Wales vs France - Round 3 “Redemption”

First topic message reminder :

Getting your backside kicked and realising your faults can make you a far better and stronger team. Should you go on for a lengthy period without teams finding the flaws in your game you are likely to get a big surprise one day when said period ends..!

Ireland played really well last Saturday, they found flaws in wales defence and attack. I think we all knew our set piece hasn’t been world class but that has been the case for a long time.

Next we face the French, now one of only two teams who can claim a grandslam should their winning run continue and they look pretty handy. They neither look like the french teams of old, Sella, Penaud, Blanco and St Andre nor do they look like the recent sides of Vahmina, Basteraud and an endless stream of different flyhalfs.

Both teams are new to their coaches, both teams are looking to push on from their past and polish their game. France look better than this time last year, Wales maybe not so much...!

Sure going to be a great game.

Wales:

15. Leigh Halfpenny (87 Caps)
14. George North (93 Caps)
13. Nick Tompkins (2 Caps)
12. Hadleigh Parkes (27 Caps)
11. Josh Adams (23 Caps)
10. Dan Biggar (81 Caps)
9. Gareth Davies (52 Caps)

1. Wyn Jones (24 Caps)
2. Ken Owens (75 Caps)
3. Dillon Lewis (24 Caps)
4. Jake Ball (44 Caps)
5. Alun Wyn Jones (C) (136 Caps)
6. Ross Moriarty (43 Caps)
7. Justin Tipuric (74 Caps)
8. Taulupe Faletau (74 Caps)

Replacements:
16. Ryan Elias (11 Caps)
17. Rob Evans (37 Caps)
18. Leon Brown (8 Caps)
19. Will Rowlands (Uncapped)
20. Aaron Wainwright (20 Caps)
21. Tomos Williams (18 Caps)
22. Jarrod Evans (5 Caps)
23. Johnny McNicholl (2 Caps)


France

15. Anthony Bouthier (Montpellier)
14. Teddy Thomas (Racing 92)
13. Virimi Vakatawa (Racing 92)
12. Arthur Vincent (Montpellier)
11. Gaël Fickou (Stade Français)
10. Romain Ntamack (Toulouse)
9. Antoine Dupont (Toulouse)

1. Cyril Baille (Toulouse)
2. Julien Marchand (Toulouse)
3. Mohamed Haouas (Montpellier)
4. Bernard Le Roux (Racing 92)
5. Paul Willemse (Montpellier)
6. François Cros (Toulouse)
7. Charles Ollivon (Toulon) (c)
8. Grégory Alldritt (La Rochelle)

Replacements:
16. Camille Chat (Racing 92)
17. Jean-Baptiste Gros (Toulon)
18. Demba Bamba (Lyon)
19. Romain Taofifenua (Toulon)
20. Dylan Cretin (Lyon)
21. Baptiste Serin (Toulon)
22. Matthieu Jalibert (Bordeaux-Bègles)
23. Thomas Ramos (Toulouse)

Why is AWJ arrogant HERSH? I’m no blinkered apologist, but I don’t see how he is under fire. If it’s the “he should have opted for 3”, well no. Wales had France under the cosh. Immediately after their yellow they gave away another penalty, and then another one. I guess we were relying on the ref to do his job!

Wales lose = Blame ref

I'm surprised by the Tompkins bashing on here - I thought he was your bright spark in attack, and he's hardly the first player to throw an intercept. He's been pretty good for 3 tests. He's very much a Pivac player though - he wouldn't have got many caps under Gatland.

I didn't see the other enthusiastic instances mentioned earlier - does sound like he needs to chill out a bit.

As for Biggar, I know he's an easy target and often vilified, but yesterday's antics were embarrassing and I'm amazed the ref let him do it for 80 minutes. Maybe there was a lot of frustration from the players - even AWJ was getting tetchy and that's a very rare sight.

