Which is more disliked London Welsh Or Bankers Or Politicians

First topic message reminder :

Which is more disliked London Welsh Or Bankers Or Politicians?

Please try and have an opinion!

Now i'm welsh. And proud. And have very little time for all things English in general. But Land of Hope and Glory? WHAT a fecking song - makes the hairs on my palms stand up. Can't believe its only ever heard at the fecking proms and the commonwealth games - should definitely be Englands's anthem IMO

good man

HERSH wrote:Please try and have an opinion!

Not aimed at you Hersh, but at the pointless thread instead

Just a coincidence that i've posted it under your post in two different threads!

beshocked wrote:Wasps have 15 NEQ in their squad as things stand.

London Irish - 19 NEQ in their squad out of 32.

Saracens - 16 NEQs in the squad out of 41

Exeter - 15 NEQs in the squad (1 extra if you include Budgen) out of 40.

Sale Sharks - 15 NEQ in the squad out of 33.

Looks like the main culprits are London Irish.

Why would you include Budgie, beshocked - he is English qualified by residency? I make it only 12 - Camacho, Mieres, Mitchell, Mumm, Naqer, Polu, Sestaret, Shoemark, Tatupu, Tui, White & Whitten - who am I missing?

beshocked wrote:Wasps have 15 NEQ in their squad as things stand.

London Irish - 19 NEQ in their squad out of 32.

Saracens - 16 NEQs in the squad out of 41

Exeter - 15 NEQs in the squad (1 extra if you include Budgen) out of 40.

Sale Sharks - 15 NEQ in the squad out of 33.

Looks like the main culprits are London Irish.

Do you have the numbers for the rest? And out of interest how many would be, as the Irish put it, project players?

None of them are project players. 100% of the NEQ are NEQ. That's all that matters.

Is Land of Hope and Glory English? I'd rather a minute of silence (or boos if playing in Wales).

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

beshocked wrote:Wasps have 15 NEQ in their squad as things stand.

London Irish - 19 NEQ in their squad out of 32.

Saracens - 16 NEQs in the squad out of 41

Exeter - 15 NEQs in the squad (1 extra if you include Budgen) out of 40.

Sale Sharks - 15 NEQ in the squad out of 33.

Looks like the main culprits are London Irish.

Why would you include Budgie, beshocked - he is English qualified by residency? I make it only 12 - Camacho, Mieres, Mitchell, Mumm, Naqer, Polu, Sestaret, Shoemark, Tatupu, Tui, White & Whitten - who am I missing?

Gareth Steenson and Tommy Hayes - both Irishman. Myles Dorrian - an Australian too. Phil Dollman - the Welshman. That's 4 more.

It's around 15-16.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

beshocked wrote:Wasps have 15 NEQ in their squad as things stand.

London Irish - 19 NEQ in their squad out of 32.

Saracens - 16 NEQs in the squad out of 41

Exeter - 15 NEQs in the squad (1 extra if you include Budgen) out of 40.

Sale Sharks - 15 NEQ in the squad out of 33.

Looks like the main culprits are London Irish.

Do you have the numbers for the rest? And out of interest how many would be, as the Irish put it, project players?

Just used wiki. It's surprisingly accurate actually.

beshocked wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

beshocked wrote:Wasps have 15 NEQ in their squad as things stand.

London Irish - 19 NEQ in their squad out of 32.

Saracens - 16 NEQs in the squad out of 41

Exeter - 15 NEQs in the squad (1 extra if you include Budgen) out of 40.

Sale Sharks - 15 NEQ in the squad out of 33.

Looks like the main culprits are London Irish.

Why would you include Budgie, beshocked - he is English qualified by residency? I make it only 12 - Camacho, Mieres, Mitchell, Mumm, Naqer, Polu, Sestaret, Shoemark, Tatupu, Tui, White & Whitten - who am I missing?

Gareth Steenson and Tommy Hayes - both Irishman. Myles Dorrian - an Australian too. Phil Dollman - the Welshman. Sireli Naqelevuki - Fijian. That's 5 more.

