606v2 Picks the irish RWC Squad: PROPS

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 10:27 am

First topic message reminder :

Morning all.

I have seen the Welsh and English have already started these kinda articles and it did seem like a good idea to try and have them all together.
So the series will determine who will be the Irish RWC squad according to the 606v2 community.

I will try and post up the next part of the series every weekday morning so we all have plenty of time to debate each position. Obviously everyone has their own opinions but try and keep a level head and back up your points with examples or clips or something.

I am going to go for a 16/14 split between the backs and forwards.
4 props
3 hookers
3 locks
6 backrow (1 able to play lock)
3 scrumhalves
2 flyhalves
3 centres (1 able to play flyhalf)
6 back 3

This is Kidney's 43 man squad.
http://www.irishrugby.ie/ireland/23313.php

So beginning with props the options are

Court-able to play both sides of the scrum (only one prop spot on the bench at RWC).
Ross-Ireland's new TH, best Irish scrummager, improving in loose.
Healy-LH, fantastic in the loose and improving in the scrum.
Buckley-TH, hot and cold in scrum and fairly handy in loose, good hands.
Hayes-TH, old and not great in loose, may retire if he doesn't make squad, human forklift in lineout.
Horan-LH, been out for a while but back and playing well enough.
Wilkinson-LH, playing well for Connacht, ok in loose, improving scrummager

Pick 4 props out of the 7 options. Explain your decisions and we will see what debates pop up.

Happy Tuesday. thumbsup

by thebandwagonsociety Tue Jul 05, 2011 1:50 pm

The Great Aukster wrote:Court is the only player who can play both sides to some sort of acceptable standard so there is no debate on his inclusion - he has to go. What would Kidney do if he had Horan on the bench and Ross had to come off?
Healy and Ross will obviously go, so it is the fourth prop that there is any debate about.

I'd take Buckley and start him with Court against the USA and Russia. I'd have Ross on the bench for the USA and Healy on the bench for Russia.

I really don't see the need to start the full test team in the first game as they will have had as many dry runs as they need in the warm-ups, so it's better to keep Healy and Ross as fresh as possible for the bigger games.

So why Buckley over Hayes?
1. He offers a lot more in the loose. Against the weaker nations he should be fine in the scrum, but can shoulder some carrying responsibility from the backrow
2. Of the remaining choices he has at least played both sides of the scrum. If there happened to be an injury to Court in the USA game he could move to LH. (Of course Kidney could just pick Healy as sub for both games instead but I was trying to spread the workload).
3. In those games he is starting, he is more likely to last the full 80 than Hayes.

BTW Pete I think it's a terrible idea to start with a 5-2 split against Italy. It implies that Ireland will change their entire front row and their second string will be a match for Italy? Surely Ireland need to avoid such set piece confrontation where possible rather than actively plan for it - would it not be better to get to uncontested scrums as soon as possible?

I'm 6 and 2 threes between Buckley and Hayes. Hayes is old but the legend would give it his all for a month of the RWC. He would also improve the lineout if on the field and helps to protect ball at the breakdown. Hayes wouldn't add anything in the loose. Buckley gives more in the loose but has a tendancy to lose focus (even when you think the importance of the game would ensure he stays fully focused). He doesn't add as much to the lineout and is equal in the scrum. But if I was to put my neck on the line and trust one of these 2 guys to give it his all in a game for Ireland, it would be Hayes every time. I feel I have given Buckley too many chances and he has never done anything more than glimpses of being top class. But if picked, I hope he proves me wrong (and I'll be delighted to be proved wrong to be honest).

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 2:10 pm

It's not just about who is better but also about who is better coming off the bench.

Realistically Buckley would add more with 20 to go.

AS of now Buckley is walking away with the votes into fourth spot and challenging Court for third spot, so people obviously are voting for him and therefore feel he must offer something that Hayes does not

by **Notch** Tue Jul 05, 2011 2:20 pm

I voted for Healy, Court, Ross and Buckley.

Hayes just can't take the pace of the game in the loose anymore. Horan and Wilkinson are exceptionally far off the standard required. So no real choice here.

