Chiefs vs Wales, June 14

Higgins

Numbers of caps is not always always a great measuring yardstick given that a two minute appearance still counts as a cap. Using MtS's 30+ caps example for Sam Cane above that might translate into something like (and this is a unresearched guess) 400 or 450 so total minutes or something more akin to the equivalent of about just six full games. Still you can learn a lot just by being included in the matchday 23 as well as following the play from to close confines of the sideline bench. This is probably more so when you team invariably win,s especially when they pull off those late escapes when all looks lost.

Immenso Rapido

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MiketheSnow" data-cid="588355" data-time="1465996228">
Since the 2011 U20 WC - which includes Wales' victory against NZ at the 2012 U-20 World Cup group stage - the following Welsh players have advanced to the national squad: BACKS 
Liam Williams, Tom Prydie, Matthew Morgan, Hallam Amos, Eli Walker, Owen Williams, Cory Allen, Tyler Morgan, Gareth Anscombe (played for NZ U20s) FORWARDS 
Rhodri Jones, Rob Evans, Samson Lee, Ellis Jenkins, Dan Baker, Ross Moriarty (played for England U20s) 
In contrast NZ have selected the following just from 2011: 
Beauden Barrett, Waisake Naholo, Lima Sopoaga, Charles Piutau, TJ Perenara 
Ben Tameifuna, Steven Luatua, Brodie Retallick, Same Cane 
The big problem is the majority of the Welsh U20 players don't play in the big matches - European rugby - often enough and when they do get selected to the national side rarely get on - because we're rarely in a comfortable enough position to bring them on. 
Unlike NZ for example who have Cane as GOAT's 'immediate' replacement with 30+ caps. 
Better structure, development, coaching and nurturing in NZ.</blockquote>
 
Distorted a bit by the fact that the 2011 NZ U20s were awesome. And 2012 was the tight time to start the next 4 year cycle at AB level. 
Since then they've been a bit mud. 
I think until last weekend Tuipolotu was the only one since 2012 onwards who had graduated to AB level. Now Ardie Savea has as well (and that's been a long time coming for a guy so anointed). Ofa T has been in squads but not yet an AB, but he was diabolically bad at U20 level in 2012. 
But I digress

bobily

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Immenso Rapido" data-cid="588491" data-time="1466028820">
<div>
 Ofa T has been in squads but not yet an AB, but he was diabolically bad at U20 level in 2012. 

</div>
</blockquote>
 
He was bad, but to be fair to him, they kept playing him at loosehead prop.

SimonAdd

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MiketheSnow" data-cid="588355" data-time="1465996228">
<div>
Since the 2011 U20 WC - which includes Wales' victory against NZ at the 2012 U-20 World Cup group stage - the following Welsh players have advanced to the national squad:
 
BACKS 
Liam Williams, Tom Prydie, Matthew Morgan, Hallam Amos, Eli Walker, Owen Williams, Cory Allen, Tyler Morgan, Gareth Anscombe (played for NZ U20s)
 
FORWARDS 
Rhodri Jones, Rob Evans, Samson Lee, Ellis Jenkins, Dan Baker, Ross Moriarty (played for England U20s) 
In contrast NZ have selected the following just from 2011: 
Beauden Barrett, Waisake Naholo, Lima Sopoaga, Charles Piutau, TJ Perenara 
Ben Tameifuna, Steven Luatua, Brodie Retallick, Same Cane 
The big problem is the majority of the Welsh U20 players don't play in the big matches - European rugby - often enough and when they do get selected to the national side rarely get on - because we're rarely in a comfortable enough position to bring them on. 
Unlike NZ for example who have Cane as GOAT's 'immediate' replacement with 30+ caps. 
Better structure, development, coaching and nurturing in NZ.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
The 2011 u20 vintage from both England and New Zealand (the two finalists) was fantastic though. They already make up the spine of the England team and now look likely to do the same with the All Blacks. Wales just didn't have the same quality at the same time. Wait for the 2013 guys to come through (they're only just doing in England and New Zealand) and Wales should have some promising players.

Chris B.

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MiketheSnow" data-cid="588268" data-time="1465975716">
<div>
If that's the case, then his bosses should ream him a new one. He's coaching Wales.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Can only do what you've got time to do.
 
Last week his focus would surely have been on the test match. Played on Saturday night.
 
Sunday doubtless a recovery session and travel to Hamilton.
 
Monday the training run for the Chiefs match.
 
Tuesday - the match.
 
The dirty-dirty players have doubtless been doing some stuff in-between times - but that's not going to lead to running out a cohesive team.

booboo

Just getting to the thread now ... 
Only two days late to this concversatio...

Thanks for the heaads up Nick about being on 502. Managed to catch the kast 60mins if the game :)
Have got as far on the thread as the Beaver "try". Ref said several times he did not see a grounding so if the TMO couldn't see it the ruling had to go the way it did. You'd have to have thought it was a try on "balance of probabilities" but requirement is for clear and obvious evidence.

booboo

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Chris B." data-cid="587849" data-time="1465890810">
Yeah - but where was the evidence that it was held up? The only thing lacking was a camera angle - the balance of likelihoods was a try - and very clearly in favour of a try. 
Stupid decision in my opinion.</blockquote>
 
See above

booboo

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Chris B." data-cid="587855" data-time="1465891190">
Is that a definite refereeing protocol? If there's any doubt with a "try no try" ruling then the benefit of the doubt goes in favour of the defending team?</blockquote>
 
No. There's no " benefit of the doubt". There is only "clear and obvious evidence".

Chris B.

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="booboo" data-cid="588750" data-time="1466069726">
<div>
No. There's no " benefit of the doubt". There is only "clear and obvious evidence".
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
Point being - the TMO must have to have clear and obvious evidence that the try is scored. He doesn't need clear and obvious evidence that it has been held up.
 
If he can't see then the decision - apparently - is always in favour of the defending team.

gt12

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Chris B." data-cid="588875" data-time="1466126930">
<div>
Point being - the TMO must have to have clear and obvious evidence that the try is scored. He doesn't need clear and obvious evidence that it has been held up.
 
If he can't see then the decision - apparently - is always in favour of the defending team.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
I'm sure this has been said, but that depends on the question he was asked. If the question was 'any reason why I can't award the try?' the clear and obvious evidence has to go the other way (i.e., in favour of the team on attack)

booboo

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Provincial Stalwart" data-cid="588174" data-time="1465955565">
Yeah, but they were playing the three best teams in the world. insert smiley face</blockquote>
 
So England ranked 3?

The Silver Fern

Chiefs vs Wales, June 14