RugbyRebels

Mikey Brown wrote:I hadn't realised that was the issue. Do you know for sure it was a high shot or are you talking more generally?

More general that your 5x more likly to get a card for attempting an intercept then a high tackle

Chunks Baws wrote:Having a peek on social media and Kyle Steyn looks to be the early tip for a WC bolter. Is he playing at 13 for Glasgow?

The Scotsman have done a piece on him too;

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/rugby-un ... -1-4895495

Talking of social media, saw this and thought of you......

https://www.rugbypass.com/news/how-gett ... eys-career

Match ball tweet in the middle.....

Edit: Wrong thread!

Training squad due to be announced soon? Would expect most names one can think of to be included.

Big D wrote:Training squad due to be announced soon? Would expect most names one can think of to be included.

Will it be that many?

Frustratingly it's still the same persisting issues, 8, depth at 1, centre bla bla bla.

Blade Thomson hasn't reappeared yet has he?

Mikey Brown wrote:

Big D wrote:Training squad due to be announced soon? Would expect most names one can think of to be included.

Will it be that many?

Frustratingly it's still the same persisting issues, 8, depth at 1, centre bla bla bla.

Blade Thomson hasn't reappeared yet has he?

He benched for the Scarlets at the weekend.

I thought Bradbury had a very strong game v England to be fair. There was at least 2 No.8 pick ups he made good ground from which isn't something our 8s have done for a while.

Chib will be RWC ready.

hugh_woatmeigh wrote:Chib will be RWC ready.

I don't think he'll make the final cut.

Big D wrote:

hugh_woatmeigh wrote:Chib will be RWC ready.

I don't think he'll make the final cut.

Could be a close one..

I don’t get how any of these assumptions are being made. Has he properly hit his stride since being in the UK (letalone since his injury) or is it still just hope?

I might just be paranoid following England’s Brad Shields debacle.

I am basing my guess on the fact Wilson is loved by GT, Bradbury was pretty good in his last couple of international outings and Thomson really has little time to show anything.

Am I the only one who thinks taking Barclay, Wilson, Watson AND Ritchie to the RWC is a bit imbalanced?

hugh_woatmeigh wrote:Am I the only one who thinks taking Barclay, Wilson, Watson AND Ritchie to the RWC is a bit imbalanced?

Not sure adding Thomson in place of one of them solves your issue to be honest. Thomson is hardly a hard carrier of the ball.

Skinner in an option as a lock/6. Bradbury, Fagerson and the 4 you name all have somewhere between fair to nailed on shouts of a place in the squad. Strauss and CdP are not in the race IMO.

Seems odd to think Fagerson is closer than Strauss given his single appearance so far and Strauss being involved in the last few games, no? I really like Fagerson, but I'm not convinced he's there yet and not even convinced he's an 8.

Strauss has his issues but I'd at least like to have as an option on the bench. I'd be happy for Thomson to take that spot if he can show enough.

I suppose that's me picturing a starting backrow of 6. Barclay 7. Watson 8. Bradbury, but have to accept Wilson will be there. I'm unsure what to do with Ritchie, he was basically our best player in the 6 nations but isn't the 6/leader we need and we can't drop Watson.

Mikey Brown wrote:Seems odd to think Fagerson is closer than Strauss given his single appearance so far and Strauss being involved in the last few games, no? I really like Fagerson, but I'm not convinced he's there yet and not even convinced he's an 8.

Strauss has his issues but I'd at least like to have as an option on the bench. I'd be happy for Thomson to take that spot if he can show enough.

I suppose that's me picturing a starting backrow of 6. Barclay 7. Watson 8. Bradbury, but have to accept Wilson will be there. I'm unsure what to do with Ritchie, he was basically our best player in the 6 nations but isn't the 6/leader we need and we can't drop Watson.

I just don't rate Strauss particularly highly against big physical teams given his style of play and relatively limited skillset and bar Japan our group is a physical one.

You are probably right regarding him being ahead of Fagerson though.

My 1st choice matchday back row would be Watson, Bradbury, Barclay, Wilson/Ritchie.

