do you worry about what people say? No, because it's going to change tomorrow," Robinson offered, explaining why Duncan -- like the chronically underrated Popovich and Spurs front-office architect R.C. Buford -- is never bothered when the recognition goes elsewhere.

"But I think, in the long run, when people look back at the Spurs and they see this Tim Duncan era, they're going to say, 'We didn't even appreciate what we had.' "

Not me.

Marc Stein is the senior NBA writer for ESPN.com.

*Disclaimer - Views expressed within this story are not necessarily the views of this Blog

Basketball: Spurs Have Exposed Flaws in LeBron's Game

By JOHN HOLLINGER - The New York Sun June 14, 2007

CLEVELAND – I am a witness, all right.

I am a witness to San Antonio establishing itself as an NBA dynasty, whether the networks want to admit it or not. I am a witness to the general lousiness of the Eastern Conference and the one-sided Finals that it's created. And I am a witness to the flaws that remain in the game of the player who will go down as the best of this generation.

Let's talk about that last item first, because I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out the first two. LeBron James, for all his brilliance, still has some flaws in his game, and those are flaws that the Spurs' suffocating defense has been able to expose repeatedly in the first three games of the Finals. They'll try to again tonight (9 p.m., ABC) as San Antonio goes for the sweep and its fourth Larry O'Brien trophy in the Duncan-Popovich era.

The first item of business is Le-Bron's catch-and-shoot game. Or rather, the lack of it. Watch James some time when he gets a pass from a teammate. Even if he's wide, wide open coming off a screen, he won't pull the trigger on the outside shot. It's different once he puts the ball on the floor — then he's comfortable shooting long shots, especially going to his left.

But repeatedly in this series, we've seen James catch the ball at the top of the key, or on the wing, while San Antonio's Bruce Bowen plays several feet off of him. It doesn't appear it even occurs to James that he can shoot in this situation — it's as though he's mentally preprogrammed to start dribbling, and only then will he allow himself to think about a shot.

Bowen has been able to give himself a big edge, because he's had the luxury of laying off James and waiting on the drive. And with a defender as good as Bowen, the last thing James wants to do is hand him a free advantage. This also affects the type of plays the Cavs can call for Bowen. Running a curl on either side for James to come off for a jumper is sort of pointless, for instance, if James is never going to catch and fire once he makes the curl.

The second area where we're seeing LeBron's lack of polish is in his low-post game. James is perhaps the most physically imposing small forward to ever play the game — he's 6-foot-8, 240 pounds and built like a tank. You'd think he'd be able to overwhelm opponents on the blocks with his superior physique, but he's never seemed very comfortable operating from the blocks.

Against Bowen, however, James has seen the rock down low more often. This isn't surprising — Bowen is an unbelievable perimeter defender but has a slight build that prevents him from doing as much damage in the post. Unfortunately, James still doesn't have a solid repertoire of moves from that position on the floor.

It's a shame since James is potentially unstoppable from here. Not only can he overwhelm most defenders one-on-one, but because he's such a great passer and has the size to see over defenses, he can burn opponents who double team. However, all of that is irrelevant unless he can master the intricacies of scoring in the low post. That means working on footwork, adding a reliable turnaround bank shot, and picking up a couple of counter moves to keep defenses honest. In other words, it will take at least one more summer of hard work.

At this point, it's important to remind ourselves that King James is 22 years old, which is the age of most college seniors. He's been in the league for four years, so our expectations keep growing, but by any reasonable standard he's still but a pup.

In light of that, it's not surprising that he still has some holes in his game, or that a team with the experience, talent, and cohesiveness of the Spurs could take advantage of it. The scary part is that even with those weaknesses, he's still as good as any player in the league. If he develops in these two areas, he'll be unguardable.

There's another silver lining here for Cavs fans, if they're looking for it. While it's certainly unlikely that Cleveland will put any kind of real scare into the Spurs as far as winning the series is concerned, I can easily see them pulling out a game or two while we're still in Cleveland.

That's because the Cavs, quite honestly, badly outplayed San Antonio in Game 3. They outhustled them, outworked them on the glass, and got higher quality shots on both ends. The reason Cleveland lost was simply that they missed a bunch of wide-open shots. If they get those opportunities again in Game 3, they'll knock them down.

