Search results

RFU getting slaughtered in the media for there selection policy of not selecting players playing abroad

Fair point, if I was a footballer I wouldn't want to play for him either.

Hopefully, he can have Finch as well

Unless we have about 10 million stashed away somewhere we have no chance.

For a moment I thought you were serious, then I saw you said you would play C Thomas ahead of him you jester.

Cook should play

And? Ffs you'd have thought people would have learned there lesson by now

Gonna be a tough game, inconsistent away form + missing players + new manager response for them. I'd go with --------RCC Ricketts--Martin--Johnson--Stokes ----------Vincelot--Fleck Lameiras-------------------Murphy ------------Tudgay--Fortune

I'd agree with taking a draw, inconsistent away form and missing players.

Its no surprise one of the first thing Mowbray does was bring in a trusted friend to sort out the scouting

Vincelot was rested as well, Stokes has been carrying his knock for weeks and playing through the pain, would expect him to continue to do so. I would be surprised to see any of them miss out tbh, think Mowbray may have been over exaggerating a bit as he kept saying it was pretty his strongest...

I'd have faith in Mowbray to replace them, never had the same faith in Pressley. This team now is largely a team Mowbray has built over preseason, Pressley inherited his team and had no idea how to rebuild.

Same as most teams, the worry isn't that we have only one player getting the bulk of goals. The worry is that the player is Armstrong who could be going back in January, I have faith in Mowbray though to replace him if we do lose him.

Ok answered that in my response to Otis, it could be or it couldn't don't know as I'm not knowledgeable on the criteria on which appeals are granted.

Ricketts misses knocked out

Which one again? I don't know the process for lodging appeals and the criteria for which they are granted so can't say, could be rather a bit of a formality with flimsy evidence or evidence that isn't directly relevant to the point at hand but they have to allow it to be heard to cover there...

That's the thing though, he is is in the black/wrong area at the moment. It was decided he was in the wrong, its up to him and his team to prove otherwise and until they can he remains in the wrong.

And equally we don't know the evidence is significant either

The law is fairly black and white though, you can't partly or half rape someone. Is the law fair in that it doesn't consider grey areas? Maybe not but you need clear definitions for it to work properly.

Great save by RCC