Steenson, Hayes, Dorrian and Dollman are all English-qualified via residency, and I had Sireli in my list as 'Naqer'

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

beshocked wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

beshocked wrote:Wasps have 15 NEQ in their squad as things stand.

London Irish - 19 NEQ in their squad out of 32.

Saracens - 16 NEQs in the squad out of 41

Exeter - 15 NEQs in the squad (1 extra if you include Budgen) out of 40.

Sale Sharks - 15 NEQ in the squad out of 33.

Looks like the main culprits are London Irish.

Why would you include Budgie, beshocked - he is English qualified by residency? I make it only 12 - Camacho, Mieres, Mitchell, Mumm, Naqer, Polu, Sestaret, Shoemark, Tatupu, Tui, White & Whitten - who am I missing?

Gareth Steenson and Tommy Hayes - both Irishman. Myles Dorrian - an Australian too. Phil Dollman - the Welshman. Sireli Naqelevuki - Fijian. That's 5 more.

Steenson, Hayes, Dorrian and Dollman are all English-qualified via residency, and I had Sireli in my list as 'Naqer'

Beat me to it As!

Beshocked & Hammer - as Asbo just pointed out there are a number of players that are viewed as non-english that are now EQ. Dom Day left the Scarlets and signed for Bath, to most he is another NEQ, yet he is EQ. Cai Griffiths is another. Then there are the lads who have lived in England long enough to be qualified, even if they are not English (Botha, Waldrum etc).

I heard somewhere there is a limit of 8 NEQ per match day 23. Is that true?

No. There is a 2 player limit on foreign players in a match day squad. But this can't include EU or PI or SA players (or anyone with the right passport). There is extra funding from the RFU based on the number of English players in the squad but not limit on NEQ

If someone gains qualification they are EQ. Before that they are NEQ. I don't view the NEQ as different if they CAN gain EQ at some point. Nor do I view the ones who are EQ due to residency as different.

It's only in Wales and Ireland that they are treated as different.

In my opinion those guys aren't English. They will never play for England.

In a way they aren't qualified for England because they aren't good enough.

Botha and Waldrom are different because they have made the grade. They have been good enough to be picked for England.

Obviously part of a club's job is to contribute to England, with Hayes,Dorrian,,Dollman and Steenson taking spots it's not good.

If you don't want to count these foreigners it's fine but you're only fooling yourself.

There are lots of English born and bred players that will never be good enough. Are they not English? Really strange way of looking at things.

beshocked wrote:In my opinion those guys aren't English. They will never play for England.

In a way they aren't qualified for England because they aren't good enough.

Botha and Waldrom are different because they have made the grade. They have been good enough to be picked for England.

Obviously part of a club's job is to contribute to England, with Hayes,Dorrian,,Dollman and Steenson taking spots it's not good.

If you don't want to count these foreigners it's fine but you're only fooling yourself.

I'm sorry, you said 'Botha' and 'made the grade' in the same sentence there...

He's won an AP have you Bushys? He's one of the top locks in the country - tells you something about the England strength in depth of the 2nd row!


HammerofThunor you could say mediocre English players are as much of a blocker as average foreign players.

If I had the choice between a top quality foreign player in my side or an English journeyman I would probably take the top quality foreigner. He'll be able to teach so much more to the youngsters.

Bushys wrote:

beshocked wrote:In my opinion those guys aren't English. They will never play for England.

In a way they aren't qualified for England because they aren't good enough.

Botha and Waldrom are different because they have made the grade. They have been good enough to be picked for England.

Obviously part of a club's job is to contribute to England, with Hayes, Dorrian, Dollman and Steenson taking spots it's not good.

If you don't want to count these foreigners it's fine but you're only fooling yourself.

I'm sorry, you said 'Botha' and 'made the grade' in the same sentence there...