The biggest surprise was Cavs guard Daniel Gibson, who finally got a much-deserved start in favor of the hobbled Larry Hughes, but proceeded to shoot 1-for-10 from the floor, including misses on all five of his 3-point attempts. That accounted for a big chunk of Cleveland's 3-for-19 effort from downtown, which in turn was the biggest reason the Cavs lost the game. But with Gibson shooting 41.9% on triples in the regular season and 41.7% in the playoffs, the Spurs would be ill-advised to give him those looks again tonight.

Yet here I go again, talking about the Cavs. That's all anyone seems to be doing, because once again we're taking San Antonio's excellence for granted. The Spurs are so understated and so calmly efficient that we've become bored with them.

But if we're bored now, one shudders to think how we'll feel when they're here next year … and the year after that … and the year after that. Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, and Tony Parker are showing no signs of slowing down, and meanwhile every other veteran role player in the league knows that this is the place to sign if you want to win a ring (see Finley, Michael, and Vaughn, and Jacque). Thus, one has to think there's a good chance the Popovich-Duncan era could produce a fifth title next year, if not more in the seasons beyond.

So yes, I've been a witness this week, just as the billboards around town are imploring. But it's had nothing to do with LeBron James. I'm witnessing the coronation of these San Antonio Spurs as one of the giants of the game's history. The Spurs are a classy, compelling dynasty worthy of our respect … and, maybe someday, our attention.

*Disclaimer - Views expressed within this story are not necessarily the views of this Blog

RUGBY: Tri-Nations Preview - Australia

Wednesday 13th June 2007

The Wallabies are virtually down and out. They are regarded as no-hopers for both the Tri-Nations and Rugby World Cup tournaments - or so their critics would have us believe.

Following the unprecedented poor performances of the Australian franchises in the Super 14 - the Brumbies in fifth place were their best performers, followed by the Force in seventh, while the Waratahs and Reds propped up the bottom of the table - the critics were convinced that the Wallabies are there for the taking.

And they did indeed look vulnerable in their opening match of the year against Wales - they were indeed there for the taking. However, the Aussies showed some real character in coming back to sneak a 29-23 win and then whitewash the Welsh (31-0) in the second Test. They showed further growth in thrashing the Fijians 49-0 the following week.

While a number of questions remain over the Australians' ability to step up in crunch matches, they at least showed they will not be the cannon fodder most expected them to be.

What makes it even more interesting is that with the 2007 Tri-Nations series reduced to a six-Test tournament (two home matches each) - to allow for the
Rugby World Cup which kicks off in France on 7 September - the attrition rate will be a lot less on the teams, which will certainly benefit the Wallabies.

The key for Australia will be how their old guard of George Gregan, Stephen Larkham and Stirling Mortlock perform. These remain the key players for the Wallabies and that is why a shortened event - which reduces the risk of serious injury - can benefit them.

You still wouldn't make them favourites, but anybody writing the Wallabies off do so at their own peril.

Strengths: They have experience in abundance in the backline - three of the wisest heads in world rugby in George Gregan (a world record 123 test caps), Stephen Larkham (107 caps) and Stirling Mortlock (56 caps). Then there is their continuity game. When the Wallabies get this going they trouble any team in the world.

Weakness: Question marks remain over the ability of their tight forwards and their scrum in particular. Any team that puts them under pressure in the set pieces will disrupt their game plan. They also don't have real dept, especially in the 9/10/12 channel.

Coach: A career rugby coach, John Connolly has more than 15 years coaching experience at the elite level. He took over from predecessor Eddie Jones as Wallaby coach in February 2006. The man, known to many in rugby circles simply as 'Knuckles', says he is ready for the challenge of preparing the Wallabies for the Rugby World Cup in France in 2007. But first he has to get through this year's Tri-Nations.

Captain: The decision to appoint 'co-captains' (Stirling Mortlock and Phil Waugh) is seen as both visionary and foolhardy. However, it does allow for smooth transition when the wise old heads of Mortlock, Gregan and Larkham move on next year. After returning from his first tour (Europe November 2006) as captain of the Wallabies, Stirling Mortlock is primed to extend his leadership credentials ahead of the 2007 Rugby World Cup. Phil Waugh became the 74th player to captain the Wallabies, leading the team on against Wales at Millennium Stadium on last year's year-end tour.

