Key areas for Wales

First topic message reminder :

These are so important.....

9. Lloyd Williams
6. Tipuric (miss Lydiate so badly)
12. Hook (Roberts offers nothing and Biggar was good other than the chargedown)

Wales need a twinkle toed rugby brain at 12. Nobody does it like Henson or Hook. Wales are still passing before drawing the man. Overlaps and being butchered unnecessarily.

last game england, lets do the business on this one, especially as by that time they are probably on for the slam. what tastes the sweetest, win or draw? sorry englanders, the result of these games runs through the welsh like lettered rock !!!!!!!

gavstar wrote:last game england, lets do the business on this one, especially as by that time they are probably on for the slam. what tastes the sweetest, win or draw? sorry englanders, the result of these games runs through the welsh like lettered rock !!!!!!!

Ha, thanks gavstar! At least you're honest I suppose. I think Ireland will be on for the Slam then though, our record there is pish.

From an outsider looking in I had the following thoughts. It strikes me that at full strength there isn;t much between the 6N teams. The main issue is depth. I watched Scrum V and the commentators, to their credit, avoided using injuries as an excuse, but to me it's an absolutely fair one. I'm not saying Ireland wouldn;t have beaten you anyway, they may well have, but they seemed to have relatively fewer injuries in their pack compared to Wales.

So the real issue I think is depth. England and France can lose a few players and it'll probably mean a slight drop in performance. But I think the drop off is less for them than it is for the other 6N teams, who don't have the numbers.

Wales, with a full team, i believe, is marginally better than England. Not by much, but I think a little. However, i said last year when you won the 6N that your game was a limited one. I was shot down but I stand by it. It's based on attrition. I hate to agree with Sean Holley (he's a better commentator than coach) but Wales game relies on direct running and wearing teams down through very accurate multiple driving phases. If it's even a little off in its accuracy, it gets punished. It's why Oz's smaller team keeps beating you. They have the footballers to exploit small mistakes.

A fully fit Welsh team with a couple of wins behind them would be, like last year, hard to stop. But, as I said last year, Gatland needs to adopt a plan B and a more inventive game as well if they want to stay ahead of teams.

I wonder, is there also a bit of a cultural shift happening as a result as well. Welsh teams have normally been more mobile but with smaller packs. The WC pack was big, abrasive and fronted up alongside some massive backs. It seems like in rushing to compete physically, you may have forgotten elements that made you so good previously. Just a thought.

Please let us not give Sean Holley any credit for stating the obvious!

Numerous followers of Welsh rugby have been pointing out the limitations of Gatland's Gameplan (pick & drive, kick & chase) since 2008. i.e. it works, just about, when all our best players are available, but falls apart when we have an injury or two as there is never a Plan B.

But it's all about the 'process' and 'having faith in the squad' and all that stuff nowadays, so we persist - and ride the highs and lows.

I've put money on us losing all remaining games except England at home, losing all the AIs, then winning another GS in 2014. 'tis the Welsh way.

I agree that our best bet for a win is England at home.We will be hurting and pride will make defeat not an option.

The key area was to stop our head coach go an a jaunt for 12 months. What company would ever let their top person bugger off. If Gatland wanted the Lions job he should have resigned and applied letting us get a proper coach, not a stand in. Howler simply isn't up to the job. In the autumn we had just lost to Argentina and in the post match interview he was smirking.... He sould have been livid. I would have been. Unacceptable!!

Taffineastbourne wrote:I agree that our best bet for a win is England at home.We will be hurting and pride will make defeat not an option.

Can't see it, I'm afraid. It was close enough last year, and they have kicked on and we have got worse. Furthermore the bosh-bosh gameplan will not work as they are too big and physical.

Scotland away is a better bet for me.

Hood83 wrote:I said last year when you won the 6N that your game was a limited one. I was shot down but I stand by it. It's based on attrition. I hate to agree with Sean Holley (he's a better commentator than coach) but Wales game relies on direct running and wearing teams down through very accurate multiple driving phases. If it's even a little off in its accuracy, it gets punished. It's why Oz's smaller team keeps beating you. They have the footballers to exploit small mistakes.

