NPR

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 1:58 pm

Hal Jordan wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 1:17 pm

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 10:09 am He's a much better wing option for England than fullback, but it's always good to have someone who can move there if needed. Wouldn't start him at 15 ever, it's just never worked out for him for England.

He has a whiff of Balshaw about him in the "Where do we pick him?" stakes.

Bit harsh! Balshaw was a raw talent who fell apart - Watson is/was a world class wing who couldn't translate club form to England form at fullback.

Raggs wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 5:06 pm FFS, Kelly out with injury.

SaintK wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 5:32 pm

Raggs wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 5:06 pm FFS, Kelly out with injury.

Yep, thigh in jury. Porter called up.

Raggs wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 5:06 pm FFS, Kelly out with injury.

inactionman wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 5:37 pm

Raggs wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 5:06 pm FFS, Kelly out with injury.

Can't get a run, can he.

Given this, I'd like to see Lawrence given a go at 12.

inactionman wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 5:37 pm

Raggs wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 5:06 pm FFS, Kelly out with injury.

Can't get a run, can he.

Given this, I'd like to see Lawrence given a go at 12.

Ovals wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 6:25 pm

inactionman wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 5:37 pm

Raggs wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 5:06 pm FFS, Kelly out with injury.

Can't get a run, can he.

Given this, I'd like to see Lawrence given a go at 12.

More likely to be Tuilagi or back to a Smith Farrell fudge.

ASMO wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 8:45 am

Ovals wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 6:25 pm

inactionman wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 5:37 pm

Can't get a run, can he.

Given this, I'd like to see Lawrence given a go at 12.

More likely to be Tuilagi or back to a Smith Farrell fudge.

10 players from the team placed 8th in the prem, this is going to go well

“There’s no reason why they can’t play together,” Evans said. “But you have to be very clear about what you are trying to achieve, how you are doing this, what the detail looks like. Once everyone is clear on that then you can go through with it.

“Some of the feedback was that maybe that [clarity] wasn’t there, so maybe there was a bit of a crossover. It’s just about making sure that you’re very clear on roles and responsibilities.

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 9:53 am Yeah I'm not hating 'let's just pick the Sarries team', but bar the bottom three who are some way off there's not a lot to choose from in the Prem.

“There’s no reason why they can’t play together,” Evans said. “But you have to be very clear about what you are trying to achieve, how you are doing this, what the detail looks like. Once everyone is clear on that then you can go through with it.

“Some of the feedback was that maybe that [clarity] wasn’t there, so maybe there was a bit of a crossover. It’s just about making sure that you’re very clear on roles and responsibilities.

Kiwis aren't generally masters of understatement and subtlety, but Evans has demonstrated it in buckets here.

Ovals wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 9:59 am

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 9:53 am Yeah I'm not hating 'let's just pick the Sarries team', but bar the bottom three who are some way off there's not a lot to choose from in the Prem.

“There’s no reason why they can’t play together,” Evans said. “But you have to be very clear about what you are trying to achieve, how you are doing this, what the detail looks like. Once everyone is clear on that then you can go through with it.

“Some of the feedback was that maybe that [clarity] wasn’t there, so maybe there was a bit of a crossover. It’s just about making sure that you’re very clear on roles and responsibilities.

Kiwis aren't generally masters of understatement and subtlety, but Evans has demonstrated it in buckets here.

Well, let's hope he's sorted those confusions out - because it's increasingly looking like a Smith Farrell partnership. Even if they don't start together, Farrell will shunt to 12 when Smith comes on.

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 9:53 am Yeah I'm not hating 'let's just pick the Sarries team', but bar the bottom three who are some way off there's not a lot to choose from in the Prem.

Kawazaki wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 10:42 am

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 9:53 am Yeah I'm not hating 'let's just pick the Sarries team', but bar the bottom three who are some way off there's not a lot to choose from in the Prem.

Me neither, however, this was supposed to be an England team that reflects form in the Premiership.

I guess Borthwick is hamstrung by the original names in the 45-player EPS. The trouble is, when does he get to pick a new EPS? And how many games does he have to bed in any new selections after he selects fully his own 45-player EPS?

Sweeney really is fucking hopeless - operationally, commercially, structurally and strategically, he really is. Should have sacked Jones after last year's 6Ns and before a new EPS was named. Total incompetence.

Kawazaki wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 10:42 am

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 9:53 am Yeah I'm not hating 'let's just pick the Sarries team', but bar the bottom three who are some way off there's not a lot to choose from in the Prem.

Me neither, however, this was supposed to be an England team that reflects form in the Premiership.

I guess Borthwick is hamstrung by the original names in the 45-player EPS. The trouble is, when does he get to pick a new EPS? And how many games does he have to bed in any new selections after he selects fully his own 45-player EPS?

Sweeney really is fucking hopeless - operationally, commercially, structurally and strategically, he really is. Should have sacked Jones after last year's 6Ns and before a new EPS was named. Total incompetence.