We have three international class props and four places. No brainer.

by red_stag Tue Jul 05, 2011 2:25 pm

I think Court isn't really international class personally. I expect Paddy McAllister to have taken his place with Ulster by end of the year.

by **Notch** Tue Jul 05, 2011 2:26 pm

He's not fantastic, but he can hold his own. McAllister, right now, couldn't. But he will be one of the few genuinely good props we've produced in the last few years with a bit more experience.

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 2:33 pm

Court does have to go just because of his versatility.
I agree that Hayes can't take the pace, his lifting is almost all he has now.

by **Notch** Tue Jul 05, 2011 2:35 pm

I should say I don't think Court is capable of playing anywhere near international class on the tighthead side. The guy is a loosehead, but Irelands coaches are desperate to find SOMEBODY who can play tighthead. So he's forced onto his weaker side.

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 2:44 pm

Well I'd much prefer him being put on the tighthead side out of desperation than Horan for instance

by **Notch** Tue Jul 05, 2011 2:48 pm

Well, yes. He does have experience of playing there which stands to him. He has a very good understanding of the mechanics of scrummaging on both sides. And he's had decent games at tighthead.

But being an international tighthead isn't something you can sort of dabble in; playing loosehead for an entire season, then switching to tighthead for internationals. He's been asked to do that and he's struggled.

by **rodders** Tue Jul 05, 2011 2:49 pm

red_stag wrote:I think Court isn't really international class personally. I expect Paddy McAllister to have taken his place with Ulster by end of the year.

I think he is stag. Like Notch says he keeps being forced to tighthead. I bet you wouldn't think Horan or Healy were international class if most of the time you saw them they were playing tighthead.

by The Great Aukster Tue Jul 05, 2011 3:01 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:"Court is the only player who can play both sides to some sort of acceptable standard so there is no debate on his inclusion - he has to go."

There is a debate. I think Court is rubbish so I wouldn't pick him. Playing both sides badly is no more useful than playing one side well. It is helpful, but not mandatory, to have a prop on the bench that covers both sides. Many teams will pick match day squads without genuine cover for both sides.

Court has played both sides for Ireland to a level that Kidney obviously thinks is as good as any available as he has been ever present in match day squads.

I was wondering which Test teams you were thinking of that had no props in the 22 with experience of playing both sides?

by **Notch** Tue Jul 05, 2011 3:07 pm

I think the issue with Court is more that he plays one side well and one side badly rather than both sides badly, to be fair.

by funnyExiledScot Tue Jul 05, 2011 3:15 pm

"I was wondering which Test teams you were thinking of that had no props in the 22 with experience of playing both sides?"

Well Scotland will most certainly be one of them, and I'm not sure any of the Aussie props genuinely cover both sides. Do any of the NZ props?

Personally I just don't really think of Court as genuine cover at tighthead, so to me it's a bit of a red herring. The question for me is whether Court is a better loosehead than Horan. I don't think so, but clearly I'm in the minority on that point, and I'd be perfectly willing to accept that there are posters on this thread who have had the joy of watching the mighty Tom Court in all his versatile glory more often than me. When I've seen him play, I've seen very little.

I should add that I don't think the world begins and ends with Marcus Horan either, for a prop he's spent far too much of his career away from the contact area, but I'd take his experience and abilities ahead of Tom Court.

by **Notch** Tue Jul 05, 2011 3:22 pm

Do you watch much of Munster and Ulster respectively though? Horans form has plummeted whereas Court has been an integral part of one of the strongest scrums in the Magners League.

Court, in turn, has lost form in the last six months.

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 3:31 pm

I am very surprised by how close the voting has been between Court and Buckley I gotta say

by **Notch** Tue Jul 05, 2011 3:34 pm

Well, a number of people will have voted for both remember. It's pretty decisive; four guys the majority of people want to see, with two who enjoy only minority sport and poor Brett Wilkinson lagging behind...

by funnyExiledScot Tue Jul 05, 2011 3:41 pm

Notch wrote:Do you watch much of Munster and Ulster respectively though? Horans form has plummeted whereas Court has been an integral part of one of the strongest scrums in the Magners League.

