Today's game thread v Bath (Away)

[jgriffin]

Moderators please close this whinge-thread.

[Rizzo]

It's not breaking any rules, and if we closed every thread containing whinges there wouldn't be a forum.

[Smurphswillgetya]

It's not breaking any rules, and if we closed every thread containing whinges there wouldn't be a forum.

Can we whinge about a thread not being closed?

[voice of the crumbie]

It's not breaking any rules, and if we closed every thread containing whinges there wouldn't be a forum.

There would still be a forum. It would just contain very few messages.

[Tigerbeat]

Without the moderators, there would not be a forum. The moderating is done in our spare time and is voluntarily.

[mol2]

It's a forum for debate and discussion.
Whether or not we agree with the sentiments of individual posts is a personal thing. Debates often get polarised and if we were all correct Tigers would already be relegated or have won the league by now

So long as the debate remains civilised and not libellous - which is how all threads should be - there should be no role for the moderators.
Some bits have got a bit heated, however the posters have clearly kissed and made up and clarified that offence wasn't intended.

The moderators should not be called upon to close a thread just because we disagree, it's gone on too long, is plain silly or because I think it's boring!

[DickyP]

It's not breaking any rules, and if we closed every thread containing whinges there wouldn't be a forum.

Can we whinge about a thread not being closed?

Can we whinge about people whinging?

[4071]

Luv to know why Brookes was let go and Balmain was kept on? Brookes has since gone on to play for England and yet Balmain is struggling I simply cannot fathom it?

You do know that Brookes is 2 years older than Balmain, @ 24 and Balmain is 22.

2 years experience is a big difference in for a prop.

Stupid trying to compare them ATM.

Balmain has had more premiership experience now @ 22 than Brookes had, and Brookes only started being on the radar last season.

Brookes had more Premiership experience than Balmain has at 22 (his career only stalled when he left Falcons and joined us), and he was already a Saxon when Tigers signed him. So... uh... yeah... you're wrong.

And there's only 15 months between them rather than 2 years.

[The Boy Dave]

RagingBull wrote:

sapajo wrote:
Luv to know why Brookes was let go and Balmain was kept on? Brookes has since gone on to play for England and yet Balmain is struggling I simply cannot fathom it?






You do know that Brookes is 2 years older than Balmain, @ 24 and Balmain is 22.

2 years experience is a big difference in for a prop.

Stupid trying to compare them ATM.

Balmain has had more premiership experience now @ 22 than Brookes had, and Brookes only started being on the radar last season.




Brookes had more Premiership experience than Balmain has at 22 (his career only stalled when he left Falcons and joined us), and he was already a Saxon when Tigers signed him. So... uh... yeah... you're wrong.

And there's only 15 months between them rather than 2 years.

I do not understand the impatience and pressure being placed on the young props at all and I think it shows a real lack of understanding of the game of rugby and the scrum in particular to make comments like the first comment.
Truth be known I don't believe the academy process actually helps in the front five positions very much and we probably lose more players in England than we find such is the late maturation for the positions.
These props are very young.
I would say wait and see what Balmain can do when he has Ayerza to prop alongside, Dan Cole has had that luxury more than most and benefitted, it's a team effort.
Brookes is a large unit, the engagement changes have suited his natural ability better and he has adapted quickly.
Balmain was perfect for the old rules but he is in the best place to learn about front row play and he will be better for the experience if everything clicks into place.
Whatever happens against London Irish just remember these lads in the front row such as Bristow, Ghiraldini and Balmain hardly know eachother or the coaches yet, give them a break!

[Tomvarndell]

Keeping Balmain and releasing Brookes is one of a few decisions which in hindsight may be wrong.

Allowing the best young fly half in the Country to go and keeping an older player who then leaves us a year later could also be deemed wrong. Many would have looked at building a team around the young playmaker but we didn't.

Losing a class 12 in Billy and keeping an older injury prone 12 could also be questioned. Different types of player but another decision which can certainly be considered questionable.

I accept these were hard decisions.

[Smurphswillgetya]

I do not understand the impatience and pressure being placed on the young props at all and I think it shows a real lack of understanding of the game of rugby and the scrum in particular to make comments like the first comment.

Whatever happens against London Irish just remember these lads in the front row such as Bristow, Ghiraldini and Balmain hardly know eachother or the coaches yet, give them a break!

Totally agree with you TBD. Good props and locks are not at their peak IMHO until they are in their late 20's early 30's. You can't accuse forum members of lacking understanding, you will be hung, drawn and quartered, they pay their money and have spent a lifetime moaning

Keeping Balmain and releasing Brookes is one of a few decisions which in hindsight may be wrong.

Allowing the best young fly half in the Country to go and keeping an older player who then leaves us a year later could also be deemed wrong. Many would have looked at building a team around the young playmaker but we didn't.

Losing a class 12 in Billy and keeping an older injury prone 12 could also be questioned. Different types of player but another decision which can certainly be considered questionable.

I accept these were hard decisions.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. I wish had bought shares in Microsoft. Also a case of short memories. Ford was not performing and Flood was the incumbent England fly half. As has been said a few times the lure of daddy's promising is something we could not compete with. How do you know we didn't wan to keep him and build a team around him. He wanted a quick fix, we didn't.
At the time Allen was the better fit for the team and his absence has shown how much we miss him. Billy is a limited player and has hardly set the world alight. I wouldn't say Allen is injury prone as his 2 longest layoffs have not been through injury. As The Boy Dave says give Balmain a chance he is young. I suppose you think we should have kept Varndell.

[jgriffin]

my request to close the thread was sinply it was about a match that happened a week ago. We could have a sticky whine-fest thread instead, moderators?

[Smurphswillgetya]

my request to close the thread was sinply it was about a match that happened a week ago. We could have a sticky whine-fest thread instead, moderators?

I am not too sure about having a sticky one JG. I draw the line at a sticky toffee pudding.

[The Boy Dave]

What's the point in closing the thread so soon, better people vent their frustrations on here and debate different views than finish up with folk shouting from the terrace!

[Tomvarndell]

At the time Allen was the better fit for the team and his absence has shown how much we miss him. Billy is a limited player and has hardly set the world alight.


He may not have set the World alight but has been a fairly regular England player and made a Lions tour since leaving. This while playing for a very average Club side.