Props

[Puja]

Is Sink’s at 12 any worse a proposition than some of the other incumbents of this shirt in England side in past couple of decades?

Yes.

Puja

[Mellsblue]

I think you're chosing a really bad example. I think any team in the world would love us to play Sink at 12. That he played there a bit as a kid doesn;t mean a great deal. It's not like a Tom Youngs who actually played adult rugby in his first position, and even then wasn;t good enough in said position.

Is Sink’s at 12 any worse a proposition than some of the other incumbents of this shirt in England side in past couple of decades?

It’s probably been the most problematic berth to fill of all (no England Head Coach getting it consistently right since 2003) and even now whilst there’s a nice crop of 13 candidates, we’re sadly one Manu injury away from yet another positional vacuum at inside centre in that I see few credible alternative candidates exactly holding their hands up for selection, do you?….

Yes. Yes it is

Next question

Don’t encourage him.

[Scrumhead]

I’m not quite seeing this passable professional 12 standard you talk of anywhere near or around test level - Manu asside (and frankly haven’t really seen it since the early 2000s in all honesty )
so I would say needs must and I’m further not buying the need to take several years to convert positions if a player has the physicality and prior experience to play the role - would think that was more of a factor if a centre was having to learn the technicalities of becoming a prop ( which was of course Sinckler’s journey).

I think you're chosing a really bad example. I think any team in the world would love us to play Sink at 12. That he played there a bit as a kid doesn;t mean a great deal. It's not like a Tom Youngs who actually played adult rugby in his first position, and even then wasn;t good enough in said position.

Is Sink’s at 12 any worse a proposition than some of the other incumbents of this shirt in England side in past couple of decades?

It’s probably been the most problematic berth to fill of all (no England Head Coach getting it consistently right since 2003) and even now whilst there’s a nice crop of 13 candidates, we’re sadly one Manu injury away from yet another positional vacuum at inside centre in that I see few credible alternative candidates exactly holding their hands up for selection, do you?….

Well you wouldn’t really know considering you don’t really watch any Premiership rugby.

Dingwall, Kelly, Ojomoh and Seb Atkinson are all better propositions than the laughable suggestion of converting a 30 year old prop.

I agree that it’s arguably the ‘most problematic berth to fill’. I just find your solution bizarre.

As I see it, Scotland and Wales took a chance on Harris and Tompkins and made them serviceable internationals. I’d like to think we have someone who can cut it if given the chance.

[Banquo]

I’m not quite seeing this passable professional 12 standard you talk of anywhere near or around test level - Manu asside (and frankly haven’t really seen it since the early 2000s in all honesty )
so I would say needs must and I’m further not buying the need to take several years to convert positions if a player has the physicality and prior experience to play the role - would think that was more of a factor if a centre was having to learn the technicalities of becoming a prop ( which was of course Sinckler’s journey).

I think you're chosing a really bad example. I think any team in the world would love us to play Sink at 12. That he played there a bit as a kid doesn;t mean a great deal. It's not like a Tom Youngs who actually played adult rugby in his first position, and even then wasn;t good enough in said position.

Is Sink’s at 12 any worse a proposition than some of the other incumbents of this shirt in England side in past couple of decades?

.

Yes. Its the worst idea you've ever come up with, not that its a high bar

[jngf]

I think you're chosing a really bad example. I think any team in the world would love us to play Sink at 12. That he played there a bit as a kid doesn;t mean a great deal. It's not like a Tom Youngs who actually played adult rugby in his first position, and even then wasn;t good enough in said position.

Is Sink’s at 12 any worse a proposition than some of the other incumbents of this shirt in England side in past couple of decades?

It’s probably been the most problematic berth to fill of all (no England Head Coach getting it consistently right since 2003) and even now whilst there’s a nice crop of 13 candidates, we’re sadly one Manu injury away from yet another positional vacuum at inside centre in that I see few credible alternative candidates exactly holding their hands up for selection, do you?….