RDW

It was the refs first international. It will take a few more games to get up to speed in the international caldron.
Great game, amazing atmosphere at the stadium. One of the best. Shame we lost. Maybe should have kicked a few penalties or not thrown an intercept.

Two of their tries were soft. But the pressure France brought in defence and attack was great.

Wales are in transition and now is a great time to do it

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:Wales lose = Blame ref

I don’t blame him. Been seeing some criticism of him from England fans actually.

mikey_dragon wrote:

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:Wales lose = Blame ref

I don’t blame him. Been seeing some criticism of him from England fans actually.

Yeah most of the welsh fans on here are too busy blaming the Englishman

Mikey I really enjoyed the game and there were decisions that could have gone either way throughout. However, the best team won & the bleating of Pivac & Biggar does not do our sport any favours.

Congrats France, simply the better team . Whocares have a beer on me .

I have to say though, I was on the Scotland v Italy thread yesterday and there’s a marked difference in the ‘feel’ of the two threads. Much more spikiness on this one. Seems to be a lot more daggers out. Odd that. Or not.....

SecretFly wrote:

Pie wrote:Google George North and concussion

Not sure hat it is about the big man but he has had far too many

I hav always thought him a little gun shy for a big lad, he's big but not super tough.

You wonder how many more he could/should take

Sometimes when you say things like that you can get accused of over-dramatising, of being 'irresponsible' in questioning a player's own decisions; decisions that are also based on sound medical advice.  
In short, often expressed concern for the welfare of certain players is read as dipping your nose into something that is none of your business.  

And then we have the ex-players with serious health issues - and we're all meant to both pity and admire these men and contribute to charities or foundations.
To me it's the one subject. Concussion, I believe, is still being regarded way too casually, and return-to-play 'protocols' are just in-the-present curtain-dressing solutions that won't protect against future health concerns of present day players.

Protectionism, ‘Fly. I think we all know that the best way to get rid of concussion from rugby is to ban rugby. Helmets, lower tackling, red cards...... none of them are effective for tackling concussion (pun intended ). We need to remove the collisions to eradicate concussion, but then what game would we have left? So I can see why it is something that people in the game are only nibbling at. It’s almost impossible to deal with it without fundamentally changing the game. It’s a question that no collision sports have found an answer to, nor have they sought to make fundamental changes to the game to address it either. Rugby is not alone in this.

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:Mikey I really enjoyed the game and there were decisions that could have gone either way throughout. However, the best team won & the bleating of Pivac & Biggar does not do our sport any favours.

Have to agree.

He was arrogant. Don't get upset about it England captains are called worse.

Poor AWJ. He did a Robshaw.

He'll learn I'm sure. A good Captain is always learning.

The Oracle wrote:Congrats France, simply the better team . Whocares have a beer on me .

I have to say though, I was on the Scotland v Italy thread yesterday and there’s a marked difference in the ‘feel’ of the two threads.  Much more spikiness on this one. Seems to be a lot more daggers out.  Odd that.  Or not.....

They certainly won the game fair on the day but Im less convinced they really are the better side overall. Wales did dominate possession and territory and forced France into consistent and blatant illegal play ( so maybe square not fair?). Maybe a different selection at 9, a fit second/first choice 10 and a 13 who was ready for the intensity of test rugby and Wales wouldve walked that game. France made a handfull of huge plays and converted their opportunities far more efficiently than Wales, but Im really not that convinced they are the real deal yet or that Wales are suddenly rubbish, they were better in this game than against Ireland and theres clear way they can get better again.
Get all your best players back and half back selections right and it might be very different, its not so different to the position that England have found themselves in.

France Im still not fully convinced are a slam winning team, although theyd be favourites for both the remaining fixtures. If they do do it its quite worrying to think that this is a team right at the start of a rebuilding exercise and really a couple of years off being their best. It will bring a real buzz back to french international rugby which isnt a bad thing for the game, and a host nations being among the favourites for a world cup helps the tournament itself.
Exciting times fro French fans, disappointing ones for the Welsh but its far from panic time yet.