Kawazaki wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 10:42 am

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 9:53 am Yeah I'm not hating 'let's just pick the Sarries team', but bar the bottom three who are some way off there's not a lot to choose from in the Prem.

Me neither, however, this was supposed to be an England team that reflects form in the Premiership.

I guess Borthwick is hamstrung by the original names in the 45-player EPS. The trouble is, when does he get to pick a new EPS? And how many games does he have to bed in any new selections after he selects fully his own 45-player EPS?

Sweeney really is fucking hopeless - operationally, commercially, structurally and strategically, he really is. Should have sacked Jones after last year's 6Ns and before a new EPS was named. Total incompetence.

Ovals wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:00 am

Kawazaki wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 10:42 am

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 9:53 am Yeah I'm not hating 'let's just pick the Sarries team', but bar the bottom three who are some way off there's not a lot to choose from in the Prem.

Me neither, however, this was supposed to be an England team that reflects form in the Premiership.

I guess Borthwick is hamstrung by the original names in the 45-player EPS. The trouble is, when does he get to pick a new EPS? And how many games does he have to bed in any new selections after he selects fully his own 45-player EPS?

Sweeney really is fucking hopeless - operationally, commercially, structurally and strategically, he really is. Should have sacked Jones after last year's 6Ns and before a new EPS was named. Total incompetence.

You're not wrong - and not even a 'no compete' clause in sight for Jones' pay off. He really should be turfed out - pretty sure we can do far better than him for nearly £700K per year. I'm surprised the Clubs put up with him.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:20 am Could a non-compete clause be legal?

You see managers in the football premiership being poached - Brighton's manager got bought by Chelsea recently because Brighton are doing well, I would have thought that football would have the resources for the best legal minds, and if non-compete clauses could be binding they would be the ones to do it.

Kawazaki wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:31 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:20 am Could a non-compete clause be legal?

You see managers in the football premiership being poached - Brighton's manager got bought by Chelsea recently because Brighton are doing well, I would have thought that football would have the resources for the best legal minds, and if non-compete clauses could be binding they would be the ones to do it.

Eddie Jones was being paid £800,000 a year. He was sacked with 9 moths left on his contract so I assume he would expect the RFU to pay him £600,000 to fuck off. That's assuming there weren't performance related bonus-incentives dialled in which the cheeky cunt would have also wanted paying out even though we all know there was fat chance of him hitting any of those targets. For that kind of money, he does whatever you tell him to do to the end of the contract term you've just paid him or else he's in breach of contract. Personally, I'd have made him work in the RFU regional office in Liverpool answering the phones until October.

Kawazaki wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:31 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:20 am Could a non-compete clause be legal?

You see managers in the football premiership being poached - Brighton's manager got bought by Chelsea recently because Brighton are doing well, I would have thought that football would have the resources for the best legal minds, and if non-compete clauses could be binding they would be the ones to do it.

Eddie Jones was being paid £800,000 a year. He was sacked with 9 moths left on his contract so I assume he would expect the RFU to pay him £600,000 to fuck off. That's assuming there weren't performance related bonus-incentives dialled in which the cheeky cunt would have also wanted paying out even though we all know there was fat chance of him hitting any of those targets. For that kind of money, he does whatever you tell him to do to the end of the contract term you've just paid him or else he's in breach of contract. Personally, I'd have made him work in the RFU regional office in Liverpool answering the phones until October.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:20 am Could a non-compete clause be legal?

You see managers in the football premiership being poached - Brighton's manager got bought by Chelsea recently because Brighton are doing well, I would have thought that football would have the resources for the best legal minds, and if non-compete clauses could be binding they would be the ones to do it.

Dinsdale Piranha wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:37 am

Like the RFU knows where Liverpool is.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:41 am

Dinsdale Piranha wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:37 am

Like the RFU knows where Liverpool is.

On that note, I was hoping the England U20s would play at least one match in Brighton again, but I see they are playing at the Stoop this year

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:40 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:20 am Could a non-compete clause be legal?

You see managers in the football premiership being poached - Brighton's manager got bought by Chelsea recently because Brighton are doing well, I would have thought that football would have the resources for the best legal minds, and if non-compete clauses could be binding they would be the ones to do it.

They can be legal, not all are, particularly if they're considered onerous or unfair on the ex-employee. Would imagine if Eddie lawyered up he'd have wriggled out of it anyway.

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:45 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:41 am

Dinsdale Piranha wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:37 am

Like the RFU knows where Liverpool is.

On that note, I was hoping the England U20s would play at least one match in Brighton again, but I see they are playing at the Stoop this year

Only the opening game, they're playing Italy at Kingsholm and France at The Rec.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:39 am

Kawazaki wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:31 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:20 am Could a non-compete clause be legal?

You see managers in the football premiership being poached - Brighton's manager got bought by Chelsea recently because Brighton are doing well, I would have thought that football would have the resources for the best legal minds, and if non-compete clauses could be binding they would be the ones to do it.

