Always a Wasp
General Category => Wasps Rugby Discussion => Topic started by: Shugs on August 30, 2022, 03:44:53 PM
-
Blackett confirming in the CET today that he can make signings again now if he wants to. Nothing confirmed as imminent - just the availability. Good news in itself and also conveys good overall news re finances.
-
Interesting reading. Things improving all around it seems.
-
Certainly appears that re-financing is moving on.
-
Good news - can we go and sign Wadey now?
-
Making a bit of room if Worcester fold I guess. Some potential bargains available basically. And with our location and Hougaard to tell them how wonderful it is, we might actually be not an unattractive option.
-
That is highly encouraging. The players should get a lift from thta.
-
Whilst it is indeed good news, I won't be counting any chickens until the Bond issue is settled & the tax bill, if there is one, is paid.
-
Yes Raggs, seems like perfect timing for a Worcester raid. They’ve definitely got a few centres that could help us and Shillcock is class in my opinion.
Van De Merwe would be amazing but sounds like he is off already along with Fin Smith, Hatherall and we don’t really need Ted Hill , who won’t be short of options.
Lots of solid academy lads there too, a few U20 and u18 age group players who will need clubs and as mentioned they won’t have to move home to come to us, I believe Hougaard hasn’t moved home from his time at Worcester.
-
From Tom Jeffreys and Bobby Bridge.
https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/wasps-were-hit-recruitment-freeze-24889550 (https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/wasps-were-hit-recruitment-freeze-24889550)
Also.
Plan to build hotel next to CBS Arena stalls as loan expires
From Nick Smith.
https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/local-news/plan-build-hotel-next-cbs-24890208 (https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/local-news/plan-build-hotel-next-cbs-24890208)
-
The hotel was always going to happen (stopped) when it didn't make City of Culture or CWG for business. Programme completely wrecked by Covid. It was said it was needed for when events are booked at the Arena. Having stayed at the nearby Novotel during an exhibition and it was packed with exhibitors I can see why.
-
So this was the loan request that was brought up recently as being an emergency operating loan?
Obviously was ,as suggested on here ,as being for capital expenditure as well as being an old application.
-
Are we in a position to be so righteous? There are some very good players there that other teams are already working to bring in, yet we won't be looking to do the same.
I didn't realize we were that good...I'm expecting top 2 now.
-
So this was the loan request that was brought up recently as being an emergency operating loan?
Obviously was ,as suggested on here ,as being for capital expenditure as well as being an old application.
No this is a different older loan. The other hasn't yet been agreed/rejected as far as I can see.
-
Good news - can we go and sign Wadey now?
+1
-
Natural target for us would be Lawrence.
-
Really using the old cricket adage of taking the score and adding two wickets on, looking at our fit squad, a couple of long term injuries in the backs and we will struggle, especially given the way some struggled for form last year. We look OK now, just about, but the depth up front is so much more apparent.
-
Racing looking at Duhan van der Merwe which might suggest Wade would be free.
-
Natural target for us would be Lawrence.
+1
-
What this does mean is that there categorically was a recruitment freeze before.
Until now, wasn't it just a rumour?
-
I think that is right Wasps. Blackett alludes to it in the article.
-
Natural target for us would be Lawrence.
+1
+2 especially as he's v unlikely to be wanted by England....and assuming fitness.
-
Venter may not be a bad signing either if Lawrence not available. In my little dream world of signings, I'd have a centre, another 2nd row and a wing/full back, maybe one of the Kitcheners for the second row???
I know this is a bit of a ghoulish post, but all conjecture in any case....
-
Lawrence is a bit of an enigma for me.
Always described in England selection discussions as a Manu alternative - but for me he is a very different player.
Not sure how England used him because he never got the ball.
He is much much smaller than Manu and I have never really seen him as a crash ball specialist but more of a silky runner at 13 - sure Worcester don’t use him as a crash ball, that’s where Beck and Venter come in.
Only thing he seems to have in common with Manu is his injury record.
