THE NEXT STEP

I think one of the biggest problems Wales have had in the past decade or two is player favouritism and the fear of dropping players with a big reputation who are out of form.

It is all well and good winning the Six Nations, but in recent history Wales have had a few poor seasons following brief success and have MASSIVELY struggled against SH teams.

I think one major reason is that we are scared to drop players. Reputations seem to be cemented and stars discovered during a tournament win, but then certain players seem to become "undroppable" or expected to retain their place permanently. We have discovered recently that even with some superstar talents in the team, there is massive competition in most positions and nobody is safe.

We have outstanding wings in North and Cuthbert, but there are plenty of other young talents on the horizon and it won't be long before Hanno Dirksen joins them. I would hope that Gatland isn't afraid to drop any of them if they fall out of form and give another potential star youngster a go. It would not surprise me if Tipuric starts sometimes against Warburton or even Shingler. There is enough talent there to try many options and we always have to pick our best 15.

Normally you would think after a grand slam that the number 10 would be the last player to be dropped, but it was such a team effort that we managed to win 5 out 5 with a 10 not actually playing that well. I really want to see Biggar or Hook starting at least one of the tests unless Priestland has a stormer in the 1st test.

If someone is player outstanding for their club or has shined in training then they all deserve consideration.

We have reaped the rewards from selecting fearless confident young players and it has been nice to see more youngsters getting regional rugby due to the French exodus. However we should be surprised if certain star players lose their place in the squad from time to time. If North is playing poor and he gets dropped then it will be the best for him and do him the world of good. Competition for places is healthy and we MUST pick on form.

Good points, many international teams are guilty of picking on experience and not form, so it's not only Wales. I don't think Priestland had the best 6 Nations so it might be a good idea for Wales to try out Biggar. Also I agree that no one is 'undroppable' as many players are surpassed by younger and hungrier players wanting to get a piece of international rugby.

One step for man, one giant sheep for welshkind.

idris wrote:I think one of the biggest problems Wales have had in the past decade or two is player favouritism and the fear of dropping players with a big reputation who are out of form.

To be honest you could substitute "Wales" for "Scotland", "Ireland" and most certainly "England" in that sentence. It's really been a big NH rugbby issue for the last decade. Coaches being frightened to look to form, and forget the same old names.

From a Scotland perspective it's felt at times as if Robinson goes on vacation between internationals and just picks the same squad when he comes back from holiday, missing form players emerging at Edinburgh and Glasgow.

I actually think Wales have it better than the rest of us at the moment with Gatland, in my view the pick of the NH coaches by some way. He's done a really decent job of bringing through young players, in the last 12 months in particular, and there aren't many form players in Wales being ignored. You certainly can't say the same about Scotland (until the latest squad, although even then there are some quibbles) and England, and to a lesser degree Ireland.

Idris as Zander said, Wales is not unique in holding onto players with reputation.

Just look at the springboks last year, we went to the world cup with Bakkies botha, half injured out of form, and yet he went, John Smit has been struggling for form, fourie du Preez struggled for form, there are probably 6 or so players that went to the world cup who were there on reputation only.

I think the mantra for coaches are, class is permanent but form temporary and hence many class players remain in the eye of the coaches even when off form.

sugarNspikes wrote:One step for man, one giant sheep for welshkind.

SugarNspikes, can you please tell me what does this remark bring to the debate?

biltongbek wrote:

sugarNspikes wrote:One step for man, one giant sheep for welshkind.

SugarNspikes, can you please tell me what does this remark bring to the debate?

It's another xenophobic comment designed to intentionally annoy the welsh. I thought these racist stereotypes were against your house rules...?

He and his other identities litter this forum with this kind of junk. We don't need it....!

Wales are not alone in picking players on reputation rather than form.The problem is players may show form at HC/MagnersLeague[or what ever it is now] and at International level.The AllBlacks often find there players at super15 level form is not duplicated at Test Level.Especially if as Wellington last year and the Blues this.

biltongbek wrote:

sugarNspikes wrote:One step for man, one giant sheep for welshkind.

SugarNspikes, can you please tell me what does this remark bring to the debate?

