Silly Season Transfer Rumours 19/20

First topic message reminder :

mikey_dragon wrote:It’s an unfortunate coincidence I think, but his injury record was exemplary before he linked up with Bath.

His last lengthy injury was a collarbone issue suffered in a Wales training camp. Probably a bit of a mixed bag. It's hard once you start getting injuries to get out of the cycle as often one leads to another, Falatau managed to break the same arm some four or five months apart. Something Billy Vunipola managed as well.

I think Carlos is right. With the financial squeeze clubs are going to look for more value for money and less marquee names. Johnny May certainly found that when he went to discuss his new contract as did Ben Youngs.

There used to be the Churchill Cup with the USA, Canada, Scotland A, Ireland A and Saxons. I don't know if players have turned around and said we would rather keep our options open than commit to a nation's second team.

There are enough internationals on the calendar (5 at Six Nations, 2/3 on the Summer tour, 3 in November) that teams should be able to cap who they actually want. If Johnny Williams is genuinely in your future plans, Eddie Jones should be able to give him 20 minutes off the bench against Fiji in a November game.

LondonTiger wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:
Williams style is similar to Parkes so it's a little like for like. He runs some hard lines so should be a good foil for JD2. England really need to start capping players who play Vs the Baabaas as there's been a couple in recent years who we've lost out on but who have played Vs the Baabaas. Williams is still a young man there was plenty of time for him to get England recognition. Now seemingly plenty of time for him to get Welsh recognition.

I disagree with capping matches against the Barbarians. If we are looking to tie people in, I feel we should either properly re-instate the Saxons or make much better use of the "development" tours.

While the likes of Tomkins, Williams, Haley & Addison have all worn the white of England, none of them were in genuine consideration for some time before their departures. Good luck to them.

I agree development tours should be used as such rather than just flogging the same group of senior players every summer.

Tompkins and Williams probably don't fit Jones type of midfield as he likes playmakers though I think both could have come in as Manu and Joseph head into their 30s. They could have given a direct 12 option partnering Slade at 13 though I can see the Ford/Farrell axis continuing alongside Marchant or Lawrence at 13. I think both are good enough to come in to the England squad.

Doc to Dragons is an interesting one, and one I'd welcome. We still need to recruit around him though. Wonder if he'll be asked to line up opposite Radrada in the QF with Bristol.

Not being able to designate u20s as a capture side is a stupid decision.

We should set up a new Churchill Cup with the countries who are most affected participating with their A sides. Obviously Wales will be frothing at the mouth at the thought but there's nothing new there

Are you no longer allowed to name the under 20s? That's passed me by. Someone at the RFU does need to grab the bull by the horns and point out again that we need to tie players down. Or go back and revisit the compensation. Granted that really is not going to happen.
Rfu are always on the back foot in terms of eligibility. Cant just leave it to the head coach.

BamBam wrote:Not being able to designate u20s as a capture side is a stupid decision.

We should set up a new Churchill Cup with the countries who are most affected participating with their A sides. Obviously Wales will be frothing at the mouth at the thought but there's nothing new there

Eligibility, as we all know is a controversial and emotive subject, despite the fact that many people and many rugby players have good cases to represent more than one country. My kids for example would have a perfectly good case to represent Scotland, Italy or England if they had ever been inclined or good enough to do so.

The recent rule changes have probably made more people feel comfortable about them, as it was probably the 3 year residence rule that really upset some people.

Changing the U20s capture rule however is probably the best change that has been made though. We should not be asking kids to make complex decisions about their futures, that may have profound implications on their careers at 18 or 19 years old. That is a system that is clearly one that could be abused and may also lead to others just avoiding the u20s set up completely. The great majority of kids who get picked at U20s don't even make it as pros, let alone go on to play international rugby. It is not a good yardstick to pin young players down with.

Let them play junior rugby as they wish and they can then make their decisions about international representation at the point when they are good enough to get selected by which time they will hopefully be able to make a much more informed choice.

