Chat Forum
It is currently Wed Apr 25, 2018 9:52 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 67626 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 1666, 1667, 1668, 1669, 1670, 1671, 1672 ... 1691  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 9:40 am 
Online

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 17915
Dai Young was quoted in the Telegraph (article/interview from Gopperth) "I heard [Saracens'] Billy Vunipola say that he’d play for less money if it meant fewer games. I’ve not had many coming through my door saying that. Look, if England were like this for two or three more seasons, then you would probably have to look at the reasons why.”

Sounds like whilst players may say they'd take less money to play less, they're not actually following through. He also doesn't seem concerned about England's result (admittedly he's Welsh, but England does impact him).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 10:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2832
Raggs wrote:
Dai Young was quoted in the Telegraph (article/interview from Gopperth) "I heard [Saracens'] Billy Vunipola say that he’d play for less money if it meant fewer games. I’ve not had many coming through my door saying that. Look, if England were like this for two or three more seasons, then you would probably have to look at the reasons why.”

Sounds like whilst players may say they'd take less money to play less, they're not actually following through. He also doesn't seem concerned about England's result (admittedly he's Welsh, but England does impact him).


I’m sure Haskell would have...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 10:09 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19131
JM2K6 wrote:
Sounds like drops in performance are pretty easy to read, no?

Anyway, we can talk about the players being knackered but it shouldn't excuse the other problems that weren't being addressed.


It can depend. Is a player playing smarter at ruck time and choosing where to go or following the play or are they running their socks off being ineffective at every ruck?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2638
Dont see how in hell you get central contracts to work with a 12 team premiership.

All the other countries with central contracts have a small number of teams. (not quite sure how the Saffa system works)
Ireland 4
Scots 2
Welsh 4

Aussie 4 /down from 5
Kiwis 5
Saffas 4 in SR and 2 in Pro14





RFU need to sort out a proper 4 year cycle with the Premiership teams that takes into account World cup years and Lions Tours and make adjustments accordingly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15379
Location: West of Londinium
Glaston wrote:
RFU need to sort out a proper 4 year cycle with the Premiership teams that takes into account World cup years and Lions Tours and make payments accordingly.

Fixed.

I like the idea of central contracts - or a more comprehensive arrangement than we have at present - but I can't see it happening until the end of the current Club /Country agreement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:54 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 17915
Glaston wrote:
Dont see how in hell you get central contracts to work with a 12 team premiership.

All the other countries with central contracts have a small number of teams. (not quite sure how the Saffa system works)
Ireland 4
Scots 2
Welsh 4

Aussie 4 /down from 5
Kiwis 5
Saffas 4 in SR and 2 in Pro14





RFU need to sort out a proper 4 year cycle with the Premiership teams that takes into account World cup years and Lions Tours and make adjustments accordingly.


You won't get central contracts to work. PRL have an agreement not to use centrally contracted players regardless, due to all the balancing issues we've talked about, and probably some we haven't. It's why no club would take Warburton when he had nowhere to play in Wales.

The RFU would basically have to play centrally contracted players in a different league.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 1:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11515
One bad championship doesn’t seem like a good enough reason to scrap our current system, the one that provided back to back titles in the previous 2 seasons.

A bit of tweaking and more sympathetic training techniques, with coaches recognising when players are shagged out, should suffice.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 1:08 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 17915
ovalball wrote:
One bad championship doesn’t seem like a good enough reason to scrap our current system, the one that provided back to back titles in the previous 2 seasons.

A bit of tweaking and more sympathetic training techniques, with coaches recognising when players are shagged out, should suffice.


Again, the sympathetic training techniques depend on what the coaches were trying to achieve. If it was win the grandslam, they got it wrong, if it was improve for the rwc, we won't know.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 3:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2358
So, the SRU chief confirms they're interested in taking a stake in an English club

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/43473255

I wonder how the RFU would view this. For me, it's a zero sum game - any benefit Scottish rugby gets is a benefit that English rugby is no longer getting. I'm agin it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 3:11 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 17915
Dobbin wrote:
So, the SRU chief confirms they're interested in taking a stake in an English club

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/43473255

I wonder how the RFU would view this. For me, it's a zero sum game - any benefit Scottish rugby gets is a benefit that English rugby is no longer getting. I'm agin it.


