My Welsh Team for the Argentina game if I was the coach...

First topic message reminder :

15: Halfpenny
14: Cuthbert
13: J Davies
12: Beck
11: North
10: Biggar
9: Gareth Davies
8: Faletau
7: Tipuric
6: Warburton
5: I Evans
4: AW Jones
3: Jarvis
2: Rees
1: Paul James

Ha ha ha...! Ill modify that I guess...!

45 minutes until all is revealed...

Keep it in your pants, Maes.

What happened to the good old 606 where there was a bloke (sure he was really Robbie McBryde) that used to 'leak' the Welsh, and Scarlets, sides a good day or so early?

This is the team I've been given as an 'inside line':

15-9 Halfers, North, Davies, Roberts, Cuffbert, Priest, Big Mike
1-8 Jarvis, Hibbard, James, Evans, AW Jones, Shingler, Warburton (c) Faletau.

I know the team and replacements but I've been warned and therefore have intentionally mislead you with my predictions

There will be a Glynneath lad in the 22 however

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:This is the team I've been given as an 'inside line':

15-9 Halfers, North, Davies, Roberts, Cuffbert, Priest, Big Mike
1-8 Jarvis, Hibbard, James, Evans, AW Jones, Shingler, Warburton (c) Faletau.

No way

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:This is the team I've been given as an 'inside line':

15-9 Halfers, North, Davies, Roberts, Cuffbert, Priest, Big Mike
1-8 Jarvis, Hibbard, James, Evans, AW Jones, Shingler, Warburton (c) Faletau.

See that was more or less what I was after, so I can tell people a few mins in advance and seem like i know my stuff. Cheers

Don't blame me if it's wrong!

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:This is the team I've been given as an 'inside line':

15-9 Halfers, North, Davies, Roberts, Cuffbert, Priest, Big Mike
1-8 Jarvis, Hibbard, James, Evans, AW Jones, Shingler, Warburton (c) Faletau.

See that was more or less what I was after, so I can tell people a few mins in advance and seem like i know my stuff. Cheers

Thats what i heard too

maestegmafia wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:This is the team I've been given as an 'inside line':

15-9 Halfers, North, Davies, Roberts, Cuffbert, Priest, Big Mike
1-8 Jarvis, Hibbard, James, Evans, AW Jones, Shingler, Warburton (c) Faletau.

See that was more or less what I was after, so I can tell people a few mins in advance and seem like i know my stuff. Cheers

Thats what i heard too

Well I wont bother asking you lot for this weeks lottery numbers...

MajorRoadWorks wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:This is the team I've been given as an 'inside line':

15-9 Halfers, North, Davies, Roberts, Cuffbert, Priest, Big Mike
1-8 Jarvis, Hibbard, James, Evans, AW Jones, Shingler, Warburton (c) Faletau.

See that was more or less what I was after, so I can tell people a few mins in advance and seem like i know my stuff. Cheers

Thats what i heard too

Well I wont bother asking you lot for this weeks lottery numbers...

Do you think the squad was picked by random?

maestegmafia wrote:

MajorRoadWorks wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:This is the team I've been given as an 'inside line':

15-9 Halfers, North, Davies, Roberts, Cuffbert, Priest, Big Mike
1-8 Jarvis, Hibbard, James, Evans, AW Jones, Shingler, Warburton (c) Faletau.

See that was more or less what I was after, so I can tell people a few mins in advance and seem like i know my stuff. Cheers

Thats what i heard too

Well I wont bother asking you lot for this weeks lottery numbers...

Do you think the squad was picked by random?

There seem to be a few people who would have you believe that they do.

The selection is not based on form, what's new.

glamorganalun wrote:The selection is not based on form, what's new.

+ 1.

Morgannwg wrote:

glamorganalun wrote:The selection is not based on form, what's new.

+ 1.

I have to disagree here - The team is picked on the form shown in Poland which of course is the most recent

What team did they play in Poland, I suspect they only played with themselves as there was nothing else to do

We've heard this kind of thing before: 'so-and-so has been selected because he impressed in training'. Remember when Huw Bennett won cap after cap despite never replicating the form he was apparently showing 'in training', until he eventually came good at the World Cup?

I hope too much weight isn't given to stats when it comes to selection. Just because a player is marginally quicker and fitter than his rivals doesn't mean he's a better rugby player.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:We've heard this kind of thing before: 'so-and-so has been selected because he impressed in training'. Remember when Huw Bennett won cap after cap despite never replicating the form he was apparently showing 'in training', until he eventually came good at the World Cup?

I hope too much weight isn't given to stats when it comes to selection. Just because a player is marginally quicker and fitter than his rivals doesn't mean he's a better rugby player.

This management team love their stats. They used to rave about our tackle success rate, but when you watched the match you could see players avoiding attempting a tackle, if they thought it may not put the man down, and let players just canter off freely (JT was awful for this), but they still got selected the following week, whereas I would have dropped them for lack of effort.

So you mean there are tackles and there are tackles?

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:So you mean there are tackles and there are tackles?

I mean a player with a 92% tackle rate may have attempted 100 tackles and but missed 8, whereas a player with a 98% tackle rate may have attempted 50 tackles and missed 1, but avoiding attempting tackles to keep their averages up. A bit like when Chris Patterson was the 'best' kicker in the world, but never attempted a kick any further out than 30m or on an angle.

Gotcha.

That said , the tackle rate of Faletau seems pretty outstanding, and when you watch him play he looks like he makes a hell of a lot of tackles, equally as do the second rows.

Similarly turnover figures seem to be appropriated to the right players.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:We've heard this kind of thing before: 'so-and-so has been selected because he impressed in training'. Remember when Huw Bennett won cap after cap despite never replicating the form he was apparently showing 'in training', until he eventually came good at the World Cup?

I hope too much weight isn't given to stats when it comes to selection. Just because a player is marginally quicker and fitter than his rivals doesn't mean he's a better rugby player.

Things have moved on a bit. Back in the day, legendary Llanelli paceman Wayne Proctor was publicly championed by the national coach as having 'put in some great 1500m times in training.'

Which later proved strangely irrelevant when Procky was trying to mark David Campese.

The software used to monitor players in games and in training can not be compared to the visual monitoring of twenty years ago.

What is used today is fantastic and can give very accurate results on players performances.

This can be layered with other information too and is subjected to stringent and objective analysis.

Software like this is seen as a tool, not a rule by all who use it in any sport.

My favourite stat belongs to Gareth Jenkins after that 60 point humiliation at Twickenham. During the post match interview he said, "we made more gain line breaks from midfield than England" - You've just got to love the optimism there

RubyGuby wrote:My favourite stat belongs to Gareth Jenkins after that 60 point humiliation at Twickenham. During the post match interview he said, "we made more gain line breaks from midfield than England" - You've just got to love the optimism there

We did, they just made more everywhere else!!!

They never got as far as the midfield