Scarlets fear playing with just 14 men in Europe

[dullonien]

Why only 2 Hookers? You'd norally see a split of 3 loosheads, 3 tightheads and 3 hookers with one extra prop who can play both 1 and 3. Well, Scarlets have lost 3 tightheads, so now only have 4 or 5 props in their entire squad (only two capable of playing 3). So they're fine for the next game, but if another get's injured which could certainly happen, then they're lacking bench cover. It's completely unfair in every shape and form for a team to start a game one man short, even if it's one on the bench. This is HC rugby, the pinacle of club rugby in the NH, I would not be happy if any team is forced to start a game one man down!

What do I want them to do? Use their heads and allow an extra prop in the squad, I don't see in any way why it would be unfair on other teams.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

That's scope for 4 looseheads, 4 tightheads and 2 hookers. Plus 1 replacement at a later date if needed. What more do you want them to do?

I know there are 3 Hookers registered by the Scarlets, which is needed, which are:

Matthew Rees
Ken Owens
Emyr Phillips

Loosehead Props:

Iestyn Thomas
Phil John
Rhodri Jones

Tighthead Props:

Deacon Manu
Rhys Thomas
Peter Edwards
Simon Gardner

 

[Teh Mite]

It says a MINIMUM of 10 players. There's scope for more.

Which backs have not been used all tournament?

 

[TRF_Cymro]

It says a MINIMUM of 10 players. There's scope for more.

Which backs have not been used all tournament?

Thats all the front row forwards that the club actually possesses on their books. Rhodri Jones, Peter Edwards and Simon Gardner are with Llanelli RFC, Llandovery RFC and Carmarthen Quins respectively.

I have just named 10 out of the 38 or so allowed, the other 28 will be divided up between the rest of the squad.

On the Scarlets page there are 42 players, not including Peter Edwards and Rhodri Jones so that makes 44. So there are 6 players on that page that are not registered. The point im making is that the Scarlets have registered correctly, and unfortunately whatever way you want to paint it, the Scarlets are unlucky to be in the situation they are in.

http://www.scarlets.co.uk/eng/rugby/people.php

 

[Teh Mite]

Not denying that at all.

 

[Seaton]

Who are they playing btw?
And if push comes to shove, can't Scarlets play a loosehead at tighthead, as opposed to starting with 14 men?
Of course he would need to train 24/7 to be anywhere suitable, but something is better than nothing

 

[dullonien]

They've got a double header against Treviso, so a tough time awaits them scrum time. Are you allowed to simply play a looshead on the tight without decent experience? As I've said, they're still ok at the moment with two props capable of playing tighthead (although their scrum will probably get mullered), but Nigel Davies is worried about the possibility of another injury with 2/3 of the group games still remaining. If another injury does occur to either looshead or tighthead then I think they won't have enough props left in the HC squad to cover the two bench spots. I believe there's only 4 fit props left in the squad.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

Who are they playing btw?
And if push comes to shove, can't Scarlets play a loosehead at tighthead, as opposed to starting with 14 men?
Of course he would need to train 24/7 to be anywhere suitable, but something is better than nothing

Never played in the front row have you?

 

[TRF_Cymro]

ERC are a bunch of fools!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/my_club/llanelli_scarlets/9256761.stm

 

[Teh Mite]

ERC are a bunch of fools!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/my_club/llanelli_scarlets/9256761.stm

Hardly - They're pointing out the rules. There is no great conspiracy against the Scarlets you know.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

Hardly - They're pointing out the rules. There is no great conspiracy against the Scarlets you know.

No, but no one with any common sense would want to see a rugby game instantly 14 v 15 ....

I still stand behind it, that if it was your club and not the Scarlets would you be agreeing with me?

 

[Teh Mite]

I've already answered that. I would be ****** off, but would still accept it. There are 23 other teams that have got by alright.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

I just hope they dont get another injury because be pretty silly to see a side having to field 14 men.