Well you wouldn’t really know considering you don’t really watch any Premiership rugby.

Dingwall, Kelly, Ojomoh and Seb Atkinson are all better propositions than the laughable suggestion of converting a 30 year old prop.

I agree that it’s arguably the ‘most problematic berth to fill’. I just find your solution bizarre.

As I see it, Scotland and Wales took a chance on Harris and Tompkins and made them serviceable internationals. I’d like to think we have someone who can cut it if given the chance.

I honestly think you ( and to be fair many others ) extrapolate far too much of your perspective on test rugby from what goes on in the Premiership, which really is a markedly lower standard of play

[jngf]

I think you're chosing a really bad example. I think any team in the world would love us to play Sink at 12. That he played there a bit as a kid doesn;t mean a great deal. It's not like a Tom Youngs who actually played adult rugby in his first position, and even then wasn;t good enough in said position.

Is Sink’s at 12 any worse a proposition than some of the other incumbents of this shirt in England side in past couple of decades?

.

Yes. Its the worst idea you've ever come up with, not that its a high bar

Maybe I should go into Politics?

[Scrumhead]

Is Sink’s at 12 any worse a proposition than some of the other incumbents of this shirt in England side in past couple of decades?

It’s probably been the most problematic berth to fill of all (no England Head Coach getting it consistently right since 2003) and even now whilst there’s a nice crop of 13 candidates, we’re sadly one Manu injury away from yet another positional vacuum at inside centre in that I see few credible alternative candidates exactly holding their hands up for selection, do you?….

Well you wouldn’t really know considering you don’t really watch any Premiership rugby.

Dingwall, Kelly, Ojomoh and Seb Atkinson are all better propositions than the laughable suggestion of converting a 30 year old prop.

I agree that it’s arguably the ‘most problematic berth to fill’. I just find your solution bizarre.

As I see it, Scotland and Wales took a chance on Harris and Tompkins and made them serviceable internationals. I’d like to think we have someone who can cut it if given the chance.

I honestly think you ( and to be fair many others ) extrapolate far too much of your perspective on test rugby from what goes on in the Premiership, which really is a markedly lower standard of play

I don’t think that’s correct at all. I watch a lot of rugby across the Premiership, European competitions and the URC so I’d like to think I have a pretty comprehensive and balanced view. From what you’ve said in the past, you barely watch any rugby outside of test matches so I genuinely have no idea how you come to the majority of conclusions you make.

You can knock the Premiership if you like, but produces enough test players for England as well as plenty poached by the celts.

[Banquo]

Is Sink’s at 12 any worse a proposition than some of the other incumbents of this shirt in England side in past couple of decades?

.

Yes. Its the worst idea you've ever come up with, not that its a high bar

Maybe I should go into Politics?

anywhere, really

[Banquo]

Is Sink’s at 12 any worse a proposition than some of the other incumbents of this shirt in England side in past couple of decades?

.

Yes. Its the worst idea you've ever come up with, not that its a high bar

Maybe I should go into Politics?

anywhere, really

thought I'd reiterate

[Banquo]

Well you wouldn’t really know considering you don’t really watch any Premiership rugby.

Dingwall, Kelly, Ojomoh and Seb Atkinson are all better propositions than the laughable suggestion of converting a 30 year old prop.

I agree that it’s arguably the ‘most problematic berth to fill’. I just find your solution bizarre.

As I see it, Scotland and Wales took a chance on Harris and Tompkins and made them serviceable internationals. I’d like to think we have someone who can cut it if given the chance.

I honestly think you ( and to be fair many others ) extrapolate far too much of your perspective on test rugby from what goes on in the Premiership, which really is a markedly lower standard of play

I don’t think that’s correct at all. I watch a lot of rugby across the Premiership, European competitions and the URC so I’d like to think I have a pretty comprehensive and balanced view. From what you’ve said in the past, you barely watch any rugby outside of test matches so I genuinely have no idea how you come to the majority of conclusions you make.

