Should Priestland retire?

Well if you know me, you'd know I've never joined in with the unacceptable levels of criticism at Rhys Priestland and I won't start now. What I will say is that I think he should retire, at least from international rugby. He isn't up to this level and he's proved it for two seasons or more. His game today against a weaker opposition (who played 40 minutes with 14 men) was the worst fly-half performance I've seen. Mike Phillips was poor too, he is usually good off the bench these days but today's game casts doubt in my mind.
Back to RP; he constantly loses the ball in contact, he's a poor goal kicker, he sometimes let's the ball just slip from out of his hands (he's a fly half remember), he's unreliable when the pressure is on, his game management is poor. His form has been average this season and from what I seen it was nowhere near enough to merit a call into the Wales squad. We have two other 10s who are getting overlooked for two poor ones. Rhys Patchell and Owen Williams should be in this squad so close to the RWC. RP and Hook should not.

you never retire from your country, your country retires you,

one area where Gatland does have an influence,

time for us to take a look at Owen Williams, Patchell, Matthew Morgan

Pretty harsh to blame Priestland when their were 20 players playing equally poorly on the field.

he didnt look comfortable out there, either kicking for goal or ball in hand

maestegmafia wrote:Pretty harsh to blame Priestland when their were 20 players playing equally poorly on the field.

I think both 9 and 10, Gatland and extremely poor decision-making by the officials equally contributed to a poor game today. If you read my post, you'll see it was based on the majority of RP's international career (and to an extent club career). The reason he was booed last week is because fans are now so convinced he will single-handedly lose us a game, which he almost did today.

Well,never been a fan of priest, and today he was back to his shakey flakey game. If biggar had missed those kicks
jiffy would have been saying " you have to get those kicks " jiffy said nothing. On the intercept again no comment
and in the studio no comment . Its all
very well saying others played poorly but he should have had those kicks and as a ten he should have been the safest pair of hands, not as bad or even worse than others. Dan is the man, lets get a few other 10s from the youngsters out there. As for hook , bit of a slap for a 70+ cap player.

Priestland was no worse than any of the others out there (Willaims and Faletau aside). I agree that we need to look at Patchell and O Williams but Morgan for me has killed his chances until at least Brizzle get promoted and playing at the top level.

Maybe he was conscious of his tash...its appalling....

GeordieFalcon wrote:Maybe he was conscious of his tash...its appalling....

Oh look he can laugh at us but i give them some stick i get verbal abuse that the MODS ignore.

Slightly different scenarios....even your fellow welsh said you were an embarrassment to them.

After the first 30 minutes I thought our entire backline (bar Liam Williams) were poor tbh.

No leadership there, and the game was far too loose, why do you play loose against pacific islanders who are naturally suited to that sort of game?

North went very quiet in the second half, Cuthbert just ran around and passed poorly, Roberts ran some good lines but kept losing the ball in contact, Scott Williams was also very quiet.

Priestland had a mixed game, nice touches in the first half, then fell apart in the second, he should have really stamped his authority on the game and controlled it, but instead it went like a game of 7s.

Don't really know what Phillips was up to half the time.

Liam Williams is the only player in the back line who actually played well for 80 minutes, he was everywhere.

Should Priestland be the scape goat for the way Wales played today?

Surely the entire team is responsible and not just Priestland.

The Saint wrote:Well if you know me, you'd know I've never joined in with the unacceptable levels of criticism at Rhys Priestland and I won't start now. What I will say is that I think he should retire

This is great stuff.

Majestic I'll Add the coaching staff to that.  There wasn't even a Plan A today.

He will be picked for the next game he can t do wrong with the blind coaching team regardless of missing tackles, dropping the ball, poor kicking and passing to players feet. If I was Hook I would return to his club and get game time.

Didn't see the game but anyone care to make a stab at maybe suggesting Wales didn't perform here to throw future and BETTER sides than Fiji off the scent of what might come?

I find it hard to believe that Fiji can last the distance with Wales when they're at full strength nevermind down to 14 for 40 minutes????!

Is Gatland just dumbing stuff down to hit New Zealand and/or South Africa with a surprise?  Is he holding back energy levels?  
I just can't believe that scoreline is Wales at home against a Fiji that played 40 minutes with 14 men.  Look what happened to Scotland with 14 men last year.   I can't believe its a genuine attempt to dominate the game from wales.
From what you guys saw, do you genuinely think it was a genuine attempt?

