Brian Moore's Full Contact Podcast

[Digby]

Recently I've come round to the idea that we can't reduce the subs as HIA checks are needed

What I would propose is some sort of endurance test to prevent some players being conditioned for 25 mins.

It could be something as simple as running a 10K in 50 mins on grass or a treadmill

Some players would argue their knees couldn't take it so another way to measure endurance for an hour.

That would prevent specific conditioning of guys for 25-60 mins.

All subs must provide some level of continual power output on IRB supplied exercise bikes whilst on the bench, riding the pine with effort

[Joz]

I''d still reduce the size of the bench and the number of allowed subs. With a hope it would over time change the culture of what's possible in terms of player size given a likely need to play 80 minutes.

Why not just go back to the old days & have 'replacements' & not 'substitutes' & as has been said 'replace' only
for an injury. So if your TH doesn't get injured you can't replace him.

Because then everyone would develop a horrible limp as they were "replaced"?

Puja

Mandate a two week recovery period for anyone replaced to give them a chance to overcome their "injury"?

[Joz]

Recently I've come round to the idea that we can't reduce the subs as HIA checks are needed

What I would propose is some sort of endurance test to prevent some players being conditioned for 25 mins.

It could be something as simple as running a 10K in 50 mins on grass or a treadmill

Some players would argue their knees couldn't take it so another way to measure endurance for an hour.

That would prevent specific conditioning of guys for 25-60 mins.

Concept 2 rower? Swimming?

[kk67]

All subs must provide some level of continual power output on IRB supplied exercise bikes whilst on the bench, riding the pine with effort

I fecking love this. Algorithm heaven.
You take the mean average of all 30 players from their GPS and transfer it to the cyclists.

[Digby]

All subs must provide some level of continual power output on IRB supplied exercise bikes whilst on the bench, riding the pine with effort

I fecking love this. Algorithm heaven.
You take the mean average of all 30 players from their GPS and transfer it to the cyclists.

It should be enough so anyone coming on after 50 minutes is reasonably fatigued and not fresh as a daisy. Basically the subs would be more for injury cover

[kk67]

That's the sort of thing the Yanks would do. I like it.

[twitchy]

Little snippet from this week that I'm not sure was discussed. Apparently Jones made the boys do really tough conditioning the week prior to the argentina game with the aus game in mind.

It would explain the lethargic performance.

[Mellsblue]

It was discussed. Jones admitted it was the case in a interview prior to the Arg match.

[Digby]

It was discussed. Jones admitted it was the case in a interview prior to the Arg match.

Comes with the caveat of Eddie said it

[fivepointer]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/ ... by-league/

Moore chatting with Squeaky. Some good stuff, mostly about RFU backroom shenanigans with some interesting insights into the last WC.

[twitchy]

Yeah that was a good (or bad) trip down memory lane.

[twitchy]

Brian was discussing with JSD this week about why goode never gets a chance for england at full back. I think they were answering their own question by saying "he plays like a 10" when you already have both farrell and ford on the pitch. Not saying he isn't effective for sarries though.

[Raggs]

He's simply never done well at international, and I think it was Eggchasers who said he likes "test match animals", and I'd guess Goode doesn't qualify for that.

[Digby]

He's a bit nice, and not the best athletic talent.

[Beasties]

He's far better now he's ditched the strictly routine when approaching contact.

[Mellsblue]

He is and he's a top quality domestic full back. I still wouldn't want him in the England team. Looking good at domestic level and looking good for Saracens are completely different things to looking good at test level.

[Puja]

If Brown, Watson and Daly were injured, then I'd want Goode in. He's not a great option at international level, but he is experienced and generally competent, which makes him a safe enough choice.

Don't know how they can ask why he "never gets a chance" - doesn't he have 30-odd caps and about 3 starts under Eddie. It's not like he's Armand.

Puja

[Beasties]

I think part of it might be that it's ages since he "got a chance" and he's improved so much over the last year or two that it's a genuinely valid question. I have been massively anti Goode for Eng in the past but even I'm mellowing to him now. I still don't want him in the team because of his defence and poor performance under a high ball whilst being properly challenged, but his plus points are now excellent rather than good so I can see why someone would select him now.

It's a similar thing with Farrell. He is a far better player now than even two years ago, the difference being the Eng team's had to adapt and fit round him rather than him being told to wait. Him playing at FH for Eng doesn't make me angry any more. IC? Hmmm that's not quite the same question.

[Banquo]

I think part of it might be that it's ages since he "got a chance" and he's improved so much over the last year or two that it's a genuinely valid question. I have been massively anti Goode for Eng in the past but even I'm mellowing to him now. I still don't want him in the team because of his defence and poor performance under a high ball whilst being properly challenged, but his plus points are now excellent rather than good so I can see why someone would select him now.

It's a similar thing with Farrell. He is a far better player now than even two years ago, the difference being the Eng team's had to adapt and fit round him rather than him being told to wait. Him playing at FH for Eng doesn't make me angry any more. IC? Hmmm that's not quite the same question.

Has Goode 'improved so much'? He looks exactly the same excellent club player as he has always done, to me....with the same obvious flaws that get exposed at intl level.

Agreed -ish on Faz, and frankly, given the limitations of the England side/the way Eddie is using resources, he's probably a better fit at 10 than Ford, painful as that is.

[Puja]

I think part of it might be that it's ages since he "got a chance" and he's improved so much over the last year or two that it's a genuinely valid question. I have been massively anti Goode for Eng in the past but even I'm mellowing to him now. I still don't want him in the team because of his defence and poor performance under a high ball whilst being properly challenged, but his plus points are now excellent rather than good so I can see why someone would select him now.

It's a similar thing with Farrell. He is a far better player now than even two years ago, the difference being the Eng team's had to adapt and fit round him rather than him being told to wait. Him playing at FH for Eng doesn't make me angry any more. IC? Hmmm that's not quite the same question.

He got a chance against Fiji and was rubbish. It's only one game, but he has to take an opportunity when it's offered.

Puja

[Beasties]

FTAOD I'm not advocating his return to Eng. Although I do believe he's better lately Banquo as he no longer does the strictly routine 10 yards from the defence only to lose all speed at the crucial moment. He does it 5 yards away now.

[Banquo]

FTAOD I'm not advocating his return to Eng. Although I do believe he's better lately Banquo as he no longer does the strictly routine 10 yards from the defence only to lose all speed at the crucial moment. He does it 5 yards away now.

I think at club level he has always done that, and its been effective....international defences are just better.