RugbyRebels

The AI's roll around and we have injury issues. Nothing new there, but its becoming a depressing theme. losing Mako & Billy would be a massive blow. Its all well and good developing depth but right now we need our best players playing together through to the WC.

Brian Moore suggests that Saracens' performance was up to international level. I'd dispute that but, to an extent, he has a point in that the team is greater than the sum of its parts. The likes of Barritt, Wigglesworth and Goode contribute brilliantly in the Saracens style. It begs the question whether Jones is capable of getting a contribution from the team that is more than the sum of its parts.


Injuries are a nuisance but with our pool of talent that's all they should be.

Jones must be wondering what the Sarries S&C team are doing to have so many players prone to injury during matches.

Insert tongue in cheek emoji here.

I pondered attempting humour around these latest possible injuries, but stumbled coming up with a line as eloquent as 'prone to injury during matches'

Mellsblue wrote:Jones must be wondering what the Sarries S&C team are doing to have so many players prone to injury during matches.

Insert tongue in cheek emoji here.

Have you been stirring via the Bath guy?

Oakboy wrote:Brian Moore suggests that Saracens' performance was up to international level. I'd dispute that but, to an extent, he has a point in that the team is greater than the sum of its parts. The likes of Barritt, Wigglesworth and Goode contribute brilliantly in the Saracens style. It begs the question whether Jones is capable of getting a contribution from the team that is more than the sum of its parts.


Injuries are a nuisance but with our pool of talent that's all they should be.

They're capable of a level above any other English side IMO.

On a semi-related point, I do wonder whether there's a Slade - Lozowski combo that could work effectively. They're both such good players

I think there could be more balanced centre pairings, but it would certainly seem to offer more threat than either player alongside Farrell. I can’t imagine there’s enough time (or will, short of a Farrel injury) to get a pairing like that settled.

They played together in Argentina perhaps? If memory serves Lozowski wasn’t great and got dropped for Francis, then Slade was pants in the next game.

I just get the feeling we really are hampered by reffing. It's just totally different in the AP to everywhere else. WR needs to get on top of that as it's insane the differences in interpretation between refs of different competitions.

And I do feel like a lot of the problems start there.

Mikey Brown wrote:I think there could be more balanced centre pairings, but it would certainly seem to offer more threat than either player alongside Farrell. I can’t imagine there’s enough time (or will, short of a Farrel injury) to get a pairing like that settled.

They played together in Argentina perhaps? If memory serves Lozowski wasn’t great and got dropped for Francis, then Slade was pants in the next game.

To begin with is Eddie serious about moving Farrell back to 10, or is that simply how Eddie wants to motivate Ford?

If the former then with JJ still out both centre slots are up for grabs. Possible Eddie only had the idea of moving Farrell from the centre if he's Manu available

Stom wrote:I just get the feeling we really are hampered by reffing. It's just totally different in the AP to everywhere else. WR needs to get on top of that as it's insane the differences in interpretation between refs of different competitions.

And I do feel like a lot of the problems start there.

It's weird the AP want it done so differently, it doesn't help them in Europe and it currently annoys England into the bargain. It's possible they're seeing big gains in viewing numbers I suppose and want to protect that, but I'm sticking with it's weird

Digby wrote:

Stom wrote:I just get the feeling we really are hampered by reffing. It's just totally different in the AP to everywhere else. WR needs to get on top of that as it's insane the differences in interpretation between refs of different competitions.

And I do feel like a lot of the problems start there.

It's weird the AP want it done so differently, it doesn't help them in Europe and it currently annoys England into the bargain. It's possible they're seeing big gains in viewing numbers I suppose and want to protect that, but I'm sticking with it's weird

The AP refs are currently closest to the IRB's clarifications and declarations on the laws. Without wishing to sound like Jacob Rees-Mogg, it's the foreigners who need to change to match what we're doing.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Stom wrote:I just get the feeling we really are hampered by reffing. It's just totally different in the AP to everywhere else. WR needs to get on top of that as it's insane the differences in interpretation between refs of different competitions.

And I do feel like a lot of the problems start there.