Sorry, I mean to type 'leap'. The spell check must have changed it.

sugarNspikes wrote:

biltongbek wrote:

sugarNspikes wrote:One step for man, one giant sheep for welshkind.

SugarNspikes, can you please tell me what does this remark bring to the debate?

Sorry, I mean to type 'leap'. The spell check must have changed it.

Somehow, I doubt that very much.

I don't form is the be all and end all in rugby.

Test rugby is what it is. The ultimate 'Test'. Some players have great domestic form but are ill suited to test rugby.

Charlie Hodgson... probably the best player in the premiership in the last decade. Showed amazing form and was easily the best 10 in the league.. even when JW was there.
Yet he didn't have the goods for test rugby.

Experience counts for a lot... but then again if you look at the Lions 05 disaster when SCW played mainly out of form hasbeens against those in better form but likely still to get run through.

For me if I had a player like Charlie Hodgson in form and a player like JW out of form say 5 years ago when they were in their peak I would go with the JW type no questions, against form. I'd rather go into a game knowing I have a chance of victory even if it meant I was relying on certain players suddenly improving on recent performances than one without a realistic chance.

Confidence is a big thing in sport.... every player will go through a dry patch but if you drop them instantly and show little faith/loyality you may risk pushing them deeper and hurting yourself in the longrun.

Continuity is also very important. If you chop and change too much you players struggle to develop a sixth sense for their fellow players and their play is negatively impacted.

All the best GS or RWC sides were those which changed very little personnel and most always carried one or two out of form players.

In the end I think coaches always have to keep an eye out for the bigger picture. They can't just say or think 'all I care about is the next game'. They need to have a medium to long term plan to breed success.

That may mean taking the odd hit along the way but if it generates long term success then it will have been worth it.

Also, picking a national team isn't simply a question of picking the best 15 players at a given point in time. Apart from things like balance within units, familiarity within units, there is also an issue of people knowing and being familiar with patterns and calls and training routines and what have you.

Also, some players bring things fans may be a bit less aware of (like being good at talking to the ref or keeping people's heads up when they're under the cosh and so on).

Also, I think it is a factor that fans see players almost always when they're playing, most of the time coaches see players they are training, so they may have a different view anyway, as people can be very different in a game situation. A coach may be giving someone a number of chances to replicate something they show on the training ground in a match situation.

But I agree, sometimes they do just seem to go with what is familiar.

I'd say the Irish team is usually the worst for this. It's harder to get out of the team than into it. I wonder is it anything to do with the fact that some players are on central contracts and some aren't. Do we have to justify the expense of the central contract by picking a guy even if he's out of form?

I also think the IRFU give the coaches short term results targets, which makes it less likely for them to select younger players and build for the future.

idris wrote:I think one of the biggest problems Wales have had in the past decade or two is player favouritism and the fear of dropping players with a big reputation who are out of form.

I agree there has been way too much favouritism in the Wales squads of recent times and we've definately dropped off after have a good season or even competition.

But I do believe there's another reason as well, which might hold for other NH teams as well - I think that the players for Wales who were top of their game during the 2008 GS, some of them had gone into that competition on the back of the WC, they had a hard season for club, won the GS then back into it, before some summer tests and back into the season with the Lions tour hanging over their head - following the Lions tour I feel most of the players were so knackered and beaten they couldn't help but have dips in form - the problem was that these were our best players and with Wales not having much strength in depth (particularly then) we had the choice of sticking with the experienced guys, or playing a team full of very raw promising players and squad players because of lack of depth.

I feel the same happens every few seasons and that the amount of rugby played is too much for most players to keep doing at full form, unless they get rests.

There is one issue within franchise rugby which can cause extend these problems. This is a limited number of players to choose from.

Take Scotland for instance, if you are the starting loosehead for Glasgow you are by definition one of the top 2 looseheads in Scotland.
Perhaps there is a better loosehead reserve at Edinburgh but due to his lack of game time the Glasgow player will be chosen ahead of him in most instances.

Its probably one of the few benefits ENG and FRA have by keeping the old club format. ENG has 10 club players in each position to choose from hypothetically (albeit many are taken by non-ENG qualified players).

