Sacked Eddie Jones claims 'I wouldn't do anything differently'

Ah, but at least you make a point that we can take interest in, risk. What makes you think it’s risky?

Double also, you wouldn’t have cleared up anything, as they may have simply told Doyle it wasn’t needed in the law as there was no need. Now that there is obviously a need it makes perfect sense that they will go back to vote it in. But has the situation changed, maybe they actually like this?

Isn’t that what your whole discussion was about, that you care because you want to make the game fast?

You can’t worry about anything retrospectively as if the intention was never laid out, say in the laws or in the code/spirit, then how is anybody to know that? Looking forward, if it was there intention, for next step is to recalibrate. They are simply going to put it in writing without first wondering if they still want a strict 5;3.

I’d therefor suggest worrying/talking about that first.

Enforcing a split seems a bit draconian, much more simple, elegant, and relevant ways of doing it. Would be easy to do, but also easily gamed and then we just have an even worse problem.

Why on earth would you say he won’t start though? That’s ridiculous, the opposite of an impact sub so I would have thought only there as a 80 minute option.

The whole article smells of cherry picking, but totally random which way it falls.

Adding Flutey does zero to fix the main issue; poor set piece, poor lineout, poor carry/cleans, poor ruck/maul D, poor tactics, backline defence optional . . .

For example. In the 2 test losses v ENG last year, the Roses’ backs scored 12 tries out of 13. Seven by wings, 2 by fullback, 1 by centre & 2 by halfback. The other try was a rolling maul. And they did this by dominating us up front, & blowing through our soft D.

But yeah, welcome Riki.