RugbyRebels

p/d wrote:

Danno wrote:
On reflection I'm not even sure that tweet is being serious

Bedford supporter

So eloquent, debonair with a rapier like wit and a hit with the ladies.

Oakboy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Assuming he picks his first choice line-up for Argentina, Jones's backline will be Youngs, Ford, May, Farrell, Tuilagi, Watson, Daly.

His tight five will be Mako(if fit), George, Sinckler, Itoje, Kruis.

Will his back-row be Curry, Underhill and Billy or Wilson, Curry and Billy?

Then the bench will presumably be: Marler, LCD, Cole, Lawes, Underhill/Wilson, Heinz, JJ and Coka.

None of those units would be my choice apart from the back-row IF he picks Wilson, Curry and Billy.

go on then....pray tell

I'd pick the following, on the assumption that Nowell and Slade are not fit (and using Jones's squad - which would not be mine):

Marler, George, Sinckler, Itoje, Lawes, Wilson, Curry, Billy, Heinz, Ford, May, Tuilagi, JJ, Daly, Watson.

Bench:
Mako, LCD, Cole, Launchbury, Underhill, Youngs, Farrell, Coka.

How about you?

Kruis for Lawes, Lawes to bench. If Mako is fit, start him. Otherwise, d’accord

Mako
George
Sinckler
Itoje
Kruis
Wilson
Curry
Billy
Youngs
Ford
May
Tuilagi
JJ
Cokanasiga
Daly

LCD
Marler
Cole
Launchbury
Heinz
Farrell
Daly

Digby wrote:Mako
George
Sinckler
Itoje
Kruis
Wilson
Curry
Billy
Youngs
Ford
May
Tuilagi
JJ
Cokanasiga
Daly

LCD
Marler
Cole
Launchbury
Heinz
Farrell
Daly

Do you always post your teams twice Daly?

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:Mako
George
Sinckler
Itoje
Kruis
Wilson
Curry
Billy
Youngs
Ford
May
Tuilagi
JJ
Cokanasiga
Daly

LCD
Marler
Cole
Launchbury
Heinz
Farrell
Daly

Do you always post your teams twice Daly?

Better two Dalys than half a Daly, I suppose.

Francis has been cited. Yellow would be sufficient but could quite easily see them wanting to make an example waaay after the horse has bolted, which would be harsh on Francis.

Frank Debney, ‘former international referee’. He thinks it’s “a classic orange card situation - not quite red, a yellow at minimum” but believes due to “the context of the tournament” it should’ve been a red and is expecting a one match ban.

Mellsblue wrote:

Puja wrote:

Timbo wrote:
Your first screen shot: Wilson and Hooley have literally only just made (very minimal) contact in that shot...take Wilson out of that equation, look at Hooleys standing/left foot and the angle of his body, he’s hitting the deck hard and neck/head first regardless there. Really don’t think Wilson’s actions have any effect.

I think Wilson's accelerated him going backwards, but you are right that he was always falling down and whacking his head even if Wilson wasn't there.

Puja

At those speeds and with Hooley unable to brace himself it only needs the slightest of touches to turn it from a poor landing to one that requires a stretcher.
I do wonder what the reaction would be if that was a US player on Daly.

Finally Watson at 15???

Mikey Brown wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Puja wrote:
I think Wilson's accelerated him going backwards, but you are right that he was always falling down and whacking his head even if Wilson wasn't there.

Puja

At those speeds and with Hooley unable to brace himself it only needs the slightest of touches to turn it from a poor landing to one that requires a stretcher.
I do wonder what the reaction would be if that was a US player on Daly.

Finally Watson at 15???

Ha! True.

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:Mako
George
Sinckler
Itoje
Kruis
Wilson
Curry
Billy
Youngs
Ford
May
Tuilagi
JJ
Cokanasiga
Daly

LCD
Marler
Cole
Launchbury
Heinz
Farrell
Daly

Do you always post your teams twice Daly?

Better two Dalys than half a Daly, I suppose.

This board has declined three times to accept my team. Then we now have a wide number of this house setting its face against agreeing at all. This board is a dead board. It should no longer sit. It has no moral right to comment on my selections


That or good point well made, and Watson in the 23 shirt

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:
Do you always post your teams twice Daly?

Better two Dalys than half a Daly, I suppose.

This board has declined three times to accept my team. Then we now have a wide number of this house setting its face against agreeing at all. This board is a dead board. It should no longer sit. It has no moral right to comment on my selections


That or good point well made, and Watson in the 23 shirt

You be careful, or we'll have a People's Poll on your team.

