Silly Season Transfer Rumours 16/17

First topic message reminder :

Nit before the Lions tour. Don't think any of the All Black internationals will end their career pre tour.

Welly wrote: I'm 75% sure Ford will be a Tigers player come next season.

Also 90% sure he will def be a Tigers player come the season after

Reading around a bit if Ford wishes to go next Season then Sale are currently the "tip", as rumour is Bath don't wish to release him to a club on similar standings around them in the table.

However if Ford would prefer to move to a club like Tigers then he might wait a year, there is of course the risk that current top fly half spots are full by then.

I would love for him to go to Sale but my head says he is more likely to move to a club that currently can compete at the top (or at least has a history of it)

Lee Dickson ----> Sale

Nic Stirzaker ----> Saints

Dickson hasn't been playing much for Saints - is that injury or lack of form?
Not too surprised that he is off. Presumably Sale will be loosing Stringer so need another experienced 9.

Would be nice if Sale went for a 9 that was not over the 30 mark, mind you Phillips yesterday showed what he can do at his best, shame he normally isnt like that.

I bet George Ford is looking forward to the speed of Dickson's delivery...

Accurate and pedestrian has got to be better than pedestrian and head height, which is what he'll get from Phillips.

Apparently the Rugby Paper think we are in for Worcesters Fijian lock Tevita Cavubati.

That would be an odd move as Lock is our strongest position. Maybe the talk that Botha is off to France is true and American Civetta isn't up to the standard....

propdavid_london wrote:Dickson hasn't been playing much for Saints - is that injury or lack of form?
Not too surprised that he is off.  Presumably Sale will be loosing Stringer so need another experienced 9.

He's had an injury but seems to now be second choice. By my reckoning he should be third choice, and the groans at the Gardens when he is subbed on would suggest many share that view.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Apparently the Rugby Paper think we are in for Worcesters Fijian lock Tevita Cavubati.

That would be an odd move as Lock is our strongest position. Maybe the talk that Botha is off to France is true and American Civetta isn't up to the standard....

Or Witty is off.........

Welly wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Apparently the Rugby Paper think we are in for Worcesters Fijian lock Tevita Cavubati.

That would be an odd move as Lock is our strongest position. Maybe the talk that Botha is off to France is true and American Civetta isn't up to the standard....

Or Witty is off.........

Green returning home maybe? Robinson signed a new deal?

Eggchasers (apecifically, JB of the three) speculating about a move upstairs for Jim Mallinder, with Lancaster moving over from Leinster. Also talk of Harry Mallinder moving somewhere.

Rugby Fan wrote:Eggchasers (apecifically, JB of the three) speculating about a move upstairs for Jim Mallinder, with Lancaster moving over from Leinster. Also talk of Harry Mallinder moving somewhere.

Heard that weeks ago when we played Leinster. But not before, guess it's easier to sell when we play against him. The Harry thing is an obvious follow on. I think a lot of this is guesswork.

Rugby Fan wrote:Eggchasers (apecifically, JB of the three) speculating about a move upstairs for Jim Mallinder, with Lancaster moving over from Leinster. Also talk of Harry Mallinder moving somewhere.

I will say listening to Eggchasers (which is eggcellent) BUT JB does seem to sprout the most rubbish at times.

So wouldn't trust it that much.

(Cockers is more the one with the inside line).

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Welly wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Apparently the Rugby Paper think we are in for Worcesters Fijian lock Tevita Cavubati.

That would be an odd move as Lock is our strongest position. Maybe the talk that Botha is off to France is true and American Civetta isn't up to the standard....

Or Witty is off.........

Green returning home maybe? Robinson signed a new deal?

Mr Welly....Witty is going nowhere...hands off! He's going to be the beast in our pack for many a year.

Sam,
Green is one of the unsung battling players...like you used to describe Louis Deacon. He's probably Deans first name on the teamsheet. And despite only being 6'4 his lineout stats are very good! I wouldn't be surprised if he was a target of the Tigers...quality player and proper old school tigers type player.

Robinson has another year on his contract (June 2018) and he's another like Witty who wont be allowed to leave and I see no reason why he would want to.
I think its probably Botha and Civetta on their way...if there is actually anything in the Cavubati link at all...

We all knew how good Green could be when he left. He had actually broke through then got a nasty knee injury. He never really got any momentum back after the injury, he needed to go and get regular game time and then it was no surprise he was back in the AP and doing well. He helps add some grit to a forward pack I think the Deacon comparison is a good one.

Rugby Fan wrote:Eggchasers (apecifically, JB of the three) speculating about a move upstairs for Jim Mallinder, with Lancaster moving over from Leinster. Also talk of Harry Mallinder moving somewhere.