Don't think I'd have an issue actually. They don't have enough money to ignore the EQP payments, so will be looking at dual SQP and EQP players, meaning anyone handy will have interest from the RFU too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 3:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18803
Location: Investigating racism in the NHS
This is different to a sugar daddy arrangement, those guys are usually just funding a club to feed their own ego - this is more like when Chinese investors take over a British company

They obviously aren't going to take over Worcester and immediately stuff it full of Jocks and SQPs, but there's a clear strategic end-game with a move like this

It might be just having a local base to find SQ talent to stick in the academy, or using the Sixways cash flow to fund the buying of SQ players from overseas, but ultimately there's going to come a point where the SRU's interest no longer align with that of English rugby and its going to be difficult to get rid of them if they're stakeholders in the domestic league


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 3:46 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2012 10:12 pm
Posts: 3704
Why don't they buy London Scottish and climb the league?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 3:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18803
Location: Investigating racism in the NHS
pandion wrote:
Why don't they buy London Scottish and climb the league?


They'd be daft if they did. Aside from having "Scottish" in the name there's nothing at all attractive about buying LS - it's a sinkhole of money just to get it up to Prem level (players and facilities) and there's no guarantee of getting a decent crowd (especially if they're competing with Quins for the same support base). Even if they made a success of it, it'd be at least 5 years before they got any return on it or it became an advantageous asset for the SRU

With Worcester they get a ready made Premiership club, with excellent facilities and a reliable monopoly on a fanbase in a strong rugby area that they can do whatever they like with straight away. Commercially it's a perfectly sound move, especially if they can get a good price for it


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 4:36 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19131
openclashXX wrote:
pandion wrote:
Why don't they buy London Scottish and climb the league?


They'd be daft if they did. Aside from having "Scottish" in the name there's nothing at all attractive about buying LS - it's a sinkhole of money just to get it up to Prem level (players and facilities) and there's no guarantee of getting a decent crowd (especially if they're competing with Quins for the same support base). Even if they made a success of it, it'd be at least 5 years before they got any return on it or it became an advantageous asset for the SRU

With Worcester they get a ready made Premiership club, with excellent facilities and a reliable monopoly on a fanbase in a strong rugby area that they can do whatever they like with straight away. Commercially it's a perfectly sound move, especially if they can get a good price for it


What's more London Scottish rent Richmond's ground and pretty much always have done.

I genuinely don't get why the SRU think buying an English club is cheaper than running another Scottish region. Last I checked the Regions run at 4 or 5 million, an English club needs to be close to the 7 million salary cap to compete. Plus they would have limits on Scottish players, plus they would need 10 plus million to buy it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 4:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2192
Because they think the AP is better than Pro 14? Exposing players to different refereeing styles?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 4:38 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19131
Raggs wrote:
Dobbin wrote:
So, the SRU chief confirms they're interested in taking a stake in an English club

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/43473255

I wonder how the RFU would view this. For me, it's a zero sum game - any benefit Scottish rugby gets is a benefit that English rugby is no longer getting. I'm agin it.


Don't think I'd have an issue actually. They don't have enough money to ignore the EQP payments, so will be looking at dual SQP and EQP players, meaning anyone handy will have interest from the RFU too.


Surely the RFU could and should stop EQP payments to a club where another union controls it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 4:39 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19131
Plastic Sarrie wrote:
Because they think the AP is better than Pro 14? Exposing players to different refereeing styles?


if they expose their players to English refereeing they will get f#cked at the breakdown.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 4:40 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19131
Plastic Sarrie wrote:
Because they think the AP is better than Pro 14? Exposing players to different refereeing styles?


I suspect it's because the Pro 14 money won't be allowed to be stretched to more teams.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 4:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2192
eldanielfire wrote:
Plastic Sarrie wrote:
Because they think the AP is better than Pro 14? Exposing players to different refereeing styles?


I suspect it's because the Pro 14 money won't be allowed to be stretched to more teams.

