Ireland v Australia, 26 November

First topic message reminder :

   
IRELAND v AUSTRALIA
26 November 2016
KO: 17:30
Aviva Stadium, Dublin

Live on [tbc]

Referee: Jérôme Garcès (France)
Assistant Referees: JP Doyle (England), Craig Maxwell-Keys (England)
TMO: Eric Gauzins (France)

A. Head to Head

32 Played 32
10 Won 21
1 Drawn 1
21 Lost 10
453 Points 657

B. Recent Form

22 November 2014
Aviva Stadium, Dublin
26 – 23 to Ireland

16 November 2013
Aviva Stadium, Dublin
15 – 32 to Australia

17 September 2011
Eden Park, Auckland
15 – 6 to Ireland

26 June 2010
Suncorp Stadium, Brisbane
22 – 15 to Australia

15 November 2009
Croke Park, Dublin
20 – 20 draw

14 June 2008
Colonial Stadium, Melbourne
18 – 12 to Australia

19 November 2006
Lansdowne Road, Dublin
21 – 6 to Ireland

C. Teams

IRELAND

Kearney; Trimble, Payne, Ringrose, Earls; Jackson, Murray; McGrath, Best, Furlong; Henderson, Toner; Stander, O'Brien, Heaslip.

Replacements: Cronin, Healy, Bealham, Dillane, Van der Flier, Marmion, Carbery, Zebo.

AUSTRALIA

Folau, Haylett-Petty, Kuridrani, Hodge, Speight, Foley, Genia; Sio, Moore (capt), Kepu; Arnold, Simmons; Mumm, Hooper, Pocock.

Replacements: Latu, Slipper, Alaalatoa, Douglas, Timani, McMahon, Phipps, Cooper, Naivalu (one to be omitted).

rodders wrote:
Agree with that but he's really looked assured with his place kicking - I'd put him ahead of Sexton on that now and he's a much better passer.

He's not as physical in defense but few are and he is standing a bit too deep in attack in my opinion but overall he's done really well and earned the starting 10 spot for the 6N, if Jonny does take a break from the game as some reports suggest.

I've been impressed with Carberry though, looks a real talent.

Seem to remember him putting in some big tackles, didn't he stop Kuridrani at one point?

Think his standing deeper is to give himself more time against the faster line speed, Id like to see him start against the likes of England and France in the 6Ns even if Sexton is available. It protects Sexton against the hits he usually takes against those teams but exposes Jackson to what they bring

I thought Jackson ran the game well. Ireland were always threatening to cut through the Aussie defence in the first half but the move usually broke down after a few phases. Some of his kicks from hand were poor though.


Another thing, it doesn't look good for the Ulster coaches that PJ's kicking percentages are far better with Ireland.

Yep...our overall kicking game (apart from points) was a bloody disaster both in execution but mostly in the intention.

Was it Pat Lam (could be wrong) - but I thought I came across a published tweet from him at one point crying: Stop kicking the ball away!

Maine man wrote:I agree that the back 3 lack outright pace. Just out of curiosity who would people class as the quickest back three players in Ireland? I'm not saying that they should be picked. Just curious.

Darren Sweetnam is very fast. Watch him in a footrace against James Lowe, the Chief's winger.
https://youtu.be/cLRYL3kbGAM?t=4m56s

Zebo is the fastest as far as I know over 100 metres (about 11 secs). He is deceptively fast. Earls I think is probably fastest over 10 metres.

Niyi & Tiernan O'Hanlon look very fast as well.

The thing is that Schmidt isn't really into fast players - he wants guys who won't get isolated and turnover the ball. He has changed both Earls & Zebo in how they play.

profitius wrote:I thought Jackson ran the game well. Ireland were always threatening to cut through the Aussie defence in the first half but the move usually broke down after a few phases. Some of his kicks from hand were poor though.

Another thing, it doesn't look good for the Ulster coaches that PJ's kicking percentages are far better with Ireland.