A fully fit Welsh team with a couple of wins behind them would be, like last year, hard to stop. But, as I said last year, Gatland needs to adopt a plan B and a more inventive game as well if they want to stay ahead of teams.

I wonder, is there also a bit of a cultural shift happening as a result as well. Welsh teams have normally been more mobile but with smaller packs. The WC pack was big, abrasive and fronted up alongside some massive backs. It seems like in rushing to compete physically, you may have forgotten elements that made you so good previously. Just a thought.

Why is it that so many people - Welshmen, Englishmen, coaches and players of visiting sides - can see the glaringly obvious but the national coaches can't?

Do you think Howley is on the take, Lucky? It just doesn't add up.

I don't know what it is, Breaker. Actually, I do: the wrong people in post. Even Gatland when he comes back, unless he comes back with some new ideas.

Linebreaker wrote:Do you think Howley is on the take, Lucky? It just doesn't add up.

“Worldly wisdom teaches that it is better for reputation to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally.” John Maynard Keynes.

What if he changed half a dozen players, dropped Gethin Sam and Jaimie, brought in Byrne at 15, Hook at 10, Gill at prop etc. and it actually worked?

People would say "why didn't you do that 6 months ago, you berk - you've just proven our point?"

samuraidragon wrote:

Linebreaker wrote:Do you think Howley is on the take, Lucky? It just doesn't add up.

“Worldly wisdom teaches that it is better for reputation to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally.” John Maynard Keynes.

What if he changed half a dozen players, dropped Gethin Sam and Jaimie, brought in Byrne at 15, Hook at 10, Gill at prop etc. and it actually worked?

People would say "why didn't you do that 6 months ago, you berk - you've just proven our point?"

Excellent post. This quote sums up Welsh rugby management, in a nutshell.

They care more about their CVs than what happens on the pitch. As long as they can demonstrate that they followed their performance flowcharts, analyzed the laptop data and organised the planned number of training sessions, they can take their Personal Development File to their monthly performance review and the CEO will tick the relevant box. When required, they can take the same stuff to a new employer. This happens in other sports and many other walks of life. How your team actually performed is less important than demonstrating that you know the process, system and logistics.

They've even got the players quoting the same old krappe now - wheeling poor little Halfpenny out to say that people shouldn't blame the coaches.

They should, of course.

Casartelli wrote:

samuraidragon wrote:

Linebreaker wrote:Do you think Howley is on the take, Lucky? It just doesn't add up.

“Worldly wisdom teaches that it is better for reputation to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally.” John Maynard Keynes.

What if he changed half a dozen players, dropped Gethin Sam and Jaimie, brought in Byrne at 15, Hook at 10, Gill at prop etc. and it actually worked?

People would say "why didn't you do that 6 months ago, you berk - you've just proven our point?"

Excellent post. This quote sums up Welsh rugby management, in a nutshell.

They care more about their CVs than what happens on the pitch. As long as they can demonstrate that they followed their performance flowcharts, analyzed the laptop data and organised the planned number of training sessions, they can take their Personal Development File to their monthly performance review and the CEO will tick the relevant box. When required, they can take the same stuff to a new employer. This happens in other sports and many other walks of life. How your team actually performed is less important than demonstrating that you know the process, system and logistics.

They've even got the players quoting the same old krappe now - wheeling poor little Halfpenny out to say that people shouldn't blame the coaches.

They should, of course.

The coaches didn't miss tackles, line up poorly in defence, turn over ball on the fourth phase in the opposition 22. No coach would ever tell a player to do that.

Your using Howley as a scape goat.

If you go 27 points down after 45 mins, at home in a 6N game, you have people on the pitch who shouldn't be there - and that's Howley's fault.