Puja

Piers Francis has been cited.

I reckon he will be banned for 3 games.

Do we get to fly in a replacement? Or is it tough titties, suck it up buttercup?

If we do get a to call for the cavalry - who will it be?

As JJ and Manu are playing well - but Slade could be crocked, do we go for a like for like centre? Roll the dice with Cips? Admit a mistake and call for another 9? or a safe pair of hands at fullback in Mikey Brown? Nowell, apparently is a possible 13 option, as is Daly, so an inside back, scrum half or Fullback would be usefull.

From the discussions on the USA board I frequent, they seem to be under the impression that you cannot replace a banned player unless they are a front row. So it is very much tough titties.

I don't know he'll be banned, certainly not for longer than a match or two - the initial contact is on the chest, as seen here:



It's not in the same category as Hodge or the Samoans to my mind. Although it won't be the end of the world if we do lose him; he's served his purpose for this tournament and it'd require two injuries minimum for him to reappear, in my opinion.

Puja

Puja wrote:From the discussions on the USA board I frequent, they seem to be under the impression that you cannot replace a banned player unless they are a front row. So it is very much tough titties.

That was our conclusion here as well, ahead of time when we were hypothesising a Farrell red card for a high shoulder charge

Might not be able to replace a banned player but it looks like you can replace an injured player as Fiji, Wales and Scotalnd have done in the last few days.

Freddo wrote:Might not be able to replace a banned player but it looks like you can replace an injured player as Fiji, Wales and Scotalnd have done in the last few days.

Yep, that's well known.
They have to be replaced permanently though (they can't return on recovery)

Which Tyler wrote:

Freddo wrote:Might not be able to replace a banned player but it looks like you can replace an injured player as Fiji, Wales and Scotalnd have done in the last few days.

Yep, that's well known.
They have to be replaced permanently though (they can't return on recovery)

Oh right. I'm sure I heard a pundit say the other day that we should not have brought some of our injured players like Slade or Nowell as we can't replace them if they don't recover.

Freddo wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Freddo wrote:Might not be able to replace a banned player but it looks like you can replace an injured player as Fiji, Wales and Scotalnd have done in the last few days.

Yep, that's well known.
They have to be replaced permanently though (they can't return on recovery)

Oh right. I'm sure I heard a pundit say the other day that we should not have brought some of our injured players like Slade or Nowell as we can't replace them if they don't recover.

As far as I'm aware, it's unclear whether you can use an injury replacement on a player with has failed to recover, rather than been injured. I think you can, but it's just not 100% clear.
Slade has made the pitch, so we can replace him IF he fails to recover.
Mako and Nowell haven't, but if they are training fully, then it's most likely that we could replace them if the re-injure (which is not the same as failing to recover). As far as I'm aware though, it's not been tested

Francis should claim not guilty. He's apparently got the same panel as Hodge, who despite pleading not guilty, still got the max reduction.

I reckon Francis could claim mitigating circumstances (height drop, starts off lower, most of the impact is the chest/shoulder, not the high hit), and argue it was worth a yellow only, not red.

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Better two Dalys than half a Daly, I suppose.

This board has declined three times to accept my team. Then we now have a wide number of this house setting its face against agreeing at all. This board is a dead board. It should no longer sit. It has no moral right to comment on my selections


That or good point well made, and Watson in the 23 shirt

You be careful, or we'll have a People's Poll on your team.

Puja

I am in no doubt whether or not people have confidence in my views

if we do replace Francis should it be with a tighthead or scrum half?

Another partially injured winger?

Beasties wrote:Another partially injured winger?

Ha. You can never have enough.

Renniks wrote:All the news on the Quill - Farrell tackle talks about Quill causing the nose injury - prettttty sure in the replays it was already fecked
Even if EJ was partly to cause for the way the news is being reported - doesn't anyone watch back replays before writing articles about it

Feck - I'm pretty sure the people on this board put more effort into their posts than sports writers.

Yeah the nose injury happened in the build up to McConochie’s try. Took an accidental boot to the nose.

Raggs wrote:Francis should claim not guilty. He's apparently got the same panel as Hodge, who despite pleading not guilty, still got the max reduction.

I reckon Francis could claim mitigating circumstances (height drop, starts off lower, most of the impact is the chest/shoulder, not the high hit), and argue it was worth a yellow only, not red.

I'm sure he's going to get at least a two match ban, just to make an example of him