Jackson did very well. That was a great sideline conversion. He needs to become more of a threat with his kicking from hand though. He works better with a 2nd playmaker (such as Olding) at 12 to take the pressure off. I think the intention was to play Olding there as well until he picked up an injury. Rory Scannell might be a better partner for him there in the future as well as he has a good kicking game.

Sin é wrote:

profitius wrote:I thought Jackson ran the game well. Ireland were always threatening to cut through the Aussie defence in the first half but the move usually broke down after a few phases. Some of his kicks from hand were poor though.

Another thing, it doesn't look good for the Ulster coaches that PJ's kicking percentages are far better with Ireland.

Jackson did very well. That was a great sideline conversion. He needs to become more of a threat with his kicking from hand though. He works better with a 2nd playmaker (such as Olding) at 12 to take the pressure off. I think the intention was to play Olding there as well until he picked up an injury. Rory Scannell might be a better partner for him there in the future as well as he has a good kicking game.

His kicking out of hand can be lethal, when Ulster beat Montpellier a few years ago over there he and Pienaar just kept kicking it on top of their back three all game

Think on Saturday he was panicking a bit with his kicking but him and Marshall link up well and have a great understanding

Whats the story with Marshall? Seems to have really gone out of favour. I know he didn't have a great game against Canada, but he wasn't that bad!

Sin é wrote:

Niyi & Tiernan O'Hanlon look very fast as well.

The thing is that Schmidt isn't really into fast players - he wants guys who won't get isolated and turnover the ball. He has changed both Earls & Zebo in how they play.

Now he has to change them back again!

Seriously - it should be a balance - incidently, just like Australia can do.  Turn a switch - a little signal from the captain, and all of a sudden a torrent of guys running onto balls, seeking out openings with clever feet and clever offloads.... and pushing sharp and at terrifying pace as genuine 'Backs' - for 5, 10 or 15 minute spurts.

I know why we're winning - grand.  I also know why we're pretty susceptible to having our players drop out with injuries during hard sequences of games.  So I'd like more balance in the approach.  Have the brutal aggressive defensive bit, have the forward power plays...but also, for periods, have it in our armoury (and have the players capable of it) to turn on the switch and have our backs (+ forwards) evolve into a full-on attacking unit with real teeth.

Sin é wrote:Whats the story with Marshall? Seems to have really gone out of favour. I know he didn't have a great game against Canada, but he wasn't that bad!

It was Canada. Joe made a point of saying the team had spoken enough about the propensity for intercepts when playing Canada.....
Australia are a big step up from Canada. Joe's ruthless streak coming through?

I thought this quote from Schmidt was funny.

“I think Simon Zebo said it was like a creche out here. He was the old guy looking after the kids running around. I think it’s probably reflective of how much control he has as a dad because the kids were all over the place!,” quipped the winning Ireland coach after the game.

profitius wrote:I thought this quote from Schmidt was funny.

“I think Simon Zebo said it was like a creche out here. He was the old guy looking after the kids running around. I think it’s probably reflective of how much control he has as a dad because the kids were all over the place!,” quipped the winning Ireland coach after the game.

Yeah.... I enjoyed that little dig. Joe is beginning to settle into the craic. There was a time when his delivery could be stilted and almost shy in getting out his views. But since he's been with the lads now with the bit of the craic and stuff - listening to how they all badger each other on buses and stuff, he's beginning to open up and join in.

Himself and Martin O'Neill could do a double act now in taking the p-iss out of players under them. O'Neill's comments about McClean's potential captaincy were also sparky and fun.

https://www.sportsjoe.ie/rugby/rory-bests-captaincy-was-immense-but-his-chats-with-the-referee-were-legendary/104489

SportsJoe take a look at Rorys chats with the ref

It's interesting to keep hearing about how all these things work out from different perspectives.  The crowds will have their own views about the games and their own imaginations will be concocting the kind of stuff that is going on in the players heads.  But it's interesting to actually get in there - into the heads of players at those very moments and the truth can be quirky.