Ah yes, the lovely, lovely BT Sport money :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 4:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14814
eldanielfire wrote:
Raggs wrote:
Dobbin wrote:
So, the SRU chief confirms they're interested in taking a stake in an English club

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/43473255

I wonder how the RFU would view this. For me, it's a zero sum game - any benefit Scottish rugby gets is a benefit that English rugby is no longer getting. I'm agin it.


Don't think I'd have an issue actually. They don't have enough money to ignore the EQP payments, so will be looking at dual SQP and EQP players, meaning anyone handy will have interest from the RFU too.


Surely the RFU could and should stop EQP payments to a club where another union controls it?


Edit. apols didnt realise what thread I was on. Ignore.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 4:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11515
eldanielfire wrote:
Raggs wrote:
Dobbin wrote:
So, the SRU chief confirms they're interested in taking a stake in an English club

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/43473255

I wonder how the RFU would view this. For me, it's a zero sum game - any benefit Scottish rugby gets is a benefit that English rugby is no longer getting. I'm agin it.


Don't think I'd have an issue actually. They don't have enough money to ignore the EQP payments, so will be looking at dual SQP and EQP players, meaning anyone handy will have interest from the RFU too.


Surely the RFU could and should stop EQP payments to a club where another union controls it?


I thought prl had rules about ownership of clubs that precluded any Union involvement. I can ‘t see prl agreeing to anything that could be seen as the thin edge of the wedge re Union ownership of a pro side.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 4:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:01 am
Posts: 5021
eldanielfire wrote:
Raggs wrote:
Dobbin wrote:
So, the SRU chief confirms they're interested in taking a stake in an English club

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/43473255

I wonder how the RFU would view this. For me, it's a zero sum game - any benefit Scottish rugby gets is a benefit that English rugby is no longer getting. I'm agin it.


Don't think I'd have an issue actually. They don't have enough money to ignore the EQP payments, so will be looking at dual SQP and EQP players, meaning anyone handy will have interest from the RFU too.


Surely the RFU could and should stop EQP payments to a club where another union controls it?


Why would they need to? The EQP payments are for English players, if a club part owned by a Scottish investor selects some English players then what difference to Saffer owned Sarries getting EQP monies for their players?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 5:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11515
Raggs wrote:
ovalball wrote:
One bad championship doesn’t seem like a good enough reason to scrap our current system, the one that provided back to back titles in the previous 2 seasons.

A bit of tweaking and more sympathetic training techniques, with coaches recognising when players are shagged out, should suffice.


Again, the sympathetic training techniques depend on what the coaches were trying to achieve. If it was win the grandslam, they got it wrong, if it was improve for the rwc, we won't know.


Anyone thinking that flogging already tired, overworked, Players, will make them fitter in 18 moths time, needs their heads testing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 5:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18803
Location: Investigating racism in the NHS
eldanielfire wrote:
I genuinely don't get why the SRU think buying an English club is cheaper than running another Scottish region. Last I checked the Regions run at 4 or 5 million, an English club needs to be close to the 7 million salary cap to compete. Plus they would have limits on Scottish players, plus they would need 10 plus million to buy it.


I suspect there's an element of diminishing returns - there's not really a big, concentrated market with sufficient player and support base left in Scotland

By expanding into England you get access to a much richer, more densely populated market with a lot of SQ players floating around that could all be hoovered up with a proper club and academy presence


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 5:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13711
ovalball wrote:
Raggs wrote:
ovalball wrote:
One bad championship doesn’t seem like a good enough reason to scrap our current system, the one that provided back to back titles in the previous 2 seasons.

A bit of tweaking and more sympathetic training techniques, with coaches recognising when players are shagged out, should suffice.


Again, the sympathetic training techniques depend on what the coaches were trying to achieve. If it was win the grandslam, they got it wrong, if it was improve for the rwc, we won't know.


Anyone thinking that flogging already tired, overworked, Players, will make them fitter in 18 moths time, needs their heads testing.


