Search results

Half of G&GR wanted Quade but the other half wanted Foley. There's probably nothing he can ever do on the field to assuage his critics. I can remember people on the Roar sternly explaining how he actually played badly that day against England. A cynic might suggest this is a good example of...

The problem for England is that fast rugby requires fast ball from those rucks, and they've chosen a slow, heavyweight back row. That seriously limits their width and the opportunity to use their fast backline. By contrast we can play outside the breakdown range of their back row. Fast back...

People say that but Cheika invested two years in developing him behind Palu. He'll be a Wallaby sooner rather than later. Probably EOYT. We should bear in mind that Cheika's careful handling of Holloway might have actually added to his potential. If Cheika thinks he's not ready that suggests...

I don't think it'll be close. They're at the end of a long season that began with the World Cup, although they did have a good long rest during that. Their minds will be on lard butties and clubbing in Skegness. The last time we played them we rooted their scrum like a roo with a prosthetic...

Beale and Kerevi is every bit as appetizing as Kerevi and Kuridrani. Maybe next World Cup.

His hands are fine. A genuine 12. And despite his size, he's not crash and bash, but an elusive runner who happens to be able to run over people as well.

Kerevi's our Fekitoa, but 10kg bigger.

A lot of that 'falling apart' was imaginary, like Michael Hooper repeatedly getting the lowest player ranking on the G&GR front page.

Oi! I used it last page.

I thought JOC (James O'Connor)'s three-try debut was pretty exceptional.

The K-Train. Fcuk yeah!

A boy! Congratulations to the Lilos.

Vunipola - aka "the theorem" - always scrums at 90deg. I like it! Vunipola's Theorem: the scrummaging angles of the England front row always add up to 180deg.

So the World Cup lineout was a dramatic improvement? But now it's gone off again. Admittedly we haven't won a lineout since the World Cup. Something must be done.

Indeed so. They weren't so good last time we played though. We won 11/13 and they won 7/8, so about even. But they seem to have gotten better since, against different opposition. The only way to be sure is to play them!

An interesting statistic from the World Cup. We scored 19 tries from lineouts (the 2nd highest in the tournament) which was 68% of all our tries (the highest in the tournament). Perhaps the 'weakness' was simply us taking more risks? By comparison, the 'on-fire' England lineout only scored 5...

He's been bang-on this year. Unless he succumbs to test match pressure (not a Moore thing) then it's the same wind, light and ugly boofhead forwards to throw to.

Whether or not our scrum is really a strength, there's been a refreshing lack of ten pounders braying about our weak pack this time. In fact all they're braying about is our arrogance. Which is how losers talk.

Not me. It's a strength. The timing of our scrum's dominance in that game (and in some others) isn't a weakness but a reflection of the fact that we have two international quality front rows, which gives us the option of going harder at the end, that clearly pays dividends. The lineout, yes...

Yeah, there are all sorts of pundits saying they'll play a fast, open game. Not a chance. They'll try to win the collisions and bully us close to the ruck, within the range of their forwards. We have to not get sucked into that.