Furlong on the halftime talk: "It is generally very focused on your job. Joe and Andy [Farrell] will have a few words and we'll break into our units.  I didn't really notice if there were bodies all around the place [referring to Payne off/Marmion on]. It was just about tasks - this is where we are and this is what we have to do."

He didn't know Marmion would be on the wing...and even had he known, it was immaterial to his job.

Marmion on his wing role: "I got a bit of a taster of it last week [against New Zealand]. I obviously haven’t played there much so it was about trusting my instincts, really.  The lads on the sideline actually helped me out a good bit. Richie Murphy was kind of telling me what to do, so I was trying to listen to him and to get on with it."

Learning the job on the move (with prompts from the sideline) against habitually one of the top 3 best side in the world....

marty2086 wrote:https://www.sportsjoe.ie/rugby/rory-bests-captaincy-was-immense-but-his-chats-with-the-referee-were-legendary/104489

SportsJoe take a look at Rorys chats with the ref

Best is a sublime captain IMO. Better captain than BOD and better at dealing with refs than O'Connell but not a better captain. He is also proving to be Ireland's greatest ever hooker.

With 100 caps he has definitely cemented his position as an Irish legend and what a performance to hit that milestone with.

Might get shot for this looking at the comments above but I thought Jackson was a mixed bag in the last two games. Had a few awful tackle attempts against NZ and made kicks from hand in both matches that a certain French-based player would have been crucified for. His place kicking was sublime though.

Sexton is far and away a better player.  If he stays on against NZ we score tries.

Engine#4 wrote:Might get shot for this looking at the comments above but I thought Jackson was a mixed bag in the last two games. Had a few awful tackle attempts against NZ and made kicks from hand in both matches that a certain French-based player would have been crucified for.  His place kicking was sublime though.

Sexton is far and away a better player.  If he stays on against NZ we score tries.

Yes maybe you're right - Jackson is still learning - needs more experience at top level. But he's getting there. No-one would argue with Sexton being better, but we need a backup for him in view of his recent injury propensity and I think Jackson is further along the line than Carbery at the minute. Jackson is still pretty young and he could become a "Sexton in waiting"

Engine#4 wrote:Might get shot for this looking at the comments above but I thought Jackson was a mixed bag in the last two games. Had a few awful tackle attempts against NZ and made kicks from hand in both matches that a certain French-based player would have been crucified for.  His place kicking was sublime though.

Sexton is far and away a better player.  If he stays on against NZ we score tries.

He (Jackson) will learn a lot from the AIs though, Engine. Joe will have many pointers for him. I know he isn't exactly a rookie at this level but as we've been reminded here somewhere he's at the same age as Sexton was when he was only getting started at Ireland.

Thank God we had him to fall back on as I think we did need that bit of International experience there for that Australian game.

I agree though, our kicking decisions during the day were frightening and often seemed madcap ...but not just by him.

Surely the next two wingers in line are the Connacht lads, Adeolokun and Healey? Both are as quick as anyone else in the frame.

Engine#4 wrote:Might get shot for this looking at the comments above but I thought Jackson was a mixed bag in the last two games. Had a few awful tackle attempts against NZ and made kicks from hand in both matches that a certain French-based player would have been crucified for.  His place kicking was sublime though.

Sexton is far and away a better player.  If he stays on against NZ we score tries.

Jacksons kicking from hand wasn't great on the day, but then neither was that of  Murray, Zebo or Carbery.

I wouldn't  worry about Jacksons defense or his kicking from hand. Neither are a weakness of Jacksons. Pressure can get to the best, and Jackson is really just coming out of his rookie stage at international level. He will settle into the role once he gets a few games behind him. Likewise, Carbery will come on leaps and bounds.

The futures bright.

What's the deal with Jackson and Olding etc? Are they still awaiting trial?

