RugbyRebels

does appear that Eddie has evaluated the low cap/non cap 25-29 year olds (approx.) and by and large discarded them for the future....AI's will be fascinating though, because it may be he just wanted to see the tyros close up for an extended period.

For the AIs is Eddie ruling out players in the Lions squad as name now only, or will he rule out people called up to the Lions squad too?

Digby wrote:For the AIs is Eddie ruling out players in the Lions squad as name now only, or will he rule out people called up to the Lions squad too?

And, will he only rule out on a game time basis? Two 20 minute bench cameos may not count, for example.

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:For the AIs is Eddie ruling out players in the Lions squad as name now only, or will he rule out people called up to the Lions squad too?

And, will he only rule out on a game time basis? Two 20 minute bench cameos may not count, for example.

Also to the point will be time spent in training, and the lack of mental rest

Digby wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:For the AIs is Eddie ruling out players in the Lions squad as name now only, or will he rule out people called up to the Lions squad too?

And, will he only rule out on a game time basis? Two 20 minute bench cameos may not count, for example.

Also to the point will be time spent in training, and the lack of mental rest

True, but so different from Arg tour?

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
And, will he only rule out on a game time basis? Two 20 minute bench cameos may not count, for example.

Also to the point will be time spent in training, and the lack of mental rest

True, but so different from Arg tour?

Of course its different, they will be getting coached by Gatland, Howley, Rowntree and O'Farrell, the poor bastards will need help from shrinks.

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
And, will he only rule out on a game time basis? Two 20 minute bench cameos may not count, for example.

Also to the point will be time spent in training, and the lack of mental rest

True, but so different from Arg tour?

Hugely so. The Lions tour is at a much higher level, with much more competition in training to advance a cause for a test team, features more games, and goes on for many more weeks.

Digby wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:
Also to the point will be time spent in training, and the lack of mental rest

True, but so different from Arg tour?

Hugely so. The Lions tour is at a much higher level, with much more competition in training to advance a cause for a test team, features more games, and goes on for many more weeks.

Plus given that they're saying the ABs will be released to their franchises to play, and that the Maori game is pretty much a 4th test match, everyone in the squad will probably get 2 - 3 games of high quality rugby, plus all the training as said.

16th man wrote:

Digby wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
True, but so different from Arg tour?

Hugely so. The Lions tour is at a much higher level, with much more competition in training to advance a cause for a test team, features more games, and goes on for many more weeks.

Plus given that they're saying the ABs will be released to their franchises to play, and that the Maori game is pretty much a 4th test match, everyone in the squad will probably get 2 - 3 games of high quality rugby, plus all the training as said.

just watching the Crusaders murder the Stormers in the first half....farrkkkkk.

Skill levels and ambition fantastic

Banquo wrote:

16th man wrote:

Digby wrote:
Hugely so. The Lions tour is at a much higher level, with much more competition in training to advance a cause for a test team, features more games, and goes on for many more weeks.

Plus given that they're saying the ABs will be released to their franchises to play, and that the Maori game is pretty much a 4th test match, everyone in the squad will probably get 2 - 3 games of high quality rugby, plus all the training as said.

just watching the Crusaders murder the Stormers in the first half....farrkkkkk.

Skill levels and ambition fantastic

Anything they can do... a midfield of Farrell, Te'o and JD2 can... watch and wince

Which Tyler wrote:

Banquo wrote:

16th man wrote:
Plus given that they're saying the ABs will be released to their franchises to play, and that the Maori game is pretty much a 4th test match, everyone in the squad will probably get 2 - 3 games of high quality rugby, plus all the training as said.

just watching the Crusaders murder the Stormers in the first half....farrkkkkk.

Skill levels and ambition fantastic

Anything they can do... a midfield of Farrell, Te'o and JD2 can... watch and wince

Crusaders setup is what Doorz was talking about a while back, the classic NZ 2-4-2 which no doubt one T. Blackadder will be looking to make work at Bath. Though in advance the skills one finds in the respective tight fives might limit what Bath can do when trying to progress what Blackadder will want

The Lions almost certainly will not be able to replicate the setup, but actually Farrell would be rather good at it I think, it'd play much more to his strengths and limit the impact of his limited running game, and two big hard running centres rarely hurts anyone, though again they're not going to get to play in the same system and the forwards couldn't probably manage it if they tried.

