dolf_lundgren wrote: I think the closer we can get Tim to the ball the better, I'd play him at scrum half!
Tim's gone mate, not coming back. You need to let it go, its for the best
Moderators: pedro52, chappo, Ron, Loops
dolf_lundgren wrote: I think the closer we can get Tim to the ball the better, I'd play him at scrum half!
joe soap wrote:
where to start? Carmichael would have been packing down behind Cosgrove much of the time. But the issue is how many youngsters can you sensibly lay in a front 5. You may think it does not matter, few coaches will agree with you.
McCallum has been very good (incidentally if you saw or recall him playing for e U20s he was very good indeed - at loose head!)- he got his chance because of injury to both Nel and Bryce, and Bergan for a bit other there was no other better alternative, otherwise he would still be bench warming at best. He deserved to start above the likes of Beavon for example quite clearly in everyone's opinion. The key thing is he was next in line, he wasn't just "given a chance". Players are not "given a chance" - they earn the right to get a chance, or are very very lucky with injuries to others. They earn that right in club matches, in training and in general attitude.
I'm not saying he should not have had a few starts, I am trying patiently to explain why perhaps he didn't get them. Just sometimes even Edinburgh coaches make reasonable calls.
joe soap wrote:royc wrote:Bennett is out for 9-12 months, which means he is certainly going to miss the first half of the season and may not be back until March/April, so could miss the whole season.
I believe its he same knee he did last time, so not good at all, he may or may not be the same player again. So you are right that Edinburgh should be looking to find another option for 13 for at least a season. Of course having both as options is the best of all worlds, the ideal world.
Friday Knight Lights wrote:For a player who relies on his speed and sudden change of movement two knee injuries on the same knee is a real worry I agree. Not sure another injury prone 13 is the answer though - we could have two high earners in the same position out for long periods.
Interesting Fruean was lined up to go to Glasgow pre heart operation, SRU showing a lot of interest - any chance he's SQ?
Tichtheid wrote:So it boils down to Carmichael and Turner, really. Is the suggestion that playing those two would have been the fairy dust needed to transform Edinburgh into a play-off side?
Friday Knight Lights wrote:To flip the question, why are those established and under performing guys still given a game week in week out? What have they showed?
joe soap wrote:Tichtheid wrote:So it boils down to Carmichael and Turner, really. Is the suggestion that playing those two would have been the fairy dust needed to transform Edinburgh into a play-off side?
TBF I don't think that is what was being suggested - more a case of "it couldn't be any worse", and give youth a chance.
My own view is it could have been worse, not much maybe, but worse. And though I think Carmichael might have had a start, there were good arguments as to why he didn't; and he did get some gametime (which for age age, position and physical status was about right given the state of his team!)
And I just don't subscribe to the "deserves a chance" theory.
Tichtheid wrote:So it boils down to Carmichael and Turner, really. Is the suggestion that playing those two would have been the fairy dust needed to transform Edinburgh into a play-off side?
Friday Knight Lights wrote:joe soap wrote:royc wrote:Bennett is out for 9-12 months, which means he is certainly going to miss the first half of the season and may not be back until March/April, so could miss the whole season.
I believe its he same knee he did last time, so not good at all, he may or may not be the same player again. So you are right that Edinburgh should be looking to find another option for 13 for at least a season. Of course having both as options is the best of all worlds, the ideal world.
For a player who relies on his speed and sudden change of movement two knee injuries on the same knee is a real worry I agree. Not sure another injury prone 13 is the answer though - we could have two high earners in the same position out for long periods.
Return to Edinburgh Rugby Forum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 49 guests