I’m not sure he’d be the best investment despite his talents. Venter would be preferable for me
-
Lawrence will be in high demand. D VDW will go wherever the money is highest, he is proper mercenary. Hatherall and Hill will not be short of offers, they are quality but we are overloaded in the backrow as it is.
Fin Smith will be fighting people off, but we already have three young 10s (even if he is potentially better than all of them). The Kitcheners are a bit soft, they're no better than what we alreayd have. It's Shillcock and Humphries that I'd really be looking at if it came to it.
-
I agree it's a bit weird and vulture-y to be picking over Warriors like this but it is just discussion.
I agree with JonnyD that the Manu comparison seems a bit of a media projection, always trying to find a similar player. Lawrence is still a powerfully build guy and has a good fend, but he's more hips and swerve than bosch. I'd say his biggest strengths are his running lines and how he takes the ball on the line and accelerates through. I'd say this fits out style nicely as Charlie and Jacob aren't scared to get to the line, Mills too as a 12. He is also a try scorer - he averages a try every 214 mins (1 try every 2.68 full games) for Worcester (Venter by contrast 588 mins or a try every 7.3 full games). Also Lawrence is 8 years younger than Venter and had a great partnership with Mills - I also believe he's a good friend of Hougaard. I agree injuries and potentially personality (*but this is just based on Eddie Jones comments so make of that what you will*) are issues to be considered but I would defo look to get Lawrence, we could do with another 13, he will fit our style and add a more exciting, attacking element.
Elsewhere my thoughts would be maybe short-term loose-head cover? Morovov or even McCallum on a three month contract would enable them to find long term clubs while being paid and give us cover while Martinez and Harris are injured and West is a bit fragile.
Another short term option might be Fergus Lee-Warner. He's versatile and has played lock enough. I'd expect his to be looking to go back to SR at the start of next year but a contract 'till Christmas provides cover for Stooke (and Launch if he is called up in the autumn). If we were looking for a longer term second row - Joe Batley would be my pick.
In the backs, I like Jamie Shillcock but wonder if that gives us too many similar 15 options - Jacob, Ali, Matteo and him. Noah Heward and Harri Doel would both be good young additions at wing and I would take either to bolster our options there, Heward would be first choice.
Looking at their academy, with Eckersly not in the academy now it seems and Corbin Thunder who I think will be like Aflie and end up in the backrow we might poach Finn Theobald-Thomas, their Eng U20 hooker. Also Seb Atkinson at centre looked good last season (except when he got scragged by Tom Willis) - 20 years old, good distributer and playmaker but we do have Hartley, Simonds and also Myall in the U18s.
-
Lawrence would be in demand. He was pissed on by England - got blamed for not being Manu when he's a v different player with a different skillset. And never got a pass. I think he looks good ball in hand and looks to distribute. Something that I always found Manu wasn't the best at - least earlier on in his career. And why I found him at 12 an odd choice.
Lawrence would fit nicely with us. Especially if/when we look to play a second 5/8th style of second playmaker from 12 or 15, he'd certainly get an opportunity! He'd have something in common with Dan too, in that they both don't seem to be on the same wavelength as Jones....
-
Neil Fissler
@neilfissler
·
10m
Hearing that Worcester Warriors players will be paid later today and that interestingly Wasps players haven’t been paid yet.
-
Difficult to tell with Fissler what's true and what's not. Sometimes he's spot on and others he's miles off.
Let's hope this is the latter.
-
He also likes to stir things up. I take most of what he says with a pinch of salt.
-
Difficult to tell with Fissler what's true and what's not. Sometimes he's spot on and others he's miles off.
Let's hope this is the latter.
I also get the feeling that he's not particularly fond of us, for whatever reason....
-
Difficult to tell with Fissler what's true and what's not. Sometimes he's spot on and others he's miles off.
Let's hope this is the latter.
I also get the feeling that he's not particularly fond of us, for whatever reason....
