RugbyRebels

Here's the Barclay clear-out. Lead with the head. 5 foot from Sir Nigel, God Referee of the world, he who cannot be criticised. I'm pretty tired of teams 9/10 times getting away with that against us. Only Oz have been sanctioned correctly in-game recently.

The French guy has been cited.

Couldn't believe it was missed at the time, right in front of Owens who dismissed Barclay when he complained about it.

Who was the TMO?

Cameo wrote:Wow I knew that there would be an overreaction if we played badly but not this bad. However disappointing, it's the first game of preseason against good team. Let's not sack the whole coaching team until at least after the first game of the tournament.

And that is not saying that I don't think that Gray should be in the team or that the defence is dodgy. I just struggle to see the last two years as a disaster.

On the flip side, away from home they have shown nothing to warrant saying it has been even average.

Chunks Baws wrote:Couldn't believe it was missed at the time, right in front of Owens who dismissed Barclay when he complained about it.

Who was the TMO?

To be fair, the refs view looks blocked. The lino and TMO should step in.

Does anyone know why Barclay wasn't taken off the field after that? He looked fairly rattled.
There should have been at least an HIA examination IMO.

Adder wrote:Does anyone know why Barclay wasn't taken off the field after that? He looked fairly rattled.
There should have been at least an HIA examination IMO.

I think he told the ref it was his neck, and the ref took his word for it.

Adder wrote:Does anyone know why Barclay wasn't taken off the field after that? He looked fairly rattled.
There should have been at least an HIA examination IMO.

On head knocks out medical staff are excellent and if anything over cautious (which I have no issue with). Any concerns he'd have been off.

General Zod wrote:

Adder wrote:Does anyone know why Barclay wasn't taken off the field after that? He looked fairly rattled.
There should have been at least an HIA examination IMO.

I think he told the ref it was his neck, and the ref took his word for it.

i honestly dont think ownes saw anything and there were comms issues throughout; He did go off the pitch for a couple of minutes but its just reckless by the frenchman.

If @worldrugby really want to make a statement about bad clearing out this guy may well be the patsy

Big D wrote:

Adder wrote:Does anyone know why Barclay wasn't taken off the field after that? He looked fairly rattled.
There should have been at least an HIA examination IMO.

On head knocks out medical staff are excellent and if anything over cautious (which I have no issue with). Any concerns he'd have been off.

I'm not sure you can say your medical staff are excellent and overcautious after watching that. He's clearly stunned and the fall is from the blow to the head, not from the force of contact. The whole point of an HIA is that you can't tell if someone's suffered a concussion from a 2 minute check on the pitch - it shouldn't be about whether they have concerns, but about whether he's taken a blow to his head/neck and fallen over in a manner that suggests being dazed.

Mind, it's hardly like your lot are the only ones. Australia let the guy who got elbowed by Barrett keep playing without an HIA and we let Piers Francis keep playing the week before last, after clearly being knocked out.

Puja

Just watched a highlights video in which we didn't actually touch the ball.

There's only so much you can tell from watching a 5 minute highlight reel of them waltzing through our fringe defence, but some of the guys (Reid, Fagerson) did not look like they've just come out of pre-season at all. Toolis and Strauss in particular looked leaden-footed.

That Barclay hit is awful. That's the kind of decision that makes it hard to argue when players roll around on the floor to draw attention to something.

I've never seen Townsend look this despondent.

Apologies to Barclay, as I posted earlier that he didn’t seem match fit. With a bang on the head of that force, I’m surprised he was still on the pitch. If the citing committee do their job then Gabrillagues won’t be on the plane to Japan

Whilst it’s not quite time to shit the bed after one hit out, questions do have to be asked about the preparation (physical, mental and skills) and conditioning that is being overseen by the coaching group.

One thing that always seems clear with the Welsh team is that the more time they spend in camp with their coaching team, the better they get. Not sure we can say the same with Scotland. Is this obsession with wanting to play the fastest rugby in the world (TM) blinding Toony to the tenets of Test rugby. It’s seems obvious to everyone else that you have to win the collisions. We can’t rely on the players raising their game to a frenzied intensity to achieve consistent results if man for man they are physically underpowered. I don’t believe we lack the physical capability to be as strong as the Welsh/Irish. I just think we are conditioning the players and forwards in particular to have a higher aerobic and endurance capacity than focusing on power.

