Search results

I should have said that I really applaud the effort that went into your post, USAR. Stuff like that is why this forum is great. I just felt some parts went too far. :)

RH, it's an internet forum. You're supposed to come out all guns blazing rather than act like a gentleman. :)

Good news. Surely such an event does not occur in a vacuum. So does this mean that Folau is not going to re-sign? Or that Beale is going elsewhere? Or that Folau will play on the wing?

Concussions are obviously no laughing matter, but I find some of the supposition in the OP to be problematic. For instance, a quick Google search reveals that Berrick Barnes has his own independent neurologist and that he was not only consulted on recovery but present at games. I'm not saying...

Who is in this "Deans knows best" brigade? I can't really think of "three prominent posters" who will eagerly and unquestioningly leap to his defense. I do see a lot of people trying to understand the selections and their relation to the possible game plan, which is not at all the same thing as...

The difference is that Higgers, prior to his injury, had not only been in career-best form, but was also playing a tighter, harder game than he had in the past. Previously, he's been great in Super Rugby but his wider game at the Reds didn't translate upwards as well, leading to some disappointing...

What is "incumbency"? Is it "played half a dozen tests because the first choice option was injured"? I don't think so. I think it should be something more like "first choice and performed" or "stepped up and performed to a high standard over a number of games".

The Tahs line out can and should count against both Douglas and Dennis. I'd have Douglas on the bench and Dennis in the stands.

I think you're right, but past experience should count against Dennis and not for him. He had one or two good games, the rest were anonymous.

That's pretty much exactly what I was thinking too. So the backups are likely to be: 16. Hooker 17. Prop 18. Prop 19. Lock/6 20. Gill/Hooper 21, Halfback 22. Inside back 23. Outside back 6. Higgers 7. Gill/Hooper 8. Mowen would have solved a lot of problems, since either Mowen or Higgers...

I think that's the logic, yeah. Hooper showed on Friday how capable of breaking open a game he is and Gill must be close to the form Aussie forward of the competition. They are also very different players, which means they can be on the field at the same time. But how good are Dennis and...

Sias Ebersohn would like to argue with you about that, but he's too busy kicking the ball away.

Sounds like Beale is all but picked. http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/steady-kurtley-shows-he-still-has-it-20130601-2nii7.html

Watching the Blues get demolished, the two kicks the last two weeks are really, really hurting. We'd be right in the hunt.

Totally agree. I wasn't arguing against Douglas being selected, either, just that 6 tests isn't particularly valuable experience, IMO. I'd have Douglas and Pyle over Timani.

6 tests does not seem to me to be sufficient to claim experience as a significant factor. Douglas played okay, but didn't set the world on fire.

Pyle has loads of potential. He should leapfrog Simmons, IMO, but Deans picks those he knows.

6 min, but yes. Like the Reds situation, though, the Tahs did not make the right choices either. They should have got the ball out quickly and attacked the middle of the field.

I think Jackson pinged Hooper then Hooper said, "You said the ball was out." And Jackson said, "I said it was not out." Which begs the question why anything needed to be said. Obviously Hooper heard "out" and went for the ball. To my mind, it's just more indication that Jackson doesn't have...

I'll see your Walsh and raise you a Kaplan.