I was about to post about all the benefits that would come with winning and suddenly though "Actually, I think it might be best if we lost". I don't want an excuse for persisting with things like Haskell-Robshaw or Hartley as captain longer than necessary; they are not World Cup winning solutions nor will they ever be.Digby wrote: I struggle with the notion that winning a comp which is so far off the best of tier 1 rugby can mean much. It's what's there I guess, but it's not very interesting as things stand.
I feel somewhat dirty for having thought it, but my celebrations would be somewhat muted if encouragement was given to what definitely looks like going in the wrong direction.
edit: I now think beating SH teams means more to me than winning the 6N.
I have loudly preached the virtues of being skeptical about Jones' public announcements, but I think in this case, it's safe to assume he will definitely trial Tuilagi as a possible long-term 12 sooner or later. Well, unless injuries happen and Slade gets a chance and totally nails it before then. I digress - it seems to be very clearly the former.Pie Man wrote:What I can't decide on is whether picking Manu at 12 would be because it's best for the team and it's future direction, or because it would be the best thing in a one-off game to nullify Roberts.