No Alcock ! Wallaby standby ?
Printable View
No Alcock ! Wallaby standby ?
We can but hope. Lets face it, Alcock should have been in the Wallaby set-up for years, especially when Pocock was injured/on sabatical, but even though (possibly because) he was originally a Waratah and moved away to get more rugby he was over-looked when a hard-working, tough tackling #7 would have helped the national side.
I'm not sure about the changes Sampson has introduced; although Brache knows how to play on the wing and come inside looking for the ball, and he certainly shores up the wide defense; and while losing Alcock is a blow, Ferris and Orr are handy replacements.
How come the Force seems to be a production line of decent back-rowers? From the days of Pocock, Hodgson & Brown-dog, through McCalman, Cottrell & Alcock, then Stander, Hardwick, RHP, Koteka, Naisirani, Ferris, now Orr, we seem to have a knack of producing or polishing great back-rowers.
Perhaps he is being rested to keep him "off the radar" so that we are at as full a strength as possible throughout NRC.
Horan Little Shield up for grabs next Sunday when we take on NSW City (aka Sydney Rays), but I expect the big challenge for it to come from Fiji in final home game this year.
Only up for grabs at home games :approve:
Same as The Log in NZ
I think maelkann is right, TIF.
It should be the same as The Log but remember who makes up the rules on this stuff (and their abilities in stuffing stuff up).
The way they've done it is after two successful defences the shield is up for grabs every game... So after the Rays, the Rising get a shot in Geelong. How dumb is that?
The other stupid thing is that even teams that win and defend the thing don't get their name engraved on the shield unless it happens to be the end of the year. Seems a bit odd for a so-called Challenge Trophy..
Who are the Rising? I have heard of the Chairman's XV and the Chairman's 66.
If it was they would have had pics all over the place last week with Vikings holding it up, show me one...
Rule Number 1
https://www.rugby.com.au/news/2017/0...eld-what-is-it
and the rest of the rules lead to Fiji, third home game if we beat Rays. I highly doubt we would accept an away challenge, even if was just to spite the RA. Rules are rules, laws are laws :approve:
TIF - honestly not being sarcastic here - are you and I reading 'consecutively' differently?
We've not had two successful defences until after the Rays game - by point 3, it's then up for challenge in every game. Unless you're looking for 'back to back, at home, inside slightly over a week'?
Wish we could get rid of Hoiles & his dreadful monotone commentary!
Not much of a crowd again!
Tries to wingers Rod and Marcel
QC 5 - 14 WF
after 23 mins