Quins v Sarries

[FKAS]

(All that BS re Ampthill ‘Buddy’ system. Sarries get paid 100’s of k so that Ampthill can stay in the champ by fielding 9-13 Sarries squad players)

Ampthill pay a fee to gain access to Sarries players, facilities and coaches. Sarries allow it because it is a decent development tool for their youngsters and coaches. I know you're bitter about it but is a sensible business a partnership.

[Puja]

Earl gives away a penalty for appealing at the referee in the middle of a ruck. Good call from the ref to immediately blow up.

Puja

Knobhead

Rude! I didn't think I was being *that* annoying!

Puja

[Puja]

I can’t help but think that Sarries would’ve won by 83 points if Farrell were still there.

I'm assuming this was meant to be in the other thread. Shall I do the honours?

I'm surprised the commentators weren't mentioning him 50 times a minute - seems like out of sight is out of mind.

Puja

[Which Tyler]

I appreciate the way they have approached injuries this season. No replay, camera pulls far back to a wide shot of the stadium. Definitely an improvement.

Here here

[FKAS]

I appreciate the way they have approached injuries this season. No replay, camera pulls far back to a wide shot of the stadium. Definitely an improvement.

Here here

I like the fact the referees don't insist on watching it. I remember when Dolly did his knee against Falcons and the referee said because there was foul play they needed up on the big screen. Everyone doesn't need to watch it back, TMO should be able to get to the correct decision.

[Mellsblue]

I can’t help but think that Sarries would’ve won by 83 points if Farrell were still there.

I'm assuming this was meant to be in the other thread. Shall I do the honours?

I'm surprised the commentators weren't mentioning him 50 times a minute - seems like out of sight is out of mind.

Puja

It was and, yes, help out an old, confused man.

[Banquo]

(All that BS re Ampthill ‘Buddy’ system. Sarries get paid 100’s of k so that Ampthill can stay in the champ by fielding 9-13 Sarries squad players)

Ampthill pay a fee to gain access to Sarries players, facilities and coaches. Sarries allow it because it is a decent development tool for their youngsters and coaches. I know you're bitter about it but is a sensible business a partnership.

is it now? try chatting to other champ clubs (see nick easter), let alone Ampthill players before patronising me. Its A business model....whither Ampthill when the money gets pulled?

Not bitter, just think the extreme way its done is ridiculous. Theyve invested nothing in facilities for example. London Scottish nearly as bad. Funnily enough, they both voted against limiting dual reg to even 6

[Banquo]

Earl gives away a penalty for appealing at the referee in the middle of a ruck. Good call from the ref to immediately blow up.

Puja

Knobhead

Rude! I didn't think I was being *that* annoying!

Puja

[FKAS]

(All that BS re Ampthill ‘Buddy’ system. Sarries get paid 100’s of k so that Ampthill can stay in the champ by fielding 9-13 Sarries squad players)

Ampthill pay a fee to gain access to Sarries players, facilities and coaches. Sarries allow it because it is a decent development tool for their youngsters and coaches. I know you're bitter about it but is a sensible business a partnership.

is it now? try chatting to other champ clubs (see nick easter), let alone Ampthill players before patronising me. Its A business model....whither Ampthill when the money gets pulled?

Not bitter, just think the extreme way its done is ridiculous. Theyve invested nothing in facilities for example. London Scottish nearly as bad. Funnily enough, they both voted against limiting dual reg to even 6

I'm not patronising you. From a neutral opinion it makes business sense. I've got no horse in the Championship race. Makes no odds to me who wins the league, I'd prefer Donny but that's just for geographical split of the Prem if they go up. There's been teams closely affiliated with the Prem clubs for a long time, Hartbury are a feeder club for Glaws. If Ampthill want to go down that path with Sarries that's up to them. They aren't going to vote for limits on dual reg if the business model is pay the Sarries fee and gain access to their development squad to fill the roster.

[Mellsblue]

You could pick an England backrow from that match and I’d be very happy.