Fly the ball was I play for about five minutes I the entire match. Seemed like everything deserved a whistle and a ten minute chat with the TMO.

Both teams looked disinterested in the second half.

Fly - if it's a ruse, it's one which has fooled us all. We looked awful today. Utterly dreadful!

MarcusHalberstram wrote:Fly - if it's a ruse, it's one which has fooled us all. We looked awful today.  Utterly dreadful!

But how can that be after weeks of training, weeks of advice and direction and two BIG games to come? How can that variability be there so dramatically as seemed to happen today? Surely at this point Gatland knows how to contruct a reasonably potent side from his squad?

They thought the game was over after 30 minutes and all played very poorly. It was almost the worst game I have seen in the last 10 years. That said I do not believe there was any reason the 2 tries should have been disallowed, but it still does not justify the way Wales played.

I do not think this is a reflection on the way we will perform next week and we will take the game to the AB's in the first 20 mins.

Anyway if you can win playing that badly it ain't that bad.

Frankly this thread is absolutely shocking, Priestland was not the only poor player out there what so ever.

I thought in the first 20 minutes he played very well, he attacked the gainline very well and was instrumental in the first two tries, he played with confidence. Yes he missed the two conversion, however they were both difficult kicks to make, one being on the wrong side for a right footed kicker. However after this the whole team seemed to think it was in the bag, we stopped dominating the collisions and players seem to be thinking past the basics of taking the ball correctly and as a result spilling it. Also numerous times in the second half priestland had to take the ball into contact as he had no options outside him.

The ref was shocking too, being very picky on straight lineout throws but then ignoring the mess at the breakdown. He had no heart for the flow of the game and the disallowed tries (1 was debatable but the other was fine) and also another penalty try he missed.

To b3 honest I though Priest played well, he put in a few good passes for the first two tries, but did fumble the ball once or twice.  But let's face it most of our back line did

Why do idiot posters on here always seem to read words that aren't there????

I've said it before, I'll say it AGAIN. Nowhere have I, or does this thread state that RP was the only poor player or the only one at fault for yesterdays match. The thread even singles out another player. A fly-half and arguably the scrum half need to control the game, yesterday they couldn't despite being provided with decent platform from the forwards, RP was worse but only just. I feel that is the most major reason and it quite clearly effected the scoreboard, it also may have cost us the game. How a 10 fumbles the ball when there's no pressure on him I'll never know.

I love the fact people are saying he put in some good passes for the first two tries, that's nice but it's one of many fly-half fundamentals for god's sake. His form didn't really merit selection in the first place as he's been playing like this for Scarlets, hence why the country was in a state of shock when he was selected. The only time he's looked good is when Shingler was controlling the game from 12. This isn't a one off, it's been going on for 2 seasons. It's time to step down as that's a jersey that should be going to Williams and Patchell.

To answer the OP: no I don't think he should retire, but neither do I think he should be picked. I believe firmly that form players should be picked and he's not displaying enough club form to warrant inclusion at this level. The crux of the problem, however, is that Gatland only seems to like to select players 'in the system', I.e. those in his unofficial elite development squad who have been through the beastings, cryo chamber sessions, ballet sessions, etc. This is fine in principle but a few injuries and you suddenly have to select players within the group who may not be in form. A similar thing happens with Lydiate, Roberts, Phillips and until recently Adam Jones. Contrast this with a team like Ireland who are not afraid to pick on form. There seems to be a constant injection of new blood into their team, players in white hot form bringing fresh impetus, new ideas, confidence and enthusiasm. I'm not calling for a Claudio Ranieri 'tinker man' style of selection and management but we've pretty much all called for Gatland to be more flexible, to pick form players, but all too often he stalls. How long did it take for Biggar to get his chance regularly? How long Webb or Gareth Davies? So for me Gatland's system of selection and retention is wrong and Priestland, through no fault of his own, is thrust into the team when not in form. Others too. But Priestland, in such a pivotal position, stands out much more when not in form and cops the flak.

I also wonder is it time for Gatland to go soon. I'm never one for knee jerk reactions and don't want a change now before the WC. However, I think there should be a shelf life for international coaches. I think Gatland is struggling to reinvent his team in ways that are necessary for all international teams. International teams get hyper-analysed and at some point they need a new direction. 8 years of the same coach is perhaps too long. Much easier to change a team's fortunes with a new coaching team, and therefore a new injection of ideas and coaching philosophies, than to try to get 1 coach to change his philosophy. Look at England, Ireland ,SA, etc. for recent examples of that. Look to Wales too for an example of that when Gats came in, but now we're stagnant, have been for a long while, and unless Gatland has somehow manages to change our whole appraoch and style pronto then I predict we'll struggle in the 6N and WC.