Court, in turn, has lost form in the last six months.

Yes I do watch quite a bit of both sides. Being a Scot I watch a fair bit of the Magners when I can get to it, and have seen quite a lot of Ulster and Munster in the HC. I'm clearly not a fan of either side, so don't watch every game, but I'm not manufacturing an opinion here for the sake of it.

As you say, neither are setting the world on fire, and neither are going to make the WC dream team. Like or not, Ireland are currently not overwhelmed with great options in the front row.

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 3:42 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:
Notch wrote:Do you watch much of Munster and Ulster respectively though? Horans form has plummeted whereas Court has been an integral part of one of the strongest scrums in the Magners League.

Court, in turn, has lost form in the last six months.
As you say, neither are setting the world on fire, and neither are going to make the WC dream team. Like or not, Ireland are currently not overwhelmed with great options in the front row.

No arguements there! Better than the last few years however.

by **Notch** Tue Jul 05, 2011 3:45 pm

It's true. I'd say we'll try and keep our first choice front row of Healy-Best-Ross together, They've started to gel very well together.

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 3:51 pm

Agree.

Particularily Best and Ross. If Cronin and Buckley took their place we'd find ourselves with a pack full of ballcarriers and DOC.

by **rodders** Tue Jul 05, 2011 3:58 pm

Hey I've changed my mind on the 5 props. Hayes is out (thanks for the memories big guy guinness

).

Ross, Healy, Court and Buckley for me.

by Sin é Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:00 pm

red_stag wrote:To me Ross MUST MUST play against Australia. We can actually get the upper hand in the scrum and it will be a great launch pad for the first phase moves that have served us well in the past.

I'd have Ross playing the opening game against USA and sitting out the Russia test. Start the Italy game but get subbed early. He plays against Australia.

Thats if there are any scrums. A lot depends on the handling skills of both teams. The Aussies won't be kean on having too many scrums.

Court has to bench - he is the only one who can play either side of the scrum. Props are injury cover in the world cup - nothing else.

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:05 pm

[quote="Sin é]
Props are injury cover in the world cup - nothing else. [/quote]

I agree with that, other than in the game against Russia where they will start but that is to prevent injuries to Ross and Healy.

Rodders-
We all owe the big fella a couple of these guinness

for the effort he's put in

by funnyExiledScot Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:05 pm

"Props are injury cover in the world cup - nothing else."

Why can't props be impact subs in a World Cup? Why is the World Cup different?

by Sin é Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:13 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:"Props are injury cover in the world cup - nothing else."

Why can't props be impact subs in a World Cup? Why is the World Cup different?

22, not 23 man squad. One player has to cover two positions for injury, otherwise you might have to resort to uncontested squads if both got injured and why the 23 man squads were introduced to club games. You could put an extra prop on the bench and so be able to make tactical prop changes. Other thing as well - all props will have to be able to play for 80 mins. Big ask as they are not used to it at club level now.

by Sin é Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:18 pm

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:[quote="Sin é]
Props are injury cover in the world cup - nothing else.

I agree with that, other than in the game against Russia where they will start but that is to prevent injuries to Ross and Healy.

Rodders-
We all owe the big fella a couple of these for the effort he's put in

I don't see Court starting any game. He is probably one of our most important props out there as he is the only one who can cover both sides, and so needs to be minded. I wouldn't fancy heading into a game against Australia with the hope that Tony Buckley could cover both sides because Court has got injured.

I actually think Mike Ross benefits greatly from playing a lot.

by Feagh McHugh Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:22 pm

Went for Healy Ross Court and Buckley.

Thanks for the memories John. As said by another poster his good games are the exception and not the norm now.

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:28 pm

Sin é wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:"Props are injury cover in the world cup - nothing else."

Why can't props be impact subs in a World Cup? Why is the World Cup different?

22, not 23 man squad. One player has to cover two positions for injury, otherwise you might have to resort to uncontested squads if both got injured and why the 23 man squads were introduced to club games. You could put an extra prop on the bench and so be able to make tactical prop changes. Other thing as well - all props will have to be able to play for 80 mins. Big ask as they are not used to it at club level now.

