Welsh World Cup Squad part 2

by Guest Mon Aug 10, 2015 3:28 am

First topic message reminder :

Anyone else think Ll Williams and Anscombe did well when they came on? Would definitely take them over Phillips and Hook at the moment.

by bedfordwelsh Sat Aug 15, 2015 6:55 am

maestegmafia wrote:JENKINS, James, Evans, LEE, Francis, Jarvis
BALDWIN,Owens, Dacey
AWJ, CHARTERIS, Ball
FALETAU, WARBURTON, LYDIATE, Tip , Moriarty , King
WEBB, Davies, Ll Williams
BIGGAR, Priestland, Anscombe
ROBERTS, Sc WILLIAMS, Morgan
NORTH, HALFPENNY, Li WILLIAMS, Amos

Bold your starting XV Maes? Am still not convinced by King but given his ability to play back row and 2nd row I do think he will get the nod ahead of Davies.

by maestegmafia Sat Aug 15, 2015 8:39 am

Yes starting xv in capitals I guess they pick themselves.

Not sure about the bench..! Maybe

Owens James Francis King Tipuric Davies Anscombe Amos

by bedfordwelsh Sat Aug 15, 2015 4:30 pm

maestegmafia wrote:Yes starting xv in capitals I guess they pick themselves.

Not sure about the bench..! Maybe

Owens James Francis King Tipuric Davies Anscombe Amos

Think those 6 in bold would def be on the bench if didn't start.

by maestegmafia Sat Aug 15, 2015 5:58 pm

King is an interesting guy. The coaches obviously rate him highly as he is per enable included over other guys like Shingler who perform a similar roll.

At the Os he's been good not spectacular.

I trust their judgement. They seem to be making some good calls.

One call they might make is Mathew Morgan instead of either Rob Evans or Arron Jarvis.

by bedfordwelsh Sat Aug 15, 2015 7:10 pm

maestegmafia wrote:King is an interesting guy. The coaches obviously rate him highly as he is per enable included over other guys like Shingler who perform a similar roll.

At the Os he's been good not spectacular.

I trust their judgement. They seem to be making some good calls.

One call they might make is Mathew Morgan instead of either Rob Evans or Arron Jarvis.

Depending on the form/fitness of Lee and Francis then they could drop Jarvis and use Jenkins or James as emergency t/head cover that would free up another slot as you suggest Maes.

by maestegmafia Sun Aug 16, 2015 12:47 am

I think our whole campaign is based around the form and fitness of our tight five. We need them to be in great form for us to qualify.

by bedfordwelsh Sun Aug 16, 2015 12:53 am

I think that could be said for most sides Maes, after we all know the games are won up front.

by mikey_dragon Sun Aug 16, 2015 1:20 am

maestegmafia wrote:I think our whole campaign is based around the form and fitness of our tight five. We need them to be in great form for us to qualify.

Genius.

by Luckless Pedestrian Sun Aug 16, 2015 1:24 am

I'd have Ken Owens over Scott Baldwin any day of the week.

by mikey_dragon Sun Aug 16, 2015 1:35 am

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Ken Owens is easily better than Scott Baldwin.

Not so sure about that. Baldwin was very good in the 6 Nations. Owens has never really nailed down a starting place in the Wales team. They're both good options though and it perhaps would have been wise to have Hibbard is the third option.

by Luckless Pedestrian Sun Aug 16, 2015 1:37 am

I edited my post too late!

Owens has had injuries, which has held him back a bit, but he's the best all-round hooker he have in my opinion. Baldwin did superbly when he stepped in, but we don't need him to hold the fort any more.

by bedfordwelsh Sun Aug 16, 2015 1:43 am

I think Owens is the better all round player and whilst a lot questioned Baldwin at beginning of the 6 Nations he has really stepped up to the mark. If Owens can get a good injury free run of games then I think we will see him emerge as the long term No1 for a while.

by **LondonTiger** Sun Aug 16, 2015 9:25 am

bedfordwelsh wrote:
Depending on the form/fitness of Lee and Francis then they could drop Jarvis and use Jenkins or James as emergency t/head cover that would free up another slot as you suggest Maes.

Are you suggesting they may select just 4 props? If so the increase in squad size to 31 was to allow an extra prop that now has to be on the bench, compared to 2011.

The rules state:

1.1.7 Compliance with Law 3.5

Compliance with the relevant World Rugby Laws and Regulations is critical in the conduct of the Tournament. Should Teams be found to be in breach of Law 3.5 (suitably trained and experienced players in the front row), the matter will be forwarded to the Tournament Disputes Committee for consideration.

In the absence of any mitigating circumstances this will result in:

forfeiture of all Match points for that fixture (including bonus points)
possible financial penalties
In terms of the provision of front row players to comply with Law 3.5, the necessary number of reserve front row players must be included in the Tournament Team to cover last minute injuries to front row players selected in the Match Team within the 48 hour replacement timeframe set out in Section 4.5 on page XX.

