Folau no show at Barcelona training session

If Phillip has signed for Tahs as touted, does he start with Skelton with LSL off the bench? And Canham is throwing his hand up for a test lock spot with his form too. And Blyth is playing to his size.

There are beginning to be good questions to be answered for selectors picking a Wallaby pack. Nella at full bore is critical though as you say.

Carley does need a break and rethink. He was laughing and joking with the French guys after the Dublin match also (he was linsesman). He shouldnt have been near them.

He also single handedly showed why English refs should not be in charge of matches involving Wales. He should have been reprimanded after the Wales - Fiji fiasco where he refused to award Wales a yellow after 7-8 penalties on their own line. A yellow would have meant Wales finish with 14, and Fiji scored the try they needed to win. He made a calculation he could get away with the bias and ‘give Wales a chance’.

Had it not been for The Draw! Ireland would have won the RWC at a canter!

🤣🤣🤣

Just so it isn’t lost: Ntamack deliberately shouldered Thomas in the face breaking his nose. The entry level for a deliberate OR injury causing citing is the higher level of 10 matches. Nyamacks claimed accidental that he was ‘protecting himself’ by following through with his shoulder on the vulnerable head of Thomas. But the WRU doctor (Davies) report was clear: a fully displaced nose break.

Ntamack apologized for the injury in the hearing. Amazingly Ntamack was adjudicated to have acted accidentally but also NOT TO HAVE injured Thomas, meaning a low level ban.

Even though it was crystal clear why club matches could not count for Ntamack (International the following week with all associated unknowns) the French, Galthie and Ntamack publicly screamed injustice when Ringrose ban (weekend before rest week) included club matches.

What was almost as bad was the rugby media accepting Galthie’s nonnense without even reading the written decision. Rugby pundits have a duty to their audience to cover the information needed to inform a position. It generally involves a few minutes of reading every 3-4 weeks.

“Murley and Sleightholme got injured during the tournament, would Roebuck have played otherwise”

You’re mistaken; Sleightholme got injured after he was dropped.

“The two Curry brothers started against Ireland and weren’t effective”

i) They played great against Ireland. England didn’t get the win (obvs) but general consensus among most who watched the game was that the Curry brothers were among England’s best players.

ii) What has this got to do with anything? Are you suggesting that Borthwick selected them against Wales by accident?

“Slade was first choice for a long time”

Yes, and then he was dropped. Again, what point are you trying to make? Do you think Borthwick dropped him by accident?

“Neither of your rebuttals really oppose my point of view that he has possibly stumbled onto a winning team by the end of this Six Nations”

I guess if you just preface everything you say with “possibly” then its impossible to ever really disprove your view. Yeah, its possible that his selections were accidental, but there is zero evidence to suggest that this is the case.

“There were newspaper reports after the Scotland game last year regarding a move from the players to change the way England were playing, with the line one prominent back never or barely touched the ball during training. You can look that up and the performances in the Ireland and France games last year also backed up this report.”

I don’t think the performances against Ireland and France backed this up at all. The style of play England tried to implement against Scotland was pretty much the same as they did against Ireland and France, just with a much higher rate of handling errors. The way Ford told it on FTLOR, England always wanted to play that way.

that has no bearing on which club he plays for