Welsh World Cup Squad part 2

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.

O'Donnell has been ruled out of the WC. Real shame as he was on fine form.

mikey_dragon wrote:

I thought Schmidt was smarter than that...

Schmidt had the right idea, Gatland didn't. I would have left out some third string players in the Wales team, and first teamers in the Ireland team. I understand Ross, Ryan and Henry needed a game, but I didn't think Heaslip and Best should have been in the team. If Heaslip got injured that would have been a massive loss.

Sean Cronin is recuperating from a shoulder op (I think). He isn't fully fit yet so thats why Best was there.

One of Heaslip, SOB or POM had to start. Everywhere else, it was 2nd/3rd choice or players coming back from long lay-offs like Ryan, Earls & Trimble. That was about Henderson's 3rd start at 2nd row in the last year and I don't think he had ever played with Ryan before so it was a very new partnership.

What I think was really pleasing about Ireland was how good the passing was - very few dropped balls or miss passes. Likewise for the lineout & scrums.

maestegmafia wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

IronMike wrote:

Gareth Davies is equally capable on the wing in my opinion, certainly knows his way to the try line

It's just as well wingers have no other responsibilities, and all they have to do is run a bit with the ball.

As a bench player it's good to have many strings to your bow.

I would certainly like to see Gareth Davies in the match day 23 for the big games.

Yes, plus a winger / back 3 option.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

IronMike wrote:

Gareth Davies is equally capable on the wing in my opinion, certainly knows his way to the try line

It's just as well wingers have no other responsibilities, and all they have to do is run a bit with the ball.

As a bench player it's good to have many strings to your bow.

I would certainly like to see Gareth Davies in the match day 23 for the big games.

Yes, plus a winger / back 3 option.

I would imagine Davies Anscombe would be definitely on the bench with the option of a centre/back three player or an extra forward adding to the three front rowers, lock and flanker option.

With regards the backs in our replacements, Davies and Anscombe realistically cover all but the centres. And North comfortably fits into centre if needed.

There are some interesting combinations...!

GunsGerms wrote:

Fanster wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:As an Ireland fan I was pretty annoyed that Wales didnt seem bothered at all for this game. It almost seemed like some sort of ploy to just treat as if it wasnt a test match from the start and not take it seriously for some reason.

It's hard to blame the 8-10 players who have rarely had a sniff of international rugby or were on debut, none had a platform to play with.

I would be annoyed as an Irish fan too, this match was a training match for the odd player to stake a claim, whereas it would provide enough fodder to drop a lot of them, Smith, Moriarty, Phillips, Hook, Tyler Morgan, Matthew Morgan can now all be dropped without whinging that they never got a shot.

Why would you start 8-10 players when the WC starts in just over a month? Seems farcical and doesnt do anyone any favours.

It's not about replACING ALL 8-10 with first teamers, but there has to be a platform for performance to allow the young boys a chance to be succesfull.

I generally would have a 50/66% policy, where at least 1/2 or 2/3 players in each small unit would be starters to allow for the young player to get a decent chance within a settled unit, for examply I would have wanted to see in the back row, 2 of Lydiate, Warburton, Tipric, Falatau to play with either Moriarty or Baker, to allow Moriarty or Baker a chance to play within a unit.

Similarly I would have played Lloyd Williams with Hook, and Phillips with Anscombe.

Sin é wrote:What I think was really pleasing about Ireland was how good the passing was - very few dropped balls or miss passes. Likewise for the lineout & scrums.

True..!

I don't think Wales had practiced much set piece work prior to this game.

And it will be interesting to see how that effects the next round of cuts to the squad.

mikey_dragon wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

beshocked wrote:Did seem like from a "neutral" that Wales drew out the white flag before a fire shot was fired.

Harsh perhaps but Wales didn't put out enough 1st teamers to threaten this Irish side in my opinion.

Only when Faletau came on did Wales have some semblance of fight in them and that was just 1 player galvanising them.

Could have been different if they had another two or three players gelling things together. It's not helpful to anyone's development if the match is one sided.

A lot of Welsh fans would have shelled out money to watch this match and they would have been disappointed.

Also where was Tomas Francis?

That is harsh. Most of us knew they would be second best, but I can't fault the effort of the players. When I seen the Irish team announcement, I took one look at their pack and bench, and knew it would be a very tough day at the office. Considering the coaches apparently had some kiwi agreement you wonder if Schmidt put in a lot of first team players just to try and get one over on us.