Also we don't really have the quality of props to be counted as impact subs really other than Buckley who could be hit or miss.

Sin-Court is not our most important prop. Ross is. I'd rather lose a bench player rather than a starter. Court will definitly start against Russia, possibly America.

by **rodders** Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:36 pm

Sin é wrote:
I don't see Court starting any game. He is probably one of our most important props out there as he is the only one who can cover both sides, and so needs to be minded.

Sin I see your logic here...Court is so important that we can't let him onto the pitch in case he hurts himself.... Whistle

by Sin é Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:39 pm

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:
Sin é wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:"Props are injury cover in the world cup - nothing else."

Why can't props be impact subs in a World Cup? Why is the World Cup different?

22, not 23 man squad. One player has to cover two positions for injury, otherwise you might have to resort to uncontested squads if both got injured and why the 23 man squads were introduced to club games. You could put an extra prop on the bench and so be able to make tactical prop changes. Other thing as well - all props will have to be able to play for 80 mins. Big ask as they are not used to it at club level now.

Also we don't really have the quality of props to be counted as impact subs really other than Buckley who could be hit or miss.

Sin-Court is not our most important prop. Ross is. I'd rather lose a bench player rather than a starter. Court will definitly start against Russia, possibly America.

I think you will see the first choice team starting against the US (to prepare for Australia). Also remember that the US were no walkover for England in the last RWC and now they have EOS as their coach and the game is on the 10th anniversary of 9/11. I don't see Kidney taking it too lightly at all.

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:40 pm

Buckley is only one vote behind Court now! Did not see this coming!

by funnyExiledScot Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:43 pm

Sin é wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:"Props are injury cover in the world cup - nothing else."

Why can't props be impact subs in a World Cup? Why is the World Cup different?

22, not 23 man squad. One player has to cover two positions for injury, otherwise you might have to resort to uncontested squads if both got injured and why the 23 man squads were introduced to club games. You could put an extra prop on the bench and so be able to make tactical prop changes. Other thing as well - all props will have to be able to play for 80 mins. Big ask as they are not used to it at club level now.

Internationals have always had 22 man squads, and I'm fairly certain international sides have coped without props covering both sides on the bench before (in fact it's fairly rare to have a player who genuinely covers both sides - and let's face it, Tom Court is barely a club class tighthead). Frankly uncontested scrums would suit Ireland down to the ground in any case.

You've got the whole training warm-up period to condition props to be able to play for 80 minutes, and whatever happens, one of your props is going to have to play 80 minutes, so that's a red herring issue to me.

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:45 pm

Sorry what would happen if Ross got injured, Court came on and then got injured. uncontested scrum yes, but would we remain with 14 players on the pitch?????

by Sin é Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:47 pm

roddersm wrote:
Sin é wrote:
I don't see Court starting any game. He is probably one of our most important props out there as he is the only one who can cover both sides, and so needs to be minded.

Sin I see your logic here...Court is so important that we can't let him onto the pitch in case he hurts himself....

I didn't say letting him on to the pitch. Whistle

(I said starting any game, i.e., limiting his chances of getting injured - like the way he was used during the 6Ns where he didn't start any games. In fact, Tom Court has only started 4 international games out of 18 in his international career so far).

by Artful_Dodger Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:53 pm

Tony Buckley is a worse scrummager than Court and cant get into a Munster team that was starting 37 year old John Hayes.

As for uncontested scrum suiting Ireland - please go and get a clue, Ireland took Englands scrum apart in the 6N with Ross and Healy starting and the idea of anyone wanting uncontested scrums against Australia(key game) is laughable, Irelands scrum will in my view have parity at least against Australia in fact I think we can gain the upper hand. Uncontested scrums would not suit Ireland least of all against Australia.

by funnyExiledScot Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:53 pm

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Sorry what would happen if Ross got injured, Court came on and then got injured. uncontested scrum yes, but would we remain with 14 players on the pitch?????

No - you can bring on another player to play prop in uncontested scrums. Wasps used to use Joe Worsely as their official "uncontested scrum" prop.

by Sin é Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:54 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:
Sin é wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:"Props are injury cover in the world cup - nothing else."

