He made a few carries but none of our carriers was penetrative to really dent the green wall in that first half - Itoje (notwithstanding his mighty fetching work) and Wyn Jones I feel in particular lacked power as a unit to punch holes - in fact Itoje was knocked back yards in one instance and carrying is the one area in which one feels he slightly under performs and does not live up to his superstar status (though more than makes up for it by acting like an openside in a locks body and he’s a given starter for all three tests) - do think our other lock needs to be a power carrier even if that’s at the expense of AWJ
It's Alun-Wyn Jones, so either Alun-Wyn or Jones, Wyn Jones is a different player entirely.
Digby wrote:I'm not sold Biggar has to start after failing an HIA. But they will trust to the return to play protocols even if they look dubious to many on the outside. Interesting they said he'd be looking to return to training on Thursday, I thought they had to count at least 6 steps separated by 24 hours in the protocols, which means I don't even have the protocols clear in my mind at even a basic level
Yes, it's 6 stages, 24 hours apart.
Stage 1: Mental and physical rest
Stage 2: General aerobic exercise
Stage 3: Sports specific exercises
Stage 4: Non-contact training ....Must pass neurological assessment
Stage 5: Full contact training
Stage 6: Ready to play
So if he's not exhibited any symptoms since Saturday afternoon, and that he passes his SCAT5 tests, he's free to take part in full contact training on Thursday
Convenient timings with there normally being a week between games. My mistake in this was overlooking the latter stages are themselves contact work, I was counting complete the 6 and then you can go back
Digby wrote:Convenient timings with there normally being a week between games. My mistake in this was overlooking the latter stages are themselves contact work, I was counting complete the 6 and then you can go back
Depends on the sport - that is the standard across all sports, even the ones where you can play 2 matches in 1 day. At elite level each stage takes 24 hours, as oversight is much better. At subelite the different stages have different time frames (such as 7 days for stage 1, and generally 2 days for stage 5) and different again for juniors.
It's laid out by neurologists, not sports administrators
Digby wrote:Convenient timings with there normally being a week between games. My mistake in this was overlooking the latter stages are themselves contact work, I was counting complete the 6 and then you can go back
Depends on the sport - that is the standard across all sports, even the ones where you can play 2 matches in 1 day. At elite level each stage takes 24 hours, as oversight is much better. At subelite the different stages have different time frames (such as 7 days for stage 1, and generally 2 days for stage 5) and different again for juniors.
It's laid out by neurologists, not sports administrators
I'm sure it's been said before, but you're a real gem - despite being a Bath fan - for setting out the medical sort of stuff here (and elsewhere) in a clear way.
Digby wrote:Convenient timings with there normally being a week between games. My mistake in this was overlooking the latter stages are themselves contact work, I was counting complete the 6 and then you can go back
Depends on the sport - that is the standard across all sports, even the ones where you can play 2 matches in 1 day. At elite level each stage takes 24 hours, as oversight is much better. At subelite the different stages have different time frames (such as 7 days for stage 1, and generally 2 days for stage 5) and different again for juniors.
It's laid out by neurologists, not sports administrators
WT have they medically proven Elite athletes can go back so much sooner because they can withstand the knocks better due to their better conditioning or is it just because they will have been scanned etc which grassroot athletes wont have access to?
Mikey Brown wrote:I’d have thought they’d tightened up the leaks but a lot of chat suggesting Mako/Sutherland, Watson/Curry and Aki/Daly are the changes.
Big question marks over fly-half, so I guess the assumption there is that Biggar is totally fit.
I think all the LHPs are pretty close. Feels like Mako is best suited for emptying the tank off the bench but cant begrudge the start. As I said, I suspect the Lions will be in the refs ear about the scrums.
Watson over Curry is pretty questionable IMO. Love Watson but don't think Curry did a lot wrong bar the stupid penalty, his two others were harsh.
whatisthejava wrote:Team out. Price and Murray swap
Daly drops to bench and Harris starts
Sutherland and Mako switch
Faletau benching ahead of Watson too.
The only one I have a real issue with is Price dropping to bench. I have always been a Price critic but how can Townsend and Gatland honestly say based on the tour and last Saturday that Murray should start?
Doubling down on Gatball. Ah well.
15. Stuart Hogg
14. Anthony Watson
13. Chris Harris
12. Robbie Henshaw
11. Duhan van der Merwe
10. Dan Biggar
9. Conor Murray
1. Mako Vunipola
2. Luke Cowan-Dickie
3. Tadhg Furlong
4. Maro Itoje
5. Alun Wyn Jones (captain)
6. Courtney Lawes
7. Tom Curry
8. Jack Conan
whatisthejava wrote:Team out. Price and Murray swap
Daly drops to bench and Harris starts
Sutherland and Mako switch
Faletau benching ahead of Watson too.
The only one I have a real issue with is Price dropping to bench. I have always been a Price critic but how can Townsend and Gatland honestly say based on the tour and last Saturday that Murray should start?