Previous campaigns:

2006: Second
2005: Third
2004: Second
2003: Second
2002: Second
2001: Champions
2000: Champions
1999: Second
1998: Second
1997: Third
1996: Third

2007 prospects: They will put up stern resistance, but their tight forwards frailties and lack of depth will count against them. Third place (or last place if you will) finish.

Fixtures:

June 16: v South Africa, Newlands, Cape Town - 15.00 (13.00 GMT)
June 30: v New Zealand, MCG, Melbourne - 20.00 (10.00 GMT)
July 7: v South Africa, Telstra Stadium, Sydney - 20.00 (10.00 GMT)
July 21: v New Zealand, Eden Park, Auckland - 19.35 (07.35 GMT)

Squad: Adam Ashley-Cooper, Alistair Baxter, Mark Chisholm, Sam Cordingley, Matt Dunning, Rocky Elsom, Adam Freier, Mark Gerrard, Matt Giteau, George Gregan, Stephen Hoiles, Julian Huxley, Stephen Larkham, Drew Mitchell, Stephen Moore, Stirling Mortlock (c), Wycliff Palu, Benn Robinson, Nathan Sharpe, Guy Shepherdson, George Smith, Scott Staniforth, Lote Tuqiri, Dan Vickerman, Phil Waugh (c)

By Jan de Koning _ Planet Rugby

*Disclaimer - Views expressed within this story are not necessarily the views of this Blog

RUGBY: Tri-Nations Preview - South Africa

Wednesday 13th June 2007

For perhaps the first time ever, the Springboks head into this year's Tri-Nations series with a sense of fear and awe attached to their name by their opponents.

South African rugby is on a high.

Coming off the back of unprecedented Super Rugby success, with the Bulls and the Sharks both winning home semi-finals, Springbok coach Jake White and captain John Smit seem ready to assert some dominance in world rugby.

Not only has there been domestic success, but the national line-up is looking settled and fairly polished to boot.

The pack is big. There are no two ways about it; it is a big and mean South African pack, and that has always meant something when facing Australia and New Zealand.

The backs, whilst not being perhaps the slickest and most cohesive outfit, are scoring tries - albeit relying on the likes of Bryan Habana and Jean de Villiers to carve them out of nothing.

But perhaps this optimism needs to be tempered somewhat. Whilst the rugby has been plain-sailing, the backroom politics have been torrid, with Jake White incessantly clashing with his employers.

Added to this is the thought that if you get on top of this large South African side, as England did in the first half of their last meeting, the soft underbelly of this side is all too easily exposed, and there is perhaps not a lot left after speed and power are nullified.

Strengths: This team, as said before, is a settled outfit, and the forwards' power must be rated as their chief weapon. Added to that, is the backline's ability to pounce on opposition errors to score quick and easy tries.

Weaknesses: The chief weakness of this side is its conservatism. White is a conservative selector, and the players are big and powerful, but it is questionable whether they have the pattern and ability to win the big games when mere strength is not enough.

Coach: Jake White is under fire, make no mistake. A shocking season last year, which also saw him fall out with the bosses of SA Rugby over contractual and then transformation issues, sees him under vast pressure this year. Added to this, is the endless Luke Watson-saga. Besides the politics, this needs to be the year where White actually proves that all his talk about building the perfect Rugby World Cup combination can come good. It could go either way.

Captain: Hooker John Smit has not always been the public's favourite. And like Jake White, his play has become more and more conservative and traditional. In past years, his form has not been good at all, but this year's Super 14 emerged as his finest performance in a competition yet. He has shown that the players back him, but the question remains whether he is able to lead a Springbok side to victory when they are trailing the All Blacks or Wallabies with only minutes to go.

Previous campaigns:

2006: Third
2005: Second
2004: Champions
2003: Third
2002: Third
2001: Third
2000: Third
1999: Third
1998: Champions
1997: Second
1996: Second

2007 Prospects: All the talk has been positive, and the Australians and New Zealanders have enjoyed talking up the Springboks ahead of this year's competition. But it is going to be a tough campaign for the Springboks. The All Blacks are still the most exciting team in world rugby, and the Australians may be a dark horse if they can hold the fort in the front row. The Springboks will finish second.