I kind of agree with Bushys' sentiment here, and I'm not even going to debate Thomas the Tank. These lads may never play for England cos they're not good enough, but then apply that rule to English-born players that also are not good enough and see where you get then - you can't have your cake and eat it on this one, beshocked? Exe have the players that they have because of where we've come from (promising English players more than two seasons ago would likely have moved on to get the opportunity of Prem exposure (ie Kvesic or Mills) that Chiefs could not offer in the Championship), not to mention that we're contributing pretty healthily at both U20 and U18 level in the last couple of years. So, no I don't believe I am fooling myself, rather you are shifting the goalposts

HammerofThunor wrote:There are lots of English born and bred players that will never be good enough. Are they not English? Really strange way of looking at things.

+1

My point was that you can't say EQ don't count as EQ, just because they're Poopie. Regardless of whether they're residency qualified or not. Pro rugby isn't just about propping up international rugby.

HammerofThunor wrote:My point was that you can't say EQ don't count as EQ, just because they're Poopie. Regardless of whether they're residency qualified or not. Pro rugby isn't just about propping up international rugby.

+1

HammerofThunor wrote:No. There is a 2 player limit on foreign players in a match day squad. But this can't include EU or PI or SA players (or anyone with the right passport). There is extra funding from the RFU based on the number of English players in the squad but not limit on NEQ

If someone gains qualification they are EQ. Before that they are NEQ. I don't view the NEQ as different if they CAN gain EQ at some point. Nor do I view the ones who are EQ due to residency as different.

It's only in Wales and Ireland that they are treated as different.

When I read that first time I thought, that ain't true!! I forgot you got to be careful with the Kolpak (is that it) rules etc.

I must be honest I see it as you are either Not-Qualified or Qualified, however I struggle to see a player who has just Qualified on residency the same as a player who has been qualifed on residency for far longer. If that makes any sense.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:No. There is a 2 player limit on foreign players in a match day squad. But this can't include EU or PI or SA players (or anyone with the right passport). There is extra funding from the RFU based on the number of English players in the squad but not limit on NEQ

If someone gains qualification they are EQ. Before that they are NEQ. I don't view the NEQ as different if they CAN gain EQ at some point. Nor do I view the ones who are EQ due to residency as different.

It's only in Wales and Ireland that they are treated as different.

When I read that first time I thought, that ain't true!! I forgot you got to be careful with the Kolpak (is that it) rules etc.

I must be honest I see it as you are either Not-Qualified or Qualified, however I struggle to see a player who has just Qualified on residency the same as a player who has been qualifed on residency for far longer. If that makes any sense.

Spidey, it does make sense, but theoretically they are one and the same

As, is it one or two player limit? I know you guys got burnt with it because you had a Fijian born player with an Australian passport (is that right?).

I understand what you mean Spiderman but I would say that I see no difference whatsoever between a guy that is NEQ but might one day and one that will never be. That's the project player thing, if they CAN gain residency qualification then they are somehow different. An idea that I see as encouraging the teams to bring in players for residency qualification.

HammerofThunor wrote:As, is it one or two player limit? I know you guys got burnt with it because you had a Fijian born player with an Australian passport (is that right?).

I understand what you mean Spiderman but I would say that I see no difference whatsoever between a guy that is NEQ but might one day and one that will never be. That's the project player thing, if they CAN gain residency qualification then they are somehow different. An idea that I see as encouraging the teams to bring in players for residency qualification.

Thunor, two player limit, and you are absolutely right - Nemani Nadolo was registered on his Oz passport rather than his Fijian one!

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

beshocked wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

beshocked wrote:Wasps have 15 NEQ in their squad as things stand.

London Irish - 19 NEQ in their squad out of 32.

Saracens - 16 NEQs in the squad out of 41

Exeter - 15 NEQs in the squad (1 extra if you include Budgen) out of 40.

Sale Sharks - 15 NEQ in the squad out of 33.

Looks like the main culprits are London Irish.

Why would you include Budgie, beshocked - he is English qualified by residency? I make it only 12 - Camacho, Mieres, Mitchell, Mumm, Naqer, Polu, Sestaret, Shoemark, Tatupu, Tui, White & Whitten - who am I missing?

