• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Reds 2018

Status
Not open for further replies.
Scrubber2050

Scrubber2050

Mark Ella (57)
Be under no illusion.

The scrum has been excellent because of Slips.

He drives the ship and has probably been the reason Thor has improved so dramatically. BT was the most excellent lock the game has seen but he would be the first to acknowledge that he knows nothing about the dark arts of front row play. Both locks have also been very good as well as the 6, 7 and 8. Their power and success seems to come from working as an 8 man unit.

JP has been a pretty good reserve (except for the last game) but still a long way from starting at Super level. Scrummaging is the first role but closely followed by all the other shit ( and I think he needs to improve that aspect of his play).

I think Sef has copped the rough end of the proverbial pineapple and I reckon he'll head off overseas as soon as he is able. I would retain Sef over Ruan in a heartbeat whereas JP is a keeper.

Definitely replace Lucas with Tuttle and I'd be also tempted to replace Duncan with Chris FS. Smith to get a bench spot, possibly.
 
RugbyReg

RugbyReg

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
The Reds face the Brumbies and NSW Waratahs (April 14) away before hosting New Zealand’s Chiefs (April 21) and South Africa’s Lions (April 28) at Suncorp Stadium.
Click to expand...

3&2 now is acceptable for most of us I’d gather, given our expectations at season start. But if we really want to make something of this season we need to win 3 of these games.

We can enter the derbies with a level of confidence for sure (no Izzy for the Tahs helps immensely). But a home win over the Chiefs or Lions is critical if we want to be considered legit contenders.
 
Zero_Cool

Zero_Cool

Arch Winning (36)
I think it's unlikely but possible we win 4 from 4. The Brumbies look in disarray. The Waratahs have no scrum (although somehow the Brumbies weren't able to best them?!). The Lions have been very erratic. The Chiefs are probably the second weakest NZ team and winning at Suncorp isn't easy.

But I think 3 from 4 with 2 bonus points is our goal.
12 points from our next 4 games is par -- if we want to be in the conversation for finals.

Frankly, I think the team is overachieving already it's possible we go 2 from 4 and are brought back down to earth. I'd lock the Chiefs in as a loss, pencil in the Brumbies as a win, and put the Lions down in pen as a question mark. The Waratahs are the real unknown -- we at least know the Lions are going to be erratic, the Waratahs could be good but they might be terrible. And I've learnt never to take a Queensland vs New South Wales game for granted.
 
Sully

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
Remember that time, about five games ago, where we said we'd manage out expecteations? Looks like that's gone out the window.
We've won three games, many people predicted three wins for the season. Let's just enjoy it and ant win from here is a bonus?
Contenders! FINALS! We haven't played a Kiwi side yet.
 
TSR

TSR

Andrew Slack (58)
Any talk of pencilling in wins makes me nervous as hell.

I do look forward to watching the team go out there and give a good account of themselves though.
 
Zero_Cool

Zero_Cool

Arch Winning (36)
Sully said:
Remember that time, about five games ago, where we said we'd manage out expecteations? Looks like that's gone out the window.
We've won three games, many people predicted three wins for the season. Let's just enjoy it and ant win from here is a bonus?
Contenders! FINALS! We haven't played a Kiwi side yet.
Click to expand...


When I say compete for finals, I mean get bounced in the first round.
That would take finishing in the top 8, that's the top 50% of teams, that's not too onerous. We haven't played a Kiwi side, but we did have a successful tour of Argentina and South Africa -- nothing to sneeze at.
 
Zero_Cool

Zero_Cool

Arch Winning (36)
dillyboy said:
Top 8? So we reduced the teams & it's an 8 team finals???

Isn't it top 6?
Click to expand...

Nope top 8, it means just over half the teams make finals. I'm fine with this, let more teams get mauled by the Kiwi's it makes more fans feel like their teams are doing better.

