RugbyRebels

switchskier wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Yep. I think Biggar is/should be in pole position for test 10. Farrell was still in Alphonsi’s and O’Gara’s 1stXVs on The Verdict. Something about if you need someone to kick the winning pen in the last minute....

Not for me. We might get away with it if SA are rusty but we're not going to beat them at their own game. Biggar has made progress in the last year at northampton but his first instinct is still to launch the ball skywards and chase after it, which he does very well. I don't expect russell to start but I want him to. It's more fun and I think gives us a better chance of winning.

I think Biggar is in top form and a far more rounded player than a couple of years ago. If either of those slip I’d have Russell but I think Biggar can play all games/tactics at an 8/10 level, as he’s playing at present. That said, I’m waiting for Russell to have one of ‘those’ games so I could have him in my XV. He’s def in the XXIII regardless.

Puja wrote:

Gloskarlos wrote: 6. Josh Navidi (Cardiff Rugby, Wales)
7. Tom Curry (Sale Sharks, England)
8. Sam Simmonds (Exeter Chiefs, England)

That's an interesting back row. Definitely not mimicking anything of the Exeter "two lumpy flankers" style that is supposed to bring the good performances out of Simmonds. Sadly, I don't expect the opposition to provide enough of a challenge to learn too much from it, but it'll be interesting to see how it goes.

Puja

Yes. Three shorties of that stature are unusual in modern back rows. Looks a tad unbalanced without a bigger/taller man to look after the basic grunt work. Could be an exciting combo if it works and should be prominent at the breakdown, but can't see Gatland risking a trio like that in a test. As you say, the opposition could make them look good.

Gloskarlos wrote:This isn't looking so good....

The whole squad is now isolating after de Jager tested positive for Covid

https://www.skysports.com/rugby-union/n ... -19-result

[ShockedDeadpool.gif]

Is that going to screw up Georgia's test against Scotland, or have they escaped unscathed from Covidland?

Puja

Only time will tell (and testing of course) I doubt they will have managed to extract themselves from SA completely unaffected.

Gloskarlos wrote:Only time will tell (and testing of course) I doubt they will have managed to extract themselves from SA completely unaffected.

That could be worth a flutter.

But no. I very much doubt they will. Not quite the level of dumbfuckery being seen with Euro football fixture/crowds, but not far off. I can't understand how either were allowed to go ahead. Just adds months/years onto the time we peasants are able to travel again.

morepork wrote:

Gloskarlos wrote:Only time will tell (and testing of course) I doubt they will have managed to extract themselves from SA completely unaffected.

That could be worth a flutter.

But no. I very much doubt they will. Not quite the level of dumbfuckery being seen with Euro football fixture/crowds, but not far off. I can't understand how either were allowed to go ahead. Just adds months/years onto the time we peasants are able to travel again.

Have you not seen? We have "Freedom Day" scheduled for later this month in which we will eschew masks, any social distancing and (to quote the front page of the Daily Mail) "learn to live with COVID like we do flu".

COVID is over, man. We're just over it. Stop living in the past.

Puja

Freedom day...you've gone Yank old chap.

You see, with pretty good vaccination rates over there, if you had shut down international travel properly (including sports stuff) you would be in a pretty good place right now. But you haven't so good luck. Same over here. Good vaccination rate overall, but believe it or not there is no effective test and trace effort. You can fuck off around the country/world with near impunity. We are so close to a threshold immunity with the vaccinations, but I fear that money will have been pished up against a wall.


Do you know for how long the Lions tour was holding out to include spectators for? It wasn't the announcement of no crowds last week was it?

morepork wrote:Freedom day...you've gone Yank old chap.

You see, with pretty good vaccination rates over there, if you had shut down international travel properly (including sports stuff) you would be in a pretty good place right now. But you haven't so good luck. Same over here. Good vaccination rate overall, but believe it or not there is no effective test and trace effort. You can fuck off around the country/world with near impunity. We are so close to a threshold immunity with the vaccinations, but I fear that money will have been pished up against a wall.


Do you know for how long the Lions tour was holding out to include spectators for? It wasn't the announcement of no crowds last week was it?

...and if we didn’t have a blond tool supposedly running the whole show

morepork wrote:Freedom day...you've gone Yank old chap.

You see, with pretty good vaccination rates over there, if you had shut down international travel properly (including sports stuff) you would be in a pretty good place right now. But you haven't so good luck. Same over here. Good vaccination rate overall, but believe it or not there is no effective test and trace effort. You can fuck off around the country/world with near impunity. We are so close to a threshold immunity with the vaccinations, but I fear that money will have been pished up against a wall.


Do you know for how long the Lions tour was holding out to include spectators for? It wasn't the announcement of no crowds last week was it?

not me. Bloody tabloids hovering on the edge of being actively COVID-denial.

I think the spectators was actually decided relatively early, probably because it's South Africa's issue rather than anything to do with us. We've got our television money, so we're fine.

Puja

Mikey Brown wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:Russell is a liability. I really hope he's nowhere near the test 23.

Was this something specific or just the usual maverick/inconsistent/smiling stuff? Only saw the very brief highlights and not sure I can bring myself to watch the full 80.

Yep, all those usual things, the dumb grin after kicking the ball out on the full, some really risky, almost intercepted passes, etc. Made Daly look world-class when he came on.

If we weren't able to go toe to toe with SA, if there was no other way than fling/hoof the ball, hope for the best, Russell would be a good option. But we're better than that. I'm no Biggar fan but he's the obvious choice.