Even with all the injuries, he could have started with James, Owens, Kohn and Tipuric - and we could have stayed competitive, rather than get steamrollered for most of the first half.

Bringing Kohn and Hook on with 7 mins to go made no sense, and the 'leave Dan alone' stuff was weird and desperate.

Howley's a decent lieutenant, but he's no head coach. Not just him though, they're all caught up in this 'process over performance' nonsense.

Casartelli wrote:If you go 27 points down after 45 mins, at home in a 6N game, you have people on the pitch who shouldn't be there - and that's Howley's fault.

Even with all the injuries, he could have started with James, Owens, Kohn and Tipuric - and we could have stayed competitive, rather than get steamrollered for most of the first half.

Bringing Kohn and Hook on with 7 mins to go made no sense, and the 'leave Dan alone' stuff was weird and desperate.

Howley's a decent lieutenant, but he's no head coach. Not just him though, they're all caught up in this 'process over performance' nonsense.

So you are saying Howley had a bad first half but a better second half?

You cant blame him for what went wrong and not what went right can you?

We always look a decent team when we throw management instruction out of the window and run the ball a bit - even against NZ we played some good rugby second half.

When we kick the ball away when there's a 3 man overlap, trundle phase after phase going nowhere, or blitz when we shouldn't because that's the team instruction, we look dire.

I do feel a bit sorry for Howley though, he's in a no-win situation. If he rings the changes then he's admitting he picked the wrong players in the first game, whereas if he sticks with the same and they get smashed again he'll look a complete idiot.

Casartelli wrote:We always look a decent team when we throw management instruction out of the window and run the ball a bit - even against NZ we played some good rugby second half.

When we kick the ball away when there's a 3 man overlap, trundle phase after phase going nowhere, or blitz when we shouldn't because that's the team instruction, we look dire.

I do feel a bit sorry for Howley though, he's in a no-win situation. If he rings the changes then he's admitting he picked the wrong players in the first game, whereas if he sticks with the same and they get smashed again he'll look a complete idiot.

Sorry but it is linch mob reactionism...! You want to make Howley a scapegoat so you are.

If the game plan wasn't working first half, it clearly wasn't. Why do you think it was Howley's game plan that wasnt working rather than the players not playing to his game plan that worked in the second half.

If looking at the situation un-objectively, can you not say that at half time the players were given a good kick up the backside by the coaches and told what they were doing wrong and came out a better side in the second half getting themselves fully back into contention before the last quarter?

Why is poor play Howley's fault and good play ignoring Howley's gameplan?

maestegmafia wrote:If the game plan wasn't working first half, it clearly wasn't. Why do you think it was Howley's game plan that wasnt working rather than the players not playing to his game plan that worked in the second half.

Are you seriously suggeting that the players took to the field in the first game of the Six Nations and decided to ignore the coaches' gameplan from the first whistle?

But we were still rubbish after halftime. We only started playing 'positive' attacking rugby when the game was dead and buried - when team orders were abandoned - same as in the NZ game.

If this running game Plan B is Howley's invention, then he's leaving it way too late.

We still have 10-12 really good players (some of them even get picked). They're just being coached appallingly.

Casartelli wrote:But we were still rubbish after halftime. We only started playing 'positive' attacking rugby when the game was dead and buried - when team orders were abandoned - same as in the NZ game.

If this running game Plan B is Howley's invention, then he's leaving it way too late.

We still have 10-12 really good players (some of them even get picked). They're just being coached appallingly.

Fair points though I'd still question why we only scored 3 tries in the 2nd half with Mitchell's coming too late to win the game. Ireland defended superbly but there are still questions over our ability to use territory and possession as effectively as we should. We simply had to score another try quickly after Halfpenny's and we failed to.