Mind you there were a fair few players in that team that won’t travel and others that are second choice. Suspect only 2/3 of the pack are first choice. Too many nice guys/imposters in the pack.

Being conditioned for playing fast doesn't explain why so many of them looked like they were running in treacle does it?

At this stage it feels like this "fastest brand of rugby in the world thing" is an open acknowledgement that we can be overpowered.

I'm not sure if my expectation from this group have players was just far too high in the last few years, but it's hard to think of any area of the game we're really consistently good. I don't know what most of the coaches are doing but it really doesn't feel like they can be on the same wavelength as each other or the players.

ARM wrote:Whilst it’s not quite time to shit the bed after one hit out.

It's not one hit out - it's been happening for well over a year? There are no improvements.

Mikey Brown wrote:Being conditioned for playing fast doesn't explain why so many of them looked like they were running in treacle does it?

At this stage it feels like this "fastest brand of rugby in the world thing" is an open acknowledgement that we can be overpowered.

I'm not sure if my expectation from this group have players was just far too high in the last few years, but it's hard to think of any area of the game we're really consistently good. I don't know what most of the coaches are doing but it really doesn't feel like they can be on the same wavelength as each other or the players.

Feels like when they get the ball the decision is full speed or stop. Nothing in between.
Thinking back to season 2017 - the Wales/Ireland/Australia games in particular - there was a gradual but inexorable increase in tempo as the scoring zone approached. Waiting....waiting to the point where you could sense they were ready to "pull the trigger" and everyone was switched on to it. That might have been after a numerous phases or just 2 or 3. Key thing is the decision making was clear and everyone was wired into it.
It seems now we are back to reacting to one player making a decision and playing it off the cuff from there. Fine when everyone is awake but fatal if 2 or 3 aren't switched on.

Struggling to remember the last time we scored a lumpen try or an All Black special where, seemingly out of nowhere, a 3 man overlap appears and a prop strolls over unmarked on the wing. All ours are things of constructed beauty. The training ground whiteboard stuff of dreams....until the opposition refuses to co-operate.

Sounds about right. We seem to have completely done away with any notion of being patient. But I’m worried GT views the only possible fix for that problem to be Greig Laidlaw.

Mikey Brown wrote:Sounds about right. We seem to have completely done away with any notion of being patient. But I’m worried GT views the only possible fix for that problem to be Greig Laidlaw.

That's exactly why Rennie said Hastings could be better than Russell. For Glasgow Hastings is good at building up the phases and waiting for the gaps to appear.

French team oot...

Hopefully, we’ll get a win and forget that Saturday, most of the 6 Nations, our appearances in Cardiff over the past decade and several other performances ever happened until the next time it happens. That will certainly be my plan.

When you look at that you can see they have a fair idea who their "1sts" are.

I am not sure GT knows who his starters are in: one of the second rows, 6, 8, 12, 13 and possibly a wing spot.

Any guesses at how we'll line up?

We might see most of the same fuds as last week - “We had a plan for the first two games and there are going to be a number of changes for next week,” said Townsend. “It might [now] be fewer, but we will have a look at where we are.

He should be starting his 1st team, but he doesn't know his 1st team and neither do we.

I'd go with:
Dell
Rambo (Brown still injured) - last start for Rambo pre WC.
Nel
Gray
GG
Thomson
Watson
Bradbury
Laidlaw
Rusell
Seymour
Johnson
Hutchinson
Maitland
Hogg - last start pre RWC.

Turner
Berghan - lets see if he can do 20-30min at LHP
Fagerson
Cummings
Wilson
Horne x2
Kinghorn

Big D wrote:He should be starting his 1st team, but he doesn't know his 1st team and neither do we.

I'd go with:
Dell
Rambo (Brown still injured) - last start for Rambo pre WC.
Nel
Gray
GG
Thomson
Watson
Bradbury
Laidlaw
Rusell
Seymour
Johnson
Hutchinson
Maitland
Hogg - last start pre RWC.

Turner
Berghan - lets see if he can do 20-30min at LHP
Fagerson
Cummings
Wilson
Horne x2
Kinghorn

No Skinner? Who is surely seen as a 2nd row now with all the depth we have in the backrow.

General Zod wrote:French team oot...

Monstered up front again That's some size of a backrow.