Gareth Steenson and Tommy Hayes - both Irishman. Myles Dorrian - an Australian too. Phil Dollman - the Welshman. Sireli Naqelevuki - Fijian. That's 5 more.

Steenson, Hayes, Dorrian and Dollman are all English-qualified via residency, and I had Sireli in my list as 'Naqer'

I'm pretty sure a Maori cap doesn't tie a player to NZ, and big H will have served his 3 years by now, so strike Tui from the NEQ list.

Good point, Dub - I recall that Ireland were looking into the O'Tui connection as they struggled for props last year, so he must be non-NZ-tied!

Maori cap doesn't as the Junior All Blacks are the the kiwi second team (and don't really play any games anymore).

Thunor - Project players count as NWQ in Wales, we are allowed 8 NWQ, but only 6 capped, but if we had 8 that were uncapped that would be our limit used up, until they qualified.

But you allow 2 players that are uncapped. So they're not the same as NWQ (that are already capped) which is limited to 6.

Yeah, re-reading my post, I guess that is special treatment

beshocked wrote:He's won an AP have you Bushys? He's one of the top locks in the country - tells you something about the England strength in depth of the 2nd row!

HammerofThunor you could say mediocre English players are as much of a blocker as average foreign players.

If I had the choice between a top quality foreign player in my side or an English journeyman I would probably take the top quality foreigner. He'll be able to teach so much more to the youngsters.

Sorry, thats completely irrelevant in the context of this discussion, which is centered at international level. Botha has proven to be a liability at lock for England, even Lancaster appears to think so, having dropped him from the starting XV in te 3rd test against SA. He might be a good club player, but he's out of his depth at international level. I would also dispute tht he's one of the top locks in the country, but thats opinion.

beshocked wrote:In my opinion those guys aren't English. They will never play for England.

In a way they aren't qualified for England because they aren't good enough.

Botha and Waldrom are different because they have made the grade. They have been good enough to be picked for England.

Obviously part of a club's job is to contribute to England, with Hayes,Dorrian,,Dollman and Steenson taking spots it's not good.

If you don't want to count these foreigners it's fine but you're only fooling yourself.

This is complete bull. So you're only allowed English players that are good enough to make the England squad? What's the point of having an academy system at all then, as so few of them go on to get a full time contract and fewer still then a full England cap.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with Exeter's recruitment policy and the way the club is run. Give it 3 years and you'll see the fruits of it with Slade, Nowell, Cowan-Dickie all coming through.

Botha is a good club player at best, it isn't a show of the depth of strength that England have in this position, rather the lack of talent available, with Palmer, Deacon and previously Shaw on the way out, Lawes injury prone and the rest of the other pretenders lacking exposure at the top level, leaving Parling plus one other.

Hence why Launchbury, Slater, Kitchener and Clark were all called up, potentially a bit earlier than we would have liked, but because we need to develop them.

Botha isn't even one of the best locks in his team and I think he'll struggle to start ahead of Hargreaves and Borthwick next season.

For what it is worth, i'd have locks something like this

Parling
Lawes
Deacon
Palmer

With the following on the edge, with something to prove to make the step up

Attwood
Robson

With these youngsters coming up quick, pushing hard

Launchbury
Slater
Kitchener

Bathite wrote:Botha is a good club player at best, it isn't a show of the depth of strength that England have in this position, rather the lack of talent available, with Palmer, Deacon and previously Shaw on the way out, Lawes injury prone and the rest of the other pretenders lacking exposure at the top level, leaving Parling plus one other.

Hence why Launchbury, Slater, Kitchener and Clark were all called up, potentially a bit earlier than we would have liked, but because we need to develop them.

Botha isn't even one of the best locks in his team and I think he'll struggle to start ahead of Hargreaves and Borthwick next season.

For what it is worth, i'd have locks something like this

Parling
Lawes
Deacon
Palmer

With the following on the edge, with something to prove to make the step up

Attwood
Robson

With these youngsters coming up quick, pushing hard

Launchbury
Slater
Kitchener

+1

Bathite sigh there is a big difference between a Waldrom and a Dollman.

