Search results

A comment in the last Eddie pod that sticks with me. "Competing isn't good enough. We should never be satisfied with that." Put's the heroic loss in it's place. Success starts with a W.

It would be no different to keep that coverage to the end of the previous game, and to keep the game to be broadcast, as scheduled. Simply swap the time slot to the previous game and shorten the intro to the next game. It isn't rocket science, the previous game post discussion is the filler...

Yes.

Absolutely! Reds second team does depend on how many Reds make the team. Under Rennie 1. Reds, 2, gap, 3 WBs. ;)

Eh? Wallabies are surely most Reds fans second team?

I can go back to 2011 like Groundhog Day.

Gordon was the backbone of the team through some dismal times. Real leadership on the field and held the place together from my perspective. Right now the expectations on him match that performance as a requirement, but he's not there. The drive to the team need to involve more than the bloke...

?? Did he run over your cat? Geez, the guy has been an excellent servant to Reds Rugby.

I'm happy to rate him in Super. The claims, if I have it right, are about international class.

I’ve entered some alternative multiverse. Peak Shiggens - outraged on behalf of the Rebels.

I’m still not understanding the Wright hype-train.

The thing that bothers me is the effectiveness in the true engine room. Recently pod 1 with the second row and possibly no 8. I think we are close with 8 but I’m not yet convinced even with the Brumby second row, let alone depth. Feels to me that we seriously need to consider Skelton even with...

The 10 is the role that for me must be able to nail a drop when closing games. Drop skills and conversion skills aren’t necessarily aligned. But often are. Ditto kick pass and kicks in play.

Completely. We have talent in spades in the back row but can't make any sensible conclusions until key figures in the tight 5 are locked. And then we start to fill the holes. Most suggestions that cover holes or build strengths create problems elsewhere. And there is little choice but to alter...

Are they not calling skewed line out throws when there is no opposition jumper? I thought that interpretation had been dropped.

Latu is going to have to prove himself highly reliable in the line out before he is again close to number 2. There are not a lot of quality alternatives, but that choice imho needs to be made primarily on then out.

If we have selected the same names in the back row, I'm less bothered by the numbers on their back. But given my scenario (missing McReight and Hooper) Gleeson to 7 has some support. I'm not sure that the Skelton experiment will fly, but it seems to connect with Eddie's "smash and grab" great...

A lot of similar comments here, Derpus. We also know that Eddie values workrate.

This in turn starts making the choice at 7 interesting. What second row/back row configuration beats 4: line out caller 5: Skelton; 6 Holloway/Hanigan/LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto); 7: Valetini; 8: Gleeson. Both Hooper and McReight don't obviously squeeze in to a pack that includes the big Will.

I'm not writing him off either, but he did have an average game. Especially by his own standards. I get a feeling that he's been given a bit a time to himself in the off season and requires a little longer to get up to speed. Hooper still had impact and showed a great rugby brain. He's just got...