RugbyRebels

I'm less pissed off with that selection than last week's but that's mainly due to Launch being there which was hardly Eddie's fault last week. But Brown on the wind again? FFS. Pleased to see Wilson in the 23 but the thinking's still all over the shop. If Cips comes on then where? It's not gonna be Ford off so the only other answer is Brown off, Daly to the wing and Cips to FB. As if we're not already experimenting at FB.... We could comceivably end with a back three of May, Cips, Solomona. Gulp.

Cipriani is a surprise, but it makes sense in terms of a) If he's going to be no 3 fly-half going towards the RWC, it makes sense to keep him onside and scuppering his big money French move and then not picking him at all wouldn't help with that, and b) Francis was crap.

Not sure of the logic of no lock on the bench. Last week, it made some sort of sense as we'd run out. This week feels like a further snub to Isiekwe, especially since Shields was so strikingly average as a lock when tried, and I hope he's mentally strong enough to move past it.

Puja

Oakboy wrote:I wonder who will come off should Cipriani come on. Will we get Spencer and him replacing Youngs and Ford (yes, please)? Or, will we see Cipriani going to FB and Daly moving to wing (no, thanks)?

Or the other possibility of Slade off, Daly to OC and Cips to FB. If Slade gets injured or has a mare then that's what has to happen.

Shields didn't strike me as any more average than Isiekwe.....

Raggs wrote:I think the finishing front row always look a lot more dynamic than starters, so am fine with sticking with sink. Would have thought Isiekwe on the bench would have been a smart choice, perhaps they were more upset over what they saw than most of us.

Would have liked to have seen Robson, but I guess Spencer is preferred (he does play for Saracens after all...).

Quite excited about doing the ruck marks for this test.

ditto on Robson, his non selection has confused me for some while.

Puja wrote:Cipriani is a surprise, but it makes sense in terms of a) If he's going to be no 3 fly-half going towards the RWC, it makes sense to keep him onside and scuppering his big money French move and then not picking him at all wouldn't help with that, and b) Francis was crap.

Not sure of the logic of no lock on the bench. Last week, it made some sort of sense as we'd run out. This week feels like a further snub to Isiekwe, especially since Shields was so strikingly average as a lock when tried, and I hope he's mentally strong enough to move past it.

Puja

He wants to look more at Shields and Wilson, and Shields in the row didn't lose him the game last time? Seems logical enough. Sucks for Isiekwe and its bad development - kinda the opposite of what Jones was talking about when he held Itoje back in the first 6N - but that aside, seems fine to me.


Brown on the wing aside, it looks a sensible enough side to me.

Beasties wrote:

Oakboy wrote:I wonder who will come off should Cipriani come on. Will we get Spencer and him replacing Youngs and Ford (yes, please)? Or, will we see Cipriani going to FB and Daly moving to wing (no, thanks)?

Or the other possibility of Slade off, Daly to OC and Cips to FB. If Slade gets injured or has a mare then that's what has to happen.

Hadn't thought of that. Developing the 'what ifs', should Ford and Farrell both get injured, we have Cipriani, Slade, Daly with Brown at FB and Solomona on the wing. I rather like that.

Oakboy wrote:

Beasties wrote:

Oakboy wrote:I wonder who will come off should Cipriani come on. Will we get Spencer and him replacing Youngs and Ford (yes, please)? Or, will we see Cipriani going to FB and Daly moving to wing (no, thanks)?

Or the other possibility of Slade off, Daly to OC and Cips to FB. If Slade gets injured or has a mare then that's what has to happen.

Hadn't thought of that. Developing the 'what ifs', should Ford and Farrell both get injured, we have Cipriani, Slade, Daly with Brown at FB and Solomona on the wing. I rather like that.

Defensively, that midfield scares the bejeebus out of me.

Mellsblue wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Beasties wrote: Or the other possibility of Slade off, Daly to OC and Cips to FB. If Slade gets injured or has a mare then that's what has to happen.

Hadn't thought of that. Developing the 'what ifs', should Ford and Farrell both get injured, we have Cipriani, Slade, Daly with Brown at FB and Solomona on the wing. I rather like that.

Defensively, that midfield scares the bejeebus out of me.

our current midfield defence is pony, and that would be my little pony

Eddie, you fucking dildo.