As for selection, you've a point. There are a few players I wouldn't have selected and some I would have. For me, Francis should have been on the bench at least. Perhaps he will earn his first cap with the first team in Dublin.

Yes, I'm sure Schmidt is so driven by his desire to 'get one over' on the Welsh that he tore up his plans for progressing the team toward the RWC.

What team do you think Schmidt should have put out? Not just any team, a weaker team for the sake of being weaker, but a team with purpose. A world cup reason for every selection...

I thought Schmidt was smarter than that...

Schmidt had the right idea, Gatland didn't. I would have left out some third string players in the Wales team, and first teamers in the Ireland team. I understand Ross, Ryan and Henry needed a game, but I didn't think Heaslip and Best should have been in the team. If Heaslip got injured that would have been a massive loss.

Not sure exactly why you're laughing, considering the result

So you don't think Heaslip and Best should have been there. I think it's obvious why they were there. Leadership, experience and result. To state the obvious; experience and leadership are vital on the field and perhaps more so in a warm up game like this when trying out new combinations and with players of little international experience.
Schmidt also wanted a win. It's in his DNA. It's also very good for the team to experience that win, away from home in front of a packed stadium. A good motivator and a very useful experience come the RWC.

Schmidt doesn't expect his players to be hampered by fear of injury leading up to the RWC (he said as much). Why should he?

Munchkin wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

beshocked wrote:Did seem like from a "neutral" that Wales drew out the white flag before a fire shot was fired.

Harsh perhaps but Wales didn't put out enough 1st teamers to threaten this Irish side in my opinion.

Only when Faletau came on did Wales have some semblance of fight in them and that was just 1 player galvanising them.

Could have been different if they had another two or three players gelling things together. It's not helpful to anyone's development if the match is one sided.

A lot of Welsh fans would have shelled out money to watch this match and they would have been disappointed.

Also where was Tomas Francis?

That is harsh. Most of us knew they would be second best, but I can't fault the effort of the players. When I seen the Irish team announcement, I took one look at their pack and bench, and knew it would be a very tough day at the office. Considering the coaches apparently had some kiwi agreement you wonder if Schmidt put in a lot of first team players just to try and get one over on us.

As for selection, you've a point. There are a few players I wouldn't have selected and some I would have. For me, Francis should have been on the bench at least. Perhaps he will earn his first cap with the first team in Dublin.

Yes, I'm sure Schmidt is so driven by his desire to 'get one over' on the Welsh that he tore up his plans for progressing the team toward the RWC.

What team do you think Schmidt should have put out? Not just any team, a weaker team for the sake of being weaker, but a team with purpose. A world cup reason for every selection...

I thought Schmidt was smarter than that...

Schmidt had the right idea, Gatland didn't. I would have left out some third string players in the Wales team, and first teamers in the Ireland team. I understand Ross, Ryan and Henry needed a game, but I didn't think Heaslip and Best should have been in the team. If Heaslip got injured that would have been a massive loss.

Not sure exactly why you're laughing, considering the result

So you don't think Heaslip and Best should have been there. I think it's obvious why they were there. Leadership, experience and result. To state the obvious; experience and leadership are vital on the field and perhaps more so in a warm up game like this when trying out new combinations and with players of little international experience.
Schmidt also wanted a win. It's in his DNA. It's also very good for the team to experience that win, away from home in front of a packed stadium. A good motivator and a very useful experience come the RWC.

Schmidt doesn't expect his players to be hampered by fear of injury leading up to the RWC (he said as much). Why should he?

Oh dear. I was laughing at your post. You can latch on to the result if you wish, but you won't see anything of the sort in the return fixture. I doubt we'd witness such a cocky attitude then.

Yeah Heaslip pretty much carried the team and was probably MOTM. But for reasons I pointed out it was a little risky, and stated it's something I wouldn't have done. He will surely be one of Ireland's top players in the world cup. For Wales to take a bit more out of it we should have included some better players into the match day squad. James, Francis, B.Davies, G.Davies, Priestland in; Smith, Andrews, King, Phillips, Hook out. That way I think it would have been a better Wales performance, rather than a wasted fixture for us.

I'm not saying he should, I think you've read a bit too much into my post.