The Great Aukster wrote:Surely the next two wingers in line are the Connacht lads, Adeolokun and Healey? Both are as quick as anyone else in the frame.

Adeolokun is untried
Healy will go the way of Carr - no defence

Wingers have to be able to defend as well as attack

Cyril wrote:What's the deal with Jackson and Olding etc? Are they still awaiting trial?

No etc and difficult to await trial when you haven't been charged

geoff999rugby wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:Surely the next two wingers in line are the Connacht lads, Adeolokun and Healey? Both are as quick as anyone else in the frame.

Adeolokun is untried
Healy will go the way of Carr - no defence

Wingers have to be able to defend as well as attack

Niyi should be given a genuine shot during the 6N. He got legs, and he knows how to use 'em.

geoff999rugby wrote:

Cyril wrote:What's the deal with Jackson and Olding etc? Are they still awaiting trial?

No etc and difficult to await trial when you haven't been charged

Cheers You tend to post on behalf of Ulster players. Do they mind you doing that?

geoff999rugby wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:Surely the next two wingers in line are the Connacht lads, Adeolokun and Healey? Both are as quick as anyone else in the frame.

Adeolokun is untried
Healy will go the way of Carr - no defence

Wingers have to be able to defend as well as attack

I see where Fionn Carr has joined the 7s team now.

Cyril wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:

Cyril wrote:What's the deal with Jackson and Olding etc? Are they still awaiting trial?

No etc and difficult to await trial when you haven't been charged

Cheers You tend to post on behalf of Ulster players. Do they mind you doing that?

I only post what I am told in general conversation.
Sometimes I understand that circumstances mean keep my mouth shut - usually around players moving.
That has been a lot tighter though since Cunningham took over from Humphreys

Regarding Olding and Jackson what I posted is in the public domain

Anyone else see Earls' comments about his red card tackle in the glasgow match? His actions when leaving the field can be excused giving the circumstances of the match but a month later and hes blaming getting sent off on Brown. He comes across very badly.

"Yes, I did lift his leg but I felt he could have done a bit more to save the impact. The way he went, I thought he was going for it a small bit, to be honest with you.

"I spoke to him and he said he was just trying to protect himself. I felt I was cheated really going off the pitch. They denied me an opportunity to put in a performance for my head coach and the Munster supporters so I kind of lost it a bit coming off the pitch."

Especially amusing since his ban was reduced due to remorse. They should make him serve the full ban in light of his comments.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/international-rugby/comment-after-a-week-where-rugbys-violence-was-under-the-microscope-keith-earls-comments-were-simply-mindboggling-35251168.html

Golden wrote:Anyone else see Earls' comments about his red card tackle in the glasgow match? His actions when leaving the field can be excused giving the circumstances of the match but a month later and hes blaming getting sent off on Brown. He comes across very badly.

"Yes, I did lift his leg but I felt he could have done a bit more to save the impact. The way he went, I thought he was going for it a small bit, to be honest with you.

"I spoke to him and he said he was just trying to protect himself. I felt I was cheated really going off the pitch. They denied me an opportunity to put in a performance for my head coach and the Munster supporters so I kind of lost it a bit coming off the pitch."

Especially amusing since his ban was reduced due to remorse. They should make him serve the full ban in light of his comments.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/international-rugby/comment-after-a-week-where-rugbys-violence-was-under-the-microscope-keith-earls-comments-were-simply-mindboggling-35251168.html

Yeah...but again, here we go, the increasing drive for universal thought control.  Ban him again because he won't put 'our' attitude into his head.  It's not good enough him 'claiming' remorse to get a lighter sentence - as most players do in the circumstances.  Ban him for not fully believing in the need for total remorse. Maybe my main criticism is that 'pretend remorse' bit. Maybe he should have just stood up and given his honest opinion there and then and take the ban hit that would come with it.
But now he's being honest to himself and his own mind.  That might appear shocking in this day and age when concealment of real opinion is almost enforced or you risk losing everything.

