Jps wrote:Oh and you can say what you want about players that get parachuted in from other countries being opportunistic about playing somewhere other than where they were born, but did anyone else see Hugh Blake shedding a tear during the anthem?
And its a shame a player as good as Ruaridh McConnochie, who came up with LS and has two Scottish parents would wind up with England, but there you go. Great to win, even better to beat England
I agree. Utterly bizarre decision to opt for England if you ask me but who know what's behind it?
hugh_woatmeigh wrote:Brilliant from the lads. I hate to say it but England have every right to be annoyed at that first try. Blatant knock on but it's great to be on the right side of a bad decision for once.
I don't agree that it was a knock on. Robertson had contol and the ball was ripped off him and that guy dropped it backwards, so that doesn't make it a knock on from him.
That was a brilliant game, but of course my stream crapped out in the last minute of the game.
I agree with that view.
Plus De Carpentier could have tackled him and chose not to. They should be annoyed at him not the ref.
I appreciate that 7s is a different code entirely but I would have thought that the lack of 15-a-side collisions would extend a career rather than shorten it. I know 7s is far pacier but Riddell and Wight were never really pacey players & while Robertson has slowed down he's not been shown up for a lack of pace yet. They're 31, 31 and 32 respectively. So why retire now? Or is 7s actually harder on the body?
hugh_woatmeigh wrote:I appreciate that 7s is a different code entirely but I would have thought that the lack of 15-a-side collisions would extend a career rather than shorten it. I know 7s is far pacier but Riddell and Wight were never really pacey players & while Robertson has slowed down he's not been shown up for a lack of pace yet. They're 31, 31 and 32 respectively. So why retire now? Or is 7s actually harder on the body?
They have to move on in their career eventually I guess.
They have been on the 7s circuit for a while and the constant touring and having to keep a high level of fitness can take it's toll.
hugh_woatmeigh wrote:I appreciate that 7s is a different code entirely but I would have thought that the lack of 15-a-side collisions would extend a career rather than shorten it. I know 7s is far pacier but Riddell and Wight were never really pacey players & while Robertson has slowed down he's not been shown up for a lack of pace yet. They're 31, 31 and 32 respectively. So why retire now? Or is 7s actually harder on the body?
Less heavy collisions but the sheer intensity if the play and having to do it over and over for a weekend is hard to maintain.
We don't really mention grass root clubs very often on here, but Robertson, Wight and McCrae all from Melrose and all had massive impacts on this Scotland side.
hugh_woatmeigh wrote:I appreciate that 7s is a different code entirely but I would have thought that the lack of 15-a-side collisions would extend a career rather than shorten it. I know 7s is far pacier but Riddell and Wight were never really pacey players & while Robertson has slowed down he's not been shown up for a lack of pace yet. They're 31, 31 and 32 respectively. So why retire now? Or is 7s actually harder on the body?
Less heavy collisions but the sheer intensity if the play and having to do it over and over for a weekend is hard to maintain.
Also the sheer amount of travelling would take its toll, especially when you have a young family.
hugh_woatmeigh wrote:I appreciate that 7s is a different code entirely but I would have thought that the lack of 15-a-side collisions would extend a career rather than shorten it. I know 7s is far pacier but Riddell and Wight were never really pacey players & while Robertson has slowed down he's not been shown up for a lack of pace yet. They're 31, 31 and 32 respectively. So why retire now? Or is 7s actually harder on the body?
Less heavy collisions but the sheer intensity if the play and having to do it over and over for a weekend is hard to maintain.
Also the sheer amount of travelling would take its toll, especially when you have a young family.
hugh_woatmeigh wrote:I appreciate that 7s is a different code entirely but I would have thought that the lack of 15-a-side collisions would extend a career rather than shorten it. I know 7s is far pacier but Riddell and Wight were never really pacey players & while Robertson has slowed down he's not been shown up for a lack of pace yet. They're 31, 31 and 32 respectively. So why retire now? Or is 7s actually harder on the body?
Less heavy collisions but the sheer intensity if the play and having to do it over and over for a weekend is hard to maintain.
Aye, all of what you boys have been saying, that and even if you are no slouch at 31/32, if you lose half a yard in pace, you will get smoked in 7's, you can hide it in 15's. I imagine it takes a huge amount of work to maintain out and out pace past the age of 30.
They should no way do that. Means that one of the few outlets for our players to see what they can really do on a professional and international stage is reduced.