Earl remains a wankr tho. And tbh, died too much with the ball.


Sarries toothless and wrong tactics.
Quins defence fantastic.


(All that BS re Ampthill ‘Buddy’ system. Sarries get paid 100’s of k so that Ampthill can stay in the champ by fielding 9-13 Sarries squad players)

Yeah, ‘buddy’ strikes me as the wrong word to use. If someone charged me six figures for an arrangement that benefitted us both I wouldn’t class them as a buddy. More a business partner, where one ‘partner’ is in a far stronger position than the other. A position they’ve been slowly strengthening over the previous decade or so.

[Banquo]

Ampthill pay a fee to gain access to Sarries players, facilities and coaches. Sarries allow it because it is a decent development tool for their youngsters and coaches. I know you're bitter about it but is a sensible business a partnership.

is it now? try chatting to other champ clubs (see nick easter), let alone Ampthill players before patronising me. Its A business model....whither Ampthill when the money gets pulled?

Not bitter, just think the extreme way its done is ridiculous. Theyve invested nothing in facilities for example. London Scottish nearly as bad. Funnily enough, they both voted against limiting dual reg to even 6

I'm not patronising you. From a neutral opinion it makes business sense. I've got no horse in the Championship race. Makes no odds to me who wins the league, I'd prefer Donny but that's just for geographical split of the Prem if they go up. There's been teams closely affiliated with the Prem clubs for a long time, Hartbury are a feeder club for Glaws. If Ampthill want to go down that path with Sarries that's up to them. They aren't going to vote for limits on dual reg if the business model is pay the Sarries fee and gain access to their development squad to fill the roster.

Once again you are telling me stuff I know pretty well and not taking in the feedback; who are the true beneficiaries of these arrangements, and if the payments should not be available any more? Of course it does beg the question of the purpose of the championship (and say if Ampthill got promoted- impossible, their facilities are awful and indeed they may be mos’d out of tier 2…instead of giving Sarries 100’s of k per annum, how about decent facilities?- where would they get the 13 players from). Next season there will be a cap on dual reg, and most clubs in the champ want 4 or less, tho 6 will likely be the number.
The Wild West on player development is something the RFU are keen to get a handle on.
To be clear, it’s a good thing that selected prem players are getting game time with champ clubs or elsewhere- just think (as do the majority of those in the champ and the rfu ) the Ampthill and Scottish models are too skewed.
Sarries don’t ‘allow’ it- they benefit financially from it, and they hang onto a much bigger pool of players, ditto Quins.
Anyhoo- the original point was the commentators were talking about an arrangement they clearly don’t understand. Not a Buddy system at all, but an outsourcing arrangement by Ampthill, ditto Scottish.

[Oakboy]

is it now? try chatting to other champ clubs (see nick easter), let alone Ampthill players before patronising me. Its A business model....whither Ampthill when the money gets pulled?

Not bitter, just think the extreme way its done is ridiculous. Theyve invested nothing in facilities for example. London Scottish nearly as bad. Funnily enough, they both voted against limiting dual reg to even 6

I'm not patronising you. From a neutral opinion it makes business sense. I've got no horse in the Championship race. Makes no odds to me who wins the league, I'd prefer Donny but that's just for geographical split of the Prem if they go up. There's been teams closely affiliated with the Prem clubs for a long time, Hartbury are a feeder club for Glaws. If Ampthill want to go down that path with Sarries that's up to them. They aren't going to vote for limits on dual reg if the business model is pay the Sarries fee and gain access to their development squad to fill the roster.