Ah, but we don't KNOW.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 5:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11515
piquant wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Raggs wrote:
Dobbin wrote:
So, the SRU chief confirms they're interested in taking a stake in an English club

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/43473255

I wonder how the RFU would view this. For me, it's a zero sum game - any benefit Scottish rugby gets is a benefit that English rugby is no longer getting. I'm agin it.


Don't think I'd have an issue actually. They don't have enough money to ignore the EQP payments, so will be looking at dual SQP and EQP players, meaning anyone handy will have interest from the RFU too.


Surely the RFU could and should stop EQP payments to a club where another union controls it?


Why would they need to? The EQP payments are for English players, if a club part owned by a Scottish investor selects some English players then what difference to Saffer owned Sarries getting EQP monies for their players?


There’s a huge difference between a club being owned by a foreigner eg a Saffer, and being owned by a foreign union. There’s no way that the RFU will makes payments to a SRU owned organisation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 6:08 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 17915
Why? If the sru follow the eqp agreement then why not?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 6:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:01 am
Posts: 5021
If the SRU or any other union tried to take full control the RFU can (if they want) simply say no. I don't think they've the same leeway on partial ownership but we'll see perhaps. The point still stands if the club is getting payments for doing what the RFU wants what does it matter when they're doing what the RFU wants?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 6:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18803
Location: Investigating racism in the NHS
Raggs wrote:
Why? If the sru follow the eqp agreement then why not?


I think there's going to be some real resistance to the idea of directly handing funding over to a rival union (even if the rules do allow it)

Either way it's a moot point, it won't be allowed to go ahead. If Altrad had his takeover of Gloucester blocked on the grounds that he owned Montpellier then there's no way they'd allow an organisation to own Worcester if they also owned two Pro12 clubs


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 6:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15379
Location: West of Londinium
openclashXX wrote:
Raggs wrote:
Why? If the sru follow the eqp agreement then why not?


I think there's going to be some real resistance to the idea of directly handing funding over to a rival union (even if the rules do allow it)

Either way it's a moot point, it won't be allowed to go ahead. If Altrad had his takeover of Gloucester blocked on the grounds that he owned Montpellier then there's no way they'd allow an organisation to own Worcester if they also owned two Pro12 clubs

It'd be amusing though if the season after purchase the SRU's new English club was relegated.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 6:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:01 am
Posts: 5021
openclashXX wrote:
Raggs wrote:
Why? If the sru follow the eqp agreement then why not?


I think there's going to be some real resistance to the idea of directly handing funding over to a rival union (even if the rules do allow it)

Either way it's a moot point, it won't be allowed to go ahead. If Altrad had his takeover of Gloucester blocked on the grounds that he owned Montpellier then there's no way they'd allow an organisation to own Worcester if they also owned two Pro12 clubs


How much of a stake did Altrad want? Though I was overlooking the joint ownership issue.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 8:07 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19131
Gospel wrote:
openclashXX wrote:
Raggs wrote:
Why? If the sru follow the eqp agreement then why not?


I think there's going to be some real resistance to the idea of directly handing funding over to a rival union (even if the rules do allow it)

Either way it's a moot point, it won't be allowed to go ahead. If Altrad had his takeover of Gloucester blocked on the grounds that he owned Montpellier then there's no way they'd allow an organisation to own Worcester if they also owned two Pro12 clubs

It'd be amusing though if the season after purchase the SRU's new English club was relegated.



I was thinking the same thing, followed by "and then they removed promotion and relegation"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 11:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2014 5:17 pm
Posts: 1735
Thank you, Ovalball , that was one line of reasoning that needed knocking on the head !

'' Anyone thinking that flogging already tired, overworked, Players, will make them fitter in 18 moths time, needs their heads testing.''

Worth taking a look at what we know about the current coaches, based on their previous performance as players, and if this contributed to their game planning.
Borthwick 's sole contribution as a player , was running lineouts. Think back to views on the weaknesses of the rest of his game. Would he be better employed simply as a consultant for lineouts ?
Similarly, Hatley was a scrumaging prop . Is his influence why you have a player like Cole , who provides virtually no contribution outside of the scrum, as a seemingly nailed on starter.
Should we be looking at coaches who provide a more balanced understanding of what a team needs to compete at the top level ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 11:53 am 
Online

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 17915
Backwoodsman1 wrote:
Thank you, Ovalball , that was one line of reasoning that needed knocking on the head !

