Second Test: Australia vs. British and Irish Lions (29/06/13)

[j'nuh]

What Warren Gatland wouldn't give to have Cian Healy available this weekend.

It would change the complexion of the forward battle completely.

Bold statement time: Corbisiero is England's star player. In light of this, I don't think Healy will be too missed, although to have both available would have been great for the Lions.

 

[jcahill1]

Bold statement time: Corbisiero is England's star player. In light of this, I don't think Healy will be too missed, although to have both available would have been great for the Lions.

Corbisiero is a better scrummager, but we're really missing what Healy can bring in the loose.

 

[dullonien]

Bold statement time: Corbisiero is England's star player. In light of this, I don't think Healy will be too missed, although to have both available would have been great for the Lions.

I'm a fan of Corbs, but Healy has been a big loss imo. His explosive carrying game would have been a big positive.

 

[j'nuh]

Not saying that Healy hasn't been a loss, just that there isn't that much between him and Corbs (and Corbs is in very good form, so there's that) for it to be game/tour-changing for me.

Ok, I meant to say that Healy would be missed, but not too much because Corbs is awesome too.

 

[Ospreylian]

The non-presence of Corbs in the 2nd test might have been the crucial difference between winning and losing, what with the amount of penalties that came from the scrum. He is as crucial to have available atm as Jones is imo. Without him we are relying on Vunipola, who struggled massively in the first half, and Grant, who is supposedly off form according to some.

 

[profitius]

When is the team named?

 

[Rich Taff]

Thursday

 

[smartcooky]

The IRB's statement on the failed appeal.

http://www.irb.com/newsmedia/mediazo...ppeal+decision

So they waste everyone's time, money and energy, with an ultimately futile appeal, and in so doing, put the Wallaby captain through a torrid time, and seriously disrupt his team's preparations for the third and deciding test, and now this; a piece of spin-doctoring BS worthy of the most two-faced politician. Who did they hire to write this claptrap, Alistair Campbell?

This whole process smacks of the antics of an amateur organisation trying to run a professional sport, and failing dismally. There are many much better ways this could have been handled. The same result could have been achieved simply by sending out a public memorandum to all JO's that while the iRB will abide by the decision (the original one) it does not agree with the conclusion or they way in which it was reached, and that JO's must not use these as precedents in future hearings. That way, the iRB could have saved all the wasted time and expense, and not come out the other end looking like a bunch of jackasses.

 

[bertiec]

Look and tell me if any of the scrums mentioned above are stationary (over the mark) or stable when the ball is put in. In other words it is ignoring the rules to suit that is making the scrums iffy. The ones that cheat best win.

 

[dullonien]

Look and tell me if any of the scrums mentioned above are stationary (over the mark) or stable when the ball is put in. In other words it is ignoring the rules to suit that is making the scrums iffy. The ones that cheat best win.

In one of them, Youngs delayed a little, but in most they were moving all over the place.