So, for me Priestland is a victim of a broken system and should be allowed to become good again at club rugby. Let him play well, grow confidence, learn how to be awesome again and IF he manages it then call him up. But don't put the millstone of the Welsh 10 jersey round his neck when he's not even smashing it in the Pro 12. In the meantime - perhaps Owen Williams or Patchell. But they're not 'on the inside' so no chance.

Griff, didn't want to quote all your article, I agree Priestland shouldn't retire and I would still have him in our squad with also Owen Williams as 3rd choice, Hook would be nowhere near the squad for me.
The main reason I responded was your suggestion that Gatland should go, do you know both Woodward and Henry were Coach/Manager of England/New Zealand for around 7-8 years and had relatively disappointing first WC and then succeeded in the 2nd, Gatland had a good WC I just hope the next one will not be a disaster, I think it was a big mistake to offer him the job until 2019, if he has a really poor WC I can see him going.

As I said, I don't want to see him go before the next WC. But soon after it. In the run up to Woodward's 2nd World Cup England were smashing the world up. We appear to be going in the other direction. I'll happily eat my hat if proved wrong, but I can't see us improving much in the 6N or WC, while other teams seem to be in the ascendency. I can see us quite easily coming 5th in the 6N with only a win away to Italy. The other teams seem to have improved vastly. Maybe I'm just being pessimistic!

Griff wrote:As I said, I don't want to see him go before the next WC. But soon after it. In the run up to Woodward's 2nd World Cup England were smashing the world up. We appear to be going in the other direction. I'll happily eat my hat if proved wrong, but I can't see us improving much in the 6N or WC, while other teams seem to be in the ascendency. I can see us quite easily coming 5th in the 6N with only a win away to Italy. The other teams seem to have improved vastly. Maybe I'm just being pessimistic!

Griff, I'm a naturally half full glass sort of person, we'll win more than 1 game in the 6N, as for the contract extension, yes I agree it's one to many, it's another of the Dodgers mistakes.

Griff I think your spot on. He'll be picked regardless of his form and it seems the only way for that to end is by RP retiring!

The Priestland Dilemma reminds me of Scotland's relationship with Dan Parks.

He made himself available for selection, he was selected, he played his heart out, fans get frustrated with his limitations and I think it is probably correct to say that he is nobody's favouritest player everest. I agree that it is not RP's fault that the Fatman keeps picking him - he can only do his best - but it merely serves to repeat the point that Wales will only see a notable difference in selection strategy when Gatland goes. It really is that simple.

I agree that WG has his pet players and it is frustrating but I disagree on his selection strategy. If you look at his history he does introduce change but slowly 1 or 2 new players here and there not wholesale changes which IMO is good, Wales were given no chance before the last World Cup and shocked everyone, I think that could be the same in 2015. I feel by that time Adam Jones, Phillips, Priestland will not be in the squad, he may see sense and utilise 1/2Penny on the wing since we seem to have what even I have to concede a better 15 now.

rainbow-warrior wrote:I agree that WG has his pet players and it is frustrating but I disagree on his selection strategy.  If you look at his history he does introduce change but slowly 1 or 2 new players here and there not wholesale changes which IMO is good,  Wales were given no chance before the last World Cup and shocked everyone, I think that could be the same in 2015.  I feel by that time Adam Jones, Phillips, Priestland will not be in the squad, he may see sense and utilise 1/2Penny on the wing since we seem to have what even I have to concede a better 15 now.

It's the way Gatland introduces them that's the problem. Like I said, he has this sort of unoffocial elite development squad. He'll add a few players to it like Amos, Prydie, Kristian Phillips, etc. and keep them in it, do all the conditioning work on them, etc. but if someone comes from nowhere with heaps of form they seldom get called up because they haven't been identified beforehand and become part of the 'system'. I can see why he does it, sort of, as he'll know that those in the inner circle will have been through a regime, they'll have all the data on them, etc. And also, it could be as a result of the club (region) vs country problems of the past. But it does mean we plug away with players out of form when there could be 'outsiders' in better form.

I agree with just about everything that has been posted recently.

Most coaches do have a shelf-life. I think far to much emphasis is put on ice chambers etc along with Gats rigid by numbers game plan. The game against Fiji destroyed a rigid plan and not only did the players look tired they often look bemused.