I have been very critical of Waldrom but there's no doubt he adds to the AP. He makes an impact. The likes of Dollman add very little.

You don't seem to understand sarcasm do you?

England do not have strength in depth at locks.

Botha is 1st choice lock for Saracens as it stands. Next season he might not be but that's then. He's at least made it to international level whether you believe he deserves it or not.

Do you think Steenson is even close for example?

Also at least we talk about Botha - you look at some players and go - whose that?


Ok I'll scrutinise each of your choices one by one.

Parling - shown nothing special so far.

Lawes - injured,unavailable

Deacon - injured,unavailable

Palmer - ageing lock, only there because there's no one else.



Attwood - what's he done recently? Overrated and overshadowed by Caldwell at Bath.

Robson - is he physical enough? Same problems as Parling.

Launchbury - isn't he injured too?

Slater - what's he done?

Kitchener - see Slater.

Bushys the English locks in South Africa hardly covered themselves in glory.

I see the 2nd row as a big weakness.


I agree in 3 years I think Exeter will sort themselves out. Don't make out that Exeter's high foreign count is all rosy whereas in comparison other clubs are demonised despite having similar numbers.

beshocked wrote:I agree in 3 years I think Exeter will sort themselves out. Don't make out that Exeter's high foreign count is all rosy whereas in comparison other clubs are demonised despite having similar numbers.

Sigh, Exeter doesn't have a "high foreign count", that is the whole point! Nobody demonised any other clubs relative to Exeter either other than you (see below)!

beshocked wrote:Wasps have 15 NEQ in their squad as things stand.

London Irish - 19 NEQ in their squad out of 32.

Saracens - 16 NEQs in the squad out of 41

Exeter - 15 NEQs in the squad (1 extra if you include Budgen) out of 40.

Sale Sharks - 15 NEQ in the squad out of 33.

Looks like the main culprits are London Irish.

beshocked wrote:Bathite sigh there is a big difference between a Waldrom and a Dollman.

I have been very critical of Waldrom but there's no doubt he adds to the AP. He makes an impact. The likes of Dollman add very little.

You don't seem to understand sarcasm do you?

England do not have strength in depth at locks.

Botha is 1st choice lock for Saracens as it stands. Next season he might not be but that's then. He's at least made it to international level whether you believe he deserves it or not.

Do you think Steenson is even close for example?

Also at least we talk about Botha - you look at some players and go - whose that?


Ok I'll scrutinise each of your choices one by one.

Parling - shown nothing special so far.

Lawes - injured,unavailable

Deacon - injured,unavailable

Palmer - ageing lock, only there because there's no one else.



Attwood - what's he done recently? Overrated and overshadowed by Caldwell at Bath.

Robson - is he physical enough? Same problems as Parling.

Launchbury - isn't he injured too?

Slater - what's he done?

Kitchener - see Slater.

Bushys the English locks in South Africa hardly covered themselves in glory.
I see the 2nd row as a big weakness.


I agree in 3 years I think Exeter will sort themselves out. Don't make out that Exeter's high foreign count is all rosy whereas in comparison other clubs are demonised despite having similar numbers.

No they didn't, but that doesn't have anything to do with what you said (presumably in his defence) that he's won an AP, because this article is about international level play.

Well, so what? I tend to think Saracens won despite him, not because of him.

By the way I like Exeter. I know any criticism of everyone's 2nd favourite AP club is always going to be met with brimstone and fire.

I also acknowledge that my own club are far from perfect. Every man and his dog knows it. It's simply because of our own inbuilt bias that we find it difficult to see other's point of view.

Strictly the likes of Dorrian,Steenson are English qualified but does that mean everything is rosy then? You could arguably count them as English but they are not are they?

I want to see more English clubs giving more game time to young guns from the academy. Exeter have a good academy so use it. I want to see more of Saracen's youngsters too.

I think both clubs and others have too many foreigners.

The difficulty is where do you draw the line?

beshocked wrote:By the way I like Exeter. I know any criticism of everyone's 2nd favourite AP club is always going to be met with brimstone and fire.