In essence the issues lies not just at a national level but also for clubs as well. Clubs & country may have different ideas, agendas etc.. does it help Dan Cole and ENG that Castrogiovanni is played ahead of him most of the time?? Probably not.

But FA - that's why many Scottish players play abroad - so you'll have 2 (or 3) players to choose from domestically and then the more experienced players will probably be playing in France or England.

With Wales now we have at Flyhalf - Priestland, S Jones, Robling, Biggar & Tovey all getting game time for the regions, but we also have Hook, Jones and N Robinson to choose from if we needed to playign abroad.

I'd say although some positions can suffer, the thing the regional structure has ensured is that because the squads are stronger the best players aren't needed to play every single game (where as in the club game maybe only 1 international may be in the Pontypool or Ebbw team so would be needed every game).

It prob doesn't help if Castrogiovanni is played in front of him every game (though I think Cole gets a decent amont of gametime doesn't he?) but I bet the presence of such a great prop has helped him develop brilliantly - just like King helped JD2 and S Williams, and Lyons helped Morgan and Murphy

I think the real reason why so many players play abroad is the financial aspect and also the desires to play in better domestic sides.

There are certainly benefits to franchises and overall I think its the best format for rugby.

My comment was more about the lack of opportunities for up & coming players which could arise in Franchise rugby... Big time players only tend to move on out of their own agenda... but if they don't it does restrict the game time of those directly below them.

Juandre Kruger played behind Bakkies & Matfield for years before he got fed up and moved to Northampton, now they retired he finally gets his chance and is already one of the best locks in the country after only half a season as a starting player in super rugby. He had to move country to develop his game as lock is or at least was 3-4 years ago a real area of strength for SA (back then they had Russouw, Bekker, Matfield, Bakkies, Muller to choose from, all world class).

But look at Hook, Phillips and Byrne - weren't wanted by the region as they knew they had good youngsters pushing them so they weren't offered contracts and went off to France were (by some reports) their playing some of the best rugby of their careers.

Or Scarlets where we developed Morgan, JD2 and Priestland so let Lyons, King and Jones go.

That's the way it should work if you find players aren't getting a chance, you use the experienced players to develop the youngsters and when their chomping at the bit and have become very good players then you let the more experienced (and expensive) players go and start developing another youngster.

That is certainly how NZ have done it in the past .... they have been quite brutal to players like Collins, not offering them contracts whilst they still had more to offer.. but did so to aid the longterm development of NZ.

Amazing to think a player like Phillips wasn't even offered a contract.

fa0019 wrote:That is certainly how NZ have done it in the past .... they have been quite brutal to players like Collins, not offering them contracts whilst they still had more to offer.. but did so to aid the longterm development of NZ.

Amazing to think a player like Phillips wasn't even offered a contract.

It was good that he wasn't as he would have taken a huge amount of cash that could be used elsewhere by the regions and the Blues had Lloyd Williams, the Scarlets had Knoyle and G Davies, the Ospreys had Webb and the Dragons could have done with him but had Evans and so didn't need to bankrput themselves. Plus moving has refreshed Phillips - so good move all round

I can't see any Welsh Franchise win a HC though with policies like that. They have the players but if they can't find ways to keep their best they will never compete in the HC thats for sure.

I agree though... it will help development.

fa0019 wrote:That is certainly how NZ have done it in the past .... they have been quite brutal to players like Collins, not offering them contracts whilst they still had more to offer.. but did so to aid the longterm development of NZ.
Amazing to think a player like Phillips wasn't even offered a contract.

Not exactly - player salaries are tied up to representation. So if you're fit but not selected for the ABs you only get your basic Super Rugby player wage. There's quite a gap. (note there are also insurance arrangements for injured players). But Collins was told he was playing his way out of an ABs shirt.

fa0019 wrote:I can't see any Welsh Franchise win a HC though with policies like that. They have the players but if they can't find ways to keep their best they will never compete in the HC thats for sure.

I agree though... it will help development.

My point was that Hook, Phillips and Byrne weren't at their best and weren't even playing as well as the youngsters behind them - so they best solution is to ship them off, get them off your wage bill, give the exciting youngsters their chance and strengthen the team with the money saved!