He made Daly look world class? Is that a bad thing or was he replaced by Daly do you mean?

Looks promising.

Puja wrote: We've got our television money, so we're fine.

Puja

I'd hazard a guess the biggest chunk of cash comes from the myriad sponsorship deals. Whether the Jamboree tour is fine will come down to whether they agreed to reductions in sponsor monies recognising some of the brands involved mayn't have the same cash on hand, and how that filters through into selling brand involvement in subsequent tours.

And they're getting very serious about their brand. If for instance your local club has supplied say 2-3 players to the Lions (having perhaps played for the club at junior level) and you organised a club dinner/party night entitled say the Ampthill Lions evening featuring your players who'd gone on to tour with the Lions you'd likely get an instruction from the Lions you're not allowed to use the Lions brand if you sold tickets for your special event. They have much the same appreciation for the grassroots as those lovely NZ chaps who shat on the Cornish Allblacks, because they have no class or common sense when it comes to concerns about brand dilution

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote: We've got our television money, so we're fine.

Puja

I'd hazard a guess the biggest chunk of cash comes from the myriad sponsorship deals. Whether the Jamboree tour is fine will come down to whether they agreed to reductions in sponsor monies recognising some of the brands involved mayn't have the same cash on hand, and how that filters through into selling brand involvement in subsequent tours.

And they're getting very serious about their brand. If for instance your local club has supplied say 2-3 players to the Lions (having perhaps played for the club at junior level) and you organised a club dinner/party night entitled say the Ampthill Lions evening featuring your players who'd gone on to tour with the Lions you'd likely get an instruction from the Lions you're not allowed to use the Lions brand if you sold tickets for your special event. They have much the same appreciation for the grassroots as those lovely NZ chaps who shat on the Cornish Allblacks, because they have no class or common sense when it comes to concerns about brand dilution

Ugh. That's tasteless and unnecessary of them.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote: We've got our television money, so we're fine.

Puja

I'd hazard a guess the biggest chunk of cash comes from the myriad sponsorship deals. Whether the Jamboree tour is fine will come down to whether they agreed to reductions in sponsor monies recognising some of the brands involved mayn't have the same cash on hand, and how that filters through into selling brand involvement in subsequent tours.

And they're getting very serious about their brand. If for instance your local club has supplied say 2-3 players to the Lions (having perhaps played for the club at junior level) and you organised a club dinner/party night entitled say the Ampthill Lions evening featuring your players who'd gone on to tour with the Lions you'd likely get an instruction from the Lions you're not allowed to use the Lions brand if you sold tickets for your special event. They have much the same appreciation for the grassroots as those lovely NZ chaps who shat on the Cornish Allblacks, because they have no class or common sense when it comes to concerns about brand dilution

Ugh. That's tasteless and unnecessary of them.

Puja

They will make the point they sell rather a lot of Lions events themselves, and if they don't act when no one would have a problem it can make it harder to act when someone is really taking the piss. It does feel to be rather missing the point, especially when they then bang on about community values.

I suppose there is one can enjoy the original names which have resulted in some clubs selling tickets linked to the Lions not called the Lions, whether a Big Cat event, a King of the Jungle evening with..., or a Maned Cat event I think I've seen too. Tbh I suspect most people still do call it a Lions evening, most events would struggle to come to their attention, which merely leaves me wishing they'd call it a Jamboree

Saturday's match against the Bulls is off due to Covid, SA currently have 11 covid cases confirmed in their squad I think, Georgia have 4, Bulls also have 4.

Very quickly becoming shambolic, if it wasn't teetering on that already.

Gloskarlos wrote:Very quickly becoming shambolic, if it wasn't teetering on that already.

It's been on a wing and a prayer for a whole year now

Mikey Brown wrote:He made Daly look world class? Is that a bad thing or was he replaced by Daly do you mean?

He was replaced by Daly. Having said that, Daly did genuinely look good.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:Russell is a liability. I really hope he's nowhere near the test 23.

Was this something specific or just the usual maverick/inconsistent/smiling stuff? Only saw the very brief highlights and not sure I can bring myself to watch the full 80.

Yep, all those usual things, the dumb grin after kicking the ball out on the full, some really risky, almost intercepted passes, etc. Made Daly look world-class when he came on.

If we weren't able to go toe to toe with SA, if there was no other way than fling/hoof the ball, hope for the best, Russell would be a good option. But we're better than that. I'm no Biggar fan but he's the obvious choice.

I agree Biggar should be the 10 but IIRC the almost interceptions were off advantages.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:Russell is a liability. I really hope he's nowhere near the test 23.

Was this something specific or just the usual maverick/inconsistent/smiling stuff? Only saw the very brief highlights and not sure I can bring myself to watch the full 80.

Yep, all those usual things, the dumb grin after kicking the ball out on the full, some really risky, almost intercepted passes, etc. Made Daly look world-class when he came on.

If we weren't able to go toe to toe with SA, if there was no other way than fling/hoof the ball, hope for the best, Russell would be a good option. But we're better than that. I'm no Biggar fan but he's the obvious choice.

How dare someone look like they're having fun when playing a game. Bench him immediately.

Also, the key word on the intercepted passes is 'almost'.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/57751748

Just call it off. This is fucking stupid.

Yeah. Time to call it off now.

Surely they must've taken out insurance policies on the tour from many years out?

Puja

I'm sure they'd be allowed to keep the air miles.