Can't remember the exact circumstances of Donnelly being picked on the bench that day in Northampton other than there being an inury crisis (pretty much permanent state of affairs in Munster) but the fact that they played Stephen Archer for 80 minutes that day tells you all you need to know about their faith in Donnelly being able to play there.topofthemoon wrote: Sun Apr 20, 2025 5:13 pmNo obligation at all - the laws only require teams to be able to replace each of LH, TH and hooker at the first time of asking.Uncle fester wrote: Sun Apr 20, 2025 4:14 pmWhy would a team be obliged to field 3 players capable of playing THP?topofthemoon wrote: Sun Apr 20, 2025 3:36 pm
Would 2 THs going down injured, uncontested scrums and being forced down to 14 not constitute a break glass situation? Or have Munster opted not to mark him as suitably trained and experienced for the TH role on the original team sheets?
Why would the rules re replacement of front row players be overruled because a player who is listed in a different position happened to play there before adult rugby?
However teams often max out the team sheet for any possible position their front row players can cover eg Cian Healy being marked as suitably trained and experienced to play hooker, even at international level.
This reduces their risk of being forced to play a man down if they cause uncontested scrums.
Just wondering if Donnelly has been marked STE at TH for the Northampton game to ensure they could fill the bench but only marked as STE at LH for the Bulls game?
It has little relevance on yesterday. If he was listed as able to play THP, we would have brought him on, especially as we were down a man.