I have to say whilst I think England should be proactive in securing their best young talent. I don't think the under 20s should secure their allegiance as often this is decided based on where the young player happens to be located more than where their heart lies in terms of national loyalty. It would be wrong to give age grade teams second claim status.

formerly known as Sam wrote:I have to say whilst I think England should be proactive in securing their best young talent. I don't think the under 20s should secure their allegiance as often this is decided based on where the young player happens to be located more than where their heart lies in terms of national loyalty. It would be wrong to give age grade teams second claim status.

Agreed, and removing this was imo a good idea. Ross Moriarty is one that springs to mind - always Welsh but based in England. Then you get the ones like Dingwall and Vellacott who represent countries at U20 often due to not being looked at by the English age grade system, but veer towards England.

Nationality is a simple matter for guys in SA say, but much more complex in the UK - though we are all guilty at times of "poaching" players.

BigGee wrote:

BamBam wrote:Not being able to designate u20s as a capture side is a stupid decision.

We should set up a new Churchill Cup with the countries who are most affected participating with their A sides. Obviously Wales will be frothing at the mouth at the thought but there's nothing new there

Eligibility, as we all know is a controversial and emotive subject, despite the fact that many people and many rugby players have good cases to represent more than one country. My kids for example would have a perfectly good case to represent Scotland, Italy or England if they had ever been inclined or good enough to do so.

The recent rule changes have probably made more people feel comfortable about them, as it was probably the 3 year residence rule that really upset some people.

Changing the U20s capture rule however is probably the best change that has been made though. We should not be asking kids to make complex decisions about their futures, that may have profound implications on their careers at 18 or 19 years old. That is a system that is clearly one that could be abused and may also lead to others just avoiding the u20s set up completely. The great majority of kids who get picked at U20s don't even make it as pros, let alone go on to play international rugby. It is not a good yardstick to pin young players down with.

Let them play junior rugby as they wish and they can then make their decisions about international representation at the point when they are good enough to get selected by which time they will hopefully be able to make a much more informed choice.

Do we not ask them to make choices about their futures at much younger years?

What age do they choose GCSE's etc and A levels etc.

By 18 they are expected to be starting degrees.

Thats some pretty big choices. So i would say they should be able to decide what allegience they have by U20! And they will also know the consequences...IF you choose to player for ___ at U20...you are fixed with them for life.

SO CHOOSE WISELY!

LondonTiger wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:I have to say whilst I think England should be proactive in securing their best young talent. I don't think the under 20s should secure their allegiance as often this is decided based on where the young player happens to be located more than where their heart lies in terms of national loyalty. It would be wrong to give age grade teams second claim status.

Agreed, and removing this was imo a good idea. Ross Moriarty is one that springs to mind - always Welsh but based in England. Then you get the ones like Dingwall and Vellacott who represent countries at U20 often due to not being looked at by the English age grade system, but veer towards England.

Nationality is a simple matter for guys in SA say, but much more complex in the UK - though we are all guilty at times of "poaching" players.

And somehow they (SA) still end up playing for France.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

BigGee wrote:

BamBam wrote:Not being able to designate u20s as a capture side is a stupid decision.

We should set up a new Churchill Cup with the countries who are most affected participating with their A sides. Obviously Wales will be frothing at the mouth at the thought but there's nothing new there

Eligibility, as we all know is a controversial and emotive subject, despite the fact that many people and many rugby players have good cases to represent more than one country. My kids for example would have a perfectly good case to represent Scotland, Italy or England if they had ever been inclined or good enough to do so.

The recent rule changes have probably made more people feel comfortable about them, as it was probably the 3 year residence rule that really upset some people.

Changing the U20s capture rule however is probably the best change that has been made though. We should not be asking kids to make complex decisions about their futures, that may have profound implications on their careers at 18 or 19 years old. That is a system that is clearly one that could be abused and may also lead to others just avoiding the u20s set up completely. The great majority of kids who get picked at U20s don't even make it as pros, let alone go on to play international rugby. It is not a good yardstick to pin young players down with.