Gooseberry wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:Wales lose = Blame ref

I don’t blame him. Been seeing some criticism of him from England fans actually.

Yeah most of the welsh fans on here are too busy blaming the Englishman

I don’t agree with that either. I’ve seen Jmac targeted elsewhere too.

Gooseberry wrote:

The Oracle wrote:Congrats France, simply the better team . Whocares have a beer on me .

I have to say though, I was on the Scotland v Italy thread yesterday and there’s a marked difference in the ‘feel’ of the two threads.  Much more spikiness on this one. Seems to be a lot more daggers out.  Odd that.  Or not.....

They certainly won the game fair on the day but Im less convinced they really are the better side overall. Wales did dominate possession and territory and forced France into consistent and blatant illegal play ( so maybe square not fair?). Maybe a different selection at 9, a fit second/first choice 10 and a 13 who was ready for the intensity of test rugby and Wales wouldve walked that game. France made a handfull of huge plays and converted their opportunities far more efficiently than Wales, but Im really not that convinced they are the real deal yet or that Wales are suddenly rubbish, they were better in this game than against Ireland and theres clear way they can get better again.
Get all your best players back and half back selections right and it might be very different, its not so different to the position that England have found themselves in.

France Im still not fully convinced are a slam winning team, although theyd be favourites for both the remaining fixtures. If they do do it its quite worrying to think that this is a team right at the start of a rebuilding exercise and really a couple of years off being their best. It will bring a real buzz back to french international rugby which isnt a bad thing for the game, and a host nations being among the favourites for a world cup helps the tournament itself.
Exciting times fro French fans, disappointing ones for the Welsh but its far from panic time yet.

Sounds like ifs and but to me, Gooseberry!  If my auntie had a c**k sh’d be my uncle, etc!

France are 3 from 3 in the same tournament as Wales are 1 from 3.  Wales might be a better team next year but, as shown yesterday, France are better currently.  Of course, if France were worse and Wales were better (which you seem to be saying) then Wales would be the better team (obvs) but that is not what we saw yesterday!

Best team won.

France have been poor for years, it's just their time.

That's the beauty of rugby, over 80mins the best teams win. blaming the ref is so football.

Robshaw seemingly didn’t know that a kick was worth 3 points, so I don’t think it’s a good comparison. As I said France were under pressure and probably should have received another YC. I commend the guys for backing themselves.

Can someone ask Eddie Butler why Willemse is a South African lock but Tompkins isn't an English centre?

Well done to France deserved winners.

What is strange are the Match Stats (Wales first - courtesy ESPN)
70% / 52% Possession 1H/2H 30% / 48%
74% / 50% Territory 1H/2H 26% / 50%
19 Clean Breaks 7
27 Defenders Beaten 18
16 Offload 5
114 / 116 (98%) Rucks Won 66 / 68 (97%)
8 / 8 (100%) Mauls Won 2 / 3 (66%)
17 Turnovers Conceded 13

Wales ahead in all categories except turnovers conceded, and considering the referee penalised Wales 7 times to France's 13, plus showing two yellows - how did Wales lose?

Much is being made about Biggar complaining to the Ref, but he was getting away with it and it could have influenced the Official. Wasn't just him either and it also happened in the Ireland game so that looks like a Pivac directive to get in the ref's ear.
It was surprising to see AWJ being sent out on the wing - never seen that before and wondered if that's another Pivac directive?

For what it's worth, Pivac seems to be drip-feeding new players into the side who can play his way and will probably increasingly marginalise the Gatland stalwarts. That is probably a good way going forward but the cohesion gained under WG looks to have evaporated.

Willemese doesn’t have a English granny? And he’s a bit Namibian.