I can't remember any 10 that has thrived with Phillips his step stutter pass has ruined reputation after reputation.

GavinDragon wrote:you never retire from your country, your country retires you,

one area where Gatland does have an influence,

time for us to take a look at Owen Williams, Patchell, Matthew Morgan

Williams is not in great form this season, solid but nothing special, and Morgan out with a broken leg until at least the new year.

Solid would do now LT. Flaky is what we have at the moment. Solid (as with Biggar) is much better IMO.

The booing when he came on against Australia was embarrassing and unfair, but only really echoed the collective groan that has happens in our living room for the last 3 years whenever the guy takes to the pitch or lines up to convert.

Should he retire?  No.  Should he be in the team?  No.  The squad?  No.  Be 1st choice for the Scarlets?...  Mmm - probably no.

I wonder what would do his career more harm though.  To continue to play when he is so obviously off form or to refuse to play (because he is so obviously off form)...

LondonTiger wrote:

GavinDragon wrote:you never retire from your country, your country retires you,

one area where Gatland does have an influence,

time for us to take a look at Owen Williams, Patchell, Matthew Morgan

Williams is not in great form this season, solid but nothing special,  and Morgan out with a broken leg until at least the new year.

Patchell is also out for at least 3 months?

https://www.606v2.com/t24079-rhys-priestland-not-all-he-s-cracked-up-to-be
I said this post world cup, and no one believed me. Finally people are coming to their senses.

Good man Hugo. I always like a man with crystal balls.

IronMike wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

GavinDragon wrote:you never retire from your country, your country retires you,

one area where Gatland does have an influence,

time for us to take a look at Owen Williams, Patchell, Matthew Morgan

Williams is not in great form this season, solid but nothing special,  and Morgan out with a broken leg until at least the new year.

Patchell is also out for at least 3 months?

What is wrong with Patchell now ? Between him and Tovey we must have the most injured pair of 10's in world rugby.

no

LordDowlais wrote:

IronMike wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

GavinDragon wrote:you never retire from your country, your country retires you,

one area where Gatland does have an influence,

time for us to take a look at Owen Williams, Patchell, Matthew Morgan

Williams is not in great form this season, solid but nothing special,  and Morgan out with a broken leg until at least the new year.

Patchell is also out for at least 3 months?

What is wrong with Patchell now ? Between him and Tovey we must have the most injured pair of 10's in world rugby.

Hamstring injury, out for 2 months actually

Didn't realise Morgan was out either but I don't think he will get a look in while Bristol are outside the Aviva.

bedfordwelsh wrote:Didn't realise Morgan was out either but I don't think he will get a look in while Bristol are outside the Aviva.

Nor should he.

Risca Rev wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:Didn't realise Morgan was out either but I don't think he will get a look in while Bristol are outside the Aviva.

Nor should he.

Retirement is purely a matter for the individual. It's not a reprimand you use on players who are playing poorly. As long as Priestland feels fit to continue and enjoys the rugby he plays, I hope he continues.

Gats, on the other hand, should pull his head from the sand and accept that Priestland simply isn't up to standard anymore. Ignoring, for a moment, the appalling display across the whole team on Saturday, Priestland invariably falls off tackles, throws disgusting interceptions or finds some other means to eff up horrendously. It's the same nearly every game he plays! And through all that Gats has taken the responsibility of sticking by him. That's not Priestland's fault! Our wise coach is too happy sticking the lad beneath the spotlight when he's clearly in no fit state to be there and then has the nerve to criticise people who register their discontent when he fecks up as a result. Many of the boo-boys, I suspect, wouldn't have been booing the man so much as the decision to have him there.

Knowsit17 wrote: Many of the boo-boys, I suspect, wouldn't have been booing the man so much as the decision to have him there.

So Boo Gatland.  

You're right in everything you say about a player not being responsible for being on a team and with rights to play on a team if picked, as any player would.  

But the Boo boys probably want everything their own way.  Boo the player and hope the Coach is listening.  I say that's being two faced and hedging bets on the idea that Gatland is still doing things right but just needs a hint on a certain few players.

No, if Priestland is wrong in the eyes of the boo boys then the boo boys should have the courage to hint in the right direction and boo their coach.  Any of them have wind enough to do that?

SecretFly wrote:Good man Hugo.  I always like a man with crystal balls.    

And tehre was me thinking you were a salty chocolate balls man

LondonTiger wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Good man Hugo.  I always like a man with crystal balls.    