Players added to a squad to replace an injured player may not play within 48 hours of the replacement being made. This means that even if you were allowed to select just 4 props (not sure it is allowed) you would be at risk of starting a match with one of the 4 injured and thus forfeiting the points.

Of course all that is completely irrelevant if you were discussing 5 vs 6 props.

by bedfordwelsh Sun Aug 16, 2015 9:30 am

[quote="LondonTiger"]

bedfordwelsh wrote:
Depending on the form/fitness of Lee and Francis then they could drop Jarvis and use Jenkins or James as emergency t/head cover that would free up another slot as you suggest Maes.

Are you suggesting they may select just 4 props?

No but am suggesting they might only take 5. 3 Looseheads in Jenkins, James and Evans plus 2 Tightheads in Lee and Francis

by **LondonTiger** Sun Aug 16, 2015 9:40 am

In which case ignore me.

Pretty sure most sides will opt for 5 props (especially NH ones) with one covering both sides of the scrum. After all if there is an injury to a specialist calling up a replacement pretty easy.

by ceilliau_chwyslyd Mon Aug 17, 2015 12:53 am

mikey_dragon wrote:
Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Ken Owens is easily better than Scott Baldwin.

Not so sure about that. Baldwin was very good in the 6 Nations. Owens has never really nailed down a starting place in the Wales team. They're both good options though and it perhaps would have been wise to have Hibbard is the third option.

Baldwin is currently number one and will do so until he has a bad run. He was excellent vs South Africa and during the 6 nations. It shows how much better Wales can perform when they have a good set piece. Our lineout vs Ireland was one of the best Welsh lineout performances I have ever seen.

Owens is also a great hooker and fantastic in attack and making yards.

Watching Hibbard last week he fell straight to the floor everytime he made contact and made little or no yards... and if you can't throw then you're too much of a risk.

by maestegmafia Mon Aug 17, 2015 2:01 am

I agree Ceilliau...!

He is the form player at international level and we have had our best line out play with him throwing since the days of bob norster

by wayne Mon Aug 17, 2015 2:44 am

ceilliau_chwyslyd wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Ken Owens is easily better than Scott Baldwin.

Not so sure about that. Baldwin was very good in the 6 Nations. Owens has never really nailed down a starting place in the Wales team. They're both good options though and it perhaps would have been wise to have Hibbard is the third option.

Baldwin is currently number one and will do so until he has a bad run. He was excellent vs South Africa and during the 6 nations. It shows how much better Wales can perform when they have a good set piece. Our lineout vs Ireland was one of the best Welsh lineout performances I have ever seen.

Owens is also a great hooker and fantastic in attack and making yards.

Watching Hibbard last week he fell straight to the floor everytime he made contact and made little or no yards... and if you can't throw then you're too much of a risk.

Ceilliau, yn gyntaf, beth yw enw gwych. I'm learning Welsh yet I had to look it up Fantastic name, let me say I know Scott personally and spoken to him on many occasions, and I'm an Ospreys ST holder, from where he has come, being discarded at academy level forcing his way back in from Bridgend Athletic, being 4th choice after coming back from Italy until we could afford to let Hibbard go and being first choice.
It has been a succession of improvements and he is still improving IMO, but I would still pick Ken over him, JUST! Scott hasn't or will not let us down and I wouldn't in the slightest be disappointed if he was selected, he's a credit to us and himself.

by maestegmafia Mon Aug 17, 2015 4:15 am

The other option we may see is that Wales choose six props but just two hookers!

by wayne Tue Aug 18, 2015 7:15 am

Maes, unless one of our props is a John Smit, (can play hooker and prop) it is not going to happen, totally different skillsets needed. Wasn't it John Yapp that was tried to make into a hooker a few years ago. Dimitri Arhip when he originally came to us (Os) was reputed to be able to play anywhere in the front row, although I've only seen him as a tight head.

by maestegmafia Tue Aug 18, 2015 8:41 am

I didn't suggest that a prop could play hooker. Just that we may take fewer hookers than expected

by Luckless Pedestrian Tue Aug 18, 2015 5:08 pm

But why?

by Gwlad Tue Aug 18, 2015 5:11 pm

maestegmafia wrote:I didn't suggest that a prop could play hooker. Just that we may take fewer hookers than expected

one gets crocked then what? bring in sam burgess?

by bedfordwelsh Tue Aug 18, 2015 7:35 pm

Surely 3 hookers have to be considered the norm that way there is at least a chance of rotating/resting one of them.

by TightHEAD Tue Aug 18, 2015 9:46 pm

Warburton thinks Wales are fitter than in 2011 RWC, having watched them against Ireland I'd have to disagree, they looked tired and lethargic to me.

by munkian Tue Aug 18, 2015 9:49 pm

Because they have trained harder ?