Aukster, I think those stats can be summed up by saying that France took their chances but Wales didn’t. Yes we had the ball and beat players as the stats show, but then we’d try basketball stuff in the French 22, or AWJ would get the ball on the wing, etc. You can have all the positive stats in the world but if you don’t dot the ball down over the line then you’re unlikely to win.

Rugby Fan wrote:I'd be interested to know how the French evaluate the teams they faced at the end of the tournament. Wales looked more likely to grab a win than England, but France would have been more aware of their tendency to fade in the final quarter, so perhaps managed the game better. They slowed things down, which helped eat up a few valuable minutes.

Agree that French game management has improved compared to the the first two games and France responded better to pressure. Another thing that improved was their set piece (specially the line out who was rubbish against Italy) . It’s a good thing we played a rusty England and Italy first otherwise we would not be top of the 6N. Resilience comes with confidence so getting wins (even if it means riding their luck at times) is very important for these young players. Not a long time ago France teams used to spend ages in the opponent 22 to get 3 points or getting turnovered and gifting the oppositions easy tries by lazy defending. Now they make it harder for the oppositions and even when someone is missing a tackle there is someone else trying to make up for his mistake - and they are the one scoring « easy tries » out of the opposition errors like yesterday (France only real attacking move was the disallowed try in fact so we are far from French flair of the blanco / sella era ).

mikey_dragon wrote:Robshaw seemingly didn’t know that a kick was worth 3 points, so I don’t think it’s a good comparison. As I said France were under pressure and probably should have received another YC. I commend the guys for backing themselves.

For me Wales should have taken the 3 points. They could have gone into the break having just scored, and then come out with most of the YC period still in the bank to get the first score and build momentum. As it was they used up the majority of the YC advantage in overtime where one mistake would stop the half.

The Oracle wrote:Aukster, I think those stats can be summed up by saying that France took their chances but Wales didn’t.  Yes we had the ball and beat players as the stats show, but then we’d try basketball stuff in the French 22, or AWJ would get the ball on the wing, etc. You can have all the positive stats in the world but if you don’t dot the ball down over the line then you’re unlikely to win.

Totally agree O but it is unusual that stats are so far wrong.

The Great Aukster wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Robshaw seemingly didn’t know that a kick was worth 3 points, so I don’t think it’s a good comparison. As I said France were under pressure and probably should have received another YC. I commend the guys for backing themselves.

For me Wales should have taken the 3 points. They could have gone into the break having just scored, and then come out with most of the YC period still in the bank to get the first score and build momentum. As it was they used up the majority of the YC advantage in overtime where one mistake would stop the half.

Yeah some think they should have, where-as I back them for trying. It hardly makes AWJ arrogant though. 

I’d like to see us become as good as Ireland in that area. Their front row are very good at scoring when close to the try line.

The Great Aukster wrote:

The Oracle wrote:Aukster, I think those stats can be summed up by saying that France took their chances but Wales didn’t.  Yes we had the ball and beat players as the stats show, but then we’d try basketball stuff in the French 22, or AWJ would get the ball on the wing, etc. You can have all the positive stats in the world but if you don’t dot the ball down over the line then you’re unlikely to win.

Totally agree O but it is unusual that stats are so far wrong.

What is right/wrong about stats, aren’t they subjective? I notice they don’t include No. of lucky bounces and interceptions... So O is right in saying that France were better at taking their chances.

The stat that’s never shown is ‘playing like headless chickens’! I think Wales’ score for that was 70% to France’s 30%

The Oracle wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Pie wrote:Google George North and concussion

Not sure hat it is about the big man but he has had far too many

I hav always thought him a little gun shy for a big lad, he's big but not super tough.

You wonder how many more he could/should take

Sometimes when you say things like that you can get accused of over-dramatising, of being 'irresponsible' in questioning a player's own decisions; decisions that are also based on sound medical advice.  
In short, often expressed concern for the welfare of certain players is read as dipping your nose into something that is none of your business.  