And tehre was me thinking you were a salty chocolate balls man

Depends on the weekend, Tiger. Variety is Heavenly.

SecretFly wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote: Many of the boo-boys, I suspect, wouldn't have been booing the man so much as the decision to have him there.

So Boo Gatland.  

You're right in everything you say about a player not being responsible for being on a team and with rights to play on a team if picked, as any player would.  

But the Boo boys probably want everything their own way.  Boo the player and hope the Coach is listening.  I say that's being two faced and hedging bets on the idea that Gatland is still doing things right but just needs a hint on a certain few players.

No, if Priestland is wrong in the eyes of the boo boys then the boo boys should have the courage to hint in the right direction and boo their coach.  Any of them have wind enough to do that?

That's the problem Fly. Picture yourself in the MS, watching Priestland throw Nadolo an intercept and the latter scampering 70m up field. What's your first inclination? To search the stands for the coaching staff so as to direct your discontent onto them? Coordinate a fans' protest, complete with banners saying "Pick on form" then and there? No. If you're the average fan sitting in a stadium and someone effs up or someone comes on who's known to eff up, the immediate inclination is to boo that person. I'm not saying I do but as someone who has experienced their share of frustration, I would chance that I have an idea what goes through people's heads when they do.

Booing during games is a fans' right, as unfortunate as that may sound. Whether it's at one player or a whole team, it's a general expression of protest. I don't get involved in personal vitriol directed at players and I don't condone singling somebody out but I can half understand how some people feel like it's the only thing they can do when the coach has made a bad call and it costs the team.

If I was to write this in a letter and try to mail it on to the coaches as advice, do you think I'd get taken seriously? I'd be amazed if they didn't flip me the moral bird. They have the luxury of not having to justify themselves to us regardless how many terrible calls they make! Many fans know this, which is why many generally don't care whether they boo or not anymore.

Knowsit17 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote: Many of the boo-boys, I suspect, wouldn't have been booing the man so much as the decision to have him there.

So Boo Gatland.  

You're right in everything you say about a player not being responsible for being on a team and with rights to play on a team if picked, as any player would.  

But the Boo boys probably want everything their own way.  Boo the player and hope the Coach is listening.  I say that's being two faced and hedging bets on the idea that Gatland is still doing things right but just needs a hint on a certain few players.

No, if Priestland is wrong in the eyes of the boo boys then the boo boys should have the courage to hint in the right direction and boo their coach.  Any of them have wind enough to do that?

That's the problem Fly. Picture yourself in the MS, watching Priestland throw Nadolo an intercept and the latter scampering 70m up field. What's your first inclination? To search the stands for the coaching staff so as to direct your discontent onto them? Coordinate a fans' protest, complete with banners saying "Pick on form" then and there? No. If you're the average fan sitting in a stadium and someone effs up or someone comes on who's known to eff up, the immediate inclination is to boo that person. I'm not saying I do but as someone who has experienced their share of frustration, I would chance that I have an idea what goes through people's heads when they do.

Yes.  But it's also much easier in a crowd of Welsh fans (many of them one day International trippers - pink hats, if you will) to choose a single player to isolate than to choose to boo a coach everytime a camera falls on him in his bunker.  It's easier because it's considered the norm that a player doing silly things might get a boo...it's part of the theatre that even the casual fans understand and appreciate.  It might even be part of the fun for those casual uninformed fans - to do the pantomime boos, and many of them might not even know why they're exactly joining along.

But it would be more difficult to sit in a crowd of Only International rugby fans and engage in a more focused knowledgeable booing episode directed at a man sitting in a crow's nest somewhere in the stadium.  He's obviously not part of the action and some uninformed fans might see the booing of him that as mean spirited act directed at a guy not actively involved in the game...and who has given them much joy during his term. So it's riskier to boo him as the booer might be told to shut the hell up by some pink hats!

But the coach is the guy choosing the players.  That's the guy overseeing the gameplans.  That's the guy being paid very well to give fans a happy day out rather than a maddening one.  He's the guy responsible for the poor player being on the field, making his mistakes.  

What I'm saying is that the fans who booed Priestland aren't doing the maths.  They still want to believe that Gatland is the right man and so therefore don't want to offend him, but have no faith in the player or players or gameplans that Gatland picks.  
Don't blame the poor player - blame the coach.  I'd say boo nobody ideally, but if booing is to be done, I want to see booing fans have the courage to boo the guy who pops up on camera every so often.  That's a protest.  That's placing blame where blame belongs.