The reason Murray starts is for his box kicking and general game management, the pundits all seem to think that Farrell was the man to steady the ship when he came on which is nonsense, it was Murray. If we were playing anything like an expansive game then I think Price would have kept his spot but we're playing kick to compete with the box-kicking so Murray is more suited to that style imo.
But we weren't competing (very well) when we were able to anyway.
I don't get that one. Let's hope Murray brings more to the table than he has so far. I thought it was a breath of fresh air actually seeing the ball cleared quickly from the breakdown but clearly that's not a priority.
Mikey Brown wrote:But we weren't competing (very well) when we were able to anyway.
I don't get that one. Let's hope Murray brings more to the table than he has so far. I thought it was a breath of fresh air actually seeing the ball cleared quickly from the breakdown but clearly that's not a priority.
whatisthejava wrote:Team out. Price and Murray swap
Daly drops to bench and Harris starts
Sutherland and Mako switch
Faletau benching ahead of Watson too.
The only one I have a real issue with is Price dropping to bench. I have always been a Price critic but how can Townsend and Gatland honestly say based on the tour and last Saturday that Murray should start?
The reason Murray starts is for his box kicking and general game management, the pundits all seem to think that Farrell was the man to steady the ship when he came on which is nonsense, it was Murray. If we were playing anything like an expansive game then I think Price would have kept his spot but we're playing kick to compete with the box-kicking so Murray is more suited to that style imo.
Thought Faz was his usual mediocre self when he came on.
I find that really strange at 9. The thing Murray has over Price is his kicking but I thought Price's kicking was very good last weekend.
I was also hoping but not sure that Watson would start. Curry was okay if you ignore the three penalties early on but that's a big if. I thought at least two of them were pretty brainless too (as was Watson's one). I suppose it's the benefit of starting, you can make up for a bad 20 mins whereas if you sub you have to make a big impact in your first 20 otherwise you're seen as having a bad game.
Is there a record for the most kicks in a game? I wonder if it might be broken on Saturday.
Daly out for Harris is the right call. Watson dropped form the bench is potentially a bit harsh, but I can also see the reasoning given that he was lucky not to get a card last weekend.
I don't get the Price replacement. Gatland appears to be going on reputation over form here, or just assuming that the Bokke are so crap that any combination will work provided we don't make stupid mistakes.
Doorzetbornandbred wrote:WT have they medically proven Elite athletes can go back so much sooner because they can withstand the knocks better due to their better conditioning or is it just because they will have been scanned etc which grassroot athletes wont have access to?
I don't think it's the sort of thing you can "prove". Though it has been "proven" that some exercises reduce your chances of concussion; with places like the RFU really pushing that side of things to their clubs.
I think it's more the level of care and attention they're getting; compete with baseline scores, access to MRI at the optimum moment, neurologists essentially on call etc etc.
I don't "know" the above, but it's certainly the impression I get. Bear in mind, I'm interested, but it's a speciality or two beyond me.
MRS is the most sensitive metric for recovery, particularly for repeat trauma, but it is not commonly used unless an individual is clearly cognitively mashed. I think for athletes they rely on a progressive exercise protocol, that matches self-reported emotional and cognitive symptoms with a progressive ramping up of physical activity, which helps combat cognitive abnormalities as defined in controlled human and animal studies of disease. Such studies, as scarce as they are, have shown it takes about 7 days for MRS metabolic abnormalities to normalise after trauma and any repeat trauma within or close to that window results in a longer recovery time in both animals and hoomans. The animal studies have correlated reduced evoked action potential and other physiological measures of compromised neural function being in concert with MRS metabolic abnormalities, and that combination bears a striking resemblance to the early stages of dementia in disease models. There are obviously potential sources of bias inherent in the self reporting aspect of the key cognitive and exercise tolerance variables in elite athletes Vs. normal fat bastards when deciding to return to play and the window of vulnerability to long term damage from repeated episodes is based on a not necessarily appropriately statistically powered set of MRS data fit for every individual. That means the decision to return for elite athletes suffers from a possibly inaccurate metric for a given individual. It's largely theoretical, unfortunately. If every professional rugby player donated their brain and clinical history to a study we might have a definitive, but...
Big D wrote:
Faletau benching ahead of Watson too.
The only one I have a real issue with is Price dropping to bench. I have always been a Price critic but how can Townsend and Gatland honestly say based on the tour and last Saturday that Murray should start?
The reason Murray starts is for his box kicking and general game management, the pundits all seem to think that Farrell was the man to steady the ship when he came on which is nonsense, it was Murray. If we were playing anything like an expansive game then I think Price would have kept his spot but we're playing kick to compete with the box-kicking so Murray is more suited to that style imo.
Thought Faz was his usual mediocre self when he came on.
Agree. He looks more and more one-dimensional and predictable and brings little to the party, especially in attack. If the Lions go into the later stages of the game trailing on the scoreboard he is not the man to get them back in it.
