kingtiger wrote: » Right lads, I have this from a very reliable source that has never steered me wrong Healy is out of the WC!!! Here is all the players cut from the provisional squad Healy / Tuohy / Conan Boss / Marmion / Gilroy / Reid / Felix Jones / Darcy / Cave only bringing two Scrum Halves (Madigan in as cover)
connachta wrote: » Who's the 3rd LH for you in the 1st option? Bent?:rolleyes: If I do understand your logic 6 props with Healy, 5 without him. I don't think this opinion is better than mine. If we lose our main element in the front-row, you're going with only 4 props and one ambidextrous? Will be costly..So costly
kingtiger wrote: » Right lads, I have this from a very reliable source that has never steered me wrong Healy is out of the WC!!! Here is all the players cut from the provisional squad Healy / Tuohy / Conan Boss / Marmion / Gilroy / Reid / Felix Jones / Darcy / Caveonly bringing two Scrum Halves (Madigan in as cover)
.ak wrote: » If Healy isn't brought they'll just replace him with Kilcoyne. The others won't be shuffled around.
Deleted User wrote: » Who are the 3% dropping Murray and Sexton
connachta wrote: » Which would mean McGrath Killer (Bent) Ross Moore (Bent) 2SH 1 useless utility back whereas most of our wigers can cover centre I'd rather prefer McGrath Killer Buckley Ross Moore White 2SH I don't say this is gonna happen, but stop claiming it's "all over the place",
.ak wrote: » I didn't claim it was all over the place. But more than likely we were brining 5 props. I don't think that'll change just because one of them has to pull out.
connachta wrote: » It's not just one of them, it's the best. We could afford to have 1 world-class player, 2 quality back-ups, and 2 covering solutions. But we can't just have 2 quality back-ups, and 3 covering solutions. 2 more "specialists" instead of 1 ambidextrous would give more options, more stability, I'd be reassured
Larbre34 wrote: » then if a replacement SH is needed mid-tournament, the under-performer in the outside backs can be sacrificed.
Larbre34 wrote: » I thought for months that 2 SH's would be the way he would go, neither Boss nor Marmion deserve to travel especially. I don't see why that adds up to a sixth prop, the reduction in the backs should enable one of Jones, D Kearney, McFadden, Trimble etc to travel, then if a replacement SH is needed mid-tournament, the under-performer in the outside backs can be sacrificed. McGrath, Kilcoyne, Ross, White and Bent is enough.
Synode wrote: » Can someone be replaced without being injured? Didn't think they could
kingtiger wrote: » I will put 50 quid on it, want to take the bet? all barring injuries v Wales
Thanos wrote: » Nothing that a good old kick to the knee would not solve..........
aimee1 wrote: » http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_fdejJGbaRV8/TCBHCFZUDVI/AAAAAAAAAws/BhTv5saQE3I/s1600/24.png
molloyjh wrote: » That's 30 players in total. We've 1 more spot. The options are to bring a 6th prop, a 3rd SH, a 2nd dedicated inside centre or an extra outside back. Of all of those options surely to God an extra prop is the bottom of the priority list when you have the option of a prop who can scrummage on both sides?
molloyjh wrote: » Let's just look at the numbers for a second here: 5 props 3 hookers 4 locks 5 back rows 17 forwards 2 scrummies 3 out-halves (one who covers a load of other positions) 3 centres (Henshaw, Payne and Earls) 3 wingers (Fitz, Bowe and Trimble/D Kearney) 2 FBs (R Kearney/Zebo) 13 backs That's 30 players in total. We've 1 more spot. The options are to bring a 6th prop, a 3rd SH, a 2nd dedicated inside centre or an extra outside back. Of all of those options surely to God an extra prop is the bottom of the priority list when you have the option of a prop who can scrummage on both sides?
connachta wrote: » Hell no, when you have utility backs who have experience to play centre, and when you'll face 3 of the best scrums by increasing order Italy, France and Argentina/N-Z
Larbre34 wrote: » Technically no, but it could be arranged. In any case, if an SH is injured and we need another called up, its straightforward.
RoundBox11 wrote: » In that case would definitely be taking Cave as the extra man considering both Earls and Zebo are better on the wing anyway so we already have wings well covered. Although looking at it that way, having an extra slot to play around with makes leaving the third SH behind just seem mad to me
molloyjh wrote: » If we're down to our 3rd choice prop in that case we're already goosed. And players can be replaced if they are injured so that can be managed to a degree. It's madness to fill an extra spot in the squad that's well covered to the detriment of at least 1, if not 2 or 3, other positions. We will be travelling with 5 props, no more. And it will be the right decision, even if it does mean leaving the Connacht man at home.
RoundBox11 wrote: » I find it totally nuts that a coach who had a 'no offloading' rule would take such a massive risk and only bring 2 scrum halves. I just really don't see it
.ak wrote: » The two things aren't comparable at all. One is taking a calculated risk with squad selection, the other is asking players not to risk possession in a game. There was no 'no offloading' rule, but he did encourage players to do the basic thing over the flashy thing. Nobody was banned from expressing themselves. Zebo threw a dodgy offload in the AIs but was picked for the 1st team in the 6N for example.
connachta wrote: » Honnestly is wasn't at all the hidden reason. I'd prefer White/Buckley stay in the West. Just fairly prefer 6 specialist props than Bent and Cave.