I actually think there is a case to be made for having the top two teams from each conference play finals (one home and one away) and give the top two 'other' teams (likely the 3rd team form two conferences, but could be third and fourth team form one conference). But it's all good. You wouldn't go with anything other than top 8 or top 4 if you have less than 12 teams.
 
Zero_Cool

Zero_Cool

Arch Winning (36)
cyclopath said:
That's Paul Cully's thing though. Most weeks it is very heavily weighted to whichever team(s) win. I'm not sure anyone but him puts much credence in the process.
Click to expand...

So the few people I speak to about it think there is a heavy Waratahs bias from Rugby.com.au. I agree they do weight it towards the winning teams. But looking at that list you'd think the Waratahs had won with the score line of the Rebles!

Like they won by less than 10 points! Surely there was at least ONE Brumbie *Pocock* who was at least very close to as good as their Waratah counterpart.

But it's just like Ned Hanigan getting 'Rookie of the Year' last year... If you're a Waratah your in the club.
Honestly, sometimes I feel like the Waratahs might be the biggest problem with Australian Rugby.
 
cyclopath

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
Zero_Cool said:
So the few people I speak to about it think there is a heavy Waratahs bias from Rugby.com.au. I agree they do weight it towards the winning teams. But looking at that list you'd think the Waratahs had won with the score line of the Rebles!

Like they won by less than 10 points! Surely there was at least ONE Brumbie *Pocock* who was at least very close to as good as their Waratah counterpart.

But it's just like Ned Hanigan getting 'Rookie of the Year' last year. If you're a Waratah your in the club.
Honestly, sometimes I feel like the Waratahs might be the biggest problem with Australian Rugby.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure this word really fits your narrative, given how much you seem to carry on about them.
 
The torpedo

The torpedo

Peter Fenwicke (45)
Zero_Cool said:
So the few people I speak to about it think there is a heavy Waratahs bias from Rugby.com.au. I agree they do weight it towards the winning teams. But looking at that list you'd think the Waratahs had won with the score line of the Rebles!

Like they won by less than 10 points! Surely there was at least ONE Brumbie *Pocock* who was at least very close to as good as their Waratah counterpart.

But it's just like Ned Hanigan getting 'Rookie of the Year' last year. If you're a Waratah your in the club.
Honestly, sometimes I feel like the Waratahs might be the biggest problem with Australian Rugby.
Click to expand...

Reminds of this:

http://www.betootaadvocate.com/head...ing-moral-fibre-of-cricket-side-says-qld-dad/
 
RugbyReg

RugbyReg

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
Zero_Cool said:
So the few people I speak to about it think there is a heavy Waratahs bias from Rugby.com.au. I agree they do weight it towards the winning teams. But looking at that list you'd think the Waratahs had won with the score line of the Rebles!

Like they won by less than 10 points! Surely there was at least ONE Brumbie *Pocock* who was at least very close to as good as their Waratah counterpart.

But it's just like Ned Hanigan getting 'Rookie of the Year' last year. If you're a Waratah your in the club.
Honestly, sometimes I feel like the Waratahs might be the biggest problem with Australian Rugby.
Click to expand...

The Reds had the bye, the Rebels were thrashed and the Tahs beat the Brumbies. A team of the week dominated by Tahs makes complete sense.
 
Zero_Cool

Zero_Cool

Arch Winning (36)
RugbyReg said:
The Reds had the bye, the Rebels were thrashed and the Tahs beat the Brumbies. A team of the week dominated by Tahs makes complete sense.
Click to expand...

Zero Brumbies, two Rebels I get they got pumped, but the 'Tahs only won by 7. Zero Brumbies, yet all but two from the Waratahs were clearly better than their counterparts (and even then it was someone from the Rebels?

I'm not disputing it being justified in being stacked with 'Tahs, sure maybe 10 but not even one Brumbie good enough to hold up as a token. How can a team that gets pumped by more than 31 have more players than a team who picked up a losing bonus point -- to a team who had 13 in the 'weekly side'.

I get it being dominated by the Waratahs but 13 of the 15 is a bit much don't you think?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top