I think to be honest it's a combination of coaching (not just Howley - we are playing the Gatland way) and players. When the players perform well and to instructions we are effective and can grind out wins like we did for the 2012 grand slam but let's face it, it's not pretty. When the players make individual errors, get turned over and the set piece falls apart, like in the 1st half last Saturday, frankly it doesn't matter what the game plan is. There were some poor selections made by Howley though. I would personally like the whole game plan to change with more of a creative offloading game off the back of an improved set piece and rejigged back row and the likes of Phillips and Roberts dropped but there's no chance of that. We're in the bizarre situation of having a coaching team which is still under the effective control of an absent coach who has chosen to take a sabbatical for the Lions and has left behind a puppet coach. It's a ridiculous situation to be in.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:If the game plan wasn't working first half, it clearly wasn't. Why do you think it was Howley's game plan that wasnt working rather than the players not playing to his game plan that worked in the second half.

Are you seriously suggeting that the players took to the field in the first game of the Six Nations and decided to ignore the coaches' gameplan from the first whistle?

Nope

I'm saying that instead of accusing Howley and making him responsible for anything that goes wrong you could also allow the thought that the team just didn't implement the game plan he wished them to. The Team made silly and costly errors in defence and attack in the first half, they reduced that massively in the second.

We can only hope that Rob remembers to give them the 'kick up the backside' before kick off against France, rather than wait until halftime.

maestegmafia wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:If the game plan wasn't working first half, it clearly wasn't. Why do you think it was Howley's game plan that wasnt working rather than the players not playing to his game plan that worked in the second half.

Are you seriously suggeting that the players took to the field in the first game of the Six Nations and decided to ignore the coaches' gameplan from the first whistle?

Nope

I'm saying that instead of accusing Howley and making him responsible for anything that goes wrong you could also allow the thought that the team just didn't implement the game plan he wished them to. The Team made silly and costly errors in defence and attack in the first half, they reduced that massively in the second.

I don't blame Rob Howley for our slow start and I don't hold him responsible for the passes into touch. I don't blame him for the captain turning down kickable penalties in the second half (although it was his appointment of captain). I do blame him for not selecting form players, one of which was instrumental in out fightback. I also blame him for the predictability of our play.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:If the game plan wasn't working first half, it clearly wasn't. Why do you think it was Howley's game plan that wasnt working rather than the players not playing to his game plan that worked in the second half.

Are you seriously suggeting that the players took to the field in the first game of the Six Nations and decided to ignore the coaches' gameplan from the first whistle?

Nope

I'm saying that instead of accusing Howley and making him responsible for anything that goes wrong you could also allow the thought that the team just didn't implement the game plan he wished them to. The Team made silly and costly errors in defence and attack in the first half, they reduced that massively in the second.

I don't blame Rob Howley for our slow start and I don't hold him responsible for the passes into touch. I don't blame him for the captain turning down kickable penalties in the second half (although it was his appointment of captain). I do blame him for not selecting form players, one of which was instrumental in out fightback. I also blame him for the predictability of our play.

Our predictable game got us back into contention. It was more the bits you don't blame Howley for that put us out of the game.

Let's be clear - as abject as our first half was, the second half was still really poor. Without a doubt Ireland relaxed and the Welsh team still made everything look so so difficult. There were some awful decisions and only the injection of better players (when is was way too late) salvaged a little pride.

It's silly to only blame a coach - but that coach still must burden a considerable share of the outcome. Stupid selection based on reputation rather than form. The pedestrian game plan, set piece problems and lateral running were evident in the Autumn and still there last week. It is fair to suggest that the team is simply not implementing the game plan Howley wants them to, but the reason could be equally simple - he is not good at coaching it !

offload wrote:It is fair to suggest that the team is simply not implementing the game plan Howley wants them to, but the reason could be equally simple - he is not good at coaching it !

Good points countering my thoughts and musings there Offload mate...!

To me it seems that far too many people jump on Howleys back for being a poor coach though refuse to give him credit when things go well. Where as with players, JD2 for example we will chastise them one week for throwing a pass into the crowd, or Roberts for not finding any angles in attack, but we will praise them when things go well.