Once again you are telling me stuff I know pretty well and not taking in the feedback; who are the true beneficiaries of these arrangements, and if the payments should not be available any more? Of course it does beg the question of the purpose of the championship (and say if Ampthill got promoted- impossible, their facilities are awful and indeed they may be mos’d out of tier 2…instead of giving Sarries 100’s of k per annum, how about decent facilities?- where would they get the 13 players from). Next season there will be a cap on dual reg, and most clubs in the champ want 4 or less, tho 6 will likely be the number.
The Wild West on player development is something the RFU are keen to get a handle on.
To be clear, it’s a good thing that selected prem players are getting game time with champ clubs or elsewhere- just think (as do the majority of those in the champ and the rfu ) the Ampthill and Scottish models are too skewed.
Sarries don’t ‘allow’ it- they benefit financially from it, and they hang onto a much bigger pool of players, ditto Quins.
Anyhoo- the original point was the commentators were talking about an arrangement they clearly don’t understand. Not a Buddy system at all, but an outsourcing arrangement by Ampthill, ditto Scottish.

Banquo, I am totally ignorant about this. Would you outline how the dual registration system works, please? I don't understand the financial side of it especially. In this case, are we talking about Saracens players (paid wages by them) who also play for Ampthill with that club paying the senior one a fee for their services?

[Mikey Brown]

Jesus... can't we talk about Tom Willis's carrying instead?

[Banquo]

Jesus... can't we talk about Tom Willis's carrying instead?

just ignore if we are boring you, its what I do

[Banquo]

I'm not patronising you. From a neutral opinion it makes business sense. I've got no horse in the Championship race. Makes no odds to me who wins the league, I'd prefer Donny but that's just for geographical split of the Prem if they go up. There's been teams closely affiliated with the Prem clubs for a long time, Hartbury are a feeder club for Glaws. If Ampthill want to go down that path with Sarries that's up to them. They aren't going to vote for limits on dual reg if the business model is pay the Sarries fee and gain access to their development squad to fill the roster.

Once again you are telling me stuff I know pretty well and not taking in the feedback; who are the true beneficiaries of these arrangements, and if the payments should not be available any more? Of course it does beg the question of the purpose of the championship (and say if Ampthill got promoted- impossible, their facilities are awful and indeed they may be mos’d out of tier 2…instead of giving Sarries 100’s of k per annum, how about decent facilities?- where would they get the 13 players from). Next season there will be a cap on dual reg, and most clubs in the champ want 4 or less, tho 6 will likely be the number.
The Wild West on player development is something the RFU are keen to get a handle on.
To be clear, it’s a good thing that selected prem players are getting game time with champ clubs or elsewhere- just think (as do the majority of those in the champ and the rfu ) the Ampthill and Scottish models are too skewed.
Sarries don’t ‘allow’ it- they benefit financially from it, and they hang onto a much bigger pool of players, ditto Quins.
Anyhoo- the original point was the commentators were talking about an arrangement they clearly don’t understand. Not a Buddy system at all, but an outsourcing arrangement by Ampthill, ditto Scottish.

Banquo, I am totally ignorant about this. Would you outline how the dual registration system works, please? I don't understand the financial side of it especially. In this case, are we talking about Saracens players (paid wages by them) who also play for Ampthill with that club paying the senior one a fee for their services?

It depends on the arrangement. Normally you pay the player a match fee (£200-£275 plus accomodation if needed) eg if you get a player for a loan period(s)/games like we do, whilst the ‘owner’ club pays the retainer/salary. I actually don’t know what the Ampthill/Scottish/Bedford/Nottingham deals are in terms of match fee per player, but each of them pays at least 120k pa for a mixed combo of player and coach access…. In Ampthills case its with Sarries, and they have exclusive access, and field between 8 and 15 Sarries contracted players in a match day squad (they also had 2 Ospreys on loan!); in Scottish case, they have first call on Quins available players, and field between 6 and 11 in a match day squad; in Bedford’s case they have first call on Saints available players, and field between 2 and 6; Nottingham is Tigers, and normally up to 4/5. Hartpury have/had a different deal with both Glaws and Bristol, but field 10+ from those, though some are ex Hartpury student (eg the Benz Solomon twins, ex Brizz now Glaws). I also believe Pirates have just done a similar deal with Exeter. It’s a bit messy, as you can tell when you see players turn out for three clubs in a season. Have to say it’s admirable that head coaches can manage squads in these scenarios- in Ampthills case, they are losing their stalwarts (3 came to us in the close season) because they simply don’t know which Sarrie will be replacing who on a week by week basis. Eg Charlie Bracken benched for Sarries last week, started for Ampthill this. RFU ambition is to use champ clubs to make sure the best u20’s are lodged with the right club for their development if not getting prem rugby; as you can see, a bit of work to do!!! It’s work in progress with the joint Tier 2 board prepping for 25/26.

