RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
The surprising part is maybe as it's an ongoing issue which now needs to be addressed is why it wasn't made known until now? Or maybe Gats did know and it was thought it could be managed on an ongoing basis. If Gats hadn't been made aware of this he could be a little annoyed, and I wouldn't blame him.

And I suspect yours is the better response to his situation, but it's not the one I had, I actually put down my cup of tea and raised my arms aloft when hearing the news this morning.

well I'm just pleased you put the tea down first!

I agree on what Gatland's response could have been- on the surface he appears to have no issue- as it looks like Billy was never really going to go, unless he did a lot more damage v Exeter.

So, you're happy a player is injured and to make matters worse you openly mocked him by raising your arms above your head. There's a special place in hell for you. If hell existed, that is.

not me gov

I know I'll get 'he's knockjng Billy again' comments and I really want to be wrong, but . . . Billy's shape, musculature and playing style make him injury-prone. He needs managing very, very carefully and a Lions tour could have been disastrous for him (and, therefore, England). We are in with a realistic chance of winning the next RWC. Billy needs to be there in prime form and fitness. It matters a thousand more times than the jamboree, IMO.

Not sure what it is about Billy's shape or muscaluture that makes him injury prone? Seems like a wild stab in the dark...

But yes, the silver lining is definitely that he should get some good rest and a strong Pre-season that he otherwise wouldn't have...as long as his shoulder isn't too bad!

Timbo wrote:Not sure what it is about Billy's shape or muscaluture that makes him injury prone? Seems like a wild stab in the dark...

But yes, the silver lining is definitely that he should get some good rest and a strong Pre-season that he otherwise wouldn't have...as long as his shoulder isn't too bad!

I contend that he, like Tuilagi, is muscle-bound to the point where joints, tendons and ligaments cannot stand the strain. I say that as a layman, possibly in ignorance and I repeat that I hope I am wrong. I first started wittering on the subject about two years ago and, so far, events have not disproved my contention - unfortunately, in both cases!

I believe Billy has the kind of shoulder injury commonplace in the game. I dont think that its got much to do with his body shape, or whether he is muscle bound. Its down to repeated hammering, which can lead to injury for any player. I don't think his injury record is anywhere near as bad as Tuilagi's. Manu has hardly played since the 2013 RWC. He cannot have strung together more than 7 or 8 games on the trot since then.
Missing the Lions is the right thing to do if he needs attention. He has hopefully years ahead of him and trying to force things when he does have a problem would be very foolish indeed.
I'm sure all players would relish a Lions trip, but i'd be surprised if any of them were prepared to risk their careers for the experience.

...........

Not sure Billy is gym muscle, looks to be naturally a big lad who could easily pile on the pounds.

Not quite the Jamie George fat lad but nor the Hask gym bunny

Billy is just a massive guy. If you look at him with out a top on (oo err missus) he isn't overly jacked what so ever. His isn't carrying to much muscle for his frame or what ever.

p/d wrote:...........

that's some great editing, right there

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
The surprising part is maybe as it's an ongoing issue which now needs to be addressed is why it wasn't made known until now? Or maybe Gats did know and it was thought it could be managed on an ongoing basis. If Gats hadn't been made aware of this he could be a little annoyed, and I wouldn't blame him.

And I suspect yours is the better response to his situation, but it's not the one I had, I actually put down my cup of tea and raised my arms aloft when hearing the news this morning.

well I'm just pleased you put the tea down first!

I agree on what Gatland's response could have been- on the surface he appears to have no issue- as it looks like Billy was never really going to go, unless he did a lot more damage v Exeter.

So, you're happy a player is injured and to make matters worse you openly mocked him by raising your arms above your head. There's a special place in hell for you. If hell existed, that is.

Thank god I'm an atheist

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote: well I'm just pleased you put the tea down first!

I agree on what Gatland's response could have been- on the surface he appears to have no issue- as it looks like Billy was never really going to go, unless he did a lot more damage v Exeter.

So, you're happy a player is injured and to make matters worse you openly mocked him by raising your arms above your head. There's a special place in hell for you. If hell existed, that is.

Thank god I'm an atheist

Thank dog I'm dyslexic

Oakboy wrote:

Timbo wrote:Not sure what it is about Billy's shape or muscaluture that makes him injury prone? Seems like a wild stab in the dark...

But yes, the silver lining is definitely that he should get some good rest and a strong Pre-season that he otherwise wouldn't have...as long as his shoulder isn't too bad!

I contend that he, like Tuilagi, is muscle-bound to the point where joints, tendons and ligaments cannot stand the strain. I say that as a layman, possibly in ignorance and I repeat that I hope I am wrong. I first started wittering on the subject about two years ago and, so far, events have not disproved my contention - unfortunately, in both cases!

Are you claiming his injury against Argentina for your point? Wasn't that because he got his leg trapped when he got cleared out of a ruck? Hard to see how that's to do with being muscle-bound.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Timbo wrote:Not sure what it is about Billy's shape or muscaluture that makes him injury prone? Seems like a wild stab in the dark...

But yes, the silver lining is definitely that he should get some good rest and a strong Pre-season that he otherwise wouldn't have...as long as his shoulder isn't too bad!