Scrumhead wrote:

Peej wrote:How can Isiekwe get picked with such limited rugby experience in a squad with so few locks?

I have a Wasps bias, but quite how Taylor or one of Robson and Simpson haven't been picked is just weird to me. Wade should have been, but I understand why (well, I don't actually, but acknowledge that there's an obsessions with the idea that he can't defend). Still, it must be gutting for him to not even be in the top 7 wingers in the league despite being the leading try scorer in the Prem and outplaying several of these guys in head to heads.

I've watched Piers Francis a couple times in Super Rugby - he is shite.

I don't have a Wasps bias, but I agree on Robson, Taylor and Wade and I also would have picked Symons.

Francis isn't shite? Whenever I've watched him he's been decent. I wouldn't have picked him, but I wouldn't have said he's 'shite'. If Eddie wanted another 10/12, he ought to have given Ryan Mills a shot.

I know this is a few pages back, but gonna have to stick up for mah boy Piers. He's a great second-playmaker option at 12 and a reliable goalkicker. He's got more in common with the style of 12 that Aaron Mauger was, in that they don't really stand out a great deal, but they do a lot of good little things with few errors, which elevates the performance of those around him. The fact that Umaga dropped him into a dysfunctional Blues backline at 12 last year, which led to it immediately settling and becoming fairly potent speaks for itself. He's definitely someone that the Blues and Counties Manukau are going to miss when he heads over to Northampton later this year.

cashead wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:

Peej wrote:How can Isiekwe get picked with such limited rugby experience in a squad with so few locks?

I have a Wasps bias, but quite how Taylor or one of Robson and Simpson haven't been picked is just weird to me. Wade should have been, but I understand why (well, I don't actually, but acknowledge that there's an obsessions with the idea that he can't defend). Still, it must be gutting for him to not even be in the top 7 wingers in the league despite being the leading try scorer in the Prem and outplaying several of these guys in head to heads.

I've watched Piers Francis a couple times in Super Rugby - he is shite.

I don't have a Wasps bias, but I agree on Robson, Taylor and Wade and I also would have picked Symons.

Francis isn't shite? Whenever I've watched him he's been decent. I wouldn't have picked him, but I wouldn't have said he's 'shite'. If Eddie wanted another 10/12, he ought to have given Ryan Mills a shot.

I know this is a few pages back, but gonna have to stick up for mah boy Piers. He's a great second-playmaker option at 12 and a reliable goalkicker. He's got more in common with the style of 12 that Aaron Mauger was, in that they don't really stand out a great deal, but they do a lot of good little things with few errors, which elevates the performance of those around him. The fact that Umaga dropped him into a dysfunctional Blues backline at 12 last year, which led to it immediately settling and becoming fairly potent speaks for itself. He's definitely someone that the Blues and Counties Manukau are going to miss when he heads over to Northampton later this year.

What's your opinion of him as a 10? Apparently that's what he sees himself as and what Northampton have signed him for, but all the reports I've read seem more complimentary of him in his performances at 12.

Puja

Puja wrote:

cashead wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:
I don't have a Wasps bias, but I agree on Robson, Taylor and Wade and I also would have picked Symons.

Francis isn't shite? Whenever I've watched him he's been decent. I wouldn't have picked him, but I wouldn't have said he's 'shite'. If Eddie wanted another 10/12, he ought to have given Ryan Mills a shot.

I know this is a few pages back, but gonna have to stick up for mah boy Piers. He's a great second-playmaker option at 12 and a reliable goalkicker. He's got more in common with the style of 12 that Aaron Mauger was, in that they don't really stand out a great deal, but they do a lot of good little things with few errors, which elevates the performance of those around him. The fact that Umaga dropped him into a dysfunctional Blues backline at 12 last year, which led to it immediately settling and becoming fairly potent speaks for itself. He's definitely someone that the Blues and Counties Manukau are going to miss when he heads over to Northampton later this year.

What's your opinion of him as a 10? Apparently that's what he sees himself as and what Northampton have signed him for, but all the reports I've read seem more complimentary of him in his performances at 12.

Puja

Serviceable without being spectacular but that doesn't make him a bad player. He'll do a job for you, but he's best used when being surrounded by a flashy backline as a settler.

Whaat is it with Saints and 10s who are better at 12? Not a cut at Francis, just seems to be a theme of theirs...