Big D wrote:

hugh_woatmeigh wrote:Am I the only one who thinks taking Barclay, Wilson, Watson AND Ritchie to the RWC is a bit imbalanced?

Not sure adding Thomson in place of one of them solves your issue to be honest. Thomson is hardly a hard carrier of the ball.

Skinner in an option as a lock/6. Bradbury, Fagerson and the 4 you name all have somewhere between fair to nailed on shouts of a place in the squad. Strauss and CdP are not in the race IMO.

Yes he is. He's also fairly rapid for a guy his size and has great hands. He can also cover lock and 6, but I think he's out of time to prove himself enough before the WC. Unless they pick him based on pre-concussion form.

When do we actually name the squad?

Chunks Baws wrote:

Big D wrote:

hugh_woatmeigh wrote:Am I the only one who thinks taking Barclay, Wilson, Watson AND Ritchie to the RWC is a bit imbalanced?

Not sure adding Thomson in place of one of them solves your issue to be honest. Thomson is hardly a hard carrier of the ball.

Skinner in an option as a lock/6. Bradbury, Fagerson and the 4 you name all have somewhere between fair to nailed on shouts of a place in the squad. Strauss and CdP are not in the race IMO.

Yes he is. He's also fairly rapid for a guy his size and has great hands. He can also cover lock and 6, but I think he's out of time to prove himself enough before the WC. Unless they pick him based on pre-concussion form.

When do we actually name the squad?

Fair dues. In the games I have seen him in he was more an advanced better version of Wilson rather than a hard yards type of carrier but I can only really recall a handful of his games even though I know I have seen a lot more of his games the 'Canes when he was there.

Next Monday or Tuesday.

Unpopular opinion but I'd pick Ritchie at 6 ahead of Barclay every day of the week. JB plays like he's two years older than he is due to the injuries and that was before analysing him post-surgery.

By making him captain we've created another Laidlaw dilemma IMO and it's confounded by Watson's lack of size (thinking more lineout jumping & collisions here) and Toony's preference of Watson. It makes for a very imbalanced backrow pool in the 23 / wider squad

Having said that my solution would be to bump Wilson down the pecking order.

I think Matt Fagerson might turn out to be the better long term bet at 8 than Bradbury. And I like Bradbury. Fagersin just seems like a better footballer and his physicality is improving all the time. RWC might be a little early for him though but he is timing his run well on current form.

I think that we get too hung up on having a ball carrier in the back row. If we have carriers in the front 5 and at least one centre that can get over the gain line then it's less of an issue. The question for me is between a Ritchie/Toolis or Bradbury/Gray combination.

switchskier wrote:I think that we get too hung up on having a ball carrier in the back row. If we have carriers in the front 5 and at least one centre that can get over the gain line then it's less of an issue. The question for me is between a Ritchie/Toolis or Bradbury/Gray combination.

Not sure that Toolis is that good a carrier but agree with your point generally. Skinner might be more the carrying second row.

It might be a bit early for Fagerson but a bit of me thinks that he is the perfect back row bench option. Brings a lot of energy and decent physicality.

Yep, like it in there but not even sure who the stronger carriers are there. Surely it’s both Bradbury and Gray? I feel we get distracted by having a big ball carrier at 8 because there are so few in front.

When McInally and Gray are at their best it makes a big difference. Skinner adds a bit of heft maybe. For various reasons we always end up trying to play coast to coast rugby on slow/backfoot ball.

Shaun Edwards back to being a free agent post wc

Wigan dont want him and he turned Wales down

Have to say would love him for Scotland, if we could become a defensive rock and then turn on the attack we could be something else,

Would seem very left-field but you've got a point.

whatisthejava wrote:Shaun Edwards back to being a free agent post wc

Wigan dont want him and he turned Wales down

Have to say would love him for Scotland, if we could become a defensive rock and then turn on the attack we could be something else,

He’s going to follow Garland into his next job.

Probably England.

We should offer him whatever he wants to become our D coach then at least we'd have tried.

I am not convinced we have the mentality for they disciplined defence he runs but with even just a reasonable defence we would win more games.