I contend that he, like Tuilagi, is muscle-bound to the point where joints, tendons and ligaments cannot stand the strain. I say that as a layman, possibly in ignorance and I repeat that I hope I am wrong. I first started wittering on the subject about two years ago and, so far, events have not disproved my contention - unfortunately, in both cases!

Are you claiming his injury against Argentina for your point? Wasn't that because he got his leg trapped when he got cleared out of a ruck? Hard to see how that's to do with being muscle-bound.

Puja

No, I'm not talking about specific injuries but the propensity to get injured. Every collision, every stretch, every turn involves stress. Add on his impact-led game style to his body's strains and the end-product is likely to be tissue damage. None of that can be avoided but it can and should be managed. If, say, Farrell can play 40 games in his management plan, Billy should be programmed for 25 or a similar ratio.

Tuilagi, as a back, should theoretically be different but I see him as a real example of mis-management. His absence is the result. He might only ever get back to 10 - 15 games per season, I'd guess. Maybe, had he been managed to play 10 games less than he did three seasons ago, he would not be so damaged now.

Professional rugby is littered with men of all shapes and sizes, some get injured a lot and some don't. You'd need indepth knowledge of each players biomechanics, rest, recovery, training regimen, diet etc to make even a remotely accurate proclamation on their 'injury-proneness'.

Just look at Alesana, even bigger than Manu, loved contact, same genetics, same league, outside back..very rarely injured.

And I'd ask again what Manu can do to avoid his latest injury? If there's still an underlying groin problem there's a problem, but as is what's kept him out is his knee being caved in from the side which would take anyone out unless they got very lucky.

Banquo wrote:

p/d wrote:...........

that's some great editing, right there

It wasn't easy, but generally pleased with the outcome

On Billy's injury maybe it's time to reflect on the way England use the no.8 role as a wrecking ball (not just the case for Billy per se)? If Jones is going to continue in this style Morgan would be the nearest like for like (though he plays a bit wider and with more pace than Billy). Incidentally seems funny that Gats has yet again overlooked Robshaw as Billy's injury call up. I imagine Haskell has been picked as he offers a degree more versitility of the two?

jngf wrote:On Billy's injury maybe it's time to reflect on the way England use the no.8 role as a wrecking ball (not just the case for Billy per se)? If Jones is going to continue in this style Morgan would be the nearest like for like (though he plays a bit wider and with more pace than Billy). Incidentally seems funny that Gats has yet again overlooked Robshaw as Billy's injury call up. I imagine Haskell has been picked as he offers a degree more versitility of the two?

If a winger gets a knee injury when sprinting past a defender on the outside should we "reflect" on whether this is the correct tactic and employ more of a bosher? Or should we accept that rugby is a contact sport and injuries are par for the course?

twitchy wrote:

jngf wrote:On Billy's injury maybe it's time to reflect on the way England use the no.8 role as a wrecking ball (not just the case for Billy per se)? If Jones is going to continue in this style Morgan would be the nearest like for like (though he plays a bit wider and with more pace than Billy). Incidentally seems funny that Gats has yet again overlooked Robshaw as Billy's injury call up. I imagine Haskell has been picked as he offers a degree more versitility of the two?

If a winger gets a knee injury when sprinting past a defender on the outside should we "reflect" on whether this is the correct tactic and employ more of a bosher? Or should we accept that rugby is a contact sport and injuries are par for the course?

That rugby is a contact sport and injuries will happen goes without saying, but the point I was making here is that the likelihood of picking up those injuries increases if one plays in a certain style e.g continually bossing through rather than attempting to go round defences. Further whilst Billy's style works well at will be interesting to see what the approach of say Beaumont,Hughes,Morgan or Clifford would be like if not simply asked to try and emulate Billy's style but bring there own respective strengths to the party. I'm hoping with Robshaw back and finally the scope to field a bonefide openside (rather than picking another six ) will bring scope for a bit more creativity to the 8 role - plus the scope to use the 8 as an additional line out jumper.

twitchy wrote:

jngf wrote:On Billy's injury maybe it's time to reflect on the way England use the no.8 role as a wrecking ball (not just the case for Billy per se)? If Jones is going to continue in this style Morgan would be the nearest like for like (though he plays a bit wider and with more pace than Billy). Incidentally seems funny that Gats has yet again overlooked Robshaw as Billy's injury call up. I imagine Haskell has been picked as he offers a degree more versitility of the two?

If a winger gets a knee injury when sprinting past a defender on the outside should we "reflect" on whether this is the correct tactic and employ more of a bosher? Or should we accept that rugby is a contact sport and injuries are par for the course?

I think Jngf makes a fair point. Everyone does expect Billy to be the wrecking ball and his nice hands seem to count for very little.
Easter had the lovely hands, positioning and almost never got injured.
How England utilise players, even outside of their further abilities, does seem to be primarily attritional.

Easter was of course protected by his shield of fat, and that impacted his involvements somewhat, and also meant if Easter was getting tired in a game he'd just give up a pen to take a breather and bollocks to his team

I'm interested to see how Te'o at 12 and JJ at 13 works for the Lions tomorrow.

I imagine Eddie will have an eye on it too.

Thought T'eo went well with the shit being shovelled on from 10

Farrrll made an immediate difference. Granted, it'd've been hard not have improved things from that Sexton performance, but his entrance turned the match.

Puja

For me, Te'o was the Lions best player today.