I think it is because he doesn’t have an ‘in’ with us at the moment. Over the last few years we have announced without any rumours at all. I would t take what he says as gospel however I don’t get the vitriol he gets. He has to rely on rumours some of which might be true but come to nothing others that might be agents stirring things and others come to fruition. He is paid to find those rumours probably dismisses the more unreliable but if he only published things that were certain he would have to wait for official announcements and I could do that with no contacts.
-
Neil Fissler
@neilfissler
·
10m
Hearing that Worcester Warriors players will be paid later today and that interestingly Wasps players haven’t been paid yet.
Steve Diamond has just tweeted that Worcester aren’t travelling to their preseason game because the wages have not been paid.
-
Neil Fissler
@neilfissler
·
10m
Hearing that Worcester Warriors players will be paid later today and that interestingly Wasps players haven’t been paid yet.
Steve Diamond has just tweeted that Worcester aren’t travelling to their preseason game because the wages have not been paid.
Maybe Fissler got his "W" mixed up!
-
Difficult to tell with Fissler what's true and what's not. Sometimes he's spot on and others he's miles off.
Let's hope this is the latter.
I also get the feeling that he's not particularly fond of us, for whatever reason....
I think it is because he doesn’t have an ‘in’ with us at the moment. Over the last few years we have announced without any rumours at all. I would t take what he says as gospel however I don’t get the vitriol he gets. He has to rely on rumours some of which might be true but come to nothing others that might be agents stirring things and others come to fruition. He is paid to find those rumours probably dismisses the more unreliable but if he only published things that were certain he would have to wait for official announcements and I could do that with no contacts.
The reason for the vitriol is that he comes across as a fairly nasty piece of work.
On the post quoted on Twitter people posted that they had heard the opposite and he went on the attack, with some fairly rude responses.
There was a fairly nasty interaction with a Tigers player not so long ago as well.
-
Neil Fissler
@neilfissler
·
10m
Hearing that Worcester Warriors players will be paid later today and that interestingly Wasps players haven’t been paid yet.
Steve Diamond has just tweeted that Worcester aren’t travelling to their preseason game because the wages have not been paid.
From the Beeb.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/62743281 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/62743281)
-
There was a fairly nasty interaction with a Tigers player not so long ago as well.
Whilst I agree that Fissler comes across as a nasty piece of work, his rumour about Nadolo was correct though, I think? - He'd suggested he was looking to go back to play in Super Rugby and Tigers eventually confirmed that Nadolo would be leaving mid-season by mutual consent to join the Waratahs in time for the start of the Super Rugby season.
The way it all came out was rather ugly, neither covered themselves in glory and it's clear that Nadolo wasn't ready for the news to be broken just yet or that it simply hadn't been agreed at that point in time.
-
Fissler is first and foremost a round ball fan. When there is conflict he supports the roundball team.
I don’t know what he is doing on the rugbypaper except earning a few quid.
-
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/bristol-bears-leicester-tigers-wasps-7529949 - Apparently we're looking at Ted Hill
-
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/bristol-bears-leicester-tigers-wasps-7529949 - Apparently we're looking at Ted Hill
Why? Surely we've got plenty back rows.
-
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/bristol-bears-leicester-tigers-wasps-7529949 - Apparently we're looking at Ted Hill
Why? Surely we've got plenty back rows.
I suppose it depends what Brad and Nemo are up to long term.
-
Maybe indicative of Brad playing more 2nd row (until Stooke returns at least????)
-
Ted Hill is quality but we don't need a back row.
For god sake, can we please get linked to a back player, ideally a center or FB
I'd be happy with Venter or Oli Morris (my first preference). I note Nanai is still listed with them...thought he was a free agent, another quality back.
-
I'd be in for Lawrence, Venter, Shillcock or Humphiries. Ted Hill is undoubtedly top quality but it's hard enough getting our back row right as it is.
-
Might also be a price consideration, and, as suggested, signing a back row frees Shields to play there as needed whilst we are short.
We are clearly weaker on the wing and centre, but if there are no cut price/affordable wings or centres and quality comes up elsewhere at a discount.........