 

[Peat]

Ulster went through their first round of HC matches this season with all the normal Tightheads missing through injury - B.J. Botha, Declan Fitzpatrick and Adam Macklin.

We didn't complain and fulfilled both fixtures.

Admittedly it does help a little when your first choice loosehead is capable of playing tighthead to an international standard, but thats neither here nor there right...

But - for whats it worth - another club was in the same situation and coped. The rules can be lived by, and everybody knew what they were.

I do think its slightly stupid though and would like to see some flexibility in allowing replacements to be called up during injury stricken phases... but don't see a problem in expecting a squad of that size to have 4 players capable of playing Tighthead.

 

[dullonien]

They had 5 players capable of playing tighthead. 3 are now injured leaving two.

I honestly can't understand how the ERC are being so stupid over this. Even if they agreed that if another tighthead did happen to get injured then they'd be allowed to bring another one in. It would be a complete farce to see a team play with 14 men due to no fault of their own.

Peat. Maybe Ulster did so the same for one round of matches (2 games), but the problem here is that the three injured players are long term injuries with broken bones, meaning the Scarlets have many more games to play with just two tightheads, including Magners League matches, although if they're sensible they will bring in another tighthead for the Magners games and not risk the two registered for HC games, but this will in turn weaken their Magners team risking their good position they've built so far. This means there's a greater chance of an injury occurring. I don't think the Scarlets would have cared if one or two were expected back in a few weeks, as there's little chance of another injury occurring in that time.

The rules about squad size is not there for this reason, this is a special case that woun't happen atall often. Why not do the sensible thing? In the end, they're running the risk of devaluing the competition because of it. In every single facet of life, there is some leniency to laws in certain circymstances, the ERC should do the same.

 

[Teh Mite]

Would it be easier if the matches were cancelled untill the players were all better?

 

[Shaggy]

It sounds as if the rules go against the whole reason why the front row specialists are required in the first place - player safety

... I understand that there's difficulty making exceptions to the rules midway through a competition, but really, something along the RWC player squad injury replacement rules might have been a better option, ie, the player(s) have been deemed medically unfit to play ... you can replace them in your squad, but they can't come back into the squad for the duration of the competition.

I'm sure the sponsors, owners of the tv rights, and fans don't want to see a farcical contest that starts with only 14 men on one side, and uncontested scrums either

 

[Teh Mite]

I'm sure the sponsors, owners of the tv rights, and fans don't want to see a farcical contest that starts with only 14 men on one side, and uncontested scrums either

The reason behind it is due to teams "tactically" going to Uncontested scrums whenever they're getting mashed. Wasps are famous for it, Newcastle have been known for it and Newport are the current exponents of it - Without the law, it's an easy way for under-performing teams to neutralise their oppositions advantage by simply "running out of props" without being penalised.

If this law means the cheating ******** like Shawn Edwards don't get away with their gamesmanship, then there's nothing wrong with it.

Scarlets are just unlucky with injuries. It's part of sport and happens.

 

[dullonien]

Yes all well and good. But in what way is it better to have an entire match with uncontested scrums? The Scarlets aren't chellenging that law, they just want the chance to start on a level playing field to the opposition. I can't see how you think it's alright for a team to start with 14 men! The Scarlets aren't trying to 'tactically' force uncontested scrums, they are simply asking for the right to not start a game with a massive disadvantage before the balls even touches a players hands.

In what way does your above statement apply to the Scarlets curren situation?

 

[Teh Mite]

Yes all well and good. But in what way is it better to have an entire match with uncontested scrums? The Scarlets aren't chellenging that law, they just want the chance to start on a level playing field to the opposition. I can't see how you think it's alright for a team to start with 14 men! The Scarlets aren't trying to 'tactically' force uncontested scrums, they are simply asking for the right to not start a game with a massive disadvantage before the balls even touches a players hands.

In what way does your above statement apply to the Scarlets curren situation?

This bit

Scarlets are just unlucky with injuries. It's part of sport and happens.