Let them play junior rugby as they wish and they can then make their decisions about international representation at the point when they are good enough to get selected by which time they will hopefully be able to make a much more informed choice.

Do we not ask them to make choices about their futures at much younger years?

What age do they choose GCSE's etc and A levels etc.

By 18 they are expected to be starting degrees.

Thats some pretty big choices. So i would say they should be able to decide what allegience they have by U20! And they will also know the consequences...IF you choose to player for ___ at U20...you are fixed with them for life.

SO CHOOSE WISELY!

Probably belongs in a different thread but I think more and more people are questioning an education system that sees potentially career/life defining decisions made that young to be fair.

My experience has certainly been that I had no clue what I wanted to do when leaving school but my A-level grades from subjects I'd largely chosen due to my mates doing them decided for me that I went to uni. Whilst I absolutely loved uni (4 years of cracking fun is often ignored in the further education argument that gets bogged down in fees etc!) I am not using my degree in any way shape or form and am in no position to pay of my student loan either. Not the worst situation for me but hardly great for Student Awards Agency Scotland who gave me my maintenance loan!

The U20s have become an important shop window for getting professional contracts. For the top talents who are guaranteed offers from the club whose academy they've come through there's less pressure. For 19-year olds on the fringe of getting a Premiership contract it's a different story though.

For example, a kid at Falcons isn't making the England U20s but has a Scottish granny, so gets offered a place in the Scotland U20s for the Junior RWC. He knows that Falcons have already offered a couple of his mates a senior contract but he hasn't had an offer. Does he hold out on a chance to showcase his talent at the Junior RWC and hence potentially miss out on a Pro contract to remain EQP, or does he tie himself to a nation he's never considered representing on the basis of a career decision rather than where his allegiances lie?

KC is probably right that we have wandered off topic a bit, but it is an interesting chat.

I tend to agree with him though that degree choices don't necessarily effect your work life. Very few degrees are truly vocational these days and even if you don't make your right life choice at 18, there is always a chance to change it later. My advice to my kids, largely formed from going off to do a subject I was not interested in and consequently did not finish, was to do a subject they enjoy at university. I hoped that by enjoying it, they would give it a good crack and do well. Fortunately my hunch on that one was right.

None of them are now working in jobs related to those degrees, but a good degree actually excludes you from very little.

The hard choices about work and career come later and with them the inevitable compromises when you realise that you can earn a lot more money as an accountant than as an aspiring writer and the big accountancy firms are quite happy to take you with a degree in english!

Yup - I did maths and finance at uni and discovered in my grad job at one of the big four that my peer group had studied subjects as diverse as music and geology, and were no further behind than anyone who had a numerical background!

I see the point about not forcing kids to make life defining choices so young, but then I think the academy and union that have developed a player through their system should receive some form of compensation once players are getting capped at international level.

Otherwise we end up in situations where unions find it more productive to invest their financial resources in "Exiles" programmes to trawl through Granny's teenage day trips than to develop a pathway through schools, academies and club rugby for their young kids. If there was a compensation payment due, maybe they'd have to think twice

BigGee wrote:KC is probably right that we have wandered off topic a bit, but it is an interesting chat.

I tend to agree with him though that degree choices don't necessarily effect your work life. Very few degrees are truly vocational these days and even if you don't make your right life choice at 18, there is always a chance to change it later. My advice to my kids, largely formed from going off to do a subject I was not interested in and consequently did not finish, was to do a subject they enjoy at university. I hoped that by enjoying it, they would give it a good crack and do well. Fortunately my hunch on that one was right.

None of them are now working in jobs related to those degrees, but a good degree actually excludes you from very little.

The hard choices about work and career come later and with them the inevitable compromises when you realise that you can earn a lot more money as an accountant than as an aspiring writer and the big accountancy firms are quite happy to take you with a degree in english!

Even further off topic but Adam Kay (comedian, former Doctor and author of excellent book 'This Is Going to Hurt' about his experience working in the NHS) did an excellent interview with Channel 4 in which he touched on the topic. Talking about kids not having a clue what they are getting into by studying medicine due to the age many commit to it.

