UNITED STATES QUAD RUGBY ASSOCIATION

January 2003

A Changing of the Guard?
By Joe Cissna

In the middle of January several teams ventured to the windy heights of Portland, Oregon and it wasn’t just for Rachel Kammeyer’s sloppy beef dogs, although that is good reason.  Despite these juicy treats, the focus was on rugby, Pacific Northwest style.  Burnt aluminum filled the nostrils and the loud impacts of front ends on aluminum spoke guards filled the ears, as several closely matched teams went head to head for some midseason fun. 

Pacific Coast rugby is strongly represented by teams from the sunny Southwest. Three of them, Sharp, Northridge and UofA, made the extra effort of venturing north.  In deference to those folks, whose idea of chill is when you sit too far from the patio heat lamp, Portland dished up some sunny weather and only a short dose of good ol’ bone chilling breeze.  Inside the gym, things heated up. 

Friday evening’s games were won without fanfare by Denver, Portland, Sharp and B.C..  The hustling seemed as much about staying warm as to outplay opponents.  Saturday’s play turned things up a notch.  B.C. played solidly against Portland through three quarters of play, but Portland’s thick bench prevailed in fourth quarter securing a consistent five point lead and finishing 8 points ahead at the buzzer. 

In Saturday pool play, scoring leaders Garrett Osborne (Denver) and Rick Draney (Sharp) generated some excitement, keeping their teams even for most of the game.  Denver got a two point lead late in first half, taking advantage of a line-up change by Sharp.  A Denver turnover early in the third quarter again reset the game, 18-18.  Trading points and turnovers, the two teams duked it out, rematching scores several times.  Osborne’s scoring repertoire included a couple McNair-like passes to his post-man Todd Caschette.  Then Denver had control problems and dropped two points down.  As the third quarter was closing, Todd Caschette redeemed a couple of earlier bad passes with a critical blocking steal, allowing Denver to enter the fourth quarter tied.   

The fourth quarter proved to be anybody’s game, with Denver coming up 32-31, then Sharp 39-38.  Denver continued to show spirit staying strong despite a two-point deficit with 1:40 remaining.  Then back court pressure by Sharp resulted in a bad long ball by Garrett Osborne.  That pass proved critical when Denver managed to force a turnover and a last second score to bring them one point shy of Sharp at the buzzer.  “I was trying to make something happen- our team was down”, said Garrett after the game.  Despite some frustrations, Denver played solidly.  When asked if they felt they had a handle on things during the game, Osborne replied “No, no control”, which might have spoken to the tone of the game as a whole.  There seemed an equal share of turnovers by the two familiar contenders. 

“We’ve played this kind of game with Denver before.” said Draney after the game “In a mid-season tournament, we’re going deep in the roster to build the team.  This was a good game for that.” 

In Denver’s next game, against Portland, could they maintain the intensity of the Sharp game two hours earlier?  Portland was cautiously optimistic, with a home crowd and a fairly easy earlier win over Arizona.   

The teams’ semifinal match started out with unfettered points trading until Denver’s control problems flared up with a bobbled ball and bad pass.  Portlander Will Groulx got a big hand on an in bounds for one turnover, but gave Denver some slack when he tried a little insider trading and got caught.  Otherwise, Portland played on the up and up and managed a three point lead after the first quarter.   

With good pressure, Portland forced bad passes to offset inbounding troubles of their own in the second quarter.  Portland’s Lynn Nelson also revealed his passing difficulties, preventing Portland from otherwise running away early.  But a quick point to end the final seconds of the half gave them a six-point lead.

At the start of the second half, Groulx chased down a long pass, reaching for Portland’s 28^th point and exciting the home crowd.  Then Groulx, a second year player, revealed a weakness for the sideline he has had since he started the sport.  Denver capitalized on it, forcing back to back turnovers and keeping alive their hopes for a rally.  Portland showed the other side of their scrappiness, forcing turnovers to maintain a six point lead going into the fourth.  After their double dose of high intensity play, Denver finally faltered during the fourth and Portland ran away for record earnings and earning a match against Sharp in the finals. 

But would their leveraged buy-out of Denver pay off dividends in a match against Sharp in the next day’s final?  Sharp’s Saturday crossover game against B.C. took place with playful sideline banter by their veteran starters, as they watched their developing players hold their own- much needed rest.  

On Sunday, in the 3-4 match, (Denver vs. BC), Denver came out fresh from a quiet night, looking to put a decisive close to the tournament.  They soundly beat B.C., who found that a game with the feisty Harlequins is not good hangover medicine. 

Sharp’s approach to a midseason tournament models a developmental approach other teams may do well to take heed of.  Rather than making the tournament a brawl of starters reasserting themselves, they switch their lineup at critical moments and force leadership on their developmental players.  That comes easy when veteran players have nothing left to prove.  All around, good play results.  But that strategy far from guarantees a win, especially against a host team with everything to prove.

The first quarter of the Tournament final was nervy for Portland. Eager to test their mettle against the “beatable” veteran champs, they made some simple errors, but balanced with scrappy play for an early lead.  Sharp turnovers gave Portland substance to their self-talk and settled them a bit.  As the game settled in, the two teams matched their intensities and took up a moderate scoring pace.  It was a tight game of possession, and it took Sharp a while to slowly come even.  Sharp closed the half up 21-20, thanks to an exciting give and go score by Draney with eight of the last nine seconds.

Sharp began the second half as they had the first- waiting in the key to see what kind of set play Portland could put together.  Portland executed the point, then forced a bad pass to take scoring advantage.  Portland kept their one-point edge through a slow scoring third quarter in which both team’s defense worked hard to change the scoring rhythm.  Sharp, true to form, worked their bench to make something happen.  Twice they forced turnovers and with 30 seconds remaining in the third quarter, forced a jump.  For Draney and this teammates, it was “just what we wanted”.  But faced with a momentum change, Portland answered with hustle.  They regained a bobbled ball, and reigned in a deflected pass in the final seconds that Groulx took across the line for a crowd pleasing score at the buzzer. 

If the game started out nervy for the Portland fans, the fourth quarter was unnerving.  Scoring slowed even further with both teams playing an edgy defense.  Portland would force a bad pass, Sharp would make a steal.  Then a jump and a steal gave Portland a 31-29 lead with possession.  But before the Portland could even take a breath, Sharp’s Steve Kaliszewski forced a critical turnover.  This was followed by an out of bounds that went to Sharp, giving them possession and a chance to tie at 31-30.  In a mid-court struggle, Portland managed to regain possession.  Portland’s Chad Farrington, proving that constant defense can put you in the right place at the right time, got a piece of the ball, which Groulx scooped and scored to make it 33-31 Portland with :39 remaining.  Equipment problems forced Sharp to expend their last time out.  When play resumed, Draney made a long pass that dropped in Farrington’s lap, who turned it around for a clinching score.  The game ended as an unprecedented Portland win- 34-32.  Always the gentlemen, Sharp was lined up early to offer their sporting compliments to the exuberant home team. 

Portland’s scoring showed that their additional line-ups and maturing players are working well this season.  Asked what the game strategy was, Coach Suhr said “to put the pressure on players other than Rick and Dan” [Draney and McCauley].  Was their win signaling a changing of the guard?  Suhr says, “We can only hope”.

Tournament Results

How to Contact us | Quad Rugby Central Index

Home Page | Rugby Calendar | Sports Page | Score Board | USQRA Zone | Files