I suspect that young Harry may need to move away from the influence of his father to get regular game time. Not sure what moving JM upstairs would do and to replace him with another fuzzy thinker in Lancaster would IMO me a big mistake. We need someone that can not only recognise talent, but can plan to use it and when things don't go to plan, have teh ability to change it. SL fails on the last two.

A decent backs coach would help as well.

I'd like to see young Harry settle on a spot..ie 10 or 12..etc

Preferably 12.

Excluding specific needs as injury cover, he's only being picked at 12. His one on one defence isn't good enough at full back, and he's had no gametime at 10.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I'd like to see young Harry settle on a spot..ie 10 or 12..etc

Preferably 12.

Definately 12, he can cover 10 to a good standard and having him on the field gives you more options on the bench, but he has the potential to be an international quality 12; he doesn't at 10.

Scottrf, agree his 1on1 defense is not there yet, but that can be worked on, just like his positioning needs a bit of work when at 15. He is still only 20, so a lot of time for a good backs coach to improve them (when we finally get one).

What I wouldn't want is for him to become a utility player covering where injuries have hit like he did last year, wing, full back, outside half and centre. You become more rounded that way, but to the detriment of your specialist position and I see that as 12.

Confirmed - Clarke to Sarries
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/38651930

As I said previously...ignoring the "other" aspects around Clark...his game is perfect for Saracens. Another aggressive, physical player. A lineout option as well...he'll fit into their pattern of play very well indeed.

Ps...Has Thacker signed a new Deal for Tigers...

Ethan Waller confirmed to Wuss next season.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Ps...Has Thacker signed a new Deal for Tigers...

Ethan Waller confirmed to Wuss next season.

Not yet. Expected to be soon.

Good signing for Wuss is Ethan Waller, wonder if he has a relegation get out clause...

Really disappointed with how we've failed to use Ethan Waller. If Hill goes too we really need to question our (non-existent) rotation policy.

And obviously Clark is a huge miss, we are well stocked at flanker, but not really with out and out 7s as he is. When he's on form he is a fantastic player.

Yeah whats these rumours about Hill going? Surely not?

GeordieFalcon wrote:Yeah whats these rumours about Hill going? Surely not?

Who knows. But surely he wants more than 20 minutes every week. He did sign a new contract in July though so hopefully there's nothing in it.

Yeah its not enough...

The whole club is stale and needs a proper shake up! maybe Lancaster is the man...maybe not. But I think Malinders time is very much up...needs to be moved over.

GeordieFalcon wrote:As I said previously...ignoring the "other" aspects around Clark...his game is perfect for Saracens. Another aggressive, physical player. A lineout option as well...he'll fit into their pattern of play very well indeed.

We'll see if they can sort out Clark's demons. Still remains to be seen whether he's got what it takes to be a good international player or whether he'll stay a good club player.

I know Saracens were looking at Carl Fearns so when that fell through, it seems this was their answer.

From a playing perspective Clark is a good enough club player though I think he lacks star quality or even the potential to be such.

Now of course perhaps one shouldn't expect every single player to be a potential diamond but it's ultimately what I think a team should strive for.

Perhaps Underhill was asking for too much as I would have liked to sign him instead.

With one year still at University, no way was Underhill going to move to Barnet.

It will be interesting to see how Clark does, bearing in mind the ad nauseum discussions in the past about whether you have to perform for "top" side to be viewed as ready for internationals, or whether being surrounded by better players makes solid individuals look better.

Londontiger you make a good point. Could make it hard to ascertain whether Clark would have improved with a move or it just becomes easier when playing with a stronger pack to look good.

Whether you like Saracens or not they've managed to do well with their backrowers. Jacques Burger is an example of someone not having an armchair ride for Namibia but still standing out.

From Clark's perspective, it's the right move to make if he still has aspirations to be an England player. I am yet to be convinced he's international level but Saracens is a good team to go to try and push for more honours.

Saints are obviously floundering a bit. Shame really as even though they are a big rival of Sarries. Got a lot of respect.

I presume Kelly Brown will retire at the end of the season, and I'd see Clark as a good replacement for him. This looks like good business to me.

Cruden to Montpelier for 2 years seems like a done deal with a salary rumoured to be around 800k€ per year.

beshocked wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:As I said previously...ignoring the "other" aspects around Clark...his game is perfect for Saracens. Another aggressive, physical player. A lineout option as well...he'll fit into their pattern of play very well indeed.

We'll see if they can sort out Clark's demons. Still remains to be seen whether he's got what it takes to be a good international player or whether he'll stay a good club player.

I know Saracens were looking at Carl Fearns so when that fell through, it seems this was their answer.