[Oakboy]

Jesus... can't we talk about Tom Willis's carrying instead?

Sorry, MB, if you already knew it all. I'm happy to talk about Tom Willis.

I'd definitely play him at 8 for England with Earl at 7 for the AIs. That would upset the Curry and Underhill fans, I imagine, but having the carrying that those two offer could put us on the front foot in attack against top opposition. Earl would need to be gagged of course. Ideally, I'd have JW at 6 but CCS will do.

I was thinking about starting a thread on, say, the first five names on the team-sheet. Itoje at 4 would be most fans' first pick, I'd guess, but after that? Marcus would be my 2nd with IFW 3rd. More difficult thereafter!!

[Oakboy]

It depends on the arrangement. Normally you pay the player a match fee (£200-£275 plus accomodation if needed) eg if you get a player for a loan period(s)/games like we do, whilst the ‘owner’ club pays the retainer/salary. I actually don’t know what the Ampthill/Scottish/Bedford/Nottingham deals are in terms of match fee per player, but each of them pays at least 120k pa for a mixed combo of player and coach access…. In Ampthills case its with Sarries, and they have exclusive access, and field between 8 and 15 Sarries contracted players in a match day squad (they also had 2 Ospreys on loan!); in Scottish case, they have first call on Quins available players, and field between 6 and 11 in a match day squad; in Bedford’s case they have first call on Saints available players, and field between 2 and 6; Nottingham is Tigers, and normally up to 4/5. Hartpury have/had a different deal with both Glaws and Bristol, but field 10+ from those, though some are ex Hartpury student (eg the Benz Solomon twins, ex Brizz now Glaws). I also believe Pirates have just done a similar deal with Exeter. It’s a bit messy, as you can tell when you see players turn out for three clubs in a season. Have to say it’s admirable that head coaches can manage squads in these scenarios- in Ampthills case, they are losing their stalwarts (3 came to us in the close season) because they simply don’t know which Sarrie will be replacing who on a week by week basis. Eg Charlie Bracken benched for Sarries last week, started for Ampthill this. RFU ambition is to use champ clubs to make sure the best u20’s are lodged with the right club for their development if not getting prem rugby; as you can see, a bit of work to do!!! It’s work in progress with the joint Tier 2 board prepping for 25/26.

Thanks for that. The system seems to me to have some merit theoretically but its effect on the promotion/relegation debate needs thought.

[Mikey Brown]

Jesus... can't we talk about Tom Willis's carrying instead?

Sorry, MB, if you already knew it all. I'm happy to talk about Tom Willis.

Lol, not at all. It's completely over my head to be honest.

That wasn't meant to come across as a serious comment, I just thought you'd be dying to mention Willis for England after that performance. He reminds me of Aldritt in that ability to make metres that shouldn't be up for grabs. Earl still has credit in the bank, for me, but specifically at 8. I don't know that he can offer what England need as a 7 while carrying the way he has been. Saying that, I don't really want Curry to take the shirt back by default either.

CCS coming in to the England backrow at 6 balanced things out much better with Earl at 8, but I'm not too sure where his form is at the moment.

Smith is also playing a bit like the media caricature of 'the maverick' at the moment. Sublime bits of skill that wins games, but a whole load of desperate miracle plays as well.

[Puja]

Jesus... can't we talk about Tom Willis's carrying instead?

Sorry, MB, if you already knew it all. I'm happy to talk about Tom Willis.

Lol, not at all. It's completely over my head to be honest.