I may not share his opinion - (from what I did see of the encounter it didn't look Red - yellow perhaps but not red.)  Anyway, I may not share his opinion, but only he and Brown know the full score on the incident in terms of 'intent'.  But it's bluntly true (however unsettling for observers) that Earls believes what he says - and expresses it honestly.

Now, it's fine for others to then attack him for his words and thoughts - but he's entitled to his genuine attitude.  All he can be is genuine.

I understand what Earls is saying, Brown did put himself in a position that made it all seem worse than it was and I said it on the match thread at the time but on reflection it was instinctive to get himself down safely and the burden is on Earls as the tackler, he created the situation and he has to accept the consequences

What I'd be frustrated at is the inconsistencies in applying the law

SecretFly wrote:

Golden wrote:Anyone else see Earls' comments about his red card tackle in the glasgow match? His actions when leaving the field can be excused giving the circumstances of the match but a month later and hes blaming getting sent off on Brown. He comes across very badly.

"Yes, I did lift his leg but I felt he could have done a bit more to save the impact. The way he went, I thought he was going for it a small bit, to be honest with you.

"I spoke to him and he said he was just trying to protect himself. I felt I was cheated really going off the pitch. They denied me an opportunity to put in a performance for my head coach and the Munster supporters so I kind of lost it a bit coming off the pitch."

Especially amusing since his ban was reduced due to remorse. They should make him serve the full ban in light of his comments.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/international-rugby/comment-after-a-week-where-rugbys-violence-was-under-the-microscope-keith-earls-comments-were-simply-mindboggling-35251168.html

Yeah...but again, here we go, the increasing drive for universal thought control.  Ban him again because he won't put 'our' attitude into his head.  It's not good enough him 'claiming' remorse to get a lighter sentence - as most players do in the circumstances.  Ban him for not fully believing in the need for total remorse.  Maybe my main criticism is that 'pretend remorse' bit.  Maybe he should have just stood up and given his honest opinion there and then and take the ban hit that would come with it.
But now he's being honest to himself and his own mind.  That might appear shocking in this day and age when concealment of real opinion is almost enforced or you risk losing everything.

I may not share his opinion - (from what I did see of the encounter it didn't look Red - yellow perhaps but not red.)  Anyway, I may not share his opinion, but only he and Brown know the full score on the incident in terms of 'intent'.  But it's bluntly true (however unsettling for observers) that Earls believes what he says - and expresses it honestly.

Now, it's fine for others to then attack him for his words and thoughts - but he's entitled to his genuine attitude.  All he can be is genuine.

He lifts his legs beyond the horizontal and drops him on his neck.  

https://i.imgur.com/xMrVfiB.jpg

Dont know what Brown was supposed to have done. It was a clear red card to me. Unintentional but dangerous.

Absolutely he should be genuine but that would have given him 2 more weeks off

My mind is going.... or maybe it's just I have too many other things genuinely on my mind besides rugby. But I genuinely can't recall did the Australian pick up a red or yellow for the above horizontal moment in the recent Ireland game?

SecretFly wrote:My mind is going.... or maybe it's just I have too many other things genuinely on my mind besides rugby.  But I genuinely can't recall did the Australian pick up a red or yellow for the above horizontal moment in the recent Ireland game?  

Yellow (probably thanks to Owens)

Thanks Munch.  I knew I didn't recall a red but just wanted to be certain.

There you go.  No red but yellow.  
If I honestly felt Earls was being basterde , I'd say it.  But I have to say my take on it is that he's just venting about what he assumes to be a wrong coloured card for the brand of 'above horizontal' he engaged in.

Now of course people will say it's a blanket cover offence, you do it and there is no grey area - you get your red to keep the game safe.

But it's not always a red.

Are we seriously at a stage when players are accusing their opponents of 'landing badly' and not protecting themselves properly to try and get their opponents carded?

If there's a player with the presence of mind to twist so he lands on his head/neck or keep his arms by his side while meeting the earth the wrong way up then he's braver/stupider than me!