And then we have the ex-players with serious health issues - and we're all meant to both pity and admire these men and contribute to charities or foundations.
To me it's the one subject. Concussion, I believe, is still being regarded way too casually, and return-to-play 'protocols' are just in-the-present curtain-dressing solutions that won't protect against future health concerns of present day players.

Protectionism, ‘Fly.  I think we all know that the best way to get rid of concussion from rugby is to ban rugby.  Helmets, lower tackling, red cards...... none of them are effective for tackling concussion (pun intended ). We need to remove the collisions to eradicate concussion, but then what game would we have left?  So I can see why it is something that people in the game are only nibbling at.  It’s almost impossible to deal with it without fundamentally changing the game.  It’s a question that no collision sports have found an answer to, nor have they sought to make fundamental changes to the game to address it either.  Rugby is not alone in this.

Well, I'll explain my real point more clearly, Oracle.  But I'm afraid it just means me repeating that highlighted sentence in a little bit.  
I'm all for rugby.  It's a combative sport.  Many people in the not too distant past - excluding me - have been in favour of changing and changing rules to make it a much more 'exciting', 'running', and evasion game.  

Now the drive for such changes weren't directly linked to player health but much more interested in simple aesthetics - making our game more attractive to people who ain't yet attracted to it.  
I've always said no - the dirt and physicality of breakdown, scrum, maul etc.... for me, essential to the game I love.

And I still say concussion is being regarded way too casually and that return-to-play-protocols is just in-the-present curtain dressing to assuage the concern of viewers and get authorities past the awkwardness.

My main point was the continuing unwillingness to make the obvious and continuous links between high profile concussion episodes (Sexton) of today with notable ex players now living through quite public serious health issues.  We're kinda meant to have pity for past players but mind our own business when it comes to present players.  Evasion of the links - not an honest debate.  
I don't have the answers but I point out that it isn't an honest debate - it's being suppressed to allow bigger and bigger boys into the game - money.

The kicking?  What the hell was the tennis interludes for?  

I think Wales are always more savvy with them so you might understand why they kicked a lot of French kicked ball right back at the French.  But, for the French, it was obviously a decided tactic - and they did get their win - but Christ, I personally think it cut down their own effectiveness and kept Wales in the game (inviting a Welsh team to attack is similar to injecting them with adrenaline) 
My only conclusion for why there was so much of it from the French was players needing rest periods (that famous iffy fitness platform French players work off). And if so, then Wales kinda played into their hands somewhat by joining in the tennis rather than trying to keep the French boys tackling.

mikey_dragon wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Robshaw seemingly didn’t know that a kick was worth 3 points, so I don’t think it’s a good comparison. As I said France were under pressure and probably should have received another YC. I commend the guys for backing themselves.

For me Wales should have taken the 3 points. They could have gone into the break having just scored, and then come out with most of the YC period still in the bank to get the first score and build momentum. As it was they used up the majority of the YC advantage in overtime where one mistake would stop the half.

Yeah some think they should have, where-as I back them for trying. It hardly makes AWJ arrogant though. 

I’d like to see us become as good as Ireland in that area. Their front row are very good at scoring when close to the try line.

Given the amount of pens France had given away plus the YC I agree going for a try was a reasonable call - sometimes these things just don't come off but that doesn't make it a bad call ...

Gatland & Edwards at the helm then Wales would have won that game. Those two were worth 10 points easily.

AWJ was over confidant, the smart call once the 40 was up was to take 3 points and start the 2nd half with a man advantage.

Oh well.

The Great Aukster wrote:

The Oracle wrote:Aukster, I think those stats can be summed up by saying that France took their chances but Wales didn’t.  Yes we had the ball and beat players as the stats show, but then we’d try basketball stuff in the French 22, or AWJ would get the ball on the wing, etc. You can have all the positive stats in the world but if you don’t dot the ball down over the line then you’re unlikely to win.

Totally agree O but it is unusual that stats are so far wrong.