You're misinterpreting me totally.

miaow wrote:I don't doubt Amos' ability and long term prospects...

mikey_dragon wrote:How does he have poor technique? He has good technique and has continued to show it throughout his career [...] I don't see why you single out the guy getting his second cap.

I'm referring to that one incident under the high ball, as I was talking solely about this one game. With the greatest of respect, this was a match to see what these youngsters and fringe players could do in a pseudo-Test match environment; it's not entirely relevant to bring up what a player has or hasn't done for the u20's and Dragons, especially when I'm explicitly asking what was so impressive about his performance in this particular game.

GunsGerms wrote:As an Ireland fan I was pretty annoyed that Wales didnt seem bothered at all for this game. It almost seemed like some sort of ploy to just treat as if it wasnt a test match from the start and not take it seriously for some reason.

In their defence, it's not uncommon in the warm up matches - as an England fan I could have said the same about Ireland last time round. At the time I was just happy to get a good win against you after the beating we'd taken at the end of the 6 nations though.

Anyway, the point is that surely some poor performances are expected at this stage. These are after all just warm up games, and it is all about preparing for the world cup. If the coaches are getting the preparation right I'd expect them to still be doing a lot of conditioning work, and for the players to be tired and consequently in poor form when playing. So as much as I'd love to take confidence from this result, I can't help feel that even if they fielded the same team Wales would be much stronger in a couple of months against England.

I've no doubt the posters here are right in thinking a number of players shouldn't and won't make the cut - but I'd give them a bit of slack as I don't think they will have been at their best. If 2011 (and his time at Wasps) is anything to go by Gatland tends to get the conditioning right, and I think Wales are going to be hard to beat.

mikey_dragon wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

beshocked wrote:Did seem like from a "neutral" that Wales drew out the white flag before a fire shot was fired.

Harsh perhaps but Wales didn't put out enough 1st teamers to threaten this Irish side in my opinion.

Only when Faletau came on did Wales have some semblance of fight in them and that was just 1 player galvanising them.

Could have been different if they had another two or three players gelling things together. It's not helpful to anyone's development if the match is one sided.

A lot of Welsh fans would have shelled out money to watch this match and they would have been disappointed.

Also where was Tomas Francis?

That is harsh. Most of us knew they would be second best, but I can't fault the effort of the players. When I seen the Irish team announcement, I took one look at their pack and bench, and knew it would be a very tough day at the office. Considering the coaches apparently had some kiwi agreement you wonder if Schmidt put in a lot of first team players just to try and get one over on us.

As for selection, you've a point. There are a few players I wouldn't have selected and some I would have. For me, Francis should have been on the bench at least. Perhaps he will earn his first cap with the first team in Dublin.

Yes, I'm sure Schmidt is so driven by his desire to 'get one over' on the Welsh that he tore up his plans for progressing the team toward the RWC.

What team do you think Schmidt should have put out? Not just any team, a weaker team for the sake of being weaker, but a team with purpose. A world cup reason for every selection...

I thought Schmidt was smarter than that...

Schmidt had the right idea, Gatland didn't. I would have left out some third string players in the Wales team, and first teamers in the Ireland team. I understand Ross, Ryan and Henry needed a game, but I didn't think Heaslip and Best should have been in the team. If Heaslip got injured that would have been a massive loss.

Not sure exactly why you're laughing, considering the result

So you don't think Heaslip and Best should have been there. I think it's obvious why they were there. Leadership, experience and result. To state the obvious; experience and leadership are vital on the field and perhaps more so in a warm up game like this when trying out new combinations and with players of little international experience.
Schmidt also wanted a win. It's in his DNA. It's also very good for the team to experience that win, away from home in front of a packed stadium. A good motivator and a very useful experience come the RWC.

Schmidt doesn't expect his players to be hampered by fear of injury leading up to the RWC (he said as much). Why should he?

Oh dear. I was laughing at your post. You can latch on to the result if you wish, but you won't see anything of the sort in the return fixture. I doubt we'd witness such a cocky attitude then.

Yeah Heaslip pretty much carried the team and was probably MOTM. But for reasons I pointed out it was a little risky, and stated it's something I wouldn't have done. He will surely be one of Ireland's top players in the world cup. For Wales to take a bit more out of it we should have included some better players into the match day squad. James, Francis, B.Davies, G.Davies, Priestland in; Smith, Andrews, King, Phillips, Hook out. That way I think it would have been a better Wales performance, rather than a wasted fixture for us.

