Australian Rugby / RA

[stillmissit]

Not surprising, Tight head is overall a harder position to master

I don't think either side is easy and both are technical. I am told that at loosehead you can pull more games but I don't know if that is true or not.

 

[Tomthumb]

I don't think either side is easy and both are technical. I am told that at loosehead you can pull more games but I don't know if that is true or not.

Loose head is far less technical. It's about aggression, use your bind to get under his chest and from there it's easy to put pressure on. Tight head is the anchor, need to ensure the scrum is low so help the hooker, and needs to control the loose head the entire time, normally by bringinng your head out to stop his head from getting under you

The difference is you can survive a bad loosehead, it's harder for them to be pushed back as the natural turn of a scrum is to the left, whereas a bad tighthead will be exposed every single time

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

HJH (Harry Johnson-Holmes) ended up there because Bell goes where ever he wants to be. He's too slow to be effective around the field and his scrumaging is at best slightly above average at Super level. I like the idea of Schoupp being tested there. Not many physical prospects like him floating around at 26. Love de Lutiis and think he could be anything but right now he's too young. Post Lions leading into the WC sure but he needs to just play footy right now.

 

[Wilson]

A bit of insight into the good work Peter Horne has been doing behind the scenes:

Turning green shoots into gold: the man behind the scenes in the Wallabies’ revival | Angus Fontaine

Peter Horne was hired as Rugby Australia’s high performance director to get the game ‘back on track’. Recent results suggest he is making headway

www.theguardian.com

 

[LevitatingSocks]

A bit of insight into the good work Peter Horne has been doing behind the scenes:

Turning green shoots into gold: the man behind the scenes in the Wallabies’ revival | Angus Fontaine

Peter Horne was hired as Rugby Australia’s high performance director to get the game ‘back on track’. Recent results suggest he is making headway

www.theguardian.com

Early days but he's saying all the right things here regarding alignment, getting buy-in, and being organized. I'd love for Joe Schmidt to stay on past the Lions tour but it's reassuring to have heard from other media that coaches like Larkham and Kiss are waiting in the wings with similar rugby philosophies to give us continuity.

 

[Slim 293]

As discussed last week...

Australian Rugby Foundation launches Rugby Future Fund

www.rugby.com.au

 

[Adam84]

Depending on profits from B&I Lions an RWC, this fund also presents the perfect spot for Rugby Australia to park a large chunk fo the funds

 

[Dctarget]

Thought I was going to tip a little of my own in, got the application downloaded then saw it has a minimum investment of $50k. Yeah, right then. Not sure the purpose of that, surely a lower minimum is still practicable.

 

[Ignoto]

surely a lower minimum is still practicable.

You can email gm@westsbulldogsrugby.com.au and we will happily take your donations

 

[Dctarget]

You can email gm@westsbulldogsrugby.com.au and we will happily take your donations

haha no donations intended, I wanted to make a profit! Their returns are pretty attractive.

 

[Crashy]

Also need to qualify as a wholesale / sophisticated investor. (Accountant sign off).
If they are going to raise $100mil, I guess they need the minimums to be reasonably chunky.

 

[Bullrush]

^^^
Literally a 2:1 ratio of LHP to THP. Thanks Adam and SMI, really explains things in the front row.

My son currently can play both sides but is primarily on the loose head side. That might change next year...lol

 

[John S]

Also need to qualify as a wholesale / sophisticated investor. (Accountant sign off).
If they are going to raise $100mil, I guess they need the minimums to be reasonably chunky.

Anyone need a tame accountant to do the sign off for you?

 

[A mutterer]

I don't think easy. Commentary I have heard (Craig Hutchinson who knows a bit about sports media rights) is that the AFL had the perfect conditions for their deal. Strong competition, etc. The market now has less competition, and with Fox apparently up for sale, this has further depressed the market.

What the big deals have is content. 24+ weeks, lots of teams, national footprints (at least for AFL and cricket), uncertainty of outcome, huge local followings. There is big competition for these which means there is less for other sports. RA are essentially selling around seven tests that are in prime time, another five or so that are in the middle of the night, and super rugby which gets terrible ratings. They don't have the world cup rights to bundle so that actually reduces the amount of product they have over four years. We've also been pretty dire for a long time which has seen people switch off.

The main hope is getting another platform interested enough to push the price up, but the outcome could be worse in terms of visibility than what we have now. There is also the restriction that most of the prime-time games need to be on free to air, which means even a streaming partner would need to do a deal with one of the tv networks.

netflix is thirsty for sports content ... someone hit them up, even soup is better watching than the tyson/paul fight

 

[Pfitzy]

netflix is thirsty for sports content ... someone hit them up, even soup is better watching than the tyson/paul fight

Did you see the Korean Rugby thing?

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Did you see the Korean Rugby thing?

Looking forward to it.

 

[A mutterer]

Did you see the Korean Rugby thing?

Sneaky bastards... will add it to watchlist

 

[LevitatingSocks]

Did you see the Korean Rugby thing?

Are they in a Roman Coliseum-esque sandpit?

 

[Pfitzy]

Are they in a Roman Coliseum-esque sandpit?

Need to toughen em up somehow

 

[hdnmstsnr]

Stowers is a good player and good on him for picking up a contract in the US. It will likely be better for his development then cooling his heels as a fringe player in a super squad, which is probably all he could've hoped for here right now, particularly with the end of the Rebels.

His best chance beyond that was probably the 7s program given his size, and considering it's John Manenti coaching at San Diego he was probably on their radar.

I think the question we should be asking is 'What do Manenti and Stowers see in the USA that the rest of us don't?' With the renewed commercial interest in American rugby thanks to their Women's 7s success - it may not be a stretch to draw a line between them. The article also points to Stowers' size as being an issue for Super Rugby franchises. This goes against the fact that South Africa and France are preferencing - with great effect - small wingers and fullbacks. Maybe Stowers wants to prove a point playing for SD, knowing Manenti likes open, heads-up attack?...or....could the two be looking to lay the foundation of a USA 7s campaign...? There seems to be more to this than meets the eye.