From a playing perspective Clark is a good enough club player though I think he lacks star quality or even the potential to be such.

Now of course perhaps one shouldn't expect every single player to be a potential diamond but it's ultimately what I think a team should strive for.

Perhaps Underhill was asking for too much as I would have liked to sign him instead.

He'll never in a million years make the England squad again...both on competition and probably due to his past issues. But again that plays right into Saracens hands....a very good back rower who can cover most positions in the back 5 and wont be away on international duty.

Like you say...its the demons that need to be fixed. But if anyone can fix them Sarries can.

Ps Who cares if he's got star quality or not...generally its the "non" star players that are the bread and butter on the pitch! IE Calum Green for us...probably Deans first name on the team sheet!

Aaron Cruden move to Montpellier looks confirmed. €800,000 a season being reported.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/88518360/all-black-aaron-cruden-signs-with-montpellier-for-two-years--report

Shame Cruden is taking a big pay out from a dreadful club that doesn't get on with its own fans over staying for the Lions tour.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

beshocked wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:As I said previously...ignoring the "other" aspects around Clark...his game is perfect for Saracens. Another aggressive, physical player. A lineout option as well...he'll fit into their pattern of play very well indeed.

We'll see if they can sort out Clark's demons. Still remains to be seen whether he's got what it takes to be a good international player or whether he'll stay a good club player.

I know Saracens were looking at Carl Fearns so when that fell through, it seems this was their answer.

From a playing perspective Clark is a good enough club player though I think he lacks star quality or even the potential to be such.

Now of course perhaps one shouldn't expect every single player to be a potential diamond but it's ultimately what I think a team should strive for.

Perhaps Underhill was asking for too much as I would have liked to sign him instead.

He'll never in a million years make the England squad again...both on competition and probably due to his past issues. But again that plays right into Saracens hands....a very good back rower who can cover most positions in the back 5 and wont be away on international duty.

Like you say...its the demons that need to be fixed. But if anyone can fix them Sarries can.

Ps Who cares if he's got star quality or not...generally its the "non" star players that are the bread and butter on the pitch! IE Calum Green for us...probably Deans first name on the team sheet!

Why should past issues matter when the England captain has 60 weeks of bans to his name? Would be a little silly to discount Clark because of that.

I think it's more likely he'll not make it due to playing reasons.

Non star players are great but it's the star players who can raise their game.

What I am saying is you strive for star players but if you get good club men that's fine.

He was our player of the season two years running. I wouldn't discount him getting a look in. At his best I'd put him better than Haskell.

Scottrf wrote:He was our player of the season two years running. I wouldn't discount him getting a look in. At his best I'd put him better than Haskell.

Clark is nowhere near Haskell, certainly on recent form anyway. At best, Haskell is outperforming some of the best in the world, Clark looks good in the AP.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Scottrf wrote:He was our player of the season two years running. I wouldn't discount him getting a look in. At his best I'd put him better than Haskell.

Clark is nowhere near Haskell, certainly on recent form anyway. At best, Haskell is outperforming some of the best in the world, Clark looks good in the AP.

'On recent form'? Clark has been injured or banned. Pretty irrelevant and clearly not the comparison I was making.

Scottrf wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Scottrf wrote:He was our player of the season two years running. I wouldn't discount him getting a look in. At his best I'd put him better than Haskell.

Clark is nowhere near Haskell, certainly on recent form anyway. At best, Haskell is outperforming some of the best in the world, Clark looks good in the AP.

'On recent form'? Clark has been injured or banned. Pretty irrelevant and clearly not the comparison I was making.

Thus proving my point

Haskell has been outstanding over the last year or so. Clark is a solid/good AP flanker but has never put in shifts against world class opposition like Haskell has. I find it extremely odd that you'd suggest he's better than Haskell.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Shame Cruden is taking a big pay out from a dreadful club that doesn't get on with its own fans over staying for the Lions tour.

He is.

You'd never change the England team if you had to put in a shift against international opposition to get selected.

Scottrf wrote:You'd never change the England team if you had to put in a shift against international opposition to get selected.

Who said this was the case?

I was stating that Clark was not a better player than Haskell......which he isn't.

He's not. But I didn't say he was (hint: I don't think injured/banned is his best). Nevermind.

Maybe it's exaggerated, but I wouldn't discount him getting a look in. I don't think it's our best stocked position and playing for Sarries could only help.

Scottrf wrote:He's not. But I didn't say he was (hint: I don't think injured/banned is his best). Nevermind.

I must have misunderstood your previous comment:

Scottrf wrote:At his best I'd put him better than Haskell

beshocked wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:

beshocked wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:As I said previously...ignoring the "other" aspects around Clark...his game is perfect for Saracens. Another aggressive, physical player. A lineout option as well...he'll fit into their pattern of play very well indeed.

