RugbyRebels

Just realised the Sheedy and Lloyd would be Bristols first internationals since Jason Hobson in 2008!

In more realted news Pivac is looking getting Randell into the Wales set up - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/54442703

jimKRFC wrote:Just realised the Sheedy and Lloyd would be Bristols first internationals since Jason Hobson in 2008!

In more realted news Pivac is looking getting Randell into the Wales set up - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/54442703

Although you do have Sinckler who is a current international, albeit he hasn't had a game to play in while under your banner yet.

Hopefully Eddie will be drafting Randall into a training squad and playing him against Georgia. He's a decent player and, while he has flaws to correct and they will determine whether he becomes a long-term England player, at the very least he's a good enough player that I don't want him playing against us.

Puja

Get ready for an extra touch of flair from the Barbarians this year.

Is this the first time Robshaw has been accused of flair?

Digby wrote:Is this the first time Robshaw has been accused of flair?

Oi. Remember that time he did a chip?

Mikey Brown wrote:

Digby wrote:Is this the first time Robshaw has been accused of flair?

Oi. Remember that time he did a chip?

He's no George Kruis. (Actually no, I don't remember his chip)

Watching some bit of nonsense that popped up with Dylan Hartley and Jamie Roberts discussing the big games coming up. Neither look very comfortable on video call in their living rooms, but some interesting bits from Hartley about Jones. Basically admits that media hype can dampen your chances with Eddie if he feels he's being pushed to select a certain player. It has to be done on his terms and everyone knew Jamie George was a much better player for a long time prior to taking his shirt.

Hartley talks so openly about his weaknesses and the ways pressure gets to you as a player, I really didn't expect to like him so much as a pundit. He also doesn't even mention Lawes in the backrow debate.

Wasn’t sure where else to post this, but having watched Scotland vs. Georgia, we can definitely use our game against the Georgians for the experimentation we missed out on with the Barbarians’ cancellation . They were really, really poor.

Their scrum was competitive, but that was about it. They didn’t even show much of the power and aggression they’re known for with Scotland repeatedly knocking them back on the gainline. It feels like they’re a very different (much weaker) proposition without Gorgodze and his generation.

It could be rustiness, given they haven’t played any rugby together but on last night’s evidence, they could be in for a long Autumn.

Scrumhead wrote:Wasn’t sure where else to post this, but having watched Scotland vs. Georgia, we can definitely use our game against the Georgians for the experimentation we missed out on with the Barbarians’ cancellation . They were really, really poor.

Their scrum was competitive, but that was about it. They didn’t even show much of the power and aggression they’re known for with Scotland repeatedly knocking them back on the gainline. It feels like they’re a very different (much weaker) proposition without Gorgodze and his generation.

It could be rustiness, given they haven’t played any rugby together but on last night’s evidence, they could be in for a long Autumn.

Yeah, just making my way through this now and questioning why. Grim stuff. Providing just enough semi-opposition that Scotland can start thinking these backs moves are actually good.

I don’t really understand Townsend’s gameplan?

I don’t get why you’d pick a second playmaker in midfield (initially Lang and then moving Hastings to 12) but then revert to scoring most of your points from lineout drives?

When it was clear that the Georgians weren’t going to put up much opposition, they’d have learned a lot more by trying to run a few more moves in the backs rather than just mauling against a passive defence.

We play Georgia in 3wks. They’ll need to really shape up to avoid some heavy defeats. If they don’t, they’re at real risk of putting the nail in the coffin for any argument they have for 6 Nations expansion.

Mikey Brown wrote:Get ready for an extra touch of flair from the Barbarians this year.

This post has not aged well. Unless this was the extra flair

Though I'm touched so many players put in so much effort to reinforce my view that rugby players are thick as mince (as are in fairness many young men when gathered in groups and still more so when booze is involved)

Digby wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Get ready for an extra touch of flair from the Barbarians this year.