You can knock the Premiership if you like, but produces enough test players for England as well as plenty poached by the celts.

There is a decent point somewhere in here about Prem standards though.

[p/d]

I think you're chosing a really bad example. I think any team in the world would love us to play Sink at 12. That he played there a bit as a kid doesn;t mean a great deal. It's not like a Tom Youngs who actually played adult rugby in his first position, and even then wasn;t good enough in said position.

Is Sink’s at 12 any worse a proposition than some of the other incumbents of this shirt in England side in past couple of decades?

.

Yes. Its the worst idea you've ever come up with, not that its a high bar

Can I take it from that you are warming to the idea of Steward at 12

[Scrumhead]

Well it’s better than Sinckler at 12, I’ll give you that …

[Scrumhead]

I honestly think you ( and to be fair many others ) extrapolate far too much of your perspective on test rugby from what goes on in the Premiership, which really is a markedly lower standard of play

I don’t think that’s correct at all. I watch a lot of rugby across the Premiership, European competitions and the URC so I’d like to think I have a pretty comprehensive and balanced view. From what you’ve said in the past, you barely watch any rugby outside of test matches so I genuinely have no idea how you come to the majority of conclusions you make.

You can knock the Premiership if you like, but produces enough test players for England as well as plenty poached by the celts.

There is a decent point somewhere in here about Prem standards though.

That might have been fair if the person making the comment on ‘standard of play’ actually watched any of the comparable leagues.

As it stands, the Premiership teams are showing up pretty well in Europe so even if our domestic competition is a long way from perfect, I also don’t think the standard of the league is a major problem. The way it’s run/funded and how it works with the RFU are far bigger issues IMO.

[Oakboy]

Just on a 'comment as you see it' basis, I'd suggest there is far more wrong with the European competitions than the Premiership. Empty seats in stadia and far less comments per match on RR might suggest which is more popular too.

To my simple mind, something is fundamentally wrong with the total number of games played. If a competition allows/encourages clubs to not field first choice XVs it is flawed.

I cherry pick my European viewing but I don't miss many televised Premiership games. I look forward more to Premiership weekends than European ones. For sustained game-to-game quality of viewing the Premiership is better. One or two European games reach a higher technical standard but picking them in advance is not easy. The French 'elite' are inconsistent. The Irish best is good but, arguably, on the wane a bit. The rest are OK but don't set the world alight. The European competitions are about twice as big as they should be.

[Which Tyler]

Heineken cup hasn't recovered from Covid - too many teams meaning that the champions' cup is for teams nowhere near to contending to be a Champion. Too many non-European teams meaning that the tournie has lost it's link with history. Weird pool formats meaning it's still too complicated (way better than the last couple of years, but it's not going to be drawing people back, that the previous format lost). You don't even play everyone in your pool, and you don't get the chance to "avenge" yourself on a team that beat you earlier.

[Epaminondas Pules]

I’m not quite seeing this passable professional 12 standard you talk of anywhere near or around test level - Manu asside (and frankly haven’t really seen it since the early 2000s in all honesty )
so I would say needs must and I’m further not buying the need to take several years to convert positions if a player has the physicality and prior experience to play the role - would think that was more of a factor if a centre was having to learn the technicalities of becoming a prop ( which was of course Sinckler’s journey).

I think you're chosing a really bad example. I think any team in the world would love us to play Sink at 12. That he played there a bit as a kid doesn;t mean a great deal. It's not like a Tom Youngs who actually played adult rugby in his first position, and even then wasn;t good enough in said position.

Is Sink’s at 12 any worse a proposition than some of the other incumbents of this shirt in England side in past couple of decades?

It’s probably been the most problematic berth to fill of all (no England Head Coach getting it consistently right since 2003) and even now whilst there’s a nice crop of 13 candidates, we’re sadly one Manu injury away from yet another positional vacuum at inside centre in that I see few credible alternative candidates exactly holding their hands up for selection, do you?….