Its an old argument but the only stats that matter are the ones on the board. I would suspect its actually pretty common to have the possession numbers this way around. Happens with England all the time.

When England play well they tend to get points quickly but make the other side play.

France far the better side yesterday, well done Les Bleu...

One thing I think intake from this is the person in the WRU who decided only to offer Shaun Edwards a 2 year contract and hence he went to France should sacked.

Shaun Edwards defence won that and the game against England.

Can see them taking a Slam this year. ...


I stated I thought France would take this years title before it started. Wish I’d put a couple if bob on it now.

Just catching up on Scrum V, it's an interesting review for this game so far. Ref was poor.

Did they debate the 'knock-on in the tackle'? Looked like a deliberate knock down all day long for me, almost like a karate chop action - France very lucky there IMO.

A Welsh rugby programme - they definitely debated that as well as the scrums.

mikey_dragon wrote:A Welsh rugby programme - they definitely debated that as well as the scrums.

To be fair, from the constant tv angle, it looked like the starting French tighthead didn’t drive straight once. Above angles probably deceive a lot though.

I don’t watch it, but did they also mention Biggar’s try being iffy too?

Cyril wrote:Another 10 minutes in the France/England game and England would have won.

France are a good side at home but will struggle away against the best.

Another 10 minutes and Cyril will.......

Very rarely venture to these boards but this game was great. France look genuinely exciting for the first time in 10+ years. They're back to playing creative but still very physical rugby and it's producing results. Very excited to see where this team will be in two to three years' time.

Dan Biggar belongs on a soccer field with his antics. Bloke has no shame.

Pr4wn wrote:Very rarely venture to these boards but this game was great. France look genuinely exciting for the first time in 10+ years. They're back to playing creative but still very physical rugby and it's producing results. Very excited to see where this team will be in two to three years' time.

Dan Biggar belongs on a soccer field with his antics. Bloke has no shame.

Look, nobody need worry.

France are inexperienced and are traditionally feckless. There's no way they can play for 80 minutes at a high level of intensity.

They've been setting their domestic league and European competition alight with skill and talent, but there's not a chance that will translate into international success.

And lastly, there's absolutely no way that S Edwards has been with the team long enough to have made any immediate impact on the French defence.

Their next opponents are a 'shoe-in' for victory, just as it was for England, Italy and Wales.

Khouli Khan wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Very rarely venture to these boards but this game was great. France look genuinely exciting for the first time in 10+ years. They're back to playing creative but still very physical rugby and it's producing results. Very excited to see where this team will be in two to three years' time.

Dan Biggar belongs on a soccer field with his antics. Bloke has no shame.

Look, nobody need worry.

France are inexperienced and are traditionally feckless. There's no way they can play for 80 minutes at a high level of intensity.

They've been setting their domestic league and European competition alight with skill and talent, but there's not a chance that will translate into international success.

And lastly, there's absolutely no way that S Edwards has been with the team long enough to have made any immediate impact on the French defence.

Their next opponents are a 'shoe-in' for victory, just as it was for England, Italy and Wales.

Scotland, with nothing to lose and nothing to gain (its basically a dead rubber match for us now - Italy arent going to beat England and Ireland), will be a different game for France. It is by no means a shoe in tht France will get the win at Murrayfield.

Not overly worried welsh fan here, its been a long while v2....

I do think that we've had a pretty bad rub of the green in the last few games, but that's swings and roundabouts and we had more than our fair share over the last 2 years during our run so it is what it is - we didn't lose the games because of the referees decisions (although they could have helped if some had gone the other way).

Few key problem areas for Wales:
Props - Dillon Lewis isn't a starter, probably not a long term bench option either - we miss Tomas Francis. Also unsure why Rhys Carre hasn't been utilised off the bench more...
Backrow - whilst they all played well individually they didn't impact the game as a unit and didn't counteract the French breakdown pressure well. Navidi is a certain starter imo, Tips aswell. Faletau probably also when back up to speed but he's not really there yet.

