Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

The 13 casualties from Wales' official RWC squad

By Ian Cameron
Kieran Hardy of Wales celebrates scoring his sides third try during the Six Nations Rugby match between England and Wales at Twickenham Stadium on February 26, 2022 in London, United Kingdom. (Photo by Craig Mercer/MB Media/Getty Images)

Warren Gatland has named his 33-man Rugby World Cup squad and there are a total of at least 13 players involved in training camps that didn’t make the cut.

ADVERTISEMENT

Jac Morgan and Dewi Lake have been named as Wales co-captains for the Rugby World Cup. The Ospreys forwards will lead a squad that includes recent international newcomers in wing Rio Dyer, centre Mason Grady and prop Corey Domachowski.

But there is no place for scrum-half Kieran Hardy, with Wales head coach Warren Gatland deciding to select just two nines in Tomos Williams and Gareth Davies.

There is also no room for rookie second row Ben Carter or up-and-coming centre Max Llewellyn, nor is there room for experienced hooker Sam Parry.

Alex Cuthbert – who pulled out of Saturday’s match against South Africa with a calf injury – has also missed the cut.

Training squad members Teddy Williams, Kieran Hardy, Alex Cuthbert, Rhys Davies, Max Llewellyn, Kemsley Mathias, Taine Plumtree, Cai Evans, Keiran Williams, Tom Rogers, Sam Parry, Ben Carter and Keiron Assiratti have all failed to make the cut.

The 33-player squad is made up of 19 forwards and 14 backs with an average age of 27 years old. Seventeen players have previous Rugby World Cup experience.

ADVERTISEMENT

Related

THE OFFICIAL 33-MAN SQUAD:

Forwards: T Basham (Dragons), A Beard (Ospreys), E Dee (Dragons), C Domachowski (Cardiff), R Elias (Scarlets), T Faletau (Cardiff), T Francis (Provence), D Jenkins (Exeter), D Lake (Ospreys, co-capt), D Lewis (Harlequins), D Lydiate (Dragons), J Morgan (Ospreys, co-capt), T Reffell (Leicester), W Rowlands (Dragons), N Smith (Ospreys), G Thomas (Ospreys), H Thomas (Montpellier), C Tshiunza (Exeter), A Wainwright (Dragons).

Backs: J Adams (Cardiff), G Anscombe (Tokyo Sungoliath), D Biggar (Toulon), S Costelow (Scarlets), G Davies (Scarlets), R Dyer (Dragons), M Grady (Cardiff), L Halfpenny (unattached), G North (Ospreys), L Rees-Zammit (Gloucester), N Tompkins (Saracens), J Williams (Scarlets), L Williams (Kubota Spears), T Williams (Cardiff).

additional reporting PA

Related

ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | Episode 11

Chasing The Sun | Series 1 Episode 1

Abbie Ward: A Bump in the Road

Pacific Four Series 2024 | Canada vs USA

Japan Rugby League One | Verblitz v Eagles | Full Match Replay

Fresh Starts | Episode 2 | Sam Whitelock

Royal Navy Men v Royal Air Force Men | Full Match Replay

Royal Navy Women v Royal Air Force Women | Full Match Replay

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
Jon 43 minutes ago
The case for keeping the Melbourne Rebels in Super Rugby Pacific

I have heard it asked if RA is essentially one of the part owners and I suppose therefor should be on the other side of these two parties. If they purchased the rebels and guaranteed them, and are responsible enough they incur Rebels penalties, where is this line drawn? Seems rough to have to pay a penalty for something were your involvement sees you on the side of the conned party, the creditors. If the Rebels directors themselves have given the club their money, 6mil worth right, why aren’t they also listed as sitting with RA and the Tax office? And the legal threat was either way, new Rebels or defunct, I can’t see how RA assume the threat was less likely enough to warrant comment about it in this article. Surely RA ignore that and only worry about whether they can defend it or not, which they have reported as being comfortable with. So in effect wouldn’t it be more accurate to say there is no further legal threat (or worry) in denying the deal. Unless the directors have reneged on that. > Returns of a Japanese team or even Argentinean side, the Jaguares, were said to be on the cards, as were the ideas of standing up brand new teams in Hawaii or even Los Angeles – crazy ideas that seemingly forgot the time zone issues often cited as a turn-off for viewers when the competition contained teams from South Africa. Those timezones are great for SR and are what will probably be needed to unlock its future (cant see it remaining without _atleast _help from Aus), day games here are night games on the West Coast of america, were potential viewers triple, win win. With one of the best and easiest ways to unlock that being to play games or a host a team there. Less good the further across Aus you get though. Jaguares wouldn’t be the same Jaguares, but I still would think it’s better having them than keeping the Rebels. The other options aren’t really realistic 25’ options, no. From reading this authors last article I think if the new board can get the investment they seem to be confident in, you keeping them simply for the amount of money they’ll be investing in the game. Then ditch them later if they’re not good enough without such a high budget. Use them to get Jaguares reintergration stronger, with more key players on board, and have success drive success.

11 Go to comments
FEATURE
FEATURE The case for keeping the Melbourne Rebels in Super Rugby Pacific The case for keeping the Melbourne Rebels in Super Rugby Pacific
Search