Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

The Short Ball - s03e11 - The Rugby Scientist

While Mils is away partying in Hong Kong at the Sevens, Scotty Stevenson is joined by James McOnie and NZR’s Chief Scientist Ken Quarrie to discuss the scientific merit of taking a lineout vs kicking for goal. There’s also talk on what the Blues can learn from the Chiefs, the place of maths in rugby, and The Smiths make James’ heart soar.

ADVERTISEMENT

Watch above or listen in to the entire episode below and subscribe on iTunes here and never miss an episode.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 2 hours ago
'It doesn’t make sense for New Zealand to deny itself access to world-class players'

..but not after that... But not until we saw him in the World Cup for Samoa.. Right. Hows that sound, going over it in your head? Sounds a bit silly if you ask me.


Why do you think you've got this view that he suddenly wasn't good after that? ..he was dropped for the best 10 in the world... How does that sound.. right?


Again, I just want you to know your statements are showing a clouded view, extreme, likely based on these biases of yours. For example the selectors judgement is exactly the same as mine. That he would be 3rd of 4th ranked, and able to allow the team to win. It's you who are trying to say the reality is a bunch of unhappy northerners opinions. Just to make some silly statement about eligibility.


Of course Lima tailed off, otherwise he wouldn't have left. Of course the northerners complained because they're never up with the play like we are with the local game. It's funny. They probably expected him to be like snapping up the next Carter, some awesome new signing and not the discard that he was. That you use this, do nothing more than propagate them in this case, so that you can use them for this other argument or yours, is the same as Razor hurting his own argument with the stance he's taken.


Do you realise, as I've already tried to point out to you, that by making this argument you are agree that NZR should allow overseas eligibility if these players were good enough by your standards? You can point out theyre not good enough to warrant changing eligibility for all you like, but by that reasoning accept that if they were good enough... even if you think that Mo'unga would be the only one, how many would you need to be happy changing? One in each position, a team of XV, should surely be enough. What if Dmac wasn't playing so well when Beauden was out, you've already said Plummer isn't good enough, Morgan? One of those old international players? Who's you're pick?

119 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Mick Cleary: Five things English rugby must fix in 2025 Mick Cleary: Five things English rugby must fix in 2025
Search