If I was Earls I'd be thinking more about how I'd let my side down badly on an emotional day and not trying to shift the blame.

There's nothing new in people suggesting that players chasing for a ball were often accused of putting themselves in danger AND unduly influencing a referee when they'd rise in the air and tuck their feet up to make themselves more vulnerable as targets than they might have been had they left their feet dangling.

Nothing new about those thoughts and pseudo 'wink wink' accusations, Cyril.

Are we all renouncing our past selves now and forgetting we had debates about these things?

SecretFly wrote:There's nothing new in people suggesting that players chasing for a ball were often accused of putting themselves in danger AND unduly influencing a referee when they'd rise in the air and tuck their feet up to make themselves more vulnerable as targets than they might have been had they left their feet dangling.

Nothing new about those thoughts and pseudo 'wink wink' accusations, Cyril.

Are we all renouncing our past selves now and forgetting we had debates about these things?

They never did find the sniper that took out Lee Byrne did they?

SecretFly wrote:Thanks Munch.  I knew I didn't recall a red but just wanted to be certain.

There you go.  No red but yellow.  
If I honestly felt Earls was being basterde , I'd say it.  But I have to say my take on it is that he's just venting about what he assumes to be a wrong coloured card for the brand of 'above horizontal' he engaged in.

Now of course people will say it's a blanket cover offence, you do it and there is no grey area - you get your red to keep the game safe.

But it's not always a red.

I believe Earls honestly thinks Brown played for the red card. From memory, I think Glasgow had another opposing player sent off for something similar a week or two before that.
For me, Earls shouldn't have created the opportunity, and so really has only himself to blame. Another point is that Earls going public with his view doesn't benefit anyone, and serves only to damage his own reputation. It's an own goal.

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Thanks Munch.  I knew I didn't recall a red but just wanted to be certain.

There you go.  No red but yellow.  
If I honestly felt Earls was being basterde , I'd say it.  But I have to say my take on it is that he's just venting about what he assumes to be a wrong coloured card for the brand of 'above horizontal' he engaged in.

Now of course people will say it's a blanket cover offence, you do it and there is no grey area - you get your red to keep the game safe.

But it's not always a red.

I believe Earls honestly thinks Brown played for the red card. From memory, I think Glasgow had another opposing player sent off for something similar a week or two before that.
For me, Earls shouldn't have created the opportunity, and so really has only himself to blame. Another point is that Earls going public with his view doesn't benefit anyone, and serves only to damage his own reputation. It's an own goal.

Unless he genuinely thinks its a tactic they use and feels that it needs to be highlighted

It is an issue that needs to be raised to be fair, if you do lift someone beyond the horizontal and are trying to bring them down safe but either trying to protect themselves or to get the tackler in trouble the tackled player goes to ground before you can are you at fault or is the culpability lessened?

Ive seen a few occasions where players have been tackled and not taken beyond the horizontal but twist and turn as they are lifted and its borderline by the time they get to ground, I think Dagg did it in Dublin last week too

Id say Earls' was just emotional given the circumstances. He does have history of some emotional interviews anyway. I wouldn't read too much into it.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:Id say Earls' was just emotional given the circumstances. He does have history of some emotional interviews anyway. I wouldn't read too much into it.

This was a month afterwards though.

Munchkin wrote: Earls going public with his view doesn't benefit anyone, and serves only to damage his own reputation. It's an own goal.

Going public is good for the inner sanctum of the tortured soul, Munch .... or so says the new Book I'm reading anyway: How to Emote in Public for Maximum Fame Gain.  Earls is just a late learner...  

Golden wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:Id say Earls' was just emotional given the circumstances. He does have history of some emotional interviews anyway. I wouldn't read too much into it.

This was a month afterwards though.

I still am fuming about things that happened a decade ago. Time don't heal everything

marty2086 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Thanks Munch.  I knew I didn't recall a red but just wanted to be certain.