Ireland are a good side, we know that. They did a good number on us, they didn't step off the pace at all in the second half. Their defence was class.

If the WRU had any balls they would have kicked Howley into touch after the AI's but kicking into touch is a no no hence we are stuck with him (and Gatland) with plan A. My bet is even with Hibbard and Jones coming back we will have the same team again but with Warbruton at 6 and Tipuric at 7 and Biggar staying at 10 (much better than Preistland). I suspect we will be in the same position as last week at half time as we will be stuffed in the scrum with one second row a good 6 playing second row and a lightweight back row gamble.

5 mins after half time when France score another try, on comes R Jones, J Hook (if we are lucky or 5mins from the end), P James and Hibbard to chase down a lost cause

I hope I am wrong but France will win with ease 42-15.

A wounded Wales have fired a warning to France and insist they will not give up their six nations title with out a fight.

Attack coach Mark Jones insist that it is Les Bleus who should fear a back lash. Jones said their as been a lot made of France losing to Italy is the worst possible result for Wales.

But the worst result was Wales was losing to Ireland-the defending 6ns champions losing at home should be a worry for other teams.

When we get our game plan right we're very formidable and we should be the wounded animal this week.

He finishers by saying that you can't tinker too much with whats not broken.

Now i dont know about you but i would say that Losing 8 games in a row and 5 of those at home. That should tell you that it is ( Broken) or at least it does need tinkeiring with.

Dont you think so.?I mean surely some thing needs to change if WALES ARE GOING TO STOP THE LOSING STREAK.

He also said they are working on cutting out basic errors like not executing two on ones.

FFS the are supposed to be International class rugby players, a two on one scenario is a basic rugby skill which is taught at the youngest level.

If these guys are still learning this at the proffessional level WTF are they doing playimg at this level.

If they can't implement 2 on 1 they should be put on the 7's circuit.

glamorganalun wrote:If they can't implement 2 on 1 they should be put on the 7's circuit.

Alun,

If they cant complete a 2 on 1 at this stage and level in their carear then they shouldn't even be at their respective Region.

probably all heard enough of me defending biggar being kept on, but 12

caps, 7 starts since 2008----canada 2 nz 2 fiji ,samoa and last week,

no way warrants being dropped, not by the chances ALL our other 10s

have had , and all the mistakes and charge downs they've had between

them !!

he went off early in the samoan game so in the losing 8 matches he has played in 1.

so choice of 10 wasnt right back then through the losing games. think back

to rp, he actually came out and said he was following a game plan, so more

or less 'dont blame me' what he couldnt handle was being blamed for

playing the way that was not of his chosing.

biggar was told after fiji by howley 'go away and re invent your game' we

will pick you if you play our game is what he meant. hook cant play

howleys game, can't help himself but to deviate, others rarely follow him,

because they are 'on plan' hook gets isolated, off we go again. yes this has

had some positive outcomes, but THEY DONT WANT ONE MAN SHOW, they

want a clockwork team, and if biggar is the one who can do it then lets give him a chance.

gav,

I agree give him a fair crack of the whip like others have had.

Lloyd frickin Williams...

I'm out

thebluesmancometh wrote:Lloyd frickin Williams...

I'm out

blues,

Yet in the post match theads after last week people were calling for him to start over Phillips this week.

Phillips, for me is still best of a bad bunch and his back ups are very poor indeed, that said out of the ones in the squad I prefer Williams to Knoyle because he is a different style to Phillips.

They are bedford and they are 100% wrong.

Phillips is no world beater, but at least he offers something and is a bit of a weapon, a lot of criticism of Phillips is very one eyed and ignorant IMHO. Noone seems to take the gameplan or pathetic excuse for attacking rucking into consideration!

As you said Phillips is the best we have (in the squad, I still would prefer Roberts or Peel) and I can't believ he was taken off so early for what was a non entity in Williams!!

I still think Phillips has a role to play for Wales but I think you have to have an opposite to him on the bench, or starting wih Phillips on the bench.