The point that made me laugh and further query the system was something along the lines of, "if a 35-year old wants to be a train driver then during the job applications you discus if you could deal with the worst happening and someone commits suicide by jumping in front of your train. But if a 17-year old wants to be a Doctor he gets asked if he has an A in Chemistry, captains a hockey team and did Duke of Edinburgh".

How early kids are expected to commit to some careers is counterproductive in my opinion.

As said this is ludicrously off topic though!

king_carlos wrote:

BigGee wrote:KC is probably right that we have wandered off topic a bit, but it is an interesting chat.

I tend to agree with him though that degree choices don't necessarily effect your work life. Very few degrees are truly vocational these days and even if you don't make your right life choice at 18, there is always a chance to change it later. My advice to my kids, largely formed from going off to do a subject I was not interested in and consequently did not finish, was to do a subject they enjoy at university. I hoped that by enjoying it, they would give it a good crack and do well. Fortunately my hunch on that one was right.

None of them are now working in jobs related to those degrees, but a good degree actually excludes you from very little.

The hard choices about work and career come later and with them the inevitable compromises when you realise that you can earn a lot more money as an accountant than as an aspiring writer and the big accountancy firms are quite happy to take you with a degree in english!

Even further off topic but Adam Kay (comedian, former Doctor and author of excellent book 'This Is Going to Hurt' about his experience working in the NHS) did an excellent interview with Channel 4 in which he touched on the topic. Talking about kids not having a clue what they are getting into by studying medicine due to the age many commit to it.

The point that made me laugh and further query the system was something along the lines of, "if a 35-year old wants to be a train driver then during the job applications you discus if you could deal with the worst happening and someone commits suicide by jumping in front of your train. But if a 17-year old wants to be a Doctor he gets asked if he has an A in Chemistry, captains a hockey team and did Duke of Edinburgh".

How early kids are expected to commit to some careers is counterproductive in my opinion.

As said this is ludicrously off topic though!

Actually though, the idea of lots of kids committing to medicine at 18 is becoming outdated.

In my 30 years plus now working as a nurse in healthcare, you see more and more people coming into medicine and nursing as mature students, I myself was 26 when I started nursing, the professions are undoubtedly much better off for that. I am certainly glad I did other stuff prior to embarking on my career as it gives me a sense of perspective tat the grass is not always greener outside the healthcare bubble and also I have other things to deal with outwith work (marriage, kids, morgage etc) the same as the rest of the population, many of whom I am looking after!

The number of women and the number of mature students coming into medicine during my time has been one of the big positives for me as an inside observer.

Hmm. I didnt know what on earth I wanted to do at 18. I knew I was english quite a bit before that like. God I sound like geordie.

BigGee wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

BigGee wrote:KC is probably right that we have wandered off topic a bit, but it is an interesting chat.

I tend to agree with him though that degree choices don't necessarily effect your work life. Very few degrees are truly vocational these days and even if you don't make your right life choice at 18, there is always a chance to change it later. My advice to my kids, largely formed from going off to do a subject I was not interested in and consequently did not finish, was to do a subject they enjoy at university. I hoped that by enjoying it, they would give it a good crack and do well. Fortunately my hunch on that one was right.

None of them are now working in jobs related to those degrees, but a good degree actually excludes you from very little.

The hard choices about work and career come later and with them the inevitable compromises when you realise that you can earn a lot more money as an accountant than as an aspiring writer and the big accountancy firms are quite happy to take you with a degree in english!

Even further off topic but Adam Kay (comedian, former Doctor and author of excellent book 'This Is Going to Hurt' about his experience working in the NHS) did an excellent interview with Channel 4 in which he touched on the topic. Talking about kids not having a clue what they are getting into by studying medicine due to the age many commit to it.

The point that made me laugh and further query the system was something along the lines of, "if a 35-year old wants to be a train driver then during the job applications you discus if you could deal with the worst happening and someone commits suicide by jumping in front of your train. But if a 17-year old wants to be a Doctor he gets asked if he has an A in Chemistry, captains a hockey team and did Duke of Edinburgh".