It's a decent pack. Can't be annoyed with that. Lovely having a proper 7 for two games in a row... Can't help thinking that bringing Simmonds on in the last 20 minutes would be bloody useful... shame he's not involved.

Brown on the wing is just criminal. I know I've been saying it for years but to have Christian Wade sitting at home and Mike Brown on the wing is just tragic.

I'd rather have Matt Banahan on the wing than Brown, all day long.

Let's hope that pack and subs can stay on top of the boks. Gustard will have earned his money if that backline holds when we're under pressure. Robshaw milked a good run so I hope shields goes well just so we can move on. If shields has a mare though it'll be Robshaw till the WC you can bet on it.

Maybe Eddie's just fucking with everybody and Brown and Daly will revert to previous despite their numbers. That'll be a downer for SA come kick off. Genius.

Is Simmonds not injured?

Beasties wrote:Maybe Eddie's just fucking with everybody and Brown and Daly will revert to previous despite their numbers. That'll be a downer for SA come kick off. Genius.

That's what I said before the 1st test

and its a good question on Simmonds, who has gone from hero to less than zero quickly; I don't think he is a top test quality 8, but he sure as hell would be a good impact sub at 7 imo, and could learn to be a top 7.

Banquo wrote:And Twitchy was correct on Isiekwe being make or break and a continued kick in the nads for Hill and Simmonds; Eddie has lost his effin marbles on the Brown and Daly thing. Nice that Cips makes the bench.

Robshaw rested/dropped is the only happy thing in that announcement imo

Brutal management. Outside of NZ probably the toughest debut you could have then being dropped completely with no locks covering. Hopefully it will be a learning experience he seems like a pretty mature guy.

Banquo wrote:

Beasties wrote:Maybe Eddie's just fucking with everybody and Brown and Daly will revert to previous despite their numbers. That'll be a downer for SA come kick off. Genius.

That's what I said before the 1st test

and its a good question on Simmonds, who has gone from hero to less than zero quickly; I don't think he is a top test quality 8, but he sure as hell would be a good impact sub at 7 imo, and could learn to be a top 7.

He's a good impact sub at 8, too.

Better balance in that pack. Robshaw needed time off, ffs. Hopefully he comes back strongly after some rest. But Shields could be good there, his carrying is surely a step up on Robshaw. But who leads the defense now? Launch?

twitchy wrote:

Banquo wrote:And Twitchy was correct on Isiekwe being make or break and a continued kick in the nads for Hill and Simmonds; Eddie has lost his effin marbles on the Brown and Daly thing. Nice that Cips makes the bench.

Robshaw rested/dropped is the only happy thing in that announcement imo

Brutal management. Outside of NZ probably the toughest debut you could have then being dropped completely with no locks covering. Hopefully it will be a learning experience he seems like a pretty mature guy.

I feel for the lad but you have to question Jones here.

Isiekwe has been on 2 tours and been in the wider squad for the last year. Plenty of time to assess whether he is ready to take a step up. Plainly he wasnt and is now deemed unsuitable for a role on the bench.

I think its reasonable to ask why Jones included him in successive squads, and why he chose to take him to SA knowing that there was a strong possibility of him having to play.

One could also ask why Ben and Nathan Earle are there too but maybe we'll save that for another time.

fivepointer wrote:

twitchy wrote:

Banquo wrote:And Twitchy was correct on Isiekwe being make or break and a continued kick in the nads for Hill and Simmonds; Eddie has lost his effin marbles on the Brown and Daly thing. Nice that Cips makes the bench.

Robshaw rested/dropped is the only happy thing in that announcement imo

Brutal management. Outside of NZ probably the toughest debut you could have then being dropped completely with no locks covering. Hopefully it will be a learning experience he seems like a pretty mature guy.

I feel for the lad but you have to question Jones here.

Isiekwe has been on 2 tours and been in the wider squad for the last year. Plenty of time to assess whether he is ready to take a step up. Plainly he wasnt and is now deemed unsuitable for a role on the bench.

I think its reasonable to ask why Jones included him in successive squads, and why he chose to take him to SA knowing that there was a strong possibility of him having to play.

One could also ask why Ben and Nathan Earle are there too but maybe we'll save that for another time.