[quote="Digby]

Back Row

Curry
Curry
Haskell
Hughes
Robshaw
Underhill
Wood

[/quote]

Whilst it will be interesting to see how Currys get on I would have given Haskell and Robshaw and Wood a rest for this tour to take a further look at Kvesic, Evans and Ludlam who all seem to have been overlooked for one reason or another yet are probably all more ready for test rugby than the Curry twins at present.

jngf wrote:[quote="Digby]

Back Row

Curry
Curry
Haskell
Hughes
Robshaw
Underhill
Wood

Whilst it will be interesting to see how Currys get on I would have given Haskell and Robshaw and Wood a rest for this tour to take a further look at Kvesic, Evans and Ludlam who all seem to have been overlooked for one reason or another yet are probably all more ready for test rugby than the Curry twins at present.[/quote][/quote]

Why would you play Kvesic ahead of Rowan when the latter has been starting ahead of him all year and is currently playing far better??

How can Ludlam be classified as more ready when he is yet to start a premiership game? The Curry's do it every week.

padprop wrote:

jngf wrote:[quote="Digby]

Back Row

Curry
Curry
Haskell
Hughes
Robshaw
Underhill
Wood

Whilst it will be interesting to see how Currys get on I would have given Haskell and Robshaw and Wood a rest for this tour to take a further look at Kvesic, Evans and Ludlam who all seem to have been overlooked for one reason or another yet are probably all more ready for test rugby than the Curry twins at present.

[/quote]

Why would you play Kvesic ahead of Rowan when the latter has been starting ahead of him all year and is currently playing far better??

How can Ludlam be classified as more ready when he is yet to start a premiership game? The Curry's do it every week.[/quote][/quote][/quote]

Exactly this. But for a poorly timed injury, Will Evans may well have been in contention, but the Currys look the most 'ready'. They're more than just holding their own at AP level - both have been noticeably good/very good in almost every game they've played. In comparison, I'd say Underhill's had more hype, but that was really built on a couple of big games for Ospreys last year. He's been OK since, but he is there on potential whereas I'd argue that the Currys are there on performance (as well as obvious potential).

Ludlam is absolutely nowhere near ... he's barely featured for Saints even when Wood and Harrison have been away. If he doesn't make a proper breakthrough next season, he needs to think about moving on IMO.

Kvesic can get back in the reckoning, but he was never going to be picked on a smattering of average games 7 months ago.

jngf wrote:[quote="Digby]

Back Row

Curry
Curry
Haskell
Hughes
Robshaw
Underhill
Wood

Whilst it will be interesting to see how Currys get on I would have given Haskell and Robshaw and Wood a rest for this tour to take a further look at Kvesic, Evans and Ludlam who all seem to have been overlooked for one reason or another yet are probably all more ready for test rugby than the Curry twins at present.[/quote][/quote]


The older guys will be there to give the younger guys some guidance I think that is a great idea. Kvesic if anyone is the one that needs a summer off and then a pre season at his new club to get some confidence back and some fresh coaching. Tossing him into a test match seems like the worst possible thing for him at this stage.

I guess Will Fraser is another openside who like Kvesic seems to have dropped off the test selection recogning?

Mind you these guys might take heart from the examples of Andy Robinson and Pat Sanderson both of whom won initial caps then went through 5 year+ dry spells before making their test comebacks.

jngf wrote:I guess Will Fraser is another openside who like Kvesic seems to have dropped off the test selection recogning?

Mind you these guys might take heart from the examples of Andy Robinson and Pat Sanderson both of whom won initial caps then went through 5 year+ dry spells before making their test comebacks.

Has Will Fraser played a match in 2017?

He's a had a couple of run outs but I fear injuries have effectively ended his career. Pity as he was looking the part a couple of seasons back.

So Paul Hill and Joe Marchant ruled out of the tour, along with Haskell who is now a Lion. Solomona is a big doubt along with Maunder. Piers Francis had a pretty brutal concussion last week, Cokanasiga missed his playoff game through injury...anymore that I'm missing? And there's still the Prem final to go.

I said at the time that announcing the squad when Eddie did was pointless with so much of the season to go. I get it with the Lions because theres the commercial aspect, but not with this England squad.

Always risky naming the squad early as injuries were always on the cards.

Disappointed Marchant will miss out. I was looking forward to seeing how he went.

Cockanasiga will be available to tour if it really was just a minor hamstring tear