sydthebeat wrote: » I think you're inadvertently agreeing with my point. There are a lot of people who associate a certain gravitas to a media outlet, and this the writers they have. Because of this, the likes of Jones, Francis, etc should be called out whenever it's warranted. Otherwise how does the average Joe KNOW that they are just pay packet leeching contrarians.
Clegg wrote: » They're losing 0-17 to Harlequins after 22 minutes.
Dave_The_Sheep wrote: » That must be tasty for everybody but sarries fans.
razorblunt wrote: » The veil is slipping big time at Sarries. Jackson Wray stood down by Luke Pearce as captain with 2 mins left as he felt their communication had broken down. He was right too. Talk about being put in your place.
Buer wrote: » The place must be in complete disarray. It'll be interesting to see how they manage to steady the ship in the coming weeks. I don't care if they have a rake of stars to come back after the 6N...if the place is toxic, they can't just flick a switch to fix that. It needs to be addressed now. It was a heavily weakened side but there's not a hope in hell that selection has 40 put on them by Quins a month ago. It still had multiple capped players throughout. I expected it to be a relatively close contest.
Squidgy Black wrote: » Brutal stuff by Wray. Refusing to talk to Pearce and just chatting back to him when Pearce asked if he wanted to work with him.https://www.reddit.com/r/rugbyunion/comments/eu95lc/luke_pearce_relegates_wray_from_being_captain_and/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
"At this point it's just a discriminatory witch hunt conspiracy against anyone named Wray." -Stephen Jones, probably.
razorblunt wrote: » Lost his head big time. Pearce was well able for him and Sarries in general, they were a bit boisterous in the first half but he slapped them down.
sydthebeat wrote: » Bookies only had 2 points between them before the game. You'd have to question how a player can be mentally with nothing to play for before a game.
Exclamation Marc wrote: » I think a lot of these players do have something to play for and that's a transfer at the end of the season. You imagine most if not all are in the shop window or being walked out so they'll need to show that they'd be good acquisitions otherwise they'll find it hard to find a club next year.
Buer wrote: » Reports on Saracens forum on a number of their players and who is interested in them: Ben Spencer (Bath and Exeter); Alex Lozowski (Gloucester and Sale); Nick Isiekwe (Harlequins); Max Malins (Exeter); Nick Tompkins (Ospreys); Matt Gallagher (Munster); Rhys Carre (Cardiff); George Kruis (Japan); Jack Singleton (Leicester). Spencer to Bath would make a lot of sense for them. It's a significant weakness for them. Based on the above, it would appear that Saracens are hoping to retain the majority of their big name stars and it's the guys who just a tier below that who are potentially on their way out. The majority of the above are still capped internationals with a lot of quality. If they offloaded the above along with Liam Williams, I could very easily see them being under the salary cap. They could absorb a lot of the above too without damaging their starting team too much also although Spencer would be a big loss given Wigglesworth is on the verge of retirement. It would definitely hurt them for the test windows though. I would imagine a number of academy guys will be seeing a lot of game time next season to blood them for the return to the top flight.
Zzippy wrote: » Reportedly they will have to spend two seasons in the Championship, if they cannot prove compliance with the salary cap for this season. Can't see the big stars staying around for that.
Iscreamkone wrote: » I always thought that the IRFU funding multiple teams was a little iffy too. No way would someone be allowed to bankroll competing football teams. Often, say Leinster players are rested on orders from up high - this could benefit their opponents say Munster who are also run by the IRFU. The optics are not good imo
Former Former wrote: » I don't believe this will be the case. The rules were not written for this scenario and it would be punishing them twice over for the same offence.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6081e4655739e0887aaf16222f88b015.svg)
