RugbyRebels

Lizard wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 1:35 am Match of the round, to decide who meets Ireland and who meets New Zealand in the QFs.

This will be great.

16th man wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 7:14 pm Apparently Boks going 7/1 on the bench.

16th man wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 7:14 pm Apparently Boks going 7/1 on the bench.

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 8:37 pm I'm no front row expert, but I really worry about the safety of putting a flanker in to scrum at hooker against a decent team.

If I were the ref, and ultimately responsible for judging safety, I'd want to see some evidence of him playing hooker in multiple matches before allowing him as a specialist.
Otherwise, no specialist = uncontested scrums, and the team forcing that loses an extra player.
I would also, of course, tell them that the moment I saw the team announcement.

ETA: what are the rules currently? Initially the increase in bench size was dependant on there being 3 specialist front rows, if that's still the case, then SA are already in breach, and presumably have to drop their 23rd man.

7:1 split is high risk, mediocre reward, I dislike it, but it's not "wrong".
8-man bench with only 2 front rowers, as far as I'm aware, isn't actually allowed.
You don't become a specialist front rower because Tassie says so, you become one by dedicating training, and playing time there.

Danno wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 10:45 pm Starting to feel like I'm the only person that thinks a 7-1 bench is a meme team and it deserves to backfire horribly.

Puja wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 10:08 pmFourie is the nominated hooker sub and does have experience playing hooker professionally in French club rugby, so he's not a complete neophyte.

Lizard wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 9:54 pm Law 3.12:
“It is a team’s responsibility to ensure that all front-row players and front-row replacements are suitably trained and experienced.”

Ref has no say.

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 8:37 pm I'm no front row expert, but I really worry about the safety of putting a flanker in to scrum at hooker against a decent team.

If I were the ref, and ultimately responsible for judging safety, I'd want to see some evidence of him playing hooker in multiple matches before allowing him as a specialist.
Otherwise, no specialist = uncontested scrums, and the team forcing that loses an extra player.
I would also, of course, tell them that the moment I saw the team announcement.

ETA: what are the rules currently? Initially the increase in bench size was dependant on there being 3 specialist front rows, if that's still the case, then SA are already in breach, and presumably have to drop their 23rd man.

7:1 split is high risk, mediocre reward, I dislike it, but it's not "wrong".
8-man bench with only 2 front rowers, as far as I'm aware, isn't actually allowed.
You don't become a specialist front rower because Tassie says so, you become one by dedicating training, and playing time there.

Numbers wrote: ↑Wed Sep 20, 2023 11:51 am

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 8:37 pm I'm no front row expert, but I really worry about the safety of putting a flanker in to scrum at hooker against a decent team.

If I were the ref, and ultimately responsible for judging safety, I'd want to see some evidence of him playing hooker in multiple matches before allowing him as a specialist.
Otherwise, no specialist = uncontested scrums, and the team forcing that loses an extra player.
I would also, of course, tell them that the moment I saw the team announcement.

ETA: what are the rules currently? Initially the increase in bench size was dependant on there being 3 specialist front rows, if that's still the case, then SA are already in breach, and presumably have to drop their 23rd man.

7:1 split is high risk, mediocre reward, I dislike it, but it's not "wrong".
8-man bench with only 2 front rowers, as far as I'm aware, isn't actually allowed.
You don't become a specialist front rower because Tassie says so, you become one by dedicating training, and playing time there.

There are numerous examples of backrowers changing to hooker, Brits and Shaun Evans at the Sacrlets are two that spring to mind and then Tom Youngs who used to be a centre and was good enough to start for the Lions at hooker, the coaches aren't stupid enough to risk player injury and it's not as if they won't have been practicing in training.

canta_brian wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 10:10 am Ok, so assuming Dupont is out for the quarters after last night, and assuming Foster doesn't keep setting new precedents of shiteness with the ABs and we don't shit the bed against Italy. Do both Ireland and South Africa want to win this? Or is a Dupontless France a more enticing quarter making a loss the preferred result?

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Sep 20, 2023 12:27 pm

Numbers wrote: ↑Wed Sep 20, 2023 11:51 am

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 8:37 pm I'm no front row expert, but I really worry about the safety of putting a flanker in to scrum at hooker against a decent team.

If I were the ref, and ultimately responsible for judging safety, I'd want to see some evidence of him playing hooker in multiple matches before allowing him as a specialist.
Otherwise, no specialist = uncontested scrums, and the team forcing that loses an extra player.
I would also, of course, tell them that the moment I saw the team announcement.

ETA: what are the rules currently? Initially the increase in bench size was dependant on there being 3 specialist front rows, if that's still the case, then SA are already in breach, and presumably have to drop their 23rd man.

7:1 split is high risk, mediocre reward, I dislike it, but it's not "wrong".
8-man bench with only 2 front rowers, as far as I'm aware, isn't actually allowed.
You don't become a specialist front rower because Tassie says so, you become one by dedicating training, and playing time there.

There are numerous examples of backrowers changing to hooker, Brits and Shaun Evans at the Sacrlets are two that spring to mind and then Tom Youngs who used to be a centre and was good enough to start for the Lions at hooker, the coaches aren't stupid enough to risk player injury and it's not as if they won't have been practicing in training.

None of those played hooker for the first time since school in a top-level international match after a couple of weeks' training and a few minutes against a broken Romania though, which is what they will be asking Van Staden to do if something happens to Mbonambi or Fourie in training this week.

Puja

canta_brian wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 10:10 am Ok, so assuming Dupont is out for the quarters after last night, and assuming Foster doesn't keep setting new precedents of shiteness with the ABs and we don't shit the bed against Italy. Do both Ireland and South Africa want to win this? Or is a Dupontless France a more enticing quarter making a loss the preferred result?

Numbers wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 10:44 am

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Sep 20, 2023 12:27 pm

Numbers wrote: ↑Wed Sep 20, 2023 11:51 am

There are numerous examples of backrowers changing to hooker, Brits and Shaun Evans at the Sacrlets are two that spring to mind and then Tom Youngs who used to be a centre and was good enough to start for the Lions at hooker, the coaches aren't stupid enough to risk player injury and it's not as if they won't have been practicing in training.

None of those played hooker for the first time since school in a top-level international match after a couple of weeks' training and a few minutes against a broken Romania though, which is what they will be asking Van Staden to do if something happens to Mbonambi or Fourie in training this week.

Puja

What would be the point of putting someone in that position if they would be prone to injury, it doesn't favour the Boks to do that so why would they do it?

This to me is a non-issue.

Spiffy wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 3:36 pm Have the Boks got a counter to Ireland's 5:3 bench split?