Midfield: We're crying out for a new 10/12 - or just the return of Anscombe for the long term - he'll be instrumental in Pivac's style of play going forward. Parkes is consistently ok, but with Biggar inside him the lack of pace in our midfield means a novice Tomkins has to deal with that thought and positionally poor defensive wingers like North outside him, he's on to a no-win situation and its not surprising our defence has been very narrow thus far...
15. Halfpenny is naturally defensive, and along with our lack of pace in midfield it really hinders our attacking play. We try throwing miracle offloads when there's no penetration and intercepts are waiting to happen...

I think I'll cry tears of joy when we learn to straighten our running lines to fix defenders and give simple, well-timed passes to the men overlapping outside...

Think selections been poor from Pivac with what he's had available but his hand has been forced somewhat.

Congratulations France, exciting team to watchand on to the GS now I reckon?

Definitely agree on Navidi. The game against France finished with Williams, Evans, Biggar... I wouldn’t mind seeing that again. Pivac’s game needs a second five-eight by the looks of it. Having seen the game Sunday I think the back-row should be Shingler/Hill, Tips, Moriarty. We need that physical edge. I liked Rowlands’ cameo so think he should stay on the bench. Carre to bench too, and perhaps Liam if available.

Take it from here, boys. We've softened England up for yis

SecretFly wrote:Take it from here, boys.  We've softened England up for yis

Same way Wales softened your lot up by putting them into a false sense of security right

Wales softened up Italy, Ireland softened up Scotland, Italy hardened up France, Ireland softened up Wales for France, England softened up Ireland, etc., etc. By the time Wales meet Scotland both teams will be softened to a blubbering mess on the floor!

SecretFly wrote:Take it from here, boys.  We've softened England up for yis

As in you've gone soft, yes quite. Watching the Exalted One finally fall apart was actually tragic.

Long term we need to get back to Anscombe, Parkes, JD2 and Watkin IMO. I think Scott W is done and Tompkins, while a good 2/3rd tier payer is not the way forward long term.
Not sure how is coming through at 12 and Parkes is mostly a safe pair of hands but without JD2 that 13 channel is so exposed

Likewise in back row I think we are much better with Navidi who is the only breakdown specialist we have.

North is IMO on his way out , hate to say it but I think he is gun shy and fragile in contact, big but not tough at all.

I dont rate McNicholl he reminds me of Steff Evans. Get Rees Zammit involved asap. Going forward him Liam and Lane feel right to me.

I'd like to see this

Tomos, Anscombe, Lane, Parkes, JD2, Rees, Liam.

Up front Carre, Owens and Dillon with Evans and Brown as 2nd tier, Rolwnads/Hill with AWJ and Navidi, Tips and Moriarty until Faletau shows he is back to his old self

Pie wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Take it from here, boys.  We've softened England up for yis

As in you've gone soft, yes quite. Watching the Exalted One finally fall apart was actually tragic.

Toner? Yep, I cried. The fall of the giant. Oh well, brush him under the carpet and move along, I suppose.

Pie, Parkes is 32 and 33 later this year, JD2 is about to turn 32. Wales do need to look at the next generation of options. Thompkins has just turned 25. Get him at 12 which is his preferred position with JD2 at 13 and I think Wales will have a better midfield. Settle Thompkins in and he'll do well for Wales.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Pie, Parkes is 32 and 33 later this year, JD2 is about to turn 32. Wales do need to look at the next generation of options. Thompkins has just turned 25. Get him at 12 which is his preferred position with JD2 at 13 and I think Wales will have a better midfield. Settle Thompkins in and he'll do well for Wales.

Yeah pretty dumb call that. Not all doom and gloom with the backline players Pivac still has to try out. Thompkins could probably play the second five-eight role well, he seems that type of player. If only certain fans would give him the chances that they gave Priestland, Cuthbert, etc.