Putting a slow prop there, no matter how problematic 12 has been, would be insanity.

[Banquo]

I don’t think that’s correct at all. I watch a lot of rugby across the Premiership, European competitions and the URC so I’d like to think I have a pretty comprehensive and balanced view. From what you’ve said in the past, you barely watch any rugby outside of test matches so I genuinely have no idea how you come to the majority of conclusions you make.

You can knock the Premiership if you like, but produces enough test players for England as well as plenty poached by the celts.

There is a decent point somewhere in here about Prem standards though.

That might have been fair if the person making the comment on ‘standard of play’ actually watched any of the comparable leagues.

As it stands, the Premiership teams are showing up pretty well in Europe so even if our domestic competition is a long way from perfect, I also don’t think the standard of the league is a major problem. The way it’s run/funded and how it works with the RFU are far bigger issues IMO.

I disagree on standard not being a big issue, as many times previously. As to Oakboys comments, I also agree with Which on the European comps losing their way/interest post covid.

[Puja]

Just on a 'comment as you see it' basis, I'd suggest there is far more wrong with the European competitions than the Premiership. Empty seats in stadia and far less comments per match on RR might suggest which is more popular too.

To my simple mind, something is fundamentally wrong with the total number of games played. If a competition allows/encourages clubs to not field first choice XVs it is flawed.

I cherry pick my European viewing but I don't miss many televised Premiership games. I look forward more to Premiership weekends than European ones. For sustained game-to-game quality of viewing the Premiership is better. One or two European games reach a higher technical standard but picking them in advance is not easy. The French 'elite' are inconsistent. The Irish best is good but, arguably, on the wane a bit. The rest are OK but don't set the world alight. The European competitions are about twice as big as they should be.

Agreed, especially on the bolded bit. The inept scheduling of the SA teams (ignoring the question of whether they even should be there) means that two teams in the same group are basically facing two different sides. Leicester get Stormers' 2nd XV because we were drawn at home. Sale get Stormers' 1st XV and a ridiculous flight.

16 team comp (5 from France, 4 from Eng, 6 from URC, 1 from previous winner/Challenge Cup winner), 4 pools of 4 home and away, quarter, semi, final. Job done. Have a second tier on the same basis and see if World Rugby are willing to sponsor a third tier that would sweep up the remaining 8 Eng/Fre/URC teams and combine them with teams from Georgia, Spain, Portugal, Germany, etc.

Puja

[fivepointer]

Just on a 'comment as you see it' basis, I'd suggest there is far more wrong with the European competitions than the Premiership. Empty seats in stadia and far less comments per match on RR might suggest which is more popular too.

To my simple mind, something is fundamentally wrong with the total number of games played. If a competition allows/encourages clubs to not field first choice XVs it is flawed.

I cherry pick my European viewing but I don't miss many televised Premiership games. I look forward more to Premiership weekends than European ones. For sustained game-to-game quality of viewing the Premiership is better. One or two European games reach a higher technical standard but picking them in advance is not easy. The French 'elite' are inconsistent. The Irish best is good but, arguably, on the wane a bit. The rest are OK but don't set the world alight. The European competitions are about twice as big as they should be.

Agreed, especially on the bolded bit. The inept scheduling of the SA teams (ignoring the question of whether they even should be there) means that two teams in the same group are basically facing two different sides. Leicester get Stormers' 2nd XV because we were drawn at home. Sale get Stormers' 1st XV and a ridiculous flight.

16 team comp (5 from France, 4 from Eng, 6 from URC, 1 from previous winner/Challenge Cup winner), 4 pools of 4 home and away, quarter, semi, final. Job done. Have a second tier on the same basis and see if World Rugby are willing to sponsor a third tier that would sweep up the remaining 8 Eng/Fre/URC teams and combine them with teams from Georgia, Spain, Portugal, Germany, etc.

Puja

Such an obvious and sensible format that its baffling we've ended up with the current mess.