It's weird the AP want it done so differently, it doesn't help them in Europe and it currently annoys England into the bargain. It's possible they're seeing big gains in viewing numbers I suppose and want to protect that, but I'm sticking with it's weird

The AP refs are currently closest to the IRB's clarifications and declarations on the laws. Without wishing to sound like Jacob Rees-Mogg, it's the foreigners who need to change to match what we're doing.

Puja

By this point, though, you'd have thought we'd have either made a bigger song and dance about it or given up. Just pick one, ffs!

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Stom wrote:I just get the feeling we really are hampered by reffing. It's just totally different in the AP to everywhere else. WR needs to get on top of that as it's insane the differences in interpretation between refs of different competitions.

And I do feel like a lot of the problems start there.

It's weird the AP want it done so differently, it doesn't help them in Europe and it currently annoys England into the bargain. It's possible they're seeing big gains in viewing numbers I suppose and want to protect that, but I'm sticking with it's weird

The AP refs are currently closest to the IRB's clarifications and declarations on the laws. Without wishing to sound like Jacob Rees-Mogg, it's the foreigners who need to change to match what we're doing.

Puja

Our position is akin to the Moggy telling the EU they could change to match us, yes they could, but they aren't and we're hurting ourselves in the process

HaHa. Your players and coaches are all thick and fear change.

Billy out for 12 weeks with a fracture to opposite arm. Confirmed.

Mako calf strain, no set time as yet.

Isiekwe sprained ankle, no set time as yet.

Fook.

Anybody got a handle on those definitely out of the AIs. Watson, JJ, May, Launchbury, Robson?

Out: BVunipola, Launchbury, Genge, Simmonds, Robson, Joseph, Watson, (Marler)

Doubtful: MVunipola, Hughes, Te’o, May, Earl, Isiekwe

Timbo wrote:Out: BVunipola, Launchbury, Genge, Simmonds, Robson, Joseph, Watson, (Marler)

Doubtful: MVunipola, Hughes, Te’o, May, Earl, Isiekwe

Thanks. Does that list change much? The same old problems remain - especially back row and centres.

The out list might as well include Cips, he's outstanding but out of luck and out of pocket

If you're going down that route, include Tuilagi. If he's not currently injured he doubtless soon will be.

I don't believe in fate, nonetheless I saw no need to tempt it

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:
It's weird the AP want it done so differently, it doesn't help them in Europe and it currently annoys England into the bargain. It's possible they're seeing big gains in viewing numbers I suppose and want to protect that, but I'm sticking with it's weird

The AP refs are currently closest to the IRB's clarifications and declarations on the laws. Without wishing to sound like Jacob Rees-Mogg, it's the foreigners who need to change to match what we're doing.

Puja

Our position is akin to the Moggy telling the EU they could change to match us, yes they could, but they aren't and we're hurting ourselves in the process

Not really - in this one, we're following what the IRB are saying and doing as we're told.

Puja

Timbo wrote:Billy out for 12 weeks with a fracture to opposite arm. Confirmed.

Mako calf strain, no set time as yet.

Isiekwe sprained ankle, no set time as yet.

Fook.

Indeed.

I think we need to work on the assumption Mako is out of the first game at the very least.

That means we’ll definitively have a debutant at loosehead for at least some of the game. Hepburn has two caps but is better as an impact sub so I’m hoping VRR gets the call.

I hope Morgan is in line for a recall. He has the pedigree and if he were to come back and do well, that would definitely be a welcome boost. Unlike other players, he’s never whinged about not being selected and has quietly got on with getting himself back in to form.

Trying to look at the positives, getting VRR involved and getting Morgan back in the mix would be a small blessing.

I'd go for Chisholm. With Mercer at 8. But it surely must be Armand for the bench spot.

Moon is a real option at LH. I'd also add in Catt. Both are dependable scrummagers. Ideally VRR will get a call but you never know with Eddie.
Mercer should be next in line based on the previous squad but Morgan would offer some experience. The only other 8 who might get a call is Chisholm.
These are all good players but we would be down to 4/5 choices in 2 key positions.