We'll see if they can sort out Clark's demons. Still remains to be seen whether he's got what it takes to be a good international player or whether he'll stay a good club player.

I know Saracens were looking at Carl Fearns so when that fell through, it seems this was their answer.

From a playing perspective Clark is a good enough club player though I think he lacks star quality or even the potential to be such.

Now of course perhaps one shouldn't expect every single player to be a potential diamond but it's ultimately what I think a team should strive for.

Perhaps Underhill was asking for too much as I would have liked to sign him instead.

He'll never in a million years make the England squad again...both on competition and probably due to his past issues. But again that plays right into Saracens hands....a very good back rower who can cover most positions in the back 5 and wont be away on international duty.

Like you say...its the demons that need to be fixed. But if anyone can fix them Sarries can.

Ps Who cares if he's got star quality or not...generally its the "non" star players that are the bread and butter on the pitch! IE Calum Green for us...probably Deans first name on the team sheet!

Why should past issues matter when the England captain has 60 weeks of bans to his name? Would be a little silly to discount Clark because of that.

I think it's more likely he'll not make it due to playing reasons.

Non star players are great but it's the star players who can raise their game.

What I am saying is you strive for star players but if you get good club men that's fine.

Because much of Hartleys has been questionable....as discussed a million times on here. Clark deliberately broke someone's arm....that's a whole level above! Plus other more serious incidents than Hartley.

As for the "star players"...you shouldn't have a team full of stars....you need a few grounded workhorses in there!

GeordieFalcon wrote:

beshocked wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:

beshocked wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:As I said previously...ignoring the "other" aspects around Clark...his game is perfect for Saracens. Another aggressive, physical player. A lineout option as well...he'll fit into their pattern of play very well indeed.

We'll see if they can sort out Clark's demons. Still remains to be seen whether he's got what it takes to be a good international player or whether he'll stay a good club player.

I know Saracens were looking at Carl Fearns so when that fell through, it seems this was their answer.

From a playing perspective Clark is a good enough club player though I think he lacks star quality or even the potential to be such.

Now of course perhaps one shouldn't expect every single player to be a potential diamond but it's ultimately what I think a team should strive for.

Perhaps Underhill was asking for too much as I would have liked to sign him instead.

He'll never in a million years make the England squad again...both on competition and probably due to his past issues. But again that plays right into Saracens hands....a very good back rower who can cover most positions in the back 5 and wont be away on international duty.

Like you say...its the demons that need to be fixed. But if anyone can fix them Sarries can.

Ps Who cares if he's got star quality or not...generally its the "non" star players that are the bread and butter on the pitch! IE Calum Green for us...probably Deans first name on the team sheet!

Why should past issues matter when the England captain has 60 weeks of bans to his name? Would be a little silly to discount Clark because of that.

I think it's more likely he'll not make it due to playing reasons.

Non star players are great but it's the star players who can raise their game.

What I am saying is you strive for star players but if you get good club men that's fine.

Because much of Hartleys has been questionable....as discussed a million times on here. Clark deliberately broke someone's arm....that's a whole level above! Plus other more serious incidents than Hartley.

As for the "star players"...you shouldn't have a team full of stars....you need a few grounded workhorses in there!

Disagree. Both have appalling records but because Hartley is England captain it's okay...

What Clark did was awful but no, I don't think Clark and Hartley are much different.

If Hartley can be captain then anyone should be available for selection when it comes to discipline. If not then it's just silly.

If they are grounded stars then it's fine. It's when "stars" let the fame go to their head and don't contribute enough which is where problems come in.

Welly wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:Shame Cruden is taking a big pay out from a dreadful club that doesn't get on with its own fans over staying for the Lions tour.

He is.

Knowing he's off will the NZRU still keep him for section? I can imagine he'll be dropped from the squad as soon as the deal to leave is confirmed. The All Blacks aren't short of flyhalfs. Lima, McKenzie, Barrett and Mo'unga are all good players and Barrett clearly first choice.

Beshocked...

Theres a whole level of difference between Hartley and Clark...and I would say that irrelevant of if Hartley was England captain or not!!

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Welly wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:Shame Cruden is taking a big pay out from a dreadful club that doesn't get on with its own fans over staying for the Lions tour.

He is.

Knowing he's off will the NZRU still keep him for section? I can imagine he'll be dropped from the squad as soon as the deal to leave is confirmed. The All Blacks aren't short of flyhalfs. Lima, McKenzie, Barrett and Mo'unga are all good players and Barrett clearly first choice.

NZ will play him if he out plays the other 10's in super rugby.