Search results

Rubbish performance by the wallabies. Spirited performance in the second half by the Italians.

Why do some referees want to trick players into infringements? They aren't a third team. It's crouch, touch, set. Not crouch, touch Set. (Good try cummins).

Yes or no.

There are enough guys in there to be able to manage the injuries better by rotating the guys through (within reason). I would hope that they do so - I couldn't stand watching another season of guys going down left, right and centre.

Something the rest of the existing wallabies have struggled with all season. I'd say that just about makes him special ATM.

Beale has not had a good game at 10 for the wallabies yet. To be fair to him though he has been poorly serviced by his number 9. ABP

I totally agree. It is no good splashing money around if the whole thing is going to go broke - totally understandable. My lack of understanding comes from the actual state of the code though. There are threads on here by guys that I presume know more than me stating that the game is...

In other news, "Pope is labelled a "Catholic" by local protestant group" and "Local bear seen to be relieving itself in nearby forest". Honestly, the process just seems so convoluted.

One test in 2012??? Is there a reason that the below matches are not included? Australia(3)23 - 19(6)Argentina(FT)Gold Coast, 15 September 2012 Australia (6) 26 - 19 (13) South Africa (FT)Perth, 8 September 2012 New Zealand (9) 22 - 0 (0) Australia (FT)Auckland, 25 August 2012

Why would the tahs let him do that? How on earth will that benefit australian rugby in any way, shape or form? Keep the players in the tahs fold for god's sake to ensure that they are the only successful team out of australia - it's a three year plan.

IF it were just injuries, then there are guys in that list that should not have ARU top ups. If it were about form, then there also guys in that list that should not have ARU top ups. This is not about injury or form, but about punishment. Which then comes back to the question, why not be...

I appreciate your thoughts - particularly the campo conundrum part, but I may have worded my question incorrectly (or not realised that you answered it already, sorry)... Under the standard super rugby franchise contract thingy, is it allowable to play here and then flit off to play over there...

Actually, does this mean that he can play for the reds AND Japan/France etc?

If they did not want him to play, why not cut him loose like they did with lote? Why go through the sham hearings, just tell him there and then that they didn't want him and end it?

How else was he meant to respond? He was punished with a hefty fine for voicing something publicly and made an apology (no doubt instructed to do so) and then given an insulting contract offer well AFTER it was supposedly resolved. If they didn't want him to play, why not be upfront and just...

Of those 32 top up contracts, how many have been finalised for next season? Has that been announced yet? Given they frigged around with Higger's forever and are still frigging around with Genia's I presume this is the same for all 32 still? I do remember that they removed the finger twins...

the posts you are reading and replying to...

And you guys are happy with that level of vindictiveness from the coach? Also happy that Deans was not reprimanded for refusing to address the players after the test at Eden Park?

Fixed this for you. :)

That is a pathetic response by the ARU.