How early kids are expected to commit to some careers is counterproductive in my opinion.

As said this is ludicrously off topic though!

Actually though, the idea of lots of kids committing to medicine at 18 is becoming outdated.

In my 30 years plus now working as a nurse in healthcare, you see more and more people coming into medicine and nursing as mature students, I myself was 26 when I started nursing, the professions are undoubtedly much better off for that. I am certainly glad I did other stuff prior to embarking on my career as it gives me a sense of perspective tat the grass is not always greener outside the healthcare bubble and also I have other things to deal with outwith work (marriage, kids, morgage etc) the same as the rest of the population, many of whom I am looking after!

The number of women and the number of mature students coming into medicine during my time has been one of the big positives for me as an inside observer.

That's really interesting to hear, BigGee. Certainly sounds like a positive change.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hmm. I didnt know what on earth I wanted to do at 18. I knew I was english quite a bit before that like. God I sound like geordie.

That all depends on perspective and upbringing is what we are saying though. Some people will feel genuine allegiance to more than one nation. It isn't all a case of people leaping on a recently discovered grandma to improve their career prospects.

My father was in the forces so I was born in Kent, moved to the states as a 1-year old, then Germany and Cyprus all by the age of 6. We then moved back to the UK living in Pembrokeshire and then Paisley. By the time we settled in Yorkshire I was 10-years old and couldn't care less about nationality frankly.

My mum is Scottish and liked rugby so I supported Scottish rugby at that time. My dad is English and a huge cricket fan so I supported England in cricket. Through my teens playing rugby in Yorkshire I ended up supporting England more and more. At 18 I moved up to Scotland for University and have stayed here ever since.

I still consider myself an England rugby fan before a Scotland fan but when I visit Murrayfield for Scotland vs England there is plenty of conflict. That isn't helped by England having one of worst anthems in sport and Scotland one of the best to be fair...

When asked my nationality I'll instinctively state British rather than English or Scottish.

Ted Hill has been named Worcester captain

Speaks volumes about the young lad given there's a fair few grizzled ex internationals in their squad

king_carlos wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hmm. I didnt know what on earth I wanted to do at 18. I knew I was english quite a bit before that like. God I sound like geordie.

That all depends on perspective and upbringing is what we are saying though. Some people will feel genuine allegiance to more than one nation. It isn't all a case of people leaping on a recently discovered grandma to improve their career prospects.

My father was in the forces so I was born in Kent, moved to the states as a 1-year old, then Germany and Cyprus all by the age of 6. We then moved back to the UK living in Pembrokeshire and then Paisley. By the time we settled in Yorkshire I was 10-years old and couldn't care less about nationality frankly.

My mum is Scottish and liked rugby so I supported Scottish rugby at that time. My dad is English and a huge cricket fan so I supported England in cricket. Through my teens playing rugby in Yorkshire I ended up supporting England more and more. At 18 I moved up to Scotland for University and have stayed here ever since.

I still consider myself an England rugby fan before a Scotland fan but when I visit Murrayfield for Scotland vs England there is plenty of conflict. That isn't helped by England having one of worst anthems in sport and Scotland one of the best to be fair...

When asked my nationality I'll instinctively state British rather than English or Scottish.

Well there you go I'd say that even as a guy who has split allegiance overall you still know which team you support in which sport. In the case of rugby I'm personally a firm believer that you know which team is yours as a fan but as a professional some will want to keep their options open. its not that they're unsure whether they support England say, but that they may regret not getting some money playing for Scotland down the line.

There'll always be people with multiple qualifications (for countries) through birth and more that get them through residency. Fair enough.

We have signed Matias Orlandi the Argentina and Jaguars centre.

GeordieFalcon wrote:We have signed Matias Orlandi the Argentina and Jaguars centre.

Cracking signing for Falcons that GF. Will add some quality to your midfield. Are anymore signings expected to follow?