Phillips is the in your face annoying so and so on a No9 back rowers hate but they serve a purpose, what you need then is a more skillful, silky type of player, which is why I would prefer Williams over knoyle I guess.

If you want opposite to Phillips players like Roberts, Rees, and even Davies/Evans are all good options. I would prefer any to Williams or Knoyle, the last 2 especially.

But I agree it's better to have a different style off the bench, but it can work both ways depending on how the games going, if Phillips is playing super but is tiring a like for like will do well, but if the game plays out like Ireland a classy speed merchant is whats needed, and Williams fell very short IMHO.

Blues,

agree, meant out of the ones in th squad.

Ye Williams over Knoyle (although I think Knoyle is the better player) just.

Hood83 wrote:

gavstar wrote:last game england, lets do the business on this one, especially as by that time they are probably on for the slam. what tastes the sweetest, win or draw? sorry englanders, the result of these games runs through the welsh like lettered rock !!!!!!!

Ha, thanks gavstar! At least you're honest I suppose. I think Ireland will be on for the Slam then though, our record there is pish.

From an outsider looking in I had the following thoughts. It strikes me that at full strength there isn;t much between the 6N teams. The main issue is depth. I watched Scrum V and the commentators, to their credit, avoided using injuries as an excuse, but to me it's an absolutely fair one. I'm not saying Ireland wouldn;t have beaten you anyway, they may well have, but they seemed to have relatively fewer injuries in their pack compared to Wales.

So the real issue I think is depth. England and France can lose a few players and it'll probably mean a slight drop in performance. But I think the drop off is less for them than it is for the other 6N teams, who don't have the numbers.

Wales, with a full team, i believe, is marginally better than England. Not by much, but I think a little. However, i said last year when you won the 6N that your game was a limited one. I was shot down but I stand by it. It's based on attrition. I hate to agree with Sean Holley (he's a better commentator than coach) but Wales game relies on direct running and wearing teams down through very accurate multiple driving phases. If it's even a little off in its accuracy, it gets punished. It's why Oz's smaller team keeps beating you. They have the footballers to exploit small mistakes.

A fully fit Welsh team with a couple of wins behind them would be, like last year, hard to stop. But, as I said last year, Gatland needs to adopt a plan B and a more inventive game as well if they want to stay ahead of teams.

I wonder, is there also a bit of a cultural shift happening as a result as well. Welsh teams have normally been more mobile but with smaller packs. The WC pack was big, abrasive and fronted up alongside some massive backs. It seems like in rushing to compete physically, you may have forgotten elements that made you so good previously. Just a thought.

I believe that this is a cyclical phenomenon in which either Wales or England are dominant over the other teams in the Northern Hemisphere. Never have both Wales and England dominated Northern Hemisphere rugby at the same time.

Ospreydragon wrote:"offload the ball" -- how dare, how very dare you ...

You'd have to change the playing philosophy of the Welsh coaching team for that to happen.

Just get them all to watch SBW you tube videos for a few hours the week before the match...thats bound to make them despise him enough to do it better...(and just hope they dont start throwing horribly timed punches during the match...perhaps use the keyword 'offload' as well...)

What happened to Liam Williams? Best and most promising player vs AB's in the AI match I thought...injured?

He's not injured as far as I'm aware, Taylorman. My guess is that he's too instinctive / unpredictable a player for this coaching team, despite the fact that an instinctive and unpredictable back three player is just the type you don't want to face as a defender.

gboycottnut wrote:

Hood83 wrote:

gavstar wrote:last game england, lets do the business on this one, especially as by that time they are probably on for the slam. what tastes the sweetest, win or draw? sorry englanders, the result of these games runs through the welsh like lettered rock !!!!!!!

Ha, thanks gavstar! At least you're honest I suppose. I think Ireland will be on for the Slam then though, our record there is pish.