Squad: Os du Randt, Gurthro Steenkamp, John Smit (captain), Gary Botha, BJ Botha, CJ van der Linde, Victor Matfield, Bakkies Botha, Johann Muller, Albert van den Berg, Schalk Burger, Pedrie Wannenburg, Juan Smith, Danie Rossouw, Bob Skinstad, Pierre Spies, Fourie du Preez, Ruan Pienaar, Michael Claassens, Butch James, Derick Hougaard, Jean de Villiers, Jaque Fourie, Wynand Olivier, Waylon Murray, Ashwin Willemse, Akona Ndungane, JP Pietersen, Percy Montgomery, Francois Steyn.

Fixtures:

16 June: v Australia, Newlands, Cape Town 15.00 (13.00 GMT)
23 June: v New Zealand, ABSA Stadium, Durban, 15.00 (13.00 GMT)
7 July: v Australia, Stadium Australia, Sydney, 20.00 (10.00 GMT)
14 July: v New Zealand, Jade Stadium, Christchurch, 19.35 (9.35 GMT)

By Chris Waldburger - Planet Rugby

*Disclaimer - Views expressed within this story are not necessarily the views of this Blog

RUGBY: Tri-Nations Preview - New Zealand

Wednesday 13th June 2007

In case you have been living in a cocoon for the past couple of years, New Zealand are the world's number one rugby team.

They are odds-on favourites to take the Rugby World Cup in France later this year, they have a squad depth that creates a green mist of envy over the faces of all of coach Graham Henry's counterparts, they are unbeaten in 23 matches at home (likely to be 24 by the time the Tri-Nations starts assuming they beat Canada) and they play a brand of rugby that has neutrals all over the place swooning with delight.

Most of the players in visiting teams fall over themselves to confess that even against the All Blacks B team - whatever that may be - all the other international A teams would struggle. Everyone tries to find a chink in the armour, but the armour on this team is eerily like the armour of the advanced model in Terminator II: even if you cleave it apart once, it simply melts back together, forms itself into a lethal cutting tool, and then slices its opposition apart.

One final test probably awaits in the form of Jake White's Springboks. White has masterminded the All Blacks' only two defeats of the past couple of years, basing his tactics on size and speed and a shamelessly bullish implementation of the two. Only the Boks have been able to bundle the All Blacks to the floor, and keep them there until the final whistle.

Graham Henry's start-of-year re-conditioning programme could have been a protest against the amount of rugby foisted upon all the players by the various competition bodies, but lurking in the back of Henry's mind might also have been an idea that his players needed just a little more muscle to cope with their likely challengers from across the time zones.

That re-conditioning appeared to be backfiring for a time, with several players getting early-season injuries mid-season in the Super 14, and many not up to speed initially. In the first Test against the weak French, the All Blacks as a team struggled to get into top gear.

But last week's French re-match saw a vast improvement, and it signalled the start of an upward trend for this team. The trick is to know when to peak ... Tri-Nations or Rugby World Cup? Time will tell.

Strengths: The best front row in the world, a perfect combination of physicality and speed in the back-row, the best fly-half in the world, and a set of backs that know each other's ins and outs intimately. Oh, and a reserve XV every bit as good as the first XV in most positions.

Weaknesses: There lingers a doubt about the ability to withstand a sustained physical onslaught, and the line-out is prone to occasional bouts of the yips. But instances of either symptom are few and far between, and becoming fewer and further.

Coach: Graham Henry is an ex-grammar school headmaster who has taken Auckland to four consecutive NPC titles, the Auckland Blues to a brace of Super 12 titles, taken Wales out of a deep slump, and taken New Zealand to the brink of greatness. The Rugby World Cup would cap a fine career.

Captain: Richie McCaw made his All Blacks debut at the age of 20 in Ireland in 2000, and inherited the captain's mantle from Tana Umaga after the Grand Slam tour of 2005 - he had been heir apparent for a long time. He is by some distance the best openside in the world.

Previous campaigns:

1996: Champions
1997: Champions
1998: Third
1999: Champions
2000: Second
2001: Second
2002: Champions
2003: Champions
2004: Third
2005: Champions
2006: Champions

2007 prospects: They really ought to win. There could be a stumble on the road in Durban, but expect the performances to improve and improve as the tournament wears on.