'' Anyone thinking that flogging already tired, overworked, Players, will make them fitter in 18 moths time, needs their heads testing.''


OK, so if we're knocking that on the head, we're left with the other alternative being Eddie Jones and his head of sports science have no fecking clue what they're doing, and have both managed to reach pretty much the pinnacle of their career paths despite that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 12:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2014 5:17 pm
Posts: 1735
Raggs wrote:
Backwoodsman1 wrote:
Thank you, Ovalball , that was one line of reasoning that needed knocking on the head !

'' Anyone thinking that flogging already tired, overworked, Players, will make them fitter in 18 moths time, needs their heads testing.''


OK, so if we're knocking that on the head, we're left with the other alternative being Eddie Jones and his head of sports science have no fecking clue what they're doing, and have both managed to reach pretty much the pinnacle of their career paths despite that.


Raggs, you could conjecture that they were attempting to establish what optimal level of fitness could be achieved . However, in the intervening period the players will have an off season, when a large part of the fitness gains achieved will be lost and the whole process of pre season training will have to start from a far lower base point. That was what I was driving at.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 1:14 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 17915
Backwoodsman1 wrote:
Raggs wrote:
Backwoodsman1 wrote:
Thank you, Ovalball , that was one line of reasoning that needed knocking on the head !

'' Anyone thinking that flogging already tired, overworked, Players, will make them fitter in 18 moths time, needs their heads testing.''


OK, so if we're knocking that on the head, we're left with the other alternative being Eddie Jones and his head of sports science have no fecking clue what they're doing, and have both managed to reach pretty much the pinnacle of their career paths despite that.


Raggs, you could conjecture that they were attempting to establish what optimal level of fitness could be achieved . However, in the intervening period the players will have an off season, when a large part of the fitness gains achieved will be lost and the whole process of pre season training will have to start from a far lower base point. That was what I was driving at.


They'd probably lose some during the off-season, but would they lose all of it? Would there be a gain overall? These are also the England guys, and the coaches would probably expect them to hold onto that fitness during their 5 weeks rest, rather than simply slob out on the couch for a month. If they hold onto even some advantage over what they would have had, then they start from a higher base, and can continue to improve.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 1:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1626
I was just thinking of some options.

Looking back at how well the English clubs and England played after the world cup when everyone had an extra month off and an extended pre season. Rather than the agreement for a world season which extends the season and games played here maybe we should look at lengthening the summer break and just reduce the games played by 4. Two less teams for the Premiership will achieve this at a stroke.

One other option is to contract 40-50 players to England and play the 6n home and away. Add in the SH sides and you have 18 games home and away or 18 total in a world international league. This is similar to the NFL.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 2:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18803
Location: Investigating racism in the NHS
Dom Barrow leaves Leicester with immediate effect, joins Northampton from next season

That move did wonders for Jamie Gibson's career x(


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 2:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11392
openclashXX wrote:
Dom Barrow leaves Leicester with immediate effect, joins Northampton from next season

That move did wonders for Jamie Gibson's career x(


Gibson's done okay at Saints TBF, unless I've got the wrong end of the stick. Probably playing to his potential.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 2:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11392
In other news, Kennedy out the door at LI unsurprisingly


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 67626 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 1666, 1667, 1668, 1669, 1670, 1671, 1672 ... 1691  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: backrow, Big Nipper, BillW, Bing [Bot], Blackrock Bullet, BokJock, Brumbie_Steve, Catman, Chilli, Diego, Edinburgh01, eldanielfire, eugenefraxby, Google Adsense [Bot], handyman, Harveys, JB1981, Jeff the Bear, Jensrsa, J Man, La soule, Lazy Couch potato, Liathroidigloine, Mick Mannock, Mullet 2, MungoMan, newportblue, pandion, penguin, Podge, PornDog, Raggs, sunnybanana, Tehui, Toulon's Not Toulouse, Tschussie, unseenwork, Working Class Rugger, Xupi and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group