RWC 2019 - Other Sides

[Mike Gibson]

Very unlucky, one mans loss and all that - possibly makes Conway a cert, and opens the door a bit more for Farrell?

???

[lawrence]

???

Ahhh i misread, my bad. Anscombe not Addison!

[kahalui]

Varies but I know for a fact that an England 23 that contains Tuilagi & BV ( on par with Farrell as England most important players) is NOT a B team.

These variations and facts of yours are fascinating. You've been contradicting your own arguments for two pages now.

Btw, Tuilagi came on late in the second half, as did Cian Healy for Ireland.

[lawrence]

Yes, England were better on the day. On that very day you could say England were doing better, unfortunately we dont judge teams based on how good they were on one day (unless its the final of the RWC) we judge based on how good they have been over a year spell.

So we don’t judge teams on results now?


Im sorry, I just can’t. I’ve two smallies at home and that’s about all I can handle when it comes to incoherent waffling nonsense that is based on completely alternative realities. Hows about this to end it:


Your right about everything your a highly intelligent individual, I’m lucky to be able to read your factual analysis for free when you should really be getting paid for such accurate and insightful analysis, long may it continue.

[Munsterboy]

Anscombe out of the RWC and will miss most of the season with an ACL injury.

On a less contentious note, I think we can all agree this just put a big dent in Wales's preparations. That's two important players out for them.

[Mike Gibson]

On a less contentious note, I think we can all agree this just put a big dent in Wales's preparations. That's two important players out for them.

With Rhys Webb unavailable too, their 8-9-10 axis looks a lot weaker now than it could have. Gareth Davies can occasionally pull a rabbit out of a hat like he did for his try yesterday but I feel he's often poor at the basics of scrum-half play.

[Piquet]

[Cathalsmart]

These variations and facts of yours are fascinating. You've been contradicting your own arguments for two pages now.

Btw, Tuilagi came on late in the second half, as did Cian Healy for Ireland.

Uh no I havent, you are trying to pick hole's in my argument that aren't there. Healy while a big player for us isnt anywhere near as crucial to our RWC aspirations as MT or BV. Stop trying to go in circle's now you know that the England team that played Wales isnt really a B team now bore off.

[Cathalsmart]

So we don’t judge teams on results now?


Im sorry, I just can’t. I’ve two smallies at home and that’s about all I can handle when it comes to incoherent waffling nonsense that is based on completely alternative realities. Hows about this to end it:


Your right about everything your a highly intelligent individual, I’m lucky to be able to read your factual analysis for free when you should really be getting paid for such accurate and insightful analysis, long may it continue.

I thought results refers to you know, more than a one off victory... Its not incoherent nonsense, you just havent a clue what you are talking about so you are getting yourself confused now. instead of the cyber bullying why do you clear you're head and then come back to me, you are lucky this is against me otherwise you would have received an infraction by now. You see where in that comment are we talking about the original point...

[kahalui]

Uh no I havent, you are trying to pick hole's in my argument that aren't there. Healy while a big player for us isnt anywhere near as crucial to our RWC aspirations as MT or BV. Stop trying to go in circle's now you know that the England team that played Wales isnt really a B team now bore off.

The Healy reference went way over your head, just like everything else you've been reading today.
You included Tuilagi as part of the Eng team, but conveniently excluded Healy from the Ire team, when both players came off the bench in the 2nd half.

Below is what you wrote about a and b teams... first you claim it's a numbers game, then when asked what the magic number is, you don't have an answer. Instead, you change your mind and tell us its about the quality of player.


'Dropping half you're A team does not make it a B team, dropping you're ENTIRE A team makes it a B team. An A team features the majority of the starting 15 and a B team feature little to none of the starting 15 so the in between (which England were on Sunday) is A'

'The Ireland team at the weekend was a complete B team, only Toner & Ringrose would play if Ireland played a test match tomorrow where's England had about half their starting XV out on the field'

'Varies but I know for a fact that an England 23 that contains Tuilagi & BV ( on par with Farrell as England most important players) is NOT a B team'


Nothing but contradictions. G'wan, tell me again, what's the difference between an a and b team?

Then you go on and on about how England can't be good after one game but nobody actually wrote that. You made that part up, all by yourself.

[Munsterboy]

Uh no I havent, you are trying to pick hole's in my argument that aren't there. Healy while a big player for us isnt anywhere near as crucial to our RWC aspirations as MT or BV. Stop trying to go in circle's now you know that the England team that played Wales isnt really a B team now bore off.

More importantly, what’s with the randomly placed apostrophes?

[Cathalsmart]

More importantly, what’s with the randomly placed apostrophes?

Reverting to spelling corrections = argument lost.

[Cathalsmart]

The Healy reference went way over your head, just like everything else you've been reading today.
You included Tuilagi as part of the Eng team, but conveniently excluded Healy from the Ire team, when both players came off the bench in the 2nd half.

Below is what you wrote about a and b teams... first you claim it's a numbers game, then when asked what the magic number is, you don't have an answer. Instead, you change your mind and tell us its about the quality of player.


'Dropping half you're A team does not make it a B team, dropping you're ENTIRE A team makes it a B team. An A team features the majority of the starting 15 and a B team feature little to none of the starting 15 so the in between (which England were on Sunday) is A'

'The Ireland team at the weekend was a complete B team, only Toner & Ringrose would play if Ireland played a test match tomorrow where's England had about half their starting XV out on the field'

'Varies but I know for a fact that an England 23 that contains Tuilagi & BV ( on par with Farrell as England most important players) is NOT a B team'


Nothing but contradictions. G'wan, tell me again, what's the difference between an a and b team?

Then you go on and on about how England can't be good after one game but nobody actually wrote that. You made that part up, all by yourself.

I think its pretty clear what I said, you are just looking for hole's that arent there and you know as well as I know that this is what you are doing, so unless you actually have a valid argument to counter mine I think its best you jog off .

[kahalui]

What are you even talking about not, you are contradicting yourself now!

Ok mate, whatever you say.

[kahalui]

I think its pretty clear what I said, you are just looking for hole's that arent there and you know as well as I know that this is what you are doing, so unless you actually have a valid argument to counter mine I think its best you jog off .

If it's so clear, why don't you spell it out for us? What's the difference between an a and b team?