That wasn't meant to come across as a serious comment, I just thought you'd be dying to mention Willis for England after that performance. He reminds me of Aldritt in that ability to make metres that shouldn't be up for grabs. Earl still has credit in the bank, for me, but specifically at 8. I don't know that he can offer what England need as a 7 while carrying the way he has been. Saying that, I don't really want Curry to take the shirt back by default either.

CCS coming in to the England backrow at 6 balanced things out much better with Earl at 8, but I'm not too sure where his form is at the moment.

I'm right there with you on Earl. I'd say you have to pick him at 8 for England with his credit in the bank, but it's not possible to just port him over to 7 and expect the same results - it's a different role with different responsibilities and he won't be able to run in all the same positions that he does at 8, because the 8 would want to be doing those. That's not to say he doesn't have the capability to be England's 7, but he's not who I would pick there.

TWillis has got to be nipping at his heels for England though. That was an incredible performance and, like you said, half his metres were after riding a tackle that would've stopped someone else. I'd be very interested to see if that can translate to the higher level.

Puja

[Banquo]

Sorry, MB, if you already knew it all. I'm happy to talk about Tom Willis.

Lol, not at all. It's completely over my head to be honest.

That wasn't meant to come across as a serious comment, I just thought you'd be dying to mention Willis for England after that performance. He reminds me of Aldritt in that ability to make metres that shouldn't be up for grabs. Earl still has credit in the bank, for me, but specifically at 8. I don't know that he can offer what England need as a 7 while carrying the way he has been. Saying that, I don't really want Curry to take the shirt back by default either.

CCS coming in to the England backrow at 6 balanced things out much better with Earl at 8, but I'm not too sure where his form is at the moment.

I'm right there with you on Earl. I'd say you have to pick him at 8 for England with his credit in the bank, but it's not possible to just port him over to 7 and expect the same results - it's a different role with different responsibilities and he won't be able to run in all the same positions that he does at 8, because the 8 would want to be doing those. That's not to say he doesn't have the capability to be England's 7, but he's not who I would pick there.

TWillis has got to be nipping at his heels for England though. That was an incredible performance and, like you said, half his metres were after riding a tackle that would've stopped someone else. I'd be very interested to see if that can translate to the higher level.

Puja

Knobhead.


Earl that is, and I thought he was poor yesterday. Just died with it far too often when decent options outside him.

Willis offers the hard nosed carrying we've often missed....but will it translate intly? We wont know unless we try.

On 7, Earl really is a 7 tbh, but you are likely right that his intl USP would be lost if doing a 7's tasking; who would you pick there.

[Oakboy]

Is it only the French that so easily swap their backrowers about? All that fuss about Tubby Armitage not getting the England 7 shirt and the French club promptly play him at 8.

I think Earl has earned the right to a realistic trial at 7 if a better 8 arrives. Ben Kay, on commentary, predicted SB's continuing requirement for a big 6 and mentioned Itoje, Chessum, Martin and CCS. I'd suggest that three of them will start at 4,5,6 with the fourth on the bench together with a back-rower. Earl starting at 7 builds in cover for 8 if a jackler is on the bench. I'd have Earl at 7 with Curry or Underhill at 20, aasuming they are fully fit. There are plenty more waiting for a go, if not.

[Mikey Brown]

Armitage is an interesing comparison actually. A fiesty carrier with great acceleration, and whilst a great poacher I don't know that he's best used simply clearing the first man at the ruck in attack, so you'd get mixed responses on whether that classifies as being good at the breakdown. If you've got your lineout options and ruck clearance covered, why not stick a player like that at 8?

Surely you're just reinforcing the case for Earl at 8 rather than 7 here?

Toulon were particular weird, even for a French side, about how they set up their backrow (a bit like Exeter maybe) so I don't know there's too much to learn from that. It's pretty much just that their blindside wears 7, but they'll often use big units at openside too. I don't remember too many weird selections at 8 for them though. Did Basteraud ever get back in France squad as a number 8?