True I can't see a Welsh region winning the HEC until we get our houses in order and get more money - but we are on our way, I think the Ospreys just need a little bit more strength in depth and the Scarlets could realistically compete in 2/3 seasons time if (big IF) we got some quality NWQ players in and continued brining through exciting youngsters at the rate we have been. The Blues could with a very good front row and a few shrewd signings as well, but like I say I can't see any of our teams doing it any time soon.

And if we have central contracts like a lot of people are calling for, we definitely won't be able to drop these out form players...

Smirnoffpriest wrote:But look at Hook, Phillips and Byrne - weren't wanted by the region as they knew they had good youngsters pushing them so they weren't offered contracts and went off to France were (by some reports) their playing some of the best rugby of their careers.

Or Scarlets where we developed Morgan, JD2 and Priestland so let Lyons, King and Jones go.

That's the way it should work if you find players aren't getting a chance, you use the experienced players to develop the youngsters and when their chomping at the bit and have become very good players then you let the more experienced (and expensive) players go and start developing another youngster.

Hook and Phillips anyway weren't offered contracts simply because the Ospreys couldn't offered them and also because they are away with Wales more than they are with the Ospreys! you're being a little bit naive there mate. I imagine they would have wanted to keep Byrne as well, seeing as Fussell is the first choice fullback now . Also, If the Scarlets could have afforded to keep King then you can bet that they would have kept him, i imagine that he also wanted to experience a different culture (aka a lot more money). At the end of the day you need big, experienced and quality squads! You can't win the HC with kids!

gowales wrote:

Smirnoffpriest wrote:But look at Hook, Phillips and Byrne - weren't wanted by the region as they knew they had good youngsters pushing them so they weren't offered contracts and went off to France were (by some reports) their playing some of the best rugby of their careers.

Or Scarlets where we developed Morgan, JD2 and Priestland so let Lyons, King and Jones go.

That's the way it should work if you find players aren't getting a chance, you use the experienced players to develop the youngsters and when their chomping at the bit and have become very good players then you let the more experienced (and expensive) players go and start developing another youngster.

Hook and Phillips anyway weren't offered contracts simply because the Ospreys couldn't offered them and also because they are away with Wales more than they are with the Ospreys! you're being a little bit naive there mate. I imagine they would have wanted to keep Byrne as well, seeing as Fussell is the first choice fullback now . Also, If the Scarlets could have afforded to keep King then you can bet that they would have kept him, i imagine that he also wanted to experience a different culture (aka a lot more money). At the end of the day you need big, experienced and quality squads! You can't win the HC with kids!

In all due respect if you compare the costly but the then largely ineffective "Galacticos" Hook/Byrne/Phillips scenario with King at the Scarlets its you who is a little naive, the Ospreys duo of Byrne/Phillips had come back from the Lions tour very much out of form, whilst Hook was performing worse that alot of players in the Ospreys background, contrast to that King had nurtured a number of the young west walian backs e.g. Jon Davies, Williams, Warren, Reynolds having learnt so much off the talented Kiwi that he and Nigel Davies knew that they were ready to step into his shoes.

Byrne - Barry Davies (if fit has always had always performed better), and Prydie (if managed better) had such alot of potential
Phillips - Webb and one of of the "foreign buys" were playing above Phillips
Hook - crikey lets see now............. at 10 were Biggar, Mathew Morgan, and at 12/13 were Bishop, Beck, Issacs, Bowe all with either more potential or playing better

So two very different scenarios, the Ospreys trio knew their days were numbered and were pushed out, where King was going through his own choice

Smirnoffpriest wrote:

It prob doesn't help if Castrogiovanni is played in front of him every game (though I think Cole gets a decent amont of gametime doesn't he?)

Have you noticed how few injuries he gets despite the stupid amount of games he plays every season? Not being expected to start every club hes available for is a huge positive, prop is a very demanding position. Most games he gets around 20-30 minutes if hes not starting. Different to other positions where replacements are often not used or just bought on for the sake of it at the end. Being a second choice prop at your club is arguably an advantage if youve established a place in the national side already.

flyhalffactory wrote: and Prydie (if managed better) had such alot of potential

Prydie was injured not mismanaged by the Os, he hardly played for us.

