We value your privacy

We and our partners store and/or access information on a device, such as cookies and process personal data, such as unique identifiers and standard information sent by a device for personalised ads and content, ad and content measurement, and audience insights, as well as to develop and improve products.

With your permission we and our partners may use precise geolocation. You may click to consent to our and our partners’ processing as described above. Please note that some processing of your personal data may not require your consent, but you have a right to object to such processing.

More Options

Fri 9 Oct 2015 | 11:07
Embarrassed Joe Launchbury admits receiving Man of the Match award was strange

11
Comments

England lock Joe Launchbury, who was bizarrely named Man of the Match after their loss to Australia, has admitted that he was as surprised as anyone to receive the award. It's not the first time during this World Cup that the award has gone to the wrong person, as organisers have adopted a strange system that selects nominees long before full time.

In the case of England vs Australia, both David Pocock and Bernard Foley had great games. Either one could have been named as the Mastercard Man of the Match, but Foley ultimately made all the difference, scoring a whopping 28 of Australia's points and finishing two excellently taken tries.

Launchbury however was given the award, and as you can see from the awkward image above, he was visibly embarassed by it.

"It was extremely strange to be named man of the match. It was embarrassing and it definitely won't go on the mantelpiece at home," Launchbury said this week. "It was a strange award that could have gone to a whole host of guys on their team."

This year the organisers of the tournament decided that the award would be selected via a process that sees a shortlist of three nominated by the official world radio feed, before fans can vote for their preferred choice on Twitter.

The fault in that is that it takes place roughly 18 minutes before the match has even finished.

As we all know, a lot can happen during that time. Another fault is that it becomes a popularity contest, and in this case, perhaps due to the timezone or sheer weight of numbers, the English player received the most votes.

We saw in New Zealand's game with Georgia that despite the latter losing, popular no-nonsense forward Mamuka Gorgodze received the award, while in South Africa's match against the USA this week, Bryan Habana scored a hat-trick (and nearly more) to equal Jonah Lomu's try scoring record in World Cups, but wasn't even nominated.

While a lot of it is indeed subjective, to choose the nominees so early isn't a fair reflection of the actual performanes. Launchbury was excellent, but as the 24-year-old himself said, there were other players who were far more deserving of the award.

As for the look on his face, priceless.

What do you think of the current system?

Posted By: Grant Constable

11 Comments

  • stroudos
    10:49 AM 11/10/2015

    Club level is different, as long as it's just an excuse to make people down pints.

  • drg
    10:10 AM 11/10/2015

    Having received it on numerous occasions at club level I will gallantly fight against any such threat of removal....

    ...paying for your own pint is bullshit...

  • stroudos
    10:46 AM 10/10/2015

    "Man", singular, of the match in rugby is bullshit anyway. I despise the whole proposition.

  • stroudos
    10:44 AM 10/10/2015

    Beats need to take that Robshaw video down too. I hated it from the beginning anyway; now it just feels like he's being trolled with it.

  • jmehrtens
    9:49 AM 10/10/2015

    If you are a supporter of one of the two teams and had to choose 20 mins before time, I can imagine you are more inclined to choose your own. at the end you probably choose someone from the winning team, but if that is not yet determined...

    On top of that there are probably more england supporters who had one choice, and fewer aussie supporters who divided their votes over two players

    Now take into account that the more knowledgable supporters are watching the game and are not inclined to waste time making a phone call, and the result shouldn't surprise anyone.

  • 10stonenumber10
    1:34 AM 10/10/2015

    That's the sort of thing I mean.

    There have been ructions recently with Robshaw and the team about their headphones. Dre Beats were the tournament sponsor, the team got a load of freebies, and the players were criticised for using them instead of Samsung. I don't know about you, but I would be put off my game by such tight scrutiny, even the 50yd walk from the bus to the stadium tunnel became a talking point, what hope did they have on the field? When you are getting psyched for a game, the last thing that should be on your mind is "Am I fulfilling contractual obligations that in no way relate to the upcoming 80 minutes?"

  • drg
    8:19 PM 09/10/2015

    I agree, I feel sorry for launchbury, it's not like he asked for the award. The system is clearly flawed, I'd rather it go to the normal sponsors pick the player system.

  • katman
    6:41 PM 09/10/2015

    *sane, not sand, of course.

  • katman
    6:40 PM 09/10/2015

    I feel sorry for Launchbury. Because it's not like he wasn't good. In fact, he played a blinder and was probably one of the three or four best players on the field. But the award really should have gone to Foley and every sand and sober person knows this.

    Also seems that the organisers know they have a rubbish MTOM system here, but yet they persist with it. If it doesn't work, then can it.

  • eddie-g
    6:05 PM 09/10/2015

    The current system is a joke. In fact, it's such a joke they could improve it by putting the decision in the hands of the citing officer.

  • 5:12 PM 09/10/2015

    Congratulations to Joe Launchbury for winning the "I've only watched rugby twice but he was the only English player available as the other two were Australian" Man of The Match award.

Related Articles