[francoisfou]

Toulon were particular weird, even for a French side, about how they set up their backrow (a bit like Exeter maybe) so I don't know there's too much to learn from that. It's pretty much just that their blindside wears 7, but they'll often use big units at openside too. I don't remember too many weird selections at 8 for them though. Did Basteraud ever get back in France squad as a number 8?

No, I think that he only played at 8 for Toulon.

[Puja]

Lol, not at all. It's completely over my head to be honest.

That wasn't meant to come across as a serious comment, I just thought you'd be dying to mention Willis for England after that performance. He reminds me of Aldritt in that ability to make metres that shouldn't be up for grabs. Earl still has credit in the bank, for me, but specifically at 8. I don't know that he can offer what England need as a 7 while carrying the way he has been. Saying that, I don't really want Curry to take the shirt back by default either.

CCS coming in to the England backrow at 6 balanced things out much better with Earl at 8, but I'm not too sure where his form is at the moment.

I'm right there with you on Earl. I'd say you have to pick him at 8 for England with his credit in the bank, but it's not possible to just port him over to 7 and expect the same results - it's a different role with different responsibilities and he won't be able to run in all the same positions that he does at 8, because the 8 would want to be doing those. That's not to say he doesn't have the capability to be England's 7, but he's not who I would pick there.

TWillis has got to be nipping at his heels for England though. That was an incredible performance and, like you said, half his metres were after riding a tackle that would've stopped someone else. I'd be very interested to see if that can translate to the higher level.

Puja

Knobhead.


Earl that is, and I thought he was poor yesterday. Just died with it far too often when decent options outside him.

Willis offers the hard nosed carrying we've often missed....but will it translate intly? We wont know unless we try.

On 7, Earl really is a 7 tbh, but you are likely right that his intl USP would be lost if doing a 7's tasking; who would you pick there.

Hard to say, cause the stupid way this season is organised means that there's only been 4 games before the squad is named and only 1 more after that before it's into camp and preparing for New Zealand, which isn't enough time to see anything about anybody's form, especially with players coming back from England and injury. I like the look of Pepper, but he's had 2.5 games this season, which isn't enough. TCurry and Underhill have had 84 mins and 34 mins respectively across a couple of games - do you trust to "class is permanent" for them?

I would say that, if TCurry is in any kind of fitness and form, which he did look like being last weekend, the 7 shirt should be his to lose in my mind. But the evidence base is so godsdamned small!

Puja

[Stom]

I'm right there with you on Earl. I'd say you have to pick him at 8 for England with his credit in the bank, but it's not possible to just port him over to 7 and expect the same results - it's a different role with different responsibilities and he won't be able to run in all the same positions that he does at 8, because the 8 would want to be doing those. That's not to say he doesn't have the capability to be England's 7, but he's not who I would pick there.

TWillis has got to be nipping at his heels for England though. That was an incredible performance and, like you said, half his metres were after riding a tackle that would've stopped someone else. I'd be very interested to see if that can translate to the higher level.

Puja

Knobhead.


Earl that is, and I thought he was poor yesterday. Just died with it far too often when decent options outside him.

Willis offers the hard nosed carrying we've often missed....but will it translate intly? We wont know unless we try.

On 7, Earl really is a 7 tbh, but you are likely right that his intl USP would be lost if doing a 7's tasking; who would you pick there.

Hard to say, cause the stupid way this season is organised means that there's only been 4 games before the squad is named and only 1 more after that before it's into camp and preparing for New Zealand, which isn't enough time to see anything about anybody's form, especially with players coming back from England and injury. I like the look of Pepper, but he's had 2.5 games this season, which isn't enough. TCurry and Underhill have had 84 mins and 34 mins respectively across a couple of games - do you trust to "class is permanent" for them?

I would say that, if TCurry is in any kind of fitness and form, which he did look like being last weekend, the 7 shirt should be his to lose in my mind. But the evidence base is so godsdamned small!

Puja

Kenningham?