Maesteg

They agreed to Gatland providing him with a full cap (to stop the Irish from nabbing him) at what 17 with no regional experience, in my mind that was very poor management decisions from the Os especially as it was almost a certainty that Gats would have dropped him

Agreed tho that he was injured, dont you think that they could have managed him through the feeder clubs rather than farm him out to England

Not sure of all the facts but the few I have been told it appears that they have mismanaged him

flyhalffactory wrote:Maesteg

They agreed to Gatland providing him with a full cap (to stop the Irish from nabbing him) at what 17 with no regional experience, in my mind that was very poor management decisions from the Os especially as it was almost a certainty that Gats would have dropped him

Agreed tho that he was injured, dont you think that they could have managed him through the feeder clubs rather than farm him out to England

Not sure of all the facts but the few I have been told it appears that they have mismanaged him

FHF

Mate Prydie spent a lot more time over the last few yeas playing sevens or playing for Swansea than playing at Wasps. Other than that he had a very serious injury, ACL i think...

The kid is still under 20 and looking a good lad. Wales cant develop every U20s winger into the latest G North or Leigh Halfpenny. Give Prydie a year or two and he may well show his abilities.

I really don't see any mismanagement at all by anyone in his career so far.

He was spotted and rushed through the age grade system because he is ridiculously fast. Faster than any of the Welsh squad. I dont know of any Irish lineage, he was born in Porthcawl to Welsh parents as far as I know and has been living in Wales all his life.

The Irish union approached him in some capacity (unsure of the validity of that mind you, but was told by a regional feeder coach around the time)

I think you could see how fast he was Maes old pal (deffo not a Nigel Walker was he), when he played at international level and he certainly didnt outstrip any opposition, so cannae see where the rediculously fast came about. Saying that he was only 17 at the time, and he was fast enough.

flyhalffactory wrote:The Irish union approached him in some capacity (unsure of the validity of that mind you, but was told by a regional feeder coach around the time)

I think you could see how fast he was Maes old pal (deffo not a Nigel Walker was he), when he played at international level and he certainly didnt outstrip any opposition, so cannae see where the rediculously fast came about. Saying that he was only 17 at the time, and he was fast enough.

Prydie was timed at 10.98 seconds over 100m in an Ospreys training session. THats not only quickest in Wales, but I think one of the fastest in World Rugby.

http://www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/Fledgling-Tom-flying-make-history/story-12437518-detail/story.html

Wow that is fast.........

However you can only see whats in front of you... and can you say he outstripped anyone he was up against in the few games he played?, I certainly didnt see it.

Saying that it makes those two selfish "non-passes" from Hook from midfield when he (Prydie) has loads of space in his debut game even more appaling now

It raises the question
Why the heck didnt the Os keep him if he is so fast, I mean he skillful, very aware, is a big lump, and in my mind a very very good (potentially) FB

To put that 100m time into perspective, Christian Wade has 10.9s for 100m and is considered very fast.

flyhalffactory wrote:

gowales wrote:

Smirnoffpriest wrote:But look at Hook, Phillips and Byrne - weren't wanted by the region as they knew they had good youngsters pushing them so they weren't offered contracts and went off to France were (by some reports) their playing some of the best rugby of their careers.

Or Scarlets where we developed Morgan, JD2 and Priestland so let Lyons, King and Jones go.

That's the way it should work if you find players aren't getting a chance, you use the experienced players to develop the youngsters and when their chomping at the bit and have become very good players then you let the more experienced (and expensive) players go and start developing another youngster.

Hook and Phillips anyway weren't offered contracts simply because the Ospreys couldn't offered them and also because they are away with Wales more than they are with the Ospreys! you're being a little bit naive there mate. I imagine they would have wanted to keep Byrne as well, seeing as Fussell is the first choice fullback now . Also, If the Scarlets could have afforded to keep King then you can bet that they would have kept him, i imagine that he also wanted to experience a different culture (aka a lot more money). At the end of the day you need big, experienced and quality squads! You can't win the HC with kids!

