RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote:Telegraph reporting that there is an unpublished 45 man EPS which Vellacott is in.

Who are the unnamed 10?[/quote]
Do you want another go at the complicated 45-40=? question?

Which Tyler wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Telegraph reporting that there is an unpublished 45 man EPS which Vellacott is in.

Who are the unnamed 10?

Do you want another go at the complicated 45-40=? question?[/quote]
My maths was based on this:

Which Tyler wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Telegraph reporting that there is an unpublished 45 man EPS which Vellacott is in.

Who are the unnamed 10?

Do you want another go at the complicated 45-40=? question?[/quote]
Do you want another go at the complicated quoting procedure?

Perhaps I’m just being miserable, but does anyone else think we should remove the words ‘Player Form’ from the subject line?

Apparently form isn’t a key part of the selection criteria at the moment.

Decent interview with simmonds.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/ ... view-rugby

Billy V is out for twelve weeks.

Mellsblue wrote:Billy V is out for twelve weeks.

not much of a season again.

................................

Not good.

I think we all knew where Dan Cole and Sam Warburton would be on that list a long time ago

Interesting and does support the notion that our players are overplayed. Nothing new there, i guess.
What would have made this a bit more relevant is to look at how many games the players have been available for, and how many minutes played in the Euro comps.

fivepointer wrote:Interesting and does support the notion that our players are overplayed. Nothing new there, i guess.
What would have made this a bit more relevant is to look at how many games the players have been available for, and how many minutes played in the Euro comps.

Yep. You could move Marler, Sinckler, Teo and Faletau up the list if it weren’t for injuries and bans. I’m also not that bothered about Joseph being too high as he didn’t play much in NZ.

Lawes is a big worry. He played loads in NZ and took a battering in the process. What was his work load during the AI’s, I can’t remember?

The likes of CJ Stander, Connor Murray, Tadgh Furlong, McGrath and even Sexton and O’brien have been fit and available for most of the season. Ireland have really got their shit together.

Timbo wrote:The likes of CJ Stander, Connor Murray, Tadgh Furlong, McGrath and even Sexton and O’brien have been fit and available for most of the season. Ireland have really got their shit together.

Yes, but I'm sure it doesn't do wonders for attendance at Pro 14 (16?, 18?) games when your favourite players arent playing in most games. Kind of devalues the competition and I doubt players care much about winning it.

It's hard to know whether the lack of senior players causes issues in attendance and TV contracts being lower than is possible. But it's certainly a reasonable concern

Mellsblue wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Interesting and does support the notion that our players are overplayed. Nothing new there, i guess.
What would have made this a bit more relevant is to look at how many games the players have been available for, and how many minutes played in the Euro comps.

Yep. You could move Marler, Sinckler, Teo and Faletau up the list if it weren’t for injuries and bans. I’m also not that bothered about Joseph being too high as he didn’t play much in NZ.

Lawes is a big worry. He played loads in NZ and took a battering in the process. What was his work load during the AI’s, I can’t remember?

and Itoje, as his minutes include an injury (I think?)

Timbo wrote:The likes of CJ Stander, Connor Murray, Tadgh Furlong, McGrath and even Sexton and O’brien have been fit and available for most of the season. Ireland have really got their shit together.

nothing new though. Their system is geared towards the national good, and leveraging the 'history' and allegiance to provinces, and aligned with the IRFU....good on them, more fool us.

What's odd is that we seem surprised every year when we have a lot of injuries and our players are shagged out.

Dont we have enough data now to determine the optimum number of games/ or minutes played for every position? We've had pro rugby for long enough, and the amount of information that is available on minutes played and injuries for every position must be pretty extensive.
Stats and data are in widespread use in the game, so why cant we say that props should play a max of X minutes and wings a max of X number and work to that standard?

I think the decision about scrapping relegation or not will be coming soon.

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Interesting and does support the notion that our players are overplayed. Nothing new there, i guess.
What would have made this a bit more relevant is to look at how many games the players have been available for, and how many minutes played in the Euro comps.

Yep. You could move Marler, Sinckler, Teo and Faletau up the list if it weren’t for injuries and bans. I’m also not that bothered about Joseph being too high as he didn’t play much in NZ.

Lawes is a big worry. He played loads in NZ and took a battering in the process. What was his work load during the AI’s, I can’t remember?

and Itoje, as his minutes include an injury (I think?)

Yep, broken jaw. An injury only the finest players suffer.

This feels a little similar in nature to asking questions about Underhill a while back, but what am I supposed to be seeing in Vellacott that marks him out as test potential?

Like Underhill he looks fine to me, but I've not noticed anything that's making me think wow get him in the squad.

Digby wrote:This feels a little similar in nature to asking questions about Underhill a while back, but what am I supposed to be seeing in Vellacott that marks him out as test potential?

Like Underhill he looks fine to me, but I've not noticed anything that's making me think wow get him in the squad.

He's quick and decisive. The latter point is a wow factor in comparison to his competition

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:This feels a little similar in nature to asking questions about Underhill a while back, but what am I supposed to be seeing in Vellacott that marks him out as test potential?

Like Underhill he looks fine to me, but I've not noticed anything that's making me think wow get him in the squad.

He's quick and decisive. The latter point is a wow factor in comparison to his competition

Is that when coming on as a sub up against tired players? The Danny Care role as it were

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:This feels a little similar in nature to asking questions about Underhill a while back, but what am I supposed to be seeing in Vellacott that marks him out as test potential?

Like Underhill he looks fine to me, but I've not noticed anything that's making me think wow get him in the squad.

He's quick and decisive. The latter point is a wow factor in comparison to his competition

Agreed to that, especially his willingness to pass the ball rather than having a cuppa whilst thinking about it.
Fair point t too that most SHs seem to look better coming off the bench than they do starting.
Also, of course, the facts that he's young and still improving, whilst Scotland want him.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:This feels a little similar in nature to asking questions about Underhill a while back, but what am I supposed to be seeing in Vellacott that marks him out as test potential?

Like Underhill he looks fine to me, but I've not noticed anything that's making me think wow get him in the squad.

He's quick and decisive. The latter point is a wow factor in comparison to his competition

Is that when coming on as a sub up against tired players? The Danny Care role as it were

That's 'a' role, but I'd say he's more decisive, based on a much smaller evidence base. I like the cut of his jib, but then i also rate Underhill....and see potential for both to improve- that's what coaches do