BamBam wrote:Ted Hill has been named Worcester captain

Speaks volumes about the young lad given there's a fair few grizzled ex internationals in their squad

He's got a Welsh nan too .

mikey_dragon wrote:

BamBam wrote:Ted Hill has been named Worcester captain

Speaks volumes about the young lad given there's a fair few grizzled ex internationals in their squad

He's got a Welsh nan too .

Already been capped.

Nope, I spoke to him about this once.

He said his nan had only been to Wales when his grandad accidentally took the Westbound exit from Severn view services rather than Eastbound

Apparently Pivac told him his Nan had far more of a Welsh connection due to a wrong turning than half the players in the Welsh squad!

formerly known as Sam wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:We have signed Matias Orlandi the Argentina and Jaguars centre.

Cracking signing for Falcons that GF. Will add some quality to your midfield. Are anymore signings expected to follow?

Well we know about Peter Lucock the Doncaster centre and HOmer the Jersey Scrum half, both of whom i actually think are good signings.
They havent been announced yet though.

But apparently we do have a few more aswell. So it'll be interesting.

The big one for me is De Walt. the SA number 8. He looks immense...only played a few games last season,but was sheer class.
HIm, Mark Wilson and one of Hardie, Welch or Graham, is going to give us a brutal back row...that will compete with the best.

And our Hookers are class. Mcguigan scored 12 tries last season and Blamire the young lad...scored 7, and played 17 games.
Keep an eye out for him this season. Got the lot for a hooker.

Its just the locks and props thats the problem

Stephen Myler to Ospreys on 1 year contract. Wow he’s still going.

mikey_dragon wrote:Stephen Myler to Ospreys on 1 year contract. Wow he’s still going.

Are the Ospreys still going?

TightHEAD wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Stephen Myler to Ospreys on 1 year contract. Wow he’s still going.

Are the Ospreys still going?

Surprisingly, yes. They have a billionaire investor.

They had to do something, with a huge doubt over Anscombe’s fitness and think Dragons’ favourite ten Price is struggling too. I have seen a bit more talk about how they held talks with Flood, so it makes sense that they’re trying tens with experience. I’m sure Brock James will still be doing kicking in training mind, as they can’t rely on Cai Evans.

I suspect Protheroe will feature at 10 too. He looks like a decent player albeit inexperienced and a bit skinny.

Myler was doing a pretty decent impression on a steady premiership 10 this season. There's a better than evens chance that he's got one more in him imo.

Strange posts from TRP lately. One of their front pages said “Ospreys eye Manu signing.” This was after Manu Tuilagi signed for Sale.... I can’t think of who else they’d be referring to?

Is Flood still linked with Ospreys, or have they settled on just Myler?

mikey_dragon wrote:Strange posts from TRP lately. One of their front pages said “Ospreys eye Manu signing.” This was after Manu Tuilagi signed for Sale.... I can’t think of who else they’d be referring to?

Is Flood still linked with Ospreys, or have they settled on just Myler?

Ospreys have nowhere near the required financial clout to go and get Manu Tuilagi in. It will be a different Manu, it's not that an unusual name for rugby players with PI heritage.

MT'd contract Sale does expire next summer so post Lions he could be off for a big payday.

I think Flood is likely to stay at Falcons. Can't see why he'd want to leave his boyhood club for a stint in competition with Myler to be Anscombe's backup. Not sure the WRU would be particularly happy about Ospreys using two aging Englishmen instead of giving a youngster game time.

It's Nasi Manu, the Tongan No. 8

A considerably cheaper Manu

Good spot Walker. Nasi Manu was fantastic last season for Benetton. Good signing, some depth to add to a strong back-row.

Big Tongan backrow is rarely a bad option if you need to add some depth. In a normal season I don't think he'd have been looking around for a contract.

I don't particularly rate Cross, but I expect they'll test Morgan Strong at 7, and have Cracknell to cover there. Manu and Gareth Evans will feature at 8. Faletau now likely to sign on with Bath, as expected I guess but he doesn't appear to be required at a Welsh team. Rhys Davies the Welsh lock who signed from Bath also seems to be highly rated by them - so it would appear they aren't recruiting a NWQ lock - that leaves them with; AWJ, B Davies, Beard, R Davies, Ashley (should move to 6), and probably James Fender from the U20's - impressive lock depth at a Welsh team who would have thought it.