-
I would still love for his, wasps and England’s sake for Alfie to give hooker a real go. He is obviously great in the back row but the difference between him and other back rowers such as Tom Willis isn’t big and he is limited as a line out jumper. If he was able to still bring his power at hooker and his throwing in was up to it then the difference between him and the next would be big. He is potentially an international class backrow but i think potentially a world class hooker. Lots of ifs there but it would mean some more backrow cover was needed.
-
I would still love for his, wasps and England’s sake for Alfie to give hooker a real go. He is obviously great in the back row but the difference between him and other back rowers such as Tom Willis isn’t big and he is limited as a line out jumper. If he was able to still bring his power at hooker and his throwing in was up to it then the difference between him and the next would be big. He is potentially an international class backrow but i think potentially a world class hooker. Lots of ifs there but it would mean some more backrow cover was needed.
Yes all that makes sense to me. Jones tells Alfie to go to the back row - but will he ever pick him there? Evidently not yet.
Look there is no argument that he’s a force of nature.
I echo your comment - he does have the potential to be a world class hooker.
-
I disagree, I believe Alfie is at his best running off the back of a scrum or as a crash ball runner from line outs. Getting tied in and tired out from front row scrummaging and line out throwing takes away a lot of his running with the ball threats.
I'm happy for him and Tom Willis to share the load at number 8.
-
I disagree, I believe Alfie is at his best running off the back of a scrum or as a crash ball runner from line outs. Getting tied in and tired out from front row scrummaging and line out throwing takes away a lot of his running with the ball threats.
I'm happy for him and Tom Willis to share the load at number 8.
The problem with Alfie's crash ball tecnique last season is teams have wortked him out. Tom makes more consistent ground.
-
I disagree, I believe Alfie is at his best running off the back of a scrum or as a crash ball runner from line outs. Getting tied in and tired out from front row scrummaging and line out throwing takes away a lot of his running with the ball threats.
I'm happy for him and Tom Willis to share the load at number 8.
But this is what we don’t know without trying it out. Will there be a big drop off in his running game? Maybe his power at scrummaging would be a huge asset? What is clear is that he won’t be a regular line out option so you have to find that elsewhere. Ideally all your back 5 can be jumpers, everyone that is not reduces your options and makes you more predictable to defend against.
-
I disagree, I believe Alfie is at his best running off the back of a scrum or as a crash ball runner from line outs. Getting tied in and tired out from front row scrummaging and line out throwing takes away a lot of his running with the ball threats.
I'm happy for him and Tom Willis to share the load at number 8.
But this is what we don’t know without trying it out. Will there be a big drop off in his running game? Maybe his power at scrummaging would be a huge asset? What is clear is that he won’t be a regular line out option so you have to find that elsewhere. Ideally all your back 5 can be jumpers, everyone that is not reduces your options and makes you more predictable to defend against.
This all assumes that he has any real background as a hooker.
I'm aware that he played some agree grade games at hooker.
The only match report that I was able to find says that he was an absolute beast, but his lineout throwing was wayward.
Since then he has said that he only ever played a few games at hooker so it's not even a natural position for him.
We may as well be talking about training Jack Willis as a hooker
-
I disagree, I believe Alfie is at his best running off the back of a scrum or as a crash ball runner from line outs. Getting tied in and tired out from front row scrummaging and line out throwing takes away a lot of his running with the ball threats.
I'm happy for him and Tom Willis to share the load at number 8.
But this is what we don’t know without trying it out. Will there be a big drop off in his running game? Maybe his power at scrummaging would be a huge asset? What is clear is that he won’t be a regular line out option so you have to find that elsewhere. Ideally all your back 5 can be jumpers, everyone that is not reduces your options and makes you more predictable to defend against.
This all assumes that he has any real background as a hooker.
I'm aware that he played some agree grade games at hooker.
The only match report that I was able to find says that he was an absolute beast, but his lineout throwing was wayward.
Since then he has said that he only ever played a few games at hooker so it's not even a natural position for him.