Ireland seemed tired in the 2nd half.

by iantobquick Tue Aug 18, 2015 10:23 pm

Pity we still can't get anything else right then? Is this stuff supposed to scare the other teams?

by bedfordwelsh Tue Aug 18, 2015 10:30 pm

Whilst I was more disappointed with the result against Ireland than I expected to be (more so by the experienced players) we all know that we are notoriously slow starters and I am not reading to much into that result.

IF however we put as poor a performance in against Ireland and/or Italy over the next few weeks then I will be worried.

by SecretFly Tue Aug 18, 2015 10:31 pm

TightHEAD wrote:Warburton thinks Wales are fitter than in 2011 RWC, having watched them against Ireland I'd have to disagree, they looked tired and lethargic to me.

?

One game TightHEAD.

Slow starters.

Fitness program designed to pay dividends when it matters not in friendlies.

I'd say knowing Gats like we all do, I'd say Warburton is right. They'll have been put through torture to get every ounce of performance out of them come the pool stages and perhaps beyond.

The only down side in that scenario is that I think England have the art and science in the bag too and they'll be screaming fit not just to levels that match the always super fit Welsh side but perhaps to by a distance beyond that. Australian players.... well they might be beaten but again, it won't be by superior match fitness, certainly not with a hard dog like Cheika shouting the orders to his staff.

by bedfordwelsh Tue Aug 18, 2015 10:37 pm

None of the top sides will lack fitness and fitness alone will not win matches or the WC.

by SecretFly Tue Aug 18, 2015 11:02 pm

bedfordwelsh wrote:None of the top sides will lack fitness and fitness alone will not win matches or the WC.

There are some sides that have taken fitness prep to an art form...along with the investments needed for such. Not all sides will have such fitness levels and it would be naïve to think so.

Some sides will have extra guile based on experience that might negate super fitness hitting them but certainly the concentration on the art of super fitness, with all the modern systems in place to achieve it, will be a factor that some teams will be relying on as very important indeed.

I say the two ultra fittest sides going to the England WC will be Wales and England itself. What they do with all the science and conditioning is another thing... but they'll have over 80 minutes in them for every game without a shadow of a doubt.

by bedfordwelsh Tue Aug 18, 2015 11:09 pm

SecretFly wrote:
bedfordwelsh wrote:None of the top sides will lack fitness and fitness alone will not win matches or the WC.

There are some sides that have taken fitness prep to an art form...along with the investments needed for such. Not all sides will have such fitness levels and it would be naïve to think so.

Some sides will have extra guile based on experience that might negate super fitness hitting them but certainly the concentration on the art of super fitness, with all the modern systems in place to achieve it, will be a factor that some teams will be relying on as very important indeed.

I say the two ultra fittest sides going to the England WC will be Wales and England itself. What they do with all the science and conditioning is another thing... but they'll have over 80 minutes in them for every game without a shadow of a doubt.

Fly,

The edge (if any) that either of those two teams will have over the likes of the SH sides or France or Ireland will be minimal at the most.

by TightHEAD Tue Aug 18, 2015 11:11 pm

Looked to me like Wales forgot to take a rugby ball with them this summer.

by bedfordwelsh Tue Aug 18, 2015 11:29 pm

Didn't forget at all just wasn't in their planning.

by munkian Tue Aug 18, 2015 11:34 pm

Team of limited/first caps thrown together is slightly disjointed 'shocker'

Hardly worth crowing about.

by bedfordwelsh Tue Aug 18, 2015 11:39 pm

munkian wrote:Team of limited/first caps thrown together is slightly disjointed 'shocker'

Hardly worth crowing about.

Agreed, if anything it was the experienced players (since dropped) who were the ones who didn't show up.

by LordDowlais Tue Aug 18, 2015 11:42 pm

Lets no forget, even with a third choice side we still managed to score three tries against a vastly more experienced Irish side.

by TightHEAD Tue Aug 18, 2015 11:44 pm

Always a plus side.

by bedfordwelsh Tue Aug 18, 2015 11:46 pm

Think most of us have given up trying to 2nd guess Gatland but I would like to see his 1st choice side (or as close to it as possible) get a run out before the England game.

by SecretFly Tue Aug 18, 2015 11:52 pm

LordDowlais wrote:Lets no forget, even with a third choice side we still managed to score three tries against a vastly more experienced Irish side.

Lets no forget, even with a third choice side we still managed to score three tries against a vastly more experienced [third choice] Irish side.

by TightHEAD Wed Aug 19, 2015 12:18 am

SecretFly wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:Lets no forget, even with a third choice side we still managed to score three tries against a vastly more experienced Irish side.

