AB RWC Squad
-
@mariner4life said in AB RWC Squad:
@ACT-Crusader said in AB RWC Squad:
There are some pretty unlikely scenarios being thrown about. We have to operate with a smaller squad and yes the outside back contingency seems like overkill. But were they ever going to select 5 locks regardless? Nope. Hey we only took 3 locks to 2015!
i get this, but
As it stands, with Retallick out for 2 or 3 games, we have 3 locks and 5 loosies. You need a combination of 7 of these for every match. It just means that we're putting a lot of load on the first stringers early in the tournament.
It does help that the two hardest pool games are pretty early, and it's likely the top side plays them anyway. 1 more injury and you are out of options. two and you are out of players, not matter what their positions are.
I think the only significant problem is if one of the indispensable locks (or Frizell) gets a short run injury against South Africa. Then we'd go into the game against France with two big guys having to play 80 minutes and no proper injury cover.
Otherwise, we can surely manage short-handed vs the minnows and Italy - and Retallick hopefully back by then anyway.
But, why take the risk? The fifth wing will maximum play vs Namibia and Uruguay.
As much as anything it's the lack of logic that annoys me. I just can't see how you'd think this balance was the best idea (short of Will Jordan and a wing friend really are going by ship and they expect them to be stuck in Suez for some considerable time)!
-
@Chris-B said in AB RWC Squad:
@mariner4life said in AB RWC Squad:
@ACT-Crusader said in AB RWC Squad:
There are some pretty unlikely scenarios being thrown about. We have to operate with a smaller squad and yes the outside back contingency seems like overkill. But were they ever going to select 5 locks regardless? Nope. Hey we only took 3 locks to 2015!
i get this, but
As it stands, with Retallick out for 2 or 3 games, we have 3 locks and 5 loosies. You need a combination of 7 of these for every match. It just means that we're putting a lot of load on the first stringers early in the tournament.
It does help that the two hardest pool games are pretty early, and it's likely the top side plays them anyway. 1 more injury and you are out of options. two and you are out of players, not matter what their positions are.
I think the only significant problem is if one of the indispensable locks (or Frizell) gets a short run injury against South Africa. Then we'd go into the game against France with two big guys having to play 80 minutes and no proper injury cover.
Otherwise, we can surely manage short-handed vs the minnows and Italy - and Retallick hopefully back by then anyway.
But, why take the risk? The fifth wing will maximum play vs Namibia and Uruguay.
As much as anything it's the lack of logic that annoys me. I just can't see how you'd think this balance was the best idea (short of Will Jordan and a wing friend really are going by ship and they expect them to be stuck in Suez for some considerable time)!
Foster said it was all to do with training, which makes sense I guess. Even if the 33rd guy with a loose forward, he too would probably be limited to a couple of pool matches.
-
-
@Chris-B I'm in two minds about where they go for the Boks test. Whilst there would be the temptation to wrap Smith, one of Scooter or Whitelock and Jordie in cotton wool, you also don't want to get embarrassed out there on Twickers. Plus this is a money spinner for all intents and purposes.
-
@canefan said in AB RWC Squad:
I'd imagine they will have another half a dozen players in France ready just in case someone is ruled out and they need a replacement
There are rules around replacement times etc to make it fair for those non-cashed up nations that can't afford to have extra players sightseeing in France
-
@Machpants said in AB RWC Squad:
Nope but then Lord can't come back if there is another injury. Brodie also can't be in camp
Sounds a bit like a law waiting to be manipulated, the faking on an injury part to swap players I mean
-
Can't find the exact rule for 2023 RWC, this is the rule from previous World Cups
Once teams have named their final 31 man squad players can only be replaced for medical or compassionate reasons. Teams must complete the relevant paperwork and send it to World Rugby along with a medical certificate where appropriate. Once signed off the replacement is not allowed to play for 48 hours. The replacement is permanent.
-
@Bovidae said in AB RWC Squad:
I assume that there is still a stand-down period for replacement players? It will be interesting if Finau, Weber and Bell stay in the UK or return to NZ.
I suspect they will be touring..
