Lorthern Nights wrote:deegee wrote:Edinburgh01 wrote:zt1903 wrote:Based on what I've seen of the expected England team there isn't a player from 1-9 of theirs that I would pick ahead of ours, their 10 is every bit as flaky as Parks, Centre combination works at Club level but untested internationally, back three is potentially superb but 2 of the 3 are not in top form.
I am not unhappy.
England look like picking an inexperienced back row, a flaky 10, an inexperienced centre pairing. Laidlaw would ask all sorts of different questions of their defence and maybe find a chink in their armour. Parks will ask one, and an easy one at that.
When I phoned my 11 year old son to tell him the team his response was, and I quote, 'f**king Dan Parks, what the fudge? We've lost the f**king game. What the fudge is Robinson thinking'. He gets his vocabulary from his mother.
I'm going to stop talking about Parks now, it's just upsetting me. Which is a shame as otherwise I think we've as good a chnace as we've ever had.
You should have waited until he was sober before breaking the news.
to both of you.
And to Spanks and the other apologists, just stop it there is no rational whatsoever for including Parks even if the other selctions are by and large the best we could put out but that is only because there arent any other options either through injury or form or ability.
Parks is gash, has always been gash and will contine to be gash, the only reason the fucker never gets injured is that is never anywhere remotely close to contact. The selection should have been Laidlaw with Weir on the bench - end of.
I agree about Parks, it's not even as if he's been playing well for Cardiff. He's been completely shite for Scotland other than a small upward blip when he came back after being dropped two years ago.
However, Robinson's made his decision and we need to get behind the team. I dread the scenario where Parks getting the hook on Saturday gets the biggest cheer of the day.