If Booth can't do anything with this team then there is no hope for them ever.

Someone was asking about Faletau leaving. Confirmed today he’s extended for 2 more years. So we will get another 6/7 games out of him *tongue in cheek*.

Also saying that Mercer didn’t accept at first, but a few players popped over his house and convinced him too!

Finally, roko bezier move off too as reported earlier.

I guess Falatau was holding out for that extension to his contract can't blame him. Nice bit of security in these uncertain times.

Tigers announce a popcorn day. First signing announced is former Quins flanker Luke Wallace.

Wallace was pretty decent when he broke through, where has he been?

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Wallace was pretty decent when he broke through, where has he been?

Moved to Coventry for a season after injury issues but played consistent rugby before the Championship season was postponed.

Faletau has no reason to move back, to be fair. I would imagine he would find it hard to play for any other Welsh pro team than the Dragons, due to his loyalty.

I do believe that Ospreys held talks with him though, not that it really means much.

Senior Academy intake for LI this season below. Should have some news on the rest of the squad this week as there's been radio silence so far

Tarek Haffar (LH)
Will Joseph (Centre)
George Davis (Flanker/Hooker)
Alex Harmes (Wing)
Michael Dykes (Wing)
Joe Vajner (Hooker)
Lucas Brooke (Flanker/Hooker)

RiscaGame wrote:Faletau has no reason to move back, to be fair. I would imagine he would find it hard to play for any other Welsh pro team than the Dragons, due to his loyalty.

I do believe that Ospreys held talks with him though, not that it really means much.

No but I'm sure his agent likes to use the regions to talk up interest so that he can get the deals he wants out of Bath.

Margin Walker is that Brooke the one with a famous father? Is Will Joseph related to the other Joseph as well? Do you expect any to get game time next season?

Yeah, Brooke is Zinzan's lad and Joseph is JJ's younger brother. The latter is a very similar style of 13 to his brother.

If anyone gets any prem gametime next season it's likely to be one of the outside backs. All three are decent, but you usually need a bit of luck to play prem rugby first year.

Haffar's one to watch. Very dominant physically at U18s, but will be interesting to see how the transition to adult rugby goes.

Hard to tell with under 18s who are physically dominant. Sometimes masks or doesn't encourage good technique. Then when they get to senior rugby they get clobbered with no plan B. That said a lot of the young props coming through these days seem a lot more ready for first team action than they used to, peak age is no longer 28.

Apparently we have signed several Senior players but will hold off announcing for the moment.

Apparently also one of Lucock and Homer has not signed. Im thinking its Homer as Lucocks club has already announced hes coming here.

I think it is Homer as well GF as he posted on social media the other day about some new highlights package he had got made, which seemed curious timing if he had a club sorted.

SirBurger wrote:I think it is Homer as well GF as he posted on social media the other day about some new highlights package he had got made, which seemed curious timing if he had a club sorted.

It's funny how you can tell a players contract hasn't been renewed these days due to things like a YouTube highlights video going up.

A friend I used to play rugby with actually set-up a company cutting together highlights videos for players. He started off doing it for Scottish Premiership players looking for a Championship or Pro D2 contract but has since moved to NZ and I've seen a fair few ITM Cup level players having videos posted by his company.

Apparently it's a surprisingly vital thing to have when you're an unknown player looking for a lower level contract. Clubs are unlikely to put a coach on a flight to watch a prop playing club rugby even if it is semi-pro level after all. From chatting to a few guys who kicked on from Scottish Premiership performance to lower level pro contracts those highlights videos can act as a crucial intermediate ground between 'I've played to this level, trained with this Pro team and won these MOM awards etc' to a coach actually coming out to see you play and chat to you. Pro rugby at that level sounds like a brutal grind I must say.