In all due respect if you compare the costly but the then largely ineffective "Galacticos" Hook/Byrne/Phillips scenario with King at the Scarlets its you who is a little naive, the Ospreys duo of Byrne/Phillips had come back from the Lions tour very much out of form, whilst Hook was performing worse that alot of players in the Ospreys background, contrast to that King had nurtured a number of the young west walian backs e.g. Jon Davies, Williams, Warren, Reynolds having learnt so much off the talented Kiwi that he and Nigel Davies knew that they were ready to step into his shoes.

Byrne - Barry Davies (if fit has always had always performed better), and Prydie (if managed better) had such alot of potential
Phillips - Webb and one of of the "foreign buys" were playing above Phillips
Hook - crikey lets see now............. at 10 were Biggar, Mathew Morgan, and at 12/13 were Bishop, Beck, Issacs, Bowe all with either more potential or playing better

So two very different scenarios, the Ospreys trio knew their days were numbered and were pushed out, where King was going through his own choice

Nope the Ospreys would have kept Hook and Phillips, probably not Byrne though. They simply couldn't afford them. Stick to Scottish rugby

flyhalffactory wrote:Wow that is fast.........

However you can only see whats in front of you... and can you say he outstripped anyone he was up against in the few games he played?, I certainly didnt see it.

Saying that it makes those two selfish "non-passes" from Hook from midfield when he (Prydie) has loads of space in his debut game even more appaling now

It raises the question
Why the heck didnt the Os keep him if he is so fast, I mean he skillful, very aware, is a big lump, and in my mind a very very good (potentially) FB

You really don't like Hook do you. Did he sleep with your wife or something?

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Smirnoffpriest wrote:

It prob doesn't help if Castrogiovanni is played in front of him every game (though I think Cole gets a decent amont of gametime doesn't he?)

Have you noticed how few injuries he gets despite the stupid amount of games he plays every season? Not being expected to start every club hes available for is a huge positive, prop is a very demanding position. Most games he gets around 20-30 minutes if hes not starting. Different to other positions where replacements are often not used or just bought on for the sake of it at the end. Being a second choice prop at your club is arguably an advantage if youve established a place in the national side already.

PSW - I was responding to somebody else with that quote - personally I haven't looked into Cole's situation - but I believe (off the top of my head and maybe wrong) that he starts a decent amount of games and like you say gets 20-30mins in the other games. I'd agree that Cole if probably developing and benefiting hugely from playing behind Castro

The Ospreys through their statements (though I suppose you could claim that "of course they would say that) have said "that the Glacitcos era has failed" and that "they'd need to concentrate on the youth coming through the ranks and being developed in the area". And it would seem that this aimed at the off form Lions stars like Hook, Phillips and Byrne as well as the NZ old timers like Collins and Holah - considering that they wanted to give youth it's head and had players like Tupric, Webb and Beck playing very well and looking very promising while Hook, Phillips and Byrne weren't doing the business and were away with Wales for half the season. I agree that Fussel isn't the best FB but if you've got a cheap Fussel not playing well it seems slightly better than having an expensive Byrne not playing well & a cheap Fussel.

gowales wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:Wow that is fast.........

However you can only see whats in front of you... and can you say he outstripped anyone he was up against in the few games he played?, I certainly didnt see it.

Saying that it makes those two selfish "non-passes" from Hook from midfield when he (Prydie) has loads of space in his debut game even more appaling now

It raises the question
Why the heck didnt the Os keep him if he is so fast, I mean he skillful, very aware, is a big lump, and in my mind a very very good (potentially) FB

You really don't like Hook do you. Did he sleep with your wife or something?

Now gowales if you cant contribute on a mature level it would be best if you went back to school. I commented on Maestegs statement that Prydie was damn fast and if you remember back to young Toms debut he had acres of space on the outside of Hook on two occasions all it took was a bit of awareness and a simple pass, and he would have had a dpouble try debut.

So then lad, if you can't contribute with a decent reply on a grown up level, maybe you should keep quiet................. and let the decent posters like Maesteg continue

By the way gowales I recently saw Hook have a bloody fantastic game for Perpignan in France, and I stated that on this forum, so I always give credit where credit is due, and vice versa.

flyhalffactory wrote:

gowales wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:Wow that is fast.........