I'm not saying he should, I think you've read a bit too much into my post.

Don't be so touchy. I thought it was obvious that my comment was tongue in cheek. My smiley not really getting the attempt at humour across.... I'm not being cocky about the win. It was too easy, the Wales team wasn't properly prepared, and you're right, I do fully expect a much closer game when Wales visit Ireland.

Ireland needed leadership. That would come from POC, POM, Heaslip and Best. As you wouldn't have picked Heaslip, and I assume Best, which two would you have picked? Maybe you think it makes much more sense not to have any proven leaders on the field?

maestegmafia wrote:With regards the backs in our replacements, Davies and Anscombe realistically cover all but the centres.

They really don't.

GunsGerms wrote:Heaslip never gets injured. He has only had one ankle injury in his career I think. He is indestructable.

Didn't he get injured against France in the Six Nations, except it turned out not have been much of an injury at all?

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Heaslip never gets injured. He has only had one ankle injury in his career I think. He is indestructable.

Didn't he get injured against France in the Six Nations, except it turned out not have been much of an injury at all?

He was very definitely injured and an injury which was the result of a cheap shot. Not much he could do about that.

Fanster wrote:I generally would have a 50/66% policy, where at least 1/2 or 2/3 players in each small unit would be starters to allow for the young player to get a decent chance within a settled unit, for examply I would have wanted to see in the back row, 2 of Lydiate, Warburton, Tipric, Falatau to play with either Moriarty or Baker, to allow Moriarty or Baker a chance to play within a unit.

Similarly I would have played Lloyd Williams with Hook, and Phillips with Anscombe.

I agree with this in principle, and I think it's a good way to bed a player into the position. For example, when a senior player is injured and replaced by someone who s relatively new to the set up, you want them to be led somewhat by the players next to them. Twelve to eighteen months down the line, all being well, that rookie will have acclimatised, and be a comfortable and confident member of the squad.

Unfortunately, that's not how Gatland works. Unlike Lancaster's loyalty to the incumbent, if Jamie Roberts is injured and replaced by Scott Williams, however well Scott plays, you can guarantee that Roberts is back in the team as soon as he's fit. Moreover, this isn't a scenario where Gatland and Wales has 12-18 months in which to get players up to speed. On the one hand this was a chance for some players like Hook and Cuthbert to play their way back into the team; neither did it, and I wouldn't be surprised to see both left out of the final squad. On the other, this was a run through of a potential scenario in the group stage. I think you can generally see who fits in and where in training, and how well they're playing; this game, as much as anything, was an audition for the Uruguay, and perhaps even Fiji, games. Gatland will be rotating heavily in at least one if not both of those games. It is highly unlikely that he will select 2/3rds of the first team in both. It's too much of a risk to slog the first team for every game in the group: if they do get out of it, they'll be spent by the quarters. Don't believe all the 'Wales are the fittest team' hype either, they're terrible chasing a deficit against the 'big' teams, so fitness may be irrelevant in what could be conditions that demand tight, gruelling rugby in the English Autumn.

Therefore, despite agreeing with your logic, I think this was a decent selection. He knows that this crop of reserves is lacking in cohesion as a result, and would probably lose handsomely to Fiji if they played tomorrow. It was as much a run through of the same sort of scenario as New Zealand's game against Scotland last Autumn was; they treated the Autumn Internationals as an audition for the World Cup group stage, seeing Scotland as the game where they can rest to first team, before the quarter final against Wales...which worked for them, as they finally put a stubborn Wales side away in the final fifteen minutes. The week's rest helped the first team. When Wales implemented this approach, they learnt that...well, Wales learnt/confirmed that the players outside the first team, as we've seen time and time again, are incapable of manifesting Gatland's gameplan effectively, and as a result they invariably lose.

Agree with Luckless. Davies is a great broken field runner, with exceptional pace and balanced running for a scrum half, but he's no winger. It's last chance saloon having him, or Anscombe, on the wing. It may be fair to say that, if Gatland were to select only two backs on the bench to aid the forward effort (although there's no need to do this with 23 players), Scott Williams would be the one to move to the wing...but then you're missing a decent replacement at centre. So, far from ideal.

Munchkin wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

beshocked wrote:Did seem like from a "neutral" that Wales drew out the white flag before a fire shot was fired.