Why can't props be impact subs in a World Cup? Why is the World Cup different?

22, not 23 man squad. One player has to cover two positions for injury, otherwise you might have to resort to uncontested squads if both got injured and why the 23 man squads were introduced to club games. You could put an extra prop on the bench and so be able to make tactical prop changes. Other thing as well - all props will have to be able to play for 80 mins. Big ask as they are not used to it at club level now.

Internationals have always had 22 man squads, and I'm fairly certain international sides have coped without props covering both sides on the bench before (in fact it's fairly rare to have a player who genuinely covers both sides - and let's face it, Tom Court is barely a club class tighthead). Frankly uncontested scrums would suit Ireland down to the ground in any case.

You've got the whole training warm-up period to condition props to be able to play for 80 minutes, and whatever happens, one of your props is going to have to play 80 minutes, so that's a red herring issue to me.

Club sides used to have 22 man squads as well - and players used to get a bit of gametime playing both sides. Now they don't. The reason why they increased the club sides to 23 was because of a certain amount of abuse of the uncontested scrums happening. Now, props are used as tactical substitutions and rarely get to play 80 mins in the club game. Makes it even harder to step up to international level as the pace of the game is greater and they have to stick it for 80 mins.

by The Great Aukster Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:55 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:"I was wondering which Test teams you were thinking of that had no props in the 22 with experience of playing both sides?"

Well Scotland will most certainly be one of them, and I'm not sure any of the Aussie props genuinely cover both sides. Do any of the NZ props?

I thought Traynor has had recent caps on both sides? Pretty sure Ben Alexander has played both sides for Australia as well. Afoa and Ben Franks definitely have played both for the ABs (maybe Owen Franks as well).

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:57 pm

Does a medical exam from a third party have to take place?

I'm not saying we should go for uncontested scrums against Australia btw, I think we will have a slight dominance here too.

by funnyExiledScot Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:57 pm

Artful_Dodger wrote:As for uncontested scrum suiting Ireland - please go and get a clue, Ireland took Englands scrum apart in the 6N with Ross and Healy starting and the idea of anyone wanting uncontested scrums against Australia(key game) is laughable, Irelands scrum will in my view have parity at least against Australia in fact I think we can gain the upper hand. Uncontested scrums would not suit Ireland least of all against Australia.

Not the smartest cookie are you. By definition, if Ireland are going into uncontested scrums it means that one or both of Ross and Healy are injured, in which case it comes down to the quality of the back up props. In my view, without the first choice props available, Ireland would struggle at the scrum against any top international rugby side (including Australia assuming the two Benns and Moore are fit).

I wasn't making a comment about your first choice front row, which has come together quite nicely.

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 5:00 pm

Thanks funny

thumbsup

by funnyExiledScot Tue Jul 05, 2011 5:01 pm

The Great Aukster wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:"I was wondering which Test teams you were thinking of that had no props in the 22 with experience of playing both sides?"

Well Scotland will most certainly be one of them, and I'm not sure any of the Aussie props genuinely cover both sides. Do any of the NZ props?

I thought Traynor has had recent caps on both sides? Pretty sure Ben Alexander has played both sides for Australia as well. Afoa and Ben Franks definitely have played both for the ABs (maybe Owen Franks as well).

Traynor is a loosehead and has only come on as a replacement for Scotland. I don't think it's him you're thinking of. The only prop in the Scotland squad to have played both sides to my knowledge for Scotland is Dickinson, and as a tighthead he's worse than useless.

I thought Ben Alexander was a tighthead only, but I'm not certain.

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 5:03 pm

Is Maas able to play both sides or is it Domingo?

by Sin é Tue Jul 05, 2011 5:10 pm

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Buckley is only one vote behind Court now! Did not see this coming!

Court has to go, but I can see the logic of wanting Buckley there because he has had some some great games in the SH.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQS2lNRV0NQ&feature=related

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88zKlovZJKg

by pete (buachaill on eirne) Tue Jul 05, 2011 5:11 pm

Buckley and Court currently drawing.

