RugbyRebels

‘It was an indefensible act,’ could sum up many moments in his career. One positive is he's been one of the more interesting analysts on the BBC 6N coverage for a while, whether that lasts I don't know but he had a strong start

Thanks for that. Interesting read.

One little snippet in the DT irked me today. Steve Diamond was talking about the benefits of having Tuilagi to run over people. That mentality is understandable because smashing into defenders has so often been effective in winning matches. As a principle, though, I deplore it. We are back to Ashton's line of dustbins and players' failure to concentrate on the gaps between them. Even Tuilagi is more of a threat if he runs between defenders rather than directly at them. Somehow (albeit idealism, perhaps) the game has to revert to running skill rather than the fall-out from battering rams.

Amusingly, they've basically not used Tuilagi so far that I've noticed.

No ability to pass that wide without exploding the error rate

Digby wrote:No ability to pass that wide without exploding the error rate

and there was me wondering what the wings were going to do....

“To explain how good Jack Willis is. He has 2.8 turnovers per 80 minutes this season. The next highest with over 400 minutes are Ben Earl and Francouis Louw with 1.5. Highest in Super Rugby Aotearoa with meaningful minutes was Boshier with 1.5.“

Timbo wrote:“To explain how good Jack Willis is. He has 2.8 turnovers per 80 minutes this season. The next highest with over 400 minutes are Ben Earl and Francouis Louw with 1.5. Highest in Super Rugby Aotearoa with meaningful minutes was Boshier with 1.5.“

What makes it even more impressive is it doesn't seem to come at a large expense to the other parts of his game, he still makes numerous tackles and carries.

Can't do much more to be the next cab off the rank, and Eddie has tried to pick him before.

Has he played lock at all?

Mikey Brown wrote:Has he played lock at all?

a natural. I'd think a move to prop would follow shortly.

Banquo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Has he played lock at all?

a natural. I'd think a move to prop would follow shortly.

Ah the old Andy Sheridan career plan. Seems a bit late in the day but I suppose there’s no such thing as a job for life these days.

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Has he played lock at all?

a natural. I'd think a move to prop would follow shortly.

Ah the old Andy Sheridan career plan. Seems a bit late in the day but I suppose there’s no such thing as a job for life these days.

Unless you are education minister.

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote: a natural. I'd think a move to prop would follow shortly.

Ah the old Andy Sheridan career plan. Seems a bit late in the day but I suppose there’s no such thing as a job for life these days.

Unless you are education minister.

Or head of the teachers' union.

And as he's actually played 8 before that would appear to rule him out of consideration there. Phew.

I know it's fashionable but Hartley's criticism of "committee men" seems a bit simplistic and too generalised. I know he isn't meaning them but in most clubs round the country, the committee men (and women) are the people willing to do all the boring work to allow everyone else to have fun. Even at that level, I don't always like the people it attracts but dismiss them for what they do not for not being committed enough or for having an easy life.

I know different considerations apply for well paid committee men at the top but they face tougher decisions and a lot of competing interests (such as Hartley thinking players should be paid much more).

I liked how Hartley ignored things like one of the big names against removing the hit in the scrum was D.Hartley, because at the time it wasn't such a physical issue for him and his club was successful with using the hit. There is though too much money in the administration of the sport at the top levels, you could get similar and even better work from people not getting six figure salaries.

Cameo wrote:I know it's fashionable but Hartley's criticism of "committee men" seems a bit simplistic and too generalised. I know he isn't meaning them but in most clubs round the country, the committee men (and women) are the people willing to do all the boring work to allow everyone else to have fun. Even at that level, I don't always like the people it attracts but dismiss them for what they do not for not being committed enough or for having an easy life.

I know different considerations apply for well paid committee men at the top but they face tougher decisions and a lot of competing interests (such as Hartley thinking players should be paid much more).

Indeed.

Digby wrote:I liked how Hartley ignored things like one of the big names against removing the hit in the scrum was D.Hartley, because at the time it wasn't such a physical issue for him and his club was successful with using the hit. There is though too much money in the administration of the sport at the top levels, you could get similar and even better work from people not getting six figure salaries.

also true.

https://www.rugbypass.com/news/joe-coka ... ry-lay-off
Cokanasiga - 2 weeks away

https://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/latest- ... land-fold/
Zach Mercer - has put on 6lb during lockdown in an attempt to force his way into Eddie's plans

Or about 2.7kgs for those hoping not to sound like Moggy

There is a mail article claiming that reffell is getting an england call up. It seems complete bollocks though, the only quotes are him saying he wants to play for wales.

That would be such an Eddie thing to do ... call up Reffell and leave out Willis.

Not only is Reffell less deserving, he also wants to play for Wales, which is quite understandable given he is Welsh.