Harsh perhaps but Wales didn't put out enough 1st teamers to threaten this Irish side in my opinion.

Only when Faletau came on did Wales have some semblance of fight in them and that was just 1 player galvanising them.

Could have been different if they had another two or three players gelling things together. It's not helpful to anyone's development if the match is one sided.

A lot of Welsh fans would have shelled out money to watch this match and they would have been disappointed.

Also where was Tomas Francis?

That is harsh. Most of us knew they would be second best, but I can't fault the effort of the players. When I seen the Irish team announcement, I took one look at their pack and bench, and knew it would be a very tough day at the office. Considering the coaches apparently had some kiwi agreement you wonder if Schmidt put in a lot of first team players just to try and get one over on us.

As for selection, you've a point. There are a few players I wouldn't have selected and some I would have. For me, Francis should have been on the bench at least. Perhaps he will earn his first cap with the first team in Dublin.

Yes, I'm sure Schmidt is so driven by his desire to 'get one over' on the Welsh that he tore up his plans for progressing the team toward the RWC.

What team do you think Schmidt should have put out? Not just any team, a weaker team for the sake of being weaker, but a team with purpose. A world cup reason for every selection...

I thought Schmidt was smarter than that...

Schmidt had the right idea, Gatland didn't. I would have left out some third string players in the Wales team, and first teamers in the Ireland team. I understand Ross, Ryan and Henry needed a game, but I didn't think Heaslip and Best should have been in the team. If Heaslip got injured that would have been a massive loss.

Not sure exactly why you're laughing, considering the result

So you don't think Heaslip and Best should have been there. I think it's obvious why they were there. Leadership, experience and result. To state the obvious; experience and leadership are vital on the field and perhaps more so in a warm up game like this when trying out new combinations and with players of little international experience.
Schmidt also wanted a win. It's in his DNA. It's also very good for the team to experience that win, away from home in front of a packed stadium. A good motivator and a very useful experience come the RWC.

Schmidt doesn't expect his players to be hampered by fear of injury leading up to the RWC (he said as much). Why should he?

Oh dear. I was laughing at your post. You can latch on to the result if you wish, but you won't see anything of the sort in the return fixture. I doubt we'd witness such a cocky attitude then.

Yeah Heaslip pretty much carried the team and was probably MOTM. But for reasons I pointed out it was a little risky, and stated it's something I wouldn't have done. He will surely be one of Ireland's top players in the world cup. For Wales to take a bit more out of it we should have included some better players into the match day squad. James, Francis, B.Davies, G.Davies, Priestland in; Smith, Andrews, King, Phillips, Hook out. That way I think it would have been a better Wales performance, rather than a wasted fixture for us.

I'm not saying he should, I think you've read a bit too much into my post.

Don't be so touchy. I thought it was obvious that my comment was tongue in cheek. My smiley not really getting the attempt at humour across.... I'm not being cocky about the win. It was too easy, the Wales team wasn't properly prepared, and you're right, I do fully expect a much closer game when Wales visit Ireland.

Ireland needed leadership. That would come from POC, POM, Heaslip and Best. As you wouldn't have picked Heaslip, and I assume Best, which two would you have picked? Maybe you think it makes much more sense not to have any proven leaders on the field?

Oh, apologies then. It's kind of hard to identify these things through the medium of the internet. My comments on Schmidt trying to get one over on Gatland were a bit tongue in cheek too. But even then you came across a little defensive. As I also said I think Schmidt had the right idea. He put out a team that didn't lack experience, and the majority of them are capable of getting a first team spot. Again as I've also said, I think on another thread, that's testament to the work of the provinces and IRFU. Ireland are perhaps the most competitive and have the most strength in depth I've ever seen. Bit of a contrast from us but we're used to it by now.

Yeah you're correct. I'm not so great with my knowledge of Irish rugby, but hasn't Murphy played 8 as well? He could have started there, with someone other than POM at 6. He could have been radical and gone with Henry and TOD on each flank too, but I'm not sure he would ever try that. If Sin is correct then I don't think there was much choice than to give Strauss and Best as hooker options. There's not really much more to add. It's just I think if the changes to team Wales that I had proposed had gone in then it would have been a better game for both.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Heaslip never gets injured. He has only had one ankle injury in his career I think. He is indestructable.