This post has not aged well. Unless this was the extra flair

Though I'm touched so many players put in so much effort to reinforce my view that rugby players are thick as mince (as are in fairness many young men when gathered in groups and still more so when booze is involved)

Haha. Jesus.

The apology on his Twitter page right above shots of him practising his goal kicking for the Barbarians also made me laugh.

So Does Eddie go With Farrell and Slade in the middle knowing it's kind of unbalanced, or does he use this as a reason to shift Farrell back to 10, which conveniently gets rid of the Simmonds question?

Devoto didn't exactly stamp his mark on the game today but I wouldn't mind seeing him given a shot, though I have a feeling he's going to take a punt on Lawrence at 12 in a Manu-light role.

With Ford likely to be out, I think it’s pretty inevitable we’ll see Farrell at 10.

It would be a good move to call Simmonds in and ask him to start in Italy with very little time with the team and I just don’t see it happening.

I’m not sure what we’ll see at 12. I’m sure Lawrence would do OK there. It’s a big ask defensively, but it is against Italy and Carlo Canna is unlikely to run all over him. We’d be losing Manu’s experience, but Lawrence runs some great lines and his passing and kicking are better than Manu’s IMO. Certainly worth giving it a go.

Scrumhead wrote:With Ford likely to be out, I think it’s pretty inevitable we’ll see Farrell at 10.

It would be a good move to call Simmonds in and ask him to start in Italy with very little time with the team and I just don’t see it happening.

I’m not sure what we’ll see at 12. I’m sure Lawrence would do OK there. It’s a big ask defensively, but it is against Italy and Carlo Canna is unlikely to run all over him. We’d be losing Manu’s experience, but Lawrence runs some great lines and his passing and kicking are better than Manu’s IMO. Certainly worth giving it a go.

Oh, I wasn't aware Ford was out when I wrote that. Is he injured?

Yeah, Achilles problem

Given the fact he’s carried Leicester for the past 18 months, I’m surprised it’s not his back.

Mellsblue wrote:Given the fact he’s carried Leicester for the past 18 months, I’m surprised it’s not his back.

Frankly, a legendary hero having to take on armies on his own being brought down by an injury to the back of his heel seems fairly thematically appropriate too.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Given the fact he’s carried Leicester for the past 18 months, I’m surprised it’s not his back.

Frankly, a legendary hero having to take on armies on his own being brought down by an injury to the back of his heel seems fairly thematically appropriate too.

Puja

Wait, what?!? Farrell has an Achilles injury, too?!?!?

Mellsblue wrote:

Puja wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Given the fact he’s carried Leicester for the past 18 months, I’m surprised it’s not his back.

Frankly, a legendary hero having to take on armies on his own being brought down by an injury to the back of his heel seems fairly thematically appropriate too.

Puja

Wait, what?!? Farrell has an Achilles injury, too?!?!?

I would not wish injury on any player but I can't help thinking that short-term exclusions for Ford, Farrell, Youngs and Heinz could be the best possible scenario for England's long-term development. It would force Jones into giving four players (including bench) game time that otherwise they are unlikely to get.

Oakboy wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Puja wrote:
Frankly, a legendary hero having to take on armies on his own being brought down by an injury to the back of his heel seems fairly thematically appropriate too.

Puja

Wait, what?!? Farrell has an Achilles injury, too?!?!?

I would not wish injury on any player but I can't help thinking that short-term exclusions for Ford, Farrell, Youngs and Heinz could be the best possible scenario for England's long-term development. It would force Jones into giving four players (including bench) game time that otherwise they are unlikely to get.

Totally agree with this

Fair point, but in similar circumstances in the past we ended up with Hughes, T'eo, Wigglesworth, Moon, probably some I've missed...

Watching the england training video, and even when Youngs is passing the ball back to the coach, when he's not under any pressure, in an exercise etc, he still sends it over the top of his head .

Perhaps Jonny Hill has been brought in to play 10?