There you go.  No red but yellow.  
If I honestly felt Earls was being basterde , I'd say it.  But I have to say my take on it is that he's just venting about what he assumes to be a wrong coloured card for the brand of 'above horizontal' he engaged in.

Now of course people will say it's a blanket cover offence, you do it and there is no grey area - you get your red to keep the game safe.

But it's not always a red.

I believe Earls honestly thinks Brown played for the red card. From memory, I think Glasgow had another opposing player sent off for something similar a week or two before that.
For me, Earls shouldn't have created the opportunity, and so really has only himself to blame. Another point is that Earls going public with his view doesn't benefit anyone, and serves only to damage his own reputation. It's an own goal.

Unless he genuinely thinks its a tactic they use and feels that it needs to be highlighted

It is an issue that needs to be raised to be fair, if you do lift someone beyond the horizontal and are trying to bring them down safe but either trying to protect themselves or to get the tackler in trouble the tackled player goes to ground before you can are you at fault or is the culpability lessened?

Ive seen a few occasions where players have been tackled and not taken beyond the horizontal but twist and turn as they are lifted and its borderline by the time they get to ground, I think Dagg did it in Dublin last week too

He might think it's a tactic but, unless he can prove it, I still think it unwise to go public. If it is a tactic that some teams are using, I can't see how refs can rule on it if it isn't obvious. They have a hard enough time dealing with interpretations

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote: Earls going public with his view doesn't benefit anyone, and serves only to damage his own reputation. It's an own goal.

Going public is good for the inner sanctum of the tortured soul, Munch .... or so says the new Book I'm reading anyway: How to Emote in Public for Maximum Fame Gain.  Earls is just a late learner...  

A PR stunt? hmmm... could be. Maybe something for a new book? Still doesn't do his reputation any good. Might help his bank balance though.

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote: Earls going public with his view doesn't benefit anyone, and serves only to damage his own reputation. It's an own goal.

Going public is good for the inner sanctum of the tortured soul, Munch .... or so says the new Book I'm reading anyway: How to Emote in Public for Maximum Fame Gain.  Earls is just a late learner...  

A PR stunt? hmmm... could be. Maybe something for a new book? Still doesn't do his reputation any good. Might help his bank balance though.

Em.............. no, I think my point is Earls is a novice in the 'game', and is probably innocent of the full potential of speaking your mind in public. Now them lads Gats and Jones - they know the real potential of calling your opponents 'bollixes' and accusing them openly of all kinds of carry on.

Earls is a ?

Maybe, but his agent is a

Philbb must have read
'How to Emote in Public for Maximum Fame Gain'. He's very good at emoting  

Where is PhilBB now that you mention him?

Have the Illuminati taken him into care now that Trump is gunning for people that want to destroy the Pro12?

Trump is very pro Pro12.

Don't keep mentioning he who shall not be named, he's like Beetlejuice, 3 mentions and he pops up

SecretFly wrote:Where is PhilBB now that you mention him?

Have the Illuminati taken him into care now that Trump is gunning for people that want to destroy the Pro12?

Trump is very pro Pro12.

He's hiding on Twitter.

Had a chat with Chunky, over on PL. Still mad as a box of frogs o0

LD has vanished completely, or travelling on a false passport. I like LD though. Hope all is ok.

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Where is PhilBB now that you mention him?

Have the Illuminati taken him into care now that Trump is gunning for people that want to destroy the Pro12?

Trump is very pro Pro12.

He's hiding on Twitter.

Had a chat with Chunky, over on PL. Still mad as a box of frogs o0

LD has vanished completely, or travelling on a false passport. I like LD though. Hope all is ok.

Yeah, LD is grand. I hope he's okay and just taking a well earned break from here. He's a bit like Wales's version of Sin e.

I don't even mind the other two, to be honest. Wouldn't have a blessed thing I'd ever agree with them on but, still, at least they often provided some colour