Hook/Darcy work on their tans this summer

sm.org

A surprising decision not to replace Shanklin:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/8054818.stm

I thought the squad was small enough already

seven-iron

we need another out half in my opnion. its such a pivotal role and to only have two no.10's going over seems a bit strange. maybe its enough tho?

spank_inferno

I agree, better to have one more taking up a seat on the plane now, cos you dont know what will happen in the next few weeks.

Better to replace now than to hurridley fly a replacement over 2 days before the 1st test because of another injury.

also: James Hook needs no more work done on his tan! I guess the Osprey's training ground has their own sun-beds!

stephen_n

5 matches each isn't that big an ask for the two outhalves his reasons for only taking two seem sound enough but still surprised he didn't replace Shanklin, would have thought it would be better to have players involved in the squad rather than bringing out players in the case of injuries!

anonymous_joe

Does that mean Shanklin wasn't in his plans?

Hook or D'Arcy would've been good options for the squad.

Webbs

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Does that mean Shanklin wasn't in his plans?

Hook or D'Arcy would've been good options for the squad.

I would say it was more likely he had a particular type of player in mind (an outside centre with a physical presence) and that there is no one who can take on that role that would stand a chance of being in the squad/team.

While I agree both Hook and D'arcy would be good options for the squad they aren't the No13 the Lions would have been looking for

anonymous_joe

Webbs wrote: »

I would say it was more likely he had a particular type of player in mind (an outside centre with a physical presence) and that there is no one who can take on that role that would stand a chance of being in the squad/team.

While I agree both Hook and D'arcy would be good options for the squad they aren't the No13 the Lions would have been looking for

Well right now there are only two good 13s in the Home Nations.

Evans and Tindall are decent, as would be the Hipkisses etc of this world, but other than O'Driscoll and Shanklin there's nothing there alright.

I'd have thought Hook to offer an option for 12 and 10, and D'Arcy, O'Driscoll's long term life partner would have been a good option, but then, I'm not McGeechan. ^^

Lil' Ian

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Does that mean Shanklin wasn't in his plans?

Hook or D'Arcy would've been good options for the squad.

Apparently Geechs was only going 2 name 36 Players but picked 37 to make provsion for the 8 munster players playing in the HC final if they made it. So no need for 37 now!;)

hardCopy

I still don't get the idea of only bringing 2 out-halves. Presumably if one of the guys picks up a slight knock in a game he won't be able to rest it because he'll be on the bench at least in the next game 3/4 days later.

Who would have been sub out-half if Munster had made the final?

Tomtom364

hardCopy wrote: »

I still don't get the idea of only bringing 2 out-halves. Presumably if one of the guys picks up a slight knock in a game he won't be able to rest it because he'll be on the bench at least in the next game 3/4 days later.

Who would have been sub out-half if Munster had made the final?

move someone to ten. Bring on an outside back and halfpenny kicking maybe?

SomeFool

Flutey can play 10 if needed.