Didn't he get injured against France in the Six Nations, except it turned out not have been much of an injury at all?

Oh yeah thats true. Cheap shot though plus he recovered like a champ.

miaow wrote:You're misinterpreting me totally.

miaow wrote:I don't doubt Amos' ability and long term prospects...

mikey_dragon wrote:How does he have poor technique? He has good technique and has continued to show it throughout his career [...] I don't see why you single out the guy getting his second cap.

I'm referring to that one incident under the high ball, as I was talking solely about this one game. With the greatest of respect, this was a match to see what these youngsters and fringe players could do in a pseudo-Test match environment; it's not entirely relevant to bring up what a player has or hasn't done for the u20's and Dragons, especially when I'm explicitly asking what was so impressive about his performance in this particular game.

I haven't. I just don't see how you believe he did so badly in this team, and on the back of just that one incident. For what was asked of him Amos did well. What were you expecting exactly, length of the field tries? He's capable of that and has done that. But that's expecting a bit much when you look at the standard of both teams. I think Amos has a lot to offer and showed glimpses of that by gaining ground and beating defenders, a lot more than some players did. His form also warrants selection ahead of others for me. So in reality it is entirely relevant to bring up his form for the Dragons.

miaow wrote:Agree with Luckless. Davies is a great broken field runner, with exceptional pace and balanced running for a scrum half, but he's no winger. It's last chance saloon having him, or Anscombe, on the wing. It may be fair to say that, if Gatland were to select only two backs on the bench to aid the forward effort (although there's no need to do this with 23 players), Scott Williams would be the one to move to the wing...but then you're missing a decent replacement at centre. So, far from ideal.

No one said he was, just that he could cover if we were depleted.

GunsGerms wrote:Heaslip never gets injured. He has only had one ankle injury in his career I think. He is indestructable.

He broke his back too just recently

Am pretty sure I read that the squad was getting trimmed ahead of the trip up North but doesn't seem that way or if they have its been kept very quiet.

Gwlad wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Heaslip never gets injured. He has only had one ankle injury in his career I think. He is indestructable.

He broke his back too just recently

So he's not Wolverine,he must be Batman!

bedfordwelsh wrote:Am pretty sure I read that the squad was getting trimmed ahead of the trip up North but doesn't seem that way or if they have its been kept very quiet.

I imagine that we will hear more by Wednesday.

News feeds are reporting that it will be cut to 36 maybe 38 this week.

bedfordwelsh wrote:News feeds are reporting that it will be cut to 36 maybe 38 this week.

And to be announced by the end of this week.

I wonder about the players not included vs Ireland in Cardiff, those that are not obvious selections.

Patchell, Gareth Davies, Francis, Thornton and Dixon.

Are they still in contention?

I'd say Patchell, Dixon, and (obviously) Thornton are gone. Gareth Davies could be second choice, but could be demoted, slightly worrying at how volatile the selection is in certain positions, especially as Davies has received such up-and-down selection at the Scarlets as well. The same will-he-won't-he applies to Francis, in that he may have been deemed too unfit to make the cut, or he could be the first choice 3 if Samson is injured.

miaow wrote:I'd say Patchell, Dixon, and (obviously) Thornton are gone. Gareth Davies could be second choice, but could be demoted, slightly worrying at how volatile the selection is in certain positions, especially as Davies has received such up-and-down selection at the Scarlets as well. The same will-he-won't-he applies to Francis, in that he may have been deemed too unfit to make the cut, or he could be the first choice 3 if Samson is injured.

I thought that it was reported that Francis fitness was good?

No idea, but I'd take reports with a pinch of salt. By the look of him, he's a big old boy, very much in the Adam Jones vein. He might have struggled with the high intensity training, and in turn Gatland might not want to risk picking him if he proves to be a unfit weakness in the defensive line. I doubt this is the case, I'm just speculating that it could be one of the two, although it's much more likely Gatland is keeping him fit and shielding him (might have had a niggle going into the Ireland game, hench the non-selection? they dont have to broadcast everything)

I'd be a bit surprised if Francis and G Davies are dropped.

bedfordwelsh wrote:I'd be a bit surprised if Francis and G Davies are dropped.  

I would too

Francis had a good season with a good club, Davies had a troubled season but showed what he can do when he got his chances.

I sometimes wonder about this forum

I think Francis not being elected fro game 1 tells us everything; he is in the final squad and is being preserved for the game when Gatland tries out his first 23.