Fixtures:

June 23: v South Africa, ABSA Stadium, Durban - 15.00 (13.00 GMT)
June 30: v Australia, Melbourne Cricket Ground - 20.00 (10.00 GMT)
July 14: v South Africa, Jade Stadium, Christchurch - 19.35 (07.35 GMT)
July 21: v Australia, Eden Park, Auckland - 19.35 (07.35 GMT)

Squad:

Forwards: Ali Williams, Andrew Hore, Anton Oliver, Carl Hayman, Chris Jack, Chris Masoe, Greg Rawlinson, Jerry Collins, John Schwalger, Keith Robinson, Keven Mealamu, Neemia Tialata, Reuben Thorne, Richie McCaw, Rodney So'oialo, Ross Filipo, Tony Woodcock, Troy Flavell.

Backs: Aaron Mauger, Brendon Leonard, Byron Kelleher, Conrad Smith, Dan Carter, Doug Howlett, Isaia Toeava, JoE Rokocoko, Leon MacDonald, Luke McAlister, Ma'a Nonu, Malili Muliaina, Nick Evans, Piri Weepu, Rico Gear, Sitiveni Sivivatu.

By Danny Stephens - Planet Rugby

*Disclaimer - Views expressed within this story are not necessarily the views of this Blog

Basketball: Two Billboards Tell the Story of the NBA Finals

June 13 (Bloomberg) -- You don't need an off-the-charts basketball IQ to understand the dynamic of these National Basketball Association Finals.

Heck, no.

Only two simple things are required to figure out what's what:

1) A car.

2) The ability to crane one's neck.

Let me explain.

The most-direct route to the AT&T Center from downtown San Antonio requires a short drive along Interstate 35 heading north. On your left, way up high, there's a billboard promoting the city's basketball team, the Spurs.

It reads: ``Team Is Everything.''

That's it. It would be a mistake to dismiss that proclamation as some marketing slogan contrived in the executive suite. It's more. Around San Antonio, it's a how-to-play, how-to- win-it-all mantra.

No photos of Tim Duncan or Tony Parker or Manu Ginobili. The face of the franchise is the championship trophy.

There's a billboard in Cleveland, too, adjacent to Quicken Loans Arena, or, as the locals refer to it, the Q.

It's big. Really big. Ten stories tall, to be exact.

Only it delivers a different message than its Texas counterpart.

If the Spurs are defined by an all-for-one motto, then the Cavaliers are all about one.

The Cleveland billboard, erected by Nike, shows LeBron James, in flight, right arm cocked, about to dunk the basketball. Funny, but through the first three games of the Finals LeBron has dunked the basketball a grand total of, let's see now, once.

One Against Five

The billboards provide the perfect metaphor for what we're seeing in the series.

It's one against five.

Last night in Cleveland they played Game 3, a quagmire the Spurs won, 75-72, equaling the second-lowest-scoring game in championship-series history.

``We set the western world of offensive basketball back 10 years,'' was the assessment of Spurs coach Gregg Popovich, whose team can celebrate its third championship in five seasons with a win tomorrow night.

Yes, it was ugly. It bordered on unwatchable at times, which helps to explain the plunging television ratings. There were turnovers. And missed shots. And blown layups. You name it. Aesthetics were absent.

In Cleveland they're fond of saying ``Rise Up'' when talking about their Cavaliers, who are making their first appearance in the championship round. Pack up is more like it.

Go It Alone

But something tells me we'll be seeing this team on this stage again.

No single player, no matter how big, fast or strong, can beat the Spurs alone. Some other teams, maybe. Not San Antonio.

If Duncan doesn't beat you, Parker will. If not Parker then Ginobili. Or even Bruce Bowen, who is expected to stuff LeBron, not the stat sheet.

Bowen not only harassed the NBA's golden goose into yet another mediocre shooting night, he added 13 invaluable points, hitting four of five 3-point attempts on a night when there seemed to be a lid over the baskets. LeBron even missed layups, ``chippies,'' he called them.

LeBron finished with 25 points on 9-of-23 shooting. He also had five turnovers. Worse, down by two and with less than 15 seconds left LeBron inexplicably passed to Anderson Varejao -- a rebounder, not scorer -- who tossed up an awkward looking shot that never had a chance.

Now's the Time

If ever there was a time for selfish, do-it-yourself LeBron to emerge that was it. Lose and learn.

Kudos to the unsung hero of the series, Bowen, who has made the Man look mortal.

``Brucey was unbelievable. He did everything for us,'' Duncan said of Bowen's Game 3. ``He'll get it done, and it doesn't matter if he gets one shot or eight shots. He's going to be in the same place at the same time. He's going to do the same thing. That's what defines our team, what he does.''