I also acknowledge that my own club are far from perfect. Every man and his dog knows it. It's simply because of our own inbuilt bias that we find it difficult to see other's point of view.

Strictly the likes of Dorrian,Steenson are English qualified but does that mean everything is rosy then? You could arguably count them as English but they are not are they?

I want to see more English clubs giving more game time to young guns from the academy. Exeter have a good academy so use it. I want to see more of Saracen's youngsters too.

I think both clubs and others have too many foreigners.

The difficulty is where do you draw the line?

beshocked, I don't think anyone has claimed that the likes of Dorrian, Steenson, Hayes, Dolman et al are English, just that they are English-qualified. Of course it would be great for the youngsters at Exe to get loads of game time, and I have no doubt that Rob Baxter will introduce them at the appropriate time when they are ready

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

beshocked wrote:I agree in 3 years I think Exeter will sort themselves out. Don't make out that Exeter's high foreign count is all rosy whereas in comparison other clubs are demonised despite having similar numbers.

Sigh, Exeter doesn't have a "high foreign count", that is the whole point! Nobody demonised any other clubs relative to Exeter either other than you (see below)!

beshocked wrote:Wasps have 15 NEQ in their squad as things stand.

London Irish - 19 NEQ in their squad out of 32.

Saracens - 16 NEQs in the squad out of 41

Exeter - 15 NEQs in the squad (1 extra if you include Budgen) out of 40.

Sale Sharks - 15 NEQ in the squad out of 33.

Looks like the main culprits are London Irish.

15 foreigners (I changed it from NEQ to include the players I mentioned) sounds quite a lot to me! No I don't see the likes of Dorrian etc as English. Neither do I see Botha.

I mentioned in the AP win because Botha has actually done something of note. Last season was his worst in a Saracens shirt but still could have been worse. Botha hasn't shone at international level but he's not been disastrously bad. He just gets panned more than others because he's an easy target - South African,not a spring chicken and in the squad because there's a lack of any other decent competition. There's outcry from England fans for an enforcer which England don't have.

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

beshocked wrote:By the way I like Exeter. I know any criticism of everyone's 2nd favourite AP club is always going to be met with brimstone and fire.

I also acknowledge that my own club are far from perfect. Every man and his dog knows it. It's simply because of our own inbuilt bias that we find it difficult to see other's point of view.

Strictly the likes of Dorrian,Steenson are English qualified but does that mean everything is rosy then? You could arguably count them as English but they are not are they?

I want to see more English clubs giving more game time to young guns from the academy. Exeter have a good academy so use it. I want to see more of Saracen's youngsters too.

I think both clubs and others have too many foreigners.

The difficulty is where do you draw the line?

beshocked, I don't think anyone has claimed that the likes of Dorrian, Steenson, Hayes, Dolman et al are English, just that they are English-qualified. Of course it would be great for the youngsters at Exe to get loads of game time, and I have no doubt that Rob Baxter will introduce them at the appropriate time when they are ready

What do they add though? Don't paper over the cracks and flaws. I defend my club and their players ferociously but I also acknowledge their flaws. Shame others cannot or refuse to do the same.

beshocked wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

beshocked wrote:By the way I like Exeter. I know any criticism of everyone's 2nd favourite AP club is always going to be met with brimstone and fire.

I also acknowledge that my own club are far from perfect. Every man and his dog knows it. It's simply because of our own inbuilt bias that we find it difficult to see other's point of view.

Strictly the likes of Dorrian,Steenson are English qualified but does that mean everything is rosy then? You could arguably count them as English but they are not are they?

I want to see more English clubs giving more game time to young guns from the academy. Exeter have a good academy so use it. I want to see more of Saracen's youngsters too.

I think both clubs and others have too many foreigners.

The difficulty is where do you draw the line?

beshocked, I don't think anyone has claimed that the likes of Dorrian, Steenson, Hayes, Dolman et al are English, just that they are English-qualified. Of course it would be great for the youngsters at Exe to get loads of game time, and I have no doubt that Rob Baxter will introduce them at the appropriate time when they are ready

What do they add though? Don't paper over the cracks and flaws. I defend my club and their players ferociously but I also acknowledge their flaws. Shame others cannot or refuse to do the same.