Lets no forget, even with a third choice side we still managed to score three tries against a vastly more experienced [third choice] Irish side.

Ireland were already in the showers at that point.

by mikey_dragon Wed Aug 19, 2015 3:39 am

TightHEAD wrote:Warburton thinks Wales are fitter than in 2011 RWC, having watched them against Ireland I'd have to disagree, they looked tired and lethargic to me.

At which point? Our fourth choice players and new caps didn't really have much possession, especially in the first half. That was to be expected against a streetwise Ireland pack though. I think we'll see a different result in the next two games.

by SecretFly Wed Aug 19, 2015 3:42 am

Now they've become forth choice?!!!

Any takers on them being a rag tag selection of 5th Graders????

Was Gats trying out selections for the WC to come or giving Regional non-starters game time before the Pro12 season?

by mikey_dragon Wed Aug 19, 2015 3:52 am

SecretFly wrote:Now they've become forth choice?!!!

Any takers on them being a rag tag selection of 5th Graders????

Was Gats trying out selections for the WC to come or giving Regional non-starters game time before the Pro12 season?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/33737995
Smith clearly has 3 LH props in front of him (James, Evans Jenkins), Hibbard clearly has 3 hookers in front of him (Baldwin, Owens, Dacey), Andrews clearly, in most peoples eyes, has 3 TH props in front of him (Lee, Francis, Jarvis). Each of Phillips and Hook have 3 players ahead of them. The new caps were Tyler Morgan, Eli Walker, Dominic Day, Ross Moriarty, Kristian Dacey, Gareth Anscombe. I'm really struggling to understand where your confusion is coming from?

by Gwlad Wed Aug 19, 2015 4:10 am

mikey_dragon wrote:
SecretFly wrote:Now they've become forth choice?!!!

Any takers on them being a rag tag selection of 5th Graders????

Was Gats trying out selections for the WC to come or giving Regional non-starters game time before the Pro12 season?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/33737995
Smith clearly has 3 LH props in front of him (James, Evans Jenkins), Hibbard clearly has 3 hookers in front of him (Baldwin, Owens, Dacey), Andrews clearly, in most peoples eyes, has 3 TH props in front of him (Lee, Francis, Jarvis). Each of Phillips and Hook have 3 players ahead of them. The new caps were Tyler Morgan, Eli Walker, Dominic Day, Ross Moriarty, Kristian Dacey, Gareth Anscombe. I'm really struggling to understand where your confusion is coming from?

You're right but what an abject waste of a warm up match. fact is it was a trial.

by mikey_dragon Wed Aug 19, 2015 4:34 am

It was a waste, it only told most of us what we already knew. Schmidt didn't allow Ireland to waste theirs. I hope it doesn't come back to bite us (I can't see it doing so anyway).

by offload Wed Aug 19, 2015 7:49 am

I think we should be clear here. We (Wales) know we can field a competitive XV that will compete well with any team at the WC. We have a very poor record against the big SH teams but it is a long time since we were on the wrong end of a cricket score.

The problem lies with a very real lack of depth for the top level. Our second team is second by some margin and we all know that at the WC we will need a strong squad. Currently our weakest area is the front five and for us to get out of the group, let alone progress much further we will need to keep our best players fit and have some luck.

When I read here about our thirds, or fourths we are referring to Welsh qualified club players and promising kids - nothing more.

by maestegmafia Wed Aug 19, 2015 9:18 am

Only way to up the depth and quality is exposure, training and improving the league/premiership levels the guys play at.

Garland can only do two of those.

Do you lads think we could have needed a fourth warm up game?

by offload Wed Aug 19, 2015 10:00 am

Maesteg, not convinced a 4th game would help. Gatland knows his 31 well enough, he just has one or two places to fine tune. Problem is we have to start our best XV against England and at this stage he won't want to risk extra games and injury. He also needs to make sure that the team against Uruguay can gel quickly and rack up some points.

We have to beat Egland. If we don't the pressure for a result v Australia will be more than we can cope with.

by Gwlad Wed Aug 19, 2015 10:02 am

Based on a first XV as follows of which 2 are questionably fit

Geth, Baldwin, Lee
Charteris, AWJ
Lydiate, Warbs, Faletau
Webb biggar
North, Doc, SWilliams, Half
LWilliams

We have a decent bench up front with only Francis untested and Tipuric real class
James, Owens, Francis
Ball, Tipuric

But poor depth in the backs to say the least
Davies/LLoyd
Anscombe/Priestland
Morgan,Amos/Cuthbert

Keeping this 23 fit is crucial. Getting Lee and Sanjay fit is fundamental. If we lose Biggar or Doc we are toast.

Retaining Hook Hibbard and Philipps would have made sense but he obviously has faith and they are just a phone call away.

by Sponsored content