From an outsider looking in I had the following thoughts. It strikes me that at full strength there isn;t much between the 6N teams. The main issue is depth. I watched Scrum V and the commentators, to their credit, avoided using injuries as an excuse, but to me it's an absolutely fair one. I'm not saying Ireland wouldn;t have beaten you anyway, they may well have, but they seemed to have relatively fewer injuries in their pack compared to Wales.

So the real issue I think is depth. England and France can lose a few players and it'll probably mean a slight drop in performance. But I think the drop off is less for them than it is for the other 6N teams, who don't have the numbers.

Wales, with a full team, i believe, is marginally better than England. Not by much, but I think a little. However, i said last year when you won the 6N that your game was a limited one. I was shot down but I stand by it. It's based on attrition. I hate to agree with Sean Holley (he's a better commentator than coach) but Wales game relies on direct running and wearing teams down through very accurate multiple driving phases. If it's even a little off in its accuracy, it gets punished. It's why Oz's smaller team keeps beating you. They have the footballers to exploit small mistakes.

A fully fit Welsh team with a couple of wins behind them would be, like last year, hard to stop. But, as I said last year, Gatland needs to adopt a plan B and a more inventive game as well if they want to stay ahead of teams.

I wonder, is there also a bit of a cultural shift happening as a result as well. Welsh teams have normally been more mobile but with smaller packs. The WC pack was big, abrasive and fronted up alongside some massive backs. It seems like in rushing to compete physically, you may have forgotten elements that made you so good previously. Just a thought.

I believe that this is a cyclical phenomenon in which either Wales or England are dominant over the other teams in the Northern Hemisphere. Never have both Wales and England dominated Northern Hemisphere rugby at the same time.

Last year we won you were second.

You've got a memory like a baby elephant, Maes.

I blame the players for missing the tackles, dropping the ball etc, but to me a number of those players had no business being out on the field in the first place.

For that, I point at Howley.

Its not a sole fingerpointing blame thing, but the facts remain the facts.

You can NOT pick a loosehead prop who's played about as much professional rugby this season as I have to start and expect him to perform.

You can NOT ignore the form number 7 in europe in a backrow that missing your main defensive man and man of the 6nations last time out. His absence has proved what he does for the welsh gameplan and that we dont have anyone to perform the same role to that standard.

Although Coombs did very well overall (poor in the first half, lost the gainline battle everytime), you only had to read the interview with him around scrummaging to see the difference in experience between him and Kohn. Oh and the fact one of them is about 5 stone heavier, 3 inches taller and is playing in the form of his life in a winning team in europe and the AP. Oh, and that team happen to play a phase-based attacking game too....

It was noticeable how much the forwards improved once Tips/and James had come on and Kohn hit nearly every ruck in his time on the field.

You cant blame Howley for Jenkins/Shinglers/Coombs performance, but you can blame him for not selecting the players most of wales were screaming out for.

Going to all the trouble of confirming Kohn's ancestry, then taking the subsequent flak for this dubious policy - and then not even starting him is inexplicable.

Utterly inexplicable.

A complete Howler, if you will.

Cas Comfort

I couldne agree more!!!

Also if the side selected is as mentioned recently he's made the same mistakes again!!

Rees goes from 1st choice to 3rd over night, seemingly receiving all the blame, how will he feel about that, and Owens goes from 2nd choice to 2nd choice behind a different player. He must be fuming, not to get ahead of Rees for Wales when he is first choice at club, and then losing out to another the week after while demoting Rees to 3rd!!!

Also Jenkins still being in the squad is crazy, he will get better as the tournament goes on, just like the AI's but as the Ai's we will have fallen short too many times to stand a chance of winning later on, we will be demoralised!!!

How Rhys Gill isn't in the squad I don't know, form prem LH and winning games in both league and europe, overlooked for Jenkins who hadn't played a game since November.

Warburton out - shoulder injury

RJ to skipper

Jeez, that's unuckly for Warbs. Could be Tips chance to really put a marker down though. Who should play 6? RJ, Coombs?