Perhaps someday the basketball-watching world will appreciate these Spurs for their commitment to defense, fundamentals and selflessness. It's doubtful, but you never know.

You have to, on some level, feel for LeBron, who is being hounded by double- and triple-teams. If it seems like he is, at times, alone out there it's because he is.

``This is all about them,'' LeBron said of San Antonio's ability to impose its will. ``It's all about me not trying to force anything and to try to go for it when I can.''

How They Do It

Perhaps next time the Cavs reach the Finals, when management adds a reliable shooter or two, someone who can make a collapsing defense pay for ganging up on LeBron, they'll actually win it.

For now let's celebrate what the Spurs are about to accomplish. Not only what they do, but how they do it.

After the game someone told Duncan the national media seems to be leaning toward naming Parker as Finals Most Valuable Player. Back in San Antonio -- it was pointed out -- polls show Duncan as the overwhelming favorite.

Would Duncan vote for Parker?

``Sure,'' he said, smiling. ``As long as we get to four that's all that matters.''

Team Is Everything.

(Scott Soshnick is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)

To contact the writer of this column: Scott Soshnick in New York at ssoshnick@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: June 13, 2007 09:39 EDT

*Disclaimer - Views expressed within this story are not necessarily the views of this Blog

RUGBY: Lock shocker won't undermine these ABs

View larger image Yahoo!Xtra

13/06/2007

Marc Hinton

While the lock "crisis" gives us all something to worry about at a time of the four-year rugby cycle when New Zealanders have a natural tendency to navel gaze, it's hard to escape the feeling that Graham Henry's All Blacks are smack-bang on target to bring home the bacon.

Sure, the margin of error may have been diminished somewhat in the second row, and that line could even be plunged into the negative regions if Chris Jack doesn't make the trip to Durban next week because of the pending birth of his first child.

Equally, I'm not convinced that Ross Filipo is a test-quality lock (much as I'm not convinced that Reuben Thorne is one either), though I could see the All Blacks getting by well enough with a second row of Troy Flavell and Greg Rawlinson for the Boks.

And, let's face it, if the All Blacks play well enough in the other areas of their game -- at the scrum, getting numbers to the breakdown, clearing quick ball, and using it efficiently through that devastating backline of theirs -- then it shouldn't matter too much that they're down a few front-rankers in the second row.

This, after all, is just the sort of thing that Henry has been planning for with his rotation, reconditioning and wide selection net. He's been building depth just so as little crises like these don't bite too deep when it counts.

Sure, the situation at lock is a little more dire then even the most avowed pessimist could have predicted, but when you still have two players as good as Jack (baby's arrival notwithstanding) and Troy Flavell to call on, all is a long way from being lost. And have you noticed? That Rawlinson is a big lump of a man himself.

Further, this is only the Tri Nations we are talking about. In case you've forgotten, it is largely irrelevant in World Cup year. The All Blacks won it in imperious fashion in 2003, but lost the one that counted against the Wallabies later that year. And we all know which result still sticks in our craw.

Everything about these All Blacks tells me they're right on track to bring the Cup home later this year. There simply isn't a weakness in their game and there's also a consistency of performance that says they just don't have a "semifinal shocker" in their makeup.

Rightly you might point out that the Springboks are a concern and that they seem to be coming right at the right time. Sure enough. But the Boks at home are one thing, and the South Africans in neutral territory are another altogether. Their record simply ain't that flash anywhere but in front of their manic fans.

They'll still be the ones to beat come September and October, most probably, but there are so many things yet that could undermine Jake White's team that it will probably be 50-50 whether they can work their way through the other side of the draw to the final.

Whereas I just can't see Henry's men missing a beat. That scrum is simply fabulous, the loose trio playing at a level few in the world can aspire to and as a backline the All Blacks simply don't have a peer in the world game. Moreover, their execution of, and ability to change, the game-plan is light years ahead of previous generations.

The lineout will worry some people, and it is such a contestable area these days that it can develop a wobble or two. But since the late-2006 correction, there's been a much more solid look about the All Black set piece.

What about selection? Is there a Leon MacDonald or a Christian Cullen brain-explosion lurking to undermine Henry?

Quite possibly. If he moves Mils Muliaina from fullback to centre it has the potential to be a negative factor. I sincerely think that, if only because I don't believe in ignoring history. Or tempting fate.