Why the hell would we drop Francis now? If Lee is touch and go even and we have no one else able to step in why would we drop the obvious replacement who Gatland has said has looked great in training

I agree we have only had good reports on Francis so far from the Welsh camp.

I just still find it strange we haven't capped him yet that's all. Lee and Francis should/will be our preferred tight head options

We've had one of 3 warm up games - the teams will get closer and closer to our 'first' squad as the games go on.

Think we all agree that Francis should have been capped against Italy but will we see what Gatland thinks his is 1st team until the England game?

bedfordwelsh wrote:Think we all agree that Francis should have been capped against Italy but will we see what Gatland thinks his is 1st team until the England game?

I think I read that Francis was to be selected in the next ge on another forum. Reasonably accurate poster.

I really think Francis omission from last weekends game tells us a lot about where Gats is at.

There is no debate, he is the man in the absence of Lee and his bench option if Lee is fit.

No trial is required.

Last weekends game therefore was a straightforward hit out for the no hopers, a confidence builder for the newbies, 1 on 1 for the half backs, a last chance for the old sweats and a first start for the the old faithfuls.

An unfit Lee won't be any good to us. My guess is that he will be staying on the bench if Francis' debut goes well.

mikey_dragon wrote:An unfit Lee won't be any good to us. My guess is that he will be staying on the bench if Francis' debut goes well.

You may be right, my worry is what if it doesnt.

And frankly its annoying because fat stubborn old hair bear or not, we have the perfect ex tight head legend who could have done the job and firmed up the set piece for us with Francis backing up. Adam who?

Gwlad wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:An unfit Lee won't be any good to us. My guess is that he will be staying on the bench if Francis' debut goes well.

You may be right, my worry is what if it doesnt.

And frankly its annoying because fat stubborn old hair bear or not, we have the perfect ex tight head legend who could have done the job and firmed up the set piece for us with Francis backing up. Adam who?

That's what we all worry.

Not just that but I don't see Adam Jones being a viable option as he is unlikely to be anywhere near fit enough to play.

We have a lot riding on two lads performing in one position.

But realistically we are not alone. Most nations are lucky if they have two decent tightheads, let alone three or four. I think only France and South Africa have a bottomless pit of enviable depth at number three.

maestegmafia wrote:a bottomless pit of enviable depth at number three.

Something auld Peter Alliss might have said in his younger divilish days as Palmer eyed up birdie.

SecretFly wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:a bottomless pit of enviable depth at number three.

Something auld Peter Alliss might have said in his younger divilish days as Palmer eyed up birdie.

Ha ha ha

Just been reading about the Wales training match played today in Park Eirias.

Apparently Tyler Morgan pulled up with a leg injury but good news that George North is back to full contact.

Eli Walker was wearing a medic vest after the weekends action, as were Charteris, Davies and a few others.

Hook, Moriarty and Amos scored tries

Hopefully Morgan's was just a minor niggle - would very much like to see him paired with Doc at some point before the actual RWC starts.

I imagine Walker is still smarting after that awful hospital pass from Hook that lead to Earl's try.

maestegmafia wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:An unfit Lee won't be any good to us. My guess is that he will be staying on the bench if Francis' debut goes well.

You may be right, my worry is what if it doesnt.

And frankly its annoying because fat stubborn old hair bear or not, we have the perfect ex tight head legend who could have done the job and firmed up the set piece for us with Francis backing up. Adam who?

That's what we all worry.

Not just that but I don't see Adam Jones being a viable option as he is unlikely to be anywhere near fit enough to play.

We have a lot riding on two lads performing in one position.

But realistically we are not alone. Most nations are lucky if they have two decent tightheads, let alone three or four. I think only France and South Africa have a bottomless pit of enviable depth at number three.

Someone better let Stewie know that Cole, Wilson, Brookes, Thomas don't constitute depth at tighthead

maestegmafia wrote:I wonder about the players not included vs Ireland in Cardiff, those that are not obvious selections.

Patchell, Gareth Davies, Francis, Thornton and Dixon.

Are they still in contention?

Personally I read it as

Patchell, Dixon and Thornton not even consided

Davies, Francis (and Preistland) not needed to be 'tested' as they are already on the plane.

I'd be surprised if Dixon was not even considered - Gats is a fan