Yeah were'nt Buckley, Trimble and Kearney some of the only good players down south last summer??
Maybe P.Wallace and Tuohy also.

by funnyExiledScot Tue Jul 05, 2011 5:12 pm

Again, didn't think either were that versatile. Does Marconnet cover both sides perhaps?

by **Notch** Tue Jul 05, 2011 5:42 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:
Sin é wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:"Props are injury cover in the world cup - nothing else."

Why can't props be impact subs in a World Cup? Why is the World Cup different?

22, not 23 man squad. One player has to cover two positions for injury, otherwise you might have to resort to uncontested squads if both got injured and why the 23 man squads were introduced to club games. You could put an extra prop on the bench and so be able to make tactical prop changes. Other thing as well - all props will have to be able to play for 80 mins. Big ask as they are not used to it at club level now.

Internationals have always had 22 man squads, and I'm fairly certain international sides have coped without props covering both sides on the bench before (in fact it's fairly rare to have a player who genuinely covers both sides - and let's face it, Tom Court is barely a club class tighthead). Frankly uncontested scrums would suit Ireland down to the ground in any case.

You've got the whole training warm-up period to condition props to be able to play for 80 minutes, and whatever happens, one of your props is going to have to play 80 minutes, so that's a red herring issue to me.

Did Tom Court sleep with your girlfriend or something? laughing

You seem very down on him. He's a decent player. You're speaking like someone who's only seen him play for Ireland!

by Artful_Dodger Tue Jul 05, 2011 7:19 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:
Artful_Dodger wrote:As for uncontested scrum suiting Ireland - please go and get a clue, Ireland took Englands scrum apart in the 6N with Ross and Healy starting and the idea of anyone wanting uncontested scrums against Australia(key game) is laughable, Irelands scrum will in my view have parity at least against Australia in fact I think we can gain the upper hand. Uncontested scrums would not suit Ireland least of all against Australia.

Not the smartest cookie are you. By definition, if Ireland are going into uncontested scrums it means that one or both of Ross and Healy are injured, in which case it comes down to the quality of the back up props. In my view, without the first choice props available, Ireland would struggle at the scrum against any top international rugby side (including Australia assuming the two Benns and Moore are fit).

I wasn't making a comment about your first choice front row, which has come together quite nicely.

Right so in other words you are saying that Ireland would actually want either Ross or Healy to be injured because then we would go to uncontested scrums, hence saying that it would be ideal for Ireland.

"would suit Ireland down to the ground"

As opposed to having both our first choice props available suiting us down to the ground? I dont think its me whos not the smartest cookie. Really when you said Ireland would want uncontested scrums you were going to the old argument of Ireland having a weak front row which is no longer true.

by The Great Aukster Tue Jul 05, 2011 8:01 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:
The Great Aukster wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:"I was wondering which Test teams you were thinking of that had no props in the 22 with experience of playing both sides?"

Well Scotland will most certainly be one of them, and I'm not sure any of the Aussie props genuinely cover both sides. Do any of the NZ props?

I thought Traynor has had recent caps on both sides? Pretty sure Ben Alexander has played both sides for Australia as well. Afoa and Ben Franks definitely have played both for the ABs (maybe Owen Franks as well).

Traynor is a loosehead and has only come on as a replacement for Scotland. I don't think it's him you're thinking of. The only prop in the Scotland squad to have played both sides to my knowledge for Scotland is Dickinson, and as a tighthead he's worse than useless.

I thought Ben Alexander was a tighthead only, but I'm not certain.

Maybe it's not Traynor I'm thinking of although I see he has played tighthead for Scotland A
http://www.scotlandrugbyteam.org/content/view/597/72/

Alexander is a loosehead first and foremost at the Brumbies but converted into a good tighthead for the national team.

by funnyExiledScot Wed Jul 06, 2011 10:19 am

Hmmmm, I've not seem him play tighthead at club rugby before so I really wouldn't consider him versatile.

There's a big difference between playing both sides and being able to play both sides. Dickinson has played tighthead for Scotland before, but gave away a penalty at just about every scrum in the process.

by Sponsored content