Mils would do a fine job in the No 13 jersey, don't get me wrong. But he's the world's best fullback, and I implore Henry and co to leave him there.

What they must decide is whether they will risk the extraordinary talents (and occasional foibles) of Isaia Toeava at centre, or go with the more dependable, but less explosive Conrad Smith.

It's a similar call at second five, though for mine Luke McAlister must be the first choice. As good as Aaron Mauger is, McAlister is better. He hits harder on defence, runs better into the gaps and can distribute and kick equally as well.

View larger image

He flies through the air with the greatest of ease ... Joe Rokocoko©Getty Images/AFP

Elsewhere this team probably selects itself. Joe Rokocoko has shown that he deserves a spot alongside the world's best wing Sitiveni Sivivatu and Byron Kelleher will be the man sending Dan Carter on his way, despite the qualities of Piri Weepu who will have to wait till next year to become the premier halfback. And at hooker it's a coin-toss between the power of Anton Oliver and the explosiveness of Kevvy Mealamu. Either does the trick nicely.

So how important is this Tri Nations then? Not very, is the simple answer.

If the All Blacks win in Durban and Melbourne they'll tighten their stranglehold on their rivals, but really they have a fairly firm hold on them already. And if they lose, they'll have a chance to put things right back at home soon after anyway.

And really regardless of how things play out over the next month or so it all comes down to the one-off in France later in the year anyway.

The thing is: Henry's men are playing at such a peak of performance, that I believe they simply won't be vulnerable to that one shocker that turns up every four years. I'm convinced that's simply not in their repertoire any more.

By the way, earlier this week I stated the case for Jono Gibbes as a replacement lock for the All Blacks. I understand the Chiefs second rower is injured, and I figured that was the case at the time, the big fella having been withdrawn from the Maori and Junior All Blacks squads.

But I just wonder how injured he is? Badly enough that he would have turned the All Blacks down? We may never know, but I just wonder whether Henry should have made that call just to find out.

Regardless we can only wish Ali Williams and Keith Robinson the speediest of recoveries. Both should be there for the Cup, if only for our peace of mind.

*Disclaimer - Views expressed within this story are not necessarily the views of this Blog

RUGBY: Dickinson was ready to apologise to French

11/06/2007

NZPA - Yahooxtra

Australian rugby referee Stuart Dickinson said he was ready to apologise to the French rugby team for some errors when coach Bernard Laporte verbally attacked him in public.

Dickinson is expected to file a report today to both the Australian Rugby Union and the International Rugby Board regarding Friday's verbal stoush in a Wellington hotel.

Laporte allegedly threatened to have a negative influence on Dickinson's career.

Fairfax general manager of sport, Trevor McKewen, overheard the tense exchange between Dickinson and Laporte.

"If you are appointed to any French games at the World Cup, the French team will not turn up," Laporte was heard telling Dickinson.

IRB referees head Paddy O'Brien said there was no excuse for Laporte's behaviour if he had threatened Dickinson.

He said Dickinson was not at his best in the All Blacks' 42-11 first-test win over France, which had sparked Laporte's tirade on the eve of the second test.

Dickinson was a touch judge in the second test, won 61-10 by the All Blacks.

"It wasn't the usual Dickinson refereeing and he knows that," O'Brien said of the first test.

That did not give Laporte the right to abuse him.

Australian Rugby Union referees' boss Peter Marshall said he spoke to Dickinson about the incident on Sunday.

"I just want due process, not to create a storm," Marshall said.

"It's important not to get too carried away but let's not ignore it either."

Dickinson said Laporte's behaviour was unexpected but would not elaborate.

"It's the first time I've run across something like this," Dickinson told Fairfax media.

He said he had arranged to meet Laporte in the foyer of a Wellington hotel because he had heard Laporte was upset about his handling of the first test in Auckland.

He said he had reviewed the video of the game, spotted only minimal mistakes and was prepared to apologise to the French team for them.

"I was talking to Bernard and looking to apologise for some of my decisions," Dickinson said.

"I wanted to make clear that I made one or two errors and was ready to put my hand up. It was probably not the most favourable of discussions.

"Bernard became upset and, not wanting it to become a full-blown argument, I just thought `let's just get through this' then I'd wait for things to calm down and for cool heads."

Using his laptop, Laporte confronted Dickinson with selected highlights of his performance from the first test and said: "You do this tomorrow and you will be finished."