We may as well be talking about training Jack Willis as a hooker
He played hooker all his youth representative career and for England age groups at hooker, that is about as good a pedigree as a young player could have. The Jack Willis comment is a bit silly isn’t it. You don’t get 6’3 hookers.
-
This all assumes that he has any real background as a hooker.
I'm aware that he played some agree grade games at hooker.
The only match report that I was able to find says that he was an absolute beast, but his lineout throwing was wayward.
Since then he has said that he only ever played a few games at hooker so it's not even a natural position for him.
We may as well be talking about training Jack Willis as a hooker
He played hooker all his youth representative career and for England age groups at hooker, that is about as good a pedigree as a young player could have. The Jack Willis comment is a bit silly isn’t it. You don’t get 6’3 hookers.
This is the article I'd read that led me to believe that he'd played very little at hooker
https://amp.rugbypass.com/news/the-unlikely-alfie-barbeary-schoolboy-position-that-ended-at-wasps/ (https://amp.rugbypass.com/news/the-unlikely-alfie-barbeary-schoolboy-position-that-ended-at-wasps/)
The Jack comment was obviously tongue in cheek, but Jack is only 2 inches taller than Alfie.
Looking around the top European leagues, it seems there's a lot of Hookers at 6'1/6'2.... Admittedly none at 6'3 though
-
Never understood why hookers 'have' to throw the ball into the lineout as it's a thankless task (ex hooker who was lucky to hit a barn door)
-
Never understood why hookers 'have' to throw the ball into the lineout as it's a thankless task (ex hooker who was lucky to hit a barn door)
I think it's more a case that since it has become the norm, no one else practices it.
As the game got analysed in greater detail, it was probably identified that in an attacking lineout, the hooker wasn't doing anything else... And as things have progressed, they seem very good at joining the back of a maul from the lineout.
It also allows both wings to be in position should there be a fast attack off the top
-
Never understood why hookers 'have' to throw the ball into the lineout as it's a thankless task (ex hooker who was lucky to hit a barn door)
I'm also an ex-hooker and I never threw a ball in ever. Always the wing who used various self patented methods to get it towards the lineout. I stood at 1 and my job was either to clatter their scrum half or prevent their hooker clattering ours. Of course there was no lifting in my day and it was all a bit of a free for all and, with the ref always standing in field, how I did it was irrelevant. Lovely stuff ;)
-
Never understood why hookers 'have' to throw the ball into the lineout as it's a thankless task (ex hooker who was lucky to hit a barn door)
I'm also an ex-hooker and I never threw a ball in ever. Always the wing who used various self patented methods to get it towards the lineout. I stood at 1 and my job was either to clatter their scrum half or prevent their hooker clattering ours. Of course there was no lifting in my day and it was all a bit of a free for all and, with the ref always standing in field, how I did it was irrelevant. Lovely stuff ;)
Played in the same era, but I was a centre/winger and hated having to throw-in. The thrower was always in the wrong if it didn't go to whoever it was aimed at, despite the fact that the forwards were more interested in their own little punch-ups rather than looking at the ball.
-
Never understood why hookers 'have' to throw the ball into the lineout as it's a thankless task (ex hooker who was lucky to hit a barn door)
I'm also an ex-hooker and I never threw a ball in ever. Always the wing who used various self patented methods to get it towards the lineout. I stood at 1 and my job was either to clatter their scrum half or prevent their hooker clattering ours. Of course there was no lifting in my day and it was all a bit of a free for all and, with the ref always standing in field, how I did it was irrelevant. Lovely stuff ;)
Played in the same era, but I was a centre/winger and hated having to throw-in. The thrower was always in the wrong if it didn't go to whoever it was aimed at, despite the fact that the forwards were more interested in their own little punch-ups rather than looking at the ball.
I remember playing a school match in that era as a winger. As you say Roger, the forwards just enjoyed a scrap, so I threw the ball over the back of them, and ran round in support, at which point the ball bounced up into my arms and I ran through and scored!
I now play hooker and still have to throw the ball in at lineouts.