Could be needed early too if a Fern sniper takes out the Ginger
-
@bayimports said in AB RWC Squad:
@Bovidae said in AB RWC Squad:
I assume that there is still a stand-down period for replacement players? It will be interesting if Finau, Weber and Bell stay in the UK or return to NZ.
I suspect they will be touring..
Could be needed early too if a Fern sniper takes out the Ginger
Yup. Doesn't appear to be anything in the rules that stops us having a small group of players holed up somewhere in France, training by themselves, at least to keep fit just in case. That avoids the cross globe flight to join the squad if needed
-
@canefan said in AB RWC Squad:
@bayimports said in AB RWC Squad:
@Bovidae said in AB RWC Squad:
I assume that there is still a stand-down period for replacement players? It will be interesting if Finau, Weber and Bell stay in the UK or return to NZ.
I suspect they will be touring..
Could be needed early too if a Fern sniper takes out the Ginger
Yup. Doesn't appear to be anything in the rules that stops us having a small group of players holed up somewhere in France, training by themselves, at least to keep fit just in case. That avoids the cross globe flight to join the squad if needed
The best thing is get them on a short term contract with a club, I don't think you can get away with having a few in country training, think the rules cover that.
-
@Dan54 said in AB RWC Squad:
@canefan said in AB RWC Squad:
@bayimports said in AB RWC Squad:
@Bovidae said in AB RWC Squad:
I assume that there is still a stand-down period for replacement players? It will be interesting if Finau, Weber and Bell stay in the UK or return to NZ.
I suspect they will be touring..
Could be needed early too if a Fern sniper takes out the Ginger
Yup. Doesn't appear to be anything in the rules that stops us having a small group of players holed up somewhere in France, training by themselves, at least to keep fit just in case. That avoids the cross globe flight to join the squad if needed
The best thing is get them on a short term contract with a club, I don't think you can get away with having a few in country training, think the rules cover that.
I think I heard some of the boys saying they planned to go on a "holiday" for a couple of weeks in September October...
-
@canefan isnt there some sort of time restriction before players can join teams to make it 'fair' on all teams (ie host team can have someoen there in minutes, while others, SH sides is a tad longer)
Plus I'd say there will be some on standby anyway, meaning they get a call, they could be on a plane within hours and in Europe within 24 hours.
-
@taniwharugby as mentioned above can't play for 48 hours, that's it. They can train the second the paperwork is signed off - like Joe Moody
-
@Machpants TITSF, I didnt read that far back!
-
@Dan54 said in AB RWC Squad:
I don't think you can get away with having a few in country training, think the rules cover that.
I don't see how that could be enforced. Are all the unselected French players going to jump in a dinghy in the channel?
-
@frugby said in AB RWC Squad:
@Chris-B said in AB RWC Squad:
@mariner4life said in AB RWC Squad:
@ACT-Crusader said in AB RWC Squad:
There are some pretty unlikely scenarios being thrown about. We have to operate with a smaller squad and yes the outside back contingency seems like overkill. But were they ever going to select 5 locks regardless? Nope. Hey we only took 3 locks to 2015!
i get this, but
As it stands, with Retallick out for 2 or 3 games, we have 3 locks and 5 loosies. You need a combination of 7 of these for every match. It just means that we're putting a lot of load on the first stringers early in the tournament.
It does help that the two hardest pool games are pretty early, and it's likely the top side plays them anyway. 1 more injury and you are out of options. two and you are out of players, not matter what their positions are.
I think the only significant problem is if one of the indispensable locks (or Frizell) gets a short run injury against South Africa. Then we'd go into the game against France with two big guys having to play 80 minutes and no proper injury cover.
Otherwise, we can surely manage short-handed vs the minnows and Italy - and Retallick hopefully back by then anyway.
But, why take the risk? The fifth wing will maximum play vs Namibia and Uruguay.
As much as anything it's the lack of logic that annoys me. I just can't see how you'd think this balance was the best idea (short of Will Jordan and a wing friend really are going by ship and they expect them to be stuck in Suez for some considerable time)!
Foster said it was all to do with training, which makes sense I guess. Even if the 33rd guy with a loose forward, he too would probably be limited to a couple of pool matches.
It really doesn't make sense. It's Foster lip service again.