Marshall said that was disappointing.

"There are more appropriate channels to go through if coaches feel they haven't been fairly treated," Marshall said.

"Those reports go to the IRB for future referee selections for test matches."

O'Brien said he expected a report from Dickinson today.

IRB spokesman Greg Thomas said if Laporte was found to have breached the code of conduct then any disciplinary action against the coach would initially be in the hands of the French national union (FFR).

Thomas said if the FFR's response was not deemed sufficient then the IRB could impose further punishment.

Dickinson was ready to apologise to French

RUGBY: Gibbes oversight defies belief

11/06/2007

Marc Hinton - yahooxtra

Am I missing something here? Why the heck isn't Jono Gibbes being fast-tracked into the All Blacks? Has the world gone completely crazy? Or more to the point have our national selectors?

The phrase "locking crisis" has been banded about with indecent haste since Ali Williams (broken jaw) and Keith Robinson (blown calf) joined the scrapheap of All Black second-rowers at the weekend. Unlike James Ryan and Jason Eaton, they may be back in time for the World Cup. But it's going to be touch and go for both.

Which leaves us with two world-class locks still standing in the All Black ranks, in the form of Chris Jack and Troy Flavell. And not much left in the way of room for error as the Tri Nations kickoff looms following this weekend's final training match in Hamilton.

Unlike some of you out there I'm refusing to even acknowledge Reuben Thorne as a legitimate test second-rower. No offence, but I'm not even convinced he's a decent No 6 let alone able to foot it with the gargantuans of the game in the middle of the engine room.

Now we hear the reinforcements have been called in from the Junior All Blacks in the form of Greg Rawlinson and Ross Filipo. (Again the fact they've decided to summon two of them reinforces my belief Thorne is no legit lock.) Sorry, folks, but this pair just don't do it for me and this is where I start wondering what the flaming heck Gibbes has done to deserve such a sidestep.

Presuming he's fully fit, it's extraordinary to me that the All Black selectors haven't whistled him up with indecent haste. Were they watching the Super 14? New Zealand's best team, by some margin, when the round-robin ended was the Chiefs. And Gibbes was a key performer for them in combination with the now-nobbled Robinson.

Gibbes is everything the All Blacks need in this time of "crisis". He's experienced, he's hard, he's athletic, he's a big-game player, and he's a proven performer. Granted, he has had his own injury issues of late, but hey if you're a New Zealand lock these days, who hasn't?

The South African Rawlinson is a solid performer. But nothing more. And he's off to play his football in the UK at the end of this year. Besides, I'd prefer a Kiwi if it's about finding someone to win us the World Cup. Filipo is an honest footballer, no doubt, but he's badly undersized for the test level and has major question marks over his ability to take the step up in class.

For mine, if Gibbes wasn't available - or wanted, for that matter - I'd be more tempted to look at Otago second-rower Tom Donnelly who's a big, raw-boned lad who looks to have more than a hint of test potential about him. Let's face it, we're only one more twist of fate away from having to throw one of these blokes in against Victor Matfield and Bakkies Botha, which is definitely no place for the faint-hearted.

In the meantime I'm not panicking, despite this worrying trend for our second-rowers to meet horrible fates. Surely now the luck is due to change.

And the reason I'm not panicking is because Troy Flavell is still running round.

This guy could now be the answer to our prayers. He's that important.

Let's consider his performance on Saturday night at the Cake Tin. He played 50 minutes in the end, and made a damn good fist of it. You could tell, even amid all the carnage and mayhem and one-way traffic, that he has a class about him that could be vital in much stiffer contests to come.

And if ever there was an excuse for him to fail he had it at the weekend. He'd turned up at the ground expecting to sit in the stands and watch, like the rest of us. He'd even pumped some serious iron earlier that day, expanding as much energy as he could given the frustrations of the waiting brief handed to him by Graham Henry.

Then Robinson goes down in the warmup, Flavell's suddenly told he's playing and before too long he'd not just riding the pine, but out there running round in anger. He never even missed a stride.

That to me is a good sign. A great one even. The guy's a brute with extraordinary skills for one so, er, huge. But he's also been round the block a few times now and nothing rattles him so much these days.

That's a good thing. For I suspect all of a sudden Troy Flavell is a very important man indeed in this All Black setup.

*Disclaimer - Views expressed within this story are not necessarily the views of this Blog