Well I'm not sure anyone could have known how he'd play. But he wasn't effective enough for Jones' liking. Binning him completely does seem a bit counter productive, though.

fivepointer wrote:

twitchy wrote:

Banquo wrote:And Twitchy was correct on Isiekwe being make or break and a continued kick in the nads for Hill and Simmonds; Eddie has lost his effin marbles on the Brown and Daly thing. Nice that Cips makes the bench.

Robshaw rested/dropped is the only happy thing in that announcement imo

Brutal management. Outside of NZ probably the toughest debut you could have then being dropped completely with no locks covering. Hopefully it will be a learning experience he seems like a pretty mature guy.

I feel for the lad but you have to question Jones here.

Isiekwe has been on 2 tours and been in the wider squad for the last year. Plenty of time to assess whether he is ready to take a step up. Plainly he wasnt and is now deemed unsuitable for a role on the bench.

I think its reasonable to ask why Jones included him in successive squads, and why he chose to take him to SA knowing that there was a strong possibility of him having to play.

One could also ask why Ben and Nathan Earle are there too but maybe we'll save that for another time.

Because he looked at the other options and decided that, despite doubts, Isiekwe was still his 5th best lock?

Peat wrote:

fivepointer wrote:

twitchy wrote:

Brutal management. Outside of NZ probably the toughest debut you could have then being dropped completely with no locks covering. Hopefully it will be a learning experience he seems like a pretty mature guy.

I feel for the lad but you have to question Jones here.

Isiekwe has been on 2 tours and been in the wider squad for the last year. Plenty of time to assess whether he is ready to take a step up. Plainly he wasnt and is now deemed unsuitable for a role on the bench.

I think its reasonable to ask why Jones included him in successive squads, and why he chose to take him to SA knowing that there was a strong possibility of him having to play.

One could also ask why Ben and Nathan Earle are there too but maybe we'll save that for another time.

Because he looked at the other options and decided that, despite doubts, Isiekwe was still his 5th best lock?

and changed his mind in 35 mins of play....

Banquo wrote:

Peat wrote:

fivepointer wrote:
I feel for the lad but you have to question Jones here.

Isiekwe has been on 2 tours and been in the wider squad for the last year. Plenty of time to assess whether he is ready to take a step up. Plainly he wasnt and is now deemed unsuitable for a role on the bench.

I think its reasonable to ask why Jones included him in successive squads, and why he chose to take him to SA knowing that there was a strong possibility of him having to play.

One could also ask why Ben and Nathan Earle are there too but maybe we'll save that for another time.

Because he looked at the other options and decided that, despite doubts, Isiekwe was still his 5th best lock?

and changed his mind in 35 mins of play....

Exactly, it's total rubbish. I've been so fond of Eddie up until the last 6ns and now, the guy's mad. You don't drop someone after 35 mins of debut, it's bollocks. The Brown on the wing this is just a waste of time. Some of these coaches are just all ego, making left-field selections so that if it does work, they can say "I told you so", that's all it is.

Banquo wrote:

Peat wrote:

fivepointer wrote:
I feel for the lad but you have to question Jones here.

Isiekwe has been on 2 tours and been in the wider squad for the last year. Plenty of time to assess whether he is ready to take a step up. Plainly he wasnt and is now deemed unsuitable for a role on the bench.

I think its reasonable to ask why Jones included him in successive squads, and why he chose to take him to SA knowing that there was a strong possibility of him having to play.

One could also ask why Ben and Nathan Earle are there too but maybe we'll save that for another time.

Because he looked at the other options and decided that, despite doubts, Isiekwe was still his 5th best lock?

and changed his mind in 35 mins of play....

Given that he didn't put in Jonny Hill, but is rather relying on a back row providing cover, I'm not sure he has changed his mind on who his 5th best lock is - merely changed it on how good his 5th best lock is.

Peat wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Peat wrote:
Because he looked at the other options and decided that, despite doubts, Isiekwe was still his 5th best lock?

and changed his mind in 35 mins of play....

Given that he didn't put in Jonny Hill, but is rather relying on a back row providing cover, I'm not sure he has changed his mind on who his 5th best lock is - merely changed it on how good his 5th best lock is.

I didnt say what bit of his mind had changed....

Its crap as Dasher says tho. Hope he doesn't end up Burrell'ed

Is anybody confident that we will win?