However you can only see whats in front of you... and can you say he outstripped anyone he was up against in the few games he played?, I certainly didnt see it.

Saying that it makes those two selfish "non-passes" from Hook from midfield when he (Prydie) has loads of space in his debut game even more appaling now

It raises the question
Why the heck didnt the Os keep him if he is so fast, I mean he skillful, very aware, is a big lump, and in my mind a very very good (potentially) FB

You really don't like Hook do you. Did he sleep with your wife or something?

Now gowales if you cant contribute on a mature level it would be best if you went back to school. I commented on Maestegs statement that Prydie was damn fast and if you remember back to young Toms debut he had acres of space on the outside of Hook on two occasions all it took was a bit of awareness and a simple pass, and he would have had a dpouble try debut.

So then lad, if you can't contribute with a decent reply on a grown up level, maybe you should keep quiet................. and let the decent posters like Maesteg continue

By the way gowales I recently saw Hook have a bloody fantastic game for Perpignan in France, and I stated that on this forum, so I always give credit where credit is due, and vice versa.

He did so GW

I printed it and posted it to Stephen Jones, who wrote back very upset... FHF I think you owe Mr Jones a few encouraging words of your best pros. He felt like his number 1 fan had deserted him for a younger model 10.

Hope alls well mate Best Wishes..

flyhalffactory wrote:The Irish union approached him in some capacity (unsure of the validity of that mind you, but was told by a regional feeder coach around the time)

I think you could see how fast he was Maes old pal (deffo not a Nigel Walker was he), when he played at international level and he certainly didnt outstrip any opposition, so cannae see where the rediculously fast came about. Saying that he was only 17 at the time, and he was fast enough.

Tom was an International Sprinter right through the age groups in Wales.

Interestingly Kristian Phillips is still UK U13 100m record holder !!!!!

I kid you not. Born on the 2nd of September 1990, on 3rd July 2003 at a league meeting in Cardiff Kristian ran 11.7 seconds for the 100 metres whilst 12 yrs old. To give you an idea, Mark Lewis-Francis's time at that age is 12.14.

The link to the UK All-Time List is here:
www.gbrathletics.com/uk/mu13...

I've also noted he is the Welsh U-11 200m record holder at 29.2 Seconds and also won age-groups for Shot-Putt at U-13 !!! Interesting article in the Sunday Times below about his unbelievable rugby talents at that age here, where a time of 11.65 is quoted as his record. He must have been a freak to play against at that age being the fastest and one of the strongest in the Country:

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/ne...

Anyway, thought that might be interesting to somebody.

To be clear, the Ospreys is kinda my region, but they hardly developed Leigh Halfpenny ?! Holley and Jonners dont have a great record when you consider the takent GarethnOwen also had. So will be interested to see how Prydie and Phillips do now they have departed, both still incredibly young,

flyhalffactory wrote:

gowales wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:Wow that is fast.........

However you can only see whats in front of you... and can you say he outstripped anyone he was up against in the few games he played?, I certainly didnt see it.

Saying that it makes those two selfish "non-passes" from Hook from midfield when he (Prydie) has loads of space in his debut game even more appaling now

It raises the question
Why the heck didnt the Os keep him if he is so fast, I mean he skillful, very aware, is a big lump, and in my mind a very very good (potentially) FB

You really don't like Hook do you. Did he sleep with your wife or something?

Now gowales if you cant contribute on a mature level it would be best if you went back to school. I commented on Maestegs statement that Prydie was damn fast and if you remember back to young Toms debut he had acres of space on the outside of Hook on two occasions all it took was a bit of awareness and a simple pass, and he would have had a dpouble try debut.

So then lad, if you can't contribute with a decent reply on a grown up level, maybe you should keep quiet................. and let the decent posters like Maesteg continue

By the way gowales I recently saw Hook have a bloody fantastic game for Perpignan in France, and I stated that on this forum, so I always give credit where credit is due, and vice versa.

Oh shut up will you self rightcheous so and so