What do they add? They are good club players, similar to those that you'll find at all English prem clubs? Not quite sure why you think that makes them "cracks and flaws"? I have to say I normally follow your logic easily, but you've got me absolutely lost on this one - I really have no idea what point you are trying to make? This all came about simply because the original figures that you quoted were inaccurate and I tried to correct them for you! End of story

beshocked wrote:Bathite sigh there is a big difference between a Waldrom and a Dollman.

I have been very critical of Waldrom but there's no doubt he adds to the AP. He makes an impact. The likes of Dollman add very little.

You don't seem to understand sarcasm do you?

England do not have strength in depth at locks.

Botha is 1st choice lock for Saracens as it stands. Next season he might not be but that's then. He's at least made it to international level whether you believe he deserves it or not.

Do you think Steenson is even close for example?

Also at least we talk about Botha - you look at some players and go - whose that?


Ok I'll scrutinise each of your choices one by one.

Parling - shown nothing special so far.

Lawes - injured,unavailable

Deacon - injured,unavailable

Palmer - ageing lock, only there because there's no one else.



Attwood - what's he done recently? Overrated and overshadowed by Caldwell at Bath.

Robson - is he physical enough? Same problems as Parling.

Launchbury - isn't he injured too?

Slater - what's he done?

Kitchener - see Slater.

Bushys the English locks in South Africa hardly covered themselves in glory.

I see the 2nd row as a big weakness.


I agree in 3 years I think Exeter will sort themselves out. Don't make out that Exeter's high foreign count is all rosy whereas in comparison other clubs are demonised despite having similar numbers.

Struggled to take anything seriously after your Parling comment.

Slater - what's he done? Well he's won an AP medal, so by your logic he is amazing, but so has Parling and Kitchener. Oh hang on, we actually now have 3 amazing locks, case close

You've missed out Tom Johnson - he was born in Germany. Kai Horstmann, our new recruit from Woos has a Saxon cap but is Zim born (as is Academy back row Dave Ewers, ). The Cowan-Dickie's and Jack Nowell are all Truro born, and we all know that Cornwall is a completely different country (and Truro is about the same distance from Exeter as Dollman's birthplace).

We even had a lad called Ben Spencer in the academy not so long ago, and he came from Oop North!

beshocked wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

beshocked wrote:By the way I like Exeter. I know any criticism of everyone's 2nd favourite AP club is always going to be met with brimstone and fire.

I also acknowledge that my own club are far from perfect. Every man and his dog knows it. It's simply because of our own inbuilt bias that we find it difficult to see other's point of view.

Strictly the likes of Dorrian,Steenson are English qualified but does that mean everything is rosy then? You could arguably count them as English but they are not are they?

I want to see more English clubs giving more game time to young guns from the academy. Exeter have a good academy so use it. I want to see more of Saracen's youngsters too.

I think both clubs and others have too many foreigners.

The difficulty is where do you draw the line?

beshocked, I don't think anyone has claimed that the likes of Dorrian, Steenson, Hayes, Dolman et al are English, just that they are English-qualified. Of course it would be great for the youngsters at Exe to get loads of game time, and I have no doubt that Rob Baxter will introduce them at the appropriate time when they are ready

What do they add though? Don't paper over the cracks and flaws. I defend my club and their players ferociously but I also acknowledge their flaws. Shame others cannot or refuse to do the same.

What do they add? Umm, they are professional players playing in a club. So what if they won't play international rugby, for England or another country, only a handful will be luckily enough to do so. Struggling to see how you think a club should be full of players all capable of playing for their country, that's a dreamworld, unless you go to the Italy model and only have 2 clubs!

The more I read, the more I have to say, but there simply isn't enough time to address the c rap chatted here!

A rugby clubs primary aim is to win games, not to produce England internationals. They run like a business in order to do this. Like a business, they aim to get the best employees together, whilst managing their overheads (in this case done by the salary cap).