Search results

In the Wallabies?

I think the line bet is a bit of a gimme - 16.5 start on TAB

That headline is weird. It’s like saying ‘Australian Super Rugby stars selected in Wallabies’. Surely they could come up with something better than that!

Certainly not radical at all and I don’t think too many would argue if he was given an opportunity against the higher ranked teams as well. However, Noah has been given the first opportunity from this next generation and the Queenslander has in no way been able to lock himself in, with the...

We win 29-28

The ratings don’t mean anything at this time of year when the northern hemisphere teams aren’t playing. Sure, the jostling between the teams that are actually playing are relevant but I’m sure Scotland and Wales aren’t throwing ticker tape parades for overtaking us by virtue of doing nothing...

He doesn’t need to have played 7, you can see he’s a looser style of player than Valetini by watching them play. That’s why im saying he’s a more complementary fit for Samu, it’s not a criticism of Valetini. Besides wouldn’t your man Dan have had a fair say in the configuration of the forward...

I think most seem to think it’s largely a moot point but you seem to have a major bee in your bonnet about it. In layman’s terms Samu is about a 6.5 and Harry is about a 7.8. Valetini is either a 6 or an 8. The only time literally where they need to line up as per numbers on their back is at...

No but Wilson/Samu is a more complementary fit on the open side from the scrum. Let me put it this way - let’s say you were forced to play a back row of Leota, Valetini and Wilson. Which one are you playing at 7?

Not at all but I’ll clarify - I’m referring to the roles from a scrum where it can actually matter.

Fair enough, I misread that slightly as ‘guaranteed in the 23’. There are really only forced changes so I’d say everyone is being rewarded for last week’s robbery. Jed played 80 I think.

Yes it’s good, Valetini can do his job from either position but Wilson is much more an 8 than a 6, and compensates a bit for the fact that Samu isn’t an out and out 7.

Wouldn’t it be based on the fact that pretty much every other viable alternative is unavailable? Unless you want to chuck Langi Gleeson in there, or a Brumbies academy player.

I saw an article yesterday, apparently RA have lodged a formal complaint to World Rugby - it's not specifically about that one decision I gather, more the inconsistencies with Mo'unga going over the allotted 90 seconds for his conversions, etc and not giving the referee and TMO's so much...

I can reconcile with both points of view. Ideally we win with a dodgy ref call on the bell after a monumentous All Blacks comeback and Scott Barrett almost securing a NZ victory with a freak try out on the flank that locks both him in at 6 and Fozzie as coach till 27.

Foketi was great but he could actually see and hear the ref from where he was standing but Foley couldn't....that's why the three in that gif doing the rounds were yelling at him.

I was taking the piss a bit but wouldn't it actually be that he can play for Ireland A and still be eligible for both nations? Or is Ireland A their 2nd 'invokes ineligibility for other nations' team?

I'm Ok with Swain being cited as long as Lomax does as well.

They are definitely yelling at Foley but it’s because they heard the ref but Foley doesn’t.

He didn’t check that, he didn’t ask for vision to check the Jake Gordon yellow, but he reversed a penalty for taking 39 fucking seconds (include the time out) to kick the ball to touch. There is no time limit on that BTW, it’s up to the referees discretion, however there is a defined 90 second...