Eddie Jones was being paid £800,000 a year. He was sacked with 9 moths left on his contract so I assume he would expect the RFU to pay him £600,000 to fuck off. That's assuming there weren't performance related bonus-incentives dialled in which the cheeky cunt would have also wanted paying out even though we all know there was fat chance of him hitting any of those targets. For that kind of money, he does whatever you tell him to do to the end of the contract term you've just paid him or else he's in breach of contract. Personally, I'd have made him work in the RFU regional office in Liverpool answering the phones until October.

I completely get your dislike of him, I and many other Scots had the same with Matt Williams, but I'm still not sure a non-compete clause would be binding.

I'm asking because I've seen that banded about as a criticism of the RFU a fair bit in the last few weeks. It could well be that it is binding, but taking the football example, I doubt it.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:45 am

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:40 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:20 am Could a non-compete clause be legal?

You see managers in the football premiership being poached - Brighton's manager got bought by Chelsea recently because Brighton are doing well, I would have thought that football would have the resources for the best legal minds, and if non-compete clauses could be binding they would be the ones to do it.

They can be legal, not all are, particularly if they're considered onerous or unfair on the ex-employee. Would imagine if Eddie lawyered up he'd have wriggled out of it anyway.

Given his job is "International Rugby Coach", it would be difficult to stop him working

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:50 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:45 am

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:40 am

They can be legal, not all are, particularly if they're considered onerous or unfair on the ex-employee. Would imagine if Eddie lawyered up he'd have wriggled out of it anyway.

Given his job is "International Rugby Coach", it would be difficult to stop him working

Pretty much. As a general rule non-competes longer than 6 months run into all sorts of difficulties, I think Australia's next game would be more than 6 months from his sacking?

I tend to agree it probably wouldn't have been worth the paper it was written on.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:47 am

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:45 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:41 am



On that note, I was hoping the England U20s would play at least one match in Brighton again, but I see they are playing at the Stoop this year

Only the opening game, they're playing Italy at Kingsholm and France at The Rec.

Ah, I only looked at the Scotland game. Well at least they are taking the games out of London, but two so close to each other isn't exactly spreading it around too much.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:45 am

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:40 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:20 am Could a non-compete clause be legal?

You see managers in the football premiership being poached - Brighton's manager got bought by Chelsea recently because Brighton are doing well, I would have thought that football would have the resources for the best legal minds, and if non-compete clauses could be binding they would be the ones to do it.

They can be legal, not all are, particularly if they're considered onerous or unfair on the ex-employee. Would imagine if Eddie lawyered up he'd have wriggled out of it anyway.

Given his job is "International Rugby Coach", it would be difficult to stop him working

Defending Gallagher Premiership champions Leicester have confirmed the signing of ex-England full-back Mike Brown on a short-term contract following the departure of the Super Rugby Pacific-bound Freddie Burns, who played his final Tigers game last Saturday. Burns, the drop goal hero from last year’s league final, has exited to join the Dunedin-based Highlanders and the vacancy will be filled by Brown following his completion of a short trial at the club.

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 6:23 pm The initial squad cull has taken place:

Hill, Blamire, Willis, Rodd, Heyes, Mitchell, Murley and Porter are the ones to miss out.

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 6:23 pm The initial squad cull has taken place:

Hill, Blamire, Willis, Rodd, Heyes, Mitchell, Murley and Porter are the ones to miss out.

SaintK wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 6:31 pm

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 6:23 pm The initial squad cull has taken place:

Hill, Blamire, Willis, Rodd, Heyes, Mitchell, Murley and Porter are the ones to miss out.

Only surprise there is Hill though I’m not unhappy with that call
I’d like to see Ribbans to start with Itoje

Ovals wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 7:47 pm

SaintK wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 6:31 pm

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 6:23 pm The initial squad cull has taken place:

Hill, Blamire, Willis, Rodd, Heyes, Mitchell, Murley and Porter are the ones to miss out.

Only surprise there is Hill though I’m not unhappy with that call
I’d like to see Ribbans to start with Itoje

Very disappointed with the Willis getting left out. It means we'll probably have a Lock @ 6 yet again. Infuriating doesn't start to cover it.

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 7:55 pm

Ovals wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 7:47 pm

SaintK wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 6:31 pm
Only surprise there is Hill though I’m not unhappy with that call
I’d like to see Ribbans to start with Itoje

Very disappointed with the Willis getting left out. It means we'll probably have a Lock @ 6 yet again. Infuriating doesn't start to cover it.

Does Chessum count as a second row?

Ovals wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 7:47 pm

SaintK wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 6:31 pm

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 6:23 pm The initial squad cull has taken place:

Hill, Blamire, Willis, Rodd, Heyes, Mitchell, Murley and Porter are the ones to miss out.

Only surprise there is Hill though I’m not unhappy with that call
I’d like to see Ribbans to start with Itoje

Very disappointed with the Willis getting left